^{page 302 note a} Archaeologia, Vol. XIX. p. 111.

^{page 302 note b} Vol. I, p. 321.

^{page 303 note a} The fullest account I have met with, is in Bromton (Twysd. X Script. Col. 750, &c.) who wrote indeed many centuries afterwards, but might have had access to authorities which no longer exist.

^{page 303 note b} P. 65. edit. 1601.

^{page 303 note c} P. 281. edit. 1592.

^{page 303 note d} Ingulf, p. 6. Oxon. 1684.

^{page 303 note e} Mon. Anglic, vol. I. p. 100, 101. &c. Hemingi Chart. Wigorn. vol. 1, p. 1, 23, 25. From many other Charters preserved in the latter work, it appears that Rex Merciorum was the title borne by Kenwulf's predecessors, as well as more generally by Offa before the murder of Ethelbert.

^{page 303 note f} Vol. I. p. 275.

^{page 303 note g} Col. 776.

^{page 304 note a} Flor. Wig. p. 286. Malms, p. 33. Ingulf, p. 7. Oxon. 1684. Alured Beverl. p. 87. The Sax. Chron. does not notice either the accession or death of Kenelm. But that he succeeded his father Kenwulf when a child, and was shortly after murdered by order of his sister Quendrida, are facts related by other historians, and by some of them very circumstantially.

^{page 304 note b} P. 33.

^{page 304 note c} Sax. Chron. p. 71. Flor. Wig. p. 287.

^{page 304 note d} Flor. Wig. p. 288. Malms, p. 33. Ingulf, p. 7. Alured. Beverl. p. 87. Ethelwerd on this occasion seems to have confounded Ludecan with Beornwulf, p. 842.

^{page 305 note a} P. 71. See also Ethelwerd, p. 842, edit. Francof. 1601, and Flor. Wigorn. p. 288.

^{page 306 note b} The story of Egbert's Coronation at Winchester as King of England, and of his Edict for changing the name of the Country, as related by Dugdale from the Winchester Annals, (Monast. Anglic, vol. 1, p. 32) has been credited by Stow, Tyrrell, and Strutt, but rejected by Mr. Turner and Mr. Lingard. Mr. Turner has truly observed, that these facts are not noticed by the best authorities. But Egbert's occasional assumption of the title of Rex Anglorum (which rests on the authority of a Charter in the Textus Roffensis, p. 97, supposed by Mr. Turner to be a forgery) is perhaps not wholly inconsistent with the supreme sovereignty which he claimed and obtained over the tributary kingdoms. Indeed, if an instrument which has been preserved by Hearne be authentick, that title had already been borne by the Mercian King Offa (see Hemingi Chartul. Wigorn. vol. 2, p. 377,) and although it does not appear that Ethelwulf and his sons, the immediate successors of Egbert, adopted the style of Reges Anglorum, yet Mr. Turner seems to have been too hasty in asserting that they always signed themselves Kings of the West Saxons; for the same volume (p. 375, 376) contains two documents in which Ethelbald (to whom his father Ethelwulf had bequeathed the separate government of the West Saxons only) is styled King of the South Angles. In the Textus Roffensis (p. 106) I find a Charter in which Ethelwulf himself is called by the more extensive title of Rex Saxonum. It may be further observed that Alfred, in a Charter dated 889 (Hemingi Wigorn. p. 43) writes himself Rex Anglorum et Saxonum, thus appearing to distinguish the classes of people over whom he governed; though in his will, as Mr. Turner has remarked, he is styled King of the West Saxons, and by Asser Angulsaxonum Rex. These diversities (which might be further multiplied) would hardly deserve notice, if they did not appear to shew that, in this early period, the nature and extent of the dominion of the West Saxon monarchs over the neighbouring territories were not very accurately defined. There seems no reason therefore to impeach the authenticity of the Rochester Charter, for having fixed on Egbert a title which was not new; more especially as it appears from Mr. Turner's own statement, that the name Angli had been common to the Saxons established in this Island, even as far back as in the time of Bede.

^{page 306 note a} By consulting Tanner's Notitia, and more particularly Mr. R. Taylor's elaborate and well executed “Index Monasticus” of the East Angles, (published since the above paper was read to the Society) it will appear that very few of the religious institutions of that kingdom survived the Danish invasion.

^{page 306 note b} Annales ed. Gale, p. 159. The story of Offa seems first to have been related by Galfridus de Fontibus, in his work “de Pueritia sancti Edmundi.” See Batteley's and Yates's histories of St. Edmondsbury. Florence, (p. 300) speaking of Edmund, says, “ex antiquorum Saxonum prosapia oriundus.” This may perhaps be thought to allude to the Saxons of the continent, as contradistinguished from the Anglo-Saxons. Milton, however, understood indifferently, for he has described Edmund to have been “lineal from the ancient stock” of the East Anglian kings. In a Legend, edited by Mabillon, a story appears respecting a king named Adalbert, the brother and predecessor of Edmund, and who is said to have reigned 37 years, and 7 months; but Archdeacon Batteley supposes this account to have been founded on mistake, and that Ethelbert, who was murdered at Offa's Court, was the king meant to be alluded to.

^{page 307 note a} Hist. Norf. vol. 1. p. 340. fol. The supposed Athla or Attlinge is indeed referred to a former age, but the tradition of the foundation of Attleburgh by an East Anglian king might have reached Galfridus, and the chronology might have been easily confounded by him. As for Brame's work, which still exists among the MSS. left by Archbishop Parker to Bene't College, and of which specimens have been given by Martin, in the Appendix to his History of Thetford, I had a hope that, notwithstanding its absurdities, it might, on examination, be found to throw some light on the subject of this paper. But a careful examination of it, obligingly undertaken at my request by two intelligent friends at Cambridge, has fully ascertained its worthlessness in this as well as in other respects.