50°43′54″N0°47′21″W / 50.731566°N 0.789127°W /50.731566; -0.789127Cymenshore was a place inSouthern England where, according to theAnglo-Saxon Chronicle,Ælle of Sussex landed inAD 477 and battled theBritons with his three sons Cymen, Wlencing andCissa,[1] after the first of whom Cymenshore was held to have been named. The spellingCymenshore is a scholarly modernisation of theOld EnglishCȳmenes ōra, which is now lost. Its location is unclear but was probably nearSelsey.
The earliest surviving manuscript to contain the name is the late ninth-century Manuscript A of theAnglo-Saxon Chronicle, which gives it in the formCymenesora. Outside theChronicle, what is generally believed to be the same name is next attested in a thirteenth-century manuscript: this includes a copy of a charter adapted from a charter issued in 957, which gives the formon Cymeneres horan[2] and also a copy of a forged charter purporting to date from 673 but perhaps originally composed in the tenth century, which gives the formin Cumeneshore.[3] These and other spellings in late manuscripts (Cymensora,Cumenshore andCimeneres horan) are generally accepted by scholars to derive from anOld English place-name, now lost, whose Old English form wasCȳmenes ōra.[4]
The first element ofCȳmenes ōra is thought to be an Old English personal name that in proto-Old English would have had the form *Cȳmīn, deriving from the same root as the later Old English adjectivecȳme ("handsome, comely") combined with thediminutive suffix *-īn, in thegenitive case. Although in early Old English this name took the form *Cȳmīn, by the eighth century, the-n had been lost: theAnglo-Saxon Chronicle talks about a person calledCymen not because that was a form of the name current in the ninth century (the form then current wasCȳme) but because a scribe inferred the form of the person's name from the more archaic place-name.[5]
Like several other Old English words that are found in place-names (prominentlywīc from Latinvīcus,port fromportūs andfunta fromfons), the second element ofCȳmenes ōra is an Old English word that was probably aloan-word from Latin. The Latin wordōra meant "border, brim, edge, margin, end, boundary", and was used amongst other things to denote coastline.[6] In Old English, this word had two quite different senses: "shore, foreshore" and (possibly deriving from the former meaning) "a hill shaped like an upturned canoe, featuring a long tract of flat land along the top, with a rounded shoulder at one or both ends".[7][8] It is possible that the stretch of low ground along the coast fromSouthampton toBognor was calledōra "the shore", and that district names including that word were used by the various coastal settlements, such asOwer near Southampton, Rowner nearGosport,Copnor inPortsmouth, Marker inWest Thorney,Itchenor, Chalder Farm, Keynor Farm, Honer inPagham, Bognor—and potentiallyCȳmenes ōra.[9]
.jpg)
The account of Ælle and his three sons landing at Cymenshore in 477 appears in the common stock of theAnglo-Saxon Chronicle, a body of material compiled and composed in the ninth century, some 400 years or more after the supposed events.[10][11]
The legendary foundation ofSaxon Sussex, by Ælle, is likely to have originated in an oral tradition before being recorded in theAnglo-Saxon Chronicle.[a][b][13][14] According to theChronicle,Cymenshore is named afterCymen, one of Ælle's sons;[15][16][17] some historians, however, have concluded that this figure was invented by scholars in theChronicle tradition from the place-name and that the actions attributed to him have no historical basis.[18]
From the collapse of Roman administration in Britain until the embedding of Christianity among the English during the seventh century, there is a dearth of surviving written material.[12] This lack of primary sources has made it difficult for historians to verify or disprove theChronicle's account of Ælle's invasion.[19] The preservation of Ælle's sons in Old English place names is unusual. The names of some founding figures in other origin legends in theChronicle seem to come fromBrittonic. It is likely that the foundation stories were known before the ninth century, but that annalists manipulated them to provide a common origin for ninth-century Wessex. These myths purport that the British were defeated and replaced by invading Anglo-Saxons arriving in small ships. These origin stories were largely believed right up to the nineteenth century.[20]
The location forCȳmenes ōra is traditionally identified withSelsey Bill, a tradition based on a place calledCumenshora in the boundary clause of an Anglo-Saxon charter. There is no archaeological or historical evidence for the settlement, of Anglo-Saxons, in the Selsey/Chichester area before the sixth century. Archaeological evidence does support the settlement of Saxons in East Sussex during the fifth century and Jutish settlement, also datable to the fifth century, West of Chichester, in neighbouring Hampshire around theMeon Valley.[21][22][23]
TheSelsey area, is traditionally the most popular candidate for Cymenshore. The tradition is based largely on two charters that refer to a place with a similar name in the boundary clause to that cited in theAnglo-Saxon Chronicle.[25][26][27] The charter that defined the land award toWilfrid at Selsey, in the 7th century, by KingCaedwalla is actually a 10th-century forgery[c][25] The relevant section of the forged charter, says (in Latin):
Ab introitu portus qui appellatur Anglice Wyderinges, post retractum mare in Cumeneshore, sic uersus occidentalem plagam iuxta mare usque Rumbruge, ...
— Kelly 1998, pp. 3–13
and the translation is:
from the entrance of the harbour which is called in English Wyderinges round where the sea falls back at Cumenshore then towards the western shore at Rumbruge ...
— Richardson 2000, p. 57
A further source is from theCharter of Byrhthelm (presumablyBrihthelm, bishop of Selsey), which is believed to be genuine and is to do with some land that had been seized from theSee of Selsey, it confirms that the boundary isfrom Wytherings Mouth[d] and Cymenshoran in the east to Hormouth in the west:
Þis sinde þat land gemeare to Selesie. Arest æt Wedering muðe, þa be sæ on Cymeneres horan, swa west be sæ oð Ðribeorgas, forð be stronde to cwuenstane 7 forð be strande on Horemuðen..
— Kelly 1998, pp. 85–91
These are the land-boundaries of Selsey, firstly at Withering,[d] thence by sea to the Owers, west by sea to Rumbridge; on by beach to queen's stone and on by beach to Hormouth..
— Barker 1949, p. 85
Rumbruge/Rumbridge (alias "thri beorg" – three barrows, now the Medmerry Bank) is believed to have been an islet and trading port off the southwest coast of the Manhood Peninsula, that has long since succumbed to the sea and Wytherings mouth was part of what is nowPagham Harbour.[30][31][e]
Just off the tip of Selsey Bill, to approximately 11 kilometres (6.8 miles) SSE, are groups of ledges and rocks known as the Owers.[f][33]
Some historians such as Hunter-Blair identify the Outer Owers and Middle Owers as the landing place for Ælle.[26] This is problematic, however, as according to SCOPAC the coastal erosion pattern means that this section of the Owers would not have been part of the shoreline for at least 5000 years.[g] The Outer Owers are approximately 11 kilometres (6.8 miles) off Selsey Bill and the erosion pattern suggests that the shore would have been 2–3 kilometres (1.2–1.9 mi) seaward 5000 years ago.[35][34]
To the south of Selsey Bill lies theMixon rocks.[35]
Selsey Bill was part of the Chichester Iron-Ageoppidum. The centre was superseded by the Romano-British Belgic tribal civitas at Chichester. Evidence for Selsey’s past importance is provided by the manyAtrebatean coins that have been discovered along the Selsey shoreline over the years. The quantity of coins and the discovery of waste gold found have suggested that there was a tribal mint at Selsey, the only other mint for this tribe was atSilchester.[37][38]
As the Mixon, south of Selsey Bill, would have been within the oldoppidum's territory, W.A.R. Richardson speculates that it could be the site ofCidade Celha (the Old City) and thereforeCȳmenes ōra.[39] The archaeological evidence demonstrates that the Mixon would have been the shoreline during the Roman occupation, with it not being breached by the sea until the 10th or 11th century.[i] As late as the 17th century, it was reported that the remains of the "ancient little city" could be seen at low tide.[36][41]
The Manor of Keynor is situated at the western end of Pagham Harbour.[42] Selsey-based historians Edward Heron-Allen and Francis Mee favour the Keynor area ofSidlesham for Cymenshore; they suggest that the name Keynor is derived fromCȳmenes ōra.[43][44] However, Margaret Gelling asserts thatKeyn-or actually means Cow-Shore in Old English.[45]
Pagham Harbour currently is a nature reserve, however in earlier times was a working harbour with three ports, one at the western end at Sidlesham Mill known as Wardur, one at the entrance to the harbour known as Charlton and one on the Pagham side known as the Port of Wythering (Wyderinges).[46][47]The port of Wardur was part of 'New Haven' a development in the Middle Ages.[42] The Port of Wythering was overrun by the sea in the 13th century and the whole harbour eventually silted up and ceased to be navigable, except for small craft.[29]
West Wittering has been cited by some early cartographers and historians as the site for Cymenshore. For example in hisBritanniaCamden said:
Cissa: who beeing of the Saxons line the second king of this pety kingdom, after his father Aella, accompanied with his brother Cimen and no small power of the Saxons, at this shore arrived and landed at Cimonshore, a place so called of the said Cimen, which now hath lost the name; but that it was neere unto Wittering, the charter of the donation which King Cedwalla made unto the Church of Selsey most evidently prooveth. Another fort likewise two miles from Cisiburie is to be seene, which they used to call Chenkburie.
— Camden 1701, p. 228
Also Morden's map of 1695 showsCimenshore being adjacent to the Witterings.
However, other historians have posited that siting Cymenshore off West Wittering as mistaken and was probably due to a mistranslation of the charter.[48] The charter itself, in the original early English describes part of the boundary of the land as.. Wedering muðe.. (Wedering mouth).[49]Wedering was the port of Withering a village, now lost, at the entrance to what is now Pagham Harbour. It is possible that earlier historians had translatedWedering incorrectly, as Wittering.[48][50]
Welch believes that the location forCymenshore is more likely to be in the Ouse-Cuckmere area of East Sussex, his reasoning is that there is no archaeological evidence to support a landing at Selsey.[51] However Richardson states that the place names with the Old Englishora element ofCymensora are very common along the Hampshire and West Sussex coastline but not around the Ouse-Cuckmere area.[52] There is also a suggestion that the archaeology off the Selsey coast has just not been fully realised yet.[j]
Shoreham has also been cited as a possible location, for example in 1906Hilaire Belloc in hisHills and the Sea when discussing StWilfrid he said:
But those memories were getting worse and worse, for it was nearly two hundred years since the ships of Ælle had sailed into Shoreham, which showed him to be a man of immense determination, for it is a most difficult harbour, and there were then no piers and lights – it was nearly two hundred years, and there was only the least little glimmering twilight left of the old day.
— Belloc 1996, pp. 117–118
Towards the end of the Roman occupation of England, raids on the east coast became more intense and the expedient adopted by Romano-British leaders was to enlist the help of mercenaries to whom they ceded territory. It is thought that mercenaries may have started arriving in Sussex as early as the fifth century.[12]Richard Coates has suggested that the Germanic invaders would previously have traded in the area and probably would have been familiar with the term and eventually use it by preference.[22]
J. E. A. Jolliffe compared agricultural and farming practices across fifth-century Sussex to that of fifth-century Kent. He suggested that the Kentish system underlay the fifth-century farming practices of Sussex. He hypothesised that Sussex was probably settled by Jutes before the arrival of the Saxons, with Jutish territory stretching from Kent to the New Forest.[55]
TheAnglo Saxon Chronicle claims that Ælle and his forces landed at Cymenshore and then travelled east and arrived at Beachy Head in 485, where they apparently broke through an agreed river border, theMercreadesburne.[56] The north Solent coast had been a trading area since Roman times. Theold Roman roads from Sidlesham[k] to Chichester and from Chichester to Winchester would have provided access to the Jutish settlements in Hampshire.[l] It is therefore more likely that the Germanic people arriving in the fifth century would have been directed to the north of theōra, and into Southampton Water. From there into the mouth of the Meon valley and would have been allowed to settle near the existing Romano-British people.[59][60]
The archaeological evidence suggests that the main area of Anglo-Saxon settlement during the fifth century can be identified by the distribution of cemeteries of that period.[m] Apart fromHighdown, near Worthing and Apple Down, 11 kilometres northwest of Chichester, they are between the lowerOuse andCuckmere rivers in East Sussex.[12] This area was believed to have been for the treaty settlement of Anglo-Saxon mercenaries,[21][n] and although some historians have suggested that Joliffe's findings 'strained the evidence' somewhat, analysis of grave goods have also provided evidence of Jutish settlement between southern Hampshire and Chichester, in the early to mid-fifth century. These connections had ceased by the end of that century.[62][23]