|
 n the far
distant primeval past human beings were extremely primitive. They moved
around the world in small groups, hunting for food and defending
themselves against their enemies. They could barely communicate with
each other, and there was no question of names for anyone or anything.
Gradually, after the passage of many thousands of years, mankind became
more intelligent and the people could converse in a simple manner. They
learned how to make fire, and they produced rough tools to help them in
their daily work. Civilisation began when men found they could maintain
a constant supply of food by keeping farm animals and by growing their
own cereals. Nomadic family groups came together to form small
settlements, followed by larger townships, leading to cities, and
finally to kingdoms and empires.
An Egyptian empire certainly existed five thousand years ago, and there
were other groups in various stages of development all across the
occupied world. Over the years, large movements of population took
place, resulting in substantial increase in violence when separate
racial groups met one another. The human brain had developed very
considerably, and a full scale vocabulary came into use. The art of
drawing and counting was being mastered and early forms of writing were
invented, so that information could be passed on from one generation to
the next. The leaders in each section were given names or titles, and so
were the gods and spirits.
Soon there were many empires that flourished and declined, including the
Persians, the Syrians, and various biblical groups. From their writings
and other evidence it is clear that personal names were then in common
use, especially among the upper classes. A large number of these names
have continued, right up to the present time. Examples are Christopher
and Peter from the Greeks, Claud (Claudius) and Paul (Paulus) from the
Romans, and many names with biblical connections such as David, James,
John, Matthew and Samuel.
Most of Europe was occupied by warrior tribes, that were tough, brave
and extremely numerous. These Celtic races spread westwards from the
Danube area about the 5th century B.C. and eventually reached Britain,
where they mingled with the ancient people already there, people who had
been capable of building the monument of Stonehenge in about 1500 B.C.
Together they constructed defensive hill-top settlements, such as the
Trundle (north of Chichester). Later, when iron tools became available,
the people in Southern England were able to clear the more wooded areas
at lower levels and along river banks. Farming became steadily more
important and efficient.
At about the same time as the Romans first came to Britain, a Belgic
tribe from Gaul (France), called the Atrebates, landed in the Isle of
White area, and then spread eastwards. The Romans meanwhile conquered
the whole country, except for the Celtic strongholds of Cornwall, Wales
and Scotland. As a result the languages of those districts still have
certain original features, and there are several personal names from the
Celtic that are well-known in Scottish history, such as Donald and
Duncan.
In Sussex the local Belgic leader was called Cogidubnus, who became an
ally of the Romans, with the result that there was little friction
between the two peoples. It is said that he lived like a king at the
magnificent Roman palace, the ruins of which can still be seen at
Fishbourne, near Chichester. No doubt he was responsible for the
original foundation of the town of Chichester which was built astride
the east-west line of communication along the coastal plain. The Romans
named it Noviomagus (New Market), and it has always been an important
place.
The Romans occupied Britain for some four hundred years, with alternate
periods of trouble and good-fortune, but in Sussex the situation was
comparatively stable. The local people were engaged on extensive farming
activity and there was a marked growth in trade and employment including
the building of Stane Street, the Roman road that ran straight from
Chichester to London, via Bignor and Pulborough. The Roman towns and
leaders all had their own Latin names, but with very few exceptions none
of them survived after the evacuation in the early part of the 5th
century A.D. The remaining population simply carried on with their own
original language, although Latin did continue in use on official
documents and in religion for very many centuries.
The Roman villas were abandoned, the towns were deserted and the roads
started to decay. The natives reverted to their old ways, with the
result that British civilisation came to a standstill and the Dark Ages
had begun.
From 400 A.D. onwards for several centuries there is very little
definite information about events in Britain, yet it was during this
period that the English nation and language was born. In an attempt to
unravel the mysteries of the age, many scholars have examined all the
available evidence and have been able to produce a probable history of
the period. However, this is general in character, and relies very much
upon various authorities who were writing at a much later date.
The first authority was a British ecclesiastic named Gildas who in about
550 A.D. wrote a religious document to demonstrate the evils of the day.
In it he included some items of information about earlier historical
events, but while his remarks may possibly be true, they do not inspire
much factual confidence.
In 674 A.D. a Monastery was founded at Wearmouth in northern England,
followed by a second one eight years later at Jarrow. One of the monks
who was educated at Wearmouth was Bede (Beada), and in 691 he took
Deacon's orders at Jarrow. He was the most learned man of his day and
while living in studious seclusion he wrote many hymns, and about the
lives of Saints. His most famous work was an ecclesiastical history of
England, which was later translated into Anglo-Saxon by King Alfred. In
general, the Venerable Bede repeated the comments of Gildas but added
details regarding the various invading tribes of Angles and Saxons.
Nennius was a Welsh scholar of the 9th century, and he produced a
composite collection of earlier works, including the ancient Britons and
the Romans. His effort seems rather fictional in style, and he mentions
King Arthur as a leader of the local natives against the Saxon invaders.
He ascribes to Arthur a victory at Mons Badonicus around the year 500
A.D., after which there was comparative peace for forty to fifty years.
The site of 'Mount Baden' is unknown, but it might be Badbury Rings in
Dorset.
Finally there are several versions of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, the
earliest of which was completed between 895 and 900 A.D., which
incorporates most of the previous material. They are written in diary
form, with yearly dates assigned to the various events, but there are
not many early entries and the dates may not be reliable. Nevertheless,
the Chronicle is a most important document, and is the main basis of
Anglo-Saxon history right up to the Norman Conquest.
In southern England, there were repeated raids and migrations by Saxons
from North Germany. These were men of aggressive and adventurous natures
who had moved westward across Europe until they reached the North Sea
around the mouths of the Rivers Elbe and Weser. They were courageous and
loyal, but they were pagans and had deities named Tiw, Woden, Thor and
Frig (words which still survive as days of the week).
Armed with spears and wooden shields, they came ashore in small groups,
and fought their way into the district until small settlements were
secured, usually near rivers and creeks. Over the centuries, the
remaining Celtic natives were driven into the mountainous regions of
Wales and Scotland, or else they fell in battle. There is no evidence
that they intermingled with the Saxons, who brought their own families
with them.
The first Anglo-Saxon leaders to be mentioned in old records were the
brothers Hengist and Horsa who landed near the mouth of the Thames in
449 A.D., and whose family founded the Kingdom of Kent. Another
important warrior was named Aelle (sometimes spelt Aella) who landed
near Selsey in 477 A.D. with his three sons.
Aelle succeeded in taking over the whole of the south coast area, and
much more besides. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle refers to Aelle as being
King of Sussex (South Saxons), but his influence and power covered a
much wider area and he was the first leader to be described by the title
of Bretwalda or 'Ruler of all Britain'. This title should not be taken
too literally, and the exact extent of Aelle's authority is unknown.
Nevertheless, it is significant that he is mentioned as the first in a
list of Bretwaldas, the last being the great King Egbert, of Wessex, who
did indeed rule over the whole of England in the 9th century.
In the year 495 A.D., a prince named Cerdic landed in the Southampton
area, and since by then the Aelle family must have been in a powerful
position it is likely that the Cerdic family was related to them or at
least allied with them. In any event Cerdic went on to found a dynasty
which produced the long line of Anglo-Saxon kings, who ruled until the
Norman Conquest some five hundred years later.
The Saxons brought their own language with them. It was Teutonic in
origin and had many inflections, but it soon became established as the
only language for the whole of England, although there were several
different dialects. Modern English is directly descended from it, but
over the years it was subject to several outside influences, arising
especially from the Scandinavian and Norman-French invasions.
The Anglo-Saxon, or Old English alphabet had a character for 'ae' which
was in frequent use, but subsequently it became either an 'a' or an 'e'.
The alphabet also had a separate character to represent the sound 'th'
which was not retained in later English. In appearance it was rather
like a letter 'y' and sometimes it changed to this (thus Ye becomes
The). The old letter 'c' could be sounded as a 'k', so for example Cyng
becomes King. The letter 'g' was often sounded rather as the modern 'y',
so Weg becomes Way (road), Stigel becomes Stile (step), Gea becomes Yea
(Yes), and Geard becomes Yard (enclosure).
About two-thirds of all the place-names in England seem to have
Anglo-Saxon origins of from the 5th to 10th centuries, but some are
comparatively modern names which were given a Saxon appearance.
Naturally, the oldest names occur where the Saxon tribes first
established themselves, especially in Sussex and the eastern counties.
Almost always they consist of two parts of which the first element is
descriptive, or the name of a person, or a family. The second element is
usually one of several Saxon words, which must now be considered
separately.
The ending '-ham' is from the earliest Saxon periods, and this word
developed later into the English 'home'. Thus words such as Longham, or
Westham, explain themselves. 'Ham' endings are common in South and East
England - Fareham, Horsham, Chatham, Faversham.
A Saxon word belonging to a rather later period is 'tun' or 'ton', and
this means an enclosure. It later became the English word 'town', but
its original meaning was nothing as large or grand as the present word
indicates. To some extent the ending '-ton' took over from '-ham', and
it does occur in areas where '-ham' is rare , often towards the north
and west - Tiverton, Taunton, Preston, Bolton.
Another Anglo-Saxon ending in common use is Wyrth (a farm) which appears
in place names such as '-worth'. Others are Burg of Burh (a fortified
place) which became '-bury' or '-borough', and Hyrst (a copse) which
became '-hurst', and Wic (a farm-stead) which became '-wick' or '-wich'.
A special explanation is required for those common place names which end
in '-chester' or '-cester'. This ending was originally derived from the
latin Castra (a camp), but the word had been taken over by the Saxons
even before they invaded England. Chichester for example, was believed
to have been called Cissa-cester, the town being named after the man who
conquered it (Cissa, the son of King Aelle of Sussex).
 One
Anglo-Saxon ending of great importance has not been mentioned so far. It
is '-ing', and it occurs at the end of a great many words in both old,
and in current use. It can be used in several different ways, but in
general it means to be 'connected with, or following on from'. It was
very important in a patronymic sense - that is, the use of the suffix 'ing'
indicated that it had been derived from the name of a father, or
ancestor, or person of a higher authority. Thus the Anglo-Saxon 'cyning'
was the son of a king, and 'aetheling' was the descendent of a noble.
The followers of King Aelle would have been called 'Aelle-ings'.
Place names ending in 'ing' are very common in the South and East, and
Sussex in particular. Hastings, for example, indicates that it was the
place where the tribe of Haesta lived. Similarly, Reading comes from
Reada-ing and Angmering from Angenmaer-ing. There is also Cocking (Cocca),
Ferring (Ferra), Iping (Ipa), Didling (Dyddel), and many more.
It is very striking that 'ing' place names are most prevalent in West
Sussex, where Aelle lived in 477 A.D. and from where he built up his
kingdom. It is not possible to list all the towns and villages
concerned, but a few examples will be of interest, and all of them were
mentioned years later in the Domesday Book:- Wortling, Tarring, Harting,
Tillington, Stedham, Pagham, Petworth and Pulborough. In addition the
following villages are among those where the existing church has remains
of Saxon work, although this would belong to the later Saxon era, after
the pagan invaders had been converted to Christianity:- Cocking,
Sompting, Woolbeding, Singleton, Stoughton, and Burpham.
Personal names of Anglo-Saxon times can now be considered, and they,
too, often consisted of two elements. Each separate part had a meaning
of its own, but the combined word did not necessarily make a phrase of
any consequence. Many experts have devoted a great deal of time to a
study of these matters, and the following are possible explanations put
forward for some of the more common Anglo-Saxon names.
'Ead' is an old word for Rich, or Happy (Rich in mind). It combines with
other words to give Edwin (Happy friend), also Edith, Edmund, Edward and
Edgar, and there were two Anglo-Saxon kings named Edred and Edwig (Edwy).
'Beorht' is a word meaning Bright and it combines with other words to
produce names such as Egbert (the first great King of England) and the
better known Albert, Herbert, Gilbert, Robert and Bertram.
It is clear that words with a pleasant or helpful meaning were popular
among the Anglo-Saxons for use in names, and a good example is 'Win',
meaning Friend. This has produced such names as Baldwin, Edwin, Godwin,
Winston and Winifred.
'Aelf' was Anglo-Saxon for Elf, and in combination with 'Ree' (meaning
Counsel) it gave the name Alfred, and the first famous King Alfred the
Great. Later, the name lapsed completely, and was not revived until the
18th century.
Finally in this brief survey, the very important Anglo-Saxon word 'Aethel'
must be mentioned. It appears to have six letters, but it should be
remembered that 'ae' was a single character originally, and so was 'th'.
Names beginning with Athel and Ethel are obviously derived from it. 'Th'
has sometimes been changed into a 'y' and so prefixes such as Ayel, Ayl
and Ail are descended from the original 'aethel'.
'Aethel' means Noble, in the sense of being noble in character, or noble
in birth, and in consequence it was a word much favoured for the names
of royalty or other persons of high rank. In a slightly different sense,
it may have come to have had a meaning somewhat similar to the modern
'Prince'.
The brothers of King Alfred the Great had been Kings of England in their
turn, and their names were Ethelbald, Ethelbert and Ethelred. Their
father was called Ethelwulf. There was also a later king names Athelstan.
Names of this type appear on many ancient Anglo-Saxon charters and other
documents.
So far as modern names are concerned, great care is necessary in their
interpretation, and even though a word may appear to have the 'aethel'
connection, not all of them will have such an origin. For example
Albert, Alice and Ethel are all considered to be 'noble', but not Aileen
or Eileen (a form of Helen) nor Alan (of early Breton origin).
It is now convenient to consider the development of English surnames,
and the name 'Ayling' in particular. The Normans, during the 11th
century, introduced many family names into England, but for a long while
these were confined to the upper classes. The common folk did not have
family names, but even so the ancient clan and tribe names persisted
from very early times.
For a long while there was little need for surnames, because it was
unlikely that the John who lived in one village would be confused with
another John who lived in the neighbouring village. Contact between the
two communities did not often occur, and in any event the two men were
probably of different ages and occupations. As the centuries moved by
however, the population increased, and it became more difficult to
distinguish one from another, especially when lists were prepared for
purposes of taxation and the like.
Gradually, therefore, individual families began to assume a surname,
partly as a means of identification or description, but also with a
feeling of pride in their ancient origins.
Some people decided on simple descriptive names, such as Butcher, Baker,
Farmer, Longfellow, Whitehead, Castle, Greenfield and many more obvious
derivations. Others took over their father's name, such as Johnson, or
Robertson, and others adopted their original clan or tribal names. Names
ending in 'ing' were mostly in the latter class, as in the case of the
Aylings.
The name 'Ayling' is very rare, and in the first place it is necessary
to make quite clear that it has no connection with the words 'ailing' or
'ailment'. The verb, to ail (meaning to feel unwell) is an old word with
an Anglo-Saxon origin, but it has an independent derivation, and has no
link whatever with any surname.
The fact that 'Ayling' has the ending of 'ing' means that it is
patronymic in form, and represents the descendants of some ancient
ancestor of Saxon times. It only remains, therefore, to decide the
origin and meaning of the first part of the name, the 'Ayl-'. There are
two possibilities (both somewhat similar), both quite exciting and
romantic, in some degree.
 The
first alternative refers back to King Aelle of Sussex, the Saxon warrior
who landed near Selsey in 477 A.D. and who became the 'Ruler of all
Britain'. His son, Cissa, had Chichester (Cissa-cester) named after him,
and another son, Wlencing is said to have had Lancing (near Worthing)
named after him. Also it seems certain that many of his followers were
commemorated in a similar manner by villages and townships throughout
West Sussex. King Aelle himself is thought to have been associated with
Hayling Island, and this deserves consideration in more detail.
In olden times the island was bigger than it is today, but over the
centuries large sections were washed away by the sea, especially along
the southern shore. The part now known as Eastoke must have been far
more extensive fifteen hundred years ago. There were Roman buildings on
both sides of the narrow channel which separated the island from the
mainland, and in the centre of the island was a fortified place, or
stronghold, now known as Tourner Bury. This was possibly of Roman
construction, but may be even older.
The name 'Hayling' has the '-ing' ending, and is clearly of Saxon
origin. The experts in such matters state that it has been derived from
Haegling, or the place where followers or tribe of Haegel lived, and the
island was referred to as Haeglinga in a document which has survived
from 905 A.D. Since 'ae' is one character, and since 'g' is pronounced
as a 'y', it is obvious that Haegel (or Hayel) could be a later version
of Ayel or Aelle.
Following his landing on or near the Selsey peninsula, Aelle eventually
ruled over the whole of Sussex. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle states that in
491 A.D. he and his son Cissa 'besieged Andredcester (the Roman fort of
Anderida, Pevensey) and slew all the inhabitants; there was not even one
Briton left there'. But before these conquests, it is certain Aelle and
his sea-faring tribe of Aelle-ings would have swarmed all over the
sheltered waterways of Chichester harbour, and up the inlets leading to
Emsworth, Bosham, and to Fishbourne. No doubt he would have come to the
island, where he would have discovered the old overgrown fortress of
earlier times. He might very well have made his headquarters at this
stronghold which he could easily defend, and here he might have settled
his tribe, while he gathered his strength and his resources before
setting out on his warlike campaigns.
Obviously, there is no proof of any of these suggestions, but they are
reasonable deductions, and they are at least as valid as all the other
fragments of history assigned to the 5th century A.D. King Aelle of
Hayling Island may be hidden in the shadows of the past, but at least he
is a romantic figure to all those who may claim to be descended from
him.
It is quite probable, and by no means a flight of fancy, to imagine that
the tribal name of Aelle-ing continued to be known and used in the West
Sussex area for many, many centuries, and that when people in that area
needed a surname for themselves, some of them chose to use the name of
their ancient forbears. Indeed, it may have been an automatic and
natural transmission, rather than a deliberate selection of a name.
Research has shown that the ancestors of present day Aylings invariably
come from the border area of Sussex and Hampshire, from the 16th to the
18th centuries, and even at the latter end of the 20th century most
Aylings are still living in that district. Surely, it is not a mere
coincidence that it is the same district as that over which the mighty
King Aelle held sway fifteen hundred years ago!
The second alternative origin of 'Ayling' is the one favoured by several
authorities, who claim that the prefix 'Ayl-' is derived from the
Anglo-Saxon 'Aethel', which has been referred to several times
previously. It is said that a whole group of surnames has descended from
this one word, in addition to the various Christian names which have
already been mentioned. It is easy to understand that names beginning
with athel or Ethel may have this origin, but it would also include such
present names as Aylmer (Noble/Famous), and Aylward (Noble/Guard), and
Aylwin (Noble/Friend).
The name Ayling is in this group, but is slightly different because the
second element 'ing' is not a simple word in it;s own right, but is a
suffix indicating a follower or descendent. Thus 'Ayling' means the son
of a noble person, or the descendent of someone of noble birth, and it
could apply to a whole family or clan and not merely to a single
relation. This derivation of Ayling from 'Aethel-ing' gives rise to some
important comments, as the term Atheling did not appear in Anglo-Saxon
records until a fairly late date, and then it was mostly used to denote
the rightful heir to the royal throne of England.
The Saxon King, Ethelred (The Unready) ruled over England from 978 A.D.
onwards, but his power was severely curtailed by repeated raids and
invasions from Denmark. From his first marriage he had several sons,
including Edmund (Ironside). His second marriage was in 1002 to Emma,
who was a sister of the Duke of Normandy (the grandfather of William the
Conqueror). The eldest son of this second marriage was Edward (the
Confessor), but he spent the first part of his life in Normandy.
When King Ethelred died on 23rd April 1016, he was succeeded by Edmund,
but he too died soon afterwards, on 30th November, 1016, and the throne
of England was passed into the hands of the Danes in the person of King
Canute and his sons. Edmund had only one surviving brother, (from
Ethelred's first marriage) but he was driven out by Canute, and later
killed. No doubt the same fate awaited Edmund's young son (the
Atheling), but he was helped to escape to Hungary, where he lived in
exile.
When the Danish era came to an end in 1042, Edward the Confessor (from
Ethelred's second marriage) came to England from Normandy, and took over
the Crown, thus restoring the Anglo-Saxon line of kings (even though he
had a Norman mother). Edward did not have any children, nor any
surviving male relatives, so when he died in January 1066, the problem
of succession was difficult. However, the throne was taken over by
Harold, who was the powerful Earl of Wessex, and the brother of Edward's
wife.
Meanwhile in Hungary, the exiled Atheling himself had children - a son
Edgar, and a daughter Margaret, and these two were the only true
descendants of the ancient Anglo-Saxon line. Edgar was always known as
Edgar Atheling, but in January 1066 he was considered too young and
inexperienced (he was only aged 15 or 16) to occupy the throne of
England, so King Harold was accepted in his place.
After King Harold and his brothers were killed at the Battle of
Hastings, the crown was then officially offered to Edgar Atheling in
order to continue the struggle against William the Conqueror, but Edgar
wisely swore loyalty to William, and retired from any full scale
conflict. Nevertheless, he did combine from time to time with those
forces which continued in opposition to William. This was particularly
so, during the years from 1068 to 1074, when he was mostly living in
Scotland at the Court of King Malcolm. However, peace was eventually
established between the two men, and thereafter Edgar Atheling was no
trouble or threat to the Norman Kings of England. Indeed, he was
honourably treated, as befitted the last direct heir of Anglo-Saxon
royalty.
Edgar Atheling did remain at the scene of all important events, but as a
'noble prince' rather than as an active politician. In this he was wiser
than many other more militant figures among the Anglo-Saxons. At least
he assured himself a long and interesting life, and he was well over 75
years of age before he died.
It is quite likely that Edgar's family and descendants were all known as
Athelings, and although there is no documentary evidence, they could
well have been the founders of the Ayling clan which thrived in the West
Sussex area from the 15th century onwards. There was an Edward Atheling
recorded as being in Surrey in 1176, but otherwise no early records of
the name have yet been traced.
Edgar Atheling's sister married King Malcolm of Scotland, and she was a
well-loved and respected Queen. Later she became Saint Margaret, and
three of her children became Kings of Scotland during Edgar's lifetime.
Her daughter Matilda married King Henry I of England and they founded
the royal line which has continued through to the present day.
If indeed Edgar Atheling and his sister were among the early ancestors
of the Ayling's then their present-day descendants can rightly claim
that it was their forbears who provided the only important hereditary
link between the ancient Anglo-Saxon kings and the Norman dynasty which
followed. The fact that this has led on to the royal family of the 20th
century may seem rather surprising to a present day Ayling, but at least
it is in accordance with the 'noble' traditions attached to their family
name.
|
