which (if the term must be used) were both subject to William; but as applied to which the word has quite different senses, meaning, in the one case, subordinate — in the other, subjugated. He must consider that there are two countries, two soils, included in the same geographical circumference; that of the Normans rich and free; that of the Saxons poor and serving, vexed by rent and toilage: the former full of spacious mansions, and walled and moated castles, — the latter scattered over with huts and straw, and ruined hovels; that peopled with the happy and the idle — with men of the army, and of the court — with knights and nobles, — this with men of pain and labour — with farmers and artisans: on the one side, luxury and insolence, — on the other, misery and envy — not the envy of the poor at the sight of opulence they cannot reach, but the envy of the despoiled when in presence of the despoilers."
Perhaps the effect of Thierry's work has been to cast into the shade the ultimate good effects on England of the Norman conquest. Yet, these are as undeniable, as are the miseries which that conquest inflicted on our Saxon ancestors from the time of the battle of Hastings, to the time of the signing of the Great Charter at Runnymede. That last is the true epoch of English nationality; it is the epoch when Anglo-Norman and Anglo-Saxon
