Yuku free message boards

Apologies first, I rarely vist my own forum! Shame on me.
Next, numbers. Nennius, or rather the Historia Brittonum, does not mention the numbers:
"et hengistus omni familiae suae iussit, ut unusquisque artauum suum sub pede in medio ficonis sui poneret (Historia Brittonum, c.46)."
Giles translated this with:
"Hengist, under pretence of ratifying the treaty, prepared an entertainment, to which he invited the king, the nobles, and military officers, in number about three hundred; speciously concealing his wicked intention, he ordered three hundred Saxons to conceal each a knife under his feet, and to mix with the Britons."
I don't know where this number of 300, as well as what sort of people invited, comes from. Geoffrey of Monmouth, who either invented these himself, or followed a tradition which had developed in the meantime, already wrote of 460 'elders', and later of 'consuls and princes'. Giles may used the number of the 300 friars of the monastery of Amesbury?

Anyway, the Council. I have pondered upon this often, but without reaching a sound conclusion. It was Gildas who, in the first place, mentioned this Council:
"Then all the councillors, together with that proud tyrant, were so blinded that, as a protection to their country, they sealed its doom by inviting in among them (like wolves into the sheep-fold), the fierce and impious Saxons, etc. (De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae, c.23 [Giles trans.]).

Who were these 'councillors'? Another translation is 'together with the council', meaning that these councillors are not just the entourage of Vortigern's court, but that Vortigern was but a first among equals in one legal sort of governemnt. However, Gildas also tells us that 'kings were anointed..soon after slain', or in the translation by Giles: "Kings were anointed, not according to God's ordinance, but such as showed themselves more cruel than the rest; and soon after, they were put to death by those who had elected them, without any inquiry into their merits, but because others still more cruel were chosen to succeed them". (DEB 21[Giles trans.]).

My conlusion is that a body of men, without doubt the rich landowners, formed a sort of government after they had ousted the administration of Constantine III. This was all in Roman fashion; the same class ruled the Roman provinces, the only difference being that the Empire had no resources to reclaim Britain. In Gaul, we see a Concilia Gallorum, which was a similar body of men, founded to strenghten the ties with Empire. In Britain, such a council could well have functioned independently.

I think Vortigern was a wealthy landowner, possibly even a church man (bishop or archbishop), who led a regular council of men from the same rank. These were no longer city councillors, insofar as that theses civitates may have been dominated by the same class. The next step is, of course, breakaway petty kingdoms, which is indeed what we see: Vortigern is pulled into a civil war with Ambrosius.

Next, we see that the military, amongst them federates from germany as well as regular Germanic and British troops, get pulled into this war, and choose sides. Logically, who has the power, wields it (look at the USA today), so these (Saxon) military decided they could as well dominate the kingdom(s).

This effectively ended all influence by the council (which is probably why we never hear of it again), as the wealthy class now uses its wealth to either protect their posessions, or uses it to gain power and territory. The end of Roman britain, in fact.

Cheers,
Robert Vermaat
Moderator.