given the fullest and most satisfactory information, which, in a matter of so remote antiquity, can be reasonably expected, as to the compilation of the A.-S. Chronicle. He says

[Preface, p. xxxvii.] "The following remarks are taken from the preface of Dr. Ingram, and I do not scruple to insert them, although the quotation is rather long, because they show the train of thought which arose in the mind of one who as yet stands foremost among the translators and illustrators of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle."

Then, citing Dr. Ingram

"It is now time to examine who were probably the writers of these annals. I say probably, because we have very little more than rational conjecture to guide us. The period antecedent to the times of Bede, except where passages were afterwards inserted, was perhaps little else originally than a kind of chronological table of events, with a few genealogies, and notices of the death and succession of kings and other distinguished personages. But it is evident from the preface of Bede, and from many passages in his work, that he received considerable assistance from Saxon bishops, abbats, and others, who not only communicated certain traditionary facts, vivâ voce, but also transmitted to him many written documents. These, therefore, must have been the early chronicles of Wessex, of Kent, and of the other provinces of the heptarchy, which formed together the groundwork of his history."

We now proceed to examine in detail the doubts thus cast upon the earlier period of A.-S. history, and which may be conveniently considered in the following order:

I. That Hengist and Horsa had no real personal existencewere merely the mythic heroes of romance-their very names being of an equivocal character.

II. That the received account of those chieftains, and of their exploits, is purely fabulous-being, in fact, not the history, but the tradition of the Jutish kingdom of Kent, and devoid of historical truth in every detail. III. That the Jutes (who established themselves in Kent) were but a mere fraction of the invaders, and were a Scandinavian, not a Germanic tribe, speaking Jutish.

We at once join issue upon these points, and affirm— I, That Hengist and Horsa were not the mere mythic heroes of poetry and of romance (as supposed by the objectors), but that they possessed a real personal identity and existence; II, That their actions, as recorded in the A.-S. Chronicle and by Bede, have all the characteristic marks of pure, genuine, and authentic history; and, III, That Hengist and Horsa, and their followers were not a Scandinavian, but a Germanic tribe, speaking a dialect of the A.-S. language.

And first, as to the personal identity and existence of Hengist and Horsa. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, as we have seen, says

....

"On heopa dagum Denzi,topja. . . . zerohton Brytene on dam stæð þe is zenemned Yppineɣ-fleot.” .. (in their days, Hengist and Horsa came to Britain at the place which is named Yppines-fleet.) . . . . "Deora Peretozan pæɲon tpezen zebroðra Penzistorja pæpon Pihtziljef juna". . . . (their leaders were two brothers, Hengist and Horsa, who were the sons of Wihtgils... .)

Nothing can be more to the purpose than the direct testimony afforded by this most valuable and interesting record. Here is nothing of poetry or romance-nothing more than a plain unvarnished assertion of a fact, and that, too, in language suited to the simplicity of the times. It has all the necessary elements and unities of time and place, person and circumstance. Thus, the time of their arrival is specifically fixed. The place also where they landed is named with equal precision. Then, after describing the various Saxon tribes who accompanied them, we find the names of their chieftains repeated, "two brothers, Hengist and Horsa."

In our extracts from the A.-S. Chronicle we have further noticed their conflicts with the Britons-the death of Horsa, slain in one of those conflicts-also the battles of Hengist and his son Æsc with the same enemy-and the succession of

Esc to the throne of Kent. But their very names are treated as visionary and fabulous. It is true that the names Hengist and Horsa, in the Saxon language, signify a horse; but that is a very insufficient ground on which to assume that no persons bearing those names ever existed. In fact, it betrays some want of experience in the details of A.-S. history; for it is well known that our Saxon ancestors not unfrequently assumed the names of animals. If this objection, therefore, were to prevail, we should annihilate all those Saxon kings, priests, and heroes who are known in history only by names of a similar character-as Ædelpulf, Cynepulf, Denepulf, Pulfitan, Pulfhepe, &c.—all of which are a combination of the word Wolf. There is, however, something singularly appropriate in the names Hengist and Horsa, as their descendants, the Kentishmen, to this day bear the .Saxon horse upon the standards of their county. But these and other Saxon names are of common occurrence to the present day amongst the Friesians, one of the Saxon tribes, who assisted in the subjugation of Britain, as appears by the following table : 14

14 Halbertsma on the Friesic Dialects. (Dr. Bosworth, A.-S. Dictionary, Pref. p. liv.)

Secondly. What we have advanced might have sufficed for the first two points of objection, had not the authenticity and veracity of our historians been so recklessly impeached. These are branded as being purely fabulous, romantic, the crude notions of a bygone age, of a doubtful and suspicious character, and devoid of historical truth in every detail. If hard words, confident assertion, and emphatic protests, without a tittle of proof, were sufficient to annihilate the labours and to destroy the reputation of our most venerable historians, it would only remain for us to submit with becoming resignation to their decision; but, conscientiously believing that the judgment thus pronounced, ex cathedrâ, is altogether erroneous, we will endeavour to fortify our opinion by a more strict investigation of the authorities which we have already adduced.

We have seen that the venerable Bede, after describing the Saxon aggression in terms almost identical with those of the A.-S. Chronicle, proceeds :

:

"Duces fuisse perhibentur eorum primi duo fratres Hengist et IIorsa, e quibus Horsa postea occisus in bello à Brittonibus hactenus in orientalibus Cantiæ partibus monumentum habet suo nomine insigne. Erant autem filii Victgilsi, cuius pater Vitta, cuius pater Vecta, cuius pater Voden, de cuius stirpe multarum provinciarum regium genus originem duxit.”

It is clear that of these two similar and almost verbatim descriptions, the one must necessarily have been taken from the other; and the only question is, which of the two is the original history? We have pronounced in favour of the A.-S. Chronicle.

As our more ancient historians are silent upon the point, it can be decided only by the internal evidence afforded by those histories. Every book is its own best interpreter. He who carefully considers Bede's Ecclesiastical History, will perceive that the venerable father of English history betrays throughout that work an earnest solicitude that the "readers or hearers" of his history shall rest satisfied that it is founded

upon sound, valid, and satisfactory authority; and accordingly, in his preface he has given a clear and satisfactory account of the authorities upon which it is established. Amongst those authorities he mentions-" written records"-" the traditions of his ancestors"-" the writings of our predecessors,”—and he concludes his history with these words-"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," &c.

It therefore appears that Bede consulted and adopted as the bases of his history whatever "writings of the ancients" he could discover; of which we consider the A.-S. Chronicle to be a portion.

It is somewhat remarkable that, instead of following the very words of the 4.-S. Chronicle, "their leaders were two brothers, Hengist and Horsa," Bede says, "their first leaders or chieftains are said to have been two brothers, Hengist and Horsa." Not, however, as expressing any doubt of the fact, but (as we shall show presently) in reference or allusion to some "writings of the ancients," "tradition," or other satisfactory authority which he had consulted. And when we consider the extensive learning of the venerable author, and the very eminent men, Albinus, Nothelm, and others, who encouraged his literary labours, it is too much to pronounce, after a lapse of eleven centuries, that his History of the A.-S. Invasion and Settlement in Britain, is "devoid of historical truth in every detail."

But it may be said that we have no evidence of the existence of the 4.-S. Chronicle at a period anterior to that of Bede. It may be admitted that the copies which have descended to our times are of a long subsequent date; but we adopt the opinion of Dr. Ingram, who, in alluding to the