conquest of Northumbria. The Danes of that region made in Edred's second year another effort for independence. They drove out the two princes whom Edmund had established, and put in their place Eric, not their old sub-king, surnamed of the Bloody Axe, but a son of the Danish king, Harold Blue-tooth (Blaatand). In 947 Edred marched against the revolted province, and ravaged it from end to end. It marks a change in the conditions of the long struggle

between English and Danes, that it is no longer the Christian people doing battle with Pagans. One of the chief acts of vengeance, with which Edred punishes the Northumbrians, is to burn to the ground the great Minster of Ripon, while Archbishop Wulfstan is found again among the chiefs and counsellors of the Danish army. The English king

EDRED EMPEROR OF ALL BRITAIN.

243

seems to have taken the Northumbrians by surprise, for we do not find that they made any attempt to resist his invasion. But they followed his retreat, and were strong enough to inflict a heavy loss upon his army when they overtook its rear at Chesterford (in Essex). The king was preparing to turn back and avenge this disaster by a fresh ravage of Northumbria, when he was appeased by entreaties for peace, and by large gifts which were to compensate for the lives of the slain.

Three years afterwards Archbishop Wulfstan was arrested, and imprisoned at Jedburgh. Of what followed in Northumbria we know nothing for certain. Snorro Sturleson, the Icelandic chronicler, tells us of a fierce battle between Eric, son of Harold Blue-tooth, and Olaf, who represented the friends of the English rule. The result was the complete defeat of Eric, who fell with five other kings. If this is the true story the Northmen fought among themselves, and the English king had his work done for him. What is certain is that, in 954, Northumbria made its final submission, and was put under the rule of an Englishman, Oswulf of Bernicia, being changed at the same time from a sub-kingdom into an earldom.

In 955 we find Edred styling himself " King of the Anglo-Saxons and Emperor of all Britain." In the same year he died. He had long been in bad health. The biography of Dunstan gives some piteous details of his illness, from which we may gather that he suffered from some painful ailment of the stomach.

This is the first life printed in Dr. Stubbs's "Memorials of Dunstan."

Curiously enough, the late chroniclers speak of him as worn out with old age. Old he could not have been, for he certainly was not born before 924. He died at Frome, in Somersetshire, on the 23rd of November, before his friend and counsellor Dunstan could reach him. Dunstan was hurrying from Glastonbury with the royal treasures, that the King might "freely dispose of them while he could." Of Dunstan it is now time to speak.

DUNSTAN.

DUNSTAN stands as certainly first among the Churchmen of Early England, as Alfred among its kings. Unhappily, we cannot get as clear an idea of his character. All or nearly all that we are told about Alfred belongs to history. If some tales are mixed with it, these are few and of little importance. The story of Dunstan, on the other hand, is overlaid with legend and fiction. Even the almost contemporary Life, written by "B," 2 a Saxon priest, and dedicated to Dunstan's successor in the archbishopric of Canterbury abounds with miracles.

These, indeed, need not trouble us very much. It is a more serious matter that Dunstan's life has been made, so to speak, the battle-field of a very bitter controversy. Into the rights and wrongs of this controversy it is impossible to go, but it may be briefly described as the contest between the Regular and the Secular clergy. The Regular clergy were the monks, those who lived according to the rules (regulae) of the The story of the burnt cakes, for instance.

2 The authorship of this Life is fully discussed by Dr. Stubbs, in his "Memorials of St. Dunstan."

various monastic orders; the Seculars were those who were not bound by such rules, but lived in the world (seculum). They were, for the most part; the clergy who served the various parish churches throughout England, though they sometimes held preferments in cathedrals. It was as to the possession of the cathedrals indeed that some of the fiercest disputes occurred. Some bishop, who was strongly attached to the monastic system, would try to turn out the Secular priests, and bring in Regulars into their places. As to the parish priests, there was a great dispute whether or no they should be allowed to marry. Both these matters would cause, it is clear, much angry feeling, and angry feeling tends more than anything else to obscure the truth of history. Dunstan was believed to have been a very vehement champion of the Regulars against the Seculars. Some writers thought that he was right, some thought that he was wrong, according as they favoured this side that; but they all agreed in exaggerating his actions; the one to show his zeal and energy, the other to prove that he was cruel and tyrannical. It is not difficult, perhaps, for us to be impartial in the matter, but it is very difficult, at so great a distance of time, to discover the truth, hidden as it is by the prejudices and interests of writers of the time, or, in any case, much nearer to it than we are.

Dunstan was born in 920, near Glastonbury. He was of noble family. Two of his relatives were bishops; others were attached to the royal household. His brother was "reeve," or steward, of the estates of Glastonbury Abbey. Dunstan was sent to the school