shores of France, where the vine could be cultivated upon the commercial principle. Had the English under the Plantagenets persevered in the home cultivation of the vine for the purpose of wine-making, whilst the claret of a better vine-country, that could be brought in a few hours across the narrow sea, was excluded from our ports, the capital of England would have been fruitlessly wasted in struggles against natural disadvantages, and the people of England would have been for the most part deprived of the use and enjoyment of a superior drink to their native beer. The English vineyards were gradually changed into plain meadows, as Lambardo has said, or into fertile corn-fields. Commercially the vine could not be cultivated in England, whilst the produce of the sunny hills of France was more accessible to London and Winchester than the corn which grew in the nearest inland county, The brethren of a monastery, whose labour was a recreation, might continue to prune their vines and press their grapes, as their Saxon ancestors had done before them; but for the people generally, wine would have been a luxury unattain able had not the ports of Sandwich and Southampton been freely open to the cheap and excellent wine of the French provinces. This is the course of every great revolution in the mode of supplying the necessities, or even the luxuries, of a people amongst whom the principle of exchange has been established. The home growth for a while supplies the home consumption. A cheaper and better supply is partially obtained through exchange and easy communication--from another parish, another county, another province, and finally from another country. Then the home growth lingers and declines ; capital is diverted into other channels, where it can be more profitably employed. Governments then begin to strive against the natural commercial laws, by the establishment of restrictive or prohibitory duties. A struggle goes on, perhaps prolonged for centuries, between the restrictions and the principle of exchange. The result is certain. The law of exchange is a law of progress ; the rule of restriction is a rule of retrogression. The law of exchange goes on to render the communications of mankind, even of those who are separated by mighty oceans, as easy as the ancient communications of those who were only separated by a river or a mountain. The rule of restriction, generation after generation, and year after year, narrows its circle, which was first a wide one, and held a confiding people within its fold; but, as it approaches to the end, comes to covtain only a class, then a few of the more prejudiced of a class, and lastly, those who openly admit that the rule is for their exclusive benefit. The meadows and the corn-fields of England have profitably succeeded her unprofitable vineyards; and the meadows and the corn-fields will flourish because the same law of exchange that drove out the vineyards will render the home exchange of corn and meat more profitable, generally, to producer and consumer than the foreign exchange. England is essentially a corn-growing and a mutton-growing country, and we have no fear that her fields will have failing crops, or her downs not be white with flocks, if the law of exchange should free itself from every restriction. England was not a winegrowing country, and therefore her vineyards perished before the same natural laws that will give the best, because the most steady, encouragement to her breadgrowing and beer-growing capacity.

HANDICRAFTS. Verstegan says, “ Touching such as have their surnames of occupations, as Smith, Taylor, Turner, and such others, it is not to be doubted but their ancestors have first gotten them by using such trades ; and the children of such parents being content to take them upon them, their after-coming posterity could hardly avoid them, and so in time cometh it rightly to be said,

* From whence came Smith, all he he knight or squire,
But from the smith that forgeth at the fire."

But the author of an ingenious little book, on “English Surnames," Mr. Lower, points out that the term was originally applied to all smiters in general. The Anglo-Saxon Smith was the name of any one that struck with a hammer,—a carpenter, as well as a worker in iron. They had specific names for the ironsmith, the goldsmith, the coppersmith ; and the numerous race of the Smiths are the representatives of the great body of artificers amongst our Saxon ancestors. The monks themselves were smiths; and St. Dunstan, the ablest map of his age, was a worker in iron. The ironsmith could produce any tool by his art, from a ploughshare to a needle. The smith in Alfric's Colloquy says, “Whence the share to the ploughman, or the goad, but for my art ? Whence to the fisherman an angle, or to the shoewright an awl, or to the sempstress a needle, but for my art ?” No wonder then that the art was honoured and cultivated. The antiquaries have raised a question whether the Anglo-Saxon horses were shod ; and they appear to have decided in the negative, because the great districts for the breed of horses were fenny districts, where the horses might travel without shoes (See 'Archæologia,' vol. iii.). The crotchets of the learned are certainly unfathomable. Mr. Pegge, the writer to whom we allude, says, “Here in England one has reason to think they began to shoe soon after the Norman Conquest. William the Conqueror gave to Simon St. Liz, a noble Norman, the town of Northampton, and the whole hundred of Falkley, then valued at forty pound per annum, to provide shoes for his horses.” If the shoes were not wanted, by reason of the nature of the soil in Anglo-Saxon times, the invading Normans might have equally dispensed with them, and William might have saved his manor for some better suit and service. Montfaucon tells us, that when the tomb of Childeric, the father of Clovis, who was buried with his horse in the fifth century, was opened in 1653, an iron horse-shoe was found within it. If the horse of Childeric wore iron horse-shoes, we may reasonably conclude that the horses of Alfred and Athelstan, of Edgar and Harold, were equally provided by their native smiths. There is little doubt that the mines of England were well worked in the Saxon times. “Iron-ore was obtained in several counties, and there were furnaces for smelting. The mines of Gloucestershire in particular are alluded to by Giraldus Cambrensis as producing an abundance of this valuable metal; and there is every reason for supposing that these mines were wrought by the Saxons, as indeed they had most probably been by their predecessors the Romans. The lead-mines of Derbyshire, which had been worked by the Romans, furnished the Anglo-Sasons with a supply of ore; but the most important use of this metal in the Anglo-Saxon period, that of covering the roofs of churches, was not introduced before the close of the seventh century." ("Pictorial History of England,' Book II. Chap. VI.) It is not impossible that something more than mere manual labour was applied to the operations of lifting ore from the mines, and freeing them from water, the great obstacle to successful working. In the Cotton Manuscripts we have a representation of the Anglo-Saxon mode of raising water from a well with a loaded lever. At the present day we see precisely the same operation carried on by the market-gardeners of Isleworth and Twickenham. A people that have advanced so far in the mechanical arts as thus to apply the lever as a labour-saving principle, are in the direct course for reaching many of the higher combinations of machinery. The Anglo-Saxons were exporters of manufactured goods in gold and silver ; and after nine hundred years we are not much farther advanced in our commercial economy than the merchant in Alfric's Colloquy, who says, “I send my ship with my merchandise, and sail over the sea-like places, and sell my things, and buy dear things, which are not produced in this land. . . . . Will you sell your things here as you bought them there ?-I will not, because what would my lahour benefit me? I will sell them here dearer than I bcright them there, that I may get some profit to feed me, my wife, and children."



(From Chronology of History, by Sir Harris Nicolas.) 827 EGBERT, or EGBRYHT, king of Wessex. He defeated and slew the king of Mercia in

825, and conquered that kingdom and all south of the Humber in 827, when he be

came the first sole monarch of England. He died 836-7. 837 ETHELWULF, son of king EGBERT, succeeded his father in February, 839. Died 857,

“having reigned eighteen years and a half.". 858 ETHELBALD II., eldest son of king Ethelwulf, succeeded his father in the kingdom of

Wessex in 858. Died 860. 861 ETHELBERT, or ETHELBRIGHT II., second son of Ethelwulf, succeeded his father in

the kingdoms of Kent, Essex, Surrey, and Sussex, and in 860 he succeeded his bro

ther in the kingdom of Wessex. Died 866, “having reigned five years."* 866 ETHELRED, or ETHERED, third son of king Ethelwulf, succeeded his brother Ethelbert

in 866. Died 871, “having reigned five years." * 872 ALINED THE GREAT, fourth son of king Ethelwulf, succeeded his brother in 871. Died

“six nights before the feast of All Saints,” viz., the 25th or 20th of October, 901,

having reigned twenty eight years and a half. 901 EDWARD I., THE ELDER, eldest surviving son of king Alfred, succeeded his father in

901. Died 925. 925 ATHELSTAN, or ETHESTAN, natural son of king Edward the Elder, elected by the Witan

on the death of his father in 925. Died 27th of October, 940, " having reigned

fourteen years and ten weeks.". 940 EDMUND I., THE Elder, fifth son of king Edward the Elder, succeeded king Athelstan

in 940. Died 26th of May, 947, “ having reigned six years and a half.". 947 EDRED, brother of king Edmund I., whom he succeeded in 947. Died 23d of Novem

ber, 955, “having reigned nine years and a half.". 955 EDwy, or Edwin, eldest son of king Edmund I., succeeded his uncle, and was crowned

at Kingston-upon-Thames in 955. Died 1st of October, 957 or 959. 959 EDGAR, THE PEACEABLE, succeeded his brother king Edwy in 959. “Consecrated

as king with great pomp at Bath," 11th of May, 973. Died July 18th, 975. 975 EDWARD II., THE MARTYR, eldest son of king Edgar, succeeded his father in 975.

Died 11th of March, 978. 978 ETHELRED II., THE UNREADY, half 1013 SWAIN, or SWEYN, king of Denmark, brother of king Edward the Martyr,

brother of king Etheldred II., whom he succeeded in 978. Abdi.

usurped the crown, and was procated the throne in 1012, but was

claimed king in the autumn of 1013. restored in 1015. Died 23d of April,

Died 3d of February, 1014. 1016. 1016 EDMUND IRONSIDES, natural son of 1014 CANUTE, or CNUT, son of king Swain, king Ethelred, elected by the Witan

was elected king of England by the in London, and the citizens, on the

fleet, in February, 1014. He defeated death of Ethelred; crowned April,

Edmund Ironsides in 1016, and 1016, but was defeated by Canute,

divided the realm with him, Canute with whom he divided the realm,

taking Mercia, and Edmund Wesses. Edmund taking Wessex, and Canute

That prince died 30th of November, Mercia Died 30th of November,

1016, and in 1017 Canute became 10JR.

sole monarch of England; or, as one copy of the Saxon Chronicle expresses it, “ took to himself the whole kingdom of England," whilst another copy says, “this year (1017) Cnut was chosen king." Died 1036.

* Saxon Chronicle. It will be seen that the length assigned to several reigns in that work does not agree with the date assigned to the accession of the kings.

1036 HAROLD I., son of king Canute, succeeded his father, by election of the Witan, in

1036, and died 16th of April, 1039, “having reigned four years and sixteen weeks."* 1039 HARDICANUTE, or HARDICNUT, king of Denmark, half brother of king Harold I., suc

ceeded to the throne about Midsummer, 1039. Died 8th of June, 1041. “He was

king over all England two years all hut ten days." 1041 EDWARD THE CONFESSOR, son of king Etheldred II., and half brother of king Hardi

canute; elected to the throne before the funeral of Hardicanute, in June, 1041, and was crowned at Winchester on Easter-day, 3d of April, 1013. Died 5th of January,

1066. 1066 HAROLD II., son of Godwin, earl of Kent, succeeded under a grant of the kingdom by

Edward the Confessor. He was crowned on the 6th of January, 1066, but was slain at the battle of Hastings, 14th of October in the same year.

Saxon Chronicle.


The following Chronology of English History to the Battle of Hastings, is taken from the

Chronological Index to the Pictorial History of England.' 55 JULIUS CÆSAR lands in Britain; gains several battles, and returns the same year to

Gaul. 54 Julius Cæsar lands a second time in Britain; fights Cassivellaunus; forces the

passage of the Thames; takes the capital of Cassivellaunus; appoints a yearly tribute, and again returns to Gaul.


43 Aulus Plautius lands in Britain ; defeats Caractacus and Togodumnus, and com

pels some of the tribes to submit. Claudius arrives in Britain, receives the submission of some of the tribes, and returns to Rome after being in the island six

months. 50 Ostorius Scapula, proprætor, arrives in Britain; carries on the war nine years ; erects

forts and lines; defeats the Sceni, captures Caractacus, and sends him to Rome. 59-61 Paulus Suetonius takes Mona (Anglesey). Boadicea defeats the Romans, and is

afterwards defeated by Suetonius, and poisons herself. 75-78 Julius Frontinus subdues the Silures.

Agricola completes the conquest of South Britain, and reconquers Mona. 79 He pursues his operations in the south-west. 80,81 He builds Agricola's wall; erects a chain of forts from Solway Frith to the Friths of

Clyde and Forth. 82 Agricola subdues the Novantæ, Selgove, and Damnii, and clears the south-west of

Scotland. 83 Crosses the Frith of Forth, and defeats the Caledonians. 84 Again defeats them at the Grampians under Galgacus. Britain discovered to be an

island. Agricola recailed to Rome by Domitian. 120 Hadrian arrives in Britain; raises a rampart between Solway Frith and the German

Ocean. 121 He repairs the wall of Agricola. 138 Lollius Urbicus drives the Caledonians beyond the Clyde and Forth, and there fixes the 140 Roman frontier; erects a rampart on the line of Agricola's forts. 183 The Caledonians lay waste the country between the lines of Agricola and the wall of

Hadrian. 207 Severus lands in South Britain ; penetrates into Caledonia; builds a wall parallel with

those of Agricola and Hadrian. 211 He marches against the Caledonians, but dies at Eboracum (York). Caracalla yields

the ground between the Solway and Tyne and the Friths of Clyde and Forth to the

Caledonians. 288 Carausius defeats the Scandinavian and Saxon pirates ; is made emperor of Britain,

&c. Britain a naval power. 297 He is murdered at Eboracum by Allectus, who succeeds him. 300 Allectus defeated and slain.


A.D. 306 Constantius Chlorus dies at Eboracum. 337 The Emperor Constantine the Great dies. 367 The Picts and Scots pillage Augusta (London) and make the inhabitants slaves. 382 Maximus becomes emperor of Britain, Gaul, Spain, and Italy. 388 He is defeated and put to death by the Emperor Theodosius the Great. 395 Theodosius dies, bequeathing the empire of the west to Honorius, over whom he ap.

points Stilicho guardian.

Stilicho repels the Picts, Scots, and Saxons. 403 The Roman empire dismembered ; part of the Roman troops recalled. 407 Marcus elected emperor of Britain; dethroned and murdered.

Constantine elected emperor of Britain; conquers a great part of Gaul; gives Spain 411 to his son Constans; dies. 420 The Romans finally abandon Britain. 428 Leogaire MacNeil, first Christian King of Ireland, began to reign. 441 The Roman party in Britain petition Ætius for aid. Germanus, a Gallic bishop, de

feats the Picts. 449 Vortigern calls in the aid of the Saxons under Hengist and Horsa, whom he places in

the Isle of Thanet.
463 Leogaire MacNeil, first Christian king of Ireland, dies.

Hengist and Horsa drive out the Picts and Scots. Vortigern marries Rowena.
The Saxons fortify Thanet. Vortigern is deposed, and Vortimer elected king. The

Saxons massacre the Britons at Stonehenge. Hengist founds in Kent the first

Saxon kingdom. 470 Riothamus, a king of Cornwall, embarks with 12,000 British to assist the Gauls. 477 Ella, the Saxon, with his three sons, lands in Sussex; defeats the Britons, and founds

the kingdom of the South Saxons. 510 He dies, having been the first Bretwalda. 627-9 Ercenwine takes possession of Essex, and founds the kingdom of the East Saxons. 547 Ida, the Angle, lands at Flamborough head, and settles between the Tees and the

Tyne, and founds the kingdom of Bernicia. 568 Ceawlin, king of Wessex, begins to reign. 593 Ethelbert, king of Kent, becomes Bretwalda. 616 He dies, and is succeeded as king of Kent by his son Eadbald. 617 Redwald, king of East Anglia, becomes Bretwalda,

The Angles of Bernicia and Deira united, and called Northumbrians. 621 Edilfrid, king of Northumbria, is slain, and Edwin, fifth Bretwalda, succeeds to his

kingdom. 625 Edwin styled “Rex Anglorum." 634 Penda, prince of Mercia, and Cadwallader, king of North Wales, defeat and slay Edwin.

Oswald defeats and slays Cadwallader at Hexham.

He is acknowledged Bretwalda. 642 He is slain in battle by Peda, and is succeeded in his kingdom by Oswy. 647 The Britons of Cornwall and Devonshire submit to the Anglo-Saxons. 651 The kingdom of Northumbria again divided. 652 Penda ravages Northumberland. Oswy sues for peace. The families of Penda and

Oswy intermarry. 654 Penda is defeated and slain near York. 655 Oswy conquers Mercia, and assumes the title of Bretwalda. 656 Wulfere made king of Mercia, and becomes Bretwalda of parts south of the Humber.

Alchfrid obtains part of Northumbria.

The yellow plague rages over Britain. 670 Oswy dies, and Egfrid, his son, succeeds.

Egfrid defeats the Picts. 679 Egfrid invades Mercia. 685 He is slain in a war with Brude, King of the Picts. 737 Ethelbald, king of Mercia, rules the country south of the Humber, except Wales. 742 Wessex again becomes independent. 748 The Danes make their first incursion into Ireland.

« ForrigeFortsett »