Bede, _Hist. Ec._ B. i. c. xv. In his Chronicon, written apparently two years earlier than his History, Bede narrates the incursions of the Picts and Scots and the final departure of the Romans under the year 429, and the landing of the Angles or Saxons in 459. The true date of the accession of Martian to the Empire in conjunction with Valentinian is 450. Lappenberg, in his _History of England_, has clearly demonstrated the legendary character of this narrative; and Kemble, in his _Saxons in England_, takes the same view. Nevertheless, Mr. Freeman, in his _Old English History_, appears to accept both dates and narratives as history; and Mr. Green, in his _History of the English People_, describes the landing of the Saxons under Hengist and Horsa in 449 in the island of Thanet as if he had himself witnessed the event. Footnote 160: Tribunus Cohortis Primæ Novæ Armoricæ Grannona in Litore Saxonico.—_Not. Imp._ Footnote 161: This has been well shown by Kemble, _Saxons in England_, vol. i. p. 10. Footnote 162: This was first observed by Sharon Turner in his _History of the Anglo-Saxons_, vol. i. p. 105. Footnote 163: Theodosii xviii (A.D. 441) Britanniæ usque ad hoc tempus variis cladibus eventibusque latæ in ditionem Saxonum rediguntur. Footnote 164: Compare the expression, ‘Repellunt nos Barbari ad mare, repellit nos mare ad Barbaros; aut jugulamur aut mergimur,’ with what is said of the Saxons, ‘Confovebatur namque, ultionis justæ præcedentium scelerum causa, de mari usque ad mare ignis orientalis,’ etc.; and of the Britons, ‘Itaque nonnulli miserarum reliquiarum in montibus deprehensi acervatim jugulabantur ... alii transmarinas petebant regiones.’ Footnote 165: Nennius, after describing how the Saxons increased in number in Britain, and how Octa passed from the north to Kent, from whom the subsequent kings of Kent descended, proceeds, ‘Tunc Arthur pugnabat contra illos in illis diebus cum regibus Brittonum, sed ipse dux erat bellorum.’ The ‘illos’ here is referred in another MS. to the Saxones mentioned in the beginning of the passage, and not to the ‘reges Cantiorum.’ Footnote 166: ‘Et vocatur Britannico sermone Guaul.’ This district is termed in the Bruts Mureif, from ‘mur,’ signifying a wall, and is identified with Reged, the kingdom of Urien, the old form of which name was Urbgen—Urbigena—City-born, alluding probably to Dumbarton. Footnote 167: ‘Id est Cat Coit Celidon,’ the battle of the wood Celidon. Footnote 168: The Vatican MS. adds, ‘ubi illos in fugam vertit quem nos Cat Bregion appellamus.’ This strange name seems to belong to the Picts more than to the Saxons, who could hardly have possessed Edinburgh at that early period. Footnote 169: