Anglo-Saxon king with his witan. Biblical scene in the Illustrated Old English Hexateuch (11th century) in the British Library, London
The development of Anglo-Saxon kingship is little understood before the 7th century. Royal dynasties often claimed descent from Woden or another deity to justify their rule, but the true basis of their power was as warleaders. Kings were buried as warriors, and war helmets instead of crowns were used in coronations until the 10th century. A king's relationship with his warband (Latin: comitatus) involved mutual obligations. His warriors fought for the king in return for food, shelter, and gifts such as weapons. The people supported their king and his warriors with food rent.[100] Kings extracted surplus by raiding and collecting food rent and "prestige goods".[101]
The later sixth century saw the end of a 'prestige goods' economy, as evidenced by the decline of accompanied burial, and the appearance of the first 'princely' graves and high-status settlements.[102] The ship burial in mound one at Sutton Hoo (Suffolk) is the most widely known example of a 'princely' burial, containing lavish metalwork and feasting equipment, and possibly representing the burial place of King Raedwald of East Anglia. These centres of trade and production reflect the increased socio-political stratification and wider territorial authority which allowed seventh-century elites to extract and redistribute surpluses with far greater effectiveness than their sixth-century predecessors would have found possible.[103] Anglo-Saxon society, in short, looked very different in 600 than it did a hundred years earlier.
By 600, the establishment of the first Anglo-Saxon 'emporia' (alternatively 'wics') appears to have been in process. There are only four major archaeologically attested wics in England – London, Ipswich, York, and Hamwic. These were originally interpreted by Richard Hodges as methods of royal control over the import of prestige goods, rather than centre of actual trade-proper.[104] Despite archaeological evidence of royal involvement, emporia are now widely understood to represent genuine trade and exchange, alongside a return to urbanism.[105]
According to Bede's Ecclesiastical History, England was divided into many petty kingdoms during the 7th century. The Tribal Hidage of the later 7th century lists 35 people groups south of the Humber. The first law code written in a Germanic language, the Law of Æthelberht, depicts a king not only as the leader of a warband but also as the maintainer of law and order. His laws concerned all levels of society: the nobility, ceorls (freemen), and slaves. Traders, missionaries, and other foreigners who lacked the protection of a lord or kinship ties (see below) were under the king's protection (Old English: mund).[106]
The most powerful king could be recognised by other rulers as bretwalda (Old English for "ruler of Britain").[107] Bede's use of the term imperium has been seen as significant in defining the status and powers of the bretwaldas, in fact it is a word Bede used regularly as an alternative to regnum; scholars believe this just meant the collection of tribute.[108] Oswiu's extension of overlordship over the Picts and Scots is expressed in terms of making them tributary. Military overlordship could bring great short-term success and wealth, but the system had its disadvantages. Many of the overlords enjoyed their powers for a relatively short period.[b] Foundations had to be carefully laid to turn a tribute-paying under-kingdom into a permanent acquisition, such as Bernician absorption of Deira.[109]
Only five Anglo-Saxon kingdoms are known to have survived to 800, and several British kingdoms in the west of the country had disappeared as well. The major kingdoms had grown through absorbing smaller principalities, and the means through which they did it and the character their kingdoms acquired as a result are one of the major themes of the Middle Saxon period. Beowulf, for all its heroic content, clearly makes the point that economic and military success were intimately linked. A 'good' king was a generous king who through his wealth won the support which would ensure his supremacy over other kingdoms.[110] The smaller kingdoms did not disappear without trace once they were incorporated into larger polities; on the contrary their territorial integrity was preserved when they became ealdormanries or, depending on size, parts of ealdormanries within their new kingdoms. An example of this tendency for later boundaries to preserve earlier arrangements is Sussex; the county boundary is essentially the same as that of the West Saxon shire and the Anglo-Saxon kingdom.[111]
The Witan, also called Witenagemot, was the council of kings; its essential duty was to advise the king on all matters on which he chose to ask its opinion. It attested his grants of land to churches or laymen, consented to his issue of new laws or new statements of ancient custom, and helped him deal with rebels and persons suspected of disaffection.
King Alfred's digressions in his translation of Boethius' Consolation of Philosophy, provided these observations about the resources which every king needed:

In the case of the king, the resources and tools with which to rule are that he have his land fully manned: he must have praying men, fighting men and working men. You know also that without these tools no king may make his ability known. Another aspect of his resources is that he must have the means of support for his tools, the three classes of men. These, then, are their means of support: land to live on, gifts, weapons, food, ale, clothing and whatever else is necessary for each of the three classes of men.[112]
This is the first written appearance of the division of society into the 'three orders'; the 'working men' provided the raw materials to support the other two classes. The advent of Christianity brought with it the introduction of new concepts of land tenure. The role of churchmen was analogous with that of the warriors waging heavenly warfare. However what Alfred was alluding to was that in order for a king to fulfil his responsibilities towards his people, particularly those concerned with defence, he had the right to make considerable exactions from the landowners and people of his kingdom.[113] The need to endow the church resulted in the permanent alienation of stocks of land which had previously only been granted on a temporary basis and introduced the concept of a new type of hereditary land which could be freely alienated and was free of any family claims.[114]
The nobility under the influence of Alfred became involved with developing the cultural life of their kingdom.[115] As the kingdom became unified, it brought the monastic and spiritual life of the kingdom under one rule and stricter control. However the Anglo-Saxons believed in 'luck' as a random element in the affairs of man and so would probably have agreed that there is a limit to the extent one can understand why one kingdom failed while another succeeded.[116] They also believed in 'destiny' and interpreted the fate of the kingdom of England with Biblical and Carolingian ideology, with parallels, between the Israelites, the great European empires and the Anglo-Saxons. Danish and Norman conquests were just the manner in which God punished his sinful people and the fate of great empires.[63]

Religion

The right half of the front panel of the seventh-century Franks Casket, depicting the pan-Germanic legend of Wayland the Smith, which was apparently also a part of Anglo-Saxon pagan mythology.
Although Christianity dominates the religious history of the Anglo-Saxons, life in the 5th and 6th centuries was dominated by pagan religious beliefs with a Scandinavian-Germanic heritage.
Pagan Anglo-Saxons worshipped at a variety of different sites across their landscape, some of which were apparently specially built temples and others that were natural geographical features such as sacred trees, hilltops or wells. According to place name evidence, these sites of worship were known alternately as either hearg or as wēoh. Most poems from before the Norman Conquest are steeped in pagan symbolism, and their integration into the new faith goes beyond the literary sources.[citation needed] Thus, as Lethbridge reminds us, "to say, 'this is a monument erected in Christian times and therefore the symbolism on it must be Christian,' is an unrealistic approach. The rites of the older faith, now regarded as superstition, are practised all over the country today. It did not mean that people were not Christian; but that they could see a lot of sense in the old beliefs also."[117]
Early Anglo-Saxon society attached great significance to the horse; a horse may have been an acquaintance of the god Woden, or they may have been (according to Tacitus) confidants of the gods. Horses were closely associated with gods, especially Odin and Freyr. Horses played a central role in funerary practices as well as in other rituals.[118] Horses were prominent symbols of fertility, and there were many horse fertility cults. The rituals associated with these include horse fights, burials, consumption of horse meat, and horse sacrifice.[119] Hengist and Horsa, the mythical ancestors of the Anglo-Saxons, were associated with horses,[c] and references to horses are found throughout Anglo-Saxon literature.[120] Actual horse burials in England are relatively rare and "may point to influence from the continent".[121] A well-known Anglo-Saxon horse burial (from the sixth/seventh century) is Mound 17 at Sutton Hoo, a few yards from the more famous ship burial in Mound 1.[122] A sixth-century grave near Lakenheath, Suffolk, yielded the body of a man next to that of a complete horse in harness, with a bucket of food by its head.[121]
Bede's story of Cædmon, the cowherd who became the 'Father of English Poetry,' represents the real heart of the conversion of the Anglo-Saxons from paganism to Christianity. Bede writes, "[t]here was in the Monastery of this Abbess (Streonæshalch – now known as Whitby Abbey) a certain brother particularly remarkable for the Grace of God, who was wont to make religious verses, so that whatever was interpreted to him out of scripture, he soon after put the same into poetical expressions of much sweetness and humility in Old English, which was his native language. By his verse the minds of many were often excited to despise the world, and to aspire to heaven." The story of Cædmon illustrates the blending of Christian and Germanic, Latin and oral tradition, monasteries and double monasteries, pre-existing customs and new learning, popular and elite, that characterizes the Conversion period of Anglo-Saxon history and culture. Cædmon does not destroy or ignore traditional Anglo-Saxon poetry. Instead, he converts it into something that helps the Church. Anglo-Saxon England finds ways to synthesize the religion of the Church with the existing "northern" customs and practices. Thus the conversion of the Anglo-Saxons was not just their switching from one practice to another, but making something new out of their old inheritance and their new belief and learning.[123]

An 8th-century copy of the Rule of St. Benedict
Monasticism, and not just the church, was at the centre of Anglo-Saxon Christian life. Western monasticism, as a whole, had been evolving since the time of the Desert Fathers, but in the seventh century, monasticism in England confronted a dilemma that brought to question the truest representation of the Christian faith. The two monastic traditions were the Celtic and the Roman, and a decision was made to adopt the Roman tradition. Monasteria seem to describe all religious congregations other than those of the bishop.
In the 10th century, Dunstan brought Athelwold to Glastonbury, where the two of them set up a monastery on Benedictine lines. For many years, this was the only monastery in England that strictly followed the Benedictine Rule and observed complete monastic discipline. What Mechthild Gretsch calls an "Aldhelm Seminar" developed at Glastonbury, and the effects of this seminar on the curriculum of learning and study in Anglo-Saxon England were enormous.[70] Royal power was put behind the reforming impulses of Dunstan and Athelwold, helping them to enforce their reform ideas. This happened first at the Old Minster in Winchester, before the reformers built new foundations and refoundations at Thorney, Peterborough, and Ely, among other places. Benedictine monasticism spread throughout England, and these became centers of learning again, run by people trained in Glastonbury, with one rule, the works of Aldhelm at the center of their curricula but also influenced by the vernacular efforts of Alfred. From this mixture sprung a great flowering of literary production.[124]

Fighting and warfare
Soldiers throughout the country were summoned, for both offensive and defensive war; early armies consisted essentially of household bands, while later on men were recruited on a territorial basis. The mustering of an army, annually at times, occupied an important place in Frankish history, both military and constitutional. The English kingdoms appear to have known no institution similar to this. The earliest reference is Bede's account of the overthrow of the Northumbrian Æthelfrith by Rædwald overlord of the southern English. Rædwald raised a large army, presumably from among the kings who accepted his overlordship, and "not giving him time to summon and assemble his whole army, Rædwald met him with a much greater force and slew him on the Mercian border on the east bank of the river Idle."[125] At the Battle of Edington in 878, when the Danes made a surprise attack on Alfred at Chippenham after Twelfth Night, Alfred retreated to Athelney after Easter and then seven weeks after Easter mustered an army at "Egbert's stone".[126] It is not difficult to imagine that Alfred sent out word to the ealdormen to call his men to arms. This may explain the delay, and it is probably no more than coincidence that the army mustered at the beginning of May, a time when there would have been sufficient grass for the horses. There is also information about the mustering of fleets in the eleventh century. From 992 to 1066 fleets were assembled at London, or returned to the city at the end of their service, on several occasions. Where they took up station depended on the quarter from which a threat was expected: Sandwich if invasion was expected from the north, or the Isle of Wight if it was from Normandy.[127]

Replica of the Sutton Hoo helmet
Once they left home, these armies and fleets had to be supplied with food and clothing for the men as well as forage for the horses. Yet if armies of the seventh and eighth centuries were accompanied by servants and a supply train of lesser free men, Alfred found these arrangements insufficient to defeat the Vikings. One of his reforms was to divide his military resources into thirds. One part manned the burhs and found the permanent garrisons which would make it impossible for the Danes to overrun Wessex, although they would also take to the field when extra soldiers were needed. The remaining two would take it in turns to serve. They were allocated a fixed term of service and brought the necessary provisions with them. This arrangement did not always function well. On one occasion a division on service went home in the middle of blockading a Danish army on Thorney Island; its provisions were consumed and its term had expired before the king came to relieve them.[128] This method of division and rotation remained in force up to 1066. In 917, when armies from Wessex and Mercia were in the field from early April until November, one division went home and another took over. Again, in 1052 when Edward's fleet was waiting at Sandwich to intercept Godwine's return, the ships returned to London to take on new earls and crews.[127] The importance of supply, vital to military success, was appreciated even if it was taken for granted and features only incidentally in the sources.[129]
Military training and strategy are two important matters on which the sources are typically silent. There are no references in literature or laws to men training, and so it is necessary to fall back on inference. For the noble warrior, his childhood was of first importance in learning both individual military skills and the teamwork essential for success in battle. Perhaps the games the youthful Cuthbert played ('wrestling, jumping, running, and every other exercise') had some military significance.[130] Turning to strategy, of the period before Alfred the evidence gives the impression that Anglo-Saxon armies fought battles frequently. Battle was risky and best avoided unless all the factors were on your side. But if you were in a position so advantageous that you were willing to take the chance, it is likely that your enemy would be in such a weak position that he would avoid battle and pay tribute. Battles put the princes' lives at risk, as is demonstrated by the Northumbrian and Mercian overlordships brought to an end by a defeat in the field. Gillingham has shown how few pitched battles Charlemagne and Richard I chose to fight.[131]
A defensive strategy becomes more apparent in the later part of Alfred's reign. It was built around the possession of fortified places and the close pursuit of the Danes to harass them and impede their preferred occupation of plundering. Alfred and his lieutenants were able to fight the Danes to a standstill by their repeated ability to pursue and besiege them closely in fortified camps throughout the country. The fortification of sites at Witham, Buckingham, Towcester and Colchester persuaded the Danes of the surrounding regions to submit.[132] The key to this warfare was sieges and the control of fortified places. It is clear that the new fortresses had permanent garrisons, and that they were supported by the inhabitants of the existing burhs when danger threatened. This is brought out most clearly in the description of the campaigns of 917 in the Chronicle, but throughout the conquest of the Danelaw by Edward and Æthelflæd it is clear that a sophisticated and coordinated strategy was being applied.[133]
In 973, a single currency was introduced into England in order to bring about political unification, but by concentrating bullion production at many coastal mints, the new rulers of England created an obvious target which attracted a new wave of Viking invasions, which came close to breaking up the kingdom of the English. From 980 onwards, the Anglo -Saxon Chronicle records renewed raiding against England. At first, the raids were probing ventures by small numbers of ships' crews, but soon grew in size and effect, until the only way of dealing with the Vikings appeared to be to pay protection money to buy them off: "And in that year [991] it was determined that tribute should first be paid to the Danish men because of the great terror they were causing along the coast. The first payment was 10,000 pounds."[134]
The payment of Danegeld had to be underwritten by a huge balance of payments surplus; this could only be achieved by stimulating exports and cutting imports, itself accomplished through currency devaluation. This affected everyone in the kingdom.

Settlements and working life
Reconstructed buildings from West Stow Anglo-Saxon Village, Suffolk
Helena Hamerow suggests that the prevailing model of working life and settlement, particularly for the early period, was one of shifting settlement and building tribal kinship. The mid-Saxon period saw diversification, the development of enclosures, the beginning of the toft system, closer management of livestock, the gradual spread of the mould-board plough, 'informally regular plots' and a greater permanence, with further settlement consolidation thereafter foreshadowing post-Norman Conquest villages. The later periods saw a proliferation of service features including barns, mills and latrines, most markedly on high-status sites. Throughout the Anglo-Saxon period as Hamerow suggests, "local and extended kin groups remained...the essential unit of production". This is very noticeable in the early period. However, by the tenth and eleventh centuries, the rise of the manor and its significance in terms of both settlement and the management of land, which becomes very evident in the Domesday Book of 1086.[135]

Reconstructed workshop at West Stow Anglo-Saxon village
Typical Anglo-Saxon farms of middle period are often characterised as "peasant farms" but a ceorl, who was the lowest ranking freeman in early Anglo-Saxon society, was not a peasant but an arms-owning male with the support of a kindred, access to law and the wergild; situated at the apex of an extended household working at least one hide of land.[136] The farmer had freedom and rights over lands, with provision of a rent or duty to an overlord who provided only slight lordly input.[d] Most of this land was common outfield arable land (of an outfield-infield system) that provided individuals with the means to build a basis of kinship and group cultural ties.[137]
The collection of buildings discovered at Yeavering formed part of an Anglo-Saxon royal vill or king's tun. These 'tun' consisted of a series of buildings designed to provide short-term accommodation for the king and his household. It is thought that the king would have travelled throughout his land dispensing justice and authority and collecting rents from his various estates. Such visits would be periodic, and it is likely that he would visit each royal villa only once or twice per year. The Latin term villa regia which Bede uses of the site suggests an estate centre as the functional heart of a territory held in the king's demesne. The territory is the land whose surplus production is taken into the centre as food-render to support the king and his retinue on their periodic visits as part of a progress around the kingdom. This territorial model, known as a multiple estate or shire, has been developed in a range of studies. Colm O'Brien, in applying this to Yeavering, proposes a geographical definition of the wider shire of Yeavering and also a geographical definition of the principal estate whose structures Hope-Taylor excavated.[138] One characteristic that the king's tun shared with some other groups of places is that it was a point of public assembly. People came together not only to give the king and his entourage board and lodging; but they attended upon the king in order to have disputes settled, cases appealed, lands granted, gifts given, appointments made, laws promulgated, policy debated, and ambassadors heard. People also assembled for other reasons, such as to hold fairs and to trade.[139]

Reconstructed Anglo-Saxon house at Butser Ancient Farm, Hampshire
The first creations of towns are linked to a system of specialism at individual settlements, which is evidenced in studying place-names. Sutterton, "shoe-makers' tun" (in the area of the Danelaw such places are Sutterby) was so named because local circumstances allowed the growth of a craft recognised by the people of surrounding places. Similarly with Sapperton, the "soap-makers' tun". While Boultham, the "meadow with burdock plants", may well have developed a specialism in the production of burrs for wool-carding, since meadows with burdock merely growing in them must have been relatively numerous. From places named for their services or location within a single district, a category of which the most obvious perhaps are the Eastons and Westons, it is possible to move outwards to glimpse component settlements within larger economic units. Names betray some role within a system of seasonal pasture, Winderton in Warwickshire is the winter tun and various Somertons are self-explanatory. Hardwicks are dairy farms and Swinhopes the valleys where pigs were pastured.[140]
Settlement patterns as well as village plans in England fall into two great categories: scattered farms and homesteads in upland and woodland Britain, nucleated villages across a swathe of central England.[141] The chronology of nucleated villages is much debated and not yet clear. Yet there is strong evidence to support the view that nucleation occurred in the tenth century or perhaps the ninth, and was a development parallel to the growth of towns.[142]

Women, children and slaves
An Anglo Saxon woman's attire shown at West Stow Anglo-Saxon Village
Alfred's reference to 'praying men, fighting men and working men' is far from a complete description of his society. Women in the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms appear to have enjoyed considerable independence, whether as abbesses of the great 'double monasteries' of monks and nuns founded during the seventh and eighth centuries, as major land-holders recorded in Domesday Book (1086), or as ordinary members of society. They could act as principals in legal transactions, were entitled to the same weregild as men of the same class, and were considered 'oath-worthy', with the right to defend themselves on oath against false accusations or claims. Sexual and other offences against them were penalised heavily. There is evidence that even married women could own property independently, and some surviving wills are in the joint names of husband and wife.[143]
Marriage comprised a contract between the woman's family and the prospective bridegroom, who was required to pay a 'bride-price' in advance of the wedding and a 'morning gift' following its consummation. The latter became the woman's personal property, but the former may have been paid to her relatives, at least during the early period. Widows were in a particularly favourable position, with inheritance rights, custody of their children and authority over dependents. However, a degree of vulnerability may be reflected in laws stating that they should not be forced into nunneries or second marriages against their will. The system of primogeniture (inheritance by the first-born male) was not introduced to England until after the Norman Conquest, so Anglo-Saxon siblings – girls as well as boys – were more equal in terms of status.
The age of majority was usually either ten or twelve, when a child could legally take charge of inherited property, or be held responsible for a crime.[144] It was common for children to be fostered, either in other households or in monasteries, perhaps as a means of extending the circle of protection beyond the kin group. Laws also make provision for orphaned children and foundlings.[145]
The traditional distinction in society, amongst free men, was expressed as eorl and ceorl ('earl and churl') though the term 'Earl' took on a more restricted meaning after the Viking period. The noble rank is designated in early centuries as gesiþas ('companions') or þegnas ('thegns'), the latter coming to predominate. After the Norman Conquest the title 'thegn' was equated to the Norman 'baron'.[146] A certain amount of social mobility is implied by regulations detailing the conditions under which a ceorl could become a thegn. Again these would have been subject to local variation, but one text refers to the possession of five hides of land (around 600 acres), a bell and a castle-gate, a seat and a special office in the king's hall. In the context of the control of boroughs, Frank Stenton notes that according to an 11th-century source, "a merchant who had carried out three voyages at his own charge [had also been] regarded as of thegnly status."[147] Loss of status could also occur, as with penal slavery, which could be imposed not only on the perpetrator of a crime but on his wife and family.
A further division in Anglo-Saxon society was between slave and free. Slavery was not as common as in other societies, but appears to have been present throughout the period. Both the freemen and slaves were hierarchically structured, with several classes of freemen and many types of slaves. These varied at different times and in different areas, but the most prominent ranks within free society were the king, the nobleman or thegn, and the ordinary freeman or ceorl. They were differentiated primarily by the value of their weregild or 'man price', which was not only the amount payable in compensation for homicide, but was also used as the basis for other legal formulations such as the value of the oath that they could swear in a court of law. Slaves had no weregild, as offences against them were taken to be offences against their owners, but the earliest laws set out a detailed scale of penalties depending both on the type of slave and the rank of owner.[148]
Some slaves may have been members of the native British population conquered by the Anglo-Saxons when they arrived from the continent; others may have been captured in wars between the early kingdoms, or have sold themselves for food in times of famine. However, slavery was not always permanent, and slaves who had gained their freedom would become part of an underclass of freedmen below the rank of ceorl.[149]

Culture
Architecture

Reconstruction of an Anglo-Saxon hall at Wychurst, Kent,c. 1000 AD
Early Anglo-Saxon buildings in Britain were generally simple, not using masonry except in foundations but constructed mainly using timber with thatch roofing.[150] Generally preferring not to settle within the old Roman cities,[151] the Anglo-Saxons built small towns near their centres of agriculture, at fords in rivers, or near natural ports. In each town, a main hall was in the centre, provided with a central hearth.[e]
Only ten of the hundreds of settlement sites that have been excavated in England from this period have revealed masonry domestic structures and confined to a few specific contexts. Timber was the natural building medium of the age;[152] the Anglo-Saxon word for "building" is timbe. Unlike in the Carolingian Empire, late Anglo-Saxon royal halls continued to be of timber in the manner of Yeavering centuries before, even though the king could clearly have mustered the resources to build in stone.[153] Their preference must have been a conscious choice, perhaps an expression of deeply–embedded Germanic identity on the part of the Anglo-Saxon royalty.
Even the elite had simple buildings, with a central fire and a hole in the roof to let the smoke escape; the largest homes rarely had more than one floor and one room. Buildings varied widely in size, most were square or rectangular, though some round houses have been found. Frequently these buildings have sunken floors, with a shallow pit over which a plank floor was suspended. The pit may have been used for storage, but more likely was filled with straw for insulation. A variation on the sunken floor design has been found in towns, where the "basement" may be as deep as 9 feet, suggesting a storage or work area below a suspended floor. Another common design was simple post framing, with heavy posts set directly into the ground, supporting the roof. The space between the posts was filled in with wattle and daub, or occasionally, planks. The floors were generally packed earth, though planks were sometimes used. Roofing materials varied, with thatch being the most common, though turf and even wooden shingles were also used.[154]

Distinctive Anglo-Saxon pilaster strips on the tower of All Saints' Church, Earls Barton
Stone was sometimes used to build churches. Bede makes it clear that the masonry construction of churches, including his own at Jarrow, was undertaken morem Romanorum, 'in the manner of the Romans,' in explicit contrast to existing traditions of timber construction. Even at Canterbury, Bede believed that St Augustine's first cathedral had been 'repaired' or 'recovered' (recuperavit) from an existing Roman church, when in fact it had been newly constructed from Roman materials. The belief was "the Christian Church was Roman, therefore a masonry church was a Roman building".
The building of churches in Anglo-Saxon England essentially began with Augustine of Canterbury in Kent following 597; for this he probably imported workmen from Frankish Gaul. The cathedral and abbey in Canterbury, together with churches in Kent at Minster in Sheppey (c. 664) and Reculver (669), and in Essex at the Chapel of St Peter-on-the-Wall at Bradwell-on-Sea, define the earliest type in southeast England. A simple nave without aisles provided the setting for the main altar; east of this a chancel arch separated the apse for use by the clergy. Flanking the apse and east end of the nave were side chambers serving as sacristies; further porticus might continue along the nave to provide for burials and other purposes. In Northumbria the early development of Christianity was influenced by the Irish mission, important churches being built in timber. Masonry churches became prominent from the late 7th century with the foundations of Wilfrid at Ripon and Hexham, and of Benedict Biscop at Monkwearmouth-Jarrow. These buildings had long naves and small rectangular chancels; porticus sometimes surrounded the naves. Elaborate crypts are a feature of Wilfrid's buildings. The best preserved early Northumbrian church is Escomb Church.[155]
From the mid-8th century to the mid-10th century, several important buildings survive. One group comprises the first known churches utilizing aisles: Brixworth, the most ambitious Anglo-Saxon church to survive largely intact; Wareham St Mary's; Cirencester; and the rebuilding of Canterbury Cathedral. These buildings may be compared with churches in the Carolingian Empire. Other lesser churches may be dated to the late eighth and early ninth centuries on the basis of their elaborate sculptured decoration and have simple naves with side porticus.[156] The tower of Barnack hearkens to the West Saxon reconquest in the early 10th century, when decorative features that were to be characteristic of Late Anglo-Saxon architecture were already developed, such as narrow raised bands of stone (pilaster strips) to surround archways and to articulate wall surfaces, as at Barton-upon-Humber and Earls Barton. In plan, however, the churches remained essentially conservative.
From the monastic revival of the second half of the tenth century, only a few documented buildings survive or have been excavated. Examples include the abbeys of Glastonbury; Old Minster, Winchester; Romsey; Cholsey; and Peterborough Cathedral. The majority of churches that have been described as Anglo-Saxon fall into the period between the late 10th century and the early 12th century. During this period, many settlements were first provided with stone churches, but timber also continued to be used; the best wood-framed church to survive is Greensted Church in Essex, no earlier than the 9th century, and no doubt typical of many parish churches. On the continent during the eleventh century, a group of interrelated Romanesque styles developed, associated with the rebuilding of many churches on a grand scale, made possible by a general advance in architectural technology and mason-craft.[155]
The first fully Romanesque church in England was Edward the Confessor's rebuilding of Westminster Abbey (c. 1042–60, now entirely lost to later construction), while the main development of the style only followed the Norman Conquest. However, at Stow Minster the crossing piers of the early 1050s are clearly proto-Romanesque. A more decorative interpretation of Romanesque in lesser churches can be dated only somewhere between the mid and late 11th century, e.g. Hadstock (Essex), Clayton and Sompting (Sussex); this style continued towards the end of the century as at Milborne Port (Somerset). At St Augustine's Abbey in Canterbury (c. 1048–61) Abbot Wulfric aimed to retain the earlier churches while linking them with an octagonal rotunda, but the concept was still essentially Pre-Romanesque. Anglo-Saxon churches of all periods would have been embellished with a range of arts,[157] including wall-paintings, some stained glass, metalwork and statues.

        St Peter-in-the-Wall, Essex: A simple nave church of the early style c. 650
    
    
        
        Brixworth, Northants: monastery founded c. 690, one of the largest churches to survive relatively intact
    
    
        
        Barnack, Peterborough: Lower tower c. 970 – spire is later
    
    
        
        Sompting Church, Sussex, with the only Anglo-Saxon Rhenish helm tower to survive, c. 1050

Art

Early Anglo-Saxon art is seen mostly in decorated jewellery, like brooches, buckles, beads and wrist-clasps, some of outstanding quality. Characteristic of the 5th century is the quoit brooch with motifs based on crouching animals, as seen on the silver quoit brooch from Sarre, Kent. While the origins of this style are disputed, it is either an offshoot of provincial Roman, Frankish, or Jutish art. One style flourished from the late 5th century and continued throughout the 6th and is on many square-headed brooches, it is characterised by chip-carved patterns based on animals and masks. A different style, which gradually superseded it, is dominated by serpentine beasts with interlacing bodies.[158]

Shoulder clasp (closed) from the Sutton Hoo ship-burial 1, England. British Museum.
By the later 6th century, the best works from the south-east are distinguished by greater use of expensive materials, above all gold and garnets, reflecting the growing prosperity of a more organised society which had greater access to imported precious materials, as seen in the buckle from the Taplow burial and the jewellery from Sutton Hoo,[159] c. 600 and c. 625 respectively. The possible symbolism of the decorative elements like interlace and beast forms that were used in these early works remains unclear. These objects were the products of a society that invested its modest surpluses in personal display, that fostered craftsmen and jewellers of a high standard, and in which the possession of a fine brooch or buckle was a valuable status symbol.[160]
The Staffordshire Hoard is the largest hoard of Anglo-Saxon gold and silver metalwork yet found. Discovered in a field near the village of Hammerwich, it consists of over 3,500 items[161] that are nearly all martial in character and contains no objects specific to female uses.[162][163] It demonstrates that considerable quantities of high-grade goldsmiths' work were in circulation among the elite during the 7th century. It also shows that the value of such items as currency and their potential roles as tribute or the spoils of war could, in a warrior society, outweigh appreciation of their integrity and artistry.[139]
The Christianization of the society revolutionised the visual arts, as well as other aspects of society. Art had to fulfil new functions, and whereas pagan art was abstract, Christianity required images clearly representing subjects. The transition between the Christian and pagan traditions is occasionally apparent in 7th century works; examples include the Crundale buckle[159] and the Canterbury pendant.[164] In addition to fostering metalworking skills, Christianity stimulated stone sculpture and manuscript illumination. In these Germanic motifs, such as interlace and animal ornament along with Celtic spiral patterns, are juxtaposed with Christian imagery and Mediterranean decoration, notably vine-scroll. The Ruthwell Cross, Bewcastle Cross and Easby Cross are leading Northumbrian examples of the Anglo-Saxon version of the Celtic high cross, generally with a slimmer shaft.
The jamb of the doorway at Monkwearmouth, carved with a pair of lacertine beasts, probably dates from the 680s; the golden, garnet-adorned pectoral cross of St Cuthbert was presumably made before 687; while his wooden inner coffin (incised with Christ and the Evangelists' symbols, the Virgin and Child, archangels and apostles), the Lindisfarne Gospels, and the Codex Amiatinus all date from c. 700. The fact that these works are all from Northumbria might be held to reflect the particular strength of the church in that kingdom.[165] Works from the south were more restrained in their ornamentation than are those from Northumbria.
Lindisfarne was an important centre of book production, along with Ripon and Monkwearmouth-Jarrow. The Lindisfarne Gospels might be the single most beautiful book produced in the Middle Ages, and the Echternach Gospels and (probably) the Book of Durrow are other products of Lindisfarne. A Latin gospel book, the Lindisfarne Gospels are richly illuminated and decorated in an Insular style that blends Irish and Western Mediterranean elements and incorporates imagery from the Eastern Mediterranean, including Coptic Christianity.[166] The Codex Amiatinus was produced in the north of England at the same time and has been called the finest book in the world.[167] It is certainly one of the largest, weighing 34 kilograms.[168] It is a pandect, which was rare in the Middle Ages, and included all the books of the Bible in one volume. The Codex Amiatinus was produced at Monkwearmouth-Jarrow in 692 under the direction of Abbot Ceolfrith. Bede probably had something to do with it. The production of the Codex shows the riches of the north of England at this time. We have records of the monastery needing a new grant of land to raise 2,000 more cattle to get the calf skins to make the vellum for the manuscript.[169] The Codex Amiatinus was meant to be a gift to the pope, and Ceolfrith was taking it to Rome when he died on the way. The copy ended up in Florence, where it still is today – a ninth-century copy of this book is in the possession of the pope.[170]

Book of Cerne, evangelist portrait of Saint Mark
In the 8th century, Anglo-Saxon Christian art flourished with grand decorated manuscripts and sculptures, along with secular works which bear comparable ornament, like the Witham pins and the Coppergate helmet.[171] The flourishing of sculpture in Mercia occurred slightly later than in Northumbria and is dated to the second half of the 8th century. The Book of Cerne is an early 9th century Insular or Anglo-Saxon Latin personal prayer book with Old English components. This manuscript was decorated and embellished with four painted full-page miniatures, major and minor letters, and continuing panels.[172] Further decorated motifs used in these manuscripts, such as hunched, triangular beasts, also appear on objects from the Trewhiddle hoard (buried in the 870s) and on the rings which bear the names of King Æthelwulf and Queen Æthelswith, which are the centre of a small corpus of fine ninth-century metalwork.
There was demonstrable continuity in the south, even though the Danish settlement represented a watershed in England's artistic tradition. Wars and pillaging removed or destroyed much Anglo-Saxon art, while the settlement introduced new Scandinavian craftsmen and patrons. The result was to accentuate the pre-existing distinction between the art of the north and that of the south.[173] In the 10th and 11th centuries, the Viking dominated areas were characterised by stone sculpture in which the Anglo-Saxon tradition of cross shafts took on new forms, and a distinctive Anglo-Scandinavian monument, the 'hogback' tomb, was produced.[174] The decorative motifs used on these northern carvings (as on items of personal adornment or everyday use) echo Scandinavian styles. The Wessexan hegemony and the monastic reform movement appear to have been the catalysts for the rebirth of art in southern England from the end of the 9th century. Here artists responded primarily to continental art; foliage supplanting interlace as the preferred decorative motif. Key early works are the Alfred Jewel, which has fleshy leaves engraved on the back plate; and the stole and maniples of Bishop Frithestan of Winchester, which are ornamented with acanthus leaves, alongside figures that bear the stamp of Byzantine art. The surviving evidence points to Winchester and Canterbury as the leading centres of manuscript art in the second half of the 10th century: they developed colourful paintings with lavish foliate borders, and coloured line drawings.
By the early 11th century, these two traditions had fused and had spread to other centres. Although manuscripts dominate the corpus, sufficient architectural sculpture, ivory carving and metalwork survives to show that the same styles were current in secular art and became widespread in the south at parochial level. The wealth of England in the later tenth and eleventh century is clearly reflected in the lavish use of gold in manuscript art as well as for vessels, textiles and statues (now known only from descriptions). Widely admired, southern English art was highly influential in Normandy, France and Flanders from c. 1000.[175] Indeed, keen to possess it or recover its materials, the Normans appropriated it in large quantities in the wake of the Conquest. The Bayeux Tapestry, probably designed by a Canterbury artist for Bishop Odo of Bayeux, is arguably the apex of Anglo-Saxon art. Surveying nearly 600 years of continuous change, three common strands stand out: lavish colour and rich materials; an interplay between abstract ornament and representational subject matter; and a fusion of art styles reflecting English links to other parts of Europe.[176]

        Trewhiddle style on silver ring c. 775 – c. 850
    
    
        
        St Oswald's Priory Cross c. 890

Language

Her sƿutelað seo gecƿydrædnes ðe ('Here is manifested the Word to thee'). Unique Old English inscription over the arch of the south porticus in the 10th-century St Mary's parish church, Breamore, Hampshire
Old English (Ænglisċ, Anglisċ, Englisċ) is the earliest form of the English language. It was brought to Britain by Anglo-Saxon settlers, and was spoken and written in parts of what are now England and southeastern Scotland until the mid-12th century, by which time it had evolved into Middle English. Old English was a West Germanic language, closely related to Old Frisian and Old Saxon (Old Low German). The language was fully inflected, with five grammatical cases, three grammatical numbers and three grammatical genders. Over time, Old English developed into four major dialects: Northumbrian, spoken north of the Humber; Mercian, spoken in the Midlands; Kentish, spoken in Kent; and West Saxon, spoken across the south and southwest. All of these dialects have direct descendants in modern England. Standard English developed from the Mercian dialect, as it was predominant in London.[177]
It is generally held that Old English received little influence from the Common Brittonic and British Latin spoken in southern Britain prior to the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons, as it took in very few loan words from these languages. Though some scholars have claimed that Brittonic could have exerted an influence on English syntax and grammar,[178][179][180] these ideas have not become consensus views,[181] and have been criticized by other historical linguists.[182][183] Richard Coates has concluded that the strongest candidates for substratal Brittonic features in English are grammatical elements occurring in regional dialects in the north and west of England, such as the Northern Subject Rule.[184]
Old English was more clearly influenced by Old Norse. Scandinavian loan words in English include place names, items of basic vocabulary such as sky, leg and they,[185] and words concerned with particular administrative aspects of the Danelaw (that is, the area of land under Viking control, including the East Midlands and Northumbria south of the Tees). Old Norse was related to Old English, as both originated from Proto-Germanic, and many linguists believe that the loss of inflectional endings in Old English was accelerated by contact with Norse.[186][187][188]

Kinship
Local and extended kin groups were a key aspect of Anglo-Saxon culture. Kinship fueled societal advantages, freedom and the relationships to an elite, that allowed the Anglo-Saxons' culture and language to flourish.[5] The ties of loyalty to a lord were to the person of a lord and not to his station; there was no real concept of patriotism or loyalty to a cause. This explains why dynasties waxed and waned so quickly, since a kingdom was only as strong as its leader-king. There was no underlying administration or bureaucracy to maintain any gains beyond the lifetime of a leader. An example of this was the leadership of Rædwald of East Anglia and how the East Anglian primacy did not survive his death.[189] Kings could not make new laws barring exceptional circumstances. Their role instead was to uphold and clarify previous custom and to assure his subjects that he would uphold their ancient privileges, laws, and customs. Although the person of the king as a leader could be exalted, the office of kingship was not in any sense so powerful or invested with authority as it was to become. One of the tools kings used was to tie themselves closely to the new Christian church, through the practice of having a church leader anoint and crown the king; God and king were then joined in peoples' minds.[190]
The ties of kinship meant that the relatives of a murdered person were obliged to exact vengeance for his or her death. This led to bloody and extensive feuds. As a way out of this deadly and futile custom the system of weregilds was instituted. The weregild set a monetary value on each person's life according to their wealth and social status. This value could also be used to set the fine payable if a person was injured or offended against. Robbing a thane called for a higher penalty than robbing a ceorl. On the other hand, a thane who thieved could pay a higher fine than a ceorl who did likewise. Men were willing to die for the lord and to support their comitatus (their warrior band). Evidence of this behavior (though it may be more a literary ideal than an actual social practice) can be observed in the story, made famous in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle entry for 755, of Cynewulf and Cyneheard, in which the followers of a defeated king decided to fight to the death rather than be reconciled after the death of their lord.[191]
This emphasis on social standing affected all parts of the Anglo-Saxon world. The courts, for example, did not attempt to discover the facts in a case; instead, in any dispute it was up to each party to get as many people as possible to swear to the rightness of their case, which became known as oath-swearing. The word of a thane counted for that of six ceorls.[192] It was assumed that any person of good character would be able to find enough people to swear to his innocence that his case would prosper.
Anglo-Saxon society was also decidedly patriarchal, but women were in some ways better off than they would be in later times. A woman could own property in her own right. She could and did rule a kingdom if her husband died. She could not be married without her consent, and any personal goods, including lands, that she brought into a marriage remained her own property. If she were injured or abused in her marriage, her relatives were expected to look after her interests.[193]

Law