THE EARLY HISTORY OF BARLICK (12)

[Stanley]

THE EARLY HISTORY OF BARLICK (12)

09 December 2001

The withdrawal of the Romans from Britain at the beginning of the fifth century set the stage for more change which was to have far-reaching effects on Barlick. In the end, greater change than any brought by the Romans. However, this is a complicated story and before we go on to look at these events we should devote a little time to the advent of Christianity, a far greater but more gradual engine of change.
Christianity started to spread shortly after 30AD with John the Baptist’s preachings, remember that Judaism was already an established religion and had always taught that there would be a Messiah. The problem with Jesus Christ was that the Jewish leaders didn’t believe that he was the one and they still hold this to be true. Sometime between 27 and 34AD Christ started preaching and by 36/37 had been crucified.
All we can say with certainty is that at some time shortly after 30AD word of Christ’s teachings had started to spread both to the East and the West. There was to be a crucial difference between the version of Christianity which grew from these teachings in Rome and the West because of persecution and that which grew in the East under different difficulties. This laid the foundations for differences between the Eastern and Western churches which eventually led to the Great Schism in the 15th century when the Eastern church refused to accept the findings of the Council of Florence in 1472 and we inherited the Orthodox Church in the Middle and Far east and some parts of Eastern Europe, and the Roman Catholic church centred in Rome and controlling the West. This state of affairs exists to this day.
However, there was another version of Christianity which is easily overlooked. The simplistic version of how the organised Roman church came into being is that the disciple Peter became the first head of the church and Pope. (Pope is actually a slang word meaning Papa or Father) Whilst this is probably true he had no organisation as such and could exert very little control over what other Christians were doing. Remember that the Christians were being persecuted in Rome.
Long before there was any official structure, from about 30AD onwards, the word was spreading and we are fairly certain it travelled by the sea routes, particularly those of the Phoenicians which were well established and had been in use for thousands of years. There already existed Phoenician/Jewish trading outposts at places like Crete, Sidon, Tyre and Sardinia in the eastern Mediterranean and others in Marseilles, Spain and even Britain. Bear in mind that at this time The Isles were the end of the known world and one could assume it was an obvious target for evangelism simply for this reason. The brand of Christianity being carried to these regions was simply the news of Christ, there was no dogma, it was if you like ‘pure’ Christianity. Anywhere where it took root it flourished but I suspect in very surprising ways. I can’t help thinking that it would be first accepted as yet another deity or cult and absorbed into whatever belief structures already existed. Eventually as the Roman church became organised it was to triumph and the old religions faded into the background but before this happened it would assume local variations.
We’ve already noted that Gildas states that the word reached Britain in 37AD and that this seems improbable. However, it is not impossible. What we can be fairly certain of is that by 200 the word had not only reached Britain but was flourishing in some parts. Celtic Christianity had been born and was to be the religion of a large part of the Isles until well into the sixth and seventh centuries.
In 313 the Emperor Constantine issued the Edict of Liberation which made Christianity the Imperial Religion. There were to be one or two interruptions when later Emperors revived Paganism but by 395 it was permanent. In 314 Constantine called a conference of the bishops, the Council of Arles and three Celtic Christian bishops attended and signed the Edict. The archaeological record shows that Christians and Pagans were sharing a church at Lullingstone in Kent in 337/340. In 343 Celtic bishops attended the Council of Sardicia (Now Sophia in Bulgaria). In 359 Celtic bishops attended the Council of Ariminum (now Rimini).
The very least we can extract from these well-certified references is that there was an organised Celtic Christian church flourishing in Britain alongside Paganism long before the Romans withdrew the legions from the Isles. This phase of Christianity in Britain has been badly served by the early historians because they had an axe to grind. They were Roman Catholics and were more interested in concentrating on the benefits that Rome brought to Britain when Augustine was sent to ‘convert’ the Britons in 597 by Pope Gregory, much more about this later. The point I am making is that there was a distinctive Celtic Christian church with its own liturgy and rituals and I find it very hard to believe that it wasn’t known about in places as remote as Barlick by the fifth century. Let me remind you again what Hugh of Kirkstall said about Barlick in 1147, he stated that ‘there was a church at Barnoldswick, very ancient and founded long before’. The question that intrigues me is how ancient and how long before?
Back to the beginning of the fifth century and what happened after the Romans left. We have no reliable sources for the fifth century but what seems to have happened is that the withdrawal of the Romans left a power vacuum and this was seen by some as an opportunity for conquest. The first assaults came from two directions, the Scots from Ireland (Remember that the Scots homeland at this time was Ireland and not Caledonia. They were the tribe of Dal Riata whose base was on the northern tip of Ireland, the Romans called them ‘Scotti’) and the Picts from north of the Wall. Names like Vortigern, Ambrosius Aurelianus and Arthur emerge from Welsh legend and seem to be the names of political and military figures who rallied the tribes against the invaders. These names are not precise, we suspect that ‘Vortigern’ wasn’t a name but a title and some scholars say that his Welsh name was Gwrtheyrn Gwrtheneu. Ambrosius seems to have been an ex-Roman legionary officer and Arthur, though seemingly well-documented is in fact a figure surrounded by legend, downright forgery and mystery, we’re fairly sure he existed but can’t assess his importance. Remember that the Wall was still manned by the remnants of the legions and we are fairly certain that the Picts invaded by sea down the west coast.
The east coast wasn’t safe either. The Romans had long recognised the danger from the warlike tribes of southern Jutland (the Jutes), Denmark (Danes), the Angles from Angeln and the Saxons from Lower Saxony. They built a chain of forts on the coast from Brancaster in Norfolk to Portchester in Hampshire as a defence against this threat. The Anglo Saxons as we now call them saw an opportunity for plunder when the Romans left, invaded and overran the coastal forts. London was sacked and the south east fell into chaos.
How did Barlick fare through all this? Funnily enough, they were probably better off than the people in the south who had been under Civil Rule. 300 years of stability under the protection of the most powerful army in the world had made the southerners soft, their towns were not built for defence and they were no match for the marauders. There is good evidence that many southern Britons left the country and settled in Northern Gaul which was still held by the legions. Some estimates say that 12,000 Britons re-located in an area around the Lower Seine where there are still clusters of villages there called Bretteville (Briton Town)
The less Romanised tribes of the north and the far west were still hardy and mounted a defence against the invaders. Vortigern, whose kingdom was on the Welsh Borders and in Gwent went one better, he reckoned that the way to safeguard his lands and ensure conditions that would enable profitable trade to continue would be to hire mercenaries to fight for the cause, who better than the war-like Anglo Saxons? In about 428/435 he brought in a few hundred Anglo Saxons under their generals Hengest and Horsa, gave them some land on the Isle of Thanet (the Celtic name was Ruoihm) and paid them not only to drive the Pictish and Scottish invaders back but to protect him against possible reprisals from Ambrosius and Arthur who both had scores to settle with him if the legends hold any truth. Once this had been done and he felt safe he stopped paying them and got on with his own business, not a smart move!
This was a crucial turning point in the history of the Isles. The Anglo Saxons had started raiding in the first place because they were looking not simply for plunder but for land to settle on. Population growth in Europe was putting pressure on resources and their thoughts had naturally turned to the rich pickings across the North Sea. Hengest almost certainly took Vortigern’s contract because things were getting too hot for him and his mercenaries on the continent. Round about 440 he sent word to Angeln that Britain was ripe for the picking and asked for reinforcements. When these arrived the Anglo Saxon warriors ran amok and started what was to be a war of conquest, the mercenaries had turned on their masters.
A hundred years later Gildas reports that by 446 things were so bad that the Britons appealed to Rome for help but none was forthcoming. If we are to believe Gildas’ account of what followed thousands of mercenaries destroyed all before them. In truth, it wasn’t like this, hundreds of tough Anglo Saxon warriors did go raiding but they were only a tiny band when compared to the British population and were not invincible. Some sources say that Hengest’s men never managed to break out of their stronghold on the Isle of Thanet and it was sea raiders who overran the country. There are stories of St Germanus defeating them with cries of ‘Hallelujah’ and a famous account of a battle at Mount Badon supposedly fought by Arthur but more likely by Ambrosius Aurelianus (Welsh name was Emrys).
We mustn’t run away with the idea that this was a complete rout of all that had existed before. Romano Britain did not immediately change into Anglo Saxon Britain. The Anglo Saxons were looking to take the place of the Romans as overlords of the country so they could tap into the wealth they sought and it was in their interest to cause as little disturbance to the people as possible. The Britons weren’t really bothered who their overlords were as long as they had peace and protection so a new partnership was built. The Anglo Saxons settled and created their own small manors and bailiwicks. Indeed, this might have been the time when a man called Bernulf came to Barlick and eventually gave the town its present name.
I wonder if this is how it happened? All the evidence points that way and I think we can take a chance on this one and put the date of the naming of Bernulf’s Wick as sometime late in the fifth century. What was the place called before by the Celts? I wonder if this was when we got a church? I wish we knew what Hugh of Kirkstall was thinking when he used the word ‘ancient’, did he mean 500 years ancient? It’s entirely possible but I’m afraid we will never really know the answer unless an archaeological dig gave us some evidence? Perhaps we need to get Time Team in to give us a hand!

09 December 2001