True but it’s still a huge find since not much is known about the old anglo-saxons

That’s Phil Harding’s music!!

But it's the one they were always looking for and never could find.

[removed]

Interesting. I read I. The book American Nations that the English settlers built houses with wood while the Germans used stone.

Hey, English food might be bad, but I suggest you try post-hole stew before knocking it.

And their brats roll on the floor with their dogs!

England didn't really exist back then, there were a few different kingdoms making up what is now England, chief among them were Wessex, Mercia, East Anglia, Northumbria and Kent.

So when the vikings came, they didn't come upon a united "england" as it were, but a bunch of powerhungry warlords/kings fighting amongst themselves, if they weren't fighting the british/welsh. And even sometimes within the kingdoms itself, civil war or power struggles within their own ranks wasn't exactly uncommon either.

The individual polities in what is now England had very small armies - a few hundred would be large for a powerful king. Really, they were best described as warbands. In dire situations, they'd call up the peasants in a levy known as the Fyrd.

When the Vikingrs arrived with the Great Heathen Army, they numbered in the thousands. The only way the English kind could match their numbers was with the Fyrd, and that would be pitting peasants against hardened Vikingrs.

So, the Anglo-Saxons struggled for some time against the Vikingrs and the polities they set up on the island, with Alfred the Great ultimately making massive changes to the way his society functioned, in order to have garrisoned forts prepared for them at all times. It worked, mostly, except for the times that it didn't, but it was more effective than what they had before.

“England” as a singular entity didn’t exist at the time. It was several kingdoms (like in the Last Kingdom) and even within those kingdoms it was very decentralised. But really it’s impossible to fully answer your question in a Reddit comment.

I finished the Last Kingdom and played the game Assassin's Creed Valhalla, both which feature real locations and real people from that era.

As people already mentioned, post-Roman Britannia was a series of Anglo-Saxon kingdoms all fighting for power.

If you read up the history on Alfred the Great, it'll fall in line with the plot for the the show.

[removed]

[removed]

Give the History of England podcast a listen. David Crowther help this period make sense to me

Truly clueless comment. Why don’t you go do some independent digging on some subjects and come to the answer yourself.

I want to know more about sub roman britons that fought against them. Now thats a lost civilization. Best thing we have from them are a few welsh poems that are awesome btw. Y Goddodin is wild.

I wish we knew more about the Briton Druids.

Family/Clan style for sure

The early modern monarchs did much the same, imposing on their subjects’ manor houses.

Arthur was a legend of the native post roman britons. They fought *against the anglo saxons.

It's somewhere near there.. they just need to find it..

[deleted]

Wind and water pick up enough sediment from the surrounding soil to cover sites, not counting things like buildings at low points, which will also accrue soil simply moving downhill very very slowly over decades via gravity. Sites higher up will be subjected to proportionately more weather effects via exposure, and will fairly quickly be worn down to ground level, especially after they fall into disrepair or are abandoned or destroyed, or all three.

Proof is a strong word.

[removed]

[removed]

I mean, they kind of did. The Vikings didn’t so much invade with force as they emigrated en masse and brought their culture with them, eventually overtaking the native Britons as the dominant cultural force in certain regions, particularly what would become the Danelaw. It was a slow cultural shift over decades and centuries, not a bloodbath over a few years.

There was absolutely fighting, because that’s what you did back then, but no archaeological evidence has ever been found to support the narrative that the Vikings showed up and took the island by force, raping and pillaging as they went. The few written accounts of this are likely specific isolated incidents, embellished by the writers. They just kind of showed up and intermingled with the post-Roman Britons and had families.

Also, the Celts did the same thing earlier in history and imported their culture from other parts of the continent onto the Isles, supplanting the cultures that existed in Neolithic and Bronze Age Britain, such as the Beaker culture. There is no reason to treat the Celts as anything nearing “native” or “original” Britons. They were yet another in a long history of people who migrated to the part of the European continent that would eventually become the British Isles, bringing their culture with them. The Celts are a relatively recent culture to show up in that area of Europe and treating them any different than the Vikings is, frankly, ridiculous.

History is more a series of slow regional cultural shifts than it is a series of changes by force of violence through invasion. Those events happened, but they’re not as impactful to the whole of history and the changing of eras as pop culture and pop-history would have you believe.

Given the population of the entire island was a tiny percentage of what it is now, and more than 50% of it was covered in forest, there was ample land.

Trying to transplant modern racism onto historical peoples is disgusting. Stop doing it.

[removed]