7. East Anglia included Cambridgeshire, Suffolk, Norfolk, and the Isle of Ely. Its chief place was Dun wich.
Of these kingdoms, it is evident that only two, Mer cia and Northumberland, were of extent sufficient to deserve the name of kingdoms. After the union of the heptarchy, under one monarch, we find, from the laws of Alfred, that minor subdivisions of the districts were established, for the better convenience of civil and mili tary government. It is probable, however, that even the petty kingdoms of the heptarchy had been also sub divided into shires, or townships, and hundreds, for the same rational purpose ; and that Alfred only renewed the institution of his ancestors, who had brought it from Germany, and learnt it under the Romans. The Anglo Saxon territories, in Germany, had been divided into what the Romans called pagi and vici, which may be translated shires and townships.
S. In external appearance, the Anglo-Saxons were distinguished by the same superiority of size, by the fairness and bloom of their complexions, and the yel low hair, which are ascribed to the Germans by all an cient historians, and which still characterize the Saxon breed of the present day. The gigantic size* of the Germans, which Tacitus says was so much admired by the Romans, was probably exaggerated by the reports of his countrymen, in the same manner as the size of the Saracens was by our own crusaders. Still, however, there is sufficient evidence that the Saxon race was su perior certainly to the Celtic, in size and beauty, and pro, bablv also to the southern inhabitants of ancient Europe, whether we suppose those inhabitants to have been Goths or Celts in their origin. The Spaniard Orosius, in speaking of the Saxons, represents them as dreadful for their courage and agility. The Emperor Julian, who had fought and lived among the same tribes, bears tes timony to their vehemence and valour ; and Zosimus, their contemporary, ranks them as superior to all the world for personal strength, as well as contempt of danger.
But though the physical qualities of the Anglo-Sax ons seem to have been preserved entire from their an cestors, and even to be recognised in their posterity, their mental qualities, like those of all other nations, have varied with circumstances. The first Saxon conquer ors ol Britain were masters of the sea, fearless in ship wreck and in battle, familiar with, and fond of, every species of danger, impatient of the superiority of even their own chiefs, merciless in their victories, and retain ing no trait of civilization, but the love of liberty, and that respect for their own females,' which at the dark est era of their barbarism is always traced. In the age
ol Etnelred the Unready, we find the descendants of the same people so debased by superstition and the fear of the Danes, that, instead of preparing for battle, they or dained the worship of a new saint; and it was no un common disgrace for their nobility to suffer, under the tyranny of the Danes, that their daughters should be violated before the eyes of their fathers by the soldiers of their oppressors, who were quartered in their houses. Under Allred, the name of an Englishman was respect able over the whole world. Under the Normans, it was a term of reproach for some centuries to be called an Englishman.
It is fair, however, to judge of a people as of an in dividual, not by the point to which they may be debased, but by that to which they may rise. If we judge of our Saxon ancestors by this test, we shall find them, when the first ferocity of conquest bad subsided, capable of great achievements under the conduct of able leaders. In the principles of their civil government, we shall find, amidst an age of comparative barbarism, some of the seeds ol those wise institutions which have grown to maturity iu our own.
The orders of society among the Anglo-Saxons (after their sovereign and princes of the blood,) were Thanes, or nobility greater and lesser, the ceorles or freemen, the freedmen, and the slaves.
Though nothing is more certain than that the power of the sovereign was limited among the Anglo-Saxons, yet it is extremely difficult to ascertain accurately the exact limits of his authority. Much of his power would depend on his personal character and talents. Eadbold of Kent for instance, had less authority than his father ; while Edwin, in Northumbria, attained to such power, that he had the banner carried before him, not only in battle, but also in his excursions with his ministers throughout the kingdom, which seems to have been an assumption of dignity unknown before. The growth of the kingly power would be favoured, not only by the talents of prosperous sovereigns, but by the na tural tendency of power to accumulate ; and from the establishment of the hierarchy, would be naturally aug mented by religious influence, till the crown had grown sufficiently strong to excite the jealousy of the church.