ANGLO-SAXON REMAINS 



the proudest throne in Britain ; but it is open to question whether the 

 battle took place within the present borders of the county, and the 

 identification of the site with Wimbledon derives no real support 

 from philology. Most recent historians have been content to admit 

 the traditional claims of Wimbledon, but the tradition owes much to 

 the ingenuity of Camden, and has been disputed more than once. 

 Worplesden in the south-west of the county has been suggested, but 

 though the site is not an unlikely one, the alleged similarity of the 

 names is rather fanciful. Another proposal, which certainly has a more 

 solid foundation in history, has been made by Mr. Elliot Maiden, 1 

 who would identify Wibbandune with Wipsedone, a place that was 

 certainly known at the time when the boundaries of the land belong- 

 ing to Chertsey Abbey were added to the original charter, perhaps in 

 the thirteenth century. This would fix the field of battle somewhere 

 on the heaths to the north of Chobham, near the Roman road 2 and the 

 present railway line between Staines and Wokingham. 



For the present purpose the question is of great importance, for it 

 has a direct bearing on the nationality of the peoples who had settled as 

 early as the middle of the sixth century to the east and to the west of 

 Surrey, the result of their collision affecting the subsequent occupation 

 of the disputed area. A final solution is perhaps impossible, but the 

 area within which the armies may have met is limited by various con- 

 siderations. The prosperous kingdom of Kent was shut in by sea or 

 river on three sides, and almost entirely on the south-western frontier by 

 Romney Marsh and the forest of the Weald. Expansion was possible 

 only along the strip of country between the Thames and the Weald, 

 corresponding to the Surrey of later centuries. After the battle of 568 

 and perhaps before that date this was politically distinct from Kent ; 

 and whatever the significance of the diocese of Rochester it seems clear 

 that the present boundary between Kent and Surrey dates from the early 

 pagan days of England. It will be observed also that on all other sides 

 Surrey has a border that may well have been dictated by the nature of the 

 ground. Attention has already been drawn to the expanse of barren heath 

 that is backed by the forests of Windsor and the Silchester district ; and 

 while the Thames formed a more effective barrier then than now, the 

 southern limit seems to have depended on the progress of forest clearing 

 in the Weald. On the other hand the Kentish border looks purely 

 arbitrary on the map, for the valley of the Ravensbourne, which is 

 certainly followed for a short distance, seems to have no bearing on the 

 delimitation. 8 



If this line is as old as the diocese of Rochester, it may be inferred 

 that there was an efficient force on the west to maintain the frontier 

 against any encroachments on the part of Kent. It is difficult however 



1 EngTtsh Historical Review, iii. 428. 

 * This is the Herestraet or via mifttaris of the charter. 



8 On this point see Mr. Elliot Maiden's paper on the West Saxon conquest of Surrey in EngRib 

 Historical Review, iii. 423, and his History of Surrey, p. 51. 



i 257 s 



