Death Keeps His Court: The Downfall and Death of King Richard II

While this Sunday marks St Valentine's Day for those more romantically inclined, for me it marks a rather more solemn occasion; the death of King Richard II. The king, having been deposed by his cousin Henry Bolingbroke the previous September, died a prisoner in Pontefract Castle on February 14th 1400, just over a month after his 33rd birthday. 

The events leading up to his death began with the death of another important figure; the king's uncle, John of Gaunt (Ghent). Gaunt was the second most powerful man in the kingdom, and as such, was as much reviled as he was respected. Amidst unpopularity and early fears that he would take the throne, and though he and the king sometimes disagreed, Gaunt was nevertheless a more loyal supporter than the other nobles. He was notably absent from the 'Merciless Parliament' of 1388, during which the Lord's Appellant, a group of nobles including another of Richard's uncles,  Thomas of Gloucester, tried the king's closest associates for treason. However, included in this group was Gaunt's eldest son and Richard's cousin, Henry Bolingbroke, then the Earl of Derby. Of similar age, the two boys reportedly hid together during the Peasant's Revolt. Two very different men, their childhood friendship did not survive into adulthood. The two quarrelled often, and understandably, Richard did not take Henry's betrayal lightly, though he did not act immediately. 

Fast forward almost ten years to 1397, and Richard is a changed man. Without his wife at his side to pacify him, Richard's rule became authoritarian. Anne of Bohemia had died three years earlier in 1394, and this seemingly had a profound effect on Richard. Without his closest confidant, her support, and her unique ability to appease him, the king asserted his royal prerogative with force. After years of biding his time, with the 'Revenge Parliament' of 1397, Richard saw the leading accusers of the Lord's Appellant struck down. Richard FitzAlan, the Earl of Arundel was executed, while his brother Thomas, the Archbishop of Canterbury was exiled, along with Thomas de Beauchamp, the Earl of Warwick. Richard's uncle, Thomas Duke of Gloucester, was arrested and imprisoned in Calais, awaiting trial. He would be murdered before this could take place. Two remaining appellants, Thomas Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk and Henry Bolingbroke, now Duke of Hereford, were pardoned and left unpunished; for the time being. In 1398, a quarrel between the two arose, each accusing the other of involvement in the murder of Gloucester. Richard invited the two to duel, before changing his mind and banishing them both, a scene reproduced with dramatic flair by Shakespeare. Mowbray was banished for life, while Bolingbroke's sentence was commuted to 10 years, with the approval of his father.

The 'Lord's Appellant'

The following year in 1399, comes the catalyst that sparked Richard's demise. John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster passed away after suddenly falling ill. A decision had to made about his vast estates. Richard decided to take the lands for the crown, but with one important caveat; they would remain in his possession until Henry 'sued the same out of the king's hands according to the law of the land'. In other words, it suggested that one day, Henry's lands may one day be restored, to him or to his son, the future Henry V, of whom Richard was fond. But for the meantime, Henry's banishment was extended to life. In Germany, he teamed up with his fellow exile Thomas FitzAlan and amassed forces, returning to England while Richard was in Ireland. By this point, the court was growing tired of Richard's extravagant behaviour and exalted demeanour, and Henry, who had been fairly popular before his exile, gained support amongst the barons. Henry was a warrior, and thus a better candidate for the throne in their eyes. He better fit the bill of a typical medieval king than the peace loving, artistic Richard did.

Delayed in his return from Ireland, Richard made his way to Conwy Castle in north Wales, arriving on August 12th,  and met with the Earl of Northumberland, Henry Percy. The 'official' version of the negotiations at Conwy maintains that Richard freely gave up his crown to his cousin. The 'Record and Process' is the official Lancastrian account of Richard's deposition. According to this, he informed Northumberland that he would 'willingly yield up and renounce his crowns of England and France...on account of his own inability and insuffiency, which he admitted.' The 'Record and Process', Nigel Saul states, is 'purely propagandist', whose 'multiple fictions' have long been held as untrue. Other accounts, some of French origin but the majority of English, tell a different story. Jean Creton's narrative is that Northumberland, speaking on behalf of Bolingbroke, offered Richard peace on three conditions:

1. That Bolingbroke's lands be restored
2. A parliament was summoned over which he would preside as steward
3. That 5 of Richard's councillors; Dukes Exeter and Surrey, the earl of Salisbury, the bishop of Carlisle and Richard Maudeleyn to be put on trial for treason. 

Richard spent a few days considering, and eventually agreed, on the condition that Northumberland swore that Bolingbroke meant 'no deceit'. This was sworn, and the agreement made. The Dieulacres chronicle says much the same; that Northumberland and the Archbishop of Canterbury 'swore on the host that the king would be permitted to retain his royal power and dominion', and the promise that he could 'save his dignity'. Henry, at this stage, apparently has no designs on his cousin's crown. 

Richard, according to Creton, vowed that despite any agreements made, Northumberland would be 'put to bitter death for what he has done to us'. Richard's idea of his own importance appears to be still firmly in place. This time, however, no revenge was to be wrought. At some point, when precisely is hard to say, Henry decided that his lands were not enough, and that he would claim the crown as well. Using a similar method to that used against Edward II and Frederick II, Richard was deemed unfit to rule. Richard was asked to formally renounce his crown, and naturally, resisted. Defiant at first, Richard said he would 'like it explained to him how it was that he should resign the crown, and to whom.' He would be asked several times, eventually offering conditions and requesting to speak with Henry himself. Henry refused, insisting that Richard resign 'simply and without conditions'. After 2 months, Richard was finally pressured to give in. Charged with 33 crimes, Richard's 22 year reign effectively ended on the 29th of September. The parliament that had been summoned earlier that month in his name was dissolved, and another assembled on the 30th in Henry's name. Henry was coronated that October, using an imperial crown according to Froissart, possibly in an attempt to emphasize his right to the throne. This move was not a popular one; many of the nobles rejected his claims as the son of Gaunt, and by right of conquest. Richard was deposed, and informed of his 'unfair sentence' on October 1st.

The Keep at Pontefract Castle

From Conwy Richard was conveyed to Flint, a short distance away, then to Chester, under the care of Gloucester and Arundel, who 'hated him more than anyone' for the deaths of their fathers. He was held in a tiny room, able to see his friend, the duke of Exeter, but unable to speak to him. After a few other movements, Richard was eventually led to the Tower of London by the 1st of September. There he would remain, until the end of October. Therein he was moved to Leeds Castle in Kent, disguised as a forester. From there, around December, he was taken secretly to Henry IV's stronghold of Pontefract, where he could be quietly forgotten, or so Henry hoped. Richard eventually died on 14th February, 1400. Henry faced several rebellions in Richard's name, namely the Epiphany Rising, which involved Richard's half brother John Holland. The plot failed, and those involved were executed. Rumours also spread that the Richard has escaped, and was alive in Stirling in Scotland, disguised as a monk, and later buried at Black Friars. When Richard died, Henry attempted to put those rumours to bed by parading his body from Pontefract to be displayed at St Pauls. On 6th March, a mass was held, afterwards his body was taken to King's Langley, where he was then buried. His body was wrapped in leaden cloth, with only his face exposed. Henry was of course anxious for everyone to know that his predecessor was dead, but not to expose any compromising evidence that may have shown on the king's body. 

Richard's death itself and the manner of it has long been speculated over. The generally accepted theory is that he died of starvation, a method that would leave no mark on his body, likely on Henry's orders. Some suggest that in despair the former king refused food himself, which is a plausible assumption, given his character and tendency for dramatic mood swings. However, it would also be reasonable to assume that Richard, for some time at least, would have expected God to prevail and provide some resolution to his predicament. 

Scharf's sketch of the king's skull

Another theory about his death is that he died during an altercation with Piers Exton, who prevented Richard's steward from tasting his food. Believing that he was being poisoned, Richard flew into a rage and hit him. Exton returned with 8 armed men, and while defending himself, Richard was struck down with a blow to the head. This theory has remained somewhat popular due to its drama, and of course by Shakespeare's play, which portrays Richard's death in a similar manner. However, it can be disproven by detailed sketches of the kings skull, drawn from real life by Sir George Scharf in 1871 when his tomb was opened. The skull shows no such wounds. The location of his imprisonment at Pontefract has also been debated. Most sources suggest that he was held in the keep, in a cramped, dark and damp dungeon. During the Victorian age another idea emerged that he was held within the Gasgogne tower. Later, 'miracles' began to take place at his burial site in Kings Langley. Henry V would eventually move his body to his personally commissioned tomb, as an act of repentance for his father's actions, and as a political move to silence any lingering rumours or unrest. He was given a grand ceremony, as befitted his style in his lifetime, using his will (ominously written before leaving for Ireland) as a rough guide. A hearse was commissioned, decorated with lights. Richard's body was unwrapped and placed in an elm wood coffin, which was led by a procession of bishops, lords and knights to the abbey. Henry himself attended the service, and arranged for tapers to burn at his tomb, for masses to be sung, and for £20 to be given to the poor at the anniversary of his death. 

Richard's tomb in Westminster Abbey shows he and his beloved wife Anne, side by side. Their effigies were once holding hands, but have since been damaged. It lies within the shrine of Edward the Confessor, to whom Richard was devoted, and alongside that of his grandfather Edward III.

Tomb of Richard II and Anne of Bohemia

Sources/Further Reading

Nigel Saul, Richard II
Bryan Bevan, Richard II
The Chronicles of Froissart
Elizabeth Hallam, Chronicles of the Wars of the Roses 
Chris Given-Wilson, Chronicles of the Revolution, 1397-1400: The Reign of Richard II
National Gallery London
Pontefract Museum Research Resources

Æthelflæd, Daughter of a King, Lady of Mercia: A Brief Biography

She was Alfred the Great's eldest daughter; she shared his dream of a united England, and apparently shared his ability as a military tactician and ruler. She proved to be a capable ruler, and a popular one. Born somewhere between her parents marriage in 868 AD, and the birth of her brother Edward c.878 AD, Æthelflæd (Aethelflaed/Ethelflaeda) was the first of five children born to Alfred the Great, King of Wessex, and his wife (notably not queen, but more on that later), Ealhswith. Half Mercian on her mothers side, Æthelflæd would later rule the kingdom of Mercia solely, defeating the Vikings, and earning herself the title of Myrcna hlæfdige, Lady of the Mercians. 

The holy vision: a united England 

Æthelflæd was born into a country ravaged by the Danes, or Vikings. 'Viking' was a verb rather than the name of the people; to go 'viking' was the act of raiding. Many of the Danes were traders, more concerned with settling in rich land that they could farm, than the violent, bloody raids that we think of today, though they did happen. They would sometimes trade their way through the winter, and raid through the summer. Alfred, clinging to a tentative peace deal and facing more raids, decided that the Anglo Saxon kingdoms would need to be united and fortified as one in order to stand against the Danes. He envisioned one England, unified by one religion, and codified by the same laws. Christianity was in its second wave in England, but the relationship with its people was still tumultuous. There had been a brief dalliance with it during the Roman occupation, wherein the richer classes of Britons, in an attempt to identify themselves with the sophisticated, civilised Romans, began to adopt the religion, albeit often in conjunction with their own gods. But soon after the Romans left, the Angles and Saxons arrived, and many Britons returned to their Pagan beliefs. Christian missionaries under Augustine then brought the faith back to them in the 6th century. Wessex became Christian when it's King, Cenwahl, was baptised, and the faith slowly expanded. Though pockets of paganism still persisted, Christianity held on, even through the Viking raids in 871 AD which targeted the holy island of Lindisfarne. The connection between King and God began to develop, and so did the idea of a Christian England. It was Alfred, the Christian King of Wessex, who began to put the idea into motion. 

The unified England of course relied upon alliances between the kingdoms. Part of her father's plan to solidify this was to marry Æthelflæd into Mercia, another powerful kingdom, and one with which Alfred already held ties through his own marriage. And so Æthelflæd married Æthelred, Ealdorman of Mercia. By this point, Alfred had begun calling himself King of the Anglo Saxons, something which Æthelred seems to readily accept. While much of England besides Wessex was held by the Danes, Mercia was under threat from new Northmen; the Norwegians, who had settled in Ireland, and were using it as a base whilst they raided the west coast of England. And so, in 879 AD, Æthelred submitted to 'the Royal will.' To cement this alliance, Æthelflæd was given in marriage to him. Alfred helped Æthelred regain control of London in 886, which he then gave back to him, possibly as part of his daughter's dowry. It is believed that Æthelflæd and Æthelred married around this time, when she would have been aged around 16. According to Asser, Alfred's biographer, they married once Æthelflæd was of appropriate age, implying that they were betrothed earlier while she was still a minor. 

Lady of Mercia

Newly married, Æthelflæd became co-ruler of Mercia alongside her husband. A few years after their wedding, their only child Ælfwynn, a daughter, was born after a difficult labour in around 888 AD. Æthelflæd proved to be a competent leader, working alongside her husband to keep the Danes out of Mercia, reinforcing the northern borders. A camp of Vikings, forced to leave Ireland after an uprising, were permitted to stay outside Chester, until they grew restless, and attempted to attack the city. Æthelflæd resolved to fight back against the Danes, ostensibly outside the city, but it was a trap. The Mercian army appeared to retreat, and the Danes, in pursuit, were lured into the city walls where the rest of the army awaited them. Chester was a powerful northern base, close to the Mercian border, so in 907 AD Æthelflæd saw to it that the old Roman city walls were reinforced. Her husband appears to have had no part in the Chester attack. There is some evidence to suggest that Æthelred, who suffered from illness, may have been incapacitated from as early as 902, meaning Æthelflæd would be responsible for most of the running of the kingdom. He at last succumbed to his illness in 911 AD, leaving his widow as the sole ruler of Mercia. 

Endeared to her people, she soon earned the title 'Lady of the Mercians'. But why lady, and not queen? One theory harks back to her father's reign, and the works of Asser. Her mother Ealhswith was never called queen, but was the first to be dubbed hlæfdige, lady. Asser refers to the story of Eadburh, daughter of Offa and Queen of the West Saxons, who, after marrying the Wessex King Beorhtric, 'began to behave like a tyrant' and '...do all things hateful to God and men.' After her husbands death in 802, she disgraced herself in an affair, and was expelled from the convent to which she had retired. This drove the men of Wessex to refuse to call the king's wife queen, and the tradition apparently stuck. Perhaps being of the House of Wessex, Æthelflæd chose to follow the same tradition, despite ruling Mercia.

After building the fortress at Chester, Æthelflæd expanded her building repertoire, building fortresses throughout Mercia between 912 and 915 AD. Seven of these locations are known to us: Bridgenorth, Stafford, Runcorn, Chirbury, Warwick, Eddisbury, and Tamworth, where a statue of her stands today. After her husband's death, Æthelflæd turned to her brother Eadweard (better known as Edward the Elder), now King of Wessex, who readily offered his support. Like his sister, Eadweard shared his father's ambition for a united England and continued to work toward it, though it would be his son, Æthelstan, who would finally be crowned King of England. The siblings formed a strong partnership, facing the Danes against her allies in Wales and continuing to drive them north. Æthelflæd had gotten York on her side, and was headed there when she died suddenly in 918, in Tamworth. While he allied with his sister, after her death Eadweard replaced his niece as ruler of Mercia, dissolving Mercia into the kingdom of Wessex, a move that seems to have faced little opposition from the Mercians. The young Ælfwynn was exiled, and likely spent rest of her life in a convent. A harsh way to treat your niece, but this was no doubt a step toward the united England they so hoped for. Ælfwynn was likely well educated, tutored at her mother's court alongside her cousin Æthelstan, who's education was praised by William of Malmesbury. However, it appears she lacked the skill and charisma of her mother that made her so popular with the people of Mercia. 

Æthelflæd is buried in Gloucester, another city which she helped fortify. She is laid to rest with her husband in St Oswald's Priory, which the pair established. 

Sources:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/history/uk_1.shtml

http://thefreelancehistorywriter.com/2012/07/06/aethelflaed-lady-of-mercia/

The Seven Ages of Britain: the fourth age, 400-1066, Documentary, Bettany Hughes

Æthelflæd: Iron Lady of Mercia, Alex Burghart, BBC History Magazine 

http://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/Aethelflaed-Lady-of-the-Mercians/

Asser's Life of King Alfred, translated and with notes by Simon Keynes, Michael Lapidge, (Penguin Classics, 2003) 

'Uchtred The Bold’: The Real Uhtred of Bebbanburg

The BBC’s latest historical drama offering, The Last Kingdom, is only two episodes in but is already gaining a fan following, including myself. Based on the Saxon Stories series by Bernard Cornwell, the series takes place in 9th century Britain, a land divided, and dominated by the Danes. The main protagonist, Uhtred of Bebbanburg, is partly based on a real Anglo Saxon man, Uchtred or Uhtred the Bold.

Vicious Vikings

Origins of Anglo Saxon settlers

In the fifth century, Britain was divided by loosely defined borders, the communities ruled by chieftains or kings. After the Romans left for good in 408 AD, the Britons faced wave after wave of invaders, the Anglo-Saxons being among them. After failed invasion attempts during the 4th century, they succeeded and settled in around 450 AD. Britain was then split into regions, known as The Heptarchy, from the Greek hepta for seven, and arkho, ‘to rule’. The first mention of these kingdoms comes from a 12th century manuscript, Historia Anglorum. These regions were Mercia, East Anglia, Essex, Sussex, Kent, Northumbria and Wessex, each with their own King. The Vikings first invaded in 793 AD.

Origins of Viking settlers

By the 9th century, eviscerated by the Danes, only Wessex remained solely under Saxon rule when the story takes place, led by King Aethelred (865–871). His brother Alfred, however, is the main focus. A pious Christian, and his brother’s heir, he is intent on uniting the country; one England, worshipping one God, under one king. He became king of Wessex in 871 on the death of  King Aethelred, and would later become known as Alfred ‘the Great’. His brother Aethelred had left two young sons, Aethelhelm and Aethelwold. However, the brothers had agreed that whoever outlived the other would inherit the property that King Aethelwulf, their father, had left them both in his will, and thus the throne (this agreement is not mentioned in the episode). By translating the works of Bede, Alfred would begin to create a country that knew its history, and which was governed by unified laws and justice for the first time since the Romans departed. But it would not be him, but his grandson, that would be crowned the first king of England.

The Heptarchy

Fact and fiction

In the series, ten year old Uhtred Uhtredson, born Osbert, becomes ealdorman (the equivalent of an earl) of Bebbanburg in the kingdom Northumbria after losing his elder brother and soon after, his father, in the struggle against the Danes. During the battle that killed his father, young Uhtred is kidnapped and taken as a slave by Ragnar ‘the fearless’, a Danish warlord. Admiring his fighting spirit, Ragnar refuses Aelfric, Uhtred’s uncle, in his attempt to buy him back, and raises him as his own, as a Dane. Uhtred embraces their lifestyle and beliefs, casting aside his Christian upbringing.

His namesake, Uhtred ‘the Bold’ of Northumbria, was the ealdorman of Banburg, what we now know as Bamburgh, from 1006 till his death in 1016. Uhtred’s birth date is unclear; various sources claim 971, or 989. He is recorded as helping to move the remains of St Cuthbert in the year 995, which would make 971 seem the most likely, putting his age at the time at 24. He was born to Waltheof of Bamburgh, the son of Osulf I, the first recorded high-reeve (believed to be a deputy to an ealdorman) of Bamburgh. His is a Scandinavian name, which suggests Viking heritage. His mother appears to be unknown. At this point, Ethelred II ‘the Unready’ (978–1016) was king of England.

Bamburgh Castle

Little is known of Uhtred's earlier years. As aforementioned, he is recorded by Symeon of Durham, a chronicler and monk at Durham Priory, in his Historia Eccleiae Dunelmensis as helping the monks move relics from Chester-le-Street to Durham in 995, and clearing a site for the cathedral. One Bishop Aldhun founded the cathedral, and Uhtred would marry his daughter, Ecgfrida around this time. In doing so he inherited a portion of church lands in Durham. He and Ecgfrida would have two children together, Eldred and Eawulf. In 1006, Durham was taken under siege by Malcolm II of Scotland. Uhtred's ageing father left the defence to him. Uhtred rallied men from all over Bernicia (Northern Northumbria, consisting of Northumberland and Durham, also Berwickshire and East Lothian, now belonging to Scotland) and Yorkshire. It was a heavy defeat for the Scots, their severed heads displayed on Durham's walls. Malcolm however lived. As a reward for his actions, Uhtred was appointed ealdorman of Northumbria by King Ethelred in 1007, while his father still lived. Aelfhelm of York, who had taken no action during the siege, was murdered on the king's orders. Uhtred then succeed Aelfhelm as ealdorman of York, uniting northern and southern Northumbria.

In 1016, Uhtred faced King Malcolm once more. The Scottish king allied himself with Owain the Bald, King of Strathclyde. Together they razed much of Northumbria to the ground, and faced Uhtred's local force at the Battle of Carham, which took place south of the River Tweed. Symeon of Durham describes the battle:

"In the year of our Lord's incarnation ten hundred and eighteen, while Cnut ruled the kingdom of the Angles, a comet appeared for thirty nights to the people of Northumbria, a terrible presage of the calamity by which that province was about to be desolated. For, shortly afterwards, nearly the whole population, from the river Tees to the Tweed, and their borders, were cut off in a conflict in which they were engaged with a countless multitude of Scots at Carrun."

It was Uhtred's forces this time who suffered heavy losses. By this point, parts of north Northumbria had been reclaimed by the Scots. The date of the battle is disputed, between 1016 and 1018. Uhtred however, is believed to have been murdered in 1016, but it is also claimed that he was killed in the battle. Bishop Aldhun, his father in law, is said to have died of grief after hearing of his death. This seems slightly odd, considering that in 1007 Uhtred dismissed his first wife Ecgfrida after roughly 12 years of marriage, in order to marry Sige, the daughter of Styr, a rich York citizen. In doing so he consolidated his place as ealdorman of York, and fathered a further two sons, Eadulf and Gospatric. All did not go to plan however, as the marriage did not sit well with Styr's enemy, Thurbrand the Hold. This leads us onto Uhtred's supposed murder. When Sweyn Forkbeard landed his army in 1013, many of the nobles, disillusioned with Ethelred, submitted to him, Uhtred included. Sweyn was declared King of England, but his reign was short. After he died in 1014, Elthelred returned. In a bid to win back Uhtred's support, he offered his daughter Aelfgifu to Uhtred as his bride. He accepted, divorcing Sige. Women of the era were often seen as 'peace weavers', and marriages such as Uhtred's were common. When in 1015, Sweyn's son Cnut made a claim to the throne, Uhtred of course sided with his brother in law, Ethelred's son Edmund Ironside. But Cnut had allied with Thurbrand. Cnut's forces were too large, and Uhtred was forced to submit to him as king. He attempted to negotiate his position, and was summoned to a meeting with the new King Cnut. On his way, he and 40 of his men were murdered by Thurbrand, with Cnut's consent. Uhtred's brother, Eadwulf, inherited Bamburgh, but Cnut created Norwegian Eric of Hlathir, his brother in law and ally, ealdorman of southern Northumbria. North and south, united under Uhtred, were now separate again. Uhtred's murder triggered a blood feud, and Uhtred's son Ealdred would eventually avenge his father by killing Thurbrand, only to later be murdered by Thurbrand's son Carl. Years later, in 1070 Ealdred's grandson would avenge him by having Carl's sons and grandsons killed.

Uhtred's sons would continue to rule Bernicia; Ealdred until his murder in 1038, and Eadwulf until his death in 1041. It then passed to his son, Osulf, until 1067, when he was killed. Uhtred’s third marriage produced a daughter, Ealdgyth,(Edith) who married Maldred, the brother of Duncan I of Scotland. Their son, Gospatric, was Earl of Northumbria from 1068 to 1072. (Another possibility is that Gospatric was Uhtred's youngest son, born to his second wife Sige. A third possibility is that he was a grandson of Ecgfrida, through her second marriage). With battles, changing political alliances and murder, the life of Uhtred the Bold was just as dramatic as that of his fictional counterpart.


Sources

http://www.royal.gov.uk/HistoryoftheMonarchy/KingsandQueensofEngland/TheAnglo-Saxonkings/Sweyn.aspx

http://www.englishmonarchs.co.uk/macalpin_15.htm

http://cybergata.com/roots/1660.htm

http://historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistoriesResponsive.asp?historyid=ab86

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/trail/conquest/wessex_kings/birth_england_wessex_04.shtml

A Biographical Dictionary of Dark Age Britain: England, Scotland and Wales, C.500-c. 1050, Ann Williams, Alfred P. Smyth, D.P Kirby, 2014

Battle Trails of Northumbria, Clive Kristen, 2004

Bloodfeud: Murder And Revenge In Anglo Saxon England, Richard Fletcher, 2004

The Anglo Saxon Chronicles, translated by Rev. James Ingram, 1823.

Horrible Histories: Vicious Vikings, Terry Deary.

History of Britain by Simon Schama, documentary.

Something Wicked This Way Comes: A Brief History Of Halloween

Everyone loves a good scare; Halloween is one of the most popular holidays of the year, one which many look forward to, young and old. Today we associate it with trick or treat, dressing up and transforming your home into a haunted mansion. There are countless films and stories about it; it is firmly embedded in our culture. Some may know that the holiday and many of its traditions have Pagan origins, not a modern American import as many believe. So how did it come to be what it is today?

Celtic Roots

The earliest form of the celebration is the Pagan festival of Samhain (pronounced sah-vin, or sow-in), originating in the Celtic countries of Scotland, Ireland, Wales, Brittany, Isle of Mann, and Cornwall. Translated, Samhain means 'summers end', and does not refer to the a Pagan god of death, a common misconception. The festival marked the coming of the darker half of the year, when the nights began to draw in. The Celts saw the year in only two seasons, summer and winter. Samhain is held by some as the New Year of the old Celtic calendar, and is still celebrated by modern day Pagan religions. Summer is over, the harvest is done for the year, the trees bare of their leaves. It all symbolises ending. Other Pagans celebrate the new year with a beginning rather than an end, at Imbolc, usually on February 1st, marking the beginning of spring and the farming season. ’Beltain’ was Samhain’s summertime equivalent, marking the beginning of summer.

Samhain was a 'feast of the dead', a time when they believed the veil between our world and the next became thin, allowing the living and the dead to mix. It was a time to remember and celebrate the dead, and reflect on the year that had passed in preparation for the new one. The celebrations would begin on the 31st, and continue until sunrise the following day. A literal 'feast for the dead' would often take place, in which a dinner would be set out for dead, and people would give an offering from their own plate to those of the deceased. A variation on this is the ’dumb feast’, which would be held in silence. Food was often left on doorsteps and at altars for the 'wandering dead' who had slipped through the veil, guided by candles in windows. Costumes were born out of this, as in order to avoid being recognised by the wandering spirits, people would disguise themselves as ghoulish creatures to confuse them. Mumming shows were also performed in later years. (Robert A. Davis argues that no sources attribute these celebrations to the remembrance of the dead, but that could perhaps be explained by the general lack of written documents of this period, long before the printing press, when the majority of the population were illiterate. Theses traditions were born of and continued by folklore.) Bonfires were lit, originally termed ’bone fires’, as the bones from the feat would be thrown it. Also thrown into the flames were stones, carved with names, and then retrieved in the morning. The condition of the stone would determine your fortunes for the coming year.

The tradition of vegetable carving began here too, likely in Ireland, but not with pumpkins as we are familiar with today. Instead turnips were used, carved into ghoulish faces to look like ’friendly spirits’, and ward away evil. Pumpkins later became prevalent in the US, where pumpkins grew abundantly, when 19th century British and European immigrants to the states discovered they were easier to carve. In fact, this year, English Heritage are encouraging a revival of the turnip tradition, owing to a poor pumpkin harvest. The term ’Jack-O’-Lantern’ possibly comes from Irish folklore, when a man named Stingy Jack attempted to trick Satan. The story of how he tricked him varies, but in each variation, too sinful for Heaven and barred from Hell, Jack is doomed to roam earth eternally with nothing but a burning ember inside a hollow turnip. Another possible origin is that they are named for the strange lights that floated over peat bogs and through woodlands, popular in Scottish folklore, so named Jack O’ Lanterns, or ’Will-o-the-wisp’ (if you've seen Disney’s 'Brave', you'll know what those are!). These were a type of fae, enticing travellers to stray from their path.

A dark festival by nature, Samhain also had an even darker side. Every seven years, the festival of 'Tara' coincided with Samhain. Tara was also the location of the High Kings court. On this day, Irish kings would be sacrificed. The tradition led to two Irish kings abdicating before the end of their seven years, and thus avoiding death. But the sacrifice would still be done, using a ’mock king’ in his place. During the four days of Tara, the old king would be killed, and the successor inaugurated and celebrated. The king was killed either with a priests spear, ’anointed with a witches brew’ ie. poisoned, or by ’fairy folk’, people in costume who would beset the king. The first Irish king to accept Christianity was Muiercetach, but he could not escape the ritual after he left his wife, taking in a ’witch woman’. Eventually, masqueraders set his house alight, killing him, on Samhain in 530 AD. Tales of such sacrifice are common in Celtic (and Norse) folklore, and is in a way echoed today in Guy Fawkes night bonfires. 

From Pagan to Christian: Medieval Halloween

In around the 7th and 8th centuries AD, the Catholic Church cleverly began to adapt these pagan feast days into their own. Samhain eventually became All Hallows' Eve, preceding or All Saint’s Day on the 1st of November, both days that were already sacred to the Pagans. Pope Boniface IV first established All Martyr’s Day on May 13th 609 AD. This was later moved by Pope Gregory III in 835 AD to 1st November, and expanded to include all saints as well as martyrs. In 1000 AD, it was expanded even further, with the introduction of All Soul's Day on Novermber 2nd. These three feasts, All Hallows' Eve, All Saint's Day and All Souls Day were known as Hallowmass. By the 9th century, Christianity was finally sweeping the Celtic lands, having ridden the wave of conquest across Europe waged by the Roman Empire centuries before.

Bobbing for apples dates from the Roman Invasion of Britain, bringing with them apple trees, representing the goddess of fruit trees Pomona. An apple sliced in half was used by women to predict their marriage fortunes. This is where bobbing comes in. Unmarried women would try to bite the apples, which were floating or hanging from string. The first to make a bite would be the next one allowed to marry. Sometimes, ladies would aim for a specific apple, etched with the name of a partner. Catch it in one bite and they would marry; two bites, she and her intended would court, but their love would not last. Three, and it was not meant to be. Apple bobbing is still done today, though without the romantic element. Its even made its way into a novel; Agatha Christie capitalised on Halloween's popularity in her novel Hallow’een Party, in which a young girl is drowned while playing the game. 

Despite the Christianisation of Halloween, many of the pagan traditions persisted into the medieval age, and new ones formed. ’Trick Or Treat’ is often believed to be an American invention, but though it has been popular there for over a century, it too has more ancient roots. In medieval Britain and Europe on All Souls Day, cakes or pastries would be offered called Soul Cakes, given by the wealthy to those less fortunate who would visit their houses. The cakes would be given in exchange for the promise that the recipients would pray for the dead of that household. The tradition was known as ’Souling’, and later developed into something more akin to modern trick or treating, where children would go door to door asking for food, ale, or coin. In Ireland and Scotland, ’guising’ was popular, and including costumes like today. Rather than offering prayer, they would sing, tell jokes, or something similar, the ’trick’ before the treat. Costumes were also used by poorer churches who, being unable to afford relics, would put on a procession through the churchyard with parishioners dressed as their patron saint, along with others dressed as angels and devils. Halloween in the Middle Ages was not associated with witchcraft, as you might expect. Witches were more associated with Walpurgisnacht or Hexennacht, ’Witches Night’, of German origin and celebrated in April. It is only in more recent times that it has become a witches holiday. 

Victorian Halloween

In early 19th century America, Halloween was not yet widely popular, being opposed in colonial New England owing to their Puritan beliefs. In the southern colonies however it was more popular, where various European ethnic groups mixed along with American Indians, resulting in uniquely American variations on the traditions. They included celebrating the harvest, tales of the dead, ghost stories and dancing, much like the Celtic forerunner. It wasn't until the second half of the century that Halloween took off in America, in some part encouraged by the influx of Irish immigrants escaping the potato famine. They brought with them the traditional costumes and trick or treating. 

Meanwhile in Victorian Britain, there was a huge trend for belief in the supernatural in the latter half of the 1800's. 'Memento Mori’ was common in the age, a rather morbid preoccupation with remembering the dead. Photographs were taken of the dead, in the belief that the film had the ability to capture something of their spirit that the eye could not see. Seances were popular, in which Sherlock Holmes writer Arthur Conan Doyle was a firm believer. He even believed in fairies, quite ironic when you consider how logical his famous character is. Queen Victoria herself took part in an annual procession at her Scottish retreat of Balmoral. But despite all of this, Halloween celebrations had depleted somewhat, owing to the rise of the Protestant church. Charles Dickens, returning from America, soon penned A Christmas Carol, famously full of ghosts. The Victorians were fascinated by such stories, with 'Penny Dreadfuls', cheap Gothic-inspired serials filled with illustrations, proving popular with the growing semi literate population. Gothic characters from the era like Dracula and Frankenstein’s Monster now make popular costumes. The divination aspect of Halloween was again in focus in this century, the tricks to predict marriage prospects ever popular. Postcards of the age show the preoccupation with romance; they feature friendly images rather than spooky ones, with the emphasis often on love.

Halloween in the 20th century

Halloween today is predominantly secular, with little reverence for the dead taking place. By the 1920's, in the age of the Bright Young People, lavish Halloween parties were common. The holiday had shifted to fun from fear, with rowdy Mischief Night pranks by teens and young people becoming an issue. This worsened during the Great Depression, with the pranks escalating into violence on occasion, likely driven by hard times. The onset of WWII and sugar rationing halted trick or treating in its tracks. By the 1950's, an effort was made to contain the celebrations, holding parties in town halls .The violence had made way for a festival that was targeted mainly toward children. After the post-war baby boom, and with sugar off the ration, it was a lucrative venture for businesses, cashing in on sales of sweets. Today a quarter of the sweets bought in the US are sold around Halloween. By the 60's and 70's, it was more commercial, with decorations becoming widely available, and costumes began to include TV characters as well as just spooky incarnations. Horror films gained popularity, but the demons were often human, not other worldy. The 80's saw adults joining in once again. Nowadays television series like ’Supernatural’ and ’American Horror Story’ prove that interest in the supernatural never goes away. Halloween is now the second biggest holiday after Christmas, with spending averaging $6 billion a year.

Sources:

http://www.ibtimes.com/samhain-2014-3-things-you-need-know-about-pagan-festival-1715741 http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/paganism/holydays/samhain.shtml https://wicca.com/celtic/akasha/samhainlore.htm http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/oct/26/go-back-to-halloweens-roots-and-carve-a-turnip-charity-suggests http://www.history.com/topics/halloween/history-of-halloween http://www.history.com/news/ask-history/what-is-bobbing-for-apples?cmpid=Social_FBPAGE_HISTORY_20151025_262381295&linkId=18240502 

The A-Z Of Witchcraft - Michael D. Bailey (Scarecrow Press, 2009)  
The Ritual Killing Of Irish Kings - C.F Dalton (Folklore journal) 
A Witches Bible - Janet and Stewart Farrar.  
McBain's Etymological Dictionary of the Gaelic Language
Escaping Through Flames: Halloween As A Christian Festival - Robert A. Davis
Halloween: From Pagan Ritual To Party Night - Nicholas Rogers