Marc Morris | The Anglo-Saxons: A History of the beginnings of England

[@davidsoskin97]

Dr. Morris’s book is one of the great history books of this year. He has the gift of bringing history to life. The extraordinary readability of this work is matched by its scholarship and originality. Anyone with a scintilla of interest in our island story should read it.

[@jcortese3300]

I only JUST bought this book after getting my feet wet with David Mitchell's "Unruly," which is a fantastic 101-level introduction to Anglo-Saxon history. I opened Morris's book thinking to myself that it would probably be denser and more academic but much less witty and engaging than Mitchell's, and I was very pleasantly surprised to learn that it was actually very witty and engaging in its own right. The older I get, the more important and interesting history seems to me, even if it's much harder to get my head around than physics. Morris's book is a fantastic guided tour of a period of history with many important insights to give: how a society collapses, how a failed state copes and how something new emerges from the ugly wreckage, how order comes from chaos and descends back into it, and what the overall trends of human behavior are throughout these processes.

[@DemocracyDeb]

Love the book. It's so rich in detail yet written so well, it is easy to digest

[@josephcollins6033]

Thank you so very much, Iain!

[@ChristopherBowly]

Really excellent - very many thanks..

[@pamelatitterington2453]

First look in, found it fascinating, thankyou

[@stephenarnold6359]

If the Vikings hadn't been pretty bloody violent they wouldn't have terrorised the French coast, northern Spain and Portugal, Kievan Rus, the Black Sea, etc.

[@hræfnwarianMLXVI]

Glad I got a copy when I did! 2020 and 2021 have been the best year for books. Although my introduction to early medieval history didn't start with Morris, but Roy Strong rather, and his book _The Story of Britain._

[@ianwilson8759]

I don't accept that there was a complete collapse in the previously Roman occupied parts of Britain in the 4th and 5th centuries. Yes, there's no organised building, coin making and writing in that period, but there was not much writing in Roman Britain. Certainly for many centuries, possibly a millennia, after the Romans left Britain what was Roman Britain was far more advanced technologically and economically than those areas in Britain and Ireland unoccupied and unaffected by Roman Rule. There is a case to be made for that continuing to this day.

[@antonybrennan]

Exactly, and Christianity did not arrive with Augustine.

[@barbaraseymour3437]

Very interesting.

[@bryn5108]

Looking forward to reading his book, especially as it appears to contradict the steady-state history of Susan Oosthuizen. Am finding this period very difficult to get my head round.

[@martinjackman2943]

Wish I was in a position to turn MY speculations into a narrative. I believe the Angles grew out of the remnants of the Germanic-descended 'Angarion (despatch rider's)' who tried to maintain the structures calling on help from kin overseas. Likewise Saxons were auxhilliaries- named from their weapon of choice who maintained sea forts and coastal naval patrols In other words the ' Romans' were Germanic and largely identical to the people coming in and had been for centuries since AD43 onwards. Additionally Pytheas in 300Bc describes two distinct populations one was similar to the later Germanic folk the other was like the Iberians.

[@The1Green4Man]

It’s interesting that England and Englishness was never defined by propositional citizenship, but instead by blood and soil. England was always defined as the land where the English/Anglish live as opposed to where the Britons or the Picts live. You cannot become English, you are born English.

[@scottscottsdale7868]

So there was a Rexit? Hmmm

[@barbaraseymour3437]

What were the people like who were left in the country when the Romans left and were found when the (north) Europeans came? Pagan, farmers (?), left over skills from the Romans, etc.? Normans -And with a different language.

[@jacquelinevanderkooij4301]

Edgar was the real successor, after Edward the confessor.

[@sharonreichter2537]

There are the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles.

[@jacquelinevanderkooij4301]

And you take that as truth? Part will be but 4th and 5th century is not written down.

[@martinjackman2943]

Wiliam the Bastard abolished slavery because a) Everything in his new colonial empire was subject to him and b) All but a few of the newly subjugated English were now second class .. in a form of what we would recognise as apartheid..they were slaves in all but name. Anglo-Saxon slavery was really an alternative to debtor's prison before such places existed

[@jacquelinevanderkooij4301]

William made all people in England slaves by taxing them 😂😂

[@martinjackman2943]

@@jacquelinevanderkooij4301 One tool of a foreign invading Feudal Heirarchy system which had replaced the 600 year old clan loyalty structure of kinship.

[@The1Green4Man]

36:50 I cringed.

[@SunofYork]

Martin needs to keep stuff out of his mouth... obvious props like glasse, thumb etc... Fools nobody

[@josephcollins6033]

Mercy! Modern women and their desire to re-write history; their desire to accuse any male writer of sexism, etc. Of course, "they were not interested in writing about ladies"! This has noting to do with modern male historians. Silly women. I am noticing a disturbing pattern with modern female historians: they want to adapt conclusions and theories according to modern female anger. I am a professor and have done much research and writing on a sophisticated level; I am not a Yahoo. Leave the men alone, ladies!

[@nassauevents2670]

How Do you explain about the Ethiopian Prince as the origin of Englishness Who settled in the Sussex area?

[@joshuddin897]

Quoi? Quand?

[@mikeycraig8970]

You don't because it is total and utter nonsense.

[@nassauevents2670]

Read the origins of Englishness. An English historian and constitution expert have written a book and google it. You will know the historical fact. I am profoundly proud and you will learn all human beings came from a single sources, politics, power, and great divided the human race.@@mikeycraig8970

[@bork2739]

Ho, ho, ho.........very funny but also booring. Odd that the Blacks left no trace whatsoever of their presence in England either in history, archaeology or folklore.

[@stephenarbon2227]

@@bork2739 There have been a couple African remains found from Roman times, [slaves?]. And there was trade eg tin from Cornwall & North Africa.

[@anncolyer6379]

Anglo Saxon.its either Anglo or Saxon two different peoples

[@stephenarbon2227]

It's a label, as I don't think it was used by anyone at the time, but both groups [plus Jutes] were from both coastal, and probably adjacent areas, and speaking [dialects of a] common Frisian language, who led a very similar style of living.

[@charliereader3462]

⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠@@stephenarbon2227 Alfred the Great styles himself as King of the Anglo Saxons from 886 onwards, so we get the term from contemporary sources, it isn’t something historians added further down the line

[@tast7017]

he explains this in the intro to the book

[@jacquelinevanderkooij4301]

You know how small the tribe of angels was? 😂😂 You forgot to mention the large tribe of frisiand (coast from france into Jutland). The romans called the Northsea the frisian sea. It just means fisherman.