the other states of Britain, as a part of the mighty Roman Empire.

When centuries afterwards, that enormous fabric which had diffused slavery and oppression, together with peace and civility over so considerable a part of the globe, had reached its final dissolution, and the abject Britons had gradually yielded to the sway of the Saxon Chieftains, the county of Huntingdon was included in the kingdom of EAST ANGLIA, which also comprehended the counties of Cambridge, Suffolk, and Norfolk. Of this division of the country, Uffa, one of the leaders of the Saxon adventurers, assumed the title of King (cyning) A.D. 575.

The county of Huntingdon was then called Huntedunescyre and Huntanedunescyre.

In the year 777, Ethelbert, King of East Anglia, was treacherously murdered by Offa, King of Mercia, and thenceforward Huntingdonshire, and the other portions of the state of East Anglia, were attached to the

+ Hume.

kingdom of Mercia, the most powerful division of the heptarchy. They continued under the dominion of the Mercian Sovereigns until, in the year 827 all the kingdoms of the heptarchy were subjugated by force of arms by Egbert, king of Wessex.† Egbert, howevc, did not incorporate East Anglia with his other dominions. Though conquered, it continued separate from the

+ "This success of Egbert's" says Sir Winston Churchill in his Divi Britannici, " enlarged his dominions so wide, that he began to bear himself up with an universal obedience: to manifest which, he turned the name of Britain, so venerable for its age (having been the only appellation of this Isle for near 1800 years before) into that of England, the country from whence his ancestors came." This is incorrect. The people of the provinces, colonised by the Angles, had long been called Angli. Bede and Boniface, in the century before Egbert, so call them. Neither did Egbert establish the monarchy of England: he asserted the predominance of Wessex over the other states, whom he defeated or made tributary. Athelstan who destroyed the Danish sovereignty, was the first sole monarch of England, A. D. 934. It is surprising that Hume, a much greater authority than Sir Winston Churchill, should have fallen into the error of representing Egbert as founder of the English monarchy.

rest under the government of its own princes. A crowd of ghastly monarchs pass swiftly along the page of its history, like the shadowy princes of the line of Banquo in the scenes of Shakspeare, until, in the year 866 we find it in the possession of the Danes, who, on their first arrival in England, landed in this state. They met with no resistance, but remained in East Anglia during the winter, augmenting their forces, and silently waiting a favourable opportunity for commencing that invasion which afterwards overwhelmed all England with its force. They sallied forth in the ensuing spring, and having in about two years completely conquered the powerful kingdom of Northumbria, and spread devastation and dismay wherever they went; the Danes returned, and completed the conquest of East Anglia. Edmund, their king, was beheaded, and Godrun or Guthrum an associate of Ingram the victorious leader of the Danes, was placed upon the throne of East Anglia. But a mighty revolution was soon to be effected by the rare and splendid union of genius,

wisdom, and valour. Alfred, justly surnamed the Great, being expelled from the throne of Wessex by the superior force of the Danes, retired for safety to the obscure retreats of Athelney, in the county of Somerset. There, surrounded by poverty, ignorance, and contempt, this great monarch meditated the glorious attempt of recovering his throne, and emancipating his countrymen. He tried and succeeded. After a doubtful struggle for the sovereignty of the island during twelve years of peril and calamity, the Anglo Saxons under Alfred, their native prince, triumphed [A. D. 878] over their enemies, and surmounted one of the most formidable invasions that any nation had experienced. Godrun and his followers were persuaded by Alfred to exchange their paganism for the christian religion, and on these terms they were admitted to cultivate and possess East Anglia as peaceful colonists. It is pleasing to reflect, that this

† Godrun, as a pledge of his admission into the Christian faith, was baptised by the name of Ethelstan, Alfred

magnanimous policy was duly felt and acknowledged by the Danes. In the same year a large fleet of Northmen arrived in the Thames and joined Godrun, as if desirous to unite with him in a new warfare, but the adventurers found no encouragement from their converted countrymen. They wintered at Fulham, and then followed their leader, the famous Hastings, into Flanders.

East Anglia continued under the government of Godrun till his death, in 890, when forgetful of their young religion and their honour, the natives co-operated with the armies of Hastings, in endeavouring to overthrow the monarchy of Alfred. They were discomfitted by the superior genius of the English sovereign, but suffered to remain in their former possessions; which they continued to occupy as an independent state, until the famous battle of Brunanburgh, in the year 934, effectually secured to Athelstan the throne of his ancestors, and the subjugation

his conqueror standing as godfather. It is scarcely possible for history to furnish a more interesting picture,