There is reason to believe that the famed three boat loads of Saxon adventurers who arrived off the coast of Kent in 446 or 449 were either exiles, as Nennius recorded, or ex-Roman foederati in search of employment.

Aetius, the Roman consul during those years could give nothing to the British delegates but advice as Rome was in no position to mount a major military expedition to Britain. As explained earlier, Aetius had his hands full with Visigoths, Huns and Ostrogoths as well as Franks and Vandals desiring either autonomy or territory at Rome's expense.

One of Aetius' recommendations probably had to do with encouraging the Britons to employ some of Rome's frontier troops who, as experienced fighters, would at least provide a trained force to break the back of the Pict raiding parties. Aetius certainly knew the value of the German fighters, having utilized them in his own army in the 451 campaign. The Britons, realizing no help would be forthcoming, perhaps took Aetius' advice or simply returned home. In any event, not too long afterwards, a contingent of Saxons arrived in Britain.

It was certainly not an unusual event, having ship loads of Saxons, Frisians and Angles setting out in search of new homes. To handle surplus numbers of able-bodied young men, it became common practice to send these bands of warriors out to make their own way and find new lands to inhabit.

Whether the followers of the two Saxon leaders Hengist and Horsa were exiles or hired fighters, the British king Vortigern welcomed their arrival, offering them food, land and booty in return for their military service.

This very early example of the use of mercenary troops is much different from the established Roman foederati system where tribes were brought into the Empire wholesale, granted certain rights as well as territories, and were then considered members of the Roman community. In Britain there was no 'Empire', no rights and certainly no sense of mutual benefit or community to be shared.

The Saxon warriors were not readily accepted by the Britons. Gildas abhorred the idea that "Those wild Saxons, of accursed name, hated by God and men, should be admitted into the island ... in order to repel the northern nations". Apparently, former enemies were not readily accepted as friends outside the constricting order of the Roman Empire in the 5th century.

The Saxons made an immediate impact in respect to the balance of power in Britain. Henry of Huntingdon, writing in the late 12th century, provides an example of what occurred when the Saxons met the Picts and Scots in open battle:

The Northerns fought with darts and spears, while the Saxons plied lustily their battleaxes and longswords, the Picts were unable to withstand the weight of their onset, and saved themselves by flight.

How could three ship loads of Saxon warriors make any sort of impact upon the power struggles in Britain? Obviously many more troops arrived than our early sources indicate. Grave finds throughout Kent (the Saxon Shore area of Roman Britain) show a great variance, so much so that there is every reason to believe that large numbers of quite diverse groups of warriors suddenly entered Britain in large numbers within a very short period of time. With the withdrawal of the Roman legions, command of the English Channel passed to the German coastal tribes and they made the most of the uncontested channel crossings.

Vortigen's Miscue

Vortigern, after employing the initial waves of Saxons against the Picts, became worried as more Germans arrived, demanding more land and pay from the Britons. The British leader ordered Hengist and Horsa to leave, but the wily Germans offered instead to bring more troops over to Britain so that victory over the Picts would be assured and for some reason, Vortigern agreed.

Bede noted that Hengist also sent word back to Germany that the Britons were cowards and that it would be an easy matter to take what lands they wished. He could have added that their king was a fool.

Nennius points out that Vortigern had married Hengist's daughter, allowing the Saxon leader to become his advisor who told him "Never ignore my advice". His advice brought forty more boat loads of Germans over who were granted lands around Hadrian's Wall.

Vortigern later fell victim to rumors that he had slept with his daughter and therefore, according to Nennius, "(was) ... Condemned by St. Germanus and the whole council of the British". This example of the Saxon chieftain's use of guile, trickery, lies and deceit was alien to the 'honorable' Britons, who took men at their word. At this point in time, around 455 according to the A.S.C_ the Saxons rose up against their British 'employers'. One can not help but notice the difference between the cunning, intelligent and manipulative German leaders and the ineffectual, manipulated British King.

As Henry of Huntingdon explained it, "The fire kindled by the hands of the pagans executed the just judgment of God for the sins of the people", God apparently punished the transgressions of the Christian Britons by visiting upon them a plague of Saxons. This view is echoed throughout the works of Nennius and Gildas.

Hengist and Horsa made their move, attacking the Britons under the command of "King Vortigern". According to Nennius, "Both priests and people, whilst swords gleamed on every side and flames crackled, were together mown down to the ground". Bede wrote that the errant Britons were only receiving their just reward, as "The fire once kindled in the hands of the pagans took God's revenge on the wickedness of the people". In the short period of a year, the Saxons reportedly overran much of Britain, the "perishing island".

Not All Impotent

The Romano-Britons were not all so impotent in the face of the invasion, however. The A-S.C. gives little evidence of any British military successes, but this is not surprising, considering the source.

Gildas, as close a contemporary as we have to the battles of the period, noted that the Britons fought a major battle and won it as "Their trust was not in man but in God". This elusive element of British unity in their Christian religion would provide them with the necessary morale to face the coming decades of continuous warfare. The Crusades would find a similar motif, where outnumbered, dwindling numbers of warriors would persevere over extreme odds, both physical and emotional.

Throughout the texts written about this volatile period of British history, the name Ambrosius Aurelianus appears. Bede wrote that Ambrosius, a captain of the Britons, had been born of Roman parents. Nennius, whose text at this point deviates a bit and becomes sprinkled with references to magic. dragons and prophecies (a carryover from the Christian amalgamation of pagan symbolism), noted that Ambrosius was the son of a Consul of Rome, and outwitted the .. wizards" of Vortigern to take over command of Britain's defense.

Nennius describes him as "A man of unassuming character, who, alone of the Roman race chanced to survive in the shock of such a storm".

There appeared to be a definite need at this time to have some stabilizing, civilizing influence at hand to thwart the pagan invaders. Ambrosius fit the part perfectly. As the probable Dux Britanniarum, Ambrosius likely gathered his forces from the north of Britain and prepared to head south to battle the threatening Saxon invaders.

Before Ambrosius had a chance to move south, the Saxons decimated Vortigern's command, and forced their way into the interior of Kent, looting, burning and killing before withdrawing to their coastal enclaves.

Battle of Aeillestreu

Nennius records that at the battle of Aeillestreu, or Episford, fought in the later part of 455, Ambrosius led the Britons, including Vortigern's sons Vortimer and Catiger against Hengist's and Horsa's Saxon armies. From the chronicles of Henry of Huntingdon we have a description of Ambrosius' impressive generalship.

The Saxons under Horsa impetuously charged Catigar's levy militia, smashing into them with enough force to break them, the deadly longswords, throwing spears and axes of the Germans felling many of the fleeing Britons, Catiger falling in the initial contact. Normally, as evidenced throughout history, if an undisciplined body of troops sees its neighbors suddenly in flight with a heated enemy in pursuit, it would join in the general rout.

In this case, however, Ambrosius had given command of the center, most assuredly consisting of veterans, comitatus and ex- foederati, to Vortimer. These troops not only did not join the rout, they turned and charged into the ranks of the pursuing Saxons, killing Horsa and routing his disheartened troops in turn.

Hengist, fighting for his life against Ambrosius, "...with the van", could not hold out against the superior numbers of the Britons and "Though he made a long resistance and caused great loss to the Britons", he turned to flee from the battle in order to escape the fate of his brother.

Far different from the ancient Roman tradition of crediting a victory to the skill and bravery of the commanding general, Ambrosius, according to Bede, "Through God's assistance ... (the Britons) achieved the victory."

This concept of the victor being granted success through God's direct or indirect intervention makes an early appearance in Britain as the psychological need to explain the horrors of the pagan conquest became manifested in looking toward God for answers and help.

Ambrosius actually showed extreme intelligence and tactical skill in placing his most trusted, reliable troops in the center, thus negating the domino affect of a rout by either of his weaker divisions. This tactical deployment meant the difference in this particular battle between victory or defeat.

Henry of Huntingdon reported three more battles that same year as the German invaders sought to hold onto their conquests, massacring the populace in the meantime to ensure no armed resistance would erupt from within their occupied borders. Nennius recorded that at one of the other three battles "By the Inscribed Stone on the shore of the Gallic Sea ... the barbarians were beaten (and) fled to their keels and were drowned as they clambered aboard them like women".

The Germans responded to these setbacks by sending word back to the continent that more men were needed. They readily arrived. The Britons, on the other hand, could not make up their losses of veteran fighters--attrition being a bitter enemy.

Vortimer died the next year in 456, after instructing his followers to attack the Germans in their ports and to drive them into the sea, a very wise strategy, but one which the Britons failed to accomplish. Ambrosius had gone back to the north to fight, having left the command in the south to Vortimer. Upon the loyal southern general*s death, the southern command once again passed to the infamous Vortigern who still remained friendly to Hengist and the Saxons through marriage.

Nennius notes that during this period the Germans "...occupied Britain not because of their strength, but because it was the will of God. The Lord did what he would, for He rules and governs all the nations". Much as the later Moslems would be viewed as God's retribution toward Christian Europe's transgressing ways, the Germans were seen more and more in this way by the chroniclers of the 5th century. Yet, the non-ecclesiastes Britons' trust and belief in their Christian redemption led them to allow Vortigern to once again assume active military command.

After all, they could not believe God would forsake them and allow the pagans final victory. There is simply no other answer as to why Vortigern could have resumed his command after his dismal showing in the past.

Tide of War

The tide of war quickly changed in 456, with the departure of Ambrosius back to the north. Hengist and his son Aesc fought a pitched battle against the poorly trained and ineptly led southern British levies, slaughtering them with better weapons and superior numbers, killing 4,000 and routing the rest who fled to London where, the A-S.C notes, "They never again appeared in arms in Kent".

Sometime within the next nine years, the Saxons offered to talk peace with the southern Britons, whose chiefs trustfully gathered to discuss terms with their enemies. The German chieftains, ever looking for any means available to win a victory, massacred the unarmed Britons, sparing only Vortigern who ransomed himself by granting the Saxons the territories of Essex, Sussex and Middlesex.

For this final act of cowardice, Nennius recorded that Vortigern "Died without honor", perhaps the worst fate a Romano-Briton could have.

Throughout the next several decades, warfare was constant, victory sometimes going to the Britons, sometimes to the Germans.

The A-S.C. notes only the German victories: at Wippedsfleet in 465, where twelve British chieftains fell; another pitched battle in 473 where the Germans "...captured countless spoils and the Britons fled from the English as from fire"; in 477 when Aelle and his sons landed, killing many Britons and chasing others into the huge forests; in 485 on the banks of the Meacredesburna; and in 491 near Pevensey, where the siege of Andredesceaster was successfully concluded and the Saxons "...killed all who were inside, and there was not a single Briton left alive". To the ecclesiastes, it seemed that God was exacting a terrible price for the transgressions of the Britons.

During this period, Ambrosius became the most powerful 'King' in Britain. With the death of the hereditary ruler Vortigern and his sons, there was no one to oppose the rule of the Dux except the thousands of invaders. By this time, Ambrosius had more or less permanently moved to the south. As Gildas noted, he fought a defensive war to hold back the Germans along the lines of the Fosse Way in central Britain.

He organized enough strength by 486 to attack Aella and fight him to a bloody standstill, forcing the German to send for more keels of reinforcements. In 488 Hengist died, but another invader sailed to Kent to succeed him. The pressure on the Britons never let up.

Aella's reinforcements arrived in 490 and his siege of Andredesceaster (noted in the A-S.C.) found Ambrosius using Roman light auxiliary tactics to harass the heavier, slower Germans into breaking off the siege and pursuing them,' but this tactic ultimately failed. It was not for want of trying, however.

The ever resourceful Ambrosius obviously utilized his few trained troops to the maximum advantage; again, the mark of a superior and able military leader.

The Saxons, solidifying their hold on Kent and the south- eastern coastal regions, repulsed Ambrosius' attempts to dislodge them by use of much larger numbers of warriors. Henry of Huntingdon described a battle in 495 where "The Saxons stood firm in order of battle before their ships, repelling the attacks of the islanders without pursuing them, for they never quitted their ranks".

This Germanic resoluteness and steadfast loyalty to their comrades and commanders would be retained throughout the next nine hundred years. it certainly served them well in this instance as tactically, any other option would have resulted in destruction. The 'barbarians' also were often competently led and in this instance, exercised a great degree of control.

Ambrosius, his strength eroded by the constant battles, could not stop the invaders. He began to base the British resistance upon reoccupied pre-Roman hill forts, which were smaller than their original sites, but still formidable when defended by the dwindling warrior aristocracy of Britain.

But defensive strategy was not going to stop the Saxon, Angle, Frisian and Frankish warriors from landing in Britain under leaders such as Cerdic, Cynric and Port, all capable and strong generals, eager for gain. By 508, it was painfully apparent that the Britons no longer possessed the same caliber of troops as they had a half century before.

Another Battle

The Germans, uniting the warbands of Cerdic, Aella, Aesc and Part, fought a major battle against a large British force (508?), and, according to the A-S.C., the Britons were initially successful, even at this late date still capable of using basic Roman tactics.

They first attacked the enemy right flank and destroyed it, but Cynric, a son of Cerdic, managed to swing his warriors onto the rear of the pursuing Britons, routing them as well as the rest of the ill- trained and undisciplined Britons, killing their commander in the process. Cerdic kept his troops in hand, a difficult task under the circumstances, yet he managed to do it through force of will.

Nennius noted that by the 6th century, 'Romans' still lived in Britain but their "...offspring in our days have greatly degenerated from their ancestral nobleness". An estimated 12,000 Romano- Britons left Britain during the last half of the 5th century, crossing the English Channel to Gaul, where they settled in Brittany, desirous of starting a new life in a new homeland, away from the ravages of constant warfare. Some degree of civilization and order still remained in the north of Britain, where Caradoc of Llangarfen wrote that a Briton named Arthur " ... often routed and drove him (rebellious Britons) out from forest and the battlefield".

The Welsh poet Taliesin elaborated:

It it grows ever worse, like Arthur, Chief of givers
With his blades long and red/From the blood of nobles;
Whose gentle blood flows.
From the battle of the woods in the distant North.