From Dr David Hill
Sir: I am concerned that Alfred Smyth's view -
that Asser's Life of King Alfred is a forgery -
might be accepted too readily (`Unmasking Alfred's false biographer',
September).
It has been realised for many years that a history or chronicle can
reveal the area of its composition by the geographical distribution
of the places discussed. To a recorder, nearby events seem more
important
than events further away. If we chart the place-names and area names,
added descriptions, etyologies and claims to be an eyewitness in
Asser's
Life, we have a distribution from South Wales to Kent, with
a concentration in the Somerset/Wiltshire area, which is precisely
what one would expect from an author who had been given two Somerset
monasteries on his arrival in Wessex, and Exeter a few years later.
Ramsey, by contrast - where Prof Smyth claims the Life
was written - has no site nearby mentioned in the text.
Many years ago I visited all the fortifications mentioned in the
Burghal
Hidage (a document dated c 919), including that of Lyng
at Athelney. It was Asser's description of Athelney - including
his reference to a `causeway between two fortresses' -
that led me to the site, where one finds the remains of a massive
earthwork. Athelstan reorganised the defences of Wessex around 930,
and small forts like Lyng were no longer maintained. At that date,
Lyng disappears from history, and by 1000 - the date when Prof
Smyth believes the Life was written - the site would
have become a green bump. Asser's description, therefore, belongs
to the period between c 880 to a short time after c 930.
Yours faithfully,
From Ms Karen Miller
Sir: I would question Alfred Smyth's argument on several
points.
We may not have a 9th century copy of the Life, but this does
not mean it was not written in the 9th century.
If the Life was written in the 10th century to promote monastic
reform, why does it only mention two monasteries founded by Alfred?
It is true that Asser mentions the state of the monasteries in the
9th century, but Alfred's problems with the monasteries are also
referred to in a letter from Fulco, Archbishop of Rheims, in c
886 - or is this letter a forgery too?
Of course Asser was biased. He was a churchman in Alfred's employ,
so it is not surprising that he wrote more hagiography than biography.
The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (ASC) has definite leanings
towards the West Saxons, but it is still a useful source.
As to Asser's reliance on the ASC, this seems natural. As a
churchman and a foreigner, he would have needed something to fill
gaps in his knowledge about military campaigns.
If the Life was written in the 10th century, why is there no
borrowing from the ASC after 887? It may be that the following
part was not complete when the real Asser was writing; but a 10th
century writer would have had access to a more complete version.
And if the Life was written in the 10th century, why does it
end in 893, rather than with Alfred's death in 899? Asser died after
Alfred, as the so-called forger would have known.
Yours sincerely,
From Dr Arnold Baines
Sir: There is hardly anything in Prof Smyth's objections which has
not been alleged and answered before, but respect for his chair
demands a reply.
`The purpose of the Life was to further the aims of monastic
reformers' in the late 10th century, Prof Smyth says. Its main object,
rather, was to extol Alfred, with a special view to Asser's
Celtic compatriots. There is no echo in Asser of the fierce hostility
between monks and secular canons, whom they were displacing in the
10th century.
`The Life is that of a saint with unhealthy desires
for illness and pain'. There is, in fact, good evidence of Alfred's
illnesses and patient endurance.
`There is nothing of substance in this Life which
an author writing in 1000 could not have found in a good library'.
There is a good deal of substance in Asser which is not in any other
source. The question is rather: is there any written source of the
Life which was not available in 893? This turns especially
on Byrhtferth's Life of St Oswald, written c 1000, with
word for word correspondences, perhaps especially as to the walls
of York. But the borrowing was surely the other way.
`[It is absurd to say that Alfred] constructed buildings of gold and
silver and presented them to Guthrum'. Aedifico,
literally `I build a house', became more generally `I construct',
and we can take aedificia accordingly. Silver-gilt reliquaries
would be appropriate gifts to a royal court.
`[The writer] claimed the Danes had come from the
Danube'. It was a common medieval misconception that the Danes were
Daci, from Dacia on the Danube. The `Danish' hundred of
Hertfordshire is still called Dacorum.
`[The writer] confused East Anglia with Essex'. Asser was writing
for Welshmen, for whom Angles and all Englishmen were (and still are)
Saxons. On the Continent, all Saxons were Angles.
`[The writer] was guilty of several omissions and duplications of
material'. This is natural in a first draft. Considering that Asser
was under pressure, that English was his third language and he was
writing in his second, he was doing quite well when he was
interrupted.
Finally, would Byrhtferth or anyone at Ramsey have known enough Old
Welsh to produce a forgery so convincing?
Yours sincerely,
From Dr Nat Alcock
Sir: Your news item about the tree-ring dating of a house
in Upton Magna, Shropshire, to 1269, is of great interest, as the
earliest date yet obtained for any cruck (`Oldest cottage', September).
The only near competitor for this title is a house at Lower Radley,
Oxfordshire, for which a felling date in the range 1260-85 was
obtained, with 1270 the best estimate. The dated cruck there, however,
is just a single blade, and the rest of the house was rebuilt in 1514.
The final verdict on whether the Shropshire house or that at
Mapledurham,
Oxfordshire, is the oldest complete cottage must wait for the full
publication of both buildings. However, on present information,
Mapledurham
should retain the title. Its three cruck and one post-and-tiebeam
trusses are complete, and almost all the minor timbers and rafters
survive. Thus, the whole structure and form of the original cottage
is still there to be seen.
Upton Magna seems to be more like the Lower Radley house. It
apparently
has two pairs of crucks complete, but lost both original ends
in a 15th century reconstruction.
Yours sincerely,
Return to the British Archaeology
homepage
© Council for British Archaeology, 1995
Asser not a forgery
DAVID HILL
Department of English
University of Manchester
1 October
KAREN MILLER
Sevenoaks
19 September
ARNOLD BAINES
Chesham
7 October
Cottage dates
NAT ALCOCK
Leamington Spa
25 September