The Royal Roads of England Part III: The Fosse Way

by Patricia Bracewell

The Fosse Way is a Roman road that extended for 231 miles from Exeter to Lincoln. It was built in the 2^nd century as the Romans marched north to subjugate the Britons. In the 9^th century the Danes used it to raid south from Chippenham and drive King Alfred into the marshes of West Somerset. The Anglo-Saxons called such a military road a herepath, here being their term for a foreign, ravaging army.

Much of the Fosse Way has been paved over, but there are still traces of the older road, one of the most striking monuments of Roman road making in England. So, how did the Romans go about making a road?

Fosse Way, with the ditch beside it.

To begin with, they were laid out in short, straight lengths, in the line of sight from one high point to the next. You won’t see any curves in a Roman road. After the initial survey work was completed, labor gangs would have scooped up material to form a mound, leaving ditches on either side of the road for drainage. The Old English word for ‘ditch’ is foss, and that’s where the Fosse Way derives its name. Along the top of the road, layers of local materials like gravel, flints or small stones formed a compact surface. The most important roads were 24 feet wide. Lesser roads would have been anywhere from 15 to 18 feet wide.

At the height of the Roman Empire, roads were built at the rate of one kilometer every day.

Modern accomodations on the Fosse Way

The Fosse Way was lined by a string of forts, and it was built to provide, first and foremost, ease of communication and the quick movement of troops. But the Roman roads would also have been used to transport produce, to allow for the swift collection of taxes and to expedite administrative duties. There would have been a courier system that utilized rest houses and posting stations where horses could be changed. And it wasn’t only the legions that used the Roman roads. Travelers could find respite at privately owned hostel-like houses along the route; those with enough money could stay in pricier accommodations – the equivalent of a modern day b&b. Anyone traveling along the Roman roads would need to carry cash – not just for food and lodging, but also to pay the tolls along the way.

The King's Bath

Journeying north for 79 miles from the Roman fortress at Exeter, a traveler would find himself in the town of Aqua Sulis. Sul was the Roman name for the goddess Minerva, and the Romans founded a massive sanctuary complex there in her honor. At least 8 temples, and perhaps more, were built along the Fosse Way as it ran through Aqua Sulis. It became a large and significant settlement, and inside its walls could be found houses of stone and timber, municipal buildings, paved streets, inns and bath houses. It was a celebrated place from the 5^th to the 7^th centuries. The Anglo-Saxons named it Bath, and one of the most beautiful Anglo-Saxon poems, The Ruin, laments its decay after the departure of the Romans.  

Bath

Bright were the buildings, with many bath-houses,

high noble gables and a great noise of armies,

many a meadhall filled with men’s joy,

until mighty wyrd made an end to all that.

The slain fell on all sides, plague-days came,

And death destroyed all the brave swordsmen;

The seats of their idols became empty wasteland,

The city crumbled, its re-builders collapsed

Beside their shrines. 

Translation: R.M. Liuzza

Bath

But Aqua Sulis rose again when, in the 9^th century Mercian kings, following the example of Charlemagne’s new palace built near the hot springs of Aachen, rebuilt the city and resided there. In the 973 King Edgar would make use of its Roman and imperial prestige to make it the site of his great coronation ceremony as king of all England.

From Aqua Sulis the Roman road continued to Corinium Dobunnorum – (Anglo-Saxon: Cirincester), which was second only to Londinium in its importance to the Romans. 

Roman Mosaic, Corinium Museum, Cirencester

It was a center for the production of glass, bricks, tiles, and pottery. It was renowned for its goldsmiths, too. In the 9^th century it became a major ecclesiastical center with a huge basilica, although by 1086 little was left of it. Like Aqua Sulis after the fall of Rome, it dwindled to near nothing.

Newport Arch, 3rd Century, Lincoln

The final stop on the Fosse Way was Lindum Colonia. Lindum is a Latinized form of the Brittonic word lindon, meaning lake, and referred to a large pool formed there in the River Witham. The Anglo-Saxons shortened Lindum Colonia into Lincoln. The Romans built a forum, temples and baths there. It would become a major international port under King Cnut and, no doubt, the goods traded with Scandinavia and north-eastern Europe made their way into southern England via the Fosse Way.

Tomorrow: Part IV Ermine Street

Sources:

Blair, Peter Hunter. Roman Britain and Early England. New York: The Norton Library, 1963.

Hill, David. An Atlas of Anglo-Saxon England. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1981.

Lapidge, Michael, ed. The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Anglo-Saxon England. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2004.

Mills, A.D. Dictionary of British Place Names. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.

Wood, Michael. In Search of the Dark Ages. New York: Checkmark Books, 2001

http://h2g2.com/edited_entry/A25829102: The Fosse Way

 

Patricia Bracewell's debut novel Shadow on the Crown, the first book in a trilogy about the 11th century queen of England, Emma of Normandy, is available in Britain and the U.S. The sequel to Queen Emma's story, The Price of Blood, will be released in 2015. For more information, please visit her website, www.PatriciaBracewell.com, look for her on Facebook at PatriciaBracewell/Author and on Twitter she's @PatBracewell. 

Giveaway: What a Rake Wants by Maggi Andersen

Maggi is giving away an ecopy of What a Rake Wants to an international winner. You can read about the book HERE. Please comment below on this post to enter.

The Royal Roads of England Part II: Watling Street

by Patricia Bracewell

Watling Street near Rochester, Kent

Watling Street is probably the best known of the four ancient royal roads, and like the Icknield Way, it began life as a track used by the early Britons. The track ran from southern England into Wales, although the segment that was most used was the section between Canterbury and St. Albans.

When the Romans arrived, they paved it, starting from where they landed at Richborough (Latin Rutupiae, meaning "muddy estuary") – where today you can still see the remains of a Roman fort and amphitheatre.   

Watling Street, Richborough

The Roman road went to Canterbury and Rochester, then continued to a ford on the Thames at a place that the Anglo-Saxons would name Thorney Isle (yes, there were thorns). Here, 600 years after the Romans left Britain, Edward the Confessor would build the palace and abbey of Westminster.

The road did not, originally, go through London because there was no bridge. Once a bridge was built, though, in about A.D. 80, what we know today as London’s Watling Street would have led across the bridge into the city, then out of Roman Londinium through the Newgate, along what is today Holborne Street to meet up with the western segment of Watling Street at Tyburn. From there the road went north in a straight line to St. Albans, dubbed by the Romans Verulamium (meaning: "the town above the marsh"), and named Wæclingaceaster (meaning: "Roman fort of Wacol’s people") by the Anglo-Saxons, from which the name Watling Street is derived.

Watling Street, London

Eventually the Romans extended the road further north and west. It crossed another Roman Road, the Fosse Way, at a place that the Romans called Venonis, which means "place of poison plants". (One wonders what unhappy incidents led to that name.) Historian Michael Wood refers to this crossroads as the greatest road junction in early England, and it was given the name High Cross. In the time of Alfred the Great, this segment of Watling Street between London and High Cross marked the border of the Danelaw, dividing those living under English Law from those living under Danish Law. There is not much to see there today, where the Fosse Way becomes High Cross Rd., except for an equestrienne center and a nearby pub named The Pig in Muck.

From High Cross the Roman Road continued northwest to the fort at Viriconium, modern day Wroxeter, 230 miles from its starting point at Richborough. Today you can leave the A5 at Haygate and take the Roman Road to see the remains of Roman Viriconium and a reconstructed villa. 

Roman ruins at Wroxeter

Replica Roman villa at Wroxeter

Watling Street, Leintwardine, Herefordshire

At Wroxeter, Watling Street turns south, extending for another forty-six miles through Stratford Bridge and Leintwardine (Latin name: Bravonium, meaning "Town of the Quern"), to its terminus at Kenchester (Latin name: Magnis, meaning "The Place of Rocks".) That's 276 miles along Watling Street from Richborough to Kenchester.

When in A.D. 60 Boudicca led a rebellion against the Romans, her army attacked and burned London (and the bridge), and the legions escaped by way of Watling Street, heading northwest. Boudicca’s army followed, and the two forces met near its junction with the Fosse Way. 

Boudicca

The 10,000 Roman legionaries were outnumbered, but their general had chosen his position with care, leaving the poorly equipped Britons with little room to maneuver against the storm of javelins that met their attack. The Britons lost the Battle of Watling Street, and traces of the burial mounds of the 80,000 Iceni who were killed there can still be seen today.

The Royal Roads of Early England - Part I: The Icknield Way

by Patricia Bracewell

Long before King Harold Godwinson had to force-march his army some 250 miles from York to that fateful meeting with Duke William at Hastings in 1066, there were four major roadways covering the length and breadth of much of England: Watling Street, Ermine Street, the Fosse Way, and the Icknield Way. From the 10^th century forward, these royal highways were maintained by order of the king whose protection was extended to travelers making use of them. Bridges, too, were part of this network of roads, and the Anglo-Saxon-built bridges at London and Rochester have been described as two of the greatest engineering feats of that period.

But these major arteries across Britain did not originate with the Anglo-Saxons. Their beginnings go back much further. This is the first of a series of four posts that will explore England’s royal roads and their origins.

From 'An Atlas of Anglo-Saxon England' by David Hill

The oldest of the ancient highways is the Icknield Way. The name first appears in written form in the early 10^th century as Icenhylte, and it may refer to the Celtic Iceni (Boudicca’s people) that inhabited Norfolk and Suffolk in the Iron Age. The origin of the name remains obscure, though, and although some scholars think the name is very old indeed, far older even than Boudicca’s ancient tribe, others disagree.

Starting at what is today the town of Brancaster on the northern coast of East Anglia, the Icknield Way ran south for several miles; at Thetford it veered southwest to continue along the northern edge of the Chilterns into the Thames Valley; after passing Stonehenge it ran along a chalk ridge into Dorset to the island’s southern coast. 

Ivinghoe Beacon, Icknield Way, Chiltern Hills. Photo: Pointillist.

 It was once widely believed that the path may even have dated to a time before the English Channel existed, extending to the Continent and points further south. Recent research has questioned that theory, although there seems to be no question that, somehow, people, animals and crops traveled to Britain from the Continent. Did they follow the Icknield Way? The jury, as far as I am able to tell, is still out.

Near the segment of the track that ran north of the Thames in Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire there were numerous springs of fresh water, and this led to the growth of ancient villages along the route. 

The Icknield Way

 In the Romano-British period there were villas beside the Icknield way – complete with mosaic pavements and hypocausts. Some of the villas were large and luxurious Roman structures, others were squalid, and still others lay between these two extremes. The dwellings in this last group likely belonged to native landowners of moderate substance who followed the building practices of the Romans and so provided their homes with a good degree of comfort.

There is a bit of a mystery concerning the Icknield Way, because in East Anglia there are dikes built across it dating from post-Roman times. These defensive ditches were clearly built to bar free passage along the path. What’s odd, though, is that although the dikes were built during a time when England was under siege by Saxons who landed on the eastern coastline, they were facing the wrong direction to protect the natives Britons from the invaders. So who built them and why?

Devil's Dike, Cambridgeshire

 Archaeologists theorize that the dikes were perhaps built by the Saxons to protect themselves from the Britons. The invaders had suffered a setback in their movement westward – they lost a major battle at Mons Badonicus in the early 6^th century – and so they may have retreated into East Anglia, settling there for a time and building these defenses while they re-grouped. Eventually they began their inexorable movement further south and west, leaving the dikes behind. If you’ve been in Cambridgeshire and walked along the Devil’s Dike, you’ve been striding atop one of these defensive embankments built roughly 1400 years ago. But looking down, you would have seen the ancient Icknield Way—at least a thousand years older still.

Devil's Dike, Cambridgeshire

Tomorrow - Part II: Watling Street

Sources:

Blair, Peter Hunter. Roman Britain and Early England. New York: The Norton Library, 1963.

Hill, David. An Atlas of Anglo-Saxon England. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1981.

Lapidge, Michael, ed. The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Anglo-Saxon England. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2004.

Mills, A.D. Dictionary of British Place Names. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.

Wood, Michael. In Search of the Dark Ages. New York: Checkmark Books, 2001

http://www.windisch.co.uk/ridgeway/html/history.htm: The Ridgeway Companion, compiled by Adrian Windisch.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Patricia Bracewell's debut novel Shadow on the Crown, the first book in a trilogy about the 11th century queen of England, Emma of Normandy, is available in Britain and the U.S. The sequel to Queen Emma's story, The Price of Blood, will be released in 2015. For more information, please visit her website, www.PatriciaBracewell.com, look for her on Facebook at PatriciaBracewell/Author and on Twitter she's @PatBracewell.

The Battle of Waterloo: Did the Weather Change History?

by Regina Jeffers

Background: The Battle of Waterloo was fought south of Brussels between the Allied armies commanded by the Duke of Wellington from Britain and the 72-year-old General Blücher from Prussia, and the French under the command of Napoleon Bonaparte. The French defeat at Waterloo brought an end to 23 years of war starting with the French Revolutionary wars in 1792 and continuing through the Napoleonic Wars. There was an eleven-month respite with Napoleon forced to abdicate and exiled to the island of Elba. The unpopularity of Louis XVIII, however, and the social and economic instability of France brought Napoleon back to Paris in March 1815. The Allies declared war once again. Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo marked the end of the so-called '100 Days,’ the Emperor's final bid for power, and the final chapter in his remarkable career.

Why did Napoleon lose?

The battle was closely fought; either side could have won, but mistakes in leadership, communication, and judgment led, in the end, to the French defeat. Wellington said his victory was a 'damned near-run thing.’

Communication was the key. The fastest means was sending messages with horseback riders, but this created a delay in instructions being carried out, and chances were high of messages being intercepted and not arriving. Given the numbers of soldiers and the distances involved, potential fatalities could occur if communications were disrupted, and Napoleon did not set up the means to ensure that orders had been received.

In choosing leaders, Napoleon used poor judgement. Marshal Grouchy was considered a great General, but this battle was too much for him. He was tardy in his pursuit of the Prussians, giving them time to regroup, and showed little initiative. Ney was also unreliable as a leader, not taking advantage of his situation in the Quatre-Bras precursory battle and then in leading the cavalry which was not supported by infantry and artillery at Waterloo.

47,000 soldiers died in the Battle of Waterloo in an area as small as 6.5 km by 3.5 km.

To see an hour by hour breakdown of the events, see BBC History. And, of course, the Waterloo 1815 website has intriguing details.

Something outside Napoleon’s control, but a matter that caused many of his problems was the weather during June 16-18, 1815. The French and Allies experienced the same conditions, but Napoleon's loss most likely can be attributed to his arrogance and inflated self-confidence which stood in the way of reason.

The Waterloo area experienced heavy rains on June 17 and the morning of the 18th. Some military strategists suggest that the soaked ground would have delayed the battle and given the Prussian army more time to join Wellington. Even Victor Hugo spoke of the weather's influence on the outcome of the battle. In Les Misérables, Chapter 3, the commentator says, “If it had not rained in the night between the 17th and the 18th of June, 1815, the fate of Europe would have been different. A few drops of water, more or less, decided the downfall of Napoleon. All that Providence required in order to make Waterloo the end of Austerlitz was a little more rain, and a cloud traversing the sky out of season sufficed to make a world crumble.”

The article by Dennis Wheeler and Gaston Demarée, “The weather of the Waterloo campaign 16 to 18 1815,” cites passages from those who had firsthand experience in the battle.

An excerpt from a letter written by Private William Wheeler of the 51st Kings Infantry reads, “…[a]nd as it began to rain the road soon became very heavy…the rain increased, the thunder and lightning approached nearer, and with it came the enemy…the rain beating with violence, the guns roaring, repeated bright flashes of lightning attended with tremendous volleys of Thunder that shook the very earth…”

Private John Lewis of the 95th Rifles wrote, “…[t]he rain fell so hard that the oldest soldiers there never saw the like…”

Napoleon planned his attack for 8 A.M., but some experts believe it was closer to eleven that he struck. Besides the wet ground slowing the progress of Napoleon’s heavy artillery, one must consider that cannon shot was meant to fall short of the target and skip along the ground to do the most damage. Under muddy conditions, the effectiveness of the  weapon was compromised. The cavalry could not easily move forward. Captain Cotter of the South Lincolnshire regiment spoke of, “…[m]ud through which we sank more than ankle deep….” The cavalry's charge was slowed from a gallop to a canter. A mist rose and mixed with gun smoke. Winds, however, did not sweep away the “veritable fog of war.”

The French infantry at last heading for the Anglo-Dutch lines crossed through fields of wet rye. Muskets and rifles which had been loaded before the march would no doubt have misfired because of damp powder. Napoleon’s assault would have suffered more than Wellington’s defensive lines under such conditions.


So, how do the events at Waterloo fit into one of my novels? In The Disappearance of Georgiana Darcy, Colonel Fitzwilliam returns from service under the Duke of Wellington at Waterloo to find personal disaster awaiting him. His new wife, his cousin Georgiana Darcy, was to meet him at his estate in Scotland. Georgiana, however, has been told that he did not survive the Battle of Waterloo, and in grief she has run from the manor house and is assumed to have lost her life on the unforgiving moors.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Shackled in the dungeon of a macabre castle with no recollection of her past, a young woman finds herself falling in love with her captor – the estate’s master. Yet, placing her trust in him before she regains her memory and unravels the castle’s wicked truths would be a catastrophe.

Far away at Pemberley, the Darcys happily gather to celebrate the marriage of Kitty Bennet. But a dark cloud sweeps through the festivities: Georgiana Darcy has disappeared without a trace. Upon receiving word of his sister’s likely demise, Darcy and wife, Elizabeth, set off across the English countryside, seeking answers in the unfamiliar and menacing Scottish moors.

How can Darcy keep his sister safe from the most sinister threat she has ever faced when he doesn’t even know if she’s alive? True to Austen’s style and rife with malicious villains, dramatic revelations and heroic gestures, this suspense-packed mystery places Darcy and Elizabeth in the most harrowing situation they have ever faced – finding Georgiana before it is too late.

Website
Blog 
Twitter - @reginajeffers
Publisher

Regina Jeffers, an English teacher for thirty-nine years, considers herself a Jane Austen enthusiast. She is the author of 13 novels, including Darcy’s Passions, Darcy’s Temptation, The Phantom of Pemberley, Christmas at Pemberley, The Scandal of Lady Eleanor, A Touch of Velvet, and A Touch of Cashémere. A Time Warner Star Teacher and Martha Holden Jennings Scholar, as well as a Smithsonian presenter, Jeffers often serves as a media literacy consultant. She resides outside of Charlotte, NC, where she spends time teaching her new grandson the joys of being a child.

“Nor Spare Any Expense to Secure Canada…”: Marquis de la Galissoniere’s Advice for Opposing England

By Rosanne E. Lortz

A cliff notes version of history will tell you that England, later called Britain, began its rise to empire during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I. The defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588 demonstrated that the English were not afraid to tangle with the toughest of them, and the colonies founded in the New World throughout the next few decades began to spread English influence far and wide.

England was not the only one to establish colonies in North America, however. France set up its own colonies in Canada and New Orleans. As England's longstanding enemies from the old continent, the French extended this rivalry to the new one. As luck would have it (or perhaps climate temperature), the French colonies in the New World did not thrive to the same level as the English colonies did. But although the French colonies did not send streams of gold to their home country, they did help out in at least one significant way--by being a thorn in England’s side.

Roland-Michel Barrin de la Galissoniere

The Marquis de la Galissoniere was the French governor of New France from 1747 to 1749. He was a well-liked, well-educated man who encouraged scientific pursuits in astronomy and cartography. In December of 1750, following his departure from the French Colonies in North America, he wrote a memoir explaining the significance of France’s New World holdings.

The letter focuses mostly on the colony of Canada, with only a few mentions of the large territory of Louisiana. The Marquis' assessment of Canada's amenities was not always complimentary. He called Canada “a barren frontier” that “has always been a burthen to France.” But despite this, he did not recommend that the colony should be abandoned. “By its position…it constitutes…the strongest barrier that can be opposed to the ambition of the English.”

How did the Marquis know that Canada was a barrier against English opposition? “We may dispense with giving any other proofs of this," he wrote, "than the constant efforts they have made, for more than a century, against that Colony.”

La Galissoniere pointed out that Canada alone “is in a position to wage war against them [the English] in all their possessions on the Continent of America.” As a strategic base for attacking the English, Canada must be preserved.

Even though the English possessed greater numbers in America, the Marquis noted that the French soldiers from Canada were able to do quite well against the English militarily. The first reason for that was “the great number of alliances that French keep up with the Indian Nations.” The second reason was because of the large number of French Canadians who, “are accustomed to live in the woods like the Indians, and become thereby not only qualified to lead them to fight the English, but to wage war even against these same Indians when necessity obliges.”

La Galissoniere encouraged the French to maintain this military superiority in the colonies since it was impossible for them to achieve naval superiority over the English. By the mid-eighteenth century, the English Navy had already become a formidable power and a danger to France. “If anything can, in fact, destroy the superiority of France in Europe, it is the Naval force of the English.”

La Galissoniere was well aware of the difficulty of defeating the English at sea. Though by no means a famous admiral, he did win one naval battle against the English a few years after his stint as governor in the New World. Étienne Taillemite calls the battle a “very modest success” which “created a stir in France out of all proportion to its real importance.” No doubt the stir surrounding the victory was due to the infrequency of such occurrences.

“No other resource remains then,” said La Galissoniere, acknowledging the impossibility of French naval supremacy, “but to attack them [the English] in their possessions; that cannot be effected by forces sent from Europe except with little hope of success, and at vast expense, whilst by fortifying ourselves in America and husbanding means in the Colonies themselves, the advantages we possess can be preserved, and even increased at a very trifling expense, in comparison with the cost of expeditions fitted out in Europe.”

Financing a war in Europe was expensive, but financing a war in the colonies was cheap! La Galissoniere goes on to explain how French attacks on the English colonies would also protect Spain’s colonies in Mexico. (In the year 1750, Spain was an ally whose gold France was hoping to profit from.) Following this, he concludes his memoir with this pithy paragraph:

All that precedes sufficiently demonstrates that it is of the utmost importance and of absolute necessity not to omit any means, nor spare any expense to secure Canada, inasmuch as that is the only way to wrest America from the ambition of the English, and as the progress of their empire in that quarter of the globe is what is most capable of contributing to their superiority in Europe.

This memoir written by the Marquis de la Galissoniere is a small but clear window into the politics of the mid-eighteenth century. It shows how the interactions between various European colonies played into the power struggle on the European continent, and how the French were willing to maintain a colony that was “a burthen” if that colony would in any way thwart “the ambition of the English.”

________________________________

Rosanne E. Lortz is the author of two books: I Serve: A Novel of the Black Prince, a historical adventure/romance set during the Hundred Years' War, and Road from the West: Book I of the Chronicles of Tancred, the beginning of a trilogy which takes place during the First Crusade.

________________________________

BIBLIOGRAPHY

"Marquis de la Galissoniere Memoir on the French Colonies in North America December 1750." American History: From Revolution to Reconstruction and Beyond. http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/documents/1701-1750/marquis-de-la-galissoniere-memoir-on-the-french-colonies-in-north-america-december-1750.php (Accessed September 4, 2014).

Taillemite, Etienne. "Barrin De La Galissonière, Roland-Michel, Marquis De La Galissonière." Dictionary of Canadian Biography. http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/barrin_de_la_galissoniere_roland_michel_3E.html (Accessed September 4, 2014).

Mining and Smelting Copper to Bronze, 2300 BCE

by Paul Burnette

How would you ever be able to extract usable copper from the earth, heat it sufficiently to allow it to combine with another metal to improve its durability, then be poured into a mold of some kind, and finally shape it into a usable tool or weapon? It would seem a tricky task even today, but equipped only with Stone Age tools, we might feel it to be truly daunting.

First steps involved what it took to remove copper or tin from the earth where it had formed as the earth cooled. Some authorities call this step fire setting, as a groove would be pounded into the rock along the line the miner wanted it to break on, wood laid along the groove then set burning, and after the rock was heated along the desired line, cold water would be thrown on and the rock would crack, breaking pieces away from the larger formation. Subsequently, using rock hammers again, the miners would pound the rocks into smaller and smaller pieces, continuously pounding and sorting, working till the fragments were small enough that pieces containing copper or tin ore could be identified and separated from the rest of the rock fragments. A crude and labor-intensive process, but much the same steps as mining today.

At some point the miners were ready to smelt the ore and further separate or partially purify the metal they were expecting. There might also have been more than one step to arrive at the desired concentration. The finer pieces of copper-rich ore would be placed in a pit furnace lined with clay laid over the sandstone or limestone base, fired by charcoal and possibly a bellows so that the copper would reach its melting point and form droplets as it cooled. The droplets would be collected from a clay lining and re-melted in probably the same furnace so that they formed irregularly-shaped ingots, which could then be collected and moved to where the casting would be managed. Of course, these ingots were not regular in shape, and they were not regular in composition, the process never yielding anything like pure copper, but rather alloys of copper with tin, zinc, arsenic, or other metals.

But that wasn’t a problem now, since the alloy would have a lower melting point than pure copper, and thus would be somewhat simpler to work with than if it was pure. For instance, a tin-bronze alloy is not too difficult to work, and melts at 950 degrees C rather than the 1084 degrees C of copper, making it easier to cast. 5-15% tin and 85-95% copper is the ratio that produces bronze that is fairly easy to work and tough enough to hold an edge better than stone, and getting tougher as it is worked with a hammer. More skilled smiths probably could detect variations in hardness or toughness in the ingots they were working with their hammers, and could then select which ones would be better for putting into tools and which ingots would be better fitted for an ornament of some kind.

Because arsenic-laden copper ores were much more common than tin-laden copper ore, it is likely that early bronze-smiths would have experienced some health issues from breathing arsenic fumes over a period of time. Thus the tin-copper alloy of bronze became the material of choice, but because of their lower incidence in nature, sources of tin came to be very important to bronze smiths as they probably at some point made the connection between health issues they were experiencing and the arsenic fumes they breathed when they worked.

The casting process could have been more complicated yet. Preparations had to be made. A smaller ‘furnace’ had to be constructed. The smith would dig a hole about a foot deep and line it with stones, perhaps, then a layer of clay. This pit could be heightened and reach higher temperatures by stacking the stones and then lining the whole with the clay layer. A clay tube then needed to be produced to carry the breath from the bellows into the furnace, which was held or mounted, possibly, at the mouth of the tube which needed to be several feet from the edge of the furnace to protect the bellows operator from the intense heat generated by the furnace. This is a possible situation in which one could smelt the copper ores to win the copper.

a. Bellows
b. Bellows-pipe (clay)
c. Ideal place for the ore or a crucible with copper or bronze
d. Charcoal, possibly mixed with copper ores
e. Loam lining
f. Sand / loam mixture
g. Stones

The crucible (c) would be simply a shallow, open clay container that would hold the desired amount of ingots, but would allow maximum exposure to the heat of the charcoal. Lifting the crucible out of the charcoal would possibly be accomplished with wooden tools, like a paddle, perhaps made from green wood or wood long soaked in water. The molten bronze would then be poured into a mold, the crucible and mold perhaps being held with other wooden implements of some kind. It seems reasonable that at least two – or perhaps three or four – smiths would have been required for this step. Especially since the hot metal would cool very rapidly.

Of course a mold would need to be prepared before the smelting began. Molds could have been made using clay or other materials to form the shape of the desired object, say a knife blade or axe head. The smith might make a wooden outer container, hollowed out and halved, each half ready to receive half of the clay. A model object could be carved from wood and pressed it into the clay in each half of the wooden container. Then the model would be removed carefully so as to leave the shape of the model in the clay. After the clay dried, the two halves of the wooden container would then be fastened together so that the full shape of the knife or axe head would be left inside the clay inside the container. A stick would have been pressed into the center of the space so that an entry passage would be left for the metal to be poured in.

So finally the molten copper-tin alloy would be poured into the mold and allowed to cool a bit before the wooden container was removed from around the clay, and then the clay would be chipped away from the cooled metal. At this point the metal could be worked in a forging process – heating, hammering, then reheating and hammering repeatedly – that would eventually produce the tool or weapon intended. It was possible, of course, that the metalworker could during this process impart any sort of decorative design to the metal that was desired. Forging step being completed, the smith would then have to affix a handle to the tang of the knife, or insert and fasten a handle to the axe head. And the process would be complete, a fairly tough, hard weapon or tool that would serve its owner more reliably, probably, than a stone tool could have.

It is this process, labor intensive as it is, that the warrior-smith Aiman teaches to youngster Ulen and to others of the Ealan Clan in the novel Bronze and Stones, and it is the value of this technology that makes Aiman so important to that group of hitherto New Stone Age people that they will not allow him to return to his home, and why he becomes a man remarkable in his time for such high status and wealth among the people living near Stonehenge in the 24th Century before the Christian era.

Sources:
“Chapter 4: The Bronze Age,” UC Davis: Earth and Planetary Sciences (1999). Web. 7/23/14. http://mygeologypage.ucdavis.edu/cowen/~gel115/115ch4.html
“Images about bronze melting.” Angelfire. (2005). Web. 7/24/14. http://www.angelfire.com/me/ik/picsbt.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Paul Burnette has been a USAF officer, graduate student, teacher, school administrator, college teacher, and is now retired with wife Jane. They have four children and four grandchildren. He presently lives in Clemson, South Carolina, previously in Denver, Biloxi, Goldsboro (NC), Raleigh, and Athens (GA). A member of the Oconee Writers Association, he has published professional articles, two short stories, and one novel, presently working on a sequel.

Amazon US

Amazon CA

Amazon UK

The Puzzle of Two Aethelrics

by Richard Denning

The period of history around the late 6th and early 7th Century could be referred to as the 'darkest years of the dark ages' for the documentation of events at these times is sketchy and incomplete. The writer of historical fiction set in this period must become a detective themselves and solve the mysteries of the past or at least come up with a plausible interpretation of events. An example of just such a mystery is that of the relations between the two Kingdoms of Bernicia and Deira that become the Kingdom of Northumbria - the powerful kingdom in Britain in the late 7th century.

Bernicia was located around Bamburgh and Lindisfarne and its dynasty included a King Ida, who had a son (amongst many), Aethelric who in turn had a son called Aethelfrith.

Deira meanwhile was located in Yorkshire and along the Humbar and had a powerful king called Aelle whose had a son called Edwin.

What we do know is that out of a dynasty of warrior kings of the northern kingdom of Bernicia, Aethelfrith emerges and conquers or absorbs the southern kingdom of Deria (Aelle by now was dead), marries its princess, Acha and sends its prince, Edwin into exile. Edwin wanders the southern kingdoms for years and then returns from exile some considerable time later and takes back his throne from the usurper around 617 AD. Edwin himself dies in battle around 632 and Aethelfrith's sons return and retake Northumbria. Its a fascinating ding-dong story of fluctuating fortunes.

Within that skeleton though there are two versions of history that MIGHT have happened.

History Version A:
Aethelric of Bernicia succeeeds Aelle about 588 and he or his son Aethelfrith annexes Deira. Prince Edwin (probably only age 3 or maybe 8 goes into exile for 29 years).

History Version B:
Aethelric of Bernicia's son Aethelfrith succeeds him to the throne of Bernicia ONLY in 593. He later invades Deira circa 603 to 605 AD, possibly kills the king (who may have been also called Aethelric - but this time Aethelric of of Deira) and rules all of Northumbria for 12 years before Edwin takes it back. This would mean Edwin goes into exile as a teenager aged about 18 or so and spends maybe 13 to 14 years in exile.

In his recent The King of the North biography of Oswald,  Max Adams plumps for Version A having Edwin go off into exile around 590. (This is a good account of Oswald's life, btw, and well worth the read). I personally, however, favour Version B.

Which version is right?

Well, here is the written evidence:

Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
A.D. 560. This year Ceawlin undertook the government of the West-Saxons, and Ella, on the death of Ida, that of the Northumbrians, each of whom reigned thirty winters.
A.D. 588. This year died King Ella, and Ethelric reigned after him five years.
A.D. 593. This year Ethelfrith succeeded to the kingdom of the Northumbrians. He was the son of Ethelric--Ethelric of Ida.
A.D. 617. This year was Ethelfrith, king of the Northumbrians, slain by Redwald, king of the East-Angles, and Edwin, the son of Ella, having succeeded to the kingdom, subdued all Britain

Ok, so that seems nice and clear. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle has an Alla (Aelle) replaced by an Ethelric who is succeeded in turn by his son. It fits VERSION A of history nicely. If we don't dig any deeper our job is done, and we can all get home for tea and crumpets. But I guess we will see what Bede has to say.

Bede, On the Reckoning of Time
He [Pope Gregory] sent to Britain Augustine, Mellitus and John, and many others, with God-fearing monks with them, to convert the English to Christ. However, the people of the Angles north of the river Humber, under Kings Aelle and Aethelfrith, did not at this time hear the Word of life.
--Bede, On the Reckoning of Time, Chapter 66.

So Bede is telling us that at the time of the coming of Augustine to Britain that NORTH OF THE HUMBER ie in Northumbria there were two kings: Aelle and Aethelfrith. So when was this? When did Augustine come to Britian. Bede tells us:

Bede, Ecclesiastical History
"Augustine, coming into Britain, first preached in the Isle of Thanet to King Ethelbert, and having obtained licence, entered the Kingdom of Kent, in order to preach therein." (A.D. 597.)

So in 597 Aelle was still alive. If Bede was right, he did not die in 588 then which contradicts the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. He was alive and moreover was still a King and ruling in Deira. If that was the case, what was Aethelfrith doing? He could not ALSO have been ruling Deira.

Lets see what Nennius had to say in his Historia Brittonum.

Chapter 63: "Eadfered Flesaurs reigned twelve years in Bernicia, and twelve others in Deira"

Now Aethelfrith (Eadfered) died about 616/617 (Bede tells us this elsewhere as does the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle) so working backwards he ruled Deira AND Bernicia from about 604 or 605 and before then was only ruling the northern bit of Northumbria - Bernicia.

The plot thickens when you consult the Historia Britonum about the genealogy of the Kings of Bernicia.

"Ida had twelve sons, Adda, Belric Theodric, Thelric, Theodhere, Osmer, and one queen Bearnoch, Ealric. Ethelric begat Ethelfrid: the same is Aedlfred Flesaur.
"Adda, son of Ida, reigned eight years; Ethelric, son of Adda, reigned four years. Theodoric, son of Ida, reigned seven years. Freothwulf reigned six years. Hussa reigned seven years."

Where on earth do all these Kings fit in to VERSION A? The short answer is they do not. VERSION A of history is essentially the version based mostly on the Anglo Saxon Chronicle. The problem is that the ASC was written in the reign of Alfred the Great three hundred years after the time it refers to. By that time the Vikings had destroyed Northumbria and many of its records. The monks compiling the ASC look like they tried to simplify matters and merged the chronologies of Deira and Bernicia and the royal genealogies blurring the issue. They essentially assumed that Aelle was ruling all of Norththumbria, and in turn his successors Aethelric of Bernicia and Aelethfrith were also ruling the whole show. Fortunately we have primary sources closer to events in Bede and Nennius to go to.

Bede was writing only a hundred years after the events, Nennius two hundred years afterwards and both before the Viking's changed the face of Northumbria. They show us that the whole situation is much more complex than the ASC records. Whilst Aelle is ruling Deira for probably 30 years, carving out a Kingdom in Yorkshire, the Bernicians go through a whole dynasty of kings as they too fight and claw a kingdom together against the might of Owain and Urien of Rheged (but that is a whole other story).

What they give us are facts that allow for a VERSION B which relies upon there having been a second King Aethelric in DEIRA as well as the one in Bernicia. This Deiran Aethelric succeeded Aelle perhaps a year or two AFTER the Augustine mission came to Britain. If he ruled for 5 years that brings us conveniently to about 604/605. The facts fit much better.

So in Bernicia, Aethelric of Bericia the son of Ida is (eventually and after a few other kings) succeeded by Aethelfrith who for 12 years rules Bernicia alone and then in 604/5 takes over Deira, possibly killing Aethelric of DEIRA and sending young Edwin into Exile.

The Kings of Deira - showing where Aethelric may have fitted in

Aethelric of Deira step forward a moment

So, if this Aethelric of Deira existed and was king for 5 years after Aelle, who was he? He is not mentioned clearly in any genealogy. Well there are a few possibilities:
A) Aelle probably had more than one son. Aethelric might have been an older brother to Edwin. Edwin certainly had a nephew Hereric who must have come from somewhere.
B) He might have been a brother of Aelle. Aelle had a brother Aelfric, who is mentioned by Bede as being a father to Osric - who briefly succeeded Edwin in 633.
C) He may have been a more distant relative, eg a cousin or even a total outsider who stepped in to rule after Aelle died when Edwin was too young to be king.

What sort of a man was Aethelric of Deira? Well William of Malmesbury speaks of Aethelric "son of Ida" as being a pitiful, elderly man and shadow of the glory of Aethelfrith his son. This seems at odds with other descriptions of Aethelric of Bernicia as being possibly the man the British called Firebrand, a fierce warrior lord and opponent of Urien and Owain of Rheged who drove his armies deep into the British lands and was remembered in Welsh poetry centuries later. Again here we must remember that Malmesbury was writing his history five hundred years after the events and probably reliant at least partially on the ASC.

I think Malmesbury might have confused WHO he was talking about. I think his description is much more likely to be applicable to Aethelric of Deira, a man who succeeded Aelle after his predecessor's long and glorious reign and perhaps was never suited to kingship. Certainly it seems he could do little to halt the expansion of the ambitious Aethefrith of Bernicia who it seems either dominated him politically or, most likely, killed him and took his throne, sending his younger brother, Edwin into exile.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Richard Denning is a historical fiction author whose main period of interest is the Early Anglo-Saxon Era. His Northern Crown series explores the late 6th and early 7th centuries through the eyes of a young Saxon lord.

Explore the darkest years of the dark ages with Cerdic.

www.richarddenning.co.uk

The West Briton

by Jane Jackson

We are so used to 24-hour news with information arriving from all over the world minutes after events occur, it’s easy to forget that two hundred years ago news travelled at the speed of a galloping horse or a fast sailing ship. But though dispatches might take days, weeks or months to arrive, their impact on local people was no less profound.

The first edition of the West Briton was published in 1810 by John Heard from offices in Boscawen Street, Truro, heart of Cornish high society in the 1800s. This was a Whig newspaper and was established to promote an alternative view to a rival Tory paper first published in 1803.

The term Whig entered British political life during the controversy of 1678–1681 about whether or not King Charles II's brother, James, should be allowed to succeed to the throne on Charles's death. Whig was a term of abuse applied to those who believed James should be excluded from on the grounds that he was a Roman Catholic.

Evolving during the C18th, the Whig party supported the great aristocratic families, the Protestant Hanoverian succession, and toleration for nonconformist Protestants (dissenters such as Presbyterians.) It drew support from emerging industrial interests and wealthy merchants. By the first half of the C19th the Whig political programme came to encompass not only the supremacy of parliament over the monarch and support for free trade, but also Catholic emancipation, the abolition of slavery and expansion of the franchise.

The term Tory - originally applied to Irish Catholic bandits – was used in the C17th to deride those who believed in the principals of hereditary succession to the crown and non-resistance to the monarch. Despite falling into disarray in 1688, within parliament a significant block of members remained bound together by support for the established Church of England, hostility to Nonconformists, and continued insistence upon the principle of divine monarchical right.

Briefly back in power during Queen Anne's reign, in 1714 they were undone by their support for James II and the Stuart Royal family’s claim to the British throne. The Tory power base was the conservative rural gentry which violently opposed the taxation required to pay for the wars with France that the Whigs, with their belief in free trade, stood to profit from. They returned to government in 1784. But after the French Revolution the Tories were increasingly seen as a party of reaction and eventually lost power in 1830.

(Whigs with their liberal views on community and social responsibility equate to American Democrats, Tories being conservative and believing in individual rights and justice, to Republicans.)

Given such violently opposed political views, editorial battles between the rival newspapers were epic, being inflammatory and scathing.

In that first edition of the West Briton, Heard expressed concerns about the actions of Napoleon Bonaparte. What follows are abstracts from articles in his newspaper.

In April 1814 the paper reported the entrance of the Allied Army into Paris. The dethronement of Bonaparte was received in every part of Cornwall with demonstrations of joy. In Penzance and Newlyn the populace erected bonfires in several streets and wealthy neighbours donated barrels of beer to aid the celebrations.

St. Michael's Mount

Marazion and St Michael’s Mount were illuminated with the castle magnificently lighted to striking effect. The bells in the castle tower, which had not been heard for many years, rang out on this joyous occasion.

The fishermen of Mousehole showed their delight by burning an effigy of Bonaparte.

The proprietors of Crinnis Mine near St Austell celebrated the victory by entertaining all the (mine) captains, miners and work people in their employ. The captains dined together and were given twelve dozen bottles of wine. The work people were treated to a whole roast ox, a thousand loaves of bread and ten hogsheads of beer. In the evening the entire company enjoyed a grand display of fireworks.

(Bonaparte was sent to Elba, escaped, and rallied his army to fight the Allies.)

After his defeat at Waterloo in June 1815, unable to escape to America because of the blockading Bellerophon, Bonaparte stepped aboard the ship that had dogged his steps for twenty years to finally surrender to the British ending two decades of war.

The Bellerophon

In July 1815 Bellerophon, known to English sailors as Billy Ruffian, entered Plymouth Sound to take on water and provisions before carrying the ex-Emperor to exile in St Helena. Bellerophon was accompanied by the Slaney and the Myrmidon, both carrying the baggage of Bonaparte and his suite.

As soon as the ship dropped anchor, every boat in Plymouth took to the water filled with people wanting to approach. But acting on orders from the Government, guard boats stationed around Bellerophon prevented the curious from getting close.

Yet despite the losses of ships and men caused by the war, and the celebrations following his defeat, such was the aura surrounding Bonaparte that when at 6pm he appeared on deck every officer, British as well as French, instantly bared their heads as a token of respect.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Crosscurrents
Accent Press
Ebook & paperback
July 2014

Website
Facebook

Jane Jackson loves history, Cornwall and romance. A professional writer for over thirty years with twenty-eight books published, she also teaches the craft of novel-writing and ten of her former students are now published novelists. Happily married to a Cornishman, with children and grandchildren, when not writing she enjoys reading for pleasure and research, long walks while listening to music and playing 'what if' with characters and plot ideas. She also likes to bake - hence the need for long walks.