This fact, which has escaped the accurate, and generally merciless, criticism of Gibbon, is very clearly proved by Zeuss, Die Deutschen, etc. pp. 361, 362. Footnote 47: The passage is sufficiently important to deserve transcription at length. “Saxonum gens, sicut tradit antiquitas, ab Anglis Britanniae incolis egressa, per Oceanum navigans Germaniae litoribus studio et necessitate quaerendarum sedium appulsa est, in loco qui vocatur Haduloha, eo tempore quo Thiotricus rex Francorum contra Irminfridum generum suum, ducem Thuringorum, dimicans, terram eorum ferro vastavit et igni. Et cum iam duobus proeliis ancipiti pugna incertaque victoria miserabili suorum cede decertassent, Thiotricus spe vincendi frustratus, misit legatos ad Saxones, quorum dux erat Hadugoto. Audivit enim causam adventus eorum, promissisque pro victoria habitandi sedibus, conduxit eos in adiutorium; quibus secum quasi iam pro libertate et patria fortiter dimicantibus, superavit adversarios, vastatisque indigenis et ad internitionem pene deletis, terram eorum iuxta pollicitationem suam victoribus delegavit. Qui eam sorte dividentes, cum multi ex eis in bello cecidissent, et pro raritate eorum tota ab eis occupari non potuit, partem illius, et eam quam maxime quae respicit orientem, colonis tradebant, singuli pro sorte sua, sub tributo exercendam. Caetera vero loca ipsi possiderunt.” Transl. Sci. Alexandri, Pertz, ii. 674. This was written about 863. Possibly some ancient and now lost epic had recorded the wars of the Saxon Heaðogeát. ----- But if such difficulties exist in dealing with the events of periods which are within the ascertained limits of our chronological system, and which have received the illustration of contemporary history, what shall we say of those whereof the time, nay even the locality is unknown? What account shall we render of those occurrences, which exist for us only in the confused forms given to them by successive ages; some, mischievously determined to reduce the abnormal to rule, the extraordinary to order, as measured by their narrow scheme of analogy? Is it not obvious that to seek for historic truth in such traditions, is to be guilty of violating every principle of historic logic? Such was the course pursued by our early chroniclers, but it is not one that we can be justified in repeating. In their view no doubt, the annals of the several Saxon kingdoms did supply points of definite information; but we are now able to take the measure of their credulity, and to apply severer canons of criticism to the facts themselves which they believed and recorded. If it was the tendency and duty of their age to deliver to us the history that they found, it is the tendency and duty of ours to enquire upon what foundation that history rests, and what amount of authority it may justly claim.