<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Tha Engliscan Gesithas</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk</link>
	<description>A society for all those interested in the history and culture of Anglo-Saxon England</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 May 2013 14:39:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>The Black Poplar Tree in Anglo-Saxon England</title>
		<link>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/the-black-poplar-tree-in-anglo-saxon-england</link>
		<comments>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/the-black-poplar-tree-in-anglo-saxon-england#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Dec 2012 21:28:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/?p=1467</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Peter C Horn
The distinguished botanist, the late Edgar Milne-Redhead, from the mid 1970&#8242;s, did much to draw attention to the Black Poplar, Populus nigra subsp. betulifolia, as a splended, but largely overlooked, English native tree.  In a letter to the writer, in 1993, he mentioned that he was overwhelmed by correrpondence received, over 500 letters, regarding [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>By Peter C Horn</strong></p>
<p>The distinguished botanist, the late Edgar Milne-Redhead, from the mid 1970&#8242;s, did much to draw attention to the Black Poplar, <em>Populus nigra subsp. betulifolia, </em>as a splended, but largely overlooked, English native tree.  In a letter to the writer, in 1993, he mentioned that he was overwhelmed by correrpondence received, over 500 letters, regarding the distribution of this tree in England.</p>
<p>Richard Mabey says it is <em>our grandest native tree </em>and that it has a <em>thick fissured trunk covered with massive bosses and burrs, growing to over 100 feet if uncut.</em>(Mabey P. 134). Oliver Rackham, the leading expert on British trees, says, <em>no other tree can compare with its rugged grandeur. Its massive, straight, but leaning trunk often reaches 100 feet tall and 6 feet thick&#8221; (Rackham, 1986, P.207). </em>It <em>would originally have grown on the unstable flood plains of rivers </em>(Rackham, 1976/2004, P. 22).Kemble Martin says, of Betulifolia, <em>perhaps native by streamsides </em>(1982). As a very impressive, native tree it must have been known to the Anglo-Saxons, who were particularly noted for their use of the wood of various trees for all manner of purposes.</p>
<p><strong>Other Species of Poplar</strong> in<strong> England</strong></p>
<p>The Aspen, Populus tremula, is native to Britain. The White poplar, <em>Populus alba, </em>is said to be an early introduction, but according to Rackham, may be native. The  Grey Poplar, <em>Populus canescens, </em>appears to be a hybrid between the Aspen and the White Poplar.  The Middle English name <em>Poplar </em>comes from the Old French <em>poplier </em>(from Latin <em>populus </em>of uncertain meaning). The Middle English <em>Abele, </em>applied to the White Poplar and sometimes to the Grey Poplar, is from the French and Latin <em>abel, </em>meaning white.</p>
<p><strong>Application of Names</strong></p>
<p>At Nowton in Sufflok in 1310, John Petrys was fined 2s for felling a poplar and Will Gunnild felled an Abel worth 2s6d (Rackham 1976/2004 P188).    This seems to show that, at that time, the term <em>poplar </em>was not applied to the White Poplar.  Rackham says <em>Poplar is richly recorded in medieval documents. The word popel or popular is systematically distinguished from Aspen (aspe) and white poplar (abel) and must denote black poplar.</em> (Rackham,<em> 1986 P.207). </em>Rackham, examining Anglo-Saxon Charters, says <em>One mention of popul at Michelmarsh, Hants, may refer to Black</em> Poplar,<em> which would otherwise be unaccountably absent from the Anglo-Saxon evidence </em>(1986. P.210). The infrequent appearance of Black Poplar in Anglo-Saxon records may be because it is not a woodland tree, but a tree of fens and flood plains.</p>
<p><strong>Early Glosses and Runic Poem</strong></p>
<p>Having established above that when the Anglo-Saxons used the term <em>popul </em>or <em>populus </em>they probably meant the black popular, the problem arises as to why, in the following glosses, populus is equated with <em>birce </em>(the birch tree):</p>
<p><em>Epinal-Erfurt 792                                    populus: birciae</em></p>
<p><em>Corpus 1609                                              populus: birce</em></p>
<p><em>Wright, Voc 1 33 2 80 13                       byrc: populus</em></p>
<p><em>Anecdota Oxon, 56 364 365                  byric: populus betula</em></p>
<p>The last gloss leaves no doubt that it is the native birch tree, <em>Betula pendula </em>that is being equated with the black poplar.</p>
<p>In the Anglo-Saxon Runic Poem, under the tree called <em>Beorc, </em>the description of the tree does not seem to relate to the birch tree. The poem reads as follows:</p>
<p><em>Beorc by∂ bleda leas, bere∂ efne swa ∂eah                              </em>Birch is fruitless. Eeven though</p>
<p><em>Tanas butan tudder, bi∂ on telgum wlitig                               </em>It bears twigs without offspring</p>
<p><em>Heah on helme hrysted fægere                                                    </em>It is in its branches beautiful</p>
<p><em>Geloden leafum, lyfte getenge                                                     </em>High on crown and fairly adorned</p>
<p>(Dickins 1915)                                                                                  Laden with leaves towards the sky</p>
<p>(Writer&#8217;s translation)</p>
<p>Dickens points out that the description of the tree in the poem is more suggestive of a species of poplar than a birch tree. The poem seems to describe a tree larger and taller than a birch and it describes a tree that does not regenerate from seed, which again does not apply to the birch tree. Dickens, influenced by the early glosses listed above, concludes that the tree in the poem is the Grey Poplar, <em>Populus canescens, </em>which is taller than the birch and also, according to Dickens, does not readily regenerate from seed. However, as mentioned above, the Grey Poplar is accepted as being a hybrid and is unlikely to have been known to the Angl0-Saxons.  The Anglo-Saxons, according to Rackham as mentioned above, probably applied the name <em>popul/populus </em>to the Black Poplar, and the latter, according to Marren, <em>has no seed dormancy and in consequence hardly ever produces a tree </em>(Marren, 1999). Therefore the Black Poplar would be a better candidate for the tree described in the Runic poem.</p>
<p>The question remains as to why, if the tree described in the Runic poem is a Black Poplar, the name <em>Beorc (Birch)</em> was applied to the tree<em> </em>and why, likewise, was the name <em>populus </em>equated to the name <em>beorc </em>in a number of glosses. This calls for some explanation. The Anglo-Saxons would have been very familiar with their limited range of native trees, but there does not seem to be an Old English name for the black poplar, or, at least, no such name has come down to us. The name <em>populus</em> or <em>popel </em>is Latin, or a corruption of a Latin name. Instead, they seem to be using the Old English name <em>beorc </em>to include both birch tree and black poplar. What, if anything have the two species of tree in common to warrent the extended use of the name <em>beorc?  </em>At first the two species look very different, but a clue perhaps lies in the botanical name of the black poplar, i.e. Populus nigra subsp betulifolia. The term <em>betulifolia </em>means Birch leaf and refers, in this instance, to the diamond-shaped, lightly serrated leaves of the black poplar, which are very similar to the leaves of the Birch tree.  This must have been a confusion among academics, since the practical Anglo-Saxons working with the trees would hardly have confused the two species.</p>
<p><strong>References</strong></p>
<p>Mabey R. <em>Flora Britannica, </em>1996</p>
<p>Rackham O. <em>The History of the Countryside, </em>1986</p>
<p>Keble Martin W. <em>The New Concise British Flora, </em>1982</p>
<p>Rackham O. <em>Trees and Woodland in the British Landscape, </em>1976/1990</p>
<p>Dickens B. (Ed) <em>Runic &amp; Heroic Poems of the Old Teutonic Peoples, </em>1915</p>
<p>Marren P. <em>Britain&#8217;s Rare Flowers, </em>1999</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><em>              </em></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><em> </em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/the-black-poplar-tree-in-anglo-saxon-england/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AT ETHANDUN</title>
		<link>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/at-ethandun</link>
		<comments>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/at-ethandun#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2011 14:01:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[poetry]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/?p=1333</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[At Ethandun     AElfred and Guthrum
with spear and shield     sharp war-hedge
faced each other     to fight for Wessex
messengers spoke     insults exchanged
for spear and swordplay     steadied the Danes
aimed at English     arrows and darts
thrown like [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At Ethandun     AElfred and Guthrum<br />
with spear and shield     sharp war-hedge<br />
faced each other     to fight for Wessex<br />
messengers spoke     insults exchanged<br />
for spear and swordplay     steadied the Danes<span id="more-1333"></span><br />
aimed at English     arrows and darts<br />
thrown like thorns     they thickened the air<br />
but bounced off mail     and bit only shields<br />
then Alfred ordered     objects more cunning<br />
than his system of burhs     or splitting the fyrd<br />
and like his ships&#8217; forms     not Frisian not Danish<br />
but designed by himself     splendid weapons<br />
those blackened buns     burnt at Athelney<br />
thrown like shot-putts     they thickened the air<br />
bursting byrnies      breaking linden<br />
mashing mail-shirts     and mangling bone<br />
warriors felled     by fire-hardened cakes<br />
thus AElfred Triumphed     at Ethandun</p>
<p>by Martin Vine</p>
<p>first published in Withowinde 120, Winter 1999</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/at-ethandun/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>THE ALCOHOLIC DRINKS OF THE ANGLO-SAXONS</title>
		<link>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/the-alcoholic-drinks-of-the-anglo-saxons</link>
		<comments>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/the-alcoholic-drinks-of-the-anglo-saxons#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 20:03:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Anglo-Saxon Drinks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/?p=923</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The four alcoholic drinks of the Anglo-Saxons were beor, ealu, medu and win. Today we have similar names for some alcoholic drinks, i.e. beer, ale, mead and wine, and it is commonly, and quite naturally, assumed that our modern drinks must be similar to those bearing similar names in Old English.

However, some writers have expressed [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The four alcoholic drinks of the Anglo-Saxons were beor, ealu, medu and win. Today we have similar names for some alcoholic drinks, i.e. beer, ale, mead and wine, and it is commonly, and quite naturally, assumed that our modern drinks must be similar to those bearing similar names in Old English.</p>
<p><span id="more-923"></span></p>
<p>However, some writers have expressed doubts as to whether beor was in fact a malt-based drink similar to beer today. It has been suggested that the drink the Anglo-Saxons called beor was in fact the drink we now call cider. It has also been suggested that beor was a strong alcoholic, sweet fruit-juice; a short drink sipped from little cups. Of course both these suggestions cannot be correct, at least not at the same period of time. The following is mainly an attempt to see if there is any evidence for or against either of these suggestions. Also will be examined a related problem, namely, if Anglo-Saxon beor was similar to the drink we now call beer, how did beor differ from the drink they called ealu (ale)?</p>
<p>Old English <em>beor </em>is a very early drink-name. Compounds such as <em>beorsele </em>(beer-hall) and <em>gebeorscipe </em>(drinking party) show that the name <em>beor </em>had been in existence long enough for it to be used in a general sense to mean &#8216;strong alcoholic drink,&#8217; in addition to its use as the name of a specific alcoholic beverage. Thus we have <em>Gif ∂onne on gebeorscipe</em> (Ine&#8217;s Laws AD688-94); and <em>beorsele </em>appearing only in early poetical texts and therefore indicating a term going back to the pagan period. It would certainly be extremely strange if a name for a high-status drink, drunk in the pagan beer-halls, was derived from monastic Latin.</p>
<p>From the Roman, Cornelius Tacitus, born c. AD 56, we learn that the alcoholic drink of the Germanic folk was a <em>liquor made from barley, or other grain, fermented to produce a certain resemblance to wine </em>(Germania: 23). It is interesting that Tacitus does not mention mead or cider. The drink of the Germanic folk, or at least their main drink, was, it seems, the drink that today we call beer or ale. We know from the Old English medicinal recipes that beor was much stronger than ealu and it would seem natural to assume that beor was the drink of the warriors in the Hall and ealu was the drink of the members of the family.</p>
<p><strong>WINE</strong></p>
<p>When Tacitus says that Germanic beer had a &#8216;resemblance to wine&#8217; he perhaps should be taken as meaning that, not having vineyards at that time, the Germans made their alcoholic drink from barley, which they grew in quantity, and that this was their equivalent alcoholic drink to the Roman wine made from grapes. In other words, the Romans drank wine and the Germans drank beer. He probably did not mean that the Germans were trying, and failing, to make a drink up to the standard of Roman wine. This insulting view was however promoted by the Roman elite at a later date, for example by the Roman Emperor Flavius Claudius Julianus (AD 331-365) who maintained that Roman wine was like nectar whereas Germanic beer stank like a Billy-goat.</p>
<p>From the 7th century AD the Anglo-Saxons had a small number of vineyards and, to some little extent , adopted the Roman drink. But wine was never plentiful throughout the period and was therefore expensive and available only to a relatively small number of wealthy people. In Ælfric&#8217;s <em>Colloquy </em>the conversation runs as follows:</p>
<p><em>Ond hwæt drincst ∂u? </em>(And what do you drink?) <em>Ealu, gif ic hæbbe, o∂∂e wæter gif ic næbbe ealu </em> (Ale, if I have it, or water if I have no ale)</p>
<p><em>Ne drincst ∂u win? </em>(Do you not drink wine) <em>Ic ne eom swa swedig ∂æt ic mæge bicgean me win. </em>(I am not so wealthy that I may buy wine)</p>
<p>There was a warmer climatic phase from the 9th &#8211; 13th centuries, when it would have been easier to cultivate vines in England, though wine was still not drunk, certainly in any quantity, by the mass of the people. In his description of Britain in the middle of the 8th century, Bede says that vines grow &#8216;in some places&#8217; (<em>on summum stowum wingeardas growa∂). </em>Wine was mainly produced for <em>personal comsumption by the lord and his retinue </em>(Hagen p.221) and later for those in the great monasteries.</p>
<p>Few monasteries were without a vineyard. Wine was needed for the Eucharist and the monks were usually allowed generous amounts for their own consumption. In the Old English medicinal recipes wine appears more frequently than any other alcoholic drink. This is partly due to the fact that the vineyards and the medicinal texts are both closely associated with the monasteries. In addition, the great use of wine reflects the Mediterranean origin of many of the recipes.</p>
<p>Wine has by far the greatest number of name compounds. According to Fell, the name <em>win </em>has fifty compounds whereas <em>beor </em>has eleven. Hagen points out that many of the win compounds are functional and descriptive, relating to wine production; for example, <em>winbeam </em>(vine), <em>winberige </em>(grape), <em>wingeard </em>(vineyard), <em>Wingeardseax </em>(pruning knife), <em>winreafetian </em>(gather grapes), <em>winwringe </em>(wine press) and <em>winwyrcend </em>(wine dresser). In passing, it should be noted that <em>beor </em>does not have these functional compounds. If the term <em>beor </em>was used by the Anglo-Saxons to mean cider, then we would expect to see compounds of the word <em>beor </em>relating to cider production; but there are none.  This is a strong indication that beor was not cider.</p>
<p>Wine was not an early, traditional drink of the Anglo-Saxons. From early, pagan times their high-status, strong alcoholic drinks were beor and medu (mead). These were the drinks of the warriors in the Hall and thus we have the terms <em>beorsele (</em>Beer Hall) and <em>meduhealle </em>(Mead Hall). Mead is a honey-based drink and it has been suggested that Beor was also a sweet drink. But having two high-status sweet drinks seems to reflect Roman rather than Germanic practice. One would have thought that beor would have been the strong drink made from barley mentioned by Tacitus, thus providing a choice between a sweetish drink (mead) and a thirst-quenching bitter drink (beor).</p>
<p><strong>Mead and other Honey-based Drinks</strong></p>
<p>The name <em>mead </em>does not seem to have germanic origins. Thus we have not only OE <em>medu</em>, OFris <em>mede, </em>OHG <em>medo </em>and ON <em>mio∂r, </em>all drinks made from honey and water, but also Lith <em>medus </em>and OSlav <em>medu, </em>meaning honey and Greek <em>medu </em>meaning wine and Sanskrit <em>madhu </em>meaning honey-sweet wine. Therefore others had ancient drinks similar to the mead of the Germanic folk.</p>
<p>The plant called in Old English <em>Meduwyrt </em>is usually taken to be, and probably was, the plant we now call <em>meadowsweet (Filipendula ulmaria). </em>This is often said to be a plant used by the Anglo-Saxons to give additional flavour to their mead.</p>
<p>In addition to mead there were a number of foreign drinks, some mentioned in the Old English medicinal recipes, that involved the use of honey, namely:</p>
<p>Ydromellum &#8211; Apples and honey fermented together, usually in water but one recipe gives wine (Cockayne Lb II iv).</p>
<p>Oxymel &#8211; a mixture of vinegar, honey and water.</p>
<p>Mulsum &#8211; wine and honey or wine, water and honey.</p>
<p>Hydromel &#8211; Honey diluted in water (becomes mead when fermented).</p>
<p><strong>Glossaries</strong></p>
<p>The view that beor was cider or a sweet alcoholic drink is largely based on certain glosses where beor is equated with various foreign drinks, as follows:</p>
<p>Beor is glossed Ydromellum (Wrt Voc 27 43)<br />
Ydromellum is glossed Æppelwin (Wrt Voc ii 49 57)<br />
Æppelwin is glossed &#8216;cider&#8217; (WW430)</p>
<p>Therefore, from all these glosses, it would appear that Beor=Ydromellum=Æppelwin=Cider, and that <em>beor</em> is another name for cider. But we have more glosses: Beor is glossed mulsum (Wrt Voc 27 46), Mulsum is glossed &#8216;cider&#8217; (Isidore 7th cent) and Mead is glossed &#8216;cider&#8217; (Isidore 7th century). From these glosses it appears that beor=mulsum=cider, but mulsum is a drink made from wine and honey and is not therefore cider. Furthermore, in the 7th century cider (syder) was simply a name for a strong alcoholic drink. There is another gloss:  Ydromellum glosses ofetes wos (fruit juice) (BL Ms 32246f 7b) From all these glosses it would appear that Beor=Ydromellum=mulsum=mead=Æppelwin=cider=fruit juice, which of course is complete nonsense.</p>
<p>Bill Griffiths warns &#8216;the equivalence between incompatible drinking practices must be unsafe&#8217; (2001). Unfortunately, Fell uses these &#8216;unsafe&#8217; glosses to support her view stating &#8216;Old English beor was a drink made from honey and the juice of a fruit other than grapes, as the glosses ofetes wos and æppelwin suggest (Fell p 90). From these glosses it appears that any one of the drinks named is synonymous with any other drink named. The question arises as to why these glosses all appear to be in error. The answer would seem to be that the glosses are either equating drinks that are to some extent similar, or they are equating an alcoholic drink of one culture with an alcoholic drink of another culture. Thus beor is glossed cider simply because they are both strong alcoholic drinks and not because they are the same drink. It hardly needs to be said that any hypothesis based on these glosses is likely to be unsound.</p>
<p><strong>What type of drink was beor?</strong></p>
<p>One suggestion is that beor was a short, sweet, highly alcoholic drink. This seems to be only partly true. The evidence does show that beor was stronger than ealu (ale) (see Cockayne Lb II lxvii), but in the medicinal recipes beor appears as a long, bitter drink rather than a short, sweet drink. For example, <em>genim bollan fulne leohtes beores </em>(take a full bowl of light beer) (Cockayne Lac 18). Presumably a light beor would not be up to the usual acoholic strength. Another recipe states &#8216; <em>after eating salty food, by no means let him drink beor and wine and ale moderately&#8217; </em>(Cockayne Lb I xxxvi). In other words a long drink is needed to quench one&#8217;s thirst, therefore beor, like wine and ale, was a long drink to be had after eating salty food.</p>
<p>In the recipes, honey is sometimes added to wine or skimmed milk, but never to beor. Fell believes that this was because beor was sweet enough without the addition of honey (Fell 1975). However, if beor was a enjoyed as a thirst-quenching bitter drink, what would be the point of adding honey to it? The question is why was it deemed necessary to add honey to the wine or the skimmed milk?  A likely answer is that, whereas beor was a palatable drink in itself, the skimmed milk, particularly at that time, would be improved by sweetening. As to the wine, <em>it seems that Anglo-Saxon wine was naturally dry </em>(Hagen p227) but <em>swete win sel mylt ∂onne ∂e afre </em>(sweet wine digests better than rough) meant that the Anglo-Saxons sometimes sweetened their wine (Hagen ibid). Therefore honey is added to the milk and wine to make these drinks more palatable whereas beor did not require the honey because it was palatable in itself.</p>
<p>An interesting Old English medicinal recipe provides us with information regarding the relative weights of beor, win and ealu compared to a pint of water. This states that a pint of beor weighs 22 pennyweights less than a pint of water (Cockayne Lb II lxvii). Fell points out that <em>given the same measure of water and a sweet alcoholic drink, the alcohol could not weigh less than the water </em>(Fell ibid). Therefore it follows that beor was not a sweet drink. However, Fell maintains that the Anglo-Saxon scribe must have made a mistake regarding the weight of the beor, and sticks to her view that beor is a sweet drink.</p>
<p>Another medicinal recipe states that <em>a pregnant woman should not eat anything salty, nor anything sweet, nor drink beor, nor eat pig or anything fatty, nor drink till she be drunk </em>(Cockayne Lb III xxxvii). In other words she should have a bland or neutral diet &#8211; which is good advice. It is interesting to consider why, specifically, she should not drink beor. Was beor forbidden because, as some maintain, it was a sweet drink? Probably not, because she has been told to avoid anything sweet and <strong>then </strong>told to avoid beor; she is not told to avoid anything sweet like beor. In other words, there are two things she must avoid, namely, sweetness and beor. It is more likely that she is told to avoid beor because it is a strong alcoholic, bitter drink. (bitter drinks reduce body heat and dry body fluids and strong alcohol obviously should be avoided when pregnant). Therefore again the evidence, properly interpreted, shows beor to be a bitter rather than a sweet drink.</p>
<p>The comparative evidence from Old Norse is relevant if, as most seem to think, the drink called <em>bjorr </em>is the same type of drink as beor. Where beor or bjorr is said to be &#8216;sweet,&#8217; it should be noted that &#8216;<em>sweet&#8217; </em>in Old, and modern, English can mean pleasant, and, as Fell says, <em>where svass is applied to bjorr, &#8216;precious&#8217; is perhaps the nearest translation </em>(Fell ibid) Therefore, when beor or bjorr is said to be sweet, it may mean that the drink is pleasant or precious and not sweet in the way that honey is sweet. More straightforwardly, in the second <em>Lay of Gudrun, </em>in the <em>Elder Edda, </em>said to date to the early 10th century, bjorr is presented as being served in a full horn of drink, cool and bitter. Thus bjorr, like beor, was a long bitter drink.</p>
<p><strong>Some Post Anglo-Saxon references to beor/beer</strong></p>
<p>1205   drink of his beore  (Layamon&#8217;s Brut)<br />
1216    hi nabbeth noth win ne bor/beor (Owl &amp; Nightingale)<br />
c 1300  alle drunken of the ber  (King Horn)<br />
c 1325  Rymenhild pours beer (King Horn)<br />
c 1330  of hir bere &amp; of hir wine (Guy of Warwick Auch )<br />
1377 &#8211; 99    beir, a last iiij d; and for each barel (Oath book Colchester)<br />
1391     in pane, beer, mede  (Acc. Exp.Derby Camden)<br />
1397    Item ii beere val liii s iiiid  (Early Eng Customs System)<br />
1400   Good ber &amp; brygt wyn both  (Gawain)<br />
1420   iii barellis biere   (Early Eng Custom&#8217;s system)<br />
1440   bere, a drynke: Cervisia hummulina  (PParv Hrl 221)</p>
<p>There would seem to be no reason to doubt that all the references to a drink called <em>beor </em>or <em>beore/bor/ber/beer/beir/beere/biere/bere, </em>as shown above,are all references to the same type of drink. If the beor of the Anglo-Saxons was a short drink, very sweet and made from fruit, then the question arises as to what date did the name change its meaning and become applied instead to a drink made from fermented grain? According to Fell, this change in meaning occurred in the 15th century when there were large-scale imports of hopped beer from Flanders into England. However, against this explanation is the use of the word <em>beer </em>in c 1300, where Rymenhild fills a gallon bowl with beer and offers it to Horn (King Horn). Beer therefore in 1300 was a long drink, and Fell is proved wrong. Furthermore, it is hard to accept that the name of an old, traditional, alcoholic drink in England should, in the 15th century, stop being applied to a short, sweet drink and be applied instead to a long bitter drink made from grain, without this being mentioned anywhere in the literature.  It is difficult to see how this change could have been achieved, without a great deal of confusion over an extended period of time.</p>
<p><strong>The Semantics of <em>Beor</em></strong></p>
<p>The Old English names for barley are <em><strong>beow</strong> </em>and <em><strong>bere</strong>. </em>We know from Tacitus (see above) that the germanic folk were noted as having an alcoholic drink made  from barley. Therefore it seems more than reasonable to take the ancient Old English drink called <em>beor </em>as being made from fermented barley, because the name of the drink seems to derive from the very similar name for barley. This was accepted without question until recent times, when, mislead by the glosses, as discussed above, it was maintained that beor was either cider or a short, sweet drink made from fruit and drunk out of tiny walnut cups. To fit in with these latter views it was necessary to find a different origin for the name <em>beor. </em>It was then suggested that <em>beor </em>was not derived from the name for barley but from the monastic Latin <em>biber </em>meaning &#8216;to drink.&#8217; If this is so then it is, it seems, no more than a remarkable coincidence that the name they derived from the Latin <em> biber </em>happened to be so similar, sometimes identical, to their name for barley.</p>
<p><strong>Types of Beor and Ealu</strong></p>
<p>There were various types of Anglo-Saxon ale. <em>Ealdus ealo∂ </em>(Old ale) is mentioned in a fly-leaf leechdom. According to Cockayne, <em>even without hops, a strong ale would keep until it became &#8216;old ale.&#8217; Keeping and careful treatment would secure its being clear (Cockayne Glossary). </em>They had <em>strang hluttor ealu </em>(strong clear ale), <em>suran eala∂ </em>(sour ale), <em>god ealu </em>(good ale) and <em>niwe </em>which is probably new ale. There is also a reference to <em>twybrownum eala∂ </em>(twice-brewed ale) (Cockayne LB I xivii 3), but this is probably a translation from a Mediterranean recipe and may not therefore be, as some suggest, evidence that the Anglo-saxons brewed their ale twice to make it a stronger drink.</p>
<p>There were also various types of Anglo-Saxon beor. There are references to <em>swi∂e beore </em>(very good beor?), <em>strangan beor </em>(strong beor), <em>leohtes beors </em>(light beor) and <em>wearmum beore </em>(warm beor). In the Old English herbarium, which is a translation of Mediterranean medicinal recipes, the Anglo-Saxon translator uses the native term <em>beor </em>to translate the foreign drink mulsum. As pointed out above, this does not mean that beor was the same type of drink as mulsum. It is from the Herbarium that one of the mis-leading glosses , i.e. beor = mulsum, has been derived. However there is a particular reason why the Saxon scribe translated mulsa as beor, which is discussed below.</p>
<p>We know, as earlier discussed, that the term <em>beor </em>was sometimes used as general term for strong alcoholic drink, as well as a specific term for a particular alcoholic drink. As a general term, <em>beor </em>was used to translate a number of foreign drinks, such as mulsum and syder (cider). However, in the Old English Herbarium, it is <em>li∂on beor </em>that is used to translate <em>aqua mulsa, </em>as follows:</p>
<p><strong>Manuscripts   Ms V (OE)                                            MS O (OE)                                      Ms Vo (Lat)<br />
</strong>Herb 1                   beore                                                        beore                                                   aqua mulsa<br />
Herb 11                 niwe beor                                                beor                                                     aqua mulsa<br />
Herb 90                swy∂e god beor                                      swy∂w god beor                                      -<br />
Herb 140              li∂on beore                                              li∂e beore                                          aqua mulsa<br />
Herb 146              li∂on beore                                              li∂e beore                                          aqua mulsa<br />
Herb 158              li∂on beore (twice)                                        -                                                           -<br />
Herb 181              li∂on wætan beores                              li∂e beore                                          aqua mulsa<br />
Herb 185              li∂on beore                                                      -                                                   aqua mulsa</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p>In Herbarium Section 11 (Ms V) the requirement for &#8216;niwe beor&#8217; seems not that important since in Ms O the scribe gives simply beor. However, since aqua mulsa is nearly always translated as li∂on beore it seems likely that in Herb 1 and Herb 11 beor should also have been translated li∂on beor. This we have li∂on (mild) beor as a translation of aqua (watered down) mulsa. It would seem fairly certain that, in Herb 181, the <em>li∂on wætan beores </em>is the scribe&#8217;s attempt to translate the &#8216;watered down mulsum,&#8217; but is does not follow from this that the Anglo-Saxons watered down their beor. The Anglo-Saxon scribe has the difficult problem of trying to translate foreign terms from a culture that incorporates drinking practices that are not always shared by both cultures. We have no latin original for Herb 90, which is a pity since iy would have been interesting to see whether <em>swy∂e god beor </em> was a translation of simply <em>mulsa, </em>that is to say a drink not required to be watered down.</p>
<p>In Herb 1 the recipe states that honey is to be added to the beore, but again the scribe is substituting a native term, as a general term, for the foreign term <em>mulsa </em>and therefore it does not mean that in practice honey would have been added to beor, when we take <em>beor </em>as a specific term, because if a sweet drink was needed then a honey-based drink such as mead would have fitted the bill. In the original Latin, adding extra honey to mulsa makes sense, but it does not make sense to add honey to a drink that is valued because it is bitter. In Leechbook II the foreign drink <em>mulsa </em>is translated by the Anglo-Saxon scribe as <em>mulsa </em>not <em>beor. </em>He states <em>Drince mulsa ∂ is gemilscede drincan ælce dæge </em>(drink mulsum that is, dulcet drinks every day); this being a translation from a Mediterranean text. Here the scribe is avoiding confusion by not using the term <em>beor </em>and he obviously knows that mulsum is a sweet drink and therefore should not be equated with beor.</p>
<p><strong>Wylisc Ealu (Welsh Ale)</strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong>Ale was the commonest drink in Wales according to the <em>Laws </em>(Hagen p 217); therefore it is not surprising that some of this Welsh Ale made its way into England in the later Anglo-Saxon period, thus appearing in some of the Old English medicinal recipes and Food-Rent lists. In these lists Wylisc ale is sometimes called <em>&#8221;Sweet&#8221; Wylisc ealu, </em>but there is no evidence to support the suggestion that Wylisc ale was a sweet, honeyed, spiced ale similar to the drink later called <em>bragot. </em>Ale has a sweetish flavour as long as the malt sugar in it is not completely fermented (Hagen p 216). Therefore Welsh Ale may have been a swete ealu as opposed to a hluttor ealu (clear ale).</p>
<p><strong>Hops</strong></p>
<p>Adding hops to beer, clarifies, preserves and gives it a bitter taste, which makes the drink more thirst-quenching. The practice of adding hops to beer may well have been done, in England, earlier than was once thought; though not done to any great extent until the 16th century. The inflorescences and nuts of the hop contain the bitter acids humulane and lupulone which have antibiotic and hence preservative qualities (Wilson).  Hildegard von Bingen in the 12th century mentions the preservative quality of hops: <em>Its bitterness inhibits some spoilage in beverages to which it is added, making them last longer </em>(Throop 1998).</p>
<p>It is not known whether the Anglo-Saxons were aware of the keeping qualities of hops; if used it may have been simply the bitter taste that was valued. It is often suggested that they used a number of different herbs to flavour their beer, but the evidence for this appears only to practices later than the period. For example, the name <em>beerwyrt</em> applied to the herb meadowsweet, a herb also associated with mead. According to Hagen, <em>sap from sycamore trees was used to make beer stronger</em>. This may be the case, but not in the Anglo-Saxon period because the sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus), a native of Central Europe, was not introduced into England until the 16th century. <em>The oft-repeated statement that the Romans introduced sycamore is based on no evidence </em>(Rackham 1986). On the other hand, there is some evidence that hops were used by the Anglo-Saxons, later in the period, to flavour, if not preserve, their drink.</p>
<p>Old English <em>hymele </em>(hop) appears in a medicinal recipe (Cockayne Lac Fo. 139a). The hop is the fructification of the female plant and Cockayne says the name <em>eowohumelan </em>(Lb III ixi) is probably &#8216;ewe hop-plant&#8217; &#8211; i.e. the female plant. The Lacnunga (Fo 133b) also refers to hegehymele (hedge-hop), a name which, according to Cockayne, implies a possible cultivated hop plant (his view is repeated later by Wilson and Hagen). But this is not necessarily the case as wild hops grow, quite naturally on hedges, which, as a climbing plant, they need for support. There is a difference between evidence and interpretation of that evidence and, if there is doubt then the, doubt usually applies to the latter.</p>
<p><em>Wild hops have been part of the British flora since long before the adoption of agriculture </em>(Godwin 1956). Their natural habitat is wet alder and oak woods and the &#8216;wild hops&#8217; seen in hedgerows today are sometimes relics of these habitats or relics of former cultivation. Cockayne points out that <em>three Saxon legal deeds refer to a hide of land at Hymel-tun (Hop-farm) in Worcestershire </em>(Cockayne Vol 2 Pref ix). This may indicate that hops were cultivated or it may just have been a place/farm where wild hops were abundant and therefore named accordingly.</p>
<p>Section 68 of the Old English Herbarium at first seems to provide clear evidence that the Anglo-Saxons added hops to their drinks. This section refers to Herba brionia &#8216;which some call <em>hymele </em>(hop). In Section 68 (Ms V) the Saxon scribe states <em>the hop is so approved and praised that men mix it with their usual drinks. </em>Cockayne says that this remark about adding hops to the usual drinks is not in the original Latin and therefore must refer to an Anglo-saxon practice (Cockayne, Vol 1 p 173 fn). Unfortunately, Cockayne did not check all the Latin versions. In Section 68 (Ms Ca) the Latin reads hæc herba tamlaudabillis est ut (et in tyriacis) potionibus mittatur, which shows that the Saxon scribe was in fact translating from the Latin and the passage therefore does not necessarily reflect Anglo-Saxon practice.</p>
<p>In Kent documents exist which refer to hop-gavel. This involves pre-conquest land tenure and shows that hops were used as a customary due or rent-in-kind payable by certain tenants (Wilson/Connelly). Also in Kent was found the Graveney boat, apparently abandoned in the 10th century, which when found still contained a cargo of hops in some abundance, presumably intended to be used for brewing.  Wilson takes the presence of these hops in this boat as providing <em>the first concrete evidence that hopped beer was known in Britain in the 10th century </em>(Wilson ibid). Also, <em>from the 9th century onwards there is good evidence that French monasteries were making beer with hops </em>(Wilson), therefore it seems quite likely that this use of hops spread from France into Kent in the 10th century, with the Graveney boat offering evidence of this import.</p>
<p><strong>Cider</strong></p>
<p>Cider is a foreign drink that was eventually introduced into England. In France the term <em>sidre </em>was commonly used to mean a fermented drink made from apples, and later the same term (ME sidre) was used in England with the same meaning. Earlier forms of the term (Med.Latin <em>cisara </em>and Late Latin <em>sicera</em>) simply meant &#8216;strong drink.&#8217; This earlier sense was retained in translations of the Vulgate, where forms of the term, such as <em>ciser,cisar and cyser, </em>were used by Christian writers to translate the Hebrew term <em>shekar, </em>a term also meaning &#8216;strong drink.&#8217;</p>
<p>According to Walter Baver&#8217;s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament in Aramaic, Sikera derives from the Akkadian <em>shikaru, </em>with the meaning of &#8216;barley beer,&#8217; but it is unlikely that this would have been known to the Anglo-Saxon scribes when they used their term <em>beor </em>to translate the foreign term <em>sicera. </em>The term <em>cider </em>is from Old French <em>cisdre, </em>earlier from Low latin <em>cicera </em>(strong drink), from Greek <em>sikera </em>from Hebrew <em>shekar </em>(strong drink). The name was at one time applied to a drink of various fermented fruits, then subsequently to a drink of fermented pears or apples, then, finally, more specifically, to a drink of fermented apples.</p>
<p><em>Many historians have presumed that the Anglo-Saxons made cider but did not have a name for it </em>says Hagen.  She suggests that they did have a name for it, and that name was <em>beor. </em>The term for cider in German is <em>Apfelwein </em>(Applewine). In Danish it is <em>Æblevin </em>and in Dutch <em>Appelwijn. </em>It might be supposed that the Anglo-Saxons had a similar name for cider, and in fact Old English Vocabularies do give cider as <em>Æppelwin </em>(WW 430), but this is no more than a book-name. The real reason why the Anglo-Saxons had no name for cider is because they had no cider, and if they had had cider they would no doubt have followed the example of other Germanic folk and called it <em>Applewine. </em>The term <em>beor </em>is never mentioned in association with apples in the Old English literature.</p>
<p>Lots of suitable apples are required to make any amount of cider. The native Crab apple (Malus sylvestris) provided the only available apple throughout most of the Anglo-Saxon period, but these Crab apples would have been unsuitable as cider apples. The vast majority of Crab apple trees that are seen today, in England, are in fact <em>Wildings. </em>That is to say they are mostly trees that have hybridised, over the last 800 years, with various varieties of cultivated apple, and consequently their fruit is larger and not so sour as the original crab apples known to the Anglo-Saxons. The fruits of Wildings, often still called &#8216;Crab apples,&#8217; are sometimes suitable for making cider. It should also be pointed out that in Anglo-Saxon times the native Crab apple trees were not all that plentiful anyway. It is described by Rackham as <em>an anti-gregarious tree. </em>This is why it was suitable to be used as a boundary marker. The cultivated apple first appeared in England at the very end of the Anglo-Saxon period.</p>
<p>There seems to be no mention of apples in Anglo-Saxon food-rent lists, but they are mentioned a few times in the medicinal recipes. However, it should be remembered that the term æppel in Old English can mean any type of fruit. For example, <em>brembel æppel </em>( Lb I Ixiv) is the blackberry, and the &#8216;apples&#8217; mentioned in another recipe (Lb II xxiii) are in fact pomegranates (Cockayne ibid). <em>Wudusur æppel and surne æppel </em>both refer to the native sour Crab. In Leechbook II apples are mentioned in half a dozen recipes, but these are all translations of Mediterranean recipes. There is one recipe where apples are used in a drink, but again this is a foreign recipe. (The writer deals with the native Crab apple and its fruit in more detail in an earlier article (Horn 2003)).</p>
<p>The exact date when apples were first cultivated in Britain is unknown, because cultivated apples cannot be distinguished from the native Crab using the plant material remains found in archæological excavations. It has been said that the cultivated apple was introduced into Britain by the Romans, but even if this is the case, since the trees do not grow &#8216;true to type&#8217; from pips, they would not have survived throughout the Anglo-Saxon period. Celtic and Cornish dialects have words for apples, but it is most probably the indigenous crab to which they refer. There is, however, some evidence that a sweet, non-native apple was grown in one location in England towards the end of the Anglo-Saxon period (Horn 2003).</p>
<p>A<em>t the end of the Anglo-Saxon period some fruit trees were being cultivated in orchards, but all on a small scale </em>(Harvey 1981). The term <em>orceard </em>(orchard) was beginning to take on its modern meaning, but the term <em>æppulretun </em>should not necessarily be taken as meaning &#8216;apple orchard&#8217; because <em>æppel </em>sometimes meant generically fruit. However, <em>an extensive apple orchard is recorded in the Domesday Book </em>(Hagen ibid), but the fact that only one is recorded, albeit described as extensive, is significant.</p>
<p>Cultivated apple varieties spread across Europe from the mediterranean into France. The Normans had a strong tradition of cultivating apples and were familiar with cider production. They introduced  a number of varieties mainly into the south of England. A variety called <em>Pearmain, </em>recorded in 1204, is the oldest cultivated apple name in England. Its name is derived from the French word for a group of apple varieties. Later the famous <em>Cox&#8217;s Orange Pippin </em>was first propagated in Kent, as was the Bramley apple. The term <em>pippin </em>is derived from a French word meaning &#8216;seedling.&#8217; Thus, like the use of hops in brewing, the cultivated apples came from France into Kent, and, to this day, hops and cider are largely associated with Kent.</p>
<p>Cider was established in France much earlier than in England, but the exclusive use of apples for cider-making came rather late. Bartholomeus Anglicus, who spent some time in France, describes, in about 1250, cider as being a drink made from fruit, which may have included apples and pears. In Anglo-Saxon England, the fruit of the wild pear, if it could be found, would have been even less suitable for cider-making than the crab apple. The earliest reference to a cultivated pear in England is in the 12th century, when Wardoun pears were developed at Warden Abbey in Bedfordshire.</p>
<p>The increase in Apple Orchards in the 14th century coincided with a decline in vineyards in England. According to Landsberg <em>the vineyards dwindled in England mainly no doubt due to the cooler and wetter weather. In addition,&#8230;good wine was at that time readily available from France. As the vineyards closed in England they were replaced by orchards, even in monasteries such as Peterborough and Christ Church Canterbury </em>(Landsburg).It was at this time that cider started to become a popular drink, mainly in the south of England. Thus we have the first record of a form of the name <em>cider </em>(syder) appearing in the English language; this being in the Shoreham Poems (1333).</p>
<p><strong>The terms <em>Beer </em>and <em>Ale</em></strong></p>
<p>The two high-status drinks in the Anglo-Saxon hall were medu and beor. As Griffiths says, <em>the association of beor with sweetness in glosses of Latin terms may be a misleading clue. The Romans seemed to have liked their wine sweet, but did not favour beer at all </em>(Griffiths ibid). If Griffiths had continued researching along these lines he would probably have anticipated this article. The Romans liked their drinks to be sweet, but it does not follow that the Anglo-Saxons would have wanted both their high-status drinks to be sweet. A choice of sweet mead or bitter beer in the Hall seems more likely. The tiny silver or walnut cups, sometimes found as grave goods, do not in themselves constitute evidence that a particular drink was served in them. The large drinking- horn was the favoured drinking vessel. <em>To be offered alcohol in a horn was a mark of status </em>(Hagen ibid). When not a horn, the drinking vessel was a bowl not a cup.</p>
<p>The terms  beer and ale, in varying forms are used in many other, mainly germanic, countries as names for a drink made from fermented grain. In Europe there are four different terms: ale is the northern term, beer the western term, cervisia the southern term and pivo the eastern term for the drink. About 40 countries use a form of the word Beer and about 10 countries use a form of the word Ale, for a drink made from fermented grain. Some of the western and northern terms are as follows:</p>
<p>Western Terms</p>
<p>Old High German      bior<br />
High German              bier<br />
Low German                beer<br />
Frisian                          bier<br />
Dutch                            bier<br />
Old Norse                    bjor<br />
Old English                 beor<br />
Mod English               beer</p>
<p>Northern Terms</p>
<p>Latvian                         alus<br />
Lithuanian                  alus<br />
Danish                         ol<br />
Norwegian                  ol<br />
Swedish                       ol<br />
Old Norse                    ol<br />
Old English                ealu<br />
Mod English              ale</p>
<p>Most countries use either a form of the word beer or a form of the word ale for a drink of fermented grain. The question arises, if beer and ale are basically the same type of drink, why are both terms used in Old English, Modern English and Old Norse. We know there must have been some difference between beor and ealu because both terms sometimes appear in the same sentence. In most countries the question does not arise because only one of the terms is used for the drink.</p>
<p>A number of writers, for example F Kluge, have maintained that Bjor is a loan-word into Norse from Old English. Jan de Vries mentions Kluge&#8217;s hypothesis (<em>Altnordisches Etymologisches Worterbuch 1962 p  40). </em>The Icelandic dictionaries of Cleasby-Vigfousson and Fritzer give the translation of bjorr as beer or ale. The view that Old Norse bjorr may be of foreign origin is also in Cleasby-Vigfusson&#8217;s Icelandic Dictionary. There are also two references to bjorr in Sturlunga Saga, both of which deal with getting the drink from ships, suggesting that Icelanders were importing bjorr and that the drink was not a native drink to Iceland. (Fell ibid).</p>
<p><strong>Conclusions</strong></p>
<p>The appearance of both terms, beor and ealu, is to be expected in Old English, because the invading Germanic tribes brought into England both Western and Northern languages, and both terms have survived down to the present day.  If a term is given a useful meaning in a language, it will survive. In more modern times the difference between beer and ale is that only the former includes hops. However, this was not always the difference between the two drinks. In the times when hops were not used, or less widely used, the difference was a difference in alcoholic strength. According to Wright&#8217;s dictionary, <em>beer was a malt liquor, stronger and superior to ale, brewed from the first mashing of the malt, and ale was a weaker brew, brewed from the malt after the beer had been extracted from it. </em>This seems to be the difference in Anglo-Saxon times. Beor was the stronger, high-status drink, drunk usually from a horn and ealu was the weaker, common drink of the people, drunk from a bowl and no doubt safer, as well as nicer, than drinking river or well water. The term beor also survived as a general term for strong alcoholic drink.</p>
<p><strong>References</strong></p>
<p>Tacitus                        Germania 23  Penguin 1970<br />
Ælfric&#8217;s                       Colloquy, Ed G N Garmonsway  1991<br />
Bede                             A History of the English Church and People<br />
Hagen A.                   A Second Handbook of Anglo-Saxon Food &amp; Drink, 1999<br />
Fell  C.                        Old English Beor<br />
Cockayne O.              Leechdoms, Wortcunning &amp; Starcraft of Early England<br />
Wright T.                   Wrt Voc Vocabularies 1857 &amp; 1873<br />
Wright &amp; Wulker     Vocabularies 1884<br />
Isidore of Seville       Etymologiarum sive Originum<br />
BL                                 Blickling Glossaries<br />
Griffiths B.                 Notes on Beer/Ale.  Internet<br />
Clark Hall                  A Concise  Anglo-Saxon Dictionary<br />
King Horn                  OUP for Early English Society 1962<br />
Wilson D G                Plant Remains from Graveney Boat, New Phytologist, 1975<br />
Wilson/Connelly     Plant Remains including Evidence for Hops.<br />
Rackham O.              The History of the Countryside, 1986<br />
Throop P.                   Hildegard von Bingen&#8217;s Physica, 1998<br />
Godwin H.                 History of British Flora, 1956<br />
Horn P C                    The Apple Tree in Anglo-Saxon England, Withowinde 130, 2003<br />
Bartholomeus           Bartholomeus Anglicus, De Proprietatibus Rerum<br />
Harvey J.                   Mediæval   Gardens, London 1981<br />
Landsberg S.            The medieval Garden<br />
Wright T.                   English Dialect Dictionary.</p>
<p><strong>(Based on Article in Withowinde 146,  2008)</strong></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><em><br />
</em></p>
<p><strong><em> </em></strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/the-alcoholic-drinks-of-the-anglo-saxons/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Aspects of Anglo-Saxon Paganism</title>
		<link>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/aspects-of-anglo-saxon-paganism</link>
		<comments>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/aspects-of-anglo-saxon-paganism#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Sep 2010 19:31:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>bocere</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Anglo-Saxon Paganism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/?p=777</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There was an interesting article in Wiþowinde 147 from Eadmund (Malcolm) Dunstall bewailing the fact that incorrect information is often repeated and that on the periphery of Anglo Saxon studies there is one particular area where this ersatz information is particularly rife, and that is the area of Englisc Paganism.  
 As a modern day Heathen/Pagan [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There was an interesting article in <strong>Wi</strong><strong>þ</strong><strong>owinde 147</strong> from Eadmund (Malcolm) Dunstall bewailing the fact that incorrect information is often repeated and that on the periphery of Anglo Saxon studies there is one particular area where this ersatz information is particularly rife, and that is the area of Englisc Paganism.  <span id="more-777"></span></p>
<p> As a modern day Heathen/Pagan I could not agree more!  Whilst Saxons living alongside Heathen Norsemen in the Danelaw area may have been influenced to return to their religious roots, I deplore the way in which it is presumed by so many that Anglo Saxon Paganism was the same as Scandinavian, except for some slight name changes: Odinn to Woden, Forr to Funor, Tyr to Tiw etc.</p>
<p>(In fact, as someone with an interest in Norse Paganism as well,  I will observe that it was not very  consistent from one village to the next, let alone across several different countries!)  Let&#8217;s not fall into the archaeologist trap: lf we can&#8217;t explain if, it must have ritual purpose&#8230;&#8221; So much is unknown, uncertain, and down to individual interpretation.</p>
<p>A lot of emphasis has been placed upon the writings of the Venerable Bede, possibly England&#8217;s first historian, writing in Jarrow after the Christianisation of England. While he does provide excellent evidence regarding some Anglo Saxon Heathen practices such as mentioning the obscure Heathen deities Eostre, Hreþa (month names) &amp; Sætere, one must remember that he was a Christian monk with a political viewpoint, especially as regarding the lineage and legitimacy of his current royal dynasty and culture.  That makes it all the more surprising that he should remind us that the</p>
<p>Heathen feast of Modra necht is arguably on 26 December and that Solmonaþ(February) is a feast of cakes, while September is named as Halegmonaþ (Holy Month) and November as Blotmonaþ (from its animal sacrifices). Why would a Christian cleric want to make these up?</p>
<p>We have a far wider range of powerful literature, in the form of texts that can be analysed for clues to our Heathen past: Heroic poetry such as Beowulf and the Battle of Maldon, material from leech books and verse charms (such as the Nine Herbs Charm), laws, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, letters, and the Anglo Saxon Rune Poem.  I would argue that you cannot get into the early Anglo Saxon mind set without understanding something of the Paganism of that period, even when it had officially ceased to exist.</p>
<p>According to the 6th century writer Gildas, the first of the heathen Saxon newcomers in the 5th century were allegedly Hengest and Horsa, two warrior leaders brought in by the Celt Vortigern to evict the Picts between about 449-456. After completing this mercenary task, they decided to stay on, against his wishes.  At a battle near Aylesford in Kent, Horsa was killed, and the still visible White Horse Stone (or possibly its replacement) is said to be where he is buried, and is thus an important place to modern heathens as a memorial to one of the two human sources of English Heathenism.  It lies off the A229 Maidstone-Chatham road, near to where the Pilgrims Way and the more modern Channel Tunnel link cross it.  lt can be found via a footpath near to a garage.</p>
<p>Consider briefly the names though:  Vortigen is less a name than a title, which has been interpreted as &#8220;King of Kings.&#8221; Horsa means &#8220;horse&#8221; and Hengest either &#8220;stallion&#8221; &#8211; or alternatively the almost-exact opposite, &#8220;gelding.&#8221; (How etymologists justify their art as a science sometimes eludes me!) How likely is it, for two sons to be both named in equine fashion?  I wonder whether these were titles, rather than names, in the same way that Emperor Haile Selassie of Ethiopia was known as the &#8220;Lion of Judah&#8221;?</p>
<p><strong>LAWS</strong></p>
<p>While I will accept that some laws are copied from one king to another, the successive laws against Paganism  seem to subtly change focus in each new generation: presumably to combat whatever was the &#8220;latest fad&#8221;.  The Saxon kings and the Church give us evidence of what was going on in England by what they forbade. For example, The Laws of King Alfred include:</p>
<p>30. The women (faamnan) who are accustomed to harbour enchanters (onfon gealdor-crasftiganJ and wizards (scin-læcan) and witches (wiccan) * do not allow them to live.</p>
<p>32. And he that sacrifices to idols (god-geldum onsaeoge), rather than to God alone, let him suffer</p>
<p>death. (Griffiths, 2006: 50)</p>
<p>Hence we know that people in the 880s were acting as enchanters, wizards and witches, as well as sacrificing to idols. It is unlikely that a law would be passed against something that did not exist. Prior to that in AD666, the biographer of St. Wilfriþ tells how a priest of the South Saxons cursed Wilfriþ and his companions as they were cast ashore in a storm.</p>
<p>The Council of Clofeshoh (747) condemned those who practiced divinations, auguries, incantations and the like.  The Dialogue of Archbishop Egbert named those who worshipped idols or gave themselves to the devil through others who took auspices or practiced astrology or enchantment as men who should never be appointed to the priesthood. (Blair, PH L997:LL7) &#8211; Though one might think they were already part of a rival priesthood, and would not therefore be interested in the one being denied them!</p>
<p>Between 1009 and 1016, King Æþelræd published his laws which included <em>Renounce all Pagan Customs </em>(Griffiths, 2006:84) demonstrating this was still a problem within an Anglo Saxon culture that had supposedly been converted to Christianity nearly four centuries previously (Pagan practices were specifically banned under Archbishop Theodore&#8217;s 7th century Penitential, which included penances for sacrificing to devils, foretelling the future and burning grain in a house after the death of a man &#8211; the last being the only reference I know of that particular Pagan practice).</p>
<p>The popular image of Christian conversion across Europe is not supported by the evidence, with some countries vacillating between various religions depending on their current rulers, invaders and even who they wanted as their allies or trading partners. Why, for instance, was the supposedly  Christian King Aþelhere of the East Angles named by Bede as being within the ill-fated 30 legions of the fervently Heathen King Penda&#8217;s AD654 expedition against Oswiu? (Stenton, 1971:83) Was it purely politics? Or had East Anglia reverted to Paganism once more? Prudence Jones &amp; Nigel Pennick provide a detailed analysis of this type of process in A History of Pagan Europe (1995).</p>
<p>Earlier, East Anglian King Redwald had been baptised in Kent, but merely erected a crucifix in his Heathen temple and had a massive treasure burial &#8211; hardly the actions expected of a Christian. Maybe, like Prince Charles, he wanted to be &#8220;Defender of the Faiths&#8221; to his multi-faith society.  The Prittlewell treasure grave has proved this type of ostentatious funeral wasn&#8217;t unique in this period.  Wulfstan, ,Ælric and King Cnut (AD995) collectively ban animal guising, saluting the moon, making offerings at waterfalls and trees, making oaths to Heathen gods etc., in edicts years apart &#8211; which</p>
<p>suggest these things were still continuing. King Edgar had already forbidden well worship, divination, and practices around trees and wells in about AD970 – only 25 years before Cnut.   It would seem unlikely that laws would be repeatedly passed against some action that no longer happened.  Of course these accounts do all give us a very clear idea of what we should do as modern Heathens if we wish to worship in the way our ancestors did.</p>
<p><strong>RITUALS &amp; MAGIC</strong></p>
<p>If one examines Anglo Saxon charms such as the one to make a field fruitful (Erce, Erce, Erce) it is hard to deny that there are some very magical acts going on alongside the instruction to say the Lords Prayer (cutting turf, and putting herbs and grain into the soil, etc.).   The period may officially be Christian, but it seems a lot of the old ways lingered, in a form semi- acceptable to the new religion.</p>
<p>When King Æþelberht met with Augustine and some 40 Christian missionaries, around 597 at Thanet in Kent, he insisted that it was in the open air, because he was suspicious of their magic. Does that mean then, at that place and time, people believed magic could only take place indoors?</p>
<p><strong>CULT CENTRES</strong></p>
<p>While there will always be linguistic and etymological arguments around place names, some of them</p>
<p>Wansdyke, Wednesbury (- Woden&#8217;s Barrow) Wednesfield, Thundersley (þunor&#8217;s grove), Tysoe (Tiw&#8217;s</p>
<p>Hill Spur) etc.- do seem to give evidence of centres of religious cults, Thurstable (Funor&#8217;s Pillar)    suggests a link with the sacred lrminsul pillars on the continent destroyed by Charlemagne, but St Anselm commenting on Heathen temples in Wessex mentions also crude pillars (ermula) of the same foul snake and the stag were worshipped with coarse stupidity in profane shrines&#8230; (Thompson, 2004:19). It was, of course, a stag that surmounted the whetstone sceptre of Sutton</p>
<p>Hoo, despite the wolf element to the Wuffing dynasty&#8217;s clan name,</p>
<p>Place names with an original element of hearg (hill sanctuary) in them such as Harrow Hill, likely indicate an outdoor altar site. Weoh = idol, allegedly, and this forms a Pagan element in place names such as Wayland Wood. What is much more controversial is the use of the Grimr nickname for Woden as part of place names. Whilst Grimsby might have been a centre for his worship, some places such as Grimsdyke, Grimspound, Grimes Graves etc, may have been named by later generations after a being that had by then gained &#8216;bogeyman&#8217; status. What has not had much attention given it in recent years is the idea of areas named after their original tribes, who in turn were ruled by people who could only do so by claiming direct lineage back to a Pagan deity such as Woden or Seaxnot. A study of Frank Stenton (1971) will still repay the effort.</p>
<p><strong>TEMPLES</strong></p>
<p>According to Bede, the Heathen priest Coifi was asked by King Edwin of Northumbria to persuade the people to convert to Christianity in 627, by setting an example. He carried a spear on a stallion and threw it into the temple (ealh) at Goodmanham in the East Riding of Yorkshire &#8211; all taboo acts for an Anglo Saxon Heathen priest. (Blair, P. L977:121).  In contrast, at least one Icelandic priest owned a stallion and none seemed barred from carrying arms. Though they did share the custom of not taking weapons into the temple.</p>
<p><em>Certainly there must have been some well-constructed Heathen temples in England. Why else would Pope Gregory write to Abbot Mellitus a letter dated 17 June 601 (quoted by Bede) instructing him:  </em></p>
<p><em>I have come to the conclusion that the temples of the idols in England should not on any account be destroyed. Augustine must smash the idols, but the temples themselves should be sprinkled with holy water and altars set up in them in which relics are to be enclosed. For we ought to take   advantage of well built temples by purifying them from devil worship&#8230;</em> (Branston, 8., L974:53-54)</p>
<p>Those English Heathen temples must have flourished well into the era of Christian conversion, since</p>
<p>elsewhere Bede <em>mentions an unbroken tradition of at least one heathen temple seen by King Aldwulf of East Anglia &#8216;who lived into our own times&#8217;</em> and who testified <em>&#8216;that this temple was still standing in his day, and that he had seen if when a boy</em>.&#8217;(Branston, B. 1974:54) The temple in question had belonged to Aldwulf&#8217;s predecessor King Rædwald, who died in about 625, and is believed to be the main burial at Sutton Hoo, His temple was probably where Rendlesham church now stands in Suffolk.   If the life of Aldwulf (Eadwulf) is taken as 664-7L3 (Pollington, 2005:120) and if he saw it when he was six years old (the earliest he is likely to have been able to recollect) then the temple was there in 670 &#8211; fofty-five years after the death of Rædwald and the supposed end of Heathen practice. Bede also writes about King Sighere of the East Saxons rebuilding ruined temples and restoring Heathen worship after a serious plague in 665.</p>
<p><strong>DANCE</strong></p>
<p>A plate on the side of the Sutton Hoo helmet shows what appear to be two figures, each dancing with two spears and a sword, across two crossed spears on the ground. They have elaborate helmets on that appear to be crested with large bird-headed horns. There is a similar figure shown on the Finglesham belt buckle from Kent, and they have close parallels with panels from Torslunda, Sweden. It appears that ritual dancing is going on, and Ormsgard Dark Ages Theatre was</p>
<p>trying to do some experimental archaeology around that at Sutton Hoo during 2008. While one may argue about what sort of ritual dance it is, it would be hard to put it into a Christian context.</p>
<p>Two of the figures from the Torslunda plates have helmets with boars on them, and at least two similar helmets have been found in England: at Benty Grange, Derbyshire and fragments at Woolaston, Northants and Guilden Morden, Cambs.   Whilst they could simply be decoration, are they evidence of a boar cult an animal sacred to the god Frey? As I indicated at the start of this article it is all down to interpretation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/aspects-of-anglo-saxon-paganism/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Anglo-Saxon Burial Mounds: Princely Burials in the 6th &amp; 7th Centuries by Stephen Pollington</title>
		<link>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/anglo-saxon-burial-mounds-princely-burials-in-the-6th-7th-centuries-by-stephen-pollington</link>
		<comments>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/anglo-saxon-burial-mounds-princely-burials-in-the-6th-7th-centuries-by-stephen-pollington#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Sep 2010 17:25:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>bocere</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Book Reviews]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/?p=758</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/anglo-saxon-burial-mounds-princely-burials-in-the-6th-7th-centuries-by-stephen-pollington"><img align="right" hspace="5" width="85" src="http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/ASburialMounds-215x300.jpg" class="alignright wp-post-image tfe" alt="" title="ASburialMounds" /></a>Published: Anglo-Saxon Books, 2008.  ISBN: 978 189828151 1, 263 pages, paperback,  £14.95.
Our ancient burial mounds, of which the Sutton Hoo set are the most well-known, are a mysterious and intriguing feature of our landscape, whether they occur singly or in groups.  Stephen Pollington has produced an excellent and detailed reference book about them.  

I turned first [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Published: Anglo-Saxon Books, 2008.  ISBN: 978 189828151 1, 263 pages, paperback,  £14.95.</p>
<p>Our ancient burial mounds, of which the Sutton Hoo set are the most well-known, are a mysterious and intriguing feature of our landscape, whether they occur singly or in groups.  Stephen Pollington has produced an excellent and detailed reference book about them.  <span id="more-758"></span></p>
<p><a rel="attachment wp-att-766" href="http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/anglo-saxon-burial-mounds-princely-burials-in-the-6th-7th-centuries-by-stephen-pollington/asburialmounds"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-766" title="ASburialMounds" src="http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/ASburialMounds-215x300.jpg" alt="" width="215" height="300" /></a></p>
<p>I turned first to the second section of the book, 126 pages in length, where all the known Anglo-Saxon barrows – some hundreds of them – are listed alphabetically by region. It includes the very many barrows that have disappeared through ploughing or other activities: for example, between 80 and 100 barrows were visible at Chartham Down, Kent, in 1729-30, and dozens of them were dug, but all traces of them had been ploughed out by 1856. The most important have lengthy entries – for example, Taplow has four pages including a diagram, Sutton Hoo seven pages – while the rest all have entries covering their identification and excavation. One of the earliest known excavations was at Barham, Kent, where a cremation urn was dug up at the time of King Henry VIII. It is fascinating to dip into, and rummage through, this section. I turned to my own area, the Peak District, where the Benty Grange mound, dug in 1848, was exceptional in its well-known boar-crested helmet. The common finds from my area are typical of all locations: corroded metal, such as shield bosses, knives, spearheads, arrowheads and buckles; female items, such as beads, pendants, pins, combs and needles; pottery and, of course, bones.</p>
<p> Pollington takes 80 pages (in the first part of the book) for discussion and analysis. He defines ‘princely burials’ and ‘chamber burials’. He takes a special interest in the latter, wherein the dead are laid out in a room surrounded by display, discussing their construction, funeral rites and meaning. He looks at ship burial, burial with a horse, and bed burial. He looks at the mythical link between dragons and barrows. He talks about the way barrows were perceived were perceived in later centuries, their fate from treasure hunters and antiquarians, and their disappearance through agricultural practice. There are accounts of some of the known antiquaries, such as Bryan Faussett (1720 – 1776), who opened Kentish barrows and recorded their contents, and Thomas Bateman (1821 – 1861) who dug in the Peak District and discovered the Benty Grange helmet.</p>
<p> Indexes include a listing of barrow placenames – that is, names including the elements <em>hlaw</em> (low) and <em>beorh</em> (barrow). Drakelow, Derbyshire, being <em>dracan hlaw</em> (dragon low) and Taplow, Buckinghamshire, being <em>Tæppan hlaw</em> (Tappa’s low).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/anglo-saxon-burial-mounds-princely-burials-in-the-6th-7th-centuries-by-stephen-pollington/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Sound of the Sutton Hoo Harp</title>
		<link>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/the-sound-of-the-sutton-hoo-harp</link>
		<comments>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/the-sound-of-the-sutton-hoo-harp#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2010 10:56:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[music]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/?p=607</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It was not that long ago (1970&#8242;s) when writers were expressing doubts about what musical instrument was meant by hearpe in the Old English literature. The question was &#8216;Why have only two been found?&#8217; (Grose &#38; McKenna, Old English Literature, 1973). A few years later the question required no answer, because by then there was [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was not that long ago (1970&#8242;s) when writers were expressing doubts about what musical instrument was meant by <em>hearpe </em>in the Old English literature. The question was &#8216;Why have only two been found?&#8217; (Grose &amp; McKenna, <em>Old English Literature, </em>1973). A few years later the question required no answer, because by then there was evidence of at least 15 hearpes, from various sites in England and Germany, all similar to the Sutton Hoo hearpe.<span id="more-607"></span></p>
<p>This early musical instrument,  called by the Anglo-Saxons a <em>hearpe, </em>is what we call today a round lyre. The triangular frame-harp came into use much later in the Anglo-Saxon period.</p>
<p>This pan-Germanic hearpe or lyre, the most famous example of which is the Sutton Hoo harp, is the musical instrument associated with the early Old English poetry, such as <em>Beowulf. </em>It is a simple yet very elegant musical instrument; aesthetically pleasing in its rounded shape.</p>
<p>This six-stringed instrument, light in weight and not too large in size would have been easy for the travelling scop to carry from place to place. The hollow sound-box looks alarmingly shallow, being no more than 25mm in the case of the Sutton Hoo harp, but it can produce a sound appropriate in volume for the germanic mead-hall.</p>
<p><strong>Tuning</strong></p>
<p>The wooden tailpiece at the foot of the hearpe, which restrains the strings, need not be much more than 50mm long, in order that the bridge may be moved to a position that will give the strings a vibrating length of about 575mm. This should give the sound a reasonably low and full tone, and, particularly when tuned to a suitable pentatonic scale, the compass of the instrument will lie within the normal tenor register. Because of the nature of the construction of the hearpe, it will in most cases go out of tune much quicker than most other instruments. This tendency can be avoided by making sure that the strings are held firm enough at the base and in the pegs. The  hearpe should then remain in tune without the need for adjustment for some weeks.</p>
<p><strong>Hucbald</strong></p>
<p>Information regarding the tuning of a six-stringed lyre is to be found in a work entitled <em>De Harmonica Institutione (c 880) </em>written by Hucbald (c840-930) who was a Flemish monk. This tuning, when starting from the first note of the C major scale, comprises the first six notes of that scale, namely CDEFGA.</p>
<p>However, Hucbald is not describing, or providing, any information on, the tuning of the Anglo-Saxon or Germanic hearpe. Hucbald is explaining how the Roman philosopher, Boethius (480-524) would havge tuned the classical lyre; an instrument which, as Hucbald notes, additional strings were often added to accomodate the ranges of the various modes.</p>
<p>Whether the Anglo-Saxon scop tuned his harp to Hucbald&#8217;s scales later in the Anglo-Saxcon period is not known, but certainly in the pagan period the scop would not have been familiar with the modes used by Boethius.</p>
<p><strong>The Pentatonic scales</strong></p>
<p>It seems fairly certain that the Anglo-Saxon hearpe would have been tuned to a pentatonic scale. The notes of these scales lie naturally to the musical ear between the octave and the instrument has six strings, which gives the five notes of the scale plus the octave note.<br />
Pentatonic scales are very common throughout the world, being much used in the early folk music of various countries.</p>
<p>Any scale comprising of five different notes may be termed &#8216;pentatonic,&#8217; but there are a number of early forms of pentatonic scales. The G flat major pentatonic scale is the base of melodies that may be played using only the black notes of the piano. The scale C D E G A (c), is the scale used in the early music of China.</p>
<p>The minor pentatonic scale, C Eflat F G Bflat (c), is the scale used in Appalachian folk music and it is also the scale used in early English folk-song music. Tuned to this scale, quite a number of early English folk melodies may be played on the Anglo-Saxon hearpe. Because these early English folk-song melodies go back many centuries, it is I think reasonable to assume that the Old English Scop would have tuned his hearpe to this pentatonic scale. We can therefore, I believe, bring back to life the sound of the Sutton Hoo harp. This I have tried to do on my CD <strong><em>The Sound of the Sutton Hoo Harp.  </em></strong></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>Techniques</strong></p>
<p>The main problem that remains is how was the hearpe played? Did it involve, as some have suggested, a technique called &#8216;block and strum? The problem with this technique is, if carried out for any length of time, it becomes very tedious to the ear. It is, I think, worth examining the Old English literature to see whether there is any mention of technique whilst playing the hearpe.</p>
<p>There is a late reference to &#8216;singing to the harp,&#8217; that is Old English <em>salletan </em> (The Paris Psalter 104). But this term can also mean &#8216;to sing psalms&#8217; (Latin <em>psallere), </em>and when sung with a harp it would have been the later triangular frame harp, such as is shown in the 11th century Psalter in St. John&#8217;s College Cambridge.</p>
<p>The Finnsburh Episode in Beowulf (Lines 1063-1065) seems to suggest that hearpe and song were conjoined:</p>
<p><em>∂ær wæs sang and sweg samod ætgædere  </em></p>
<p><em>Fore Healfdenes Hilde-wisan</em></p>
<p><em>Gomen-wudu greted gid oft wrecan </em></p>
<p>(There was song and sound together gathered<em>  </em></p>
<p>before Half-danes battle leader<em>  </em></p>
<p>Game-wood played, tale often repeated)<em>                                                                                                                                                                      <span style="font-style: normal;">                                                                                                                                                                           But <em>sweg </em>here may mean the general sound in the Hall, the background noise, rather than <em>hearpesweg </em>(the sound of the harp). This interpretation is perhaps strengthened by <em>gomen-wudu greted </em>coming in the next line; <em>gomen-wudu </em>(joy-wood) being one of a number of kennings for the hearpe.</span></em></p>
<p>A passage in <em>Widsi∂ </em>provides another reference to the joining together of hearpe and voice:</p>
<p><em>Donne wit Scilling sciran reorde </em></p>
<p><em>For uncrum sigedryhtne song ahofan </em></p>
<p><em>Hlude bi hearpan hleo∂or swinsade                                                                                                </em></p>
<p>When Scilling and I with clear voice<em> </em></p>
<p>raised a song for our victorious Lord<em> </em></p>
<p>Loud was the sound of the harp&#8217;s melody<em> </em>)<em>                                                                                    <span style="font-style: normal;">                                                                                                                                                                                           In this passage <em>Scilling </em>is sometimes taken to be the name of Widsi∂&#8217;s hearpe rather than another person. But in either case it is not made absolutely clear that the hearpe and voice are heard together at the same time. </span></em></p>
<p>In <em>The Gifts of men </em>the hearpe appears to be played quite quickly and skifully and separately from the voice of the Scop:</p>
<p><em>Sum mid hondum mæg hearpan gretan</em></p>
<p><em>Ah he gleobeames gearobrygda list</em></p>
<p>(One with his hands may play the harp</p>
<p>He has on the glee-wood a quick-playing skill)</p>
<p>Note here also the term <em>gleobeames </em>(glee-wood), another kenning for the hearpe, sometimes appearing as <em>gliwbeam. </em>The late equation of this term with the timbrel (tambourine or drum) is either by extension or error. A play-wood or pleasure-wood, or perhaps music-wood, is the meaning of the term; the hearpe, basically, being a thin wooden board in appearance. The term <em>gleo </em>in the form <em>glee, </em>has come down to the present day, but now with the meaning <em>part-song.</em></p>
<p>An extract from <em>The Fortunes of Men </em>describes a lively hearpe-playing style:</p>
<p><em>Sum sceal mid hearpan æt his hlafordes fotum sittan</em></p>
<p><em>feoh ∂icgan ond a snellice snere wrætan </em></p>
<p><em>lætan scrælletan sceacol, se∂e hleape∂ </em></p>
<p><em>nægl neomegende, bi∂ him neod micel. </em></p>
<p>(One shall with hearpe sit at his Lord&#8217;s feet,</p>
<p>receive treasure and rapidly twang</p>
<p>the harp-string, letting the plectrum loudly sound,</p>
<p>which leaping nail sounds sweet</p>
<p>and brings much pleasure.)<em>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          <span style="font-style: normal;">                                                                                                                                       Here we see that the hearpe was, at least sometimes, played loudly and quickly leaping from one string to another.</span></em></p>
<p>Finally, some lines from the Riming Poem:</p>
<p>L 25   <em>gellende sner  </em>(harpstring resounding)</p>
<p>L 27/28 <em> scyl wæs hearpe </em></p>
<p><em>hlude hlynede, hleo∂or dynede                                                                                                                                 </em></p>
<p><em>     </em>(clear-sounding was harp</p>
<p>loudly resounding)</p>
<p>Macrae-Gibson in his glossary (<em>The OE Riming Poem</em>, 1983) gives <em>gellende, hlynede and dynede </em>all as &#8216;resounding,&#8217; but they must surely have had, at least, slightly different meanings. The sublety of meaning being lost means we have lost some information regarding the sound of the hearpe. Macrae-Gibson translates the lines as &#8216;ringing loudly so that the sound re-echoed;&#8217; but this is a personal intepretation.</p>
<p>One thing to bear in mind is that, when the poetry is composed later in the period, it may well be that the references are to the triangular frame- harp rather than the earlier germanic round hearpe.</p>
<p><strong>The Rhythm of the Poetry</strong></p>
<p>Pope argues that the verse was rhythmically, rather than metrically, regular (J C Pope, <em>The Rhythm of Beowulf, </em>1942 rev. 1966). He suggests that Old English verses &#8216;were chanted whilst being accompanied by a small harp which provided a drone.&#8217; (ibid). However, the Old English extracts above do not support this suggestion. It does seem to be the case that, by slightly emphasizing the alliterated syllables, the natural rhythm of the poetry emerges.</p>
<p><strong>Conclusions</strong></p>
<p>We see from the Old English passages above that the hearpe was played in a number of different ways. It was played loudly, quickly, with leaping notes, sweetly and with a resounding sound. The technique was not restricted to a drone (though a sort of drone may be sustained if required), nor was it restricted to repetitive &#8216;block and strum,&#8217; which soon becomes wearisome.</p>
<p>It is reasonable to assume that the hearperes would have had some differences in their techniques; there is no reason to assume that there was a standard method of playing the instrument. The hearpe would have been very useful during the recital of the poetry. It might have been played during short interludes, especially when the scop needed to collect his thoughts. It must surely have been used to reflect the various moods, actions and atmosphere of the poetry.</p>
<p><strong>(Based on Article published in Withowinde, Spring 2005)</strong></p>
<p><strong>                                                                                                                                                       </strong></p>
<p><strong><br />
</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/the-sound-of-the-sutton-hoo-harp/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>National and Local Meetings &amp; Events</title>
		<link>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/regular-local-meetings</link>
		<comments>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/regular-local-meetings#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Aug 2010 21:54:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News and Events]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/?p=509</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[See the inside cover of  Withowinde journal  for contact details and confirmation of event details
IT IS WISE TO CHECK THE DAY BEFORE AN EVENT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE EVENT HAS NOT BEEN CANCELLED.

SCIRGEREFAN (County Representatives)
or Tungerefan (Contact Points)
Essex  Linden Currie
Leicestershire  Alison Skinner
Nottinghamshire/Derbyshire  Roy Bickerstaffe
List of other Local Contact Points
Canterbury: David Hinch
South-West and South London: [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>See the inside cover of  Withowinde journal  for contact details and confirmation of event details</strong></p>
<p><strong>IT IS WISE TO CHECK THE DAY BEFORE AN EVENT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE EVENT HAS NOT BEEN CANCELLED.</strong></p>
<p><strong><br />
</strong><strong>SCIRGEREFAN (County Representatives)</strong></p>
<p>or Tungerefan (Contact Points)</p>
<p><strong>Essex  </strong>Linden Currie</p>
<p><strong>Leicestershire  </strong>Alison Skinner</p>
<p><strong>Nottinghamshire/Derbyshire  </strong>Roy Bickerstaffe</p>
<p><strong>List of other Local Contact Points</strong></p>
<p><strong>Canterbury:</strong> David Hinch</p>
<p><strong>South-West and South London:  </strong>Mark Case</p>
<p><strong>Wetherby and York</strong> George Roe</p>
<p><strong>South Gloucestershire &amp; North Somerset</strong> Hugh Soar</p>
<p><strong>West Cumbria</strong> Liz Bell</p>
<p><strong>Ryedale, North Yorkshire</strong> Phyllis Wicks</p>
<p><strong>Coastal West Sussex</strong> Patrick Marshall</p>
<p><strong>Manchester</strong> Martin Singer</p>
<p><strong>North-East Worcestershire</strong> Jane Love</p>
<p><strong>Hereford</strong> Alison Silver</p>
<p><strong>Bedfordshire </strong> Peter Horn</p>
<p><strong>Southwest Surrey-Godalming Hundred</strong> Richard Dean</p>
<p><strong>East Sussex</strong> Avril Simmonds</p>
<p><strong>East Anglia</strong>   John Chatwin</p>
<p><strong>Wessex (Hamtunscir, Meonware) </strong>Peter O&#8217;Sullivan</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>Wetherby and York    (</strong>George Roe has organised the following events</p>
<p>Sunday 2<sup>nd</sup> June 2013</p>
<p><strong>All Saints Church Otley.</strong> Meet at the church at 1.00pm. Guided tour by Margaret Parkin who is a church warden and volunteer at the local museum.</p>
<p>Sunday 7<sup>th</sup> July 2013</p>
<p><strong>Escomb Saxon Church</strong> nr Bishop Auckland. Meet at the Saxon Inn at 12.00pm to eat, explore the village or walk the nearby lake. Guided tour of the church from 1.30pm by Gill Beddow the church visits co-ordinator. A contribution of £2pp is expected to church funds.</p>
<p>Saturday 3<sup>rd</sup> August 2013</p>
<p><strong>English Companions Summer lectures</strong> at St Roberts Conference Centre, Harrogate. Meet at the centre at 12.45pm. Archaeologists Dominic Powlesland and David Johnson will be sharing insights gleaned from their excavations. David Mosley will be talking about Anglo-Saxon coinage – see separate flyer for more details. Tickets £2 members £3 none members in advance from George Roe</p>
<p>Saturday &amp; Sunday 21<sup>st</sup> -22<sup>nd</sup> Sept 2013</p>
<p><strong>The Battle of Stamford Bridge Festival</strong>. The Companions will be pitching their tent for the weekend!</p>
<p><strong>The following events have been organised by Harry Ball (Events Officer), please contact him for further details.</strong></p>
<p>8th June 2013, Saturday &#8211; Breedon on the Hill and Stanton by Bridge, Derbyshire. This is a Companion&#8217;s Field Visit .</p>
<p>31st August &#8211; 1st Sept &#8211; Tamworth Festival &#8211; The Companion&#8217;s Living History Tent -to be arranged.</p>
<p><strong>LEARNING DAY/FOLCEMOT</strong></p>
<p>The Companions will be holding a Learning Day at Elstow combined with the Folk Moot (AGM) This will be on Sunday, 8th September 2013 at Elstow Playing Fields Hall, ELSTOW near Bedford. All sessions open to the public. Small Fee.</p>
<p>Further details to follow.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong><br />
</strong></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tha-engliscan-gesithas.org.uk/archives/regular-local-meetings/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
