How in the name of history did ‘Anglo-Saxon’ become a racist slur?

As academics declare the ancient term is no longer appropriate because of its appropriation by white supremacists, the influencer behind History With Hilbert – whose animated videos are watched by millions – explains why they are wrong

Netflix series ‘The Last Kingdom’ is an example of how Anglo-Saxons have invaded the popular consciousness (Netflix)

Say the term “Anglo-Saxon” to most people, and they’re likely to picture the Smashing Saxons from Horrible Historiesor the protagonists of Bernard Cornwell’s The Last Kingdom. In the popular consciousness, they’re a group of Beowulf-declaiming, boar-helmet-wearing figures of a bygone age, when dragons and longships lurked on the horizon.

Not so for a small group of (largely North American) academics, however, who argue that even the historical use of the term “Anglo-Saxon” is tantamount to supporting white supremacy.

Against this backdrop, Cambridge University Press has made the decision to rename its journal Anglo-Saxon England, which has been running since the 1970s, to Early Medieval England and Its Neighbours.

It’s a decision that historian Dominic Sandbrook has condemned as demonstrating an inability to “say no to a handful of mad Americans”. Cambridge University Press denies this, and argues the name change fits a wider scope for future publications, though many suspect the debate around “Anglo-Saxon” is the real reason.

This isn’t the first time that the term has caused distress. In 2017, Mary Rambaran-Olm, a self-described “woman of colour and an Anglo-Saxonist”, became vice-president of the International Society of Anglo-Saxonists (Isas). Two years later, she resigned her position, citing the society’s “racist” name and continued use of the term “Anglo-Saxon.” In a flurry – some would say panic – to appease the offended, Isas duly changed its name to the much less snappy International Society for the Study of Early Medieval England.

This prompted a letter of protest by 70 of the most prominent experts in the field, who argued that “Anglo-Saxon” is acceptable in both academia and popular culture all over the world, and that most racist connotations came from North America, where the term has been co-opted by white supremacist groups. They were ignored.

So, what are these arguments against the term’s use that so easily broke the massed ranks of academics like a flimsy shield wall?

Well, there are two: that “Anglo-Saxon” was “hardly used” by the Anglo-Saxons to refer to themselves; and that because racists have used the term, it has been in some way “contaminated”. Instead, they argued, scholars should use “Early-” or “Old English”.

Here’s the problem. “English” ultimately comes from “Angle”, and in the Early Middle Ages, it was not used in the same way it is today. The first reference to “England” (in Engla londe), in a translation of Bede, referred to West Lothian in Scotland. At the same time, parts of today’s England, such as Cornwall and Cumbria, were not culturally Anglo-Saxon.

Using “English” seems needlessly Anglocentric and teleological, given that, before crossing into Britain, the Anglo-Saxons settled in Frisia, in today’s Netherlands and Germany. Using “English” as a replacement for Anglo-Saxon causes needless confusion and conflation. “Old English” is a linguistic label but, given how so much of Anglo-Saxon writing was done in Latin, using it as a replacement actually narrows and ignores the cultural diversity of the period. This, no doubt, was not what the protestors had in mind.

To their second argument, good luck finding a term not misused at some point in history. In the Second World War, the SS Panzer Division “Wiking” recruited Scandinavians to participate in Hitler’s Final Solution; Mussolini sought to create a “New Rome”.

Despite these historical atrocities, Vikings and Romans still very much make up part of our history books – no “Old Norwegians” or “Early Classical Italians” necessary. Why? Well, because most of us intuitively understand that using a term is not the same as endorsing every way in which it has been used.

It was only after looking for issues with Anglo-Saxon as a term that Dr Rambaran-Olm became convinced it was problematic. It did not stop her from becoming vice-president of Isas, or naming herself an “Anglo-Saxonist”.

Nor should it. If the term “Anglo-Saxon” alone formed such a bar for minorities, she would not have done so. Changing a label will not solve any real-world racism. In fact, abandoning the term, to be used exclusively by racists, does nothing but advance their cause.

From HBO’s Vikings to Assassins’ Creed Valhalla, “Anglo-Saxon” is a term understood by the public. We should not turn those with an interest in history into racists by policing well-established terminology to satisfy a few disgruntled voices who haven’t done their homework.

Hilbert Vinkenoog runs the YouTube channel History With Hilbert. He is currently writing a historical fiction novel set in the Early Middle Ages