Chapter XI: Appendix (1)

‘Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is
no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.…
Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is
due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom
honour.’—ROM. xiii. 1, 7.

It is impossible, I think, to read the Epistles of the New Testament with any degree of attention, and not to see how anxious the writers are that the Christianity which they preach should not be regarded as a revolutionary and explosive force, upsetting and destroying existing institutions, social and political; how concerned they are that their converts should give no offence (beyond what was involved in the fact of their religion) to the heathen neighbours among whom they lived; that they should ‘Walk in wisdom toward them that are without[949],’ and have their ‘conversation honest among the Gentiles[950]’; how careful they are to say no word which should disturb the existing relations of slaves and masters, of wives and husbands, of subjects and sovereigns; even though the sovereign, the husband, the master might be heathen, and the slave, the wife, the subject might be Christian. If there must be a breach, let it come from the heathen member of the bond. The rule for the Christian was: ‘let him not depart[951].’

And, in thus writing, the Apostles were but following out the teaching and example of our Lord Himself. When He compares the kingdom of Heaven to leaven[952], He means, I suppose, that the working of His doctrine was to be, as a rule, gradual and assimilative, not sudden and explosive.

And He Himself always refused to assume the part of a political agitator, or even of a social reformer, which His followers sometimes wished to thrust upon Him. ‘He withdrew Himself,’ when the multitudes threatened to ‘take Him by force, to make Him a king[953]’; He would not be ‘a judge or a divider’ in matters of inheritance[954]. All social and political problems He left men to work out for themselves with the powers which God has given them, under the guidance and control of God’s ordinary providence; and to apply for themselves to the solution of these problems the principles of His teaching, under the ordinary operations of the Holy Spirit. And this refusal to interfere with the normal development of human society emphasises all the more, as has been remarked[955]. His uncompromising vindication of the law of marriage, as the one social institution the sanctity of which is above all human laws: ‘God made them male and female[956].’

He would not agitate against the tribute[957]; though the refusal probably cost Him the popularity which had manifested itself so noisily in the triumphal entry. And, in His trial before Pilate, He distinctly recognised the Roman provincial government of Judaea, heathen and foreign though it was, as being divinely ordered: ‘Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above[958].’

When the publicists of the middle ages, with Dante at their head, laid stress on the birth and death of Christ under the Roman Empire as giving a divine authority to that Empire, and to the mediaeval Empire which claimed to be its successor[959], they were but carrying to somewhat fanciful extremes an argument based upon undoubted facts.

And so St. Paul, in the passage which I have taken for my text, claims no less than a divine sanction for the civil power: ‘The powers that be are ordained of God.… Render therefore to all their dues.’ And the magnitude of the claim is enhanced, if we remember that this was written, not under any of the better Roman emperors; not under Trajan, whose virtues so touched the heart of the Middle Ages, that they represented his soul as transferred to Paradise through the intercession of St. Gregory, the apostle of the English[960]; not under a philosophic saint like Marcus Aurelius; but, probably, under the vain and vicious Nero.

If then such was the claim on the duty of subjects then, how much greater the claim on us, who, for more than sixty years, have lived under one of the very best of Christian sovereigns.

We can most of us remember the kind of thought and speech which was prevalent not so many years ago. It was a common impression then that the part to be played by the institution of Royalty in the future history of the world was a very slight one. The growth of popular power, the spread of education, and other causes, would reduce it to be nothing more than the veil, and a very transparent veil, of a Democracy.

The history of the last quarter of a century has signally falsified this forecast; and the present state of Europe gives it an emphatic contradiction. At the present moment the question of war or peace, that is for thousands, if not millions, the question of life or death, hangs upon the fiat of some four or five men.

Nor is the view of the insignificance of Royalty borne out by the history of England as a whole.

The story of English Royalty reaches back some fourteen hundred years. In 519, according to the traditional account, Certic and Cynric assumed the kingship of the West Saxons; and the reflexion of the compiler of the Saxon Chronicle, writing probably under Alfred, that ‘the royal house of the West Saxons has ruled ever since that day,’ has, with the exception of the Norman period, remained almost literally true down to the present time. For it was Wessex which grew into England; and the first idea of union, loosely and imperfectly realised under Egbert, was gradually wrought out in many years of suffering. Alfred saved England from the Danes, though at a tremendous sacrifice, and holds in real history the place which romance assigns to Arthur; a Christian king,

‘Scarce other than my own ideal knight,’

who rolls back the tide of heathen conquest from his native land. We call him, and we call him rightly, ‘Alfred the Great.’ But in days nearer his own he was known as ‘England’s Darling.’ Will not the historian of the future see a certain sad appropriateness in the fact that the Queen should have died in the year which is to celebrate the millenary of the death of this, the greatest of her ancestors, the one whom she so much resembled in her unswerving loyalty to duty, her constant labour for the good of her people, her unfaltering allegiance to truth? ‘The most thoughtful provider for the widow, the defenceless, the orphan, and the poor, … most beloved by his people,’ says Florence of Alfred. Asser calls him ‘Alfred the truth-teller’; and we all remember how the great tribune of the people, as he was sometimes called, declared that the Queen was the most truthful person he had ever known.

So too after the fierce suffering of the Norman Conquest, it was Henry II who knit the framework of the country together by an administrative system, under the forms of which we, to a large extent, still live; while Edward I, taking up the idea, which Simon de Montfort seemed to have lighted upon almost by accident, made popular representation the permanent basis of our constitution, on the express ground that ‘what touches all, should be approved by all.’

Once more, in the religious crisis of the sixteenth century, Henry VIII and Elizabeth, whatever their shortcomings, did much to impress upon the English Church that sane and sober character of a via media, which, in spite of extremists on either side, it has kept ever since.

We do not, at this stage of our national history, expect services quite of this kind from the Crown. And yet the services which it has rendered during the late reign have been simply immense. To take only two of the most obvious; two, on which the late Mr. Bagehot was fond of dwelling:—(1) It has been the symbol and sign of our unity, not only as a nation, but as an empire. In every quarter of the globe, millions upon millions of her subjects, who knew little or nothing of the nature of Parliaments, of the theory of constitutional government, of the responsibility of ministers, of the rise and fall of parties, looked up to the Queen as the bond of union between them, the mother and head of a vast family dispersed throughout the whole world; and this feeling had been deepened and strengthened to an extraordinary degree by the events of the last fifteen months.

(2) And closely connected with this is the second point. The experience of more than three-and-sixty years has taught us to look up to the Crown as the head of our home and family life. This has not always, indeed has not often been the case, in English, or in any other history. The feeling in our own case has owed something to the homely virtues of King George III, but almost everything to the unfailing love and sympathy of the Queen. In joy and sorrow, the humblest of her subjects might feel that they had a share in her sympathy and care. And this sympathy was not of that easy kind which stoops from painless heights to look upon the woes of others, but had been won through depths of suffering and sorrow; and the comfort which she gave to others was, in the Apostle’s words, ‘the comfort wherewith’ she herself had been ‘comforted of God[961].’

Perhaps it is these two elements which come out most strongly in the universal grief called forth by the heavy blow which has fallen upon us. We have lost our mother, the head of our vast family; and we go forth, like orphans in the night, to meet the unknown trials of a new century, without the guidance of that wisely moderating hand, without the sympathy of that feeling heart, to which we had learned to turn with a habit which had become an instinct.

‘Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; … fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.’ May we not add, what was hardly possible in the then circumstances of the Roman world, ‘love to whom love’?

‘I exhort therefore,’ says the Apostle in another place, ‘that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; for kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty[962].’ Surely we have need, at the present time, to obey this exhortation. ‘Supplications, prayers, intercessions,’ shall we not offer these for our new ruler and all his subjects? One of the earliest Christian prayers which has come down to us is a prayer for rulers in the Epistle of St. Clement of Rome[963]:—‘Do Thou, Lord, direct their counsel, according to that which is good and well-pleasing in Thy sight; that, administering in peace and gentleness, with godliness, the power which Thou hast given them, they may obtain Thy favour.’ Eighteen centuries have not made that prayer obsolete, or unnecessary. If there is much that is hopeful and encouraging in the opening of the new era, there is also not a little to cause anxiety even to the most buoyant; and problems have to be faced, which may affect not merely the well-being, but the very existence of our Church and Empire.

‘And giving of thanks.’ Shall we not render that too? Shall we not thank God that for more than three-and-sixty years He gave us such a Queen?

I dare say many of us read with absorbing interest those extracts, covering the past century, which the _Times_ reprinted from its own columns at the end of the year. But, among all those extracts, there was nothing, I think, more interesting than to read the proclamation issued by the Queen at her accession, three-and-sixty years before, and to note how exactly her hopes and promises were fulfilled. It is one of the sternest tests which can be applied to a life of any length. To most of us, if confronted in middle or declining years with the hopes and resolutions of our youth, would they not sound more like sarcasms than like prophecies?

Lastly, let us remember, that every great life, and every great example which is lived before us, brings with it a corresponding weight of obligation and responsibility. Let us pray with St. Ignatius that it may not turn to a witness against ourselves: εὔχομαι ἵνα μὴ εἰς μαρτύριον αὐτὸ κτήσωνται[964].

ADDENDA

Page 19. If the view taken in the text is correct, we might borrow a phrase from the Saxon Chronicle, and say that Asser was bishop _at_ Exeter, rather than bishop _of_ Exeter. See Chron. 897 and note.

Page 28. The medical friend who is cited on p. 21 has also given me his opinion with reference to the passage in Asser describing the mysterious disease with which Alfred was said to have been attacked during his marriage festivities. He thinks the malady indicated was probably stone in the bladder; and that it possibly _was_ connected with the ‘ficus’ from which Alfred is said to have suffered. The latter was either piles or prolapsus of the rectum, conditions often caused in the young by the straining induced sympathetically by the presence of a stone in the bladder. This makes the medical aspect of the case more intelligible. It does not, however, affect the literary and historical inconsistencies of the account which I have pointed out in the text.

Page 52. Opponents of the genuineness of Asser endeavour to meet some of the arguments advanced in the text, by saying that the forger made use of genuine documents. This does not touch the argument from the unity of style and diction. Waiving this, the difference between us is reduced to the question: Is Asser a genuine work which has been largely interpolated? or is it a spurious work embodying many genuine elements? The former seems to me more probable. But thus stated, the question rather resembles the famous problem in the _Oxford Spectator_, whether a certain College ribbon was a blue ribbon with two white stripes, or a white ribbon with three blue stripes. And there I am content to leave the matter.

FOOTNOTES

[1] What is stated above is, I believe, quite correct. I am however informed that the first suggestion of my name came from another member of the electoral board, to whom also I am indebted for many kindnesses.

[2] Benedict of Peterborough, II. vii.

[3] Hoveden, II. lxxviii.

[4] Const. Hist. ii. 621.

[5] Alfred the Great, by Warwick H. Draper, with a Preface by the Lord Bishop of Hereford, p. 12.

[6] Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society.

[7] Mr. Macfadyen’s Work seems to me a little tinged with this view; Alfred the West Saxon, by Dugald Macfadyen, cf. especially pp. 161 ff.

[8] This seems to be the Bishop of Bristol’s view: Alfred the Great, containing chapters on his Life and Times, … edited by Alfred Bowker, pp. 107-112. I refer to this work in future as ‘Essays.’

[9] Alfred in the Chroniclers, by Edward Conybeare, pp. 17, 27, 36. Pauli had already protested against this view, König Ælfred, p. 209.

[10] See Saxon Chronicle, ii. 75, 76. Two charters, Birch, Nos. 445, 446; K. C. D. Nos. 256, 1047, cited by Pauli, u. s. p. 53, support the view that Athelstan was the son of Æthelwulf; but, though they are not asterisked by Kemble, I doubt their genuineness.

[11] The tradition about Erigena has been investigated by Huber, Johann Scotus Erigena, … München, 1861, pp. 108 ff., who rightly regards it as baseless. Yet it still hovers about; e.g. Draper, pp. 48, 49; Macfadyen, pp. 47-49. The Bishop of Bristol seems to me a little inconsistent, Essays, pp. 107 ff. Huber himself u. s. makes the extraordinary statement that the Preface to Alfred’s version of the Pastoral Care is not extant. As it had been printed at least ten times before Huber’s book appeared, he might have known of its existence. On Erigena there is an interesting letter by William of Malmesbury, printed in Stubbs’ edition, I. xliii ff.

[12] Essays, pp. 96, 165.

[13] Ed. Arnold, p. 145; Mr. Macfadyen cites the statement from Hoveden, without definitely accepting or rejecting it, p. 4. This is a nice instance of the growth of legend. In William of Malmesbury, G. P. pp. 160, 161, Æthelwulf before his accession is a subdeacon; in H. H. he becomes a bishop; finally Harding’s rhyming chronicle makes him a cardinal, cited by Pauli, König Ælfred, p. 54. Pity that no one had the courage to make him Pope!

[14] Essays, pp. 83, 89.

[15] ibid., p. 11.

[16] Conybeare, p. 58.

[17] For the St. Gallen MS. of Orosius, cf. Zangemeister’s edition (Teubner), pp. 302 ff. For the Donaueschingen MS. cf. Schilling, Ælfred’s angelsächsische Bearbeitung der Weltgeschichte des Orosius (1886).

[18] See Schepss, Archiv für’s Studium der neueren Sprachen, xciv. 156.

[19] On p. 129 Mr. Conybeare suggests an emendation of the Chronicle which shows that he has not mastered the Saxon declension of adjectives. In the same passage of the Chronicle, Mr. Draper confuses Legaceaster (Chester) with Legraceaster (Leicester), p. 16.

[20] Mr. Conybeare’s knowledge of the sources of English history seems to stop with the Monumenta Historica Britannica, 1848. He never even mentions the Rolls Series. He says, e.g., that the Liber de Hyda ‘has never been printed in full,’ p. 216. It was edited for the R. S. by Mr. Edward Edwards in 1866; cf. also pp. 120, 144, 161, 173, 177.

[21] Cited by Ebert, Literatur des Mittelalters im Abendlande, ii. 96.

[22] In regard to the Orosius, Schilling’s dissertation, cited above, brings this out very well. See below, §§ 99-103.

[23] Essays, p. 187.

[24] Lectures v, vi.

[25] § 93, below.

[26] Saxon Chronicle, II. civ.

[27] Hoveden, I. xc.

[28] Essays, p. 202.

[29] Bede, ii. 28; Saxon Chron. II. cxii.

[30] 892, 899, 900.

[31] 869, 872, 873, 879, 880, 881, 883, 884.

[32] 889, 898.

[33] At 901.

[34] Cf. Ethelred’s Laws, viii. 43: ‘uton niman us to bysnan … Æðelstan ⁊ Eadmund ⁊ Eadgar,’ Schmid, p. 248.

[35] See § 118 below.

[36] Const. Hist. i. 28 (ed. 1854).

[37] Birch, No. 537; K. C. D. No. 304.

[38] Birch, No. 574; K. C. D. No. 1074; cf. Green, C. E., p. 133.

[39] See below, §§ 63, 64, 82.

[40] e.g. Ebert, u. s. iii. 250; Pauli, u. s. p. 4.

[41] 473 C [15], 484 B [39], 485 A [41]; cf. 491 E [56]. For Asser I give references to M. H. B., adding the pages of Wise’s edition in brackets.

[42] Echoes from the Oxford Magazine, p. 29.

[43] 474 A [16].

[44] 474 B [17].

[45] 475 B [19].

[46] 477 A [23].

[47] 481 C [32].

[48] 484 C [40].

[49] 492 D [58].

[50] 494 A [61].

[51] 470 D [8].

[52] 472 B [12].

[53] 471 C [10].

[54] 476 C [22].

[55] 494 D [63].

[56] Vasallus, 480 B, 481 D [30, 33]; senior, 471 A, B [9, 10], cf. 494 E [64]; indiculus, 487 E _bis_ [48]; comes (= ealdorman), 469 B, D, 470 A, D, 476 A, B, 473 B _bis_, 491 B [5, 6-8, 14, 21 _bis_, 55]. Comes is also used of the Danish jarls, 476 A-477 B [21-23]. For Frankish use of vasallus see S. C. H. i. 205; for senior, ib. 193.

[57] 471 E [11]; the circumstances of the anecdote are possible. Charles the Great’s last wife Liutgarde died in 800. His sons Charles and Pippin seem never to have married. Beorhtric died in 802.

[58] 472 D [13].

[59] See Chronicle, ii. 80, 81. Prudentius and Hincmar are strictly contemporary.

[60] 491 A [54].

[61] 483 D [38].

[62] 470 C [8]; Chron. 855.

[63] Writing to Æthelwulf Lupus says: ‘uestrum in Dei cultu feruorem ex Felice didici, qui epistolarum uestrarum officio fungebatur,’ Migne, Pat. Lat. cxix. col. 459. Writing to Felix himself, he says that he had known him formerly in the monastery of Fara [Faremoûtier-en-Brie, see Bede, ii. 148], which seems to show that Felix was a Frank, ib. col. 462. The object of these letters was to get the pious Æthelwulf to subscribe to roofing the monastery of Ferrières with lead.

[64] e.g. for vasallus cf. Pauli, König Ælfred, pp. 12, 13; S. C. H. i. 156, and the charters there cited of the ninth and tenth centuries; for comes = ealdorman, ib. 158, 159.

[65] Cited in Dict. Nat. Biog. s. v. Grimbald.

[66] ‘Legatos ultra mare … direxit,’ 487 B [46]. Cf. the letter of Fulk of Rheims to Alfred, Wise, p. 128 (if this is genuine, see § 88 below).

[67] 489 B [51], an addition to the Chron.

[68] ‘Dedit mihi Exanceastre, cum omni parochia quae ad se pertinebat in Saxonia et Cornubia,’ 489 A [51]. On the meaning of Saxonia see § 30 below.

[69] T. Wright, Biographia Britannica Literaria, Anglo-Saxon Period (1842), pp. 405 ff.

[70] Annales Cambriae, and Brut y Tywysogion, sub anno. (I shall cite the latter work as Brut.)

[71] MS. D of the Chron. mentions a king of the West Welsh (i.e. Cornwall) as late as 926. See Chron. II. viii.

[72] 488 A-C [49 f.].

[73] Ann. Cambr. and Brut., sub anno.

[74] Ed. J. Gwenogfryn Evans, pp. 212, 213.

[75] Cf. Lingard, Anglo-Saxon Church, ii. 384 (ed. 1858).

[76] Ann. Cambr. and Brut, s. aa. 840, 873; cf. Ang. Sac. ii. 648. The Brut calls him ‘Meuruc escob bonheđic,’ i.e. ‘M. a noble bishop.’ The origin of this curious mistake is as follows. The Ann. Cambr. at 873 say ‘Nobis episcopus et Meuruc moritur.’ The compiler of the Brut misread this as ‘Nobilis episcopus Meuruc moritur.’

[77] Ann. Cambr. and Brut, 874.

[78] A Lumberth, bishop of Menevia, dies in 944, Ann. Cambr., or 942, Brut; but if this is the same person it would give him a tenure of seventy years.

[79] My friend Bodley’s Librarian has kindly called my attention to an interesting inscription found in St. Lawrence’s Church at St. Helier’s, Jersey, about ten years ago, which he thinks confirms the idea of the existence of a see at Exeter in early times. The interpretation of the inscription seems to me, however, too uncertain to justify me in making use of it. Lingard, u. s. suggests that by the grant of Exeter, &c., Asser received the western portion of the diocese of Sherborne, and that on the death of Wulfsige he succeeded to the whole.

[80] ‘Ad patriam remeauimus. Sed cum ab eo discesseramus in Wintonia ciuitate febris infesta me arripuit; in qua sedulo per duodecim menses et unam hebdomada die noctuque … laboraui,’ 487 D [48]. A medical friend, to whom I showed this passage, thinks that this prolonged febrile condition was probably due to gastritis.

[81] Chronicle, II. ciii. f.

[82] Theopold, Kritische Untersuchungen, p. 32.

[83] e.g. ‘insiliariis’ for ‘insidiariis,’ 470 D [9].

[84] 477 B [24], Flor. i. 85: [‘Pagani uictoria potiuntur. Rursus, duobus euolutis mensibus, rex Ætheredus et frater eius Ælfredus cum Paganis, qui se in duas diuiserant turmas, apud Meretun pugnantes, diu uictores existunt, aduersariis omnibus in fugam uersis; sed illis in proelium redeuntibus, multi ex his et ex illis corruunt, et] Pagani uictoriam accipientes loco funeris dominantur.’ The passage within the brackets has been lost in our text of Asser, owing to the recurrence of the words ‘Pagani uictoria.’ Of course Florence may have modified the passage a little, as his manner is.

[85] Above, § 12.

[86] e.g. 877, 884.

[87] Elimauit, Flor. i. 96, eleuauit, Asser; aptius, Flor. i. 83, apertius, Asser. But these are possibly only editorial blunders.

[88] See below, § 25.

[89] 489 C-490 C [52-54].

[90] Oxford Historical Society, 1885.

[91] The writer of the article on Camden in the Dict. Nat. Biog. thinks that no special blame attaches to Camden in this matter. But I find it difficult to take his view of the question.

[92] Chronicle, ii. 93.

[93] 480 C-481 B [30-32].

[94] See below, § 46.

[95] Chronicle, ii. 92.

[96] 479 B-480 A [29].

[97] 484 C-485 C [40-42].

[98] König Ælfred, p. 93.

[99] These events really belong to 885; Asser has omitted the year 884, and so wrongly numbered the succeeding annal. See below, p. 50.

[100] 474 C [17]; 492 C [58].

[101] Especially if the disease indicated be, as some have thought, epilepsy, with all its deteriorating effects upon the brain; so Green, C. E., p. 101.

[102] Possible instances are: infatigabiliter studiose, 477 E [25]; Florence omits ‘studiose’; talento telonio, 484 B [39]; Flor. omits talento; citius plus, 496 D [68]. Not in Flor.

[103] 475 A [19] the printed text has ‘expetiuit,’ but Flor. and two of the Asser MSS. and ASN have the rare word ‘subarrauit,’ which occurs in the same sense, 497 B [70].

[104] 484 D [40].

[105] The same sort of thing occurs occasionally even in these days of the printing press. In the early copies of a recent Blue Book on China, in the middle of a dispatch of Sir Claude Macdonald, occurred the following sentence: ‘not very grammatical, but I suppose we must let Sir Claude Macdonald write as he pleases.’ This is obviously the comment of some official, written on the margin of his proof, which escaped deletion when the proof was returned to the printer, and so was incorporated in the text.

[106] See Gorham, History and Antiquities of Eynesbury and St. Neot’s, pp. 45 ff. It was in the reign of Edgar, therefore not later than 975. The body was stolen.

[107] Vol. II. xv. ff.

[108] I use S. D.¹ and S. D.² to indicate the two recensions. That S. D.² used the original text of Asser is shown by his having the false reading ‘qui fuit Fingodwulf’ in Alfred’s pedigree, which S. D.¹ omits and Florence corrects, S. D. ii. 99; that he used S. D.¹ is proved by the fact that under 853 they both have the false reading ‘Wada’ for the ‘Huda’ of Asser, Florence, and the Chron., S. D. ii. 71, 102; that he used Florence is proved by the fact that he gives the amount of Æthelwulf’s Roman benefaction as ‘ccc mancusas denariorum,’ ii. 103; where the word ‘denariorum’ is from Florence, and is not in Asser or S. D.¹ Unfortunately Mr. Arnold is very capricious in his use of large and small type. He prints in large type, as if original to S. D., many passages which come from Florence or Asser.

[109] Thus we should read ‘ferri’ for ‘fieri,’ 471 E [11]; ‘Stratcluttenses’ for ‘Stratduttenses’ 478 C [27].

[110] 492 D [58].

[111] Gams, Series Episcoporum, p. 452. Elias’ predecessor was Theodosius, c. 864-879. In the whole list of patriarchs there is no Abel or Bel.

[112] S. D. ii. 89.

[113] ‘Þis eal hét þus secgean Ælfrede cyninge domne Helias Patriarcha Gerusalem,’ ii. 290.

[114] ibid., xxiv. f.

[115] pp. 147, 148; cf. Mas Latrie, Trésor de Chronologie, pp. 791, 835.

[116] Shrine, u. s. p. 113. Aug. 5.

[117] In 909 according to MS. C of the Chronicle (Mercian Register); in 906 according to MS. D. The notice of St. Winnoc as ‘lord of the minster of Wormhoult to the south of the sea,’ p. 145, Nov. 6, is also emphasised by Mr. Cockayne as proving that the work is earlier than 900, in which year St. Winnoc’s body was translated to Bergues. But this point, if insisted on, would prove the work to be earlier than 846. For in that year St. Winnoc was translated from Wormhoult to St. Omer (_or_ Sithiu). The translation to Bergues in 900 was from St. Omer, not from Wormhoult. But an English writer might easily be ignorant of either or both these translations. It is better therefore not to lay stress on this point. See the Life of St. Winnoc in Mabillon, AA. SS. iii. 311, 312 (ed. 1672). An English writer could hardly however have been ignorant of Oswald’s translation, if it had taken place.

[118] 493 C [60].

[119] See Ducange, s. v.

[120] Malmesbury says of Athelney: ‘ut nullo modo nisi nauigio adiri queat,’ G. P. p. 199. But ‘nauticis’ cannot mean ‘boats,’ but only ‘sailors.’

[121] 480 B [30].

[122] 487 C [47].

[123] 476 A [21].

[124] 487 C [47].

[125] 488 B [49].

[126] aquilonaris, 469 C [5], 474 C [17]; meridianus, 469 C [6], 476 A [21], 477 D [25], 479 A [28], 482 C [35]. East and west are always ‘orientalis,’ ‘occidentalis,’ occiduus.’ There is nothing like the Irish ‘airther,’ ‘iarthar,’ ‘fore,’ and ‘hinder,’ for east and west.

[127] 467 [1], 473 C [15], 479 A [28], 483 B [37]; cf. Britannica insula, 483 A [36].

[128] König Ælfred, p. 258.

[129] Dextralis [dextera] pars [plaga] Britannie, pp. 161, 169, 212, 223, 237.

[130] Reges et principes [totius regni] D. B. pp. 70, 118; omnes Ecclesiae totius D. B. p. 115; clerus et populus D. B. p. 165; Dubricius archiepiscopus D. B. pp. 163, 192; incolae D. B. p. 230; D. B. insulae, p. 162; cf. p. 269: ‘[Grifud] rex Britannie, et ut sic dicam totius Gualie’; from which it would seem that ‘Britannia’ is a narrower term than ‘Gualia’; but their exact relation I do not know.

[131] 470 A [7].

[132] 471 D [10].

[133] 487 B, D, 488 A [47-49]; cf. also 496 A, B [49], where Alfred sends alms to the monasteries not only of ‘Saxonia’ and Mercia, but also to those of ‘Britannia,’ Cornwall, Gaul, Armorica, Northumbria, and Ireland.

[134] 477 D, 478 A [25], 483 C [37].

[135] 473 C [15]. Ethelwerd is at the opposite pole to Asser in this respect, for he uses Australes _Angli_ for Sussex, 510 C, D, and Occidentales _Angli_ for Wessex, 509 E, 510 D, 514 D, 515 C, 517 C. We have, however, Saxones Occidentales, 519 A.

[136] 474 C [17], 475 D [20] _bis_, 482 D [35], 483 C, D [37, 38], 484 B [39].

[137] 470 A [7], 485 D [43], 486 E [46], 492 A [56].

[138] 470 A [7].

[139] 473 C [15], 478 D [27], 479 A [28], 483 B [37], 484 A [38], 487 C [47].

[140] 475 B [19], 478 D [27], 479 A [28], 480 B [30], 481 D [33], 482 C [35].

[141] Saxonica poemata, 473 E [16]; S. carmina, 485 E [43], 486 A [43]. Cf. what is said of Charles the Great, Einhard, c. 29: ‘barbara et antiquissima carmina, quibus ueterum regum actus et bella canebantur, scripsit memoriaeque mandauit. Inchoauit et grammaticam patrii sermonis.’ Of his son Louis the Pious on the other hand it is said: ‘poetica carmina gentilia, quae in iuuentute didicerat, respuit, nec legere, nec audire, nec docere uoluit,’ Theganus, Vita Hludouici, c. xx (Pertz, ii).

[142] 474 A [16], 485 E [43], 486 A [43], 497 E [71].

[143] 471 A [146] _ter_, 471 C [147], 487 C [47], 488 A [49].

[144] ‘In Saxonia et in Cornubia,’ 489 A [51].

[145] ‘In omni Saxonia et Mercia, et … in … Cornubia,’ 496 A, B [67].

[146] For cases in which it does include Northumbria see Bede, ii. 368.

[147] See Bede, ii. 43, 86.

[148] 478 B [26], 484 B [39].

[149] 489 C [52]. In the Book of Llandaff we have in one place: ‘in confinibus Britannie et _Anglie_,’ p. 192. Asser never has Anglia.

[150] 467 _bis_ [1, 3], 471 C [10], 473 D [15], 483 A [36], 483 C [37], 484 B, C [39], 489 B [51], 491 B [55].

[151] Beorhtric, 471 D [11]; Æthelwulf, 469 D [153], 470 B [7], 483 E [38]; Æthelbald, 472 D [13]; Æthelberht, 473 C [15]; Æthelred, 475 B [19].

[152] See below, § 49.

[153] 467 [1].

[154] Chron. 886; cf. ibid., 901.

[155] 475 A [19], 476 D [22], 477 C [24].

[156] ‘In sempiterno graphio,’ 470 C [8]; the very same phrase, Cambro-British Saints, p. 100.

[157] 484 A [38]; the true year is 885, v. inf. p. 50.

[158] Dümmler, Gesch. d. Ostfränkischen Reiches, ed. 1. ii. 224.

[159] Bede certainly speaks of Saxons, Angles, Jutes, as being all peoples of Germania, H. E. I. xv. In Alfred’s Orosius Germany includes all between the Rhine, the Danube, the Don, and the White Sea.

[160] 483 A [36], 486 B [44].

[161] 477 E [11].

[162] 470 C [8], 472 D [13], 483 E [38].

[163] 491 A [54].

[164] 483 D [38].

[165] ibid.

[166] 483 D [38].

[167] 484 A [38], 489 B [51].

[168] 483 A [36] _bis_; ibid., C [37] _bis_.

[169] 483 A, B [36, 37]; at the beginning of the annal 886 we should probably read: ‘[orientalem] regionem fugiens’; Florence has ‘orientali Francia relicta,’ i. 101. In the division which followed the deposition of Charles the Fat, Arnulf has ‘orientales regiones Hreni’; Rudolf, ‘internam partem regni’ (= þæt middel rice, Chron.); Odo, ‘occidentale regnum,’ 491 A [54]; cf. Chron. 887 and notes.

[170] 479 A [28], 487 B [46], 498 B [67].

[171] 484 A [39], 486 B [44].

[172] 493 E [61], 494 B [62] _bis_.

[173] 484 A [38].

[174] 473 C [15].

[175] See § 30.

[176] Histoire de France, i. 36: ‘leur indomptable personnalité, toujours prête à réagir contre le despotisme du fait,’ a passage alluded to by M. Arnold, Celtic Literature, p. 102.

[177] 488 A-C [48-50].

[178] Bede, ii. 75, 76.

[179] Chron. ii. 118, 119.

[180] Collected Papers, p. 467; I have to thank my friend Mr. F. Jenkinson, Librarian of the sister University, for reminding me of this passage.

[181] e.g. the Book of Llandaff, which is of the twelfth century, though based on older materials; Brochmail, Elised, Mouric, Ris, Rotri, Teudur, will all be found in the Index.

[182] Digal Rotri, ‘the avenging of Rotri,’ Ann. Cambr. and Brut, sub anno, 880; cf. ibid., 877.

[183] See Chron. 835, and note.

[184] 892 Ann. Cambr.; 891 Brut. He may be the Himeyt who occurs in No. 2 of the ancient Welsh pedigrees, printed from Harleian MS. 3859, in Y Cymmrodor, ix. 171.

[185] Ann. Cambr., Brut., sub anno.

[186] pp. 212, 213; he is mentioned, ibid. 226-231.

[187] ibid., Index; in Cambro-British Saints, p. 22, the name is derived from an eponymous king Gluigius.

[188] pp. 200, 206, 216, 226, 231-236; cf. Pedigree, No. 29, u. s.

[189] Ann. Cambr., sub anno.

[190] Book of Llandaff, pp. 238, 239.

[191] 481 B [32].

[192] 895 Ann. Cambr.; 894 Brut.

[193] Above, § 12.

[194] The special use of the term ‘Saxonia’ occurs only in the biography; but then there was no great occasion to use it in the annals. Conversely, the seven instances in which Welsh equivalents for Saxon place-names are given occur wholly in the annals. But this also is quite natural. In the annals, as we shall see, the writer was translating; and he added explanations to make his text more intelligible to his Welsh readers. For the same reason, and also because of their greater length, the biographical sections give greater scope for the author’s idiosyncrasies both of diction and of style; and therefore they naturally contain a number of peculiarities which cannot be paralleled in the annals.

[195] The biographical sections (B) occupy nearly twice as much space as the annalistic (A). For purposes of statistics it is hard to draw the line exactly between them, because, even in the annals, there are small biographical insertions, and it is difficult to know under which head to class these. The longer anecdotes about Æthelwulf, Æthelbald, and Æthelred I have counted as B. I give a few statistics of the vocabulary. It will be seen that some words of frequent occurrence occur only under one heading, and these taken alone might support the theory of a double authorship; but I do not think they do. See last note. Adunatus, A³, B¹; aedificium (in special sense noted in text), A¹, B³; aliquantulus, A¹, B⁴; animose, A⁶; belligerare, A⁵, B²; curtum, B⁶; incessabiliter, B³; infatigabiliter, A² (the writer is fond of words ending in -bilis, -biliter); licentia (in sense of _leisure_), B³; more aprino, B¹; more lupino, A¹; more uulpino, A¹; ordinabiliter, B⁶; testudo, A¹, B²; uniuersitatis uia (i.e. death), A⁶, B¹; ultramarinus, A¹, B¹; uita praesens, B¹².

[196] 482 C [35].

[197] i. 321; E. T. ii. 55.

[198] König Ælfred, p. 141.

[199] 486 A [43].

[200] 492 D [58].

[201] ibid.

[202] 495 D [66].

[203] Gesta Pontificum, pp. 389 f.: ‘Fastigium cristallinum rex Ethelwulfus apposuit scrinio, in quo nomen eius litteris aureis est legere.’ In front were ‘ex solido argento iactae imagines,’ i.e. statuettes cast in solid silver; at the back ‘leuato metallo miracula figurauit,’ i.e. scenes representing Aldhelm’s miracles. Does ‘metallo leuato’ mean that they were engraved? or does it indicate ‘champlevé’ enamel? The latter would be another link with Alfred’s Jewel, though the enamel of that is ‘cloisonné.’ Malmesbury speaks in the present tense, so that the shrine had survived to his time; and he must have seen it almost daily. In the Chron. Monast. Casinensis, under the year 1020 we find mentioned: ‘loculus mirificus … argento et auro ac gemmis Anglico opere subtiliter ac pulcherrime decoratus,’ Pertz, vii. 649; cf. ibid., 712: ‘Anglus quidam aurifex.’

[204] e.g. 486 D [45] neque enim … administraret; 488 A [49] qui saepe … sub ipsis; 492 D [59] ueluti gubernator … contendit, &c.

[205] Instances of recurrence at longer intervals: 469 A [4] nobilis ingenio, nobilis et genere; 473 D [16] cum nobilitate generis, nobilis mentis ingenium; 474 A [17] crebris querelis, et intimis suspiriis; 486 C [45] querelabatur et assiduo gemebat suspirio; 496 B [67] in quantum infirmitas et possibilitas atque suppetentia permitteret; 497 A [69] in qu. poss. aut supp. immo etiam inf. perm. Instances of recurrence at short intervals: 485 D, E [43] artes quae nobilibus conueniunt, studia qu. nob. conu.; 485 E [43] et maxime Saxonica carmina studiose didicere; 486 A [43] et max. carm. Sax. memoriter discere, et … studiosissime; 491 C [55] erga studium … sapientiae uoluntatem, erga st. sap. deuotionem; 492 A, B [57] quamuis dissimili modo (repeated); 493 A, B [59, 60] inani poenitentia … inanem poenitentiam … detestabilis poen … sera poen.; 494 B, D [62, 63] iudaico more [= like Judas] (repeated); 495 D, E [66] unicuique secundum propriam dignitatem (repeated). In the long passage about Alfred’s illness this feature reaches the degree of caricature. If my view is right that that passage is a conflation of two traditions relating to the same events, this characteristic also would be accounted for.

[206] Parentheses: 481 B [32] non enim … uidimus; 489 B [51] quia illa ciuitas … parua; 491 A [54] nullus enim … solus. Repetition: 478 D [27] tutissimo terrarum situ; 481 C [32] locus situ terrarum tutissimus.

[207] Ecgberht … and his Coins, Numismatic Chronicle, 3rd Series, xx. 66-87. For a copy of this (too) ingenious essay I am indebted to the kindness of Sir Henry himself. His unfavourable view of the Saxon Chronicle is strongly expressed here and elsewhere.

[208] Foundations of England, i. 257.

[209] See Chron. sub anno, and notes.

[210] ‘Aut cum Paganis sub captiuitate erant,’ 489 C [52].

[211] 469 C [5].

[212] 469 B, C [5] (four times).

[213] 487 C [47]; probably in 473 A [14] Suth-Seaxum should be read for-am.

[214] 484 A [38]. These forms are very common in Ethelwerd, whose work is also based mainly on the Chronicle: ‘quod Huiccum nuncupatur,’ 509 f.; Dorsetum Dux, 511 B; Defenum Dux, 511 C.

[215] 489 B [51], 490 C [54]; in the latter passage he has also Sigona, which is a sort of compromise.

[216] 469 B [219].

[217] 469 D [220] and _passim_.

[218] 483 A [36], Chron. 881. Florence has ‘exercitus saepedictus,’ which shows that he misunderstood or misread ‘superius’ as ‘supradictus.’ This illustrates the relation of Florence to Asser, as well as that of Asser to the Chron.

[219] See Chron. ii. 95.

[220] 482 C [35].

[221] 469 B [5] Sheppey; 469 C [6] Oakley; 476 C [22] Ashdown; 479 A [28] Exeter; 481 D [33] Selwood.

[222] See above, p. 38, note 3.

[223] 469 B, C [225] Sheppey and London; ib. C, D [6] Surrey, and ‘Mediterranei Britones’; 474 C [17] York; 476 A [21] Reading; 477 D [25] Wilton; 478 D [27] Wareham; 479 A [28] Exeter; 480 B [30] Chippenham; 482 C [35] Cirencester; 483 B [37] Rochester.

[224] Above, p. 44. Other good additions will be found under 853, 871. (I do not include under this head the story of Æthelred and his mass.) But the fact that Asser was occasionally able to make authentic additions no more disproves the greater originality of the Chron. than similar additions in Ethelwerd, who, while following in the main the Chron., evidently had other good sources now lost. On the type of Chron. used by Asser, see Chron. II. lxxxiv.

[225] 492 C [58]: ‘ad quadragesimum quintum [annum] quem nunc agit.’

[226] 496 A [67], from Cura Past. iii. c. 20. [Anglo-Saxon Version, cap. xliv.]

[227] Alfred says that he translated sometimes ‘word be worde,’ word by word, sometimes ‘andgit _of_ andgite,’ ‘sensum _ex_ sensu.’ The exact correspondence is curious.

[228] See above, §§ 24, 25.

[229] u. s. p. 356.

[230] Rev. C. S. Taylor, The Danes in Gloucestershire, pp. 7-9.

[231] 480 C-481 B [30-32].

[232] Ed. Coxe, i. 331, 332.

[233] pp. 339 ff.

[234] ‘Saxones Anglicos Zephyri sub uento morantes,’ p. 350.

[235] AA. SS. July vii. 314 ff.

[236] ‘Priusquam Anglia … Nortmannorum subiugaretur ditioni,’ p. 320ᵇ.

[237] p. 320ᵃ.

[238] Imitatio, i. 3; Eng. Transl. ed. 1863.

[239] p. 320ᵇ.

[240] pp. 317 ff.

[241] Whitaker, u. s. p. 367.

[242] pp. 256 ff.

[243] In the Shrine, pp. 12 ff.

[244] Anglia, iii. 104 ff.

[245] Catalogue of British History, i. 539.

[246] Two Saxon Chronicles, pp. 351 ff.

[247] See below, p. 56, note 4.

[248] Grundriss … der angelsächsischen Litteratur, p. 494.

[249] Gorham, pp. 256, 257.

[250] ibid. 258.

[251] AA. SS. u. s. p. 321ᵃ; Whitaker, pp. 318, 367.

[252] AA. SS. ibid.; Whitaker, p. 367. The Metrical Life seems to make him king of Kent only, ibid. 318.

[253] Whitaker, p. 318.

[254] AA. SS. p. 321ᵇ; Whitaker, pp. 320, 367.

[255] AA. SS. ibid.; Whitaker, p. 321.

[256] Whitaker, p. 343; Gorham, p. 257: ‘on Sc͠es Ælfeges dagen þæs halgen biscopes.’ The absurdity is hardly less if we suppose the earlier Ælfheah to be meant, 934-951. But the title of ‘Saint’ seems to show that the later one is intended. If so, the life cannot at any rate be earlier than 1012. And this alone would be fatal to Ælfric’s authorship, as he was himself a personal friend of this later Ælfheah, and could not possibly have made such a confusion; cf. Wülker, Grundriss, p. 455.

[257] AA. SS. pp. 322ᵇ, 323ᵃ; Whitaker, pp. 328, 346, 368; Gorham, p. 257.

[258] AA. SS. p. 323ᵇ; Whitaker, pp. 329, 346, 368.

[259] AA. SS. p. 325ᵃ; Whitaker, pp. 333 ff., 347 ff., 370 ff.; Gorham, p. 258.

[260] AA. SS. p. 325ᵇ; Whitaker, pp. 335, 349, 372; Gorham, pp. 258, 259.

[261] AA. SS. p. 327ᵃ: ‘panes … quos nonnulli liridas appellant’; Whitaker, pp. 351 ff.; Gorham, p. 259.

[262] AA. SS. pp. 327ᵇ-328ᵇ; Whitaker, pp. 355 ff., 371 ff.; Gorham, p. 260.

[263] 481 A [32].

[264] Bede, ii. 48, 168, 175, 243, 371.

[265] Ebert, u. s. ii. 229.

[266] AA. SS. pp. 323ᵃ, 325ᵇ; Whitaker, pp. 328, 348, 368, 370; Gorham, p. 258.

[267] Gregorovius, Gesch. der Stadt Rom, iii. 206, 207. The Saxon Chronicle dates his pontificate 883-885, another indication that it is a year in advance of the true chronology.

[268] AA. SS. p. 325ᵇ; Whitaker, pp. 335, 349, 372; Gorham, p. 259.

[269] Chron. 885.

[270] ibid. 883; omitted in MS. ‘A’ _only_. According to Malmesbury, Alfred gave this relic to Glastonbury, Antiq. Eccl. Glast. p. 316 (ed. Gale).

[271] Even Mr. W. H. Simcox, English Historical Review, i. 232; on the ground that the evidence is ‘earlier than much which we accept.’ Even were this so, it does not touch the fact of its being _inconsistent_ with authentic records.

[272] ‘Com þa Guðrum se hæðene king mid his wælreowen here ærest on east dæle _Sexlandes_.… Ða Ælfred king … þæt ofaxode þæt se here … wæs … swa neh _Englelande_, he sone for fyrht fleames cepte, and his cæmpen ealle forlet, and his heretogen, and eall his þeode; … ferde þa lutigende geond heges and weges, geond wudes and feldes, swa þæt he … becom to Æðelingege,’ Gorham, p. 239; cf. AA. SS. p. 327ᵃ.

[273] Pauli thinks that the result was partly due to internal treachery, König Ælfred, p. 123; cf. also Asser, 480 B [30] ‘et etiam a Christianis,’ &c.

[274] Professor Earle’s suggestion, who notes that Alfred’s will shows that he had a ‘ham’ at Chippenham; cf. Asser, 480 B [30].

[275] König Ælfred, p. 117.

[276] ‘Butan þam cyninge Ælfrede,’ ‘diese vier Worte klingen in ihrer trockenen Einfachheit unendlich grossartig,’ ibid., 125 note. The same words are used of Hereward, 1071 E, 1072 D; and Pauli has remarked that Alfred’s position in Athelney was not unlike Hereward’s in Ely, p. 129.

[277] Chron. 878, and notes.

[278] Weltgeschichte, VI. ii. 44. Ethelwerd in his Preface says: ‘dilucidius explicare oportet,’ 499 C. If this is his idea of lucidity, what would his obscurity be?

[279] cf. Pauli, u. s. p. 145 note.

[280] On Ethelwerd cf. Chronicle, II. xliv, ci. f., cxxv, 8, 9, 18, 28, 47, 59, 89 f., 174, 178.

[281] sub anno 901.

[282] Pauli thinks he detects traces of a ballad in a passage of Ethelwerd, König Ælfred, p. 119 note; but it is difficult to argue from a writer like Ethelwerd.

[283] Ed. Arnold, p. 147; On Henry of Huntingdon, cf. Chron. II. lvii f., 10, 43, 70, 215, 244 f.

[284] ii. 84.

[285] ‘Incelebres,’ not ‘in celebres.’

[286] S. D. i. 62, 63, 204 ff., 230 ff.; ii. 83, 111.

[287] Gesta Regum, i. 125.

[288] Old English History, p. 130.

[289] Not the cathedral, as I have wrongly said, Chron. II. 94.

[290] S. D. i. 204, 230.

[291] G. R. i. 124-126, 130.

[292] See below, §§ 90, 115.

[293] G. R. i. 132, 133.

[294] See Chronicle, II. cxxvii.

[295] ‘Incurabili morbo languentem … curandum transmisit,’ Higden, vi. 318, 356; Lib. de Hyda, p. 26.

[296] W. M. i. 129; Ingulf, p. 28; Bromton, col. 818; W. Thorn, col. 1777 (hundred et _lestes_); Ann. Winton. p. 10; Robert of Gloucester, i. 293; Lib. de Hyda, p. 42.

[297] Geoffrey of Monmouth, iii. 5, 13; Layamon’s Brut, i. 269 f.; John of Wallingford, p. 538; Higden, ii. 92 (from Alfred of Beverley). The whole myth is due to a misunderstanding (wilful, probably, in the first instance) of the partial incorporation in Alfred’s Laws of the _Mercian_ code of Offa.

[298] ‘Primus monarcha Anglorum,’ Lib. de Hyda, p. 48, which gives a long comment on this text; cf. Ric. de Cirencest. Speculum Hist. i. 45: ‘primus … monarcha, et ad quem monarchia regni Anglicani totaliter extitit deuoluta.’ Ethelwerd, though so much nearer the time, is not guiltless in this matter, saying that Alfred ‘obtinuit regnum … super prouincias Brittanniae cunctas,’ p. 514 C.

[299] Wendover, i. 363.

[300] ‘Illam maximam regis credidit dignitatem, nullam in ecclesiis Christi habere potestatem,’ Ailred of Rievaulx, ed. Migne, col. 719.

[301] Bromton, col. 814; Rudborne, Ang. Sac. i. 207; Lib. de Hyda, p. 41.

[302] ‘Uir literatissimus, et philosophus in uniuersitate Oxenfordensi,’ Rudborne, u. s.

[303] Bromton, col. 818: ‘tertiam [partem] scholaribus Oxoniae, nouiter congregatis’; so Lib. de Hyda, p. 45.

[304] Rapin (Eng. trans. 1732), i. 95, 160; Carte (ed. 1747), i. 311, 316. The fiction-monger of the Mirror of Justices treats it as already ancient in the time of Alfred. I owe these references to Sir Frederick Pollock.

[305] Miroir des Justices, pp. 296-298; where the names of the defaulting justices are given, and very marvellous they are. I owe this reference to Draper, p. 35.

[306] See above, §§ 44, 45; cf. also Wallingford, p. 535.

[307] See ii. 87.

[308] cf. S. D.² ii. 117: ‘dum reuerterentur _domum_’; the difference between ‘domūiret’ and ‘dormiret’ would be extremely small.

[309] Ed. Bannatyne Club, p. 22.

[310] See ii. 114.

[311] ‘her Aldfrið … forðferde … on Driffelda,’ Chron. 705 (Northern recension).

[312] He transfers to Æthelred Asser’s description of Alfred’s division of his time and revenues, Langtoft, Rolls Ed. i. 312-324.

[313] Church History, Book ii. 83; cited by Raine, Priory of Hexham, i. 22.

[314] See i. 354.

[315] Chron. 883, MSS. B and C.

[316] See pp. 19, 28.

[317] For Mr. Riley’s notable exposure of Ingulf, see Archaeological Journal, xix. 32 ff., 114 ff.

[318] Ingulf, pp. 20 ff.

[319] ibid. 20.

[320] Bede, H. E. iii. 18; so John the Old Saxon, abbot of Athelney, was ‘bellicosae artis non expers, si in meliori disciplina non studeret,’ Asser, 494 D [63].

[321] See p. 25.

[322] See p. 27.

[323] ibid.

[324] cf. Wulfstan’s Homilies, ed. Napier, p. 310; Ælfric, Lives of Saints, pp. 440, 468; and the references to the Laws given, Chron. ii. 164, 165. Edgar indeed was formally enrolled as a confessor, and found a place in the Calendar, see AA. SS. July 8, p. 659.

[325] Chron. 1018, MS. D.

[326] Gorham, p. 260.

[327] Rolls Ed. p. 163.

[328] Rolls Ed. p. 10.

[329] Rolls Ed. p. 113.

[330] Chron. II. cxxvii.

[331] Thus 869 and 870 are _both_ given as Alfred’s twenty-first year; this throws the Series one wrong up to 876 inclusive. The annal 877, as I have shown, is blank in the genuine text of Asser. Then in 878 not only is this not allowed for, but the number twenty-seventh is repeated from 876. This further increases the error by two, i.e. the total error now amounts to three years; and this error is maintained to the end.

[332] Chronicle, II. xlix, cii-civ, cxvii, 44, 73, 77.

[333] Foundations of England, i. 247.

[334] Bede, I. lvi.

[335] A yet earlier copy of this document is printed in Sweet’s Oldest English Texts, p. 179; another copy occurs in the Cambridge University MS. of the Anglo-Saxon Bede; and a third in a fragment which probably originally belonged to MS. B of the Chronicle; all these MSS. read ‘xxiii.’ with A; a later copy printed by Professor Napier reads ‘xxii.,’ this is probably a mere slip, or it may be due to the influence of Asser. See Chronicle, II. xxviii. f., lxxxix. f., 1, 79. In the Hyde Register, pp. 94 ff., is a later copy beginning with Ine and going down to Canute; this omits the passage about Alfred’s age.

[336] Cited by Stubbs, W. M. II. xlii. f.

[337] On the intellectual poverty of Rome about this time see a very interesting passage in Gregorovius, u. s. iii. 141-149.

[338] 473 D [16].

[339] ‘religiosa nimium femina’ is Asser’s description of his mother, 469 A [4]. Æthelwulf’s famous donation, whatever its exact nature, is at any rate proof of his piety and charity; which are not necessarily, as some persons seem to think, marks of a weak intellect. The letters of Lupus of Ferrières, cited above, § 14, are evidence that his liberality was well known on the Continent.

[340] Asser, 473 D [15].

[341] On pilgrimages and the disastrous results which often followed from them, see Gregorovius, ii. 178 ff., iii. 76 ff.; Bede, ii. 281, 282; on the passion for relics, ibid. 158; Gregorovius, iii. 72 ff.; Ebert, ii. 99, 334 ff., iii. 208 ff.

[342] On sponsors at confirmation see Bede, ii. 383.

[343] Ed. Hearne, pp. 19 ff.

[344] In a review of vol. ii of my Saxon Chron., in Brandl und Tobler, Archiv für ’s Studium der neueren Sprachen, civ. pp. 188 ff.

[345] ‘Cingulo, honore, uestimentisque.’ _Cingulum_ sometimes means ‘dignity,’ ‘office,’ v. Ducange, s. v.; and that may be the meaning here.

[346] Waitz, Deutsche Verfassungsgesch. ii. 133, cited by Stubbs, Const. Hist. i. 145; the authority is Gregory of Tours: ‘in Basilica beati Martini tunica blatea indutus est, et chlamyde, imponens uertici diadema,’ ii. 38.