eral of its oars;
they were about seven yards long, and must have been thirty-two, sixteen
on each side. This measurement seems to have been normal, for the
"Anglo-Saxon Chronicle" says that Alfred had ships built twice the size
of ordinary ships, and gave them "sixty oars or more" (_sub anno_ 897).
A ship constructed on the exact model of the Scandinavian barks went
from Bergen to New York at the time of the Chicago Exhibition, 1893. It
was found to be perfectly seaworthy, even in rough weather.

[33] It may be added in favour of this same word that it is difficult to
replace it by another as clear and convenient. Some have proposed "Old
English," an expression considered as having the advantage of better
representing the continuity of the national history, and marking less
conspicuously the break occasioned by the Norman Conquest. "Anglo-Saxon"
before the Conquest, "English" after, implies a radical change, a sort
of renovation in the people of England. It is added, too, that this
people already bore in the days of King Alfred the name of English. But
besides the above-mentioned reasons, it may be pointed out that this
break and this renovation are historical facts. In language, for
example, the changes have been such that, as it has been justly
observed, classical English resembles Anglo-Saxon less than the Italian
of to-day resembles Latin. Still it would not be considered wise on the
part of the Italians to give the name of "Old Italians" to their Roman
ancestors, though they spoke a similar language, were of the same blood,
lived in the same land, and called it by the same name. As for Alfred,
he calls himself sometimes king of the Saxons "rex Saxonum," sometimes
king of the Angles, sometimes king of the Anglo-Saxons: "AEgo Aelfredus,
gratia Dei, Angol Saxonum rex." AEthelstan again calls himself "rex
Angul-Saxonum" (Kemble, "Codex" ii. p. 124; Grein, "Anglia," i. p. 1; de
Gray Birch, "Cartularium Saxonicum," 1885, ii. p. 333). They never call
themselves, as may be believed, "Old English." The word, besides, is not
of an easy use. In a recent work one of the greatest historians of our
day, Mr. Freeman, spoke of people who were "men of old English birth";
evidently it would have been simpler and clearer to call them
Anglo-Saxons.

[34] "Anglo-Saxon Chronicle," Rolls, _sub anno_ 491.

[35] "De Moribus Germanorum," xv., xxvi.

[36] Names of villages recalling German clans or families are very
numerous on the east