Converting the Anglo-Saxons
Or, Don't Underestimate the Role of Pagan Kings
Early on in my post-secondary studies, fascination with Anglo-Saxon Christianity dominated my reading and writing. Below is a brief history of the process of conversion that swept across early England. It’s not meant to be exhaustive but meant to provide a kind of starting point for those interested in the topic.
Introduction
The conversion of Anglo-Saxon England to Christianity stands out in history. As the pagan people were brought under the umbrella of the Orthodox Roman religion, a new course was embarked upon. Not only have English-speaking countries been affected over the course of time, but all places and peoples who have been exposed to England have been touched in some way by their national religion. Moreover, the religion that holds sway of the English people today is the same religion that their ancestors practiced in the seventh century. The core beliefs of the people may have changed over the years, rising and falling just as English systems of government and moral codes have done in the nation’s illustrious history. It is arguable that the English past hinges upon the moment that Ethelbert, king of Kent, made the spiritual journey from local paganism to the Christian faith. Documented by the Venerable Bede, Ethelbert’s conversion paved the way for England to become a church long before it was ever a nation. For such a point to be considered a beginning, it is important to understand the life of the people prior to Christianity and the changes that this new faith made in their daily lives. Did Christianity make an immediate impact, and if so on whom? Did the layman subscribe to this new religion, or was it the choice of the upper class? And most important of all, how did the kings of the day influence the adoption of the Christian faith? The decision of men such as Ethelbert to follow the Christian God may have had many motivations, ranging from political and monetary to spiritual or even to simply pleasing one’s wife, but the effect of their decisions did not gain ground based on their motivations. The application of the faith of the royalty to their subjects changed the face of England forever.
According to James Campbell, author of The Anglo-Saxons, the details of what happened in England prior to 600 AD and the coming of Christianity is sparse. In a very honest passage, Campbell explains that “the natural vice of historians is to claim to know about the past. Nowhere is this claim more dangerous than when it is staked in Britain between AD 400 and 600.”1 Campbell asserts that what happened in this time is elusive and will always be thus, but the archeological evidence from the period is plentiful and can give some idea of the conditions of the day. It was the pagan custom of the Germanic people to bury the dead with a plethora of goods that scholars now examine, but in truth, what little scholars have simply does not render an accurate portrait of the general lifestyle of the pre-Christian Anglo-Saxons.2 The written record that is available is slim, with the earliest outlook provided by a priest, Gildas, who wrote negatively of all the surrounded him. Other authors rarely make mention of Britain, so historians rely on Bede’s historical account. That the people of England were pagan is certain. Bede cites “evil spirits fleeing about the island,” and makes mention of Roman persecutions of Christians to connect the island with rest of Europe.3 And the Anglos-Saxons hailing from Nordic regions would have “shared a common stock of mythology with the Scandinavians.”4 Even after the conversion, the former pagan kings did not completely divorce themselves from their beliefs: the “impact of culture on cult is as important in history as the reverse, and the terms in which the newly converted Anglo-Saxons interpreted the Christian religion were shaped by the tribal culture, impregnated, as it was, by the heathenism of the old religion.”5
Religious Identification & Germanic Customs
It is significant to note that there were Christians in England prior to Augustine’s arrival in 597 AD.6 Tertullian claims that there were Christians in England by the late 100s, and three British bishops appear in documents from the Council of Arles in 314.7 The British population would have retained some Christians after the Germanic invasion, and the Anglo-Saxon pagans could have been exposed to these monotheistic worshippers, but whatever impact they may had was most likely minimal.8 The information concerning the conversion of the peoples outside the Anglo-Saxon realms is sketchy to say the least. The argument concerning when the Picts converted to Christianity ranges over dates from the 400s up to 597 AD.9[10] With such a wide margin for error, it is difficult to pinpoint when many of the other peoples in England were converted. The people of areas such as Essex and Kent were undoubtedly pagan, and this posed a problem for any missionary, or king, who wished to introduce a religion that forbids the observance of multiple deities. This is not to say, however, that a king’s influence was irrelevant if his people were accustomed to a certain system of beliefs.
While scholars consider Bede’s writings historically sound, Bede was “a man who stood outside the world which he described, one who saw that world through the eyes of a biblical exegete.”10 With such a thought in mind, it’s easy to see what Campbell was saying concerning the ‘truth’ of the time in England before Christianity. However, the Germanic culture of England would have much in common with the Germanic tribes written about by the Roman senator Tacitus. Tacitus points out one of the most important concepts to Germanic life: “The chiefs fight for victory, the followers fight for their chief.”11 This idea of absolute loyalty did not only apply to warfare, but also bled out into every form of service to their king. And in this way, the religion of the king trickled down to become the religion of his followers. It is significant to note that starting with King Ethelbert, the picture that academics have becomes much clearer concerning this concept. The great drama of English history unfolded with Ethelbert and continued through other Christian kings like Edwin of Northumbria.
Ethelbert & Augustine of Canterbury: A Combined Effect
Ethelbert’s reign was marked by a significant event: his marriage to Bertha, a Christian Merovingian princess. Campbell remarks that, “[their] marriage was the first link in a chain of events which was to lead to the conversion of England.”12 Bertha, who was the daughter of the king of Paris, brought a bishop to England and this Bishop Liudhard restored an old Roman church to use. This event opened the doors for the Pope to begin sending missionaries into England. Pope Gregory the Great had a fiery passion to bring the Anglo-Saxons under the umbrella of the Roman church. Gregory and Ethelbert both shared business interests in Gaul, and this could have given Gregory an impression of Ethelbert’s political and spiritual position in England.13 In a letter to Theodoric and Theodebert, Gregory wrote,
it has come to our knowledge that the nation of the Angli is desirous, through the mercy of God, of being converted to the Christian faith, but that the priests in their neighbourhood neglect them, and are remiss in kindling their desires by their own exhortations.14
The monk that Gregory chose was Augustine, later known as Augustine of Canterbury, who served in Gregory’s own monastery. Pope Gregory had a very particular vision of what it was to be a holy Christian, and Augustine “had imbibed the lessons of his master.”15 Augustine’s own personality was one of an official, reserved position. Bede in his Bedae Opera Historica records the only story of Augustine that bears any charismatic influence, and it chronicles the healing of a blind man during Augustine’s meeting with the Britons.16 Stories such as this demonstrate the Roman missionaries’ close adherence to the ideals of Gregory the Great, and his subsequent influence upon the English conversion. However, even after an event like a miracle, Augustine was a man, who at the very least could be considered ‘stiff-necked.’
Augustine served as the bishop of Canterbury from 597 to 604 AD, and it was Augustine who baptized Ethelbert within his first year of being sent to England.17 This event led 10,000 of Ethelbert’s fellow Anglo-Saxons to be baptized as well.18 An event like this demonstrates the type of loyalty with which Tacitus labeled the Germanic people. Upon his arrival in 597, Augustine was faced with a pagan kingdom, ruled by a man who had already been under the influence of his Christian wife and her bishops. The significant thing for Augustine to do was to ‘seal the deal,’ in a matter of speaking. His conversion did not immediately cause Ethelbert to rearrange the customs and traditions in Kent, however. An example of the initial impact of the Kentish king’s acceptance of the Christian faith can be seen in the conversion of his nephew, King Sabert of the East Saxons, and in the refusal to convert by Ethelbert’s own son, Eadbald.19 Ethelbert, who gave his people their first set of written laws in 602 CE, never outlawed the former pagan traditions.20 Thus, when his son Eadbald took the throne after his death, there was a cultural return to the old ways as well.21 It wasn’t until King Eorcenberht, the grandson of King Ethelbert, took the throne in 640 AD that the pagan religions were outlawed and Christianity was established as the permanent religion of the kingdom of Kent.
This does not mean that Ethelbert did not contribute to the Christianization of England. By allowing Augustine to set up a base of operations in Canterbury, Ethelbert forever set apart Canterbury as the ultimate place of religious authority in England, despite beliefs that London and York would become metropolitan areas for the church.22 This tradition is still in effect today, with the Archbishop of the Anglican Church residing in Canterbury. Ethelbert effected other aspects of Christian practices as well. Ethelbert's laws, while Germanic in nature, had the connotation of being something more Christian than pagan which undoubtedly impacted his subjects. Ethelbert was firmly cementing the laws of his nation with his act of compiling them. While the notions of revenge and wergeld are foreign to modern Christians, to the Germanic people who inhabited England these were natural concepts. Hence, poems such as “The Dream of the Rood” showcase the old traditions meeting the new faith and finding a way to coexist. Also, by writing them down, Ethelbert was borrowing a literate tradition which had been brought over by Christians such as his wife and Augustine. The Anglo-Saxon culture was on the verge of change, and Ethelbert pushed his society over the edge by being baptized into the Christian Church.
Good King Edwin
The Northumbrian king, Edwin of Deira, was a pagan when he came to power, and he remained a devout one for a great portion of his life.23 Edwin had something in common with Ethelbert though, for Edwin also married a Christian woman. Edwin’s wife, Ethelburga was a Christian princess from Kent, made a concerted effort to convert her husband to Christianity and she was not alone in her efforts. According to Bede, Edwin approached his wife’s religion in the same manner as Ethelbert had done with Bertha. Edwin promised to have his wise men examine this religion, and he would permit her to continue to practice her faith and this policy was extended to any who came with her.24 Edwin was a shrewd king. He was often implored by the bishop Paulinus to acknowledge Christ, yet Edwin would continually make empty promises in return for prayers of protection and victory.25 After a vision that plagued Edwin exceedingly, the Northumbrian king submitted to Paulinus and Christ, converting to Christianity in an uncharacteristically humble manner.26 Paulinus’ response to Edwin’s conversion typifies the approach to the Anglo-Saxon kings, showcasing their earthly power and authority:
Behold, by the granting of the Lord you have escaped the hand of the enemy whom you dreaded; behold, by His bountiful gift you have obtained the kingdom for which you longed. Remember that you delay not to perform the third thing which you promised, by receiving His faith and keeping His commandments, Who both delivered you from your temporal adversities, and exalted you to the honour of a temporal king; and if you shall be willing hereafter to obey His pleasure which He declareth to you through me, He will also deliver you from the perpetual torment of evils, and make you partaker with Him of the eternal kingdom in the heavens.27
The belief that Edwin’s good fortune as a king had always been a result of the grace of God, even though he was newly converted to Christianity, was surely an inspiration to Edwin’s followers. Kings like Edwin and Ethelbert had the ability to spread their faith because of their status as good kings prior to converting to Christianity. Had the Anglo-Saxon kings been seen as poor kings, it is doubtful that their retainers would have followed their lead. However, Edwin was seen as a good king. According to Bede, Edwin held council with his chiefs after his faith encounter, and he promoted the Christian faith among them all, many of them converting to their king’s new religion.28 Edwin, similar to Ethelbert, had a great impact on his retainers and his faith trickled down through him.
Oswy & Oswine: Contrasting Christian Kings
The royalty of the day was not merely involved in deciding what God to follow or what sacrifice to make. Just as Constantine held the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE, the English king Oswy held the Synod of Whitby in 664 AD in order to firmly establish when England when celebrate the Christian holy day of Easter, and he eventually sided with Rome over the Irish monks, the Roman celebration being determined according to the Julian calendar while the Irish celebration of Easter was measured according to the Jewish calendar.29 Such an act demonstrated the kings’ religious authority and their ability to unite their people in a common belief. Of course, Christianity was not always such a unifying thing for the Anglo-Saxon kings. Prior to Oswy’s rise to power in Northumbria, Oswine had ruled and his faith had been the reason for his downfall according to Bede.30 According to the tale told by Bede, after being rebuked by Aidan “Oswine reflected, took of his sword (symbolically laying aside his connection with bloodshed), prostrated himself at Aidan’s feet and begged forgiveness for his temerity.”31 Aidan however wept saying,
I know . . . that the king will not live long; for I never before saw so humble a king; whence I conclude he will soon be snatched out of this life, because this nation is not worthy of such a ruler.32
This Christian virtue played out in Oswine’s life is such a manner that it did eventually lead to his downfall, as he was betrayed in his own home after refusing to meet a rival king in battle.33 The story of Oswine, contrasted against the stories of Ethelbert, Edwin, and Oswy demonstrate the variety of ways in which Christianity influenced each the Anglo-Saxon kings and how that affected their followers. In Oswine’s case, the Christian values learned became a hindrance to his rule, while kings like Ethelbert and Oswy reveled in the success that their newfound faith brought them. Regardless of what the outcome, there is little argument that the coming of Christianity to Anglo-Saxon England did anything less than revolutionize the manner in which the former pagan kings interacted with their subjects, and as a result how the kings’ subjects interacted with them.
Conclusion
The conversion of Anglo-Saxon England was a top-down affair, with kings like Ethelbert and Edwin paving the way for Christianity to take a firm root in what would become one of the most powerful nations in history; a nation that was pleased to take their religion out into the world and share, sometimes forcibly, their faith with all cultures they encountered. The cultural, political, and social changes that were set in motion by the coming of Christianity continue to make their presence known in England today, and these changes can be traced back to the pagan Anglo-Saxon kings of old. And William Chaney’s words ring true when held up to the historical lens with which the scholar or the academic approaches Anglo-Saxon England, “to move from example to thesis, culture and cult are related, a dimension is added in the past-enmeshed Conversion story in the transition from paganism to Christianity in Anglo-Saxon England.”34 And the greatest factor involved in both the English “culture and cult” was undoubtedly their kings. The religion of the Anglo-Saxon royalty served as the role model for the rest of the Anglo-Saxon people. Thus, the prayer goes,
O God, who didst call thy servant Ethelbert of Kent to an earthly throne that he might advance thy heavenly kingdom, and didst give him zeal for thy Church and love for thy people.35
James Campbell, The Anglo-Saxons, ed. Eric John & Patrick Wormald (New York: Penguin Books, Limited, 1991), 20.
Ibid., 27.
Bede, Baedae Opera Historica Vols. 1 & 2, eds. T. E. Page, E. Capps, W. H. D. Rouse, L. A. Post, and E. H. Warmington, trans. J. E. King. The Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA; Harvard University Press, 1930), 30, 35-39.
Henry Mayr-Harting, The Coming of Christianity to Anglo-Saxon England (New York: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1991), 26.
William A. Chaney, “Paganism to Christianity in Anglo-Saxon England,” The Harvard Theological Review 53 (1960), 197.
Roger Collins, Early Medieval Europe 300-1000, 2nd ed. (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, Limited, 1999), xi.
Everett Ferguson, Church History, Volume One: From Christ to Pre-Reformation (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005), 353.
Mayr-Harting, 32.
Collins, 181.
S. D. Church, “Paganism in Conversion-Age Anglo-Saxon England: the Evidence of Bede's Ecclesiastical History Reconsidered.” History 93 (2008), 180.
Cornelius Tacitus, The Agricola and the Germania, trans. S. A. Handford (New York: Penguin Classics, 2001), 113.
Campbell, 44.
Mayr-Harting, 61.
Gregory the Great, “Register of the Epistles of Saint Gregory the Great,” in Leo the Great, Gregory the Great, eds. Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, trans. James Barmby, vol. 12, A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, Second Series (New York: Christian Literature Company, 1898), 205.
Mayr-Harting, 74.
Ibid., 71.
F. L. Cross and Elizabeth A. Livingstone, eds. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 567.
James Keifer, “Ethelbert of Kent, King and Confessor,” eds. Brenda Curry-White and Darren Provine. http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bio/4.html.
Mayr-Harting, 64.
Patrick J. Geary, ed and trans. Readings in Medieval History: The Early Middle Ages. 3rd ed. Vol. I (New York: Broadview, 2003), 221.
Chaney, 198.
Ferguson, 356.
Mayr-Harting, 66.
Bede, 109.
Ibid., 245.
Ibid., 247-249.
Ibid., 281.
Ibid., 289-293.
Mayr-Harting, 103.
George H. Brown, “Royal and Ecclesiastical Rivalries in Bede's History.” Renascence 52 (1999), 28.
Ibid., 29
Bede, 393-399.
Brown, 29.
Chaney, 217.
Keifer.
Excellent!