# Anglo-Saxon settlement of Britain

The settlement of Great Britain by Germanic peoples from continental Europe led to the development of a new Anglo-Saxon cultural identity, and a shared Germanic language, Old English, whose closest known relative was Old Frisian, spoken on the other side of the North Sea. The first Germanic-speakers to settle Britain permanently are likely to have been soldiers recruited by the Roman administration, possibly already in the fourth century AD or earlier. In the early fifth century AD, during the end of Roman rule in Britain and the breakdown of the Roman economy, larger numbers arrived and their impact upon local culture and politics increased.
There is ongoing debate about the scale, timing and nature of the Anglo-Saxon settlements, and also about what happened to the existing populations of the regions where the migrants settled. The available evidence includes a small number of medieval texts, which emphasize Saxon settlement and violence in the 5th century, but do not give many clear or reliable details. Linguistic, archaeological and genetic information have played an increasing role in attempts to better understand what happened. The British Celtic and Latin languages spoken in Britain before Germanic-speakers migrated there had very little impact on Old English vocabulary. According to many scholars, this suggests that a large number of Germanic-speakers became important relatively suddenly. On the basis of such evidence it has even been argued that large parts of what is now England were cleared of prior inhabitants. However, a contrasting view that gained support in the late 20th century suggests that the migration involved relatively few individuals, possibly centred on a warrior elite, who popularized a non-Roman identity after the downfall of Roman institutions. This hypothesis suggests a large-scale acculturation of natives to the incomers' language and material culture. In support of this, archaeologists have found that, despite evidence of violent disruption, settlement patterns and land use show many continuities with the Romano-British past, despite profound changes in material culture.
A major genetic study in 2022 which used DNA samples from different periods and regions demonstrated that there was significant immigration from the area in or near what is now northwestern Germany, and also that these immigrants intermarried with local Britons. This evidence supports a theory of large-scale migration of both men and women, beginning in the Roman period and continuing until the 8th century. At the same time, the findings of the same study support theories of rapid acculturation, with early medieval individuals of both local, migrant and mixed ancestry being buried near each other in the same new ways. This evidence also indicates that in the early medieval period, and continuing into the modern period, there were large regional variations, with the genetic impact of immigration highest in the east, and declining towards the west.
One of the few written accounts of the period is by Gildas, who probably wrote in the early 6th century. His account influenced later works which became more elaborate and detailed, but which cannot be relied upon for this early period. Gildas reported that a major conflict was triggered some generations before him, after a group of foreign Saxons was invited to settle in Britain by the Romano-British leadership in return for defending against raids from the Picts and Scots and began to seize control of the region themselves. Gildas reported that, after a long war, the Romano-British recovered control. Peace was restored, but Britain was now ruled by "tyrants" (that is, kings, rather than imperial Roman administrators). Gildas gives no other information about Saxons or other Germanic people before or after this specific conflict. No other local written records survive until much later. By the time of Bede, more than a century after Gildas, Anglo-Saxon kingdoms had come to dominate most of what is now modern England. Many modern historians believe that the development of Anglo-Saxon culture and identity, and even its kingdoms, involved not only Germanic immigrants but also local British people and kingdoms.

## Background and context

A traditional account of Anglo-Saxon immigration has been influential since at least the eighth century, when Bede the Venerable outlined his reconstruction of what had happened some centuries earlier. While he partly based upon his work upon earlier records such as the near contemporary Gildas, these gave a very incomplete picture, and he added many details. Modern scholars see several aspects of his expanded account as questionable, while popular and fictional accounts, including even Arthurian legend, have tended to take it for granted.
In the traditional account, there was a single large coordinated invasion of Anglo Saxons into Britain after the end of Roman rule in 411 AD. This adventus saxonum represented the main immigration event, and this was followed by a period where small, pagan Anglo Saxon kingdoms in the east fought small. Christian British kingdoms in the west, and bit by bit the Anglo Saxons defeated the British and took over the country, and in this way England became English by force. In this traditional account ethnic Anglo-Saxons and ethnic Britons were distinct and separated peoples, conscious of the war between their nations. It was envisioned that British people living in Anglo-Saxon kingdoms either had to move, or else convert to a foreign culture.
In contrast, Modern scholars however generally believe that Germanic-speakers started arriving in Britain already before the end of Roman rule, probably mainly as soldiers. They may have already formed a significant part of Romano-British society at the end of Roman rule, and their culture probably continued to be especially associated with the military. That immigration and conflict involving Germanic-speakers increased during the 5th century, after the end of Roman rule, is still widely accepted by scholars, but it is no longer assumed that this necessarily involved the immediate formation of small Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, or a straightforward conflict between two opposed ethnic groups. Such ethnic kingdoms were known to Bede from his own time, but much uncertainty remains about the way in which these kingdoms developed between the time of Gildas and the time of Bede.

### Continental Roman sources

The area of present-day England was part of the Roman province of Britannia from 43 AD. The province seems unlikely ever to have been as deeply integrated into Roman culture as nearby Continental provinces, however, and from the crisis of the third century Britain was often ruled by Roman usurpers who were in conflict with the central government in Rome, such as Postumus (about 260–269 AD), Carausius (286–293 AD), Magnentius (350–353 AD), Magnus Maximus (383–388 AD), and Constantine III (407–411 AD).$^{:16}$
The people referred to as "Anglo-Saxons" by modern scholars tend to be referred to in Latin sources as "Saxons" (Saxones). This term only began to be used by Roman authors in the 4th century. It was at this time used of raiders from north of the Frankish tribes who lived near the Rhine delta. Roman writers reported that these Saxons had been troubling the coasts of the North Sea and English Channel since the late 3rd century. Among the earliest such mentions of Saxons, they were named as allies of both Carausius, and Magnentius. In 368 AD imperial forces under the command of Count Theodosius defeated Saxons who were apparently based in Britain. At some point in the third or fourth centuries the Romans also established a military commander who was assigned to oversee a chain of coastal forts on each side of the Channel; the one on the British side was called the Saxon Shore (Litus Saxonicum). The central Roman administration, like the rebel administrations, also recruited soldiers from the Frankish and Saxon regions beyond the Rhine in what is now the Netherlands and Germany, and such forces are likely to have become more important in Britain during periods when field armies were withdrawn during internal Roman power struggles.
There are very few reliable written records for the fifth century, but what exists is generally understood to indicate a sharp increase of Anglo-Saxon immigration into Britain, and the beginnings of Anglo-Saxon rule in some areas. According to the Chronica Gallica of 452, a chronicle written in Gaul, Britain was ravaged by Saxon invaders in 409 or 410. This was during the period when Constantine III was leading British Roman forces in rebellion on the Continent. Although the rebellion was eventually quashed, the Romano-British citizens reportedly expelled their Roman officials during this period, and never again re-joined the Roman Empire. Procopius, who lived and wrote in the mid-sixth-century Eastern Roman Empire, that after the overthrow of Constantine III in 411, "the Romans never succeeded in recovering Britain, but it remained from that time under tyrants".
A fifth-century hagiography of Saint Germanus of Auxerre claims that he helped command a defence against an invasion of Picts and Saxons in 429 while in Britain trying to combat the Pelagian Heresy. The Chronica Gallica of 452 reports for the year 441: "The British provinces even at this time have been handed over across a wide area through various catastrophes and events to the rule of the Saxons."
Procopius reported meeting Englishmen who visited Byzantium with Frankish envoys, and hearing accounts of the situation in the 6th century. He heard that the island called Brittia, which was across from the mouth of the Rhine river, and north of Spain and Gaul, was settled by three nations, the "Angles, Frisians, and the Britons who share their name with the island" (᾿Αγγίλοι ... Φρίσσονες ... Βρίττωνες), each ruled by its own king. Each nation was so prolific that it sent large numbers of individuals every year to the Franks, who planted them in unpopulated regions of their territory. Procopius never mentions Saxons or Jutes, and understood instead that the northern neighbours of the Franks were the Warini (Οὔαρνοι), whose kingdom stretched from the north side of the Rhine mouth to the Danube, and the area south of the Danes. He portrays the Angles and Warini as both being to some extent under the hegemony of their more powerful neighbours the Franks in the time of Theudebert I (ruler Austrasia 533-547).

### Gildas

The earliest text to give an explicit account of settlement of Britain by what it calls "Saxons" (Saxones) is the tract De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae. Its date of composition is uncertain, plausibly falling between the late fifth and the mid-sixth century. Inspired by Old Testament prophetical writing, seven eighths of the De excidio chasises political figures contemporary with Gildas for their irreligious behaviour. In Gildas's account, settlement in Britain by Saxons was divine punishment for the sinful nature of many British rulers. In the view of modern historians, the most important contributions of this source is what it tells us about Gildas's own time, such as the political and religious environment which he took for granted, or the fact that his high standard of literary Latin indicates that he had access to a classical education.
Nevertheless, the De excidio opens with a short historical sketch, with no clear dates, of the sins of the Britons and their "ruin and conquest" by "Saxons", initially invited to the island as mercenaries. Although it makes up only an eighth of the text, it is this passage that has attracted most attention from historians, from the early Middle Ages into the twenty-first century, and is the basis for the traditional narrative of the Settlement. Gildas indicates that the Britons wrote to the Roman military leader Aëtius in Gaul (who other sources tell us was in office between 445 and 454), begging for assistance, with no success. Gildas reports that an un-named Romano-British "proud tyrant" then invited "Saxons" to Britain to help defend Britain from the Picts and Scots. Historians have understood this to imply a Roman-style military treaty, in which Saxons served as foederati, rewarded with lands in Britain. According to Gildas, these Saxons eventually came into conflict with the Romano-British when they were not given sufficient monthly supplies. In reaction to this they overran the whole country, and then returned to their "home" (domum), somewhere in Britain. After this, the British united successfully under Ambrosius Aurelianus, and struck back. Historian N. J. Higham has called the ensuing conflict the "War of the Saxon Federates". It ended after the siege at "Mount Badon", the location of which is no longer known. The work does not mention any ongoing conflict against Saxons after Badon.

### Bede

Gildas was Bede's main source for understanding the migration of what he called the "Angle or Saxon nation" (Latin: Anglorum sive Saxonum gens), but Bede made significant adaptations. Bede is the oldest surviving source to name the "proud tyrant" as Vortigern, but his source for this name is unknown, and Bede may have misunderstood a British title, meaning "high ruler", as a personal name. Furthermore, although he reports St Germanus coming to Britain after this conflict began, he would have been dead by then. In Bede's semi-mythical account the call to the "Angle or Saxon nation" (Latin: Anglorum sive Saxonum gens) was initially answered by three boats led by two brothers, Hengist and Horsa ("Stallion and Horse"), and Hengist's son Oisc. Some modern scholars have suggested that both "Hengist" and Oisc may both represent memories of the same person as Ansehis, who was named in the Ravenna Cosmography as the chief of the "Old Saxons" who led his people to Britain. Bede believed that these Saxons had a region assigned to them in the eastern part of Britain. A bigger fleet followed according to him, representing the three most powerful tribes of Germania, the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes, and these were eventually followed by terrifying swarms. In a well-known passage, Bede gave a rough description of the homelands of these three peoples, and described the places in Britain where he believed they had settled:
* The Saxons came from what Bede called Old Saxony, and settled in Wessex, Sussex and Essex. (Bede also generally used the term "Saxon" as a collective term covering all the earliest Germanic settlers and raiders. Like the Ravenna Cosmography he also used the term "Old Saxons" to distinguish the Saxons of his time who were neighbours of the Franks in Europe.)
* Jutland, the peninsula containing part of what is now modern Denmark, was the homeland of the Jutes who settled in Kent and the Isle of Wight.
* The Angles (or English) were from "Anglia", a country which Bede understood to have been emptied by this migration, and which lay between the homelands of the Saxons and Jutes. Anglia is usually interpreted as being near the old Schleswig-Holstein Province (straddling the modern Danish-German border), and containing the modern Angeln. (Bede also used the term English as a collective term for the Anglo-Saxons of his time.)
The naming of these three specific tribes was probably influenced by the semi-mythological genealogical claims of the royal families of Bede's time. In another passage Bede clarified that the continental ancestors of the Anglo-Saxons were not really limited to three tribes, or one settlement period. He named pagan peoples still living in Germany (Germania) in the eighth century "from whom the Angles or Saxons, who now inhabit Britain, are known to have derived their origin; for which reason they are still corruptly called "Garmans" by the neighbouring nation of the Britons": the Frisians, the Rugini (possibly from Rügen), the Danes, the "Huns" (Pannonian Avars in this period, whose influence stretched north to Slavic-speaking areas in central Europe), the "old Saxons" (antiqui Saxones), and the "Boructuari" who are presumed to be inhabitants of the old lands of the Bructeri, near the Lippe river.

## Linguistic evidence

All linguistic evidence from Roman Britain suggests that most inhabitants spoke British Celtic and/or British Latin. However, by the eighth century, when extensive evidence for the post-Roman language situation is next available, it is clear that the dominant language in what is now eastern and southern England was Old English, whose West Germanic predecessors were spoken in what is now the Netherlands and northern Germany. This was in marked contrast to experience on the Continent where the invaders adopted the Latin derived languages of the local population. Explaining the rise of Old English, and its continued westward and northward spread, is crucial in any account of the Anglo-Saxon settlement of Britain.
Old English shows little obvious influence from Celtic or spoken Latin: there are for example few English words of Brittonic origin. Moreover, except in Cornwall, the vast majority of place-names in England are easily etymologised as Old English (or Old Norse, due to later Viking influence), demonstrating the dominance of English across post-Roman England. Intensive research in recent decades on Celtic toponymy has shown that more names in England and southern Scotland have Brittonic, or occasionally Latin, etymologies than was once thought, but even so, it is clear that Brittonic and Latin place-names in the eastern half of England are extremely rare, and although they are noticeably more common in the western half, they are still a tiny minority─2% in Cheshire, for example.
The incidence of British Celtic personal names in the royal genealogies of a number of "Anglo-Saxon" dynasties such as those of Wessex, Lindsey and Mercia is very suggestive of Saxonisation at an elite level. The Wessex royal line was traditionally founded by a man named Cerdic, an undoubtedly Celtic name cognate to Ceretic (the name of two British kings, ultimately derived from *Corotīcos). This may indicate that Cerdic was a native Briton and that his dynasty became anglicised over time. A number of Cerdic's alleged descendants also possessed potentially Celtic names, including the 'Bretwalda' Ceawlin. The last man in this dynasty to have a Brittonic name was King Caedwalla, who died as late as 689. In Mercia, too, several kings bear seemingly Celtic names, most notably Penda. As far east as Lindsey, the Celtic name Caedbaed appears in the list of kings. This is also the case with some bishops, for example four upper-class Northumbrian brothers in the English Church; Chad, Cedd, Cynibil and Caelin with British rather than Anglo-Saxon names.
Extensive research was ongoing into the twenty-first century on whether British Celtic did exert subtle influences on Old English, with a 2012 synthesis concluding that 'the evidence for Celtic influence on Old English is somewhat sparse, which only means that it remains elusive, not that it did not exist'.

## Archaeological evidence

Due to the relative lack of written sources, archeology is a very important tool in our understanding of the Anglo-Saxon settlement of Britain. Although there are a number of very important finds such as the Sutton Hoo burial there are also a large number of smaller finds that have illustrated and changed our understanding.
After the Roman withdrawal from Britain there was a collapse in the Roman material culture leaving a gap in the archaeological record that was filled by the Anglo-Saxons, with the earliest Anglo-Saxon cemeteries dated to the early 5th century. Some burial grounds, especially near Roman roads and former military sites, hint at possible foederati troops coexisting with British communities, although there may be other reasons for such Anglo-Saxon arrivals. Cemeteries often reveal a mix of local and foreign elements, whether in grave goods like Romano-British belt fittings reused by Anglo-Saxons, or distinctive items with continental links such as Quoit brooches in Kent.
Although Roman authority collapsed in the early fifth century, many agricultural practices and even certain Roman field systems endured under new, potentially looser arrangements between local Britons and the incoming groups, with some material evidence indicates that coastal Saxon Shore forts, long assumed to be purely defensive, may also have served as trade or shipping hubs.
Meanwhile, isotopic and skeletal analyses offer new perspectives on who the settlers were and how they lived. Oxygen and strontium tests conducted at sites like West Heslerton and Eastbourne show that migrants from the Continent were both men and women and from multiple generations, while shared burial grounds suggested shorter-statured Britons and taller incomers often seem to have intermarried. The regional variation and the large number of mixed burial grounds supports the view that migration did not unfold as a single event but as a complex, evolving process.

## Genetic evidence

Genetic studies have provided new insights into the Anglo-Saxon migration, showing significant but regionally variable levels of continental ancestry in early medieval England. Archaeogenetic studies, based on data collected from skeletons found in Iron Age, Roman and Anglo-Saxon era burials, have concluded that the ancestry of the modern English population contains large contributions from both Anglo-Saxon migrants and Romano-British natives.

### Ancient genome studies

A 2022 study analyzing 460 ancient genomes from England, Ireland, the Netherlands, Germany, and Denmark found that 25–47% of present-day English DNA originates from Anglo-Saxon migrants. The proportion was highest in eastern England, with early medieval individuals there deriving up to 76% of their ancestry from a northern European population spanning the Netherlands, northern Germany, and Denmark. However, individuals of local British ancestry also persisted, and there was evidence of intermarriage between these groups. One of the study’s authors, Duncan Sayer, stated: *"You can't argue with [mass migration] anymore. So now we need to talk about what that migration actually is and how these people interacted."*
Other studies have reinforced these findings. A 2020 study of Viking-era burials estimated that modern English populations derive 38% of their ancestry from native British sources and 37% from a Danish-like population, of which up to 6% may be attributed to Viking migrations. A 2016 study using ancient DNA from early medieval burials in Cambridgeshire found evidence of intermarriage between native Britons and continental immigrants, contradicting theories of strict segregation between the groups.

### Modern population studies

A 2015 study by Leslie et al. on "The fine-scale genetic structure of the British population" identified clear genetic clusters in Britain, reflecting historical demographic events. It estimated that Anglo-Saxon ancestry in central and southern England ranged from 10% to 40%, with little to no input in certain regions of Scotland and Wales.
Härke, Mark Thomas, and Michael Stumpf created a statistical study of those who held the "migrant" Y chromosomes and those that did not, and examined the effect of differential reproductive success between those groups, coupled with limited intermarriage between the groups, on the spread of the genetic variant to discover whether the levels of migration needed to meet a 50% contribution to the modern gene pool had been attained. Their findings demonstrated that a genetic pool can rise from less than 5% to more than 50% in as little as 200 years with the addition of a slight increase in reproduction advantage of 1.8 (meaning a ratio 51.8 to 50) and restricting the amount of female (migrant genes) and male (indigenous genes) inter-breeding to at most 10%.

### Criticism

Some scholars have questioned whether it is legitimate to conflate ethnic and cultural identity with patterns highlighted by genetic evidence. A 2018 editorial for Nature warned against simplistic interpretations of ancient DNA data, cautioning that such studies risk reinforcing outdated "culture-history" models of the early 20th century. Scholars have also debated whether “Germanic” identity had any real ethnic or cultural unity outside of Roman ethnography.

## Competing descriptions of the settlement
### Traditional account: a massive migration

The traditional account based largely on Bede and subsequent medieval writers has influenced much of the scholarly and popular perceptions of the process of anglicisation in Britain. It remains the starting point and 'default position', to which other hypotheses are compared in modern reviews of the evidence. In the twentieth century, support for the traditional account came in particular from historical linguists, who were able to add to the evidence of written sources the observation that English was little affected by the pre-existing Brittonic and Latin languages of Britain. There is linguistic and historical evidence for a significant movement of Brittonic-speakers to Armorica, after whom it was renamed Brittany. In 2014, Peter Schrijver stated that 'to a large extent, it is linguistics that is responsible for thinking in terms of drastic scenarios' about demographic change in late Roman Britain.

### Acculturation theory: a small migration

By around 2010, scholars broadly agreed that the Anglo-Saxon settlement involved a relatively small group of migrants who seized power in eastern England, with local populations largely assimilating to their culture and language rather than being displaced. Old English thus spread chiefly through political dominance, leaving only faint Celtic linguistic traces.
Archaeology indicates that sub-Roman Britain still had significant economic and political structures into the fifth or sixth century, despite vulnerability to raids and settlement. According to Gildas, Saxon mercenaries hired by a weakened Roman administration revolted, seizing control in some regions.
By Bede’s era, kingdoms such as Wessex, Mercia, and Northumbria still housed many Britons, but law-codes show they had lower status, spurring assimilation. Over generations, Old English became the more prestigious language; Brittonic place-names were replaced through adaptation, new naming, or the general instability of settlements rather than by overwhelming demographic change.

### Archaeogenetics, isotope analysis, and the disruption of consensus

From around 2010, research in archaeogenetics began to produce large amounts of new evidence for the movements of people and for the family relations of people in early medieval burial grounds. These studies suggested that the migration, which included both men and women, continued over several centuries, possibly allowing for significantly more new arrivals than had previously been thought. This led to the possibility of testing claims such as Bryan Ward-Perkins's statement in 2000 that while "culturally, the later Anglo-Saxons and English did emerge as remarkably un-British, [...] their genetic, biological make-up is none the less likely to have been substantially, indeed predominantly, British". As of the 2020s no new consensus had emerged.

### Estimating migrants' numbers

Different descriptions of the Anglo-Saxon settlement demand varying assumptions about pre-existing Britons and incoming Germanic speakers, but there is no firm evidence for the exact numbers, and no consensus on how many lived in fourth-century Britain or arrived in the fifth. Estimates place the fourth-century population at 2–4 million, possibly declining to 1 million, while migrant numbers range between 20,000 and 200,000. Computer models, cemetery data, and demographic calculations point toward a smaller, ongoing influx in different regions, potentially boosted by Britons’ losses to plagues or emigration, with the total immigrant proportion perhaps 10–20%.

### Regional variation

The general view now is that the spread of Anglo-Saxon culture varied across Britain where the southeast experienced “mass migration,” gradually shifting to “elite dominance” in the north and west. Place-name evidence supports this, with southeastern counties having almost no Brittonic names, in contrast to areas farther north and west. East Anglia, Lincolnshire, Essex and Kent all show archaeological signs of large-scale continental immigration, possibly tied to fourth-century depopulation or encouraged by strong local ports. In Wessex, immigration came from both the south coast and the Thames valley, with Romano-British powers directing settlers inland, yet enough Germanic arrivals held sway to encourage Britons’ assimilation. Farther north, in Bernicia, only a small group of immigrants may have seized local power, adopting some native institutions and art forms. Even into the eighth century, Wessex, Mercia, and Northumbria still housed notable numbers of Britons.