Continuity of the Fenlands use during the early Anglo Saxon period

[Patrick Waterson]

All of which suggests the fens may in fact have been picked up more or less by default once other areas had been subdued in more traditional fashion.  This would certainly be compatible with the apparent continuity of occupancy and seemingly of cultural interactions with landscape, so yes, it could be that the fens changed hands without the customary effects of new occupancy on sheep, houses and women.  One might even posit a Men-of-Kent-and-Duke-William Invicta-style bargain with the Angles once it became apparent that the Fens were standing alone.

Or the invaders may have moved in, done the usual bit of pillage etc. but taken over the survivors as a going concern as they were not, as Anthony rightly points out, raiding at this juncture but rather conquering in order to settle.  And as Jim emphasises, nobody (with the possible exception of Pilgrim Fathers) wants to cross the sea purely to engage in subsistence farming, so taking over as much as possible of the resident population to do the spadework seems like a good idea.

Either way, the Fens are something of an exception to the green and pleasant agricultural land characterising the more desirable parts of the country and hence we should be very careful about assuming that a transition of ownership leaving land working practices intact in the Fens tells us anything about the rest of England.

What we can presumably conclude, and which I take to be Dave's initial point, is that the invaders did not engage in a 'final solution' involving exterminating every man jack (and woman jill?) among the locals.  I would however question any assumption that the changeover involved nothing more than simple immigration and integration.

[Jim Webster]

immigration and integration works best if you don't have large numbers of men, and we never get huge figures for the various Germanic people, three keels here, a few more there

[aligern]

The trouble with the thesis that there are few German speaking invaders and those mainly warriors who intermarry with the local indigenes is that the subsequent development of English does not contain loan words from Welsh or Latin for things to do with childhood or mothering.
I can well believe that areas such as the Fens are not immediately penetrated, but the arriving Germans came fromnFenland areas such as Frisia and would be familiae with economically exploiting such areas.

Whatever model we cleave to for the A/S takeover it has to take into account the complete Anglicisation of  the East of the country.
Roy

[Erpingham]

Re Fenland anglicisation, I am remind that St Guthlac (674-715) retreated to the Fens as a hermit and was beset not only by Britons but British speaking demons.  This raises the possibility that either there were British speakers there or it was felt the sort of backward place that might harbour British speakers.  Fortunately, Guthlac could speak British and successfully defeated them without resort to violence. 

[Imperial Dave]

dont forget, we are speaking about a time 1500 years ago. Multilingual societies, cross channel familial connections, multi cultural contacts...all things that possibly made the area feel part of a small world in some respects. 

[Anton]

I was wondering if St Guthlac would get a mention.  His parents seem to have had Celtic names and he was from Mercia so we can assume he knew what British sounded like.

Refugees inhabiting marginal areas seems a reasonable explanation.

I'd take the same view as Roy on this discussion and add two things. I recall we had a post on the concentration of 'Germanic' DNA in East Anglia.  Also Peter Heather holds the view that East Anglia was one of the areas where mass migration took place. If so, even the rank and file warriors needed some reward if political stability was to have a chance. In such circumstances all land changes hands and the original population, where it continues, now has new owners.

[Imperial Dave]

agreed and mass 'extinctions' of the lower classes is much less than previously thought (and written about)

[Erpingham]

Also Peter Heather holds the view that East Anglia was one of the areas where mass migration took place.

We shouldn't forget that the fenland isn't the majority of East Anglia.  Its just the boggy wilderness at the top left.  It isn't the part which would automatically attract settlers while there is better land on offer.

[Mark G]

That is interesting, Anthony.
I hadn't realised the fens were surrounded on three land sides.

It reduces their isolation quite a bit, I think.

[Imperial Dave]

although it enhances their 'leave them alone' status ie not worth the bother initially