events of this war are very confusedly related by historians; but it appears that not fewer than five pitched battles were in one year fought, between the two rival kings, with various success. The two monarchs, at last, having collected their whole force were preparing for an engagement, which would in all probability have decided their fate, and that of the kingdom in one day; but Edmund proposed to the Danish king to trust the decision to a single combat, which Canute declining, a treaty was concluded, by which the kingdom was divided between them, with the reversion of the whole to the survivor. By this partition, all the country south of the Thames, with the city of London, and part of Essex, was assigned to Ed. mund, and the rest allotted to the share of Canute. Edmund did not long enjoy his peaceable sovereignty, being murdered in about a year, at the instigation of the traitor Edric, duke of Mercia.

Canute, in consequence of Edmund's death, convened an assembly of the nobles, and put in his claim to the government of the united monarchy, and although some did not willingly acknowledge, none durst openly dispute his right. The people had indeed too long, and too severely, smarted under the Scourge of a destructive war, to have any great inclination to renew its calamities, for the sake of deciding who should be their master. The children of Edmund were therefore abandoned, and Canute acquired the undivided sovereignty. Thus was the Danish government established in England, and the monarchy of the Anglo Saxons subverted, about one hundred and ninety years after its foundation by Egbert.

Canute was one of the greatest and best monarchs that had ruled over England. One of his grand political objects, was the incorporation of the two nations, which he diligently laboured to accomplish. He sent back a great part of the Danish troops, who were liberally rewarded for their services with English money. Canute, while king of England, made several yoyages to his Danish dominions, and took a journey to Rome, where he appeared with great splendour; was received with extraordinary respect; and left many marks of

his munificence. His name derives as much lustre from his magnanimity and love of justice, as from his political and military talents. One of the first acts of his reign was to condemn to death Edric, duke of Mercia, the assassin of Edmund. To put an end to the existence of a disloyal traitor, whom conscience could not bind, nor favours render faithful, and who converted his wealth and his power to the worst of purposes, was an act both of justice and policy. This monarch seemed intent on effacing from the minds of his subjects, the re nembrance of past calamities; and on restoring tranquillity and social order throughout his dominions. He died A. D: 1036, in the twentieth year of his reign.

Harold, from his swiftness in running, surnamed Harefoot, succeeded his father Canute in the throne of England; but made no great figure, either in war or in peace. His short reign of four years affords few materials for history.

Hardicanute, the son of Canute, by Emma of Normandy, relict of Ethelred, next ascended the throne. He was indolent and luxurious; lived unbeloved, and died unlamented, A. D. 1042. With this prince ended the monarchy of the Danes in England, after it had continued about twenty-eight years.

Edward the Confessor, the son of Ethelred and Emma, was at this juncture advanced to the throne of his ancestors, and in him the Saxon line was restored. This prince was placed on the throne by the influence of Earl Godwin, whose interest he secured by engaging to marry his daughter. This nobleman's genius, his great alliances, his high dignities, and important offices, had long rendered him the principal arbiter of public affairs. Having convened an assembly, to which the English alone had been called, he displayed, in an eloquent oration, the calamities which the country had suffered from the Danes. Historians relate, that this oration had such an effect on the minds of the assembly, as to produce a unanimous decree, that no prince of the Danish race should ever ascend the throne of England. It is also said to have been likewise resolved in this council, that the Danes should be expelled from the kingdom, and that this decree was imme

diately carried into execution. Edward died A. D. 1066, after a reign of twenty-four years, leaving the succession unsettled.

Harold, the son of earl Godwin, who inherited all the talents and genius of his father, had, during the reign of Edward, acquired a degree of popularity, which at this critical juncture raised him to the vacant throne. The manner in which the succession was determined, is differently related by historians. Some say that he was elected by the witena-gemot, or general assembly of the prelates and nobility; others, that he extorted a nomination from his dying predecessor; while others assert, that he usurped the crown without any formality or troubling himself about the consent of the nation. By whatever means Harold obtained the crown, his political and military talents rendered him worthy of wearing it; but he had no sooner assumed the regal dignity, than he was menaced with an invasion from Normandy. While he was preparing to repel the threatened attack, his brother Tasty, who had been banished in the reign of king Edward, returned with a piratical fleet; and after harrassing the coasts of the island, went to Norway, and prevailed on Hassagar, king of that country, to join him in the invasion of his brother's dominions. Being arrived on the coast of England with a formidable fleet, and numerous army, they entered the Humber, and sailing up the Ouse, landed their forces. The earls of Northumberland and Chester venturing to give them battle, were defeated, and their army almost totally destroyed. The Norwegians besieged York, which shortly after surrendered, and then began their march northward; but Harold, on receiving intelligence of these transactions, marched with a powerful army against the invaders, and attacked them at Stamford bridge, on the east side of which the Norwegians had entrenched themselves. The bravery of one of the Norwegians deserves to be commemorated. This single man defended the bridge with his battle-axe for a considerable time, and killed forty of the English with his own hand; but at last, being himself slain, the passage was forced; and the Norwegians, after an obstinate resistance, totally routed. This is

supposed to have been the most considerable battle that had hitherto been fought in England; each of the two armies, consisting of not less than sixty thousand men ; and as it continued from seven in the morning till three in the afternoon, the carnage was dreadful; Toston and the king of Norway were slain.

But while success thus attended the arms of Harold, he received intelligence of the landing of William, duke of Normandy in Sussex, and immediately marched southward to repel the invasion. Having, by hasty marches, arrived at London, and reinforced his army, he found it greatly diminished, not only by the battle of Stamford bridge, but also by desertion, of which an impolitic act on his part had been the cause. At that place, a vast booty had been found in the Norwegian camp; and it was the custom in those days to divide all the spoils among the officers and soldiers. But Harold had, on this occasion, retained the whole. All the nobility of the kingdom, however, repaired to him at London, and offered him their assistance. Having collected all the forces he could muster, he commenced his march against the duke, who was encamped near Hastings. The conduct of Harold, in hazarding the fate of the kingdom on the event of a battle, was more heroic than prudent; and the loss of his crown and his life, was owing to his precipitancy. The details given by different historians of this celebrated engagement, are often contradictory; but all agree, that the Normans gained a complete and decisive victory, and that the death of Harold, who was shot in the head by an arrow, ultimately decided the event of the day. The piety as well as prudence of the Normans, appears also to have been greater than that of the English; as the night preceding the battle, was by the former, spent in preparations for the contest, and in prayer to the Almighty for success; but by the latter, in feasting and carousing, supposing themselves certain of victory.

Harold was the last of the Saxon kings. Before we proceed, a view of the state of society among the Saxons is proper. The witena gemots, or general assemblies of the northern nations, formed the basis of all those political systems, which

were established on the ruins of the Roman empire. The fields of Mars, among the Francs, and the cortes of the Spaniards were the same as the witena-gemots of the Germans. To determine who were the persons that composed these assemblies, is a question that has baffled the researches of all historians and political writers. All agree, that the nobility constituted an important branch; as did also the bishops and principal abbots, after the introduction of Christianity; but whether that class of people, now called commons, constituted any part of this great national council, is a problem of difficult solution. But it is evident, that whatever might have originally been the case, the commons were afterwards, in most, or perhaps all the nations of Europe, excluded from these legislative assemblies, until re-admitted by royal authority. The first well authenticated instance of the commons of England sending representatives to the national senate, will be found in the reign of Edward the first; and it was not until the eighth year of Henry the fourth, that the right of electing county members, was extended to all freeholders possessing estates of forty shillings per annum.

Among the Saxons as among all other nations ancient and modern, a numerous class of people existed, who had no possessions. In every country, where liberty reigns, this order of men, how little soever favoured by fortune, enjoy all the rights of humanity, and are, in regard to their persons, the disposal of their time, and the exercise of their talents, equally free with those of the highest rank. Among most of the nations of antiquity, social distinctions were more strongly marked, and the superiority of one class of men over another, more strictly maintained. This lowest order of men among the Saxons were slaves; but of two different descriptions; one, consisting of those who, having no property of any kind, were maintained by their masters, and were slaves in the strict sense of the word. The other, of those who, holding small farms at the will of the great proprietors, performed for them all the laborious works which they required. These, managing the lands of their lords, drew from them some benefits to themselves, and enjoyed certain privileges;