Consider David Starkeys and Francis Pryors respective versions Essays

Consider David Starkeys and Francis Pryors respective versions Essays Consider David Starkeys and Francis Pryors respective versions Essay Consider David Starkeys and Francis Pryors respective versions Essay Essay Topic: Burial Rites There is considerable speculation over the events of this period depending on the background of the Historian or Archaeologist and on the sources they depend upon. Therefore it comes as no surprise that there is such a stark contrast between the interpretations of Starkey and Pryor regarding the events following the fall of Roman administration in 410. Starkey argues a full blown invasion by Germanic tribes as described by Bede and Gildas. This was ethnic cleansing at its most savagely effective. Pryor on the other hand believes in continuity, that life went on just as it had during and even before the Romans. He argues that rather than the invasion force there were a few economic migrants. In this scenario, life went on as it did during Roman times and the only change was this cultural exchange.When one looks beyond Starkey and Pryor and at other historians (and archaeologists) you find that there seem to be four distinct possibilities for what happened after Romans left Britain. Th e first is migration; under this interpretation the country was flooded by economic migrants from the Germanic tribes who had been displaced by pressure from the Huns who were rapidly advancing through Germany. After a couple of generations the different ethnicities would have mixed significantly to cr4eate a single culture which would have been predominately Anglo Saxon due to the lack of any clearly defined culture left after the falling Roman Empire. The second theory is invasion again by Germanic tribes. In this interpretation there would be masses of Angles and Saxons who arrived by boat and started a violent conquest of the new lands. Initially they might have been invited in by the Britons as mercenaries, and these then sent back for more men before uprising against their masters, or they could have arrived independent of the locals knowledge.The third theory is that Britain was conquered by a small Germanic Elite. This would not be the massive invasion army which is suggest ed by the invasion theory but rather a group of nobles with the aid of their War bands. With their noble ranking they would not just subjugate the country through the use of their war bands but also by manipulating the political scene and playing an active part in politics within the rapidly declining towns. The last theory is simply cultural exchange. Under this theory, there was little migration; but rather the Romano British with a limited cultural exposure left after the departure of the Romans in 410 imported different elements of Germanic culture while forming new trading partners (with Germanic tribes).When one looks generally at the way in which different people approach the problem of determining what happened in this period you can usually split it into two camps. The historians tend to rely amuch more on the written evidence (which in this period is nearly non existent except for Gildas and there are serious questions about the reliability of all written documents in thi s period), while the Archaeologists looks at the archaeology and the other modern investigative techniques. However, while these might be much more reliable, they can only suggest possibilities for what happened. What few have failed to grasp in that the only way to approach this problem is to use both and see where they compliment and contradict each other and try and build a picture from then onwards.There are a number of different interpretations of the Roman to Anglo Saxon transition. The establishment view is that Roman Britain wound down slowly between 400 and 500. Roman culture is in decline from c.360 and has no presence after 450. Anglo Saxons dominate the country during the 5th Century having migrated from Holland, Northern Germany and Denmark and colonise eastern parts of England. Tradition suggests that Hengest and Horsa were invited over by Vortigen to fight against the Picts. The Britons and returned to a Celtic Iron Age way of life similar to the Anglo Saxons. They l ived in warring tribal Kingdoms and around 550 they start to make progress through the west. Richard Reece based his interpretations from excavations in Cirencester. His view was that Roman Britain was in decline during the 3rd Century and by 400 most of the Roman institutions had disappeared and that the towns were merely administrative centres. He argues that there were no mass migrations of Anglo Saxons but Anglo Saxon fashion became popular in 5th Century eastern England.The Discontinuity view suggests that Roman Britain flourished until c. AD 400, but then dramatically collapsed and nothing was left of the old Roman system after 430. Pagan Anglo Saxons then migrated into Eastern England, but in lesser numbers than thought previously. Both Britons and Anglo Saxons were ruled by Kings who were in a knock out competition for tribal dominance. Anglo Saxons eventually prevailed and gradually spread their culture and language throughout the rest of the country. Nicholas Highams view is similar to this view. However; the Britons survive using Roman institutions into the 5th Century. Britain is divided into two zones: 1) the highly Romanized Christian elite in the east and 2) A pagan, un Romanized upper class in the west. During the early 5th Century, defence of the east depended upon the use of Anglo Saxon mercenaries. These rebelled and the Western kingdoms became subordinate to the Anglo Saxons before AD 500. Anglo Saxon culture was adopted by the Britons and the Anglo Saxons retained elements of the Roman Administration.There is evidence for Anglo Saxon pressure on the Islands before 400, with a major raid (or even an invasion attempt) around 367. This is known as the Barbarian conspiracy as during this time, Britain came under attack from all sides the Saxons from the East, the Picts from the North and the Irish from the West. Around 383 a group of fortifications were built along the Yorkshire coast. All this continues to demonstrate the pressures and at least the reality of the threat of invasion by Anglo Saxon. Zosimus writes that in 410 there was a major Barbarian invasion of Gaul and says The Barbarians from beyond the Rhine, ravaging everything at pleasure, compelled both the inhabitants of the British Isle and some of the peoples of Gaul to secede from the Empire of the Romans and to live independent of them, no longer obeying the Roman Laws. This fits in with the discontinuity interpretation.It also continues to agree with the war like nature of the Germanic tribes as written about by Caesar and Tacitus. It is a matter of the greatest glory to the tribes to lay waste, as widely as possible, the lands bordering their territory, thus making them uninhabitable. They regard it as the best proof of their valour that their neighbours are forced to withdraw from those lands and hardly anyone dares set foot there1 Tacitus echoes these sentiments. Therefore one would expect if any migration were to take place then it would have a l argely violent nature to it, rather than the peaceful migration which post revisionist historians have suggested.Due to the fact that Gildas is one of the few sources in this period any mistakes in this source are likely to be replicated or even exaggerated in further sources, as is suspected in Bede and the Anglo Saxon Chronicle (A.S.C) (although there were other sources used for the Chronicle than Gildas). However, using these sources can give us a rough framework for what might have happened during this period, and thus we can identify a number of key stages. By looking at these alongside the modern techniques and the archaeology we can get a fairly accurate picture of what could have happened. Henson has done a good start with this book The origins of the Anglo Saxons in which he has collated all the data from Gildas, Bede and the A.S.C. This information is used below to lay out a rough idea of what happened during that period.In 410, Roman Soldiers left Britain due to pressure s affecting Rome itself. After several Saxon raids and increasing pressure from the Picts and the Scots (and with the refusal of any help from Rome) it was decided to hire Germanic mercenaries in 428. In 430, Hengest returned to Britain with his Son Octa and more mercenaries to defend the north from the Picts. Hengest married his Daughter off to Vortigern in return for Kent. Around 433, Diplomacy breaks down between the Britons and Hengest, resulting in a war. In 435 0 all German mercenaries under Hengest were expelled and returned to Germany. Around 444 Amrbosius takes over the leadership of the fight against the Saxons.Aurelianus became leader for 32 years. After his death, his brother Uther succeeded him and fought a further war with Octa and defeats him at Verulamium between 488 and 491. In 495 Arthur (The mythical status of Arthur is disputed however it appears that there was some sort of successful leader around this time who is referred to as Arthur) succeeded his father and continued the fight leading to a decisive victory over the Saxons at Badon Hill around 499. This led to a stop in the Anglo Saxon advance, and was the last country wide native poltical ruler. After Arthurs death, the Anglo Saxons began to return in around 527 (possibly invited by some of the British Tribes) and began winning battles against the British (who were suffering more from plagues than the Anglo Saxons were). For the next 100 years there is continued fighting between the British and the Anglo Saxons, with the Saxons gradually creeping west through the country. According to the A.S.C this expansion began in around 550.Although a general picture, we can identify four main stages. The first is from 400 to 440, 446 being around the time when the rebellion against the Britons began by German Mercenaries (Henson places this 13 years earlier due to the difference between the calendars in use by Gildas). The continuing fight is the second stage spanning from the start of the rebell ion in 440 to the Battle of Badon in around 500. The third stage is that of British rule up to around 550 when the Anglo Saxons begin to expand throughout the country. The last stage is continued expansion throughout the country. There were regional variations as one would expect considering the size of the country and the variety of society in this area.The fundamental different traditions in burial between Anglo Saxons and Britons mean that it is very easy to identify the differences and with the use of Radio Carbon Dating one can plot the changing fashions around the country. Taylor states New burial customs are a highly visible element in the early history of Anglo Saxon England, the change from late Roman graves being as distinctive as any of the upheavals brought about by the ending of the Roman Empire.2 It can be seen that as time goes on, burial rites change.Initially we see the introduction of Anglo Saxon tradition as seen by the presence of grave goods or cremation (which would not be present in Christian Romano British graves) and the gradual spreading of these tradition westwards following the Saxons as they spread throughout the country. Heinrich Harke suggests that many Britons survived the initial entry of the Anglo Saxons and instead were integrated into Anglo Saxon society. In his article Finding Britons in Anglo Saxon graves he gives evidence to suggest that the reason that many archaeologists cant find British graves, is because they are actually buried in Anglo Saxon settlements and cemeteries. This could suggest that the Anglo Saxons effectively subdued these areas with quicker speed than suggested and the Britons then served as slaves or workers.However, it could also suggest peaceful co existence between the two races. As time goes on, Anglo Saxon style burials become more frequent until the time of the Anglo Saxon conversion to Christianity. When one compares Anglo Saxon pottery from eastern England and from Schleswig Holstein and Lower Saxony, there are striking similarities in style, shape and size. These indicate at the very least cultural exchange and some sort of trading. However when one looks at the data collated on the number of finds of such pottery and on products such as amber (which is native to the areas where Anglo Saxons and Jutes would have resided before coming to Britain), the scale of the area and the number of finds suggest much more than mere trading but rather a movement in people into Eastern England and then further a field. Settlement evidence suggests a complete break in building traditions.Some use of pre-existing Roman foundations has been found like in Wroxeter but on the whole settlements were of a completely different style to anything seen in Britain previously. This again reaffirms the suggestion that Anglo Saxons migrated into England but not entirely in what fashion. West Heslerton is very suggestive of the nature of the relationship between Anglo Saxons and the locals. The fact that there do not appear to be any form of defence around the settlement can either show that the Britons were not considered a threat (and the Anglo Saxons had subjugated them) or that the Anglo Saxons were there with the Britons permission and this suggests a more peaceful co existence interpretation of the data.DNA evidence shows that the lack of presence of a gene in most areas of Britain which is prevalent in most areas of Frisia and Schleswig is suggestive of a cultural assimilation.3 However, considering that since the arrival of the Anglo Saxons, Britain has had a large number of different genes introduced by other migrating people. The Vikings and the Normans are also likely to give different genes to the native country. More recently with the levels of immigration the genes are considerably more mixed up than one would expect. Oxygen isotope analysis shows similar problems with finding individuals from the Anglo Saxon homelands showing most of the teeth found at Wes t Heslerton were native to Britain. 4 This clearly contradicts other theories, however one has no idea about the make up of society at that point, and there can potentially be a large number of unfound Anglo Saxon settlements which might prove otherwise.A better interpretation suggests that mercenaries were initially invited into the country to provide protection. In concordance with their war like nature they start their rebellion (Hensons date). However, at this stage they are not strong enough and are forced out of the country. Roger of Wendover suggests that this occurs in around 435. In around 440 the Saxons return in greater numbers and begin to make advances through the country. For the next fifty years there is a constant battle for control of the island, with Ambrosius taking control of the fight in 444. The advance of the Saxons is stopped in around 500 with the Battle of Badon hill (which has been attributed to this Arthur figure Arthur in this case is used as a front fo r the real successful British ruler around this time).Following this there is a time of peace where Arthur rules the island and is the last point of native rule. After Arthurs death, the resistance to the Anglo Saxons starts failing when tribal politics begin to become an issue and at the least co operation begins to stop. Not surprisingly, the Anglo Saxons start to make large advances through the country. By 575 the east is secure and movement through the west is still progressing. Using the Settlement evidence found at West Heslerton which like many other Anglo Saxon settlements does not have any form of defence of palisade suggests that the Anglo Saxons felt secure in this area. The warriors are followed by a large number of economic migrants which set up large trade routes between Britain and their former native countries. This accounts for the density in material which is found. The Anglo Saxons have control of Britain until 1066.In conclusion, it can be seen that the picture concerning Britain during this time is much more complex than merely invasion or migration. It is a case of tribal politics, a falling Empire and a vacuous people who have little culture and even less ability of defence. The inviting of Anglo Saxons to act as mercenaries spells the end of Romano Britain. However, even with all modern technology, techniques and expertise, there is still a lot more myth and speculation concerning this time period than fact, and that is probably going to be the case forever. Kemble in 1849 said in despair from what has preceded it will be inferred that I look upon the details of the German conquests in England as irrevocably lost to us.5

Close the Gap on Prefixes and Suffixes

Close the Gap on Prefixes and Suffixes Close the Gap on Prefixes and Suffixes Close the Gap on Prefixes and Suffixes By Mark Nichol Thanks to widespread confusion about the correct treatment of prefixes and suffixes, syllables and words attached before or after root words, many people persist in inserting hyphens more frequently than necessary. Essentially, however, hyphens seldom belong in prefixed and suffixed words: Prefixes and root words are almost always combined without hyphens (prepaid, nonprofit, posttraumatic). Exceptions include when the root word is a proper noun (un-Christian, anti-Semitic) or a number (â€Å"pre-2010 models†), or when the first letter of the root word and the prefix’s last letter are the same (anti-intellectual, co-opt). Repetitions of consonants, however (nonnative), are not excepted. Some prefixes, like vice, unfortunately, are used indiscriminately; they may be disconnected (â€Å"vice president†), hyphenated (vice-regent), or closed up (viceregal). And then there are antonyms styled at odds with each other, such as on-screen and offscreen. (Easy solution: Reconcile them one way or the other.) Other idiosyncratic instances of hyphenation include ambiguous treatments like re-cover in the sense of â€Å"to cover again,† rather than â€Å"to retrieve,† mid before a numbered century (â€Å"mid-twenty-first century† or â€Å"mid-21st century†), and non attached to an phrasal adjective (â€Å"non-meat-eating†). A common error is to refer to very large amounts of money with a phrase like â€Å"multi-billion-dollar budget† or, worse, â€Å"multi-billion dollar budget.† However, words prefixed by multi need no hyphen: â€Å"multibillion-dollar budget.† The en dash, a hyphen on steroids, is used when the link must carry more weight: when prefixes and suffixes are linked to permanent open compounds to form phrasal adjectives. Examples include â€Å"postCivil War era† and â€Å"high schoolage drivers.† Suffixes are rarely hyphenated, either (airborne, lifelike, nationwide). Some sources suggest hyphenating borne, like, and wide to a word three or more syllables long, but it’s not necessary; communitywide, for example, may look cumbersome, but it’s best to be consistent. However, words ending in l, and most proper nouns, retain a hyphen when linked to like, and proper nouns linked to wide are always hyphenated. Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Punctuation category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:35 Synonyms for â€Å"Look†In Search of a 4-Dot Ellipsis25 Idioms About Bread and Dessert