236 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters. 



navians. It may be assumed therefore, that the Eorls of Kent 

 were identical with the Jarls of Denmark and Norway. Now 

 the Scandinavian Jarls were not an hereditary class of noble- 

 men, but were officers or magistrates appointed for life or 

 pleasure.' It is significant too, that the late well-established 

 use of Earl, as the governor of a province, is attributed to 

 Danish influence. 



In the laws of Kent its use is never inconsistent with this. 

 Ceorl is used, as it always is, for the common freemen — " pea- 

 sant," if we choose to employ this term, but not by any means 

 & low order of peasant ; the ceorls are represented as land- 

 owners and even slave-owners, and may perhaps be best 

 described by the term "yeoman." The legal standing of ihe 

 Eorl, as represented by the hot or composition, is double or 

 triple that of the Ceorl ; but this is by no means a proof of 

 difference in hereditary rank, but may equally well indicate a 

 personal authority or a special relation to the king. 



Turning to the Saxon Chronicle for this early period, we 

 find this conclusion strengthened. In a speech of King 

 Wihtred of Kent, A. D. 692, we read : " Kings shall appoint 

 Earls and Ealdormen, Shire-reeves and Judges " (eorlas and 

 ealdermen, scire-revan and domesmenn.) From this it appears 

 clearly that the Eorls were not an hereditary, but an appointed 

 class. In the same document, A. D. 657, we read (of the 

 King of Mercia): " to all his thegns, to the archbishop, to the 

 bishops, to his earls." Note the word "his," showing a per- 

 sonalj rather than an hereditary relation. Again, A. D. 675 

 (in Merciii) : " neither king, nor bishop nor earl nor no man." 

 This, although not so explicit as the others, certainly implies 

 no hereditary rank. The above are all the instances of the 

 use of the word eorl which I have been able to find before the 

 time Alfred except in works of poetry. I think it will be 



1 Dahlmann, Gesch, Danemarcks, ii. pp. 88 and.305. The same Tiew is taken by the 

 latest Norwegian historians, Munci and Kevsjr, an I am informed (being myself igno- 

 rant of Norwegian) by Mr. R. B. Anierioa, Instruc'orln the Scandinavian languages in 

 the Universitj of Wisconsin. 



