{Anglo-Saxon Cycles [continued (3)]}[31st October 1990]

[Redbook8:81-82][19901031:1540d]{Anglo-Saxon Cycles [continued (3)]}[31st October 1990]

19901031.1540

[continued]

I won’t be describing all these patterns in this way* – this* is intended to show how a C[ircles] A[nalysis] & S[ynthesis] pattern may emerge in parts of what at first sight appears to be a formless mess.

Two other lessons emerge:

(1) that an institution may last over more than one cycle if it manages to recover around/after C;

(2) ref the Viking invasions, beginning c800[ce], is A~-J~ in the 2^nd 512 year cycle ce, instead of at C→M~: their consequences are incorporated into that* ‘Saxon’ cycle (2^nd 512-year ce – the first Saxons arrived in c430ce (512R~448); but they were invited, not invaders, and driven back at Mons Badonicus in c500ce, the new Germanic invasion not beginning until about 550ce, in the new 512 y[ea]r cycle). So far as the Vikings are concerned, arriving late in the Saxon cycle** they were only partially successful, were incorporated more or less into or along with the Saxon kingdom, and shared its fate, at the end of the cycle, of Norman conquest.

*[See last previous entry]

**But of course this is their 256 year cycle – 768-1024[ce]

(see [[Redbook8:104-106][19901108:1417]{Travelling Cycles}[8th November 1990],] 105)

<901108>

[continued]

[PostedBlogger09for10082022]