Masaryk UniversityFaculty of ArtsDepartment of Englishand American StudiesEnglish Language and Literature

Anna erbaumovAnglo-Saxons and English IdentityMasters Diploma Thesis

Supervisor: Dr., M.A. Stephen Paul Hardy, Ph.D.

2010

I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently, using only the primary and secondary sources listed in the bibliography.

V Plzni dne 22.11.2010

I would like to thank my supervisor Dr., M.A. Stephen Paul Hardy, Ph.D. for his advice and comments, and my family and boyfriend for their constant support.

Table of Contents10Introduction

41Anglo-Saxon Period (4101066)

41.1Anglo-Saxon Settlement in Britain

51.2A Brief History of the Anglo-Saxon Period

71.3Saxons, English or Anglo-Saxons?

91.4The Origins of English Identity and the Venerable Bede

151.5English Identity in the Ninth Century and Alfred the Greats Preface to the Pastoral Care

171.6Conclusion

192The Conquered England (10661204)

192.1The Norman Conquest

202.2The English and Norman Identities in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries

222.3English Identity and the Anglo-Saxons in William of Malmesburys Deeds of the

Kings of the English

252.4Conclusion

273The Late Middle Ages (12041485)

273.1England, English Identity and the Anglo-Saxons in the Late Middle Ages

313.2The Romance of Guy of Warwick

363.3Conclusion

384The Tudor Age (14851603)

384.1England, English Identity and the Anglo-Saxons in the Tudor Age

414.2Matthew Parkers A Testimony of Antiquity

454.3Conclusion

475The Early Stuarts (16031660)

475.1England under the Early Stuarts and the Uses of Anglo-Saxon Past in the Construction of English Identity during the Civil War

505.2John Hares St. Edwards Ghost, or Anti-Normanism

535.3Conclusion

556From Restoration until 1789

556.1England after the Restoration and the Revival of Interest in the Anglo-Saxon Past

586.2Daniel Defoes The True-Born Englishman

616.3Conclusion

637The Nineteenth Century (17891914)

637.1The Nineteenth Century and the Racialization of the Myth of the Anglo-Saxon past

657.2Charles Dickenss A Childs History of England

687.3Conclusion

698After the Second World War (19452010)

698.1The United Kingdom after the Second World War: the Crisis of English Identity and the Decline of Interest in Anglo-Saxon Past?

778.2Geraldine McCaughreans Britannia: 100 Great Stories from British History

808.3Conclusion

819Conclusion

8610Works Cited

9611Resum

9712Summary

0 IntroductionThe Norman Conquest is generally considered to be the end of what we call Anglo-Saxon England. However, Anglo-Saxon England remained a vital cultural construct in post-Conquest England. In fact, the remembrance and re-imagining of Anglo-Saxon England in the post-conquest period is part of an ongoing cultural process that began from the first moment that William stood among the slain Anglo-Saxon nobles after the battle of Hastings, writes Robert Allen Rouse in the first chapter of his book The Idea of Anglo-Saxon England in Middle English Romance (1). When, in the introduction to Anglo-Saxonism and the Construction of Social Identity, Allen J. Frantzen and John D. Niles define what they mean by Anglo-Saxonism, they claim that it is the process through which a self-conscious national and racial identity first came into being among the early peoples of the region that we now call England and how, over time, through both scholarly and popular promptings, that identity was transformed into an originary myth available to a wide variety of political and social interests (1). However, this collection of essays explores Anglo-Saxonism only in certain periods of time and in different parts of the world ranging from the United States to England and Scandinavia.

My thesis further develops the concepts put forward in this work. I argue that the perceptions of the Anglo-Saxon past played an important role in English history and that they were used in various ways in the construction of English national identity, each period of English history appropriating the Anglo-Saxon past in its own way according to its current needs. Therefore, the aim of this thesis is to demonstrate systematically how the Anglo-Saxon past was viewed in different periods of English history, from the Anglo-Saxon period until the twentieth century, and how (if at all) it influenced the development of English identity. I am primarily concerned with the history and identity of England and the English, not with that of Britain, though it is inevitably connected. As investigating popular perceptions of identity in the past is extremely difficult, I will rather concentrate on how writers throughout the ages attempted to shape English identity through their works. Each period of English history will be investigated mainly through one work of a contemporary author.

All chapters, which are named after the period of English history which they deal with, are structured similarly. First, I introduce the given historical period and the main developments relevant to the evolution of English identity at the time. Then, I summarize what has been argued about the perception of the Anglo-Saxons and the development of English identity during the period. In the final part of each chapter, I analyze one work by an English author dealing with the Anglo-Saxon past.In chapter one, I provide a brief account of the origins of the Anglo-Saxon settlement in England and the evolution of England during the Anglo-Saxon period. Then, I describe the origins and meanings of the terms Saxon, English and Anglo-Saxon as well as how the meanings of these terms have changed throughout history. Finally, I attempt to find out when the world first saw an English identity and how that identity was viewed at this early point in history by analyzing the eighth-century Ecclesiastical History of the English People by the monk Venerable Bede and the ninth-century preface to the Pastoral Care by King Alfred the Great.Chapter two is devoted to the period between the Norman Conquest of 1066 and the beginning of the thirteenth century. I focus on the impact of the Norman Conquest on the development of English identity and attempt to trace the interaction of the English and Norman identities until the final victory of the English. As a contemporary work dealing with the clash of the two identities, I analyze Deeds of the Kings of the English written at the beginning of the twelfth century by William of Malmesbury, a monk of Anglo-Norman origin.

Chapter three deals with a number of changes which occurred in England during the late medieval period. It endeavours to explain what the consequences were for English identity, which represented a rather complicated notion at the time, and what the role of the Anglo-Saxons was in this process. As an example of how the Anglo-Saxons were viewed in this period, a fifteenth-century romance of Guy of Warwick is analyzed.

In chapter four, I explore the period between 1485 and 1603, during which England was ruled by the Tudor monarchs. I focus on the process of the English Reformation, initiated by King Henry VIII, and on the new period in the development of English identity, which was initiated by the Reformation. Moreover, I attempt to explain what the role of the Anglo-Saxon past was in this development. In the second part of the chapter, I analyze the preface to A Testimony of Antiquity, a collection of religious writings from the Anglo-Saxon period assembled by Archbishop Matthew Parker, one of the most important figures of the Reformation. Chapter five discusses the period of the reign of the early Stuart kings, 16031660. It focuses mainly on the English Civil War. First, it attempts to explain the causes of this conflict. Then, it concentrates on the role of the Anglo-Saxon past in this event and its impact on English identity. Finally, special interest is paid to one of the examples of the radical interpretation of English history, St. Edwards Ghost, or Anti-Normanism, a pamphlet by a radical thinker John Hare published in 1647.

Chapter six explores the period after the Restoration of the Stuart kings until the end of the eighteenth century. It mainly deals with the political situation in England after the Restoration and the revival of interest in the Anglo-Saxon past in the eighteenth century and its accommodation to the new needs provided by the accession of kings of foreign origin to the English throne. In the second part of the chapter, I analyze the satirical poem The True-Born Englishman by Daniel Defoe. In chapter seven, I focus on the nineteenth century. After briefly introducing the period and the origins of the racialization of the myth of Anglo-Saxon past, I endeavour to trace the development of English identity in the nineteenth century in relation to Anglo-Saxon past. Following this, I attempt to illustrate the perceptions of the Anglo-Saxons and their significance in the development of English identity during this period by analyzing a section of A Childs History of England by Charles Dickens.

Chapter eight deals with the period from the Second World War until present. It attempts to describe the changes that the British Empire underwent in the post-war period, how they influenced English identity and what was the role of the Anglo-Saxons in this process. As an example of a recent work, I provide an analysis of Britannia: 100 Great Stories from British History, a collection of stories and legends from the history of Great Britain written by Geraldine McCaughrean. 1 Anglo-Saxon Period (4101066)

In the fifth and sixth centuries, significant political, economic and cultural changes took place in Britain. After the Roman legions withdrew, the structure of the Roman state rapidly disintegrated. The economy collapsed and the Latin language was gradually abandoned. The Dark Ages began (Brooks 21).

In such a state, Britain was ripe for invasion (Rodrick 16) and it did not take long before such an invasion took place. The territory was soon split between the Celts, who were driven to the west and highland areas, and the invading Germanic tribes which settled in the south and east, bringing with them their language and pagan culture (Brooks 2123). Both formed a number of smaller kingdomsstruggling to survive and, often, attacking their neighbours to expand their own control (Rodrick 17).

However, by the eleventh century, the members of these Germanic tribes which we usually call Anglo-Saxons had practically managed to make England (John 4): the separate English kingdoms had gone, and the kingdom of England had been born (Saul 5), as well as a certain sense of Englishness (Saul 1). 1.1 Anglo-Saxon Settlement in Britain

During the four centuries of its existence, Roman Britain faced assaults from all directions. From the north and west, it was threatened by the Celtic peoples settled in Wales, northern England and Ireland; the Germanic peoples were attacking from the east and south. In the second half of the third century, fortifications had to be built along the eastern and southern shores to prevent the growing piracy in the Narrow Seas (Blair and Keynes 1-4). After the third-century stagnation, Britain enjoyed a revival in the first half of the fourth century. Nevertheless, from about 340, the prosperity of Britain declined again due to increasingly severe pressure on northern and seaward frontier and political troubles (Haigh 22).In 398399, the Roman General Flavius Stilicho repulsed the invasions of the Picts, the Saxons and the Irish into Britain. In 401 or 402, however, he withdrew troops to defend Italy against the Goths led by Alaric (Haigh 23). It was followed by the cessation of the payment of the remaining regular troops and civil officials from the central resources which provoked extreme discontent (Blair and Salway 56). Three emperors were elevated in a rapid succession by the army in Britain in the hope of better defence for Britain, of whom only Constantine III survived (Blair and Keynes 3). At the very end of 406, the attack of the barbarians on Gaul and the subsequent moving of the centre of the western government south from Trier to Arles only led to a greater isolation of Britain (Haigh 2223). Constantine III left for Gaul with even more troops to justify his loyalty to the emperor (Blair and Keynes 3).In 409, neglected by Constantine III and the whole empire and again attacked by barbarians, the disillusioned Romano-Britons expelled both Constantines administration and the invaders. In fact, they completely abandoned Roman rule (Haigh 2223). Control was taken by usurpers (tyranni), local potentates of various background (Blair and Salway 58). From 409, in the absence of central government, groups of barbarians were probably employed as mercenaries. Some archaeological findings suggest that they may have been brought to Britain already under Stilicho or Constantine III. It was probably from the 430s onwards that Germanic settlers started to arrive in large numbers in Britain (Blair and Salway 5761). 1.2 A Brief History of the Anglo-Saxon Period

The Venerable Bede mentions three groups of the Germanic peoples who arrived in Britain: the Angles, Saxons and Jutes. According to him, the Angles settled in the north and east, while the Saxons settled in the south. The Jutes were to be found in Kent, the Isle of Wight and southern Hampshire. This pattern of settlement was roughly confirmed by archaeological findings though geographical boundaries were not clearly cut. Archaeological evidence and place names suggest that other Germanic peoples, though in smaller numbers, settled in Britain. Among them were Frisians, Franks and Norwegians. Nevertheless, the scale of the Germanic migration into Britain is still debated (Lapidge et al. 416).However, it seems that the leaders of the invading warrior bands became kings over smaller territories. It is traditionally believed that, in the course of the sixth century, these territories were absorbed into seven larger kingdoms (the so-called Heptarchy): Kent (the Jutes), Northumbria, Mercia, East Anglia (the Angles), Essex, Sussex, and Wessex (the Saxons) (Kramer 28; Nangonov 9). Nevertheless, as Richard Dargie suggests, recent research has revealed a much more fluid pattern of power and identity during the first three centuries of the Anglo-Saxon period (48). England was in fact a loose confederation of individual kingdoms, different kingdoms occasionally gaining greater power than others and their rulers functioning as overlords to the whole region (Rodrick 19).One by one, the kingdoms were converted to Christianity, initially by missionaries under St. Augustine sent by Pope Gregory the Great to Kent in 597 (Scragg 2). The first archbishopric was established in Canterbury from where Roman Christianity spread over the island. Moreover, Irish Christianity, brought by Irish monks from Iona in western Scotland, reached Northumbria in the first half of the seventh century and started to spread to central England. The two branches of Christianity coexisted until 664, when, after the Synod of Whitby, the Irish Church had to submit to the Roman one (Nangonov 11; Scragg 2).By the ninth century, the seven kingdoms were transformed into three even larger kingdoms, Wessex, Mercia and Northumbria, which had been the largest ones since the middle of the seventh century (Kramer 28; McDowall 12). From 793, England had been attacked by the Vikings, initially ravaging the coastal areas but later also settling down (Kramer 30). They were one of the causes of the unification of England undertaken by King Alfred the Great (r. 871-99) from the House of Wessex (Scragg 3). In 878, England was divided between the territories controlled by Alfred the Great and the Danelaw where the Danes were forced to retreat (Nangonov 12). Alfreds work was continued by his son Edward the Elder (899924) and his grandson Athelstan (92439), resulting in most of the formerly independent (or semi-independent) Anglo-Saxon kingdoms gradually coming under a single rule. By the time of Athelstans death, modern boundaries of England were virtually set and the king, having also links through marriage into many influential European families, exercised a certain degree of power over much of the British Isle: politically, England was born (Scragg 3). Despite some temporary losses of control over certain territories and divisions of the territory, Athelstans successors managed to maintain the unity and gradually reconquer the Danelaw. When Ethelred the Unready became king in 978, the Danes started attacking England again. Between 1016 and 1042, England was part of Scandinavian Empire. In 1042, Ethelreds last surviving son, Edward the Confessor, was brought back from exile in Normandy. The disputes over the succession after his death in 1066 finally resulted in the Norman Conquest (Nangonov 1214; Scragg 34).

1.3 Saxons, English or Anglo-Saxons?The term Saxones, representing a Germanic tribe of the North Sea Coast, was first mentioned by the Egyptian astronomer, mathematician and geographer Ptolemy at around 150 AD. He situates the Saxons to western Holstein or to western Slesvig. During the third century, they probably migrated westward along the coast. In the fourth century, they occupied the German coast from Elbe to Ems. During the fourth and fifth centuries, Saxon became a generic term for a North Sea pirate. Therefore, the Saxons, Angles and Jutes who conquered eastern Britain in the fifth century were all called Saxons by their victims and by the Continental writers of the day, and the name was long kept as a generic term for the English settlers and their descendants, irrespective of the tribal divisions and subdivisions which held for many centuries (Malone 174). The English, on the other hand, used the term Saxon strictly for the members of the Saxon tribe. They referred to themselves as Angli (Malone 174). The Roman historian Tacitus was the first one to speak about the Anglii by whom he understood one of the seven tribes worshipping a goddess called Nerthus at an island sanctuary. While Tacitus regarded the Anglo-Saxons as a seaboard people, Ptolemy represented them as inland people dwelling in the west of the middle Elbe. It is, nonetheless, agreed that Ptolemy was wrong as the Old English poem Widsith, Tacitus, Bede and Alfred situate the English to the southern part of the Jutland peninsula. Moreover, the area north-east of Slesvig still bears the name of Angeln. However, we are not sure about the original home of the Jutes (Blair and Keynes 89).The abbreviated form Angli, referring to all Germanic inhabitants of Britain, was first used, in Latinized form, by Pope Gregory the Great at the end of the sixth century (Malone 174). Gregorys Angli (or Anguli) were given a wider currency by the Venerable Bede (Lapidge et al. 170). The term also gradually conquered the Continent where it allowed to avoid ambiguity because the term Saxones also referred to the Saxons of Germany (these were called Old Saxons by the English writers) (Malone 174). When the word English first appeared in Old English, it had already lost its original sense of or about the Angles and referred to all the Teutonic peoples who had settled in Britain in the fifth century (Kumar 9). It was the Lombard historian and poet Paul the Deacon (c. 720c. 799) who, in his History of the Langobards, introduced a third generic name, Angli Saxones or Saxones Angli for the English, though never much used. It was sometimes used in the learned Continental writings until the end of the tenth century but in England, it appeared only in connection with the Royal title (Rex Angulsaxonum) (Malone 17576). It was adopted at the court of Alfred the Great to express the amalgamation of Anglian and Saxon peoples under Alfreds leadership in the 880s (Lapidge et al. 38). The names Angli and Saxones were far more common until the end of the tenth century, when Angli definitively replaced the two other names (Malone 17576). Accordingly, the kings from the later tenth century bore the title rex Anglorum and, as Susan Reynolds asserts, the compound name did not reappear until it was resurrected in the sixteenth century in order to distinguish the language and history of the inhabitants of England before the Norman Conquest from those of later periods (398).As for the meaning of Anglo-Saxon in English, Kemp Malone proposes three main definitions, of which the following one is the most important:

English in the broad or unrestricted sense, i.e. without regard to historical periods, political boundaries, or geographical areas; applied to the English people and their culture (laws, customs, language, literature, etc.) from the fifth century to the present day, in England, Scotland, Ireland, America, etc. This is the oldest sense of the word and the only meaning recorded in the Middle Ages; it is also the most frequent meaning in popular speech today. (184)The two other possible meanings, according to Malone, are: English in some restricted sense; various restrictions are applied (she further lists six types of such restrictions) and Pre-English (implying a restriction of English to the later Middle Ages and modern times) (Malone 18485). We should also mention the term gens Anglorum (English people), coined again by Pope Gregory the Great and subsequently promoted by Bede. The vernacular version of this name Angelcynn appears in a Mercian charter in the 850s, but becomes common at the close on the ninth century in vernacular texts associated with the court of Alfred the Great (Lapidge et al. 171). It is also used in the sense the land of the English folk (Blair and Salway 1993). It was the eleventh-century king Canute who called his kingdom Engla Lond (Lapidge et al. 171).In this masters thesis, I am mainly using the name Anglo-Saxons in the sense of the English people, that is, the Germanic peoples who settled in England and who are generally known as the Anglo-Saxons (Bede 22) and the adjective Anglo-Saxon in the sense English but with a temporal restriction to the Saxon period of English history (circa 400 to 1066 A.D.) to which a part or the whole of the Norman period (10661154) is often added (Malone 18485).1.4 The Origins of English Identity and the Venerable BedeAs Susan Reynolds claims, we do not know how consistently the Germanic-speaking invaders of Britain behaved like a group or felt themselves to be a group during the fifth and sixth centuries. We do not know what they called themselves or what others called them, if indeed they had any collective name (401). During the two centuries after their arrival, the Germanic peoples were illiterate which means that for the fifth and sixth centuries, we have to rely on foreign sources and archaeology (Blair and Salway 61). Most sources describing the period of the Germanic settlement are of a later date and they are based on oral tradition, myth and imaginative fiction (Wormald, Anglo-Saxon 2). In fact, as Blair and Keynes state, for the period between 410 and 597, there are few events in the history of Britain so firmly established that they can be regarded as incontrovertible historical facts (2). The situation improves only after 597, the year when Pope Gregory the Great sent a mission to the Angles and when literacy and, subsequently, written history were brought to the Germanic peoples of Britain together with Christianity (Wormald, Anglo-Saxon 2). Therefore, we cannot state for certain whether the Germanic peoples formed a homogeneous group, either racially or culturally, when they came to Britain. Neither do we know how much different they were from the British population or the Pictish and Scottish invaders (Blair and Keynes 1011; Reynolds 402). We can say, though, that in the seventh century, military and political conflicts did not always follow ethnic lines (Reynolds 402). They derived rather from different interests of individual kingdoms the Germanic peoples formed in Britain. Because, as Susan Reynolds suggests, after a generation or two of post-Roman Britain not everyone, perhaps comparatively few people, can have been of pure native or invading descent. Who can have known who was descended from whom? (403). Moreover, as she further argues, the origin of the inhabitants of England as such may not be the clue to the creation of the common English identity in the eighth century: That was a matter not of physical descent but of changes in political and social solidarity. Anyone who lived in an area dominated by an English king and who therefore owed allegiance to him was likely to come to consider himself and to be considered English. In time everyone in these areas came to speak English (Reynolds 40304). In short, the layer of unity was as yet a matter of feeling, not one of either political authority or genuinely common descent (Reynolds 404). As Krishan Kumar mentions, it was probably the monk Venerable Bede (c. 672735) who first (or at least as the first Anglo-Saxon) spoke of the English (gens Anglorum) as a single people (41). At the age of seven, Bede was taken to the monastery of Jarrow (the twin monastery of Wearmouth) in Northumbria, where he spent the rest of his life. Without ever leaving Northumbria, he became one of the most learned men of Europe and the institution of Wearmouth-Jarrow one of the most important cultural centres in Europe. Though he regarded himself mainly as a biblical commentator (Farmer, Introduction 21), Bedes greatest achievement was the Latin Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum (Ecclesiastical History of the English People). The History consists of five volumes. It begins in 60 BC with the unsuccessful invasion of Britain by Julius Caesar and ends in AD 731 when Bede finished writing. Therefore, when we read the History, we have to take into account that it was completed about 130 years after Augustine came into Britain and 300 years after the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons (Farmer, Introduction 24). It means that further back we proceed in history, the less reliable the facts are. Bede himself, in the preface to the History, distinguishes between his pre- and post- conversion sources. The first book was largely based on Liber querulus de excidio Britanniae by the British monk Gildas which, as D. H. Farmer argues, was more of a homily than a history. Explicitly dependent on the biblical account of Jeremiah, it saw the downfall of the British in terms of Israels fall to the Assyrians (24). Among other pre-conversion sources of the History, we may mention Orosius, Pliny, Solinus, Life of St. Germanus written by Constantinus, Life of St. Alban and the Liber Pontificalis (Gransden 19). Nevertheless, in the preface, Bede lists only his contemporary sources. Abbot Albinus of Canterbury (709-32) was not only his principal source for Kent but, as Bede claims, it was mainly owing to the persuasion of Albinus that I was encouraged to begin this work (Bede 42; Authors Preface). Albinuss assistant Nothelm, a London priest, supplied Bede with the letters of Pope Gregory and some later popes which he found in the papal archives in Rome (Farmer, Introduction 25). Other sources include Daniel, Bishop of Winchester (the history of the West and East Saxons and the Isle of Wight), monks of Lastingham monastery (information about Chad, Cedd and Mercia), Abbot Esi (East Anglia), Bishop Cynibert (Lindsey) and himself and countless faithful witnesses (Northumbria) (Bede 43; Authors Preface).In fact, Bede accorded prominence to the kingdom of Northumbria where he originated. On the other hand, his attitude was rather hostile towards Mercia, whose pagan king Penda caused the death of Edwin, the first Christian king of Northumbria. As regards Wessex, Bede lacked information about this kingdom and therefore omitted many important facts from its history. Bedes account of the Celtic Christians was influenced by his sympathies for the Irish and his antipathy towards the Welsh (Farmer, Introduction 2930). Nevertheless, even if it may sometimes be biased and contain historical inaccuracies, Bedes Ecclesiastical History was widely read and respected in the dark and middle ages and today is regarded as the most important source for early English history (Gransden 14). As Krishan Kumar remarks, Bedes History was, as its title made clear, primarily Church history; its purpose moral and prescriptive (Kumar 4142). This moral purpose is evident already from the preface to the History: For if history records good things of good men, the thoughtful hearer is encouraged to imitate what is good (Bede 41; Authors Preface). As for example D. H. Farmer argues, for Bede, Christianity represented a unifying force which brought together Picts, Irish, Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and, possibly, even the Britons (the symbol of this unity was the celebration of the Easter on the same day) (Farmer, Introduction 27). However, Bede is mainly interested in the history of the English people and the Church of the English, as he claims in the autobiographical note of his History (Bede 5). Inspired by Gildas, Bede perceives the arrival of the German tribes into Britain as Gods punishment for the wickedness of the Britons. In chapters thirteen and fourteen of Book One, he describes how the Britons, stricken by famine and without help from Rome, are left at the mercy of the barbarians. However, they gradually manage to banish the invaders from their territory and they enjoy a period of sheer abundance. But, according to Bede, such wealth leads to an extreme proliferation of sin between both laymen and the clergy. Consequently, God sends a terrible plague on the whole nation but not even such blight causes the Britons to turn back to the Christian faith. Therefore, even a worse disaster follows when the Britons themselves, on the advice of King Vortigern, decide to invite the Saxon peoples to help them protect themselves from the attacks of the Irish and the Picts.

As Bede notes, this decision, as its results were to show, seems to have been ordained by God as a punishment on their wickedness (Bede 62; bk. 1, ch. 14). Because, though the Angles initially defeat the invaders from the North, the former later start coming in large numbers and finally they ally with the Picts and turn against the Britons. They continue to devastate the country and slain the people until a major defeat by the Britons in 493 at the battle of Badon Hill.Bede mentions three races of the Germanic peoples: the Angles, Saxons and Jutes. The Jutes are the ancestors of the people of Kent and the Isle of Wight and the area opposite to it. From the Saxons are descended the East, South and West Saxons and the Angles are forebears of the East and Middle Angles, the Mercians, the Northumbrians and the remaining English peoples (Bede 63; bk. 1, ch. 15). Nevertheless, together they form the English people, gens Anglorum, the people chosen by God, as Bede claims. Because, while the Britons only committed another sin when they did not preach the Word of God to the invaders, God remembered them [the people whom he had chosen], and sent this nation more worthy preachers of truth to bring them to the Faith (Bede 72; bk. 1, ch. 22).

These more worthy preachers of truth were to become Augustine and his companions sent to Ethelbert, the King of Kent, in 596 by Pope Gregory the Great. Gregorys deep desire for the salvation of our nation, as Bede claims, was aroused at a market in Rome where he saw some English boys beautiful as angels and decided that they should therefore joint the angels in heaven (Bede 103; bk. 2, ch. 1). For Bede, Gregory the Great represents a father of the English people who transformed our still idolatrous nation into a church of Christ (Bede 98; bk. 2, ch. 1).From this point, Bedes History becomes predominantly a narration about the gradual conversion of the Germanic peoples and the succession of their kings and bishops. Because, as Sarah Foot points out, part of what Bede had aimed to illustrate was the process by which a national Church was created; as he traced the establishment of separate sees in each individual kingdom . . . he stressed not a series of distinct institutions for each individual people but the making of a single Church, subject to Rome (60).

Nevertheless, this process was very slow as the conversion of a king did not guarantee that his successors would also become adherents of the Christian faith. The revival of the worship of pagan gods is usually accompanied by the misfortunes of the people of the kingdom. In this aspect, the English people resemble the nation of Israel. For instance, in chapter one of Book Three, King Edwins successors abandon the Christian faith for the former beliefs. But, as Bede concludes, not long afterwards they were justly punished by meeting their death at the hands of the godless Cadwalla, king of the Britons who installed tyranny in Northumbria (Bede 143; bk. 3, ch. 6). But, as soon as King Oswald, a man beloved of God, becomes king, though his army is small, he manages to defeat Cadwalla. Later, this king, reputed for his devotion and piety, subjugates all the four nations of Britain (Bede 144; bk. 3, ch. 6). As for example Sarah Foot has argued, Bedes History culminates when Theodore becomes archbishop (Foot 60). For Theodore was the first archbishop whom the entire Church of the English obeyed (Bede 205; bk. 4, ch. 1). Bede also represents Theodores reign as the period of the biggest prosperity of the English: Never had there been such happy times as these since the English settled in Britain; for the Christian kings were so strong that they daunted all the barbarious tribes (Bede 205; bk. 4, ch. 2). However, the most important for us is the fact that not only was this first time when the separate churches of the individual kingdoms were united under one authority, but Theodore was the first person to whom all the English offered any sort of authority (Foot 60). Though Bede was mainly concerned with the church history, he also hints, as Sarah Foot promotes, at the possible political unity of the nation in the list of seven kings who ruled several English kingdoms (Foot 60). According to Bede, the first of these kings, whom the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle calls Bretwaldas (Overlord kings) was Aelle, King of the South Saxons (Bede 111; bk. 2, ch. 5; Farmer, Notes 366).There definitely did not exist, in the political sense, any single English nation at the time of Bede (Wormald, Anglo-Saxon 7). Still, Susan Reynolds concedes that by the eighth century, however, a sense of unity had somehow developed that enabled Bede to write in Latin of the gens Anglorum (402). Brooks goes even further maintaining that none the less the Anglo-Saxons had a sense that they were one people. Thus their greatest historian, the Northumbrian monk, Bede, chose to write the Ecclesiastical History of the single English people, not of separate English kingdoms (21). For Krishan Kumar (and some other scholars as Cowdrey or Higham), on the other hand, the existence of English national identity in the eighth century is unconvincing. He refutes that Bedes account could provide us with a clue to English identity in the Anglo-Saxon period, arguing that Bedes concerns were more theological than sociological or historical in the usual sense (Kumar 46) and that the Historys purpose was not so much national as imperial (Kumar 47), expressing rather Bedes desire for the unification of the whole Britain under the Roman Church (Kumar 42-47).1.5 English Identity in the Ninth Century and Alfred the Greats Preface to the Pastoral Care

However, it is towards the end of the ninth century that, according to Kathleen Davis, we observe the emergence of the sense of English unity (619). It was caused by the necessity for the English to unite against the Vikings and promoted by the court of King Alfred the Great (87199) (Foot 51). In 878, he defeated the Danes at the battle of Eddington. The Danish leader Guthrum and some of his captains were baptized and the English concluded peace with the Danes. England was divided between the Danes and the king of Wessex. In 879, the Danish army finally moved to East Anglia where it began systematic settlement. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle mentions that in 886 (it was, in fact, probably earlier), Alfred recaptured London and created a united West SaxonMercian realm (Foot 52). As all the Angles and Saxons those who had formerly been scattered everywhere and were not in captivity with the Vikings turned willingly to King Alfred and submitted themselves to his lordship (Alfred the Great 98; ch. 83), Alfred became the king of the whole English people (all Angelcynn) who were not subjected to the Danes and, thereafter, the charters call him rex Angul-Saxonum (instead of the traditional title of rex Saxonum of the kings of Wessex) (Foot 5152). Alfred the Great also became famous due to his attempts to revive learning in England (Keynes and Lapidge 28). Part of this project was a series of translations from Latin to Old English. One of the books Alfred translated was Pope Gregory the Greats Liber Regulae Pastoralis (Pastoral Care or Pastoral Rule), a handbook about the duties and obligations of the clergy. It is its preface that is of particular interest to us.Alfred begins the prefatory letter by greeting Bishop Woerferth. As many scholars argue, this greeting represents a common opening of a writ. Alfred thus establishes his authority not only as a translator but also as a king and the preface thus becomes legally binding as the kings word. The past events then acquire a present significance as a justification for the program of translation and education (Davis 626). Alfred then complains about the decline of knowledge and morality in England, remembering the old times when English kings obeyed God, ruled wisely and expanded their kingdom and when the English were so reputed for their learning that men came from abroad to let themselves be taught by them. He contrasts it with the present situation when teachers have to be obtained from abroad. Interestingly, the decline of learning is not the consequence of the Danish invasion because Alfred mentions it already before it had all been ravaged and burned (Alfred the Great 219). It seems that it was rather the decay of knowledge that caused the invasion, when Alfred says that therefore we have lost both the wealth and the wisdom, because we would not incline our hearts after their [our forefathers] example (Alfred the Great 219).In this first part of the preface, Alfred conceives of the English as a united nation. In fact, as Kathleen Davis points out, England achieved political unity only in the middle of the tenth century under Alfreds successors (617). But Alfred ventures even further evoking the past of this non-existing nation, and this past is constructed as an ideal one. It is an important fact because, as Davis explains, it not only posits the nation as a pre-existing, homogeneous entity, but also authorizes the contemporary nation in terms of apparently intrinsic, timeless characteristics, such as the composition of its people, its geographical boundaries, its laws, values, and political structure (622). In fact, as Sarah Foot points out, while Bede conceived of the English people as a newly created unity based on the Christian faith (a new Israel), Alfred, who based his ideas on Bede, further developed this idea. He claimed that he was only restoring the state which had existed before (55).In the other part of the letter, Alfred introduces and justifies his translation project. If the forebears of the English did not translate any books into their language, it was only because they did not think that learning would ever so decline in England that people would not be able to read in Latin. Moreover, by translating books he accomplishes nothing else than what Ancient Greeks, Romans and other Christian nations did when they translated the law from Hebrew. Therefore, he decides to translate some books which are most needful for all men to know into the language which we can all understand (Alfred the Great 220). He also mentions his intention to educate the young free men of England so that they could read and write in English and teach Latin to those who are to continue in their studies.Here, Alfred represents the English language as a factor uniting the English and distinguishing them from other nations. Moreover, English does not have a subordinate status compared to Latin: the English vernacular stands as one among many legitimate languages in which wisdom can be conveyed (Davis 615). By mentioning some books, Alfred in fact introduces a larger project than the translation of one book. He intends to create a whole corpus of writings in English. If we accept Kathleen Daviss suggests that translation produces the boundaries of a culture that define it against other cultures (Davis 616), then this corpus helps to establish the sense of English identity based on the common language. As Sarah Foot, basing herself on Keynes and Lapidge, argues, due to his promotion of the term Angelcynn during the preface reflecting the common identity of the West Saxons, Mercians and the people of Kent as opposed to the Danish but also having a common heritage, faith and a shared history, we may consider King Alfred the Great the inventor of the English as a political community (Foot 5152).

Alfred concludes the preface by claiming that he will send one copy of the Pastoral Care to every bishopric in his kingdom where it should remain. Thus, he assures the dissemination of his ideas and of the sense of unity among the English people. 1.6 ConclusionAs we have seen, reliable sources about early Anglo-Saxon history, not to mention identity, are virtually unavailable. Therefore, it is extremely difficult to try to trace the origins of English identity and to examine the nature of the earliest perceptions of English identity. However, we know that in his Ecclesiastical History of the English People, completed at the beginning of the eighth century, the English monk Bede created a single English people on the basis of the common faith, Christianity, and a united church with close connections to Rome. He also distinguished the English from their neighbours by the language they spoke. His History being primarily focused on the history of the English church, Bede describes the English as a chosen people sent to Britain to punish the wickedness of the Britons. Here, they are gradually converted to Christianity. The high point of the English Church comes when Theodore becomes the archbishop of the whole English people. This is also the period of the greatest prosperity of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. Some scholars argue that, as Bede speaks of an English people united on the basis of religion and mentions the overlords of England, suggesting a possible political unity of the English, his History proves that a sense of English identity had already existed by the eighth century among the English. Others, however, refuse this view, and object that we cannot draw any conclusions about English identity from Bedes History. A century later, when justifying his educational programme and promoting the unity of the English people under West Saxon rule, King Alfred the Great took up Bedes ideas and further developed them by claiming a common past for the English. In the preface to the Pastoral Care, he claimed that he was only restoring a once existing kingdom of the English where learning had flourished. What distinguished the English from the Danish was their language, English. Though political unification of England was achieved only under his successors, Alfred the Great is therefore considered by some scholars the inventor of England as a political community.On the basis of what has been argued above, we may conclude that, though assessing English identity in the Anglo-Saxon period is extremely difficult, a certain concept of a separate English identity was born already in this period, even though it may have originated from the elites with specific aims on mind and may not have been shared by the entire population. Moreover, in the ninth century, Alfred the Great, drawing on a glorious past of the English, attempted to create a common English identity based on the English language. The idea of the English as one united people also persisted during the tenth and eleventh centuries. First, under West Saxon kings, it referred exclusively to the Germanic peoples; then, under Cnut (101635), it included both the Danish and the English; and, finally, under William the Conqueror, it encompassed the Normans as well as the Germanic inhabitants of Britain (Lapidge et al. 171). 2 The Conquered England (10661204)By the eleventh century, England had become one of the most integrated and centralized states in Europe (Kumar 42). When the Normans invaded England, it was a well-ordered state with a uniform system of administration, a highly developed structure of royal law, a centralized coinage and an effective system of taxation (Kumar 42). Therefore, the Norman Conquest cannot have been the making, even if it was the saving, of England. England, as its name implies, was made already (Wormald, Engla Lond 10).

Moreover, the English had succeeded in forging some kind of territorial and possibly even proto-national identity. However, it was mainly thanks to their social, political and cultural elites. When they were replaced by the Norman elite, it had significant consequences: socially, the social hierarchy was tightened by a greater emphasis on the obligations of the subjects towards their lords; politically, in the domestic scene the control from the kings court and government increased, and internationally, close relations in Scandinavia gave way to a growing involvement with the Continent; and culturally, Norman French replaced Anglo-Saxon as the language of the ruling class (Kramer 34). Therefore, we may suppose that the Norman Conquest must have had an impact on English identity (at least on that of the elites) and how the English perceived of themselves.2.1 The Norman Conquest

Edward the Confessor was the last English king descended directly from Cerdic, King of Wessex in the sixth century (Barlow 99). When he died in 1066 without leaving any obvious heir, Harold, a member of the most powerful family of Wessex, the Godwinsons, and Edwards brother-in-law, was appointed king by the Witan. Nevertheless, his right to the throne was challenged by William, Duke of Normandy, who claimed that King Edward had promised it to him and that Harold, during his visit to Normandy in 1064 or 1065, swore an oath that he would not try to take hold of the throne. Harold retorted that he had been forced to swear so and the oath therefore was not valid. Before William could assert his claims by force, a third claimant to the throne, Harold Hardrada, King of Norway, invaded in Yorkshire. But as soon as Harold Godwinson defeated the Viking pretender, he had to move his army to the south of England where William had landed. Harold Godwinson was killed and his tired troops were defeated in the battle near Hastings on 14 October 1066 (McDowall 17).Having captured London, William was crowned King of England in Westminster Abbey on 25 December 1066 and became the first Norman king of the English. Nevertheless, the disturbances that his reign would bring about were already suggested at his coronation. The nervous Norman guards afraid that the people cheering the king would attack him set fire to nearby houses and the ceremony ended in disorder. In fact, there would be an Anglo-Saxon rebellion against the Normans every year until 1070 (McDowall 23).2.2 The English and Norman Identities in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries

According to Hugh Thomas, by the eleventh century, the idea of a common and distinct English identity was well established, at least within the elites. Language, culture and geography formed the basis of the distinction. A separate identity was supported by the origin myth and historical tradition (founded by Bede and depicting the English as a chosen people), the royal government (especially via coinage and loyalty oaths) and the English church (both the members of the English church and the cult of the saints fostered the identity). It was connected with the loyalty to the English people, the land, and the king. On the other hand, we cannot draw any definitive conclusions about the ethnic self-identity of the peasants. The sense of Englishness was probably widespread among them but we are not sure how strong it was. Moreover, we have to take into account that other group identities (for instance regional identities) rivalled the English identity (2026).The same is true about the Normans. Both before and after 1066, a strong sense of a separate ethnic identity existed in Normandy, at least among the elites. The invaders considered themselves to be the Normans, not the French, though, being of Viking origin, by 1066, they had adopted French language and culture. Their sense of their distinct identity was based on the origin myth and history first recorded by Dudo of Saint-Quentin. One of the things that distinguished the Normans from the French was the Scandinavian heritage. The Normans thus became a chosen people who could trace their ancestry to the Trojan Antenor and who, on the one hand, came to France to punish the vices of its inhabitants and, on the other hand, to receive salvation through them. Norman identity was supported by the Norman government and the church (centred on Rouen). The French played an important role in its shaping, not dissimilar to the role of the Vikings in shaping the English identity (but the Normans developed hostility also towards other peoples such as the Bretons and Irish) (Thomas 3540).As Hugh Thomas writes, hostility dominated the relationship between the ethnic groups and the bitterness between the English and Normans lingered well into the twelfth century (5). Nonetheless, the relations between the two ethnic groups changed radically between the late eleventh and twelfth centuries.

The Norman invasion naturally provoked sentiments of hatred in the English. It was, moreover, strengthened by the ruthless suppression of the English rebellions (Thomas 61). However, the process of integration and assimilation had started already during the reign of William I (Thomas 62). Thomas, who distinguishes between individual and collective identity, recognizes three stages in the development of the shifting identity. During the first stage, lasting until late in Henry Is reign, strong distinctions existed between the English and Normans and their identities. On the other hand, some individuals of Continental descent already adopted, at least partially, English identities. Ambiguity was developing about collective identities. In the second phase, delimited by the reigns of Stephen and Henry II, nobles were increasingly turning to an English identity. Collective identity became even more ambiguous and collective reference appeared only rarely in sources. English identity gradually became the norm for the descendants of earlier immigrants. In the final period, at around the beginning of the thirteenth century, the process of the merging of the two identities was completed. The English identity was firmly established as the collective identity of the elites (Thomas 7780). Some historians may see the completion of the assimilation even earlier in the twelfth century (Thomas 57). Still, the outcome remains the same: that the English identity triumphed over the Norman one though it was the identity of the conquered.For the transitional period from plainly Norman to English identity, we may now speak about the Anglo-Normans. However, this term does not appear in contemporary sources (Thomas 7273). Still, multiple ethnicity remained a possibility. As Hugh Thomas argues, it was not viewed in terms of hyphenated identities but people were perceived as having more than one identity (Thomas 73). It was not a matter of a transitional group identity but of individual choice (Thomas 71). In fact, different individuals made different choices (Thomas 74). We therefore have to approach the authors from this period of shifting identity one by one. To illustrate the process, I will now analyze William of Malmesburys Deeds of the Kings of the English.2.3 English Identity and the Anglo-Saxons in William of Malmesburys Deeds of the Kings of the English

William of Malmesbury was probably born not far from Malmesbury in Wiltshire between 1085 and 1090. He was of mixed parentage: his father was Norman and his mother English (Thomson 4). In fact, we may draw many parallels between the life and work of William of Malmesbury and that of Bede. From his boyhood until his death, William was monk of Malmesbury abbey in Wiltshire (Thomson 4) which was not a very important institution, except for the first half of the twelfth century (Gransden 141). He studied scriptures, hagiography, theology, the classics, civil and common law (Gransden 141) and became one of the most prolific writers of his time (Jones 11). Similarly to Bede, he became famous due to his historical works (Gransden 141). In 1126, William of Malmesbury completed the first version of his Gesta Regum Anglorum (Deeds of the Kings of the English), a chronicle covering the history of England from 449 until 1127. It was the second secular literary history of the English nation to be written in England (Gransden 142). William of Malmesburys project was unique in many aspects. His historical method, based on both the Anglo-Saxon and the Anglo-Norman historiography, was innovative. He also transferred sources for the Anglo-Saxon period which are otherwise lost and provided us with (more or less) reliable information for his period (Gransden 142). He was the first historian to revise his writings as his opinions changed (Gransden 142). He revised the Deeds twice (Gransden 168). He also encouraged readers to cooperate on his project. The book appeared in English as The Chronicle of the Kings of England in 1847, and was edited by J. A. Giles. As Antonia Gransden indicates, for William of Malmesbury, the task of a historian was to record the truth, as far as it could be discovered, about important people and events, without fear or favour, clothing it in literary form, for the edification and amusement of his audience (142). He used works of almost all the historians, biographers and hagiographers of the Anglo-Saxon period and many of those of his generation (Gransden 143). Nevertheless, his dedication of the Deeds to Robert, Earl of Gloucester, son of King Henry I and William of Malmesburys patron, suggests that he could not be completely impartial. Moreover, as Antonia Gransden argues, he felt obliged to prove the great antiquity of Malmesbury and Glastonbury: to do this he sometimes made uncritical use of legend and he copied forged charters (168). Still, though he did not always succeed in remaining objective, he showed a considerable critical acumen (Gransden 168) and is considered to be the best of the twelfth century chroniclers (Jones 11).William of Malmesbury begins the preface of his Deeds by praising Bede. He claims that there has not been any English history written in Latin of a quality better than that of Bede. William of Malmesburys purpose therefore is to fill up the chasm, and to season the crude materials with Roman art (Malmesbury 4). His Deeds are composed in five books. The first book is dedicated to the history of the English since their arrival to Britain until the reign of King Egbert and the author here gradually narrates the history of the individual Germanic peoples. The second book deals with the history of the English up to the Norman Conquest and the three remaining books treat the lives and reigns of three kings: William I, William II and Henry I. William of Malmesbury begins his narrative with the description of Roman Britain. After the withdrawal of the Roman troops from Britain, when attacked by the Scots, the Britons are left to their fate. As the author writes, at that time, Vortigern was king of Britain. He is depicted as a man wholly given up to the lusts of the flesh, the slave of every vice: a character of unsatiable avarice, ungovernable pride, and polluted by his lusts (7; bk. 1, ch. 1). Together with his council, he decides to invite the Angles and Saxons to protect the kingdom. The Britons suppose that these Germanic peoples, being of a roving life (7; bk.1, ch. 1), would be so grateful for any piece of land that would enable them to settle down that they would not attempt anything against their hosts. Nevertheless, the Britons are to recognize soon that they underestimated the Germans who are as treacherous as themselves. The Anglo-Saxons, led by two brothers, Hengist and Horsa, first come in a small number. However, they soon bring more compatriots with them and the beautiful daughter of Hengist. Vortigern, driven by lust, offers Hengist the whole of Kent for her hand and this is how the first Anglo-Saxon kingdom is founded. After that, despite the efforts of the Britons to expulse the invaders, the Anglo-Saxons gradually occupy the whole island for the counsels of God, in whose hand is every change of empire, did not oppose their career (11; bk. 1, ch. 1). William of Malmesbury then describes the development of the kingdoms and their mutual feuds. For him, Wessex represents the most magnificent and lasting kingdom that has ever existed in Britain (17; bk. 1, ch. 2).

Of particular interest is the depiction of the Norman invasion and the events which preceded it. Harold, Edward the Confessors successor, is portrayed as a plotter who seized the diadem, and extorted from the nobles their consent (255; bk. 2, ch. 13). On the other hand, William of Malmesbury opposes those who claim that the English were defeated in the battle of Hastings because, even though they were numerous, they were cowardly. He asserts that they were few in number and brave in the extreme; and sacrificing every regard to their bodies, poured forth their spirit for their country (257; bk. 2, ch. 13). However, in the following chapter, the author describes William the Conqueror as a brave man who keeps oaths (contrary to Harold) and whose claims to the English throne are a just cause (273; bk. 3, ch. 1), supported by both the Pope and God himself. The chroniclers view of the English and the Normans is also revealed by his description of the preparations for the battle of Hastings. The English spend the night before the battle drinking and singing whereas the Normans confess their sins. William of Malemsbury summarises the battle as a fatal day to England, a melancholy havoc of our dear country, through its change of masters (278; bk. 3, ch. 1). Because, though the English were warlike heathens when they arrived in Britain, they progressively became extremely religious. However, in process of time, the desire after religion and literature had decayed, for several years before the arrival of the Normans (279; bk. 3, ch. 1). Here, we learn why the English had to be defeated and subjected to the Normans: because they had turned away from God. Rather than seek knowledge and Gods will, they indulged in luxury and drunkenness (while the Normans remained frugal). Because of their rashness, they were defeated by the Normans who revived, by their arrival, the observances of religion, which were everywhere grown lifeless in England (280; bk. 3, ch. 1). In fact, the Normans are portrayed as generally superior to the English: the English indulge in gluttony whereas the Normans eat with moderacy, the English live in poor houses whereas the Normans dwell in grand mansions. As for which identity William of Malmesbury considered to be his own, the best conclusion is probably proposed by Nick Webber. He asserts that William saw himself as neither Norman, like William of Jumiges, nor English, like the Anglo-Saxon chronicler, but as a product of two gentes, two cultures and one country (Webber 151). Interestingly, William of Malmesbury was able to distinguish between the land and the people. While he considered England to be his patria and English to be his tongue, the people with whom he identified were the inhabitants of England and of the two, he considered the Normans to be superior (Webber 151).

As we have seen, during his history, William of Malmesbury in turn takes opposite sides. It is due to the facts that he used both English and Norman sources and that he was half Norman and half English (Gransden 147). In the preface to Book Three, he claims that as the blood of either people flows in my veins, I shall steer a middle course (258; bk. 3, ch. 1). His attempts to reconcile the two sides are well illustrated by a passage at the end of Book Two. While he extols the bravery of the English and their struggle for liberty, he adds that nor in saying this, do I at all derogate from the valour of the Normans, to whom I am strongly bound, both by my descent, and for the privileges I enjoy (257; bk. 2, ch. 13). Living in an England ruled by the Normans, it was certainly expected that he glorify them. Nevertheless, he seems to be persuaded about the superiority of the Normans. On the other hand, he does not deny some strong points of the English.

2.4 Conclusion

To conclude, we may state that when England was conquered by the Normans in 1066, two peoples with two different and well-established identities encountered. Though their relationship was deeply marked by hostility at the beginning, a radical change had taken place in their relationship by the end of the twelfth century (Thomas 57, 69). Normanitas, a product of the eleventh century, as G. A. Loud argues, declined in the twelfth century when the Normans established themselves in the kingdom (Ashe 55). However, the Norman aristocracy did not merely accept the English identity. Llater, by the thirteenth century, it had even become part of their political agenda and propaganda (Thomas 71). It is even more surprising that the identity of the conquered triumphed over the identity of the conquerors. Nevertheless, there was a period of transition between these two identities. During this period, hostility towards the other ethnicity persisted with some authors as is well illustrated by William of Malmesburys comment on the different treatments of the figure of William the Conqueror: Normans and English, incited by different motives, have written of king William: the former have praised him to excess; extolling to the utmost both his good and bad actions: while the latter, out of national hatred, have laden their conqueror with undeserved reproach (258; bk. 3, Preface). On the other hand, others who issued from mixed background were not as strict in their opinion the manner in which they represented the English past and identity was ambiguous. One of them was William of Malmesbury. William of Malmesbury first depicts the Anglo-Saxons, though pagans, as a nation elected by God to occupy Britain and punish the sins of its inhabitants. In Britain, they are converted to Christianity. However, gradually, they turn away from God and God sends other invaders to punish them, the Normans. On the other hand, the Anglo-Saxons are also portrayed as a brave nation willing to sacrifice their lives for their country. Nevertheless, the Normans are depicted as superior.

By presenting the invasions of the Anglo-Saxons and the Normans as Gods punishment for the sins of Britains inhabitants, William of Malmesbury manages to justify both of them. His presenting of the Normans as superior must have suited the demands of the society he was living in. On the other hand, by defending certain qualities of the Anglo-Saxons, he could have remained loyal to his English origin at the same time. However, it does not seem that Anglo-Saxon past would play an essential role in constructing English identity in this period.3 The Late Middle Ages (12041485)The late Middle Ages were a turbulent period. England, as well as most of Europe, was stricken with wars, revolts, plagues, disease and famine (McDowall 43). However, it was also a period of an unprecedented development of the sense of English national awareness and identity.

In the second half of the twelfth century, the political and cultural ties of England to the Continent, and to France in particular, were very close. The kings of England ruled over a large part of western France. Their nobles possessed lands in Normandy, spoke French as their first language, read or listened to French romances and saints lives and went to France to attend tournaments. The higher clergy were often trained in the schools and monasteries of northern France. The English church was subordinated to the authority of the Pope. In fact, England was truly distinctive only in its government (Kramer 39; Haigh 94). Despite the development of feudalism, the English kings enjoyed a precocious degree of both power and authority unrivalled in any other European kingdom at that time (Haigh 94).

By the end of the late Middle Ages, however, the image of England radically changes. As a result of a number of changes, by 1450, it had become a nation with a sense of separate identity and an indigenous culture (Haigh 94). 3.1 England, English Identity and the Anglo-Saxons in the Late Middle AgesIn 1154, after disputed successions which followed the death of Henry I, the son of William of Normandy, Henry II became the King of England. However, being also Duke of Normandy, Count of Anjou and Duke of Aquitaine, he brought together several inheritances under his rule. The so called Angevin Empire which he thus created lasted until 1215, when it collapsed under King John. It covered a vast territory stretching from Scotland to the Pyrenees and the Angevin (or Plantagenet) family became the most powerful dynasty in Europe (Kramer 3742). Nevertheless, this early developed and strong monarchy was also very soon limited by Magna Carta (Haigh 9697), a document which limited royal rights (Kramer 42). Moreover, Parliament played an important role in late medieval government. Waging wars was expensive and the kings had to persuade their subjects to pay taxes. Therefore, whenever the merchants and gentry provided the king with money, their political strength increased. Slowly, early forms of representational government developed (Kramer 39; McDowall 43). The first parliament was summoned by Simon de Montfort in 1265 (Nangonov 28). The commons representatives have been its permanent members since 1337 (Gillingham and Griffiths 134). In order to persuade them, well-developed methods of communication and propaganda were used. The preambles of official proclamations, songs, ballads, sermons, coronations, royal progresses, the formal entries of kings and queens into towns and even the works of writers became an instrument of propaganda (Gillingham and Griffiths 13536). John Gillingham and Ralph A. Griffiths state that in the fifteenth century, authors rarely produced their works unsolicitedly (136). At the beginning of the reign of King John, in 1204, Normandy was recovered by the French. As Nigel Saul argues, England thus became separated from her closest mainland partner. The Anglo-Norman nobility became definitely English. The language of political debate also changed. The terms liberties and inheritances were replaced by nations and commmunities (Saul 8). A growing national feeling may be partly observed in the reign of Henry III: the . . . opposition of the nobility to Henry IIIs foreign expeditions, to the aliens whom he patronized at Court and to the papal clerks whose intrusion into English benefices he permitted, marked the novel development of baronial nationalism in reaction to the policies of the monarch (Haigh 94). Though it may have been rather disguising the struggle for the kings favour, the concept of alienness figured in political debate (Saul 8-9).

Despite the breakdown of the Angevin Empire, close relations with Continental Europe continued, both political and cultural. Chivalry long represented a unifying force of the European elites (Saul 10-11). However, at the end of the thirteenth century, with the break out of wars in northern Europe, the pervasive feeling of solidarity between the European elites started to change. Perceptions of ethnicity gradually sharpened (Saul 11). According to Saul, nationalism became a very useful concept during the reigns of the three Edwards. It helped them to gain popular support for their cause (12) which was represented by foreign wars (Haigh 94). While the conquest of Wales in the 1280s was presented as the civilizing mission of a superior nation towards barbarians (Haigh 94), two wars were particularly important for the development of English identity the war with Scotland (12961328) and the war with France, the so called Hundred Years War (13371453) (Saul 12). The mythical history of Britain (especially that associated with King Arthur) should have justified the rightfulness of Edward Is conquest of Wales and Scotland and of Edward IIIs and Henry Vs incursions into France (Haigh 106). A distinctive English culture was also developing. From the second half of the fourteenth century, the use of English as the language of an elevated literature was growing (Haigh 96) while the knowledge of French was in marked decline before the end of the fourteenth century (Gillingham and Griffiths 144); the English Perpendicular style was developing in architecture (Haigh 96). With the establishment of national orders of chivalry (the first of them being the Order of the Garter founded around 1348), royal and national allegiance started to dominate solidarities of chivalry. By the mid- to late fifteenth century, the ties between the English and European nobility were weakening and the monarchy itself was becoming less cosmopolitan (Saul 12).

The institution which united people of all nations was the Church (Saul 12). However, religious changes that endangered the traditional links between England and the universal Church were taking place during the late Middle Ages. From the thirteenth century onwards, the English religion was becoming increasingly anti-papal. From Edward Is reign, English kings were gradually taking control over the Church (Haigh 96) and the Church of England was acquiring its English character (Gillingham and Griffiths 137). The lay hostility to papal authority also partly gave birth to Lollardy, Englands first heresy, founded by John Wycliff at the end of the fourteenth century (Haigh 96). His translation of the Bible into English became an instrument of religious reform. As David McDowall writes, if the Lollards had been supported by the king, the English Church might have become independent from the papacy in the early fifteenth century (50). Also, saints in the late Middle Ages were increasingly becoming patrons of nations. During the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, St George became the patron saint of England (Saul 1516).

Thorlac Turville-Petre maintains that the establishment and exploration of a sense of a national identity is a major preoccupation of English writers in the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries: who are the English; where do they come from; what constitutes the English nation? (121). In fact, it is a current trend among scholars and historians to identify the discourse of English to the late thirteenth century and early fourteenth century (Rouse 70). However, according to Donald Scragg, apart from chroniclers and historians, few authors of the late medieval period were interested in the Anglo-Saxon period. Major writers showed no interest at all for this subject. Nevertheless, some of the major Anglo-Saxon kings continued to attract attention. They appear, for example, in the early thirteenth-century The Proverbs of Alured or the early fourteenth-century verse romance Athelston in which, as Scragg notes, tenth-century names are used merely for nostalgic effect (67). In fact, it was the myth of Trojan origins of the English which dominated from the twelfth to the seventeenth centuries (Kumar 204). In England, it reached its zenith in the 1130s in Historia regum Britanniae (History of the Kings of Britain) written by a Welsh bishop Geoffrey of Monmouth. In his History, Geoffrey of Monmouth combined Trojan origins with the tale of Arthur, who is depicted as a descendant of Trojan kings, and created a British identity on the basis of a Celtic past. According to him, Britons trace their origins to Brutus, great-grandson of Aeneas, who settled in Britain with his companions after the fall of Troy (Bradley 8182). Though immediately condemned by some contemporaries, the work influenced British history for centuries (Swanson 61). However, Robert Allen Rouse asserts that while major canonical Middle English authors are much more preoccupied with classical or Arthurian pasts than with that of the Anglo-Saxon period, we find an extensive and enduring interest in the deeds and actions of the figures of Englands Anglo-Saxon past in more popular literature (Rouse 8). In the following part of this chapter, I will investigate the relevancy of the claims of the growing national feeling in the romance of Guy of Warwick and the role of the Anglo-Saxon past in this process. 3.2 The Romance of Guy of WarwickThe first written account of the legend is the early thirteenth century Anglo-Norman romance Gui de Warewic by an unknown author. It may have been composed in Oseney Abbey to flatter the dOilly family who had founded this important Augustinian house in 1129. It is an ancestral romance, an Anglo-Norman narrative that tried to provide a sense of belonging. It is a genre not dissimilar from the twelfth-century genealogical literature usually written by a secular clerk or chaplain to present the lineage and remarkable deeds of their patron family. It was not concerned with the contemporary events but with the past of the family, which was represented as glorious (Richmond 39). The legend of Guy of Warwick later appears in many adaptations, for instance the fourteenth-century Middle English verse romance (included in the Auchinleck Manuscript) destined primarily for a lower or lower-middle class (Richmond 53) or its second fifteenth-century version which I will use as the source of my analysis. However, as Susan Crane argues, these Middle English romances differ from the original Anglo-Norman romance in the same sense as Sir Beues of Hamtoun differs from its antecedent: Sir Beues of Hamtoun undertakes an important development, whose beginnings are barely discernible in Boeve, from the perception of the baronial family as a political unit owing personal allegiance to rulers on the basis of reciprocal support, to a wider perception of national identity and the importance of national interests (Crane 59). The romance is preserved in the Cambridge Univ. Lib. MS. Ff. 2. 38. It consists of 11,976 lines and it is set in tenth- century England, precisely during the reign of King Athelstan. In this chapter, I analyze the nineteenth-century reprint of the romance published under the name The Romance of Guy of Warwick. However, I refer to this work only as Guy of Warwick. At the beginning of the romance, we are introduced to Sir Roholde, an English earl who holds Warwick and is also lord of Oxford and Buckingham. He is so rich and powerful that no one dares to oppose him. He has a daughter, Felice la Belle, who is so beautiful and accomplished that no other maiden can be compared to her. Earls and dukes court her but in vain. Sir Roholde also has a brave steward named Segwarde, lord of Wallingford, who takes excellent care of his lords property. Segwardes son, Guy of Warwick, a courteous, well educated, handsome and strong squire, is loved by all people. He falls in love with Felice but she will not grant him her love before he is a proven knight. Guy therefore persuades the earl to bestow knighthood on him and leaves England with money and three knights, Harrawde, Toralde and Urry. They arrive at a town in Normandy where a tournament in honour of the German Emperors daughter takes place. Guy and his companions do very well at the tournament; Guy defeats the emperors son Gayere, Otoun, Duke of Pavia, and two other dukes. On the third day, he is declared the winner. Guy sends the prize to Earl Roholde who is very pleased at it. Guy then wins praise in many countries. When they have travelled as far as Rome, his companions express a desire to return to England. They are all heartily welcomed back home. Guy goes to see Felice and reminds her of her promise. However, she replies that she will not marry him until he becomes the best knight in Christendom.Woeful Guy therefore leaves again for foreign countries. After achieving many valiant exploits, he is wounded at a tournament in Benevento in Italy and is subsequently ambushed by Duke Otoun. Guy loses all his men except for Harrawde but manages to escape and is cured by a hermit. He thereafter reconciles the Emperor Raynere to Segwin, Duke of Louvain. Guy and Harrawde follow the Emperor to Germany where they learn about the Emperor of Constantinople being besieged by the sultan. Guy not only manages to kill the sultan, but also escapes the traps set by Morgadowre, the envious steward of the Emperor. He is about to marry the Emperors daughter when, at seeing the wedding rings, he is reminded of Felice. Under the pretext that he cannot stay at a court where he is exposed to so many plots he leaves the Emperor. He then rescues Tyrry, son to Earl Aubry of Gormoyse, and Ozelle, daughter to the Duke of Lorraine, whom Duke Otoun wanted to marry, kills Otoun and all are reconciled. Subsequently, Guy returns to England. Here, he slays a dragon at King Athelstans request. Then he finally arrives home and marries Felice. Nevertheless, their happiness does not last long. One day after a hunt, Guy contemplates the beauty of the landscape and realizes that until now, he has done everything for Felices sake but nothing for the glory of God. He therefore decides to devote the rest of his life to penance and serving God. He parts with Felice expecting a baby and leaves for Jerusalem and Antioch. Here, Guy defeats the giant Ameraunt and saves the sons of a pilgrim, Earl Jonas, imprisoned by the Saracen king Triamour. He then refuses all wealth and honours offered to him, visits all the saints shrines in the country and leaves for Constantinople. In the meantime, Felice devotes herself to charitable works and gives birth to their son Reynbrown. When he grows up, he fulfils Guys wish of being educated by Harrawde. However, one day, Reynbrown is kidnapped by Russian merchants and given to a king in Africa. Harrawde sets off to find him but he is captured by the Saracens in Africa and thrown into prison. Guy, travelling home through Germany, meets Tyrry and slays Barrarde, Otouns cousin, in order to obtain freedom for Tyrry.Guy then returns to England. Meanwhile, the Danish king has brought a giant called Collebrande to England, giving Athelstan the choice either to find a knight who could defeat the giant, or become a Danish liegeman. Though Guy is afraid as never before when he sees the giant, he finally overcomes him. He reveals his identity only to Athelstan. Guy then makes his way to Warwick but pretends to be a pilgrim. He settles in a hermitage where he remains until his death. After a dream foretells his death, Guy sends a messenger for Felice. She arrives just before he dies and they only have time to embrace each other before Guys spirit is taken to heaven. Felice dies by Guys side forty days later. Harrawde and Reynbrown meet as adversaries in a battle but eventually recognize each other. On their way home, Reynbrun accomplishes many valiant deeds. Finally, Harrawde and Reynbrown are reunited with Harrawdes son Asslake and return together to England, Harrawde taking up Wallingford again which he received from Guy and Reynbrown becoming Earl of Warwick.As Thorlac Turville-Petre argues, the romance of Guy of Warwick, as well as that of Beues of Hamtoun, is deeply concerned with the construction of Englishness (Rouse 73) and the space in which it is constructed is the Anglo-Saxon past (Rouse 74). However, English national identity is not the sole identity demonstrated in the romance of Guy of Warwick and similar Middle English romances. In fact, a whole hierarchy of identities, which sometimes compete with each other, are present there: the identity of the region or city, national identity, the identity of the whole Christendom (Rouse 74-75). In the romance of Guy of Warwick, the dominant identity is that of a Christian knight and the Other is represented by the Saracens. It is in contrast to the Saracens that the identity of Guy of Warwick is represented.Travelling to the East, Guy encounters a racial, cultural and religious Other (Rouse 76). The first of these Others, as Robert Allen Rouse argues, is admiral Coldran, a cousin of the sultan (77). In reality, he shares some characteristics with Guy he is also very strong and stout, but his envenomed weapons distinguish him from Christian knights who do not know and use such weapons (Rouse 77). After another unsuccessful battle, the sultan realizes the uselessness of the Saracen gods and destroys them (3425 3442). The Christian God is represented here as more powerful than the heathen gods. Similarly, the difference in religion is manifested in Guys speech when he comes to the sultans pavilion as a messenger: That ylke kynge, at sytty in heuyn,

That made e erthe and e planettys seuyn

And in the see the sturgone,

Yeue the, syr sowdan, hys malysone,

And all, that y hereynne see,

That beleue in Mahowndys poste. (36533658)As Rouse concludes, Guys first encounter with the Saracen Other constructs a cultural opposition that leaves no room for compromise or co-existence. His speech to the sultan is notable for the uncompromising attitude of religious intolerance towards the Saracens, an attitude that is characteristic of the whole romance (80).

Guy encounters the Saracen Other for the second time in the form of the giant Ameraunt. As Rouse argues, this judicial combat, fought against the sultans giant champion Amoraunt, highlights two important elements of the Saracen Other: Gigantism and Honour (or the lack thereof) (81). Indeed, Guy is astonished at the giants appearance:Brynge forthe, he seyde, the gyawnt,

A paynym, that hyght Amerawnt.

He was armed nobullye:

Euery man of hym had farlye.

Hys body was boe grete and longe:

He semed to be owtrageus stronge.

But, when Gye sye that sarsyn,

That was so myghty and so kene,

Be Cryste, he seyde vnto e kynge an,

ondur ys e deuell and no man. (79517960)Ameraunt is also contrasted with Guy, a Christian knight, in terms of honour. When, on that hot day, the giant becomes thirsty, he asks Guy to allow him to drink some water. He promises to grant Guy the same favour if the latter needs it. Guy agrees and the fight resumes. Then Guy is wounded and he demands the giant to keep his promise and let him drink. However, Ameraunt replies that he will let him drink only if Guy reveals his true identity to him. When he learns that his opponent is the famous Guy of Warwick, he claims that he would not let him drink even for the whole Hungary. Guy therefore leaps into the river without Ameraunts permission and renews his forces. However, the Saracens lack of honour, contrasted with Guys mercifulness, becomes obvious in this passage. He becomes a traytoure (8280). As we have seen, and as Rouse points out, the opposition between the Christian hero and a Saracen is constructed here on three levels: in terms of religion, appearance and honour (76). The English are all that the Saracens are not: Christian, honourable, trustworthy, moderate, and human (Rouse 83). Though Guy has the qualities of a supranational chivalrous knight, he remains an English knight. However, while during the Hundred Years War English identity was often constructed in opposition to the continental enemies, especially the French (Rouse 84), we do not find much evidence of the sentiments of hatred between the English and the nationals of Continental states in the romance of Guy of Warwick. As Rouse asserts, when Guy does encounter villains, it is his superlative ability as a knight that is the root of the problem, not his national identity (85).On the other hand, by surpassing the qualities of all other knights in the whole of Christendom, Guy as an Englishman becomes the ideal Christian knight. In this, we may perceive an attempt to commend England above other countries. Patriotism is also suggested in the following passage, where the need to save England from the Danish is expressed: Byschoppes, archedekyns and abbottys,

Wyse men of the churche and no sottys,

At Wynchestur be euerychone,

The moost parte of the reygyown.

They haue sende thorow Ynglande

To yonge and olde, y vnderstande,

That ey schulde faste dayes thre

And nyght and day in preyers bee,

That God them sende soche a man,

That wyll and may, dar and can

Thorow helpe of God almyght

For Ynglondes sake in batell fyght

Wyth the gyawnt Collebrande

And hym to stroye wyth hys hande. (99259938)

We can therefore conclude that in this work, the Anglo-Saxon past is depicted as heroic and glorious and thus serves the interests of the late Middle Ages when a proper English culture and the sense of being English were being born and therefore needed to be promoted.

3.3 ConclusionDuring the late Middle Ages, England experienced a lot of turbulent events and underwent numerous changes. Compared to the situation at the end of the twelfth century, when England had strong cultural and political ties to the Continent, by 1450, England had become a nation with a sense of separate identity. This sense of a separate identity was shaped by the wars between France and England in particular. Moreover, we can claim that, by 1450, England was emerging as a nation with proper language, literature, and architecture. The Church of England was also increasingly becoming an independent church with an English character. Though the Anglo-Saxon past, overshadowed by the Arthurian legends, was not the centre of attention during this period, it appears for instance in Matter of England Romances, one of them being the fifteenth-century version of the romance of Guy of Warwick which takes place under the reign of King Athelstan.

In fact, the concept of identity was complicated during this period and there were competing individual identities. The romance of Guy of Warwick primarily presents Guy as a perfect representation of a Christian knight, valiant, honourable, credible, faithful, and moderate. However, while being depicted as the most valiant knight in the world, emphasis is also placed on him being an Anglo-Saxon knight and on England as his patria. We can therefore assert that a sense of English identity and even superiority, supported by the glorious and heroic past of the English, is present in this work. Thus, the heroic Anglo-Saxon past might have served to strengthen the English identity and enhance the pride of belonging to the English nation.4 The Tudor Age (14851603)The reign of the Tudor dynasty in England can be in many respects regarded as the end of the Middle Ages and the beginning of the modern era. An absolute monarchy and a national Church were established. England defeated its main rival, Spain, and the foundations of its maritime supremacy were laid. However, under Henry VIII, the English Church passed under the control of the state. The Reformation, brought about by Henry VIII, was a major political and social change which had the appearance of a religious change (Nangonov 5456). By its potential to justify the break with the Roman Church, the Anglo-Saxon past was to play an important role in the Reformation and the further development of English identity. 4.1 England, English Identity and the Anglo-Saxons in the Tudor Age

In the second half of the fifteenth century, England witnessed quarrels between its two most powerful families the House of York and the House of Lancaster. Between 1461 and 1483, the country was ruled by the Yorkist king Edward IV. When he died, leaving as his heir a young boy, Edwards youngest brother declared himself King Richard III. However, Richard made himself unpopular with both Lancastrians and Yorkists. When, in August 1485, Henry Tudor, the heir to the Lancastrian title, landed in Wales, he was joined by many discontent lords, both Lancastrians and Yorkists. When Henry Tudor and Richard III met on 22 August at Bosworth Field, half of Richards army changed sides. Richard was thus quickly defeated and Henry was crowned king on the very battlefield, becoming Henry VII and founding a new dynasty the Tudors (McDowall 55).

Henry VII established the foundations of a wealthy nation state and a powerful new monarchy (McDowall 67). In 1486, he united the houses of York and Lancaster by marrying Elizabet