Part 5 of 9
NOTE PP. p. 544. The Submission at Berkhampstead
781. See vol. i. p. 524 et seqq.
782. Æsch. Ag. 1653. οἶδ’ ἐγὼ φεύγοντας ἅνδρας ἐλπίδας σιτουμένους.
783. See above, p. 90.
785. Will. Pict. 113. “Caussam viduæ, inopis, pupilli, ipse humiliter audiebat, misericorditer agebat, rectissimè definiebat. Ejus æquitate reprimente iniquam cupiditatem, vicini minùs valentis aut limitem agri movere, aut rem ullam usurpare, nec potens audebat quisquam nec familiaris.” Cf. vol. ii. p. 172.
786. Ib. “Accipere solitus est avido auditu suavique gustu sacræ paginæ sermones, iis, ut animæ epulum sumeret, delectari desiderans, castigari, atque edoceri. Sumebat et honorabat condecenti reverentiâ hostiam salutarem, Dominicum sanguinem.” I do not know that the word “auditu” absolutely proves that William could not read, but it looks like it. He was however fully aware of the advantages of learning, even in laymen. See vol. ii. p. 274. This passage is also to be noticed as one among several which show that communion in both kinds was still allowed. The Archdeacon goes on to extol his sovereign’s orthodoxy in the matter of Transubstantiation, and to tell how he drove from his dominions the heresy which thought otherwise—“aliter sentientem pravitatem”—that is doubtless the teaching of Berengar. See vol. ii. pp. 116, 227.
787. Ib. 114. “Ejus liberi pietatem Christianam infantes didicere diligenti provisione ipsius.” This pious care answered better with his daughters than with his sons.
788. Ib. “Quoties ejus edicto et hortatu convenere Præsules, Metropolitanus cum suffraganeis, de statu relligionis, clericorum, monachorum, atque laicorum acturi. Synodis his arbitrum se deesse nolebat.” The advantages of the prince’s presence are then dwelt upon.
789. Ib. “Delato forte suas ad aures immani alicujus crimine, quod Episcopus aut Archidiaconus justo dementiùs vindicaverit, reum majestatis æternæ teneri jussit incarceratum, quousque caussa domini æquitate districta decerneretur, Episcopum aut Archidiaconum, veluti adversarios divinæ partis, criminans in judicium devocandos, feriendos gravi sententiâ.” The obscure words “justo dementiùs” mean, I conceive, not that the ecclesiastical judges were too strict, but that they let off offenders for money. On the doings of Archdeacons see vol. ii. p. 230, and the passage of John of Salisbury there referred to.
790. Will. Pict. 115. “Lanfrancum ... intimâ familiaritate colebat; ut patrem venerans, verens ut præceptorem, diligens ut germanum aut prolem. Illi consulta animæ suæ, illi speculam quamdam, unde ordinibus ecclesiasticis per omnem Normanniam prospiceretur, commisit.”
792. See the great anathema in Paul of Bernried’s Life of Gregory, cap. lxxvi. (ap. Murat. iii. 336); “Henrico Regi, filio Henrici Imperatoris, ... totius Regni Teutonicorum et Italiæ gubernacula contradico.” Mark how, as constantly in Lambert, while Italy has a name, Germany has none. See vol. i. pp. 172, 176.
793. Compare Lord Macaulay’s remarks (ii. 624) on the different clauses of the resolution by which the Crown was declared vacant after the flight of James the Second.
794. See above, p. 178, and vol. i. pp. 268, 519.
795. See vol. i. p. 175. In the passage of Bruno there referred to, Philip gets no higher title than “Latinæ Franciæ Rector.” Yet he is better off that Charles the Bald, who, in the Annales Fuldenses under 875 (Pertz, i. 389), is only “Galliæ Tyrannus.”
797. I hold, it may be remembered (see vol. i. p. 646), that the balance of evidence is against Godwine’s churlish birth; but, if such a rumour, true or false, were afloat, it would be enough. I do not however find the point brought forward by any contemporary Norman writer.
799. See vol. ii. pp. 277, 593.
800. Henry of Huntingdon, as we have seen (see vol. i. p. 332), seriously believed in William’s hereditary right. So elsewhere (761 E) he speaks of his “jus cognationis.” The Ramsey Historian also (cap. cxx.) says that William sought “regnum aviti propinquitate sanguinis debitum.” But perhaps still more remarkable is the way in which William of Poitiers (143), after describing William’s election and coronation at Christmas, adds, “Et, si ratio sanguinis poscitur, pernotum est quam proximâ consanguinitate Regem Edwardum attigerit filius Ducis Rodberti, cujus amita, Richardi Secundi soror, filia Primi, Emina, genitrix fuit Edwardi.”
801. Compare the passage from Orderic (598 A) quoted in Appendix C.
802. Liber de Hydâ, 291. “Dei etenim nutu multorum fit concursus populorum, ultro se navibus ingerentium, qui audierant Angliam argenti et auri omnibus opulentam, cibi et potûs omniumque frugum uberrimam, omnibus præterea bonis esse refertam.” So Orderic (494 A) speaks of William’s foreign followers as “Anglicæ prædæ inhiantes.”
803. Will. Pict. 124. “Non eo animi viget [Heraldus] robore, quo vel minimum quid meorum polliceri audeat. At arbitrio meo pariter quæ mea sunt, quæque dicuntur illius, promittentur atque dabuntur.” To any man but William one might have quoted the fable about the bear and his skin.
804. See vol. i. pp. 330, 633.
805. Ib. p. 525, and above, p. 266.
806. This comes among the three causes for William’s invasion given by Henry of Huntingdon (761 D); “Primò, quia Alfredum cognatum suum Godwinus et filii sui dehonestaverant et peremerant: Secundò, quia Robertum Episcopum et Odonem Consulem [see vol. ii. p. 564] et omnes Francos Godwinus et filii sui arte suâ ab Angliâ exsulaverant: Tertiò, quod Haraldus, in perjurium prolapsus, regnum, quod jure cognationis [see above, p. 278] suum esse debuerat, sine aliquo jure invaserat.”
808. William of Poitiers (124) is emphatic on this head; William “non tantùm ditionem suam et gloriam augere, quantùm ritus Christianos partibus in illis corrigere intendit.”
810. See Appendix W.
811. See above, p. 151.
813. See above, p. 258, and vol. ii. p. 198.
817. See above, p. 116.
818. See above, p. 118.
820. See above, p. 159.
821. See above, pp. 183, 201; vol. ii. 232.
822. See vol. ii. pp. 185, 186.
823. See above, pp. 129, 153.
824. See above, p. 155.
825. See above, p. 158.
826. I get the details of this meeting and of the larger meeting at Lillebonne from the Roman de Rou (11118 et seqq.), the only account which carefully distinguishes the two. See Appendix W.
827. Roman de Rou, 11156;
828. Ib. 11165. “Maiz sez homes è sez clers creie.” It is curious to find the wealth of the Church pointed to so early as among possible ways and means.
829. Ib. 11171;
This good constitutional doctrine almost forestalls the teaching of our great constitutional poet of the thirteenth century;
Political Songs (Camden Soc.), p. 110. But, instead of “communitas regni,” Normandy had only “grant barnage.”
832. See Ord. Vit. 493 A, B.
833. Orderic twice stops to discuss the Roman origin of Lillebonne (554 C and 864 B, C). It was founded by Caius Julius Cæsar on the site of a Gaulish town called Caletum, which he had destroyed. It was called Julia after his daughter. In Orderic’s own time it was barbarously called “Illebona.” William of Malmesbury (iii. 238), from whom we learn that Lillebonne was the place of meeting, calls it “Lillebona.”
834. These points in the history of Lillebonne are said to have been made out by the researches of M. Deville. But I am sorry to say that I know those researches only through M. Joanne’s excellent Guide to Normandy, p. 243. Lillebonne however is a place which speaks for itself.
835. See the view in Cotman’s Architectural Antiquities of Normandy, p. 75.
836. William kept his court (“curia”) at Lillebonne in 1063. See Orderic, 482 A. A synod was also held there in 1080. See vol. ii. p. 241.
837. Compare the Diets of Poland, at once the most aristocratic and the most democratic of all assemblies. Compare also the whole history of the States of Britanny, so well traced out by the Count of Carné, in his États de Bretagne. The second order, the Noblesse, was always more independent than either the Clergy or the Burghers, and its internal constitution was that of a Landesgemeinde.
838. This is implied in the words of William of Poitiers (124), “Quis enim juxta præstitutum naves perfici, aut perfectis remiges inveniri, annuo spatio posse speraret?”
839. Roman de Rou, 11182;
840. Roman de Rou, 11186;
841. Ib. 11196;
842. Ib. 11202;
843. Will. Pict. 124. “Quis novâ hac expeditione pulcherrimum statum patriæ in omnem redigi miseriam non timeret?”
844. Ib. “Quis Romani Imperatoris opes eâ vinci difficultate non affirmaret?” The ideas of Caius Julius Cæsar and of King Henry the Fourth were perhaps a little intermingled in the mind of the Archdeacon of Lisieux.
845. Ib. 123. “Thesauris illum abundare, quibus partis suæ Duces et Reges præpotentes conducantur.”
846. Ord. Vit. 493. “Normannorum paucitatem non posse vincere Anglorum multitudinem asserebant.”
847. Will. Pict. 124. “Classem [Heraldum] habere plurimam, homines in ministeriis nauticis peritissimos, qui sæpiùs pericula et prœlia maritima sint experti; terrâ illius, uti divitiis, ita militis copiâ, hanc multipliciter superari.”
848. See the passage quoted in p. 293.
849. Roman de Rou, 11214;
850. Ib. 11220;
851. Roman de Rou, 11228;
852. Ib. 11226;
853. Ib. 11244;
Cf. Psalm lxvi. 12.
854. Roman de Rou, 11251;
855. Roman de Rou, 11260;
856. Ib. 11264;
857. Ib. 11272;
See Taylor’s note, p. 108.
858. Roman de Rou, 11278;
Henry of Huntingdon (M. H. B. 761 E), in his abridged narrative, cuts the matter far too short. I do not remember any other writer who mentions the trick of William Fitz-Osbern.
859. So William of Malmesbury, iii. 238. “Super negotio singulorum sententias sciscitatus.” But he perhaps goes too far when he speaks of “omnes ejus voluntatem plausibus excipientes.”
860. Roman de Rou, 11290;
861. Roman de Rou, 11298;
862. I have read, in some peerage or book of genealogy, the pedigree of some one who professes to be descended from one of the English knights who went over to ask William to come and deliver them from the tyranny of Harold. Truly pedigree-makers will say anything.
863. See the account of Robert the son of Wymarc in William of Poitiers, 128.
864. By the second I mean Ralph of Norfolk, of whose origin I shall speak elsewhere. See Appendix LL.
865. On the movements of Tostig see Appendix X.
869. See vol. ii. p. 501, and Appendix X.
870. Ord. Vit. 492 D. “Tosticus ... festinus Normanniam adiit, et Willelmum Ducem cur perjurum suum regnare sineret fortiter redarguit.” The phrase “perjurus suus” is like the common phrase of “the King’s rebels” and such like.
871. Ib. “Seque fideliter, si ipse cum Normannicis viribus in Angliam transfretaret, regni decus obtenturum illi spopondit.”
872. Ord. Vit. 493 A. “Ejus exhortationibus animatus Normanniæ proceres convocavit.”
873. Ib. 492 D. See Appendix N.
874. Ord. Vit. 493 C. “Interea Tosticus in Angliam remeandi licentiam a Duce accepit; eique auxilium suum, tam per se quàm per omnes amicos suos, firmiter spopondit. Sed, sicut scriptum est, ‘Homo cogitat, Deus ordinat,’ evenit multò aliter quam sperabat. Nam de Constantino pelagus intravit, sed Angliam attingere nullatenus potuit. Heraldus enim mare navium militumque copiâ munierat, ne quis hostium sine gravi conflictu introiret in regnum quod fraudulenter invaserat. Tosticus itaque magnis undique premebatur angustiis, utpote qui nec Angliam per bellum cum paucis contra in numeros invadere, nec Normanniam propter contrarietatem ventorum poterat repetere.” It is wonderful how many undertakings in this age were thwarted by stress of weather.
875. See the next Chapter.
876. Ord. Vit. 494 A. “Galli namque et Britones, Pictavini et Burgundiones, aliique populi Cisalpini ad bellum transmarinum convolârunt, et Anglicæ prædæ inhiantes variis eventibus et periculis terræ marique sese obtulerunt.” Lappenberg (543), and Mr. Thorpe (ii. 286) more distinctly, hints that it was from mistaking the meaning of the word “Cisalpini” that Thierry got his Piedmontese. We have already seen something of the use of the word as well as of “transmarinus.” See vol. i. pp. 181, 210 (note 1), 230, 627.
877. Guy of Amiens (v. 259. M. H. B. 861 C, Giles 34) makes William count up French, Bretons, Cenomannians, and adds,
878. Will. Pict. 122. “Convenit etiam externus miles in auxilium copiosus, quos ex parte notissima Ducis liberalitas, verum omnes justæ caussæ fiducia contraxit.”
879. See Appendix W.
880. See the story in Lambert and Berthold (ap. Pertz, v. 272) under the year 1062. Milman, Latin Christianity, iii. 74.
881. Lambert, 1063. “Adalbertus Premensis Archiepiscopus ... sæpiùs colloquendo, obsequendo etiam atque adsentando, ita sibi Regem brevi devinxerat, ut, cæteris episcopis posthabitis, totus in eum inclinaretur, et ipse in regno communi penè monarchiam usurpare videretur.” Milman, iii. 77.
882. Lambert, 1065. “Per concessionem ejusdem Archiepiscopi [Adalberti sc.] primùm se Rex arma bellica succinxit.”
883. Ib. 1066. Milman, iii. 81.
884. It was Stamfordbridge, not Senlac, which attracted the attention of Lambert. See Appendix M.
885. Henry, in his own troubles, sent an embassy to William (Bruno de Bello Saxonico, c. 36, ap. Pertz, v. 342). See also the amazing account of “Willehelmus Bostar” in Lambert, 1074. See vol. ii. p. 582.
886. William of Poitiers says first, at an earlier time (120), “Admirabatur, laudabat, ac venerabatur eum supra nomina Regum Imperii Romani majestas, cujus olim gloriosissimus moderator Henricus, Conradi Imperatoris Augusti filius, cum ipso etiam tum puero, veluti cum nominatissimo Rege, amicitiam junxit ac societatem.” He now (123) says, “Et Romanorum Imperatori [he was not yet Emperor] Henrico, Henrici Imperatoris filio, nepoti Imperatoris Chounradi, noviter junctus fuit in amicitiâ.” After the former passage the Archdeacon adds, what is yet more amazing, that the Eastern Emperor wished for William as a neighbour to help him to withstand the advance of the Mahometans; “Optabat hunc vicinum et amicum nobilis et ampla, multisque Regibus dominans Constantinopolis, quo propugnatore sperneret gravem potentiam Babylonis.” The wise proverb τὸν Φραγκὸν φίλον ἔχῃς γείτουα οὐκ ἔχῃς (Eginh. Vita K. 16) must have been forgotten.
887. See vol. ii. pp. 276, 373.
888. Will. Pict. 123. “Cujus [Henrici] edicto in quemlibet hostem Germania ei, postularet, veniret adjutrix.”
889. Ib. “Rex quoque Danorum Suenus fidem legationibus ei spopondit, sed inimicis ejus amicum exhibebat se fidelem, sicut in sequentibus legendo ipsius detrimenta, spectabis.” This of course takes in the help which Swend gave to the English insurgents after William’s coronation, but it must be connected also with William’s assertion (p. 132) that there were Danish troops at Senlac.
891. Roman de Rou, 11326;
I fancy that the splendid church of this monastery is less known than it should be to travellers and architectural students. It contains nothing so old as the days of William and Philip, but, among other magnificent portions, it has a Lady Chapel which reminds one at once of the Chapel of Henry the Seventh at Westminster and of that of Saint Lewis at Paris.
892. Roman de Rou, 11330;
893. Ib. 11362;
894. See vol. i. pp. 96, 129–131, 247–250.
895. Roman de Rou, 11368;
896. See Roman de Rou, 11390–11433, and Appendix W.
897. See above, p. 86, and Appendix N.
898. See Dugdale, Baronage, i. 400; Mon. Angl. v. 491; Ellis, i. 422. The charter there quoted (later than 1274), by an amazing piece of genealogy, makes Gilbert a son of Count Baldwin and a nephew of William. “Giselbertus de Gaunt, filius Baldwini Comitis de Flandriâ venit cum Willelmo Conquæstore avunculo suo in Angliam.”
899. Dugdale, i. 425; Mon. Angl. vi. 959; Ellis, i. 420, 504. “Walterus Bec ... venit cum Conquæstore et habuit hæreditatem suam in Flandriâ.” He appears in Domesday as “Walterus Flandrensis.”
901. See Appendix Y.
902. See above, pp. 231, 233.
903. On Odo, see above, pp. 168, 231. This Alan Fergant must be carefully distinguished from his cousin Alan Fergant, who was afterwards Count of Britanny, and who married William’s daughter Constance. See the pedigree drawn out by Mrs. Green, Princesses, i. 25. So Roman de Rou, 11508;
904. Roman de Rou, 11511; “E li Sire i vint de Dinan.”
905. Ib. 11505;
Cf. Will. Pict. 142, where his name is written “Haimerius.”
906. Roman de Rou, 11312;
907. Liber de Castro Ambasiæ, c. iv., ap. D’Achery, iii. 276. He joined William when he was “omnem militiæ valetudinem quam invenire potuit in arma commovens,” and when “ex diversis regionibus optimi milites et bellicosi gregatim convenirent.” After a fitting panegyric we read, “Statim ut a Guillermo Duce fuit agnitus, super omnes ei familiarior est habitus.”
908. See the account of this war in the Gesta Consulum, D’Achery, iii. 259, where Fulk’s conduct to his brother is called a “persequutio,” while Fulk himself (p. 233) speaks of his own “tribulatio” and the “invasio” of his brother.
909. Gest. Cons. 259, where we hear of “proditio” and “proditores,” while Fulk (u. s.) speaks only of a “campestre prœlium in quo eum [Geoffrey] Dei gratiâ superavi,” and adds delicately, “proinde accepi civitatem Andegavæ.” See also the two Angevin Chronicles in Labbé, i. 276, and, more fully, 288. These troubles were among the effects of the comet.
910. Gest. Con. 260. “Fulco Richin Barbatum fratrem suum captum tenuit et in vinculis Chainoni castro posuit.”
911. See Appendix Z.
912. Will. Gem. vii. 33. He is followed by Benoît, 36866–36963.
913. See above, p. 207.
915. The famous application of Pippin as to the lawfulness of deposing Childebert was rather a case of conscience.
916. See the very remarkable account of these struggles in Lambert, 1064. Milman, iii. 83. With the high-minded comments of the impartial Lambert it is well to compare the panegyric of the partizan William of Poitiers (122). He at least had good reason to say that Alexander “responsa edebat justa salutariaque.” So Benoît, 36787;
He goes on, prematurely enough, to say,
917. Will. Malms. iii. 238. “Ne justam caussam temeritas decoloraret, ad Apostolicum ... misit, justitiam suscepti belli quantis potuit facundiæ nervis allegans.” The name of this eloquent ambassador comes from Orderic, 493 B.
918. Roman de Rou, 11446;
919. William of Malmesbury (iii. 238) discusses the point; “Haroldus id facere supersedit, vel quod turgidus naturâ esset, vel quod caussæ diffideret, vel quod nuntios suos a Willelmo et ejus complicibus, qui omnes portus obsidebant, impediri timeret.” There was clearly no record or received tradition about the matter.
920. I find no suggestion of the possibility of any hearing of the English side anywhere but in the passage of William of Malmesbury just quoted.
921. William of Malmesbury (u. s.) says that the Pope gave judgement, “perpensis apud se utrimque partibus.” But it is from a letter written long after to William by Hildebrand, then Gregory the Seventh, that we learn how strong an opposition was made to William’s claims. The letter is dated April 24th, 1080, and has chiefly to do with the affairs of the see of Le Mans. Gregory says to William; “Notum esse tibi credo, excellentissime fili, priusquam ad pontificale culmen ascenderem, quanto semper te sinceræ dilectionis affectu amavi, qualem etiam me tuis negotiis et quam efficacem exhibui, insuper ut ad regale fastigium cresceres quanto studio laboravi. Quâ pro re a quibusdam fratribus magnam penè infamiam pertuli, submurmurantibus quod ad tanta homicidia perpetranda, tanto favore meam operam impendissem. Deus verò in meâ conscientiâ testis erat, quàm recto id animo feceram, sperans per gratiam Dei et non inaniter confidens de virtutibus bonis quæ in te erant, quia quantò ad sublimiora proficeres, tantò te apud Deum et sanctam ecclesiam (sicut et nunc, Deo gratias, res est) ex bono meliorem exhiberes.” Ep. Greg. VII. cxxxvi., ap. Bouquet, xiv. 648.
922. See above, p. 89 et seqq.
923. Orderic (482 B) tells a story how, at one stage of the endless negotiations about Abbot Robert of Saint Evroul (see above, p. 184), Robert came with certain Papal Legates to claim his Abbey; “Audiens verò Dux ... vehementer iratus dixit se quidem Legatos Papæ de fide et relligione Christianâ, ut communis patris, libenter suscepturum; sed si quis monachorum de terrâ suâ calumniam sibi contrariam inferret, ad altiorem quercum vicinæ silvæ per capitium irreverenter suspensurum.” This was in 1063. William plainly recognized no Benefit of Clergy, and when the witnesses are liable to be hanged, the proceedings of the Court can hardly be called free.
924. So at least Wace (12353) makes William say after he is landed in England;
925. We may infer this last object from the care with which William (see Will. Pict. 144) took, after his coronation, to send to Rome “Sancti Petri pecuniam,” and also from his famous correspondence with Gregory. See Lanfranc, ep. 10 (Giles, i. 32).
926. Roman de Rou, 11452;
For a hair another reading has a tooth.
927. The banner is mentioned by most writers. Will. Pict. 123. “Vexillum accepit [Willelmus] ejus [Alexandri] benignitate, velut suffragium Sancti Petri; quo primo confidentiùs ac tutiùs invaderet adversarium.” Ord. Vit. 493 C. “Vexillum Sancti Petri Apostoli, cujus meritis ab omni periculo defenderetur, transmisit.” Will. Malms. iii. 238. “Papa vexillum in omen regni Willelmo contradidit.” So Wace, u. s., and Benoît, 36807. Wace calls it “gonfanon,” Benoît “enseigne.”
928. In this Chapter we of course return to English authorities, to the Chronicles and Florence, the latter now distinctly assuming the character of an independent authority. These we have to compare throughout with the great Norwegian account, the Saga of Harold Hardrada in Snorro, many of the details of which are manifestly mythical. A few scattered hints may also be picked up from German, Norman, and other sources.
929. Chronn. Ab. Wig. 1066. “And sona þaræfter [after the appearance of the comet] com Tostig eorl fram begeondan sǽ into Wiht mid swa myclum liðe swa he begytan mihte. And him man geald þar æigðer ge feoh ge metsunge.” So Florence; “Non multò post, Comes Tostius de Flandriâ [on this point see Appendix Z] rediens, ad Vectam insulam applicuit, et postquam insulanos sibi tributum et stippendium solvere coegerat, discessit.” The Peterborough Chronicler, followed, as he so often is, by William of Malmesbury (ii. 228), as also by Henry of Huntingdon (M. H. B. 762 A), takes no notice of Tostig’s movements till he appears in the Humber. The Norman account, it will be remembered (see above, p. 304), makes him not land in England at all till he comes with Harold Hardrada.
930. Chron. Ab. 1066. “And fór þa þanon, and hearmas dyde ægwar be þam sæ riman þa he tó mihte, oð he becom to Sandwic.” Flor. Wig. “Circa ripas maris, donec ad Sandicum portum veniret, prædas exercuit.”
931. Will. Malms. iii. 238. “Præterea, qui [Haroldus] putaret minas Willelmi numquam ad factum erupturas, quod ille conterminorum Ducum bellis implicaretur, totum animum otio cum subjectis indulserat; nam profectò, nisi quod Noricorum Regem adventare didicit, nec militem convocare nec aciem dirigere dignatus fuisset.”
932. Flor. Wig. 1066. “Mox, ut regni gubernacula susceperat, ... cœpit ... pro patriæ defensione ipsemet terrâ marique desudare.”
933. Chronn. Wig. Ab. “And Harold cyng his [Tostiges] broðor gegædrade swa micelne sciphere and eac landhere, swa nan cyng her on lande ær ne dyde forþam þe him wæs gecyðd þæt Wyllelm Bastard [“Willelm eorll fram Normandige, Eadwardes cingces mæg,” Chron. Ab. and Fl. Wig.] wolde hiðer [“cuman,” Ab.] and ðis land gewinnen, eallswa hit syððan aeóde.”
934. Chron. Ab. and Fl. Wig. “Ða cydde man Harolde kynge þe on Lundene wæs.”
935. Chron. Ab. 1066. “Þa Tostig þaet geaxode þaet Harold cing wæs toward Sandwic, þa for he of Sandwic, and nam of þam butsekarlon sume mid him, sume þances, sume unþances.” So Florence; “De butsecarlis quosdam volentes, quosdam nolentes, secum assumens.”
937. Chron. Ab. “And gewende þa norð into [Humbran] and þær hergode on Lindesege.” So Florence; “Recessit, et cursum ad Lindesegiam direxit.” Chronn. Wig. Petrib. “And þá hwile com Tostig eorl into Humbran mid sixtigum scipum.” So William of Malmesbury, ii. 228; “Eodem anno Tostinus, a Flandriâ in Humbram navigio sexaginta navium delatus, ea quæ circa oram fluminis erant piraticis excursionibus infestabat.”
938. Chronn. Wig. Petrib. 1066. “And Eadwine eorl com mid landferde, and adraf hine út.” The Abingdon Chronicler and Florence add Morkere; so William of Malmesbury (ii. 228); “Ab Edwino et Morchardo, concordis potentiæ fratribus, impigrè de provinciâ pulsus.”
939. Chronn. Wig. Petrib. “And þa butsecarlas hine forsocan.”
940. Ib. “And he for to Scotlande mid xii. snaccum.”
941. See vol. ii. pp. 384, 452.
942. Snorro, ap. Laing, iii. 70. The peace was made on the terms of the status in quo.
943. See the quotation from Adam of Bremen in vol. ii. p. 121.
944. See Appendix X.
946. See vol. ii. 90, 106, 151.
947. Snorro, ap. Johnstone, 193; Laing, iii. 78. See Appendix BB.
948. “Enn Gamli Knútr konungr eignadiz at erfd Dana-ríki, en med hernadi oc orrosto England” (Johnstone, 194). But England was Cnut’s first Kingdom; he did not succeed to Denmark till the death or deposition of his brother Harold. (See vol. i. pp. 403, 465.) This is another proof how utterly the short reign of Harold was forgotten.
949. Johnstone, p. 195. “Mæla menn þat, segir hann, at þer hinir Ensko se eigi alltrúir.”
950. Orderic (493 D) makes Tostig make this proposal to Harold; “Medietatem Angliæ vobis retinete, aliamque mihi, qui vobis inde fideliter serviam, retinete.” The proposal is quite in the spirit of any one who represented, or claimed to represent, Northumberland. Compare William’s alleged offer to Harold of England in the next Chapter.
951. Snorro, ap. Johnstone, 195. “Því eignadiz Magnús Konungr Danmórk, at þar landz höfdingiar veitto hönom; enn því feckt þú eigi at allt landz-folk stód i múti þer. Því bardiz Magnús Konungr eigi til Englandz, at allr landz-lydr villdi hafa Játvard at Konungi.” It would almost seem as if, both in England and in Denmark, a distinction was drawn between the chiefs and the mass of the people. The people seem to be conceived as being, always and everywhere, patriotic; but it was possible that some of the chief men in both countries might be won over to the cause of the invader. This is eminently true of England in the reign of Æthelred. The people, the land-folk, of Denmark, says Tostig, resisted Harold; the people of England were unanimous for Eadward. None but the Danish chiefs are spoken of as supporting Magnus, and it is only from the chiefs in England that Tostig looks for the means of fulfilling his promise to Harold.
953. See above, p. 289.
954. Snorro, ap. Laing, iii. 101;
Compare the discriminating comparison between him and his brother Saint Olaf; Johnstone, 225; Laing, iii. 102.
955. Snorro, ap. Johnstone, 197; Laing, iii. 80. “Enn sumir sögdo, at England mundi verda torsott, mann-folk ofa-mikit á, oc þat lid er kallat er þínga-manna-lid, þeir voro menn sva fræknir, at betra var lid eins þeirra enn II Harallds manna hinna besto.” Harold’s Staller Ulf is scandalized at the comparison.
956. Chron. Ab. 1066. “þa com Harold cyning of Norwegan norð into Tínan on unwaran.”
957. See the quotation from the Worcester Chronicle in p. 325.
958. See vol. i. pp. 426, 427.
959. See above, p. 325, note 4. The Abingdon Chronicle speaks of “scipfyrde and eac landfyrde,” that of Worcester of “sciphere and eac landhere.” No doubt both kinds of force were called out. The preparations of Harold are also strongly set forth by Orderic, 500 A; “Hastingas et Penevesellum aliosque portus maris Neustriæ oppositos.... toto anno illo cum multis navibus et militibus callide servaverat.” Compare also his account of Tostig’s expedition, see above, p. 304. And, after all, no one does more justice to Harold in this respect than the most hostile of all writers, William of Poitiers (123); “Heraldus interea promptus ad decernendum prœlio, sive terrestri sive navali, plerumque cum immani exercitu ad littus marinum opperiens.”
960. Chron. Ab. “Þa hit wæs to Nativitas Sanctæ Mariæ, þa wæs manna metsung agán, and hig nan man þar na leng gehealdan ne mihte.” This last expressive clause is left out by Florence, who says merely “victu deficiente.” Cf. above, p. 167. Compare also the preparations made for the defence of the southern coast in 1337, and the writ of Edward the Third commanding the dispersion of the levies which are described as “Hujusmodi onera importabilia sustinere non valentes.” Rymer, vol. ii. part ii. p. 996; Longman, Edward III. i. 121.
961. Chron. Ab. “And man draf þa scypu to Lundene, and manega forwurdon ær hi þyder cómon.”
962. See Appendix AA.
963. See above, p. 65.
964. Snorro, Johnstone, 196; Laing, iii. 80. “Sendi Haralldr konungr ord um allan Noreg, oc baud út leidángri, hálfom almenningi.”
965. Snorro gives him about two hundred ships of war, besides transports and other smaller craft (“Haralldr konungr hefdi nær cc. skipa, oc umfram vista-byrdingar oc smá-skútor.” Johnstone, 198; Laing, iii. 81); the three Chronicles, William of Malmesbury, and the Scholiast of Adam of Bremen (iii. 51) give him three hundred, Florence five hundred, while in Marianus Scotus (ap. Pertz, v. 559) the number rises to “minùs mille.”
966. Marianus, u. s. “Araldus, qui et Arbach vocabatur, Rex Nordmandorum, minùs mille navibus venit mense Septembri, Anglicam terram regnaturus.” “Arbach” is an odd corruption of Hardrada. I ought to have mentioned before that the English writers all transfer to him the surname “Harfagra,” which belongs to the famous Harold of the ninth century. A Flemish chronicler (Chron. S. Bavo. Corp. Chron. Fland. i. 459), who copies Marianus, turns him into “Haricnuth, Rex Nordanhymbrorum.”
968. Snorro, ap. Laing, iii. 30, 37.
969. Snorro, ap. Johnstone, 200; Laing, iii. 82. “Haralldr konungr, ádr hann fór af Þrándheimi, hafdi þar látit taka til Konungs Magnus son sinn, oc setti hann til ríkis í Noregi, er konungi fór í braut.” Thora is simply called “Þora Þórbergs dóttir,” while Elizabeth is “Ellisif drottning.”
970. See vol. i. pp. 453, 475, 531, 533.
971. Schol. ad Ad. Brem. iii. 51. “Insuper massa auri, quam Haroldus a Græciâ duxit, ad Bastardum tali fortunâ pervenit. Erat autem pondus auri quod vix bisseni juvenes cervice levarent.”
972. This however Orderic seems to wish us to believe. William makes his preparations (494 A), while still “nescius infortunii quod præoccupârat suum præcursorem [Tosticum sc.] et extra statutum cursum longè propulerat ad septemtrionem.”
973. See Flor. Wig. 1098. Will. Malms. iv. 379. Ord. Vit. 768. The expedition of Harold, Cnut, and Osbiorn in 1069 (see Florence in anno) was undertaken directly for the deliverance of England. Magnus in 1098 said expressly that he came not against England, but against Ireland and the Isles.
974. Snorro, ap. Johnstone, 198; Laing, iii. 81. The name should be noticed. Had every Harold his Gyrth?
975. The “witch-wife” of Laing’s translation is a “tröll-kona” in the original.
976. On the career of Thorfinn, see Orkneyinga Saga, ap. Johnstone, Ant. Celt. Scand. 176 et seqq.; Torfæi Orcades, i. 16 (p. 63 et seqq.); also Robertson, Scotland under Early Kings, i. 111–129.
977. The Orkneyinga Saga (Johnstone, p. 181) attributes to him an expedition into England in the reign of Harthacnut, of which I find no trace in English history.
978. Mark the prevalence among the Northern nations of scriptural names, when they were all but unknown in England. We have already had James, King of the Swedes (see vol. i. p. 455); now we have Mary and Paul, besides the Russian Elizabeth.
979. Snorro, ap. Johnstone, 200; Laing, iii. 83. So the Scholiast on Adam of Bremen, iv. 31; “Haraldus, frater Olaph nequissimus, Orchadas suo adduxit Imperio, regnumque suum dilatavit usque ad Riphæos montes et Island.” Is the Kingdom of Norway, with Iceland for a part of it, distinguished from the Empire of Britain? Adam is here discussing the geography of the Riphæan mountains, but they are a familiar flourish. See the extracts in vol. i. p. 208, where they are placed somewhere in Britain.
980. Chron. Wig. 1066. “Tostig him to beah and his man wearð.” Will. Malms, ii. 228. “Ibi Regi Noricorum ... obvio manus dedit.” See Appendix X.
981. Adam Brem. iii. 51. “Tosti ... Regem Nordmannorum auxilio ducit Haroldum, Regemque Scotorum, et occisus est ipse Tosti et Rex Hiberniæ et Haroldus cum toto exercitu eorum a Rege Anglorum.” The “Rex Scotorum” and the “Rex Hiberniæ” can hardly be the same person, and Tostig was just now on the best terms with Malcolm.
982. See the last quotation.
983. Chron. Manniæ, 1047 (1066), p. 3 Munch. “De quâ fugâ [apud Stamfordbrige] quidam Godredus cognomento Crouan, filius Haraldi nigri, de Ysland fugiens venit ad Godredum filium Sytric qui tunc regnavit in Manniâ, et honorificè susceptus est ab eo.” See Munch’s note, pp. 50, 51. He however takes “Ysland” to mean not Iceland, but Isla.
984. Flor. Wig. 1066. “Citato cursu ostium Humbræ fluminis intraverunt.”
985. For these accounts of the harrying of “Kliflönd,” “Skardaborg,” and “Hellornes,” see Snorro, Johnstone, 201; Laing, iii. 83.
986. Scarborough, unluckily, is not mentioned in Domesday, otherwise the name of its lord might perhaps help us to recover the personality of a man who must have been worth remembering.
987. We read some way further on in the Abingdon Chronicle how Harold of England found the fleet at Tadcaster.
988. Flor. Wig. 1066. “In loco qui Richale dicitur applicuerunt.”
989. The carelessness of Eadwine and Morkere is strongly set forth by William of Malmesbury, ii. 228; “Ambo ergo [Harald Hardrada and Tostig] consertis umbonibus terram Transhumbranam populabantur; germanos recenti victoria feriatos, qui nihil minus quam talia latrocinia metuerent, aggressi, victos inter Eboracum includunt.”
991. Marianus (Pertz, v. 559), describing the Battle of Fulford, mentions the slaughter of a hundred priests; “Eburaci in auctumno plus quam mille laicorum centosque [sic] presbyterorum bello occidit de Anglis.” The Chronicle of Saint Bavon (see above, p. 340) cuts down the number of priests killed to ten. The Hyde writer (292) mistakes the battle for a storm and massacre at York, with a grievous slaughter of priests; “Eboracam ... tandem ... capientes tantâ in eâ cæde debacchati sunt, ut ex numero presbyterorum qui in eâ interfecti sunt, quantus fuit cæterorum morientium numerus, utrumque conjici potest undecies enim xx. [220?] presbyteri feruntur ibi occidisse.”
992. The earlier writers do not give the name of the place; they are satisfied with saying that it was near York. The Worcester and Peterborough Chronicles say that the Northmen “comon to Eoforwic and heom þær wið fuhton Eadwine Eorl,” etc. So Florence says “juxta Eboracum,” and Marianus “Eburaci.” Henry of Huntingdon (M. H. B. 762 A), after saying that the fight was “juxta urbem,” adds, “cujus locus pugnæ in australi parte urbis adhuc ostenditur.” But to the local knowledge of Simeon a still more exact account seemed needful. He copies Florence as usual, but after the words “juxta Eboracum” he inserts the words “apud Fulford.” The matter is elaborately discussed by a writer in the Gentleman’s Magazine, August, 1863, p. 216 (cf. p. 347), who is very busy with Snorro, Rapin, Thierry, and Drake’s Eboracum, but who unluckily did not “possess a copy of Simeon.”
We’ll remember where you stopped. All chapters