Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T00:53:28.098Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Lincoln and the Anglo-Saxon see of Lindsey

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Steven Bassett
Steven Bassett
Affiliation:
The University of Birmingham
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is by no means universally agreed that Lindsey was ever a kingdom or had kings. Stenton, in what is still the most thorough discussion of Lindsey, expressed his doubts on the matter but then dismissed them; there are other scholars who retain theirs. Of those listed, for example, in the supposedly royal genealogy (not a regnal list) of Lindsey, none apart from the last named, Aldfrith, is known to have been a king; some of them may indeed have ruled, but Lindsey would be unique if power had always been transmitted by direct royal primogeniture. Certainly our almost total ignorance of Lindsey's history is a considerable obstacle to viewing it as a fully developed kingdom; but that absence of evidence is no doubt largely due to its early subordination to Northumbria and Mercia by turns. Bede's description of it, whatever else he neglected to tell us, as prouincia and its meriting a bishop both point to the conclusion that Lindsey was indeed a kingdom, but one of those which succumbed early on to aggrandizing neighbours.

Type
Research Article
Information
Anglo-Saxon England , Volume 18 , December 1989 , pp. 1 - 32
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Stenton, F.M., ‘Lindsey and its Kings’, Preparatory to Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Stenton, D.M. (Oxford, 1970), pp. 127–35, at 127Google Scholar. Several colleagues have expressed their doubts to me about Lindsey's ever having had the status of a kingdom.

2 Dumville, D., ‘The Anglian Collection of Royal Genealogies and Regnal Lists’, ASE (1976), 23–50, at 31, 33 and 37.Google Scholar

3 Bede's Historia Ecclesiastica [hereafter HE]; see below, n. 45. This source will be quoted subsequently (with page refs.) from Bede's Ecclesiastical History of the English People, ed. Colgrave, B. and Mynors, R.A.B. (Oxford, 1969). The see existed from 678 to c. 1011:Google ScholarHandbook of British Chronology, 3rd ed., ed. Fryde, E.B., Greenway, D.E., Porter, S. and Roy, I. (London, 1986), p. 219.Google Scholar

4 For further discussion see my recent paper ‘In Search of the Origins of Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms’ in The Origins of Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms, ed. Bassett, S.R. (Leicester, 1989), pp. 3–27.Google Scholar

5 B. Eagles, ‘Lindsey’ in Origins of Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms, ed. Bassett, pp. 202–12, at 205–6.

6 The Lincolnshire Domesday and the Lindsey Survey, ed. Foster, C.W. and Longley, T., Lincoln Record Soc. (Lincoln, 1924), pp. 237–60; Stenton, ‘Lindsey and its Kings’, pp. 133–4.Google Scholar

7 See below, pp. 10–11.

8 The western border of this area may have been not the Trent but the Idle, which Bede identifies as the (north–eastern) boundary of Mercia: HE 11.12.

9 Eagles, B.N., The Anglo-Saxon Settlement of Humberside, BAR Brit. ser. 68 (Oxford, 1979), 411–12;Google ScholarFennell, K.R., ‘The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Loveden Hill…and its Significance in relation to the Dark Age Settlement of the East Midlands’ (unpubl. PhD dissertation, Nottingham Univ., 1964).Google Scholar

10 Eagles, ‘Lindsey’, Origins of Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms, ed. Bassett, pp. 208–9 and refs. cited.

11 Stenton, F.M., Anglo-Saxon England, 3rd ed. (Oxford, 1971), p. 338.Google Scholar

12 The group called Bilmiga probably occupied part of modern SE Lincs.: Davies, W. and Vierk, H., ‘The Contexts of Tribal Hidage: Social Aggregates and Settlement Patterns’, FS 8 (1974), 223–93, at 233–4 and 236Google Scholar. Spalding, also in SE Lincs., may not represent the settlement areas of the Spalda but of an off–shoot group: ibid. pp. 232 and 234.

13 Kesteven may mean ‘administrative district named Ched(forest)’: Gelling, M., Place-Names in the Landscape (London, 1984), p. 292Google Scholar; Holland may mean ‘district characterized by hill–spurs’: ibid. p. 289. The late–tenth–century chronicler Æthelweard locates a battle fought in 894 ‘on the western side of the place called Stamford. This is to say, between the streams of the river Welland and the thickets of the wood called Kesteven (Ceostefne) by the common people’: The Chronicle of Æthelweard, ed. Campbell, A. (London, 1962), p. 51.Google Scholar

14 HE IV.11; Handbook of British Chronology, ed. Fryde et al., p. 219. The see lasted until c. 1011, after one or more lengthy interruptions in the late ninth and earlier tenth centuries; thereafter Lindsey went back to the control of the bishóps of Dorchester: Kirby, D.P., ‘The Saxon Bishops of Leicester, Lindsey (Syddensis), and Dorchester’, Leicestershire Arch, and Hist. Soc. Trans. 41 (1965–1966), 1–8.Google Scholar

15 Respectively, S( = Sawyer, P.H., Anglo-Saxon Charters: an Annotated List and Bibliography, R. Hist. Soc. Guides and Handbooks 8 (London, 1968)) 66; ptdGoogle Scholarde G. Birch, W., Cartularium Saxonicum, 5 vols. (London, 1885–1895) [hereafter BCS], 66 (a forgery, based on HE iv.28); S 891 and 899 (charters of Æthelred II);Google ScholarAlcuini epistolae, ed. Dümmler, E., MGH Epist. 4 (Berlin, 1895), no. 5 (report of the Legates in 786; it is incompletely printed as BCS 250, where Ceoluulfus (bishop of Lindsey from 767 to 796) is wrongly rendered Edeulfus); BCS 425 (an episcopal profession); andGoogle ScholarPage, R.I., ‘Anglo-Saxon Episcopal Lists, Part III’, Nottingham Med. Stud. 10 (1966), 2–24, at 5, 6, 10, 11, 15, 16 and 21. The two instances of Lindisfarnorum in these episcopal lists (in London, British Library, Cotton Vespasian B. vi (s. ixin; later corrected), 108r, col. 3 – 109r, col. 2, at 108v, col. 2; and in Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 140 (Bath Abbey, c. 1100), 115r, col. –2 – 115V, at 115r, col. 7) are obvious slips, since both head lists of bishops of Lindsey.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

16 Handbook of British Chronology, ed. Fryde et al., p. 219.

17 BCS 312; Sanders, W.B., Facsimiles of Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts [hereafter OSFacs.], 3 vols. (Ordnance Survey, Southampton, 1878–1884) 1, no. 4;Google ScholarBrooks, N.P., The Early History of the Church of Canterbury (Leicester, 1984), p. 363, n. 16.Google Scholar

18 OSFacs. 1, no. 5.

19 BCS 290.

20 Willelmi Malmesbiriensis monachi de gestis pontificum Anglorum libri quinque, ed. Hamilton, N.E.S.A., , RS (London, 1870), p. 16.Google Scholar

21 Campbell, J., ‘Bede's Words for Places’, Names, Words and Graves: Early Medieval Settlement, ed. Sawyer, P.H. (Leeds, 1979), pp. 34–54. at 42; A.W. Clapham, ‘Introduction’, inGoogle ScholarDavies, D.S., ‘Pre–Conquest Carved Stones in Lincolnshire’, Arch J 83 (1926), 1–20, at 1–2;Google ScholarHill, J.W.F., Medieval Lincoln (Cambridge, 1948), pp. 377–8 and refs. cited. A case has also been made for Louth:Google ScholarOwen, A.E.B., ‘Herefrith of Louth, Saint and Bishop: a Problem of Identities’, Lincolnshire Hist, and Arch. 15 (1980), 15–19.Google Scholar

22 Clapham, ‘Introduction’, p. 2, n. 2; Radford, C.A.R., ‘A Lost Inscription of Pre-Danish Age from Caistor’, Arch J 103 (1946), 95–9.Google Scholar

23 Kenneth Cameron (pers. comm.). The instance of 1190 is in an early-thirteenth-century hand.

24 BCS 312 (OS Facs. 1, no. 4). I am most grateful to Nicholas Brooks and Simon Keynes for discussing this charter with me.

25 As first suggested in Sympson, E.M., ‘Where was Sidnacester?’, Associated Archit. Socs. Reports and Papers 28 (1905–1906), 87–94, at 94.Google Scholar

26 Respectively, Alcuini epistolae, ed. Dümmler, no. 5 (Ceoluulfus, Lindensis Faronensis episcopus) and BCS 425 (Berhtredus … Lindisfarorum antistes). There is an episcopal profession for Eadwulf himself, but it is of no help since he is erroneously styled archbishop of York: Canterbury Professions, ed. Richter, M., Canterbury and York Soc. 67 (Torquay, 1973), no. 1.Google Scholar

27 Simon Keynes (pers. comm.).

28 *Sӯðe, ‘south people’, would be analogous to Mierce as a tribe-name derived from OE mearc.

29 William of Malmesbury's own manuscript reads Sidna-. The several known copies of it have various forms, one of which (of the first recension) is Suthna- (De gestis pontificum, ed. Hamilton, pp. xx and 16, n. 2).

30 Simon Keynes suggests (pers. comm.) that it meant something to the scribe of the early-ninth-century Canterbury document, and meant little or nothing to anyone thereafter (i.e. that later forms are probably worthless).

31 Gelling, Place-Names in the Landscape, p. 39.

32 See appendix below, pp. 31–2. I am very grateful to Dr Gelling for her most helpful comments on this and the other place-names discussed here.

33 838 D( = 841): An Anglo-Saxon Chronicle from British Museum, Cotton MS., Tiberius B.IV, ed. Classen, E. and Harmer, F.E. (Manchester, 1926), p. 24.Google Scholar

34 See below, pp. 31–2, and pers. comm.

35 Ekwall, E., The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Place-Names, 4th ed. (Oxford, 1960), p. 299; Stenton, ‘Lindsey and its Kings’, pp. 132–4.Google Scholar

36 Gelling, Place-Names in the Landscape, pp. 34–40.

37 This is broadly analogous to the extension of the topographical name hwicce to cover an entire kingdom: M. Gelling, ‘The Place-Name Volumes for Worcestershire and Warwickshire: A New Look’, Field and Forest. An Historical Geography of Warwickshire and Worcestershire, ed. Slater, T.R. and Jarvis, P.J. (Norwich, 1982), p. 69.Google Scholar

38 Asser's Life of Alfred, ed. Stevenson, W.H. (Oxford, 1904), p. 34; but see below, p. 9, for the chronicler Æthelweard's different reading of it.Google Scholar

39 Jackson, K.H., Language and History in Early Britain (Edinburgh, 1953), pp. 332 and 543;Google ScholarCameron, K., The Place-Names of Lincolnshire, EPNS 58.1 (Cambridge, 1985), 2–3Google Scholar

40 Conceivably that of mercenaries, as elsewhere: Biddle, M., ‘Towns’, The Archaeology of Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Wilson, D.M. (London, 1976), pp. 99–150, at 104–5, 2nd 112 and refs. cited there in n. 104. On the problems of identifying Germanic mercenaries, seeGoogle ScholarHills, C., ‘The Archaeology of Anglo-Saxon England in the Pagan Period: a Review’, ASE 8 (1979), 297–329, at 297–307.Google Scholar

41 Cameron, Place-Names of Lincolnshire, pp. 2–3.

42 Ibid. p. 3.

43 BCS 297.

44 See below, p. 32.

45 HE Preface(p. 6);ch. Headings to 11(p. 120);11.16 (p. 190);111.11 (bis)(p. 246);111.27(p. 312); IV.3 (bis) (pp. 336 and 344); and 111.11 (p. 246) respectively.

46 HE III. 24 and iv. 12 (pp. 292 and 370). For convenience of reference I shall continue in most contexts to use Lindsey as the name of the kingdom and the see.

47 HE III.II and III.27 (pp. 246 and 312); IV. 12 (p. 370); and IV.3 (bis) and IV.12 (pp. 336, 346 and 370) respectively.

48 HE IV.12 (p. 370).

49 Chronicle of Æhelweard, ed. Campbell.

50 E.g. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle 993 CDE: Two of the Saxon Chronicles Parallel, ed. Plummet, C. (Oxford, 1892–1899) 1,: 27 (E text) and ASC 1013 CDE: Two Chronicles, ed., Plummer I, 143 (E).Google Scholar

51 ASC 838 ABC (=841): Two Chronicles, ed. Plummer I, 64 (A); Chronicle of Æthelweard, ed. Campbell, p. 31 (he uses urbs of London only one sentence later). The D-version of the Chronicle, however, has Lindesige: see, further, below, p. 32.

52 ASC 875 AB, 874 C: Two Chronicles, ed. Plummer I, 72 (A).

53 Chronicle of Æthelweard, ed. Campbell, p. 40.

54 Wacher, J., The Towns of Roman Britain (London, 1974), p. 133. Simon Esmonde Cleary points out (pers. comm.) that the archaeological evidence from the lower town suggests that it was seen as part of the colonia from the start.Google Scholar

55 Colyer, C.M. and Jones, M.J., ed., ‘Excavations at Lincoln. Second Interim Report: Excavations in the Lower Town 1972–8’, Ant J 59 (1979), 50–91, at 55 and 88–9;CrossRefGoogle ScholarJones, M.J., ‘New Streets for Old: the Topography of Roman Lincoln’, Roman Urban Topography in Britain and the Western Empire, ed. Grew, F. and Hobley, B., CBA Research Report 59 (London, 1985), 86–93, at 92.Google Scholar

56 Bassett, S., ‘Beyond the Edge of Excavation: the Topographical Context of Goltho’, Studies in Medieval History Presented to R.H.C. Davis, ed. Mayr-Harting, H. and Moore, R.I. (London, 1985), pp. 21–39, at 32–4 and 38.Google Scholar

57 Eagles, Anglo-Saxon Settlement of Humberside, pp. 182–7 and figs. 118–19; and ‘Lindsey’, Origins of Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms, ed. Bassett. Michael Jones informs me that there is still no archaeological evidence of any early Anglo-Saxon occupation of the town.

58 Morris, R.K., The Church in British Archaeology, CQA Research Report 47 (London, 1983), 38–9 and 48;Google ScholarRodwell, W., ‘Churches in the Landscape: Aspects of Topography and Planning’, Studies in Late Anglo-Saxon Settlement, ed. Faull, M.L. (Oxford, 1984), pp. 1–23, at 4 (and refs. cited there);Google ScholarStafford, P., The East Midlands in the Early Middle Ages (Leicester, 1985), pp. 87–8.Google Scholar

59 HE II. 16 (p. 191): Praedicabat…uerbum … prouinciae Lindissi. This church, built in stone and ‘of remarkable workmanship’, was still standing (though roofless) in Bede's day: ibid. (p. 193).

60 Morris. Church in British Archaeology, p. 48.

61 Mann, J.C., ‘The Administration of Roman Britain’, Antiquity 35 (1961), 316–20, at 318. I have discussed the possible influence of fourth-century diocesan geography on the location of the seventh-century Anglo-Saxon sees in my paper ‘Churches in Worcester Before and After the Conversion of the Anglo-Saxons’ (forthcoming).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

62 HE 11.16 (p. 192).

63 He is reminiscent or the praepositus who showed St Cuthbert around the Roman monuments of Carlisle: see Colgrave, B., Two ‘Lives’ of Saint Cuthbert (Cambridge, 1940), p. 122.Google Scholar

64 Bubba, Beda and Bisc[e]op/Beoscep: Dumville, ‘The Anglian Collection of Royal Genealogies and Regnal Lists’, pp. 31, 33 and 37.

65 For Berhtfrith, see HE v.24 (p. 5 66), and Colgrave, B., The Life of Bishop Wilfrid by Eddius Stephanas (Cambridge, 1927), p. 130. For Berhtwald, see Colgrave, Life of Bishop Wilfrid, p. 80; according to William of Malmesbury, Berhtwald was the son of King Wulfhere (Degestis pontificum, ed. Hamilton, pp. 351–2).Google Scholar

66 M.J. Jones, ed., ‘Excavations at Lincoln. Third Interim Report: Sites outside the Walled City 1972–1977’, Ant J 61 (1981), 83–114, at 84; Jones, ‘New Streets for Old’, fig. 63 on p. 91.

67 For the latter suggestion, see Hill, Medieval Lincoln, p. 6, n. 1.

68 Gelling, Place-Names in the Landscape, p. 34. Dr Gelling lists an impressive number of northern names in which ēg seems to be used of a narrow promontory of dry ground (p. 36).

69 ‘Excavations at Lincoln. Third Interim Report’, ed. Jones, pp. 88–92.

70 Gilmour, B.J.J. and Stocker, D.A., St Mark's Church and Cemetery, Lincoln Archaeol. Trust [hereafter LAT] Monograph Ser. 13.1 (London, 1986), 3 and 15–17.Google Scholar

71 ‘Excavations at Lincoln. Third Interim Report’, ed. Jones, p. 83.

72 Ibid. p. 84 (181–2 High St); Magilton, J.R. and Stocker, D.A., ‘st Mary's Guildhall’, Archaeology in Lincoln 1981–82, LAT Annual Report 10 (Lincoln, 1982), 8–16Google Scholar; J.R. Magilton, ‘Monson Street’, ibid. pp. 17–19, at 17; Gilmour and Stocker, St Mark's Church and Cemetery, P.13.

73 To judge by the pottery from excavated sites in Lincoln which has been published so far: Coppack, G., ‘The Excavation of a Roman and Medieval Site at Flaxengate, Lincoln’, Lincolnshire Hist, and Arch. 8 (1973), 87–94;Google ScholarAdams, L., Medieval Pottery from Broadgate East, Lincoln 1973, LAT Monograph Ser. 17.1 (London, 1977); Gilmour and Stocker, St Mark's Church and Cemetery, pp. 35–40. Findspots of middle Saxon pottery in Lincolnshire (to 1970) are mapped and listed in P.V. Addyman andGoogle ScholarWhitwell, J.B., ‘some Middle Saxon Pottery Types in Lincolnshire’, Ant J 50 (1970), 96–100.Google Scholar

74 ‘Excavations at Lincoln. Third Interim Report’, ed. Jones, pp. 88–92; B. Gilmour, ‘Brayford Wharf East’, Archaeology in Lincoln 1981–82, LAT Annual Report 10, 20–4 (where the possibility of Roman lock gates is discussed on p. 22).

75 Gilmour, ‘Brayford Wharf East’, p. 20.

76 Henry I is known to have had the Fossdyke cleaned out; similar work was done on other fenland canals of Roman origin by Cnut: The Fenland in Roman Times, ed. Phillips, C.W., Royal Geog. Soc, Research Ser. 5 (London, 1970), 79, n. 35.Google Scholar

77 Gelling, Place-Names in the Landscape, p. 3 23; Gelling, M., Signposts to the Past (London, 1978), pp. 67 and 70.Google Scholar

78 Eagles, Anglo-Saxon Settlement of Humberside, p. 157.

79 The earliest written record of it is of c. 1107: Cameron, Place-Names of Lincolnshire, pp. 45–6.

80 Collingwood, R.G. and Wright, R.P., The Roman Inscriptions of Britain, I: Inscriptions on Stone (Oxford, 1965), nos. 270–1;Google ScholarCleary, S. Esmonde, Extra-Mural Areas of Romano-British Towns, BAR Brit. ser. 169 (Oxford, 1987), 113 (where reference is also made to a possible parallel at Trier, where an extramural vicus lay at the far end of a river bridge from the colonia).Google Scholar

81 Reynolds, S., An Introduction to the History of English Medieval Towns (Oxford, 1977), p. 26; Biddle, ‘Towns’, pp. 112–20;Google ScholarHodges, R., Dark Age Economics (London, 1982), pp. 66–74.Google Scholar

82 The Laws of the Earliest English Kings, ed. Attenborough, F.L. (Cambridge, 1922), p. 22.Google Scholar

83 R. Kemp, ‘Pit your “wics” or how to excavate Anglian York’, Interim 11.3, York Archaeol. Trust (Autumn 1986), 8–16; ‘Redfeams — Where Anglians and Vikings Meet’, ibid. 11.4 (Winter 1986–7), 12–19.

84 Biddle, M., ‘London on the Strand’, PA 6. 1 (July 1984), 23–7;Google ScholarVince, A., ‘The Aldwych: Mid-Saxon London Discovered?’ CA 93 (August 1984), 310–12.Google Scholar

85 Tatton-Brown, T. and Macpherson-Grant, N., ‘Anglo-Saxon Canterbury: Topography and Pottery’, CA 98 (Oct. 1985), 89–93, at 90–1.Google Scholar

86 Perring, D., Early Medieval Occupation at Flaxengate, Lincoln, LAT Monograph Ser. 9.1 (London, 1981), 33. The only comparable imported item (so far published) from excavations on the promontory is a copper alloy ansate brooch, probably a late-seventh or eighth-century import from mainland western Europe: Gilmour and Stocker, St Mark's Church and Cemetery, p. 41.Google Scholar

87 Rumble, A.R., ‘HAMTVN alias HAMWIC (Saxon Southampton): the Place-name Traditions and their Significance’, Excavations at Melbourne Street, Southampton, 1971–76, ed. Holdsworth, P., CBA Research Report 33 (London, 1980), 7, 10 and Table 3.1 on 14.Google Scholar

88 Biddle, ‘Towns’, pp. 120–2 and refs. cited there; see also Haslam, J., ‘Market and Fortress in England in the Reign of Offa’, World Archaeol. 19 1 (June, 1987), 76–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

89 Assuming that they preferred to use them (as Haslam supposes: ibid. p. 81 and fig. 2) rather than to fortify the Lindsey promontory. There is no archaeological evidence of early defences on the promontory, but it is nonetheless interesting to note the antiquary Camden's account of Anglo-Saxon activities at Lincoln: ‘Old Lincoln of the Britons is supposed to have been on the very peak of a hill, where Nennius … records that the warlike Briton Vortiraer [son of Vortigern] was buried. But when he had been overthrown, the Saxons at first settled the southern part of the hill, and fortified it from the ruins of its antiquity; they afterwards went down to the river and built in the place called Wigford (Wickanforde), which they fenced in with ramparts (moenibus obsepserunt) wherever it was not defended by the river’ (Camden, W., Britannia; sive, Florentissimorum regnorum, Angliae, Scotiae, Hiberniae … chronographica descripta (London, 1594), p. 415). Camden's moenibus may mean nothing more than Sincil Dyke, but his account has features which tally with the archaeological and place-name evidence for Lincoln's early history and so might just embody a genuine tradition about earthwork defences.Google Scholar

90 Perring, Early Medieval Occupation at Flaxengate, Lincoln, pp. 44 and 46; Jones, ‘New Streets for Old’, p. 88.

91 Listed and mapped in Gilmour and Stocker, St Mark's Church and Cemetery, fig. 1 on p. 2.

92 Regesta regum Anglo-Normannorum II, ed. Johnson, C. and Cronne, H.A. (Oxford, 1956), no. 821 (for the date 1107);Google ScholarThe Registrum Antiquissimum of the Cathedral Church of Lincoln 1, ed. Foster, C.W., Lincoln Record Soc. (Lincoln, 1931), 33 and 262; Hill, Medievall Lincoln, p. 144.Google Scholar

93 Hill, Medieval Lincoln, pp. 147–8 and 166.

94 Taylor, H.M., ‘st Mary-le-Wigford, Lincoln’, Arch J 131 (1974), 348Google Scholar; H.M. Taylor, ‘st Peter-at-Gowts, Lincoln’, ibid. 348–50.

95 , H.M. and Taylor, J., Anglo-Saxon Architecture, 3 vols. (Cambridge, 1965–1978) 1, 390–1.Google Scholar

96 Gilmour and Stocker, St Mark's Church and Cemetery, pp. 16–17.

97 See below, pp. 26–7, for further discussion of St Mary-le-Wigford.

98 Regesta regum Anglo-Normannorum I, ed. Davis, H.W.C. (Oxford, 1913), no. 283; Registrum antiquissimum I, ed. Foster, 3;Google ScholarGiraldi Cambrensis opera, ed. Brewer, J.S., Dimock, J.F. and Warner, G.F., RS, 7 vols. (London, 1861–1891) VII, 19. Giraldus Cambrensis, too, knew that Lindsey was a place south of the Witham and, it seems, that the Anglo-Saxon cathedral had once been thereGoogle Scholar. In the Vita S. Remigii, probably written c. 1198 during the three years he spent at Lincoln (ibid. p. xi) Giraldus says, ‘And so he [Remigius] energetically joined Lindsey, and the whole land between the Witham namely the river of Lincoln and the. Humber (‘Lindeseiam, terramque totam inter Widhemam scilicet Lincolniae fluvium et Humbriam’) to his diocese and the province of Canterbury. And … he took care that his cathedral was founded in honour of the blessed virgin on the top of the hill at Lincoln across the Witham (‘in summo apud Lincolniam montis vertice trans Widhemam’) and was excellently built in a short while’ (ibid. p. 19).

99 E.g. Hill, Medieval Lincoln, p. 67; Owen, D.M., Church and Society in Medieval Lincolnshire (Lincoln, 1981), p. 57.Google Scholar

100 Owen, D., ‘The Norman Cathedral at Lincoln’, Anglo-Norman Studies VI, ed. Brown, R. A. (Woodbridge, 1984), 188–99.Google Scholar

101 Lincolnshire Domesday, ed. Foster and Longley, pp. 4–5.

102 Florentii Wigorniensis monachi chronicon ex chronicis, ed. Thorpe, B, 2 vols. (London, 1848–1849) 11, 30.Google Scholar

103 Lincolnshire Domesday, ed. Foster and Longley, pp. 206–7.

104 Handbook of British Chronology, ed. Fryde et al., p. 219.

105 Registrum antiquissimum I, ed. Foster, 206.

106 Owen, ‘The Norman Cathedral at Lincoln’, pp. 194–5.

107 English Historical Documents c. 500–1042, ed. Whitelock, D., 2nd ed. (London, 1979), pp. 431–2.Google Scholar

108 After the addition of at least the northern part of Stamford's hinterland: Stenton, Anglo-Saxon England, p. 358.

109 See above, pp. 2–3.

110 Owen, ‘The Norman Cathedral at Lincoln’, p. 195.

111 Registrum antiquissimum I, ed. Foster, 186.

112 Thacker, A.T., ‘The Church in Cheshire’, A History of the County of Cheshire I, ed. Harris, B.E., Victoria Hist, of the Counties of England (Oxford, 1987), 268–73;Google ScholarPevsner, N. and Hubbard, E., The Buildings of England: Cheshire (Harmondsworth, 1971), p. 149. I am grateful to Dr R.N. Swanson for drawing my attention to St John's, Chester.Google Scholar

113 Florentii Wigorniensis Monachi chronicon ex chronicis, ed. Thorpe 1, 216; Hill, Medieval Lincoln, PP. 74–5.

114 Ibid. p. 75. The earliest fabric in the present church is probably of mid-eleventh-century date: Fernie, E., The Architecture of the Anglo-Saxons (London, 1983), p. 127.Google Scholar

115 Anglo-Saxon Charters, ed. Robertson, A.J. (Cambridge, 1939), pp. 213–17.Google Scholar

116 Lincolnshire Domesday, ed. Foster and Longley, pp. 47–8.

117 Ibid. pp. 25–50.

118 Registrum antiquissimum I, ed. Foster, 186; Hill, Medieval Lincoln, pp. 65–6.

119 Mossop, H.R., The Lincoln Mint c. 890–1279, ed. Smart, V. (Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 1970), pl. I, nos. 7–11;Google ScholarStewart, I., ‘The St Martin Coins of Lincoln’, BNJ 36 (1967), 46–54, at 46–7 and 54;Google ScholarBlackburn, M., Colyer, M.C. and Dolley, M., Early Medieval Coins from Lincoln and its Shire c. 770–1100, LAT Monograph Ser. 6.1 (London, 1983), 14.Google Scholar

120 Stewart, ‘The St Martin Coins’, pp. 47 and 51; Blackburn, et al., Early Medieval Coins, pp. 13–14.

121 Owen, ‘The Norman Cathedral at Lincoln’, p. 190, n. 19.

122 See above, n. 90.

123 Blackburn, et al., Early Medieval Coins, p. 14.

124 E.g. Hill, Medieval Lincoln, pp.72–3.

125 The Anglo-Saxons, ed. Campbell, J. (Oxford, 1982), p. 147. One no longer need believe that ‘Not a church was left standing, nor a religious house spared throughout the county’:Google ScholarThe Victoria History of the County of Lincoln 11, ed. Page, W. (London, 1906), 6.Google Scholar

126 Blair, W.J., ‘secular Minster Churches in Domesday Book’, Domesday Book. A Reassessment, ed. Sawyer, P.H. (London, 1985), pp. 104–42, at 120–3.Google Scholar

127 E.g. Registrum antiquissimum 1, ed. Foster, nos. 2, 10, 24, 54, 45, 67, 252 and 302.

128 ibid. p. 205.

129 Taylor, ‘st Mary-le-Wigford, Lincoln’, p. 348.

130 ‘In loco autem in quo ecclesia beatae Mariae Magdalenae … sita erat’: Giraldi Cambrensis opera, ed. Brewer et al., VII, 194.

131 Clapham, A.W., ‘Lincoln Cathedral, I: Explanatory Note’, ArchJ 103 (1946), 102–3, at 102;Google ScholarBilson, J., ‘The Plan of the First Cathedral Church of Lincoln’, Archaeologia 62 (1911), 543–64. Two grave slabs of uncertain provenance, now in the cathedral cloister, are thought to be of mid-eleventh-century date: Owen, ‘The Norman Cathedral of Lincoln’, p. 194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

132 ‘Terram ab omnibus consuetudinibus solutam et quietam sufficienter dedisse ad construendam matrem ecclesiam totius episcopatus et eiusdem officinas’: Registrum antiquissimum I, ed. Foster, 3.

133 As happened, for example, at Winchcombe and Oxford: Bassett, S.R., ‘A Probable Mercian Royal Mausoleum at Winchcombe, Gloucestershire’, AntJ 65 (1985), 82–100, at 88;Google ScholarBlair, J., ‘st Frideswide Reconsidered’, Oxoniensia 52 (1987), 71–127, at 89.Google Scholar

134 Giraldi Cambrensis opera, ed. Brewer et al., vii, 209.

135 The cathedral was not extended east of the line of the Roman defences until the very end of the twelfth century: Stocker, D.A., ‘Excavations to the South of Lincoln Minster 1984 and 1985 — An Interim Report’, Lincolnshire Hist, and Arch. 20 (1985), 15–19, at 18.Google Scholar

136 Arnold-Fotster, F., Studies in Church Dedications, 3 vols. (London, 1899) 1, 90.Google Scholar

137 That is, not before late in 918, but perhaps not until the later 920s at the earliest: Stenton, Anglo-Saxon England, p. 551; Blackburn, et al., Early Medieval Coins, p. 13; Handbook of British Chronology, ed. Fryde, et al., p. 219.

138 Levison, W., England and the Continent in the Eighth Century (Oxford, 1946), pp. 263–4; Arnold-Forster, Studies in Church Dedications I, 41–2.Google Scholar

139 Registrum antiquissimum I, ed. Foster, 15.

140 I am very grateful to the following: Professor N.P. Brooks and Dr Margaret Gelling, for their valuable advice and criticism at all stages in the preparation of this paper; and Dr W.J. Blair, Professor K. Cameron, Professor R.H.C. Davis, Dr A. S. Esmonde Cleary, Mr M.J. Jones and Dr S. Keynes for their many helpful comments and corrections.

141 Jackson, Language and History in Early Britain, p. 543.

142 HE II. 14 and III.24 (pp. 188 and 292); Jackson, K.H., ‘On the Name “Leeds”’, Antiquity 20 (1946), 209–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

143 873 AB, 874 C: Two Chronicles, ed. Plummer 1, 72 (A).

144 Asser's Life of King Alfred, ed. Stevenson, p. 34 (in chs. 45 and 46).

145 Ibid. p. 242 (n. to ch. 45).

146 838 D ( = 841): An Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, ed. Classen and Harmer, p. 24.

147 The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle: A Revised Translation, ed. Whitelock, D. et al. , (London, 1961; rev. 1965), p. xiv and ref. cited there.Google Scholar