dignity, and, honouring him as a god, offer sacrifice to him for the sake of victory or valour, and the people, deceived, believe what they see, as is their wont. The aforesaid youths, therefore, arrive, according to the petition of the king and his senate, with three vessels, laden with arms, and prepared with every kind of warlike stores. . . . . This migration is said to have been made from the three provinces of Germany, which are said to have been the most distinguished, namely, from Saxony, Anglia, and Giotæ. The Cantuarians derived their origen from the Giota [Jutes], and also the Uuhtii, who took their name from the island Wihta [Wight], which lies on the coast of Britain."

"Britain, therefore, is now called Anglia, because it took the name of its conquerors-for their leaders aforesaid were the first who came thence to Britain, namely, Hengist and Horsa, sons of Wyhrtels; their grandfather was Wecta, and their great-grandfather Withar, whose father was Woden."

This author then proceeds as in the Saxon Chronicle above. (Bohn's Edit. pa. 4, 5, 6.)

WILLIAM OF We now proceed to WILLIAM OF MALMESBURY. Nat. c. 4.D. (Nat. circ. A.D. 1095; ob. circ. A.D. 1143.)

MALMESBURY,

1095;

Ob. c. A.D.

1143.

The translator, in his preface (Bohn's Edit. p. xi), says

"The northern nations. had their historical traditions and the songs of their bards from the remotest times. Influenced by this feeling the Anglo-Saxons turned their attention to the composition of annals very early after their settlement in Britain, and hence originated that invaluable register, the Saxon Chronicle, in which facts are briefly related as they arose, in chronological order, indeed, but without comment or observation."

William of Malmesbury says

"In the year of the incarnation of our Lord ccccXLIX, Angles and Saxons first came into Britain. . . . . . At this time Vortigern was K. of Britain. . . . It was unanimously resolved to invite over from Germany the Angles and Saxons, nations powerful in arms, but of a roving life. This counsel was adopted, and ambassadors, men of rank, and worthy to represent the country, were sent into Germany. They arrived in Britain in three of those long vessels which they call ceols. At this and other times came over a mixed multitude from three of the German nations, that is to say, the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes. . . . These were under the conduct of Hengist and Horsa, two brothers of suitable disposition and of noble race in their own country. They were great-grandsons of the celebrated

.

Woden, from whom almost all the royal families of these barbarous nations deduce their origin; and to whom the nation of the Angles, fondly deifying him, have consecrated, by immemorial superstition, the fourth day of the week, as they have the sixth to his wife Frea. Bede has related in what particular parts of Britain the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes fixed their habitations." "The truce was broken seven years after their arrival, and during the ensuing twenty they frequently fought partial battles, and, as the Chronicle relates, four general actions. From the first conflict they parted on equal terms, one party lamenting the loss of Horsa, the other that of Catigis, another of Vortigern's sons. The Angles having the advantage in all the succeeding encounters, peace was concluded. Hengist died in the thirtyninth year after his arrival. . . . . . He left a son named Eisc." (Lib. 1, c. 1.)

SHARON TURNER, F.S.A. (whose recent death every antiquary must lament), in his invaluable History of the Anglo- S. TURNER, Saxons, thus notices the arrival of Hengist and Ob.4.D.1849. Horsa in Kent :

"[A.D. CCCCXLIX.] In this state of the country three Saxon cuyles or vessels arrived from Germany on the British coast, whose leaders were named Hengist and Horsa, descendants of Woden. As their numbers were too few for conquest, their visit must have been either a matter of accident, or for the purpose of a transient depredation. Nennius says they were exiles. . . They arrived at Ebbsfleet, in the Isle of Thanet, near Richborough. They were retained to serve against the northern invaders, the Pihtas; they were promised food and clothing, and were stationed in Thanet. . . . . . In the beginning of his career, Hengist could not have seen a kingdom in the smiles of Gwrtheyrn. It was in the civil feuds and warring interests of the unhappy island that he first anticipated the future gratification of his ambition. The subsequent actions of Hengist are known but imperfectly." (2d Edit. London, 4to, vol. i, book 2, c. 1.)

This very careful and accurate author then proceeds to notice the conflicts between the Saxons and Britons, for which he cites Nennius, Gildas, Ethelwerd, Wittichind, Bede, Saxon Chronicle, Florent, Wigorn, and other authorities.

Mr. Turner says

"When we turn to the simple and authentic facts that all the battles of Hengist were fought in Kent, and that one of the last contests was even in Thanet, in the extremity of his little kingdom; and that no good evidence is extant of his having penetrated far beyond the region which he transmitted to his posterity..

We must perceive that exaggeration has been as busy

with Hengist as with Arthur. . . The truth seems to be, that the fame of Hengist depends more on the circumstance of his having first conceived and executed the project of an hostile settlement in Britain, than on the magnitude of his conquests, or the extent of his devastations." [Ib. book 2, c. 1.] "We may safely infer, that when the Anglo-Saxons visited England, they came under war-kings. The reigns of Hengist and the founders of the dynasties of the Octarchy, were so many periods of continued warfare, and their immediate posterity were assailed with hostility from the natives almost perpetual. The Anglo-Saxons were under a necessity of continuing their warkings until at length a permanent, though a limited, monarchy was established. Their chiefs, or witena, continued in their influence and power. They elected the king, though they chose him from the family of the deceased sovereign; and their consent in their gemot continued to be necessary to the more important acts of his authority." (Ibid. vol. ii, book 7, c. 2.)

Whilst I am yet writing, Mr. Kemble's Saxons in England (published Lond. 1849) has come under my notice. As this learned antiquary concurs with those whom I have already mentioned, in denouncing the authenticity of our ancient annals, it would be unfair and uncandid to omit his remarks. "The received accounts (says this author) of our migrations, our subsequent fortunes, and ultimate settlement, are devoid of historical truth in every detail.

Thus, when we find Hengist and Horsa approaching the coast of Kent in three keels, and Elli effecting a landing in Sussex with the same number, we are reminded of the Gothic tradition," &c. (Vol. i, p. 16.)

"The form itself in which details which profess to be authentic have been preserved ought to secure us from falling into error; they are romantic, not historical. Gildas, Nennius, and Beda mention but a few contests, and even those of a doubtful and suspicious character." (Ibid. p. 18.)7

7 It is much to be regretted, that so eminent an antiquary as this learned author unquestionably is, should indulge in such extravagant denunciations as the following, and that, too, in support of a mere, and very questionable, hypothesis. [Vol. i, p. 13.]— "Notitia utriusque Imperii ..... Comes Littoris Saxonici per Britannias. The term Littus Saxonicum has been explained to mean rather the coast visited by, or exposed to the ravages of the Saxons, than the coasts occupied by them; but against this loose system of philological and historical interpretation I beg emphatically to protest! .... As the littus Saxonicum on the mainland was that district in which members of the Saxon Confederacy were settled, the Littus Saxonicum per Britannias unquestionably obtained its name from a similar circumstance."

This learned work abounds with ingenious and fanciful hypotheses. Many will, I imagine, not hesitate to unite with me in emphatically protesting against this author's emphatic protest."

8

I have now noticed such of our ancient historians as appear to me sufficient to enable me to investigate and dispose of the doubts which some learned antiquaries have thus ventured, in this nineteenth century, to cast upon their veracity and fidelity, and upon the earlier transactions of our Anglo-Saxon

ancestors.

It is true that I might have summoned to the rescue a formidable array of our national historians, from the eighth to the nineteenth century, and thus have swelled the list of my authorities to an immeasurable and inconvenient extent.

To obviate that inconvenience I have selected (in addition to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle) the Saxon historians, Bede and Ethelwerd-the British historians, Gildas and Nennius-the Anglo-Norman historian, William of Malmesbury—and our recent English historian, the late Sharon Turner.

Having placed the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle at the head of my authorities, it becomes my first duty to ascertain what credit is due to that venerable record of our country's history.

M. Mallet (Northern Antiquities) and Mr. Kemble (AngloSaxons in England) seem to consider that the Saxon Chronicle is posterior to, and in fact borrowed from Bede. I am inclined to think that this is an erroneous view of the matter; and that the Saxon Chronicle is one of the bases upon which Bede has erected his valuable work.

8" Where one's proofs are aptly chosen,

Four are as valid as four dozen."

9 "The first Angles who passed into Britain under the conduct of Hengist and Horsa were a mere handful of men. The ancient Saxon Chronicle informs us that they had only three vessels, and it should seem that their number could not well exceed a thousand. Some other swarms having afterwards followed their example, their country was reduced to a mere desert, and continued destitute of inhabitants for more than two centuries; being still in this state in the time of Bede, from whom the author of the Saxon Chronicle borrowed this fact." (Mallet, Northern Antiquities, Bohn's Edit., pp. 161-162.)

"In point of fact (speaking of the Bretwalda) everything depends upon the way in which we construe a passage of Beda, together with one in the Saxon Chronicle borrowed from him." (Kemble's Sarons in England, vol. ii, p. 10.)

In his preface to the Ecclesiastical History of the English Nation, addressed "to the most glorious King Ceolwulph," Bede says

"To the end that I may remove all occasion of doubting what I have written, both from yourself and other readers or hearers of this history, I will take care briefly to intimate from what authors I chiefly learned the same.

My principal authority and aid in this work was the learned and reverend Abbat Albinus,10 who, educated in the church of Canterbury, by those venerable and learned men, Theodore,11 of blessed memory, and the Abbat Adrian,12 transmitted to me by Nothelm,18 the pious presbyter of the church of London, either in writing or by word of mouth of the same Nothelm, all that he thought worthy of memory that had been done in the province of Kent, or the adjacent parts, by the disciples of the blessed Pope Gregory, as he had learned the same, either from written records or the traditions of his ancestors. . . . Thus, from the beginning of the volume to the time when the English nation received the faith of Christ, have we collected the writings of our predecessors, and from them gathered matter for our history; but from that time to the present, what was transacted in the church of Canterbury by the disciples of St. Gregory, or their successors, and under what kings the same happened, has been conveyed to us by Nothelm, through the industry of the aforesaid Abbat Albinus."

And Bede concludes his valuable history thus

"Thus much of the Ecclesiastical History of Britain, and more especially of the English nation, as far as I could learn, either from the writings of the ancients, or the traditions of our ancestors, or of my own knowledge, has, with the help of God, been digested by me, Bede, the servant of God and priest of the monastery of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, which is at Wearmouth and Jarrow. (Bede, Eccl. Hist., Bohn's Edit., pp. 2, 297.)

The learned editor of Bohn's Edit. of Bede's History and of the A.-S. Chronicle, has, in his preface to the latter work,

10 Albinus succeeded Adrian, on his death, A.D. 708, as abbat of St. Augustine's monastery at Canterbury. He was the first abbat of that house who was an Englishman by birth. He died A.d. 732. [Wright's Biographia Britannica Literaria—A.-Saxon period, p. 290.]

11 Theodore, a native of Tarsus, was made Abp. of Canterbury, famous for his skill in the Greek and Latin languages. He and Adrian established schools at Canterbury. [Wright, ut supra, pp. 31, 36.]

12 Adrian was an African by birth, of great learning; he accompanied Theodore to Engand, and was made abbat of St. Augustine's monastery at Canterbury.

13 Nothelm was afterwards archbishop of Canterbury. He died A.D. 739.