Question 1
Evaluate the interpretations in both of the two passages and explain which you think is more
convincing as an explanation of the nature of the Danelaw.
Passage A
In 879 Guthrum was back in East Anglia, to carry out the third Danish partition of English soil. The shires of Northampton, Huntingdon, Cambridge, and Bedford, together with Norfolk, Suffolk, and Essex, and (briefly) London itself, were to be made as Danish as the former English kingdoms that lay north of them. This considerable portion of eastern England, stretching from the Tees to the Thames, was the first delimitation of the future Danelaw, a kind of Denmark overseas, conquered, occupied and organised by Danes, and clearly distinguishable from the rest of England by race, law, language, personal names and place-names, and not least by social custom. The Danelaw was, we suspect, at no time fully homogeneous, but internal variations in respect of race, density of Norse settlement, political allegiance and social organisation counted less than its separateness from English England. The evidence of personal coins and moneyers is indicative, and that of language, vocabulary, and place names compulsive, that there was a rapid and heavy settlement of parts of the Danelaw that represented a migration. Recent attempts to minimise the Norse element have been unconvincing. For example, Scandinavian vocabulary penetrated every domain of language as indicated by groups of words such as law, by-law and outlaw. This was a political situation King Alfred had to live with; he and his successors would seek to contain and diminish it, then bring it back under English rule; but to the close of the Viking period Anglo-Danish and Anglo-Norman monarchs and law-makers would be forced to recognise the separateness and special circumstances of Danish England.
Adapted from G. Jones, A History of the Vikings, published in 1984.
Passage B
The term Danelaw is usually associated with the treaty King Alfred made with Guthrum sometime between 886 and 890. In theory the treaty gave Guthrum authority over Essex, East Anglia, parts of Mercia and Northumbria. In practice it was unlikely that Guthrum was acknowledged as leader over all of these geographical entities. It is more probable that the Guthrum treaty was established simply to create a demarcation line between East Anglia, to where Guthrum fled and settled, and Wessex. Some historians have associated the Danelaw with the emergence of a distinct Danish law and culture. This indicates that the Danelaw came to be recognised as more than a geographical region but also something with economic, social, political and cultural characteristics which clearly emanated from Scandinavia. However, there are difficulties in seeing the Danelaw as an entity that was fixed in terms of geography and institutions. Firstly, with respect to time, the Danelaw was a fluid concept. Its origins can certainly be dated to 886-90 or maybe even before to 878. But, by the late ninth century its composition had already changed as parts of Mercia had been consolidated under Anglo-Saxon rule and by 920 it might be argued that it hardly existed at all given the exploits of Edward the Elder. Yet, even under Edward’s overlordship the old Danelaw seemed to retain a distinct Danish feel about it. Secondly, the concept is problematic insofar as it is doubtful as to whether the Danelaw ever constituted a single, integrated economic, social and political entity. The available evidence suggests the existence within the Danelaw of numerous separate Viking communities (some purely Viking, others Anglo-Viking) that may or may not have collaborated at any one point in time. However, the evidence, such as place names, does support the notion that to an extent such communities may have been brought together by shared cultural beliefs and views on law and order.
Adapted from A. Holland and N. Fellows, Early Medieval England 871–1107, published in 2015.
[30]
Answer
