scholars in illustrating the symbols supposed to be couched under the
myth of the Ygg-drasill, or the great Ash-tree. With this I shall not
weary the reader; especially since large systems have been built on very
small premises, and the erudition employed has been equally ingenious and
unsatisfactory: I content myself with stating the simple myth.
The Ygg-drasill has three roots; two spring from the infernal
regions--i.e. from the home of the frost-giants, and from Niffl-heim,
“vapour-home, or hell”--one from the heavenly abode of the Asas. Its
branches, says the Prose Edda, extend over the whole universe, and its
stem bears up the earth. Beneath the root, which stretches through
Niffl-heim, and which the snake-king continually gnaws, is the fount
whence flow the infernal rivers. Beneath the root, which stretches in
the land of the giants, is Mimir’s well wherein all wisdom is concealed;
but under the root which lies in the land of the gods, is the well of
Urda, the Norna--here the gods sit in judgment. Near this well is a fair
building, whence issue the three maidens, Urda, Verdandi, Skulda (the
Past, the Present, the Future). Daily they water the ash-tree from
Urda’s well, that the branches may not perish. Four harts constantly
devour the birds and branches of the Ash-tree. On its boughs sits an
eagle, wise in much; and between its eyes sits a hawk. A squirrel runs
up and down the tree sowing strife between the eagle and the snake.
Such, in brief, is the account of the myth. For the various
interpretations of its symbolic meaning, the general reader is referred
to Mr. Blackwell’s edition of MALLETT’s Northern Antiquities, and
PIGOTT’s Scandinavian Manual.
NOTE (P)
Harold’s Accession.
There are, as is well known, two accounts as to Edward the Confessor’s
death-bed disposition of the English crown. The Norman chroniclers
affirm, first, that Edward promised William the crown during his exile in
Normandy; secondly, that Siward, Earl of Northumbria, Godwin, and Leofric
had taken oath, “serment de la main,” to receive him as Seigneur after
Edward’s death, and that the hostages, Wolnoth and Haco, were given to
the Duke in pledge of that oath [291]; thirdly, that Edward left him the
crown by will.
Let us see what probability there is of truth in these three assertions.
First, Edward promised William the crown when in Normandy. This seems
probable enough, and it is corroborated indirectly by the Saxon
chroniclers, when they unite in relating Edward’s warnings to Harold
against his visit to the Norman court. Edward might well be aware of
William’s designs on the crown (though in those warnings he refrains from
mentioning them)--might remember the authority given to those designs by
his own early promise, and know the secret purpose for which the hostages
were retained by William, and the advantages he would seek to gain from
having Harold himself in his power. But this promise in itself was
clearly not binding on the English people, nor on any one but Edward,
who, without the sanction of the Witan, could not fulfil it. And that
William himself could not have attached great importance to it during
Edward’s life, is clear, because if he had, the time to urge it was when
Edward sent into Germany for the Atheling, as the heir presumptive of the
throne. This was a virtual annihilation of the promise; but William took
no step to urge it, made no complaint and no remonstrance.
Secondly, That Godwin, Siward, and Leofric, had taken oaths of fealty to
William.
This appears a fable wholly without foundation. When could those oaths
have been pledged? Certainly not after Harold’s visit to William, for
they were then all dead. At the accession of Edward? This is obviously
contradicted by the stipulation which Godwin and the other chiefs of the
Witan exacted, that Edward should not come accompanied by Norman
supporters--by the evident jealousy of the Normans entertained by those
chiefs, as by the whole English people, who regarded the alliance of
Ethelred with the Norman Emma as the cause of the greatest
calamities--and by the marriage of Edward himself with Godwin’s daughter,
a marriage which that Earl might naturally presume would give legitimate
heirs to the throne.--In the interval between Edward’s accession and
Godwin’s outlawry? No; for all the English chroniclers, and, indeed, the
Norman, concur in representing the ill-will borne by Godwin and his House
to the Norman favourites, whom, if they could have anticipated William’s
accession, or were in any way bound to William, they would have naturally
conciliated. But Godwin’s outlawry is the result of the breach between
him and the foreigners.--In William’s visit to Edward? No; for that took
place when Godwin was an exile; and even the writers who assert Edward’s
early promise to William, declare that nothing was then said as to the
succession to the throne. To Godwin’s return from outlawry the Norman
chroniclers seem to refer the date of this pretended oath, by the
assertion that the hostages were given in pledge of it. This is the most
monstrous supposition of all; for Godwin’s return is followed by the
banishment of the Norman favourites--by the utter downfall of the Norman
party in England--by the decree of the Witan, that all the troubles in
England had come from the Normans--by the triumphant ascendancy of
Godwin’s House. And is it credible for a moment, that the great English
Earl could then have agreed to a pledge to transfer the kingdom to the
very party he had expelled, and expose himself and his party to the
vengeance of a foe he had thoroughly crushed for the time, and whom,
without any motive or object, he himself agreed to restore to power or
his own probable perdition? When examined, this assertion falls to the
ground from other causes. It is not among the arguments that William
uses in his embassies to Harold; it rests mainly upon the authority of
William of Poitiers, who, though a contemporary, and a good authority on
some points purely Norman, is grossly ignorant as to the most accredited
and acknowledged facts, in all that relate to the English. Even with
regard to the hostages, he makes the most extraordinary blunders. He
says they were sent by Edward, with the consent of his nobles,
accompanied by Robert, Archbishop of Canterbury. Now Robert, Archbishop
of Canterbury, had fled from England as fast as he could fly on the
return of Godwin; and arrived in Normandy, half drowned, before the
hostages were sent, or even before the Witan which reconciled Edward and
Godwin had assembled. He says that William restored to Harold “his young
brother;” whereas it was Haco, the nephew, who was restored; we know, by
Norman as well as Saxon Chroniclers, that Wolnoth, the brother, was not
released till after the Conqueror’s death, (he was re-imprisoned by
Rufus;) and his partiality may be judged by the assertions, first, that
“William gave nothing to a Norman that was unjustly taken from an
Englishman;” and secondly, that Odo, whose horrible oppressions revolted
even William himself, “never had an equal for justice, and that all the
English obeyed him willingly.”
We may, therefore, dismiss this assertion as utterly groundless, on its
own merits, without directly citing against it the Saxon authorities.
Thirdly, That Edward left William the crown by will.
On this assertion alone, of the three, the Norman Conqueror himself seems
to have rested a positive claim [292]. But if so, where was the will?
Why was it never produced or producible? If destroyed, where were the
witnesses? why were they not cited? The testamentary dispositions of an
Anglo-Saxon king were always respected, and went far towards the
succession. But it was absolutely necessary to prove them before the
Witan [293]. An oral act of this kind, in the words of the dying
Sovereign, would be legal, but they must be confirmed by those who heard
them. Why, when William was master of England, and acknowledged by a
National Assembly convened in London, and when all who heard the dying
King would have been naturally disposed to give every evidence in
William’s favour, not only to flatter the new sovereign, but to soothe
the national pride, and justify the Norman succession by a more popular
plea than conquest,--why were no witnesses summoned to prove the bequest!
Alred, Stigand, and the Abbot of Westminster, must have been present at
the death-bed of the King, and these priests concurred in submission to
William. If they had any testimony as to Edward’s bequest in his favour,
would they not have been too glad to give it, in justification of
themselves, in compliment to William, in duty to the people, in
vindication of law against force! But no such attempt at proof was
ventured upon.
Against these, the mere assertion of William, and the authority of
Normans who could know nothing of the truth of the matter, while they had
every interest to misrepresent the facts--we have the positive assurances
of the best possible authorities. The Saxon Chronicle (worth all the
other annalists put together) says expressly, that Edward left the crown
to Harold:
“The sage, ne’ertheless,
The realm committed
To a highly-born man;
Harold’s self,
The noble Earl.
He in all time
Obeyed faithfully
His rightful lord,
By words and deeds:
Nor aught neglected
Which needful was
To his sovereign king.”
Florence of Worcester, the next best authority, (valuable from supplying
omissions in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle,) says expressly that the King
chose Harold for his successor before his decease [294], that he was
elected by the chief men of all England, and consecrated by Alred.
Hoveden, Simon (Dunelm.), the Beverley chronicler, confirm these
authorities as to Edward’s choice of Harold as his successor. William of
Malmesbury, who is not partial to Harold, writing in the reign of Henry
the First, has doubts himself as to Edward’s bequest, (though grounded on
a very bad argument, viz. “the improbability that Edward would leave his
crown to a man of whose power he had always been jealous;” there is no
proof that Edward had been jealous of Harold’s power--he had been of
Godwin’s;) but Malmesbury gives a more valuable authority than his own,
in the concurrent opinion of his time, for he deposes that “the English
say,” the diadem was granted him (Harold) by the King.
These evidences are, to say the least, infinitely more worthy of
historical credence than the one or two English chroniclers, of little
comparative estimation, (such as Wike,) and the prejudiced and ignorant
Norman chroniclers [295], who depose on behalf of William. I assume,
therefore, that Edward left the crown to Harold; of Harold’s better claim
in the election of the Witan, there is no doubt. But Sir F. Palgrave
starts the notion that, “admitting that the prelates, earls, aldermen,
and thanes of Wessex and East-Anglia had sanctioned the accession of
Harold, their decision could not have been obligatory on the other
kingdoms (provinces); and the very short time elapsing between the death
of Edward and the recognition of Harold, utterly precludes the
supposition that their consent was even asked.” This great writer must
permit me, with all reverence, to suggest that he has, I think, forgotten
the fact that, just prior to Edward’s death, an assembly, fully as
numerous as ever met in any national Witan, had been convened to attend
the consecration of the new abbey and church of Westminster, which Edward
considered the great work of his life; that assembly would certainly not
have dispersed during a period so short and anxious as the mortal illness
of the King, which appears to have prevented his attending the ceremony
in person, and which ended in his death a very few days after the
consecration. So that during the interval, which appears to have been at
most about a week, between Edward’s death and Harold’s coronation [296],
the unusually large concourse of prelates and nobles from all parts of
the kingdom assembled in London and Westminster would have furnished the
numbers requisite to give weight and sanction to the Witan. And had it
not been so, the Saxon chroniclers, and still more the Norman, would
scarcely have omitted some remark in qualification of the election. But
not a word is said as to any inadequate number in the Witan. And as for
the two great principalities of Northumbria and Mercia, Harold’s recent
marriage with the sister of their earls might naturally tend to secure
their allegiance.
Nor is it to be forgotten that a very numerous Witan had assembled at
Oxford a few months before, to adjudge the rival claims of Tostig and
Morcar; the decision of the Witan proves the alliance between Harold’s
party and that of the young Earl’s--ratified by the marriage with Aldyth.
And he who has practically engaged in the contests and cabals of party,
will allow the probability, adopted as fact in the romance, that,
considering Edward’s years and infirm health, and the urgent necessity of
determining beforehand the claims to the succession--some actual, if
secret, understanding was then come to by the leading chiefs. It is a
common error in history to regard as sudden, that which in the nature of
affairs never can be sudden. All that paved Harold’s way to the throne
must have been silently settled long before the day in which the Witan
elected him unanimi omnium consensu. [297]
With the views to which my examination of the records of the time have
led me in favour of Harold, I can not but think that Sir F. Palgrave, in
his admirable History of Anglo-Saxon England, does scanty justice to the
Last of its kings; and that his peculiar political and constitutional
theories, and his attachment to the principle of hereditary succession,
which make him consider that Harold “had no clear title to the crown any
way,” tincture with something like the prejudice of party his estimate of
Harold’s character and pretensions. My profound admiration for Sir F.
Palgrave’s learning and judgment would not permit me to make this remark
without carefully considering and re-weighing all the contending
authorities on which he himself relies. And I own that, of all modern
historians, Thierry seems to me to have given the most just idea of the
great actors in the tragedy of the Norman invasion, though I incline to
believe that he has overrated the oppressive influence of the Norman
dynasty in which the tragedy closed.
NOTE (Q)
Physical Peculiarities of the Scandinavians.
“It is a singular circumstance, that in almost all the swords of those
ages to be found to the collection of weapons in the Antiquarian Museum
at Copenhagen, the handles indicate a size of hand very much smaller than
the hands of modern people of any class or rank. No modern dandy, with
the most delicate hands, would find room for his hand to grasp or wield
with ease some of the swords of these Northmen.”
This peculiarity is by some scholars adduced, not without reason, as an
argument for the Eastern origin of the Scandinavian. Nor was it uncommon
for the Asiatic Scythians, and indeed many of the early warlike tribes
fluctuating between the east and west of Europe, to be distinguished by
the blue eyes and yellow hair of the north. The physical attributes of a
deity, or a hero, are usually to be regarded as those of the race to
which he belongs. The golden locks of Apollo and Achilles are the sign
of a similar characteristic in the nations of which they are the types;
and the blue eye of Minerva belies the absurd doctrine that would
identify her with the Egyptian Naith.
The Norman retained perhaps longer than the Scandinavian, from whom he
sprang, the somewhat effeminate peculiarity of small hands and feet; and
hence, as throughout all the nobility of Europe the Norman was the model
for imitation, and the ruling families in many lands sought to trace from
him their descents, so that characteristic is, even to our day,
ridiculously regarded as a sign of noble race. The Norman probably
retained that peculiarity longer than the Dane, because his habits, as a
conqueror, made him disdain all manual labour; and it was below his
knightly dignity to walk, as long as a horse could be found for him to
ride. But the Anglo-Norman (the noblest specimen of the great conquering
family) became so blent with the Saxon, both in blood and in habits, that
such physical distinctions vanished with the age of chivalry. The Saxon
blood in our highest aristocracy now predominates greatly over the
Norman; and it would be as vain a task to identify the sons of Hastings
and Rollo by the foot and hand of the old Asiatic Scythian, as by the
reddish auburn hair and the high features which were no less ordinarily
their type. Here and there such peculiarities may all be seen amongst
plain country gentlemen, settled from time immemorial in the counties
peopled by the Anglo-Danes, and inter-marrying generally in their own
provinces; but amongst the far more mixed breed of the larger landed
proprietors comprehended in the Peerage, the Saxon attributes of race are
strikingly conspicuous, and, amongst them, the large hand and foot common
with all the Germanic tribes.
NOTE (R)
The Interment of Harold.
Here we are met by evidences of the most contradictory character.
According to most of the English writers, the body of Harold was given by
William to Githa, without ransom, and buried at Waltham. There is even a
story told of the generosity of the Conqueror, in cashiering a soldier
who gashed the corpse of the dead hero. This last, however, seems to
apply to some other Saxon, and not to Harold. But William of Poitiers,
who was the Duke’s own chaplain, and whose narration of the battle
appears to contain more internal evidence of accuracy than the rest of
his chronicle, expressly says, that William refused Githa’s offer of its
weight in gold for the supposed corpse of Harold, and ordered it to be
buried on the beach, with the taunt quoted in the text of this work--“Let
him guard the coast which he madly occupied;” and on the pretext that
one, whose cupidity and avarice had been the cause that so many men were
slaughtered and lay unsepultured, was not worthy himself of a tomb.
Orderic confirms this account, and says the body was given to William
Mallet, for that purpose. [299]
Certainly William de Poitiers ought to have known best; and the
probability of his story is to a certain degree borne out by the
uncertainty as to Harold’s positive interment, which long prevailed, and
which even gave rise to a story related by Giraldus Cambrensis (and to be
found also in the Harleian MSS.), that Harold survived the battle, became
a monk in Chester, and before he died had a long and secret interview
with Henry the First. Such a legend, however absurd, could scarcely have
gained any credit if (as the usual story runs) Harold had been formally
buried, in the presence of many of the Norman barons, in Waltham
Abbey--but would very easily creep into belief, if his body had been
carelessly consigned to a Norman knight, to be buried privately by the
sea-shore.
The story of Osgood and Ailred, the childemaister (schoolmaster in the
monastery), as related by Palgrave, and used in this romance, is recorded
in a MS. of Waltham Abbey, and was written somewhere about fifty or sixty
years after the event--say at the beginning of the twelfth century.
These two monks followed Harold to the field, placed themselves so as to
watch its results, offered ten marks for the body, obtained permission
for the search, and could not recognise the mutilated corpse until Osgood
sought and returned with Edith. In point of fact, according to this
authority, it must have been two or three days after the battle before
the discovery was made.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Sismondi’s History of France, vol. iv. p. 484.
[2] “Men’s blinded hopes, diseases, toil, and prayer,
And winged troubles peopling daily air.”
[3] Merely upon the obscure MS. of the Waltham Monastery; yet, such is
the ignorance of popular criticism, that I have been as much attacked for
the license I have taken with the legendary connection between Harold and
Edith, as if that connection were a proven and authenticated fact!
Again, the pure attachment to which, in the romance, the loves of Edith
and Harold are confined, has been alleged to be a sort of moral
anachronism,--a sentiment wholly modern; whereas, on the contrary, an
attachment so pure was infinitely more common in that day than in this,
and made one of the most striking characteristics of the eleventh
century; indeed of all the earlier ages, in the Christian era, most
subjected to monastic influences.
[4] Notes less immediately necessary to the context, or too long not to
interfere with the current of the narrative, are thrown to the end of the
work.
[5] There is a legend attached to my friend’s house, that on certain
nights in the year, Eric the Saxon winds his horn at the door, and, in
forma spectri, serves his notice of ejectment.
[6] The “Edinburgh Review,” No. CLXXIX. January, 1849. Art. I.
“Correspondance inedite, de Mabillon et de Montfaucon, avec l’Italie.”
Par M. Valery. Paris, 1848.
[7] And long before the date of the travesty known to us, and most
popular amongst our mediaeval ancestors, it might be shown that some rude
notion of Homer’s fable and personages had crept into the North.
[8] “The apartment in which the Anglo-Saxon women lived, was called
Gynecium.”--FOSBROOKE, vol. ii., p. 570.
[9] Glass, introduced about the time of Bede, was more common then in
the houses of the wealthy, whether for vessels or windows, than in the
much later age of the gorgeous Plantagenets. Alfred, in one of his
poems, introduces glass as a familiar illustration:
“So oft the mild sea
With south wind
As grey glass clear
Becomes grimly troubled.”
SHAR. TURNER.
[10] Skulda, the Norna, or Fate, that presided over the future.
[11] The historians of our literature have not done justice to the great
influence which the poetry of the Danes has had upon our early national
muse. I have little doubt but that to that source may be traced the
minstrelsy of our borders, and the Scottish Lowlands; while, even in the
central counties, the example and exertions of Canute must have had
considerable effect on the taste and spirit of our Scops. That great
prince afforded the amplest encouragement to Scandinavian poetry, and
Olaus names eight Danish poets, who flourished at his court.
[12] “By the splendour of God.”
[13] See Note (A) at the end of this volume.
[14] It is noticeable that the Norman dukes did not call themselves
Counts or Dukes of Normandy, but of the Normans; and the first
Anglo-Norman kings, till Richard the First, styled themselves Kings of
the English, not of England. In both Saxon and Norman chronicles,
William usually bears the title of Count (Comes), but in this tale he
will be generally called Duke, as a title more familiar to us.
[15] The few expressions borrowed occasionally from the Romance tongue,
to give individuality to the speaker, will generally be translated into
modern French; for the same reason as Saxon is rendered into modern
English, viz., that the words may be intelligible to the reader.
[16] “Roman de Rou,” part i., v. 1914.
[17] The reason why the Normans lost their old names is to be found in
their conversion to Christianity. They were baptised; and Franks, as
their godfathers, gave them new appellations. Thus, Charles the Simple
insists that Rolf-ganger shall change his law (creed) and his name, and
Rolf or Rou is christened Robert. A few of those who retained
Scandinavian names at the time of the Conquest will be cited hereafter.
[18] Thus in 991, about a century after the first settlement, the Danes
of East Anglia gave the only efficient resistance to the host of the
Vikings under Justin and Gurthmund; and Brithnoth, celebrated by the
Saxon poet, as a Saxon par excellence, the heroic defender of his native
soil, was, in all probability, of Danish descent. Mr. Laing, in his
preface to his translation of the Heimskringla, truly observes, “that the
rebellions against William the Conqueror, and his successors, appear to
have been almost always raised, or mainly supported, in the counties of
recent Danish descent, not in those peopled by the old Anglo-Saxon race.”
The portion of Mercia, consisting of the burghs of Lancaster, Lincoln,
Nottingham, Stamford, and Derby, became a Danish state in A.D. 877;--East
Anglia, consisting of Cambridge, Suffolk, Norfolk, and the Isle of Ely,
in A.D. 879-80; and the vast territory of Northumbria, extending all
north the Humber, into all that part of Scotland south of the Frith, in
A.D. 876.--See PALGRAVE’S Commonwealth. But besides their more allotted
settlements, the Danes were interspersed as landowners all over England.
[19] Bromton Chron--via., Essex, Middlesex, Suffolk, Norfolk, Herts,
Cambridgeshire, Hants, Lincoln, Notts, Derby, Northampton,
Leicestershire, Bucks, Beds, and the vast territory called Northumbria.
[20] PALGRAVE’s History of England, p. 315.
[21] The laws collected by Edward the Confessor, and in later times so
often and so fondly referred to, contained many introduced by the Danes,
which had grown popular with the Saxon people. Much which we ascribe to
the Norman Conqueror, pre-existed in the Anglo-Danish, and may be found
both in Normandy, and parts of Scandinavia, to this day.--See HAKEWELL’s
Treatise on the Antiquity of Laws in this Island, in HEARNE’s Curious
Discourses.
[22] PALGRAVE’s History of England, p. 322.
[23] The name of this god is spelt Odin, when referred to as the object
of Scandinavian worship; Woden, when applied directly to the deity of the
Saxons.
[24] See Note (B), at the end of the volume.
[25] The Peregrine hawk built on the rocks of Llandudno, and this breed
was celebrated, even to the days of Elizabeth. Burleigh thanks one of
the Mostyns for a cast of hawks from Llandudno.
[26] Hlaf, loaf,--Hlaford, lord, giver of bread; Hleafdian, lady, server
of bread.--VERSTEGAN.
[27] Bedden-ale. When any man was set up in his estate by the
contributions of his friends, those friends were bid to a feast, and the
ale so drunk was called the bedden-ale, from bedden, to pray, or to bid.
(See BRAND’s Pop. Autiq.)
[28] Herleve (Arlotta), William’s mother, married Herluin de Conteville,
after the death of Duke Robert, and had by him two sons, Robert, Count of
Mortain, and Odo, Bishop of Bayeux.-ORD. VITAL. lib. vii.
[29] Mone, monk.
[30] STRUTT’s Horda.
[31] There is an animated description of this “Battle of London Bridge,
“which gave ample theme to the Scandinavian scalds, in Snorro Sturleson:
“London Bridge is broken down;
Gold is won and bright renown;
Shields resounding,
War-horns sounding,
Hildur shouting in the din,
Arrows singing,
Mail-coats ringing,
Odin makes our Olaf win.”
LAING’s Heimskringla, vol. ii. p. 10.
[32] Sharon Turner.
[33] Hawkins, vol. ii. p. 94.
[34] Doomsday makes mention of the Moors, and the Germans (the Emperor’s
merchants) that were sojourners or settlers in London. The Saracens at
that time were among the great merchants of the world; Marseilles, Arles,
Avignon, Montpellier, Toulouse, were the wonted stapes of their active
traders. What civilisers, what teachers they were--those same Saracens!
How much in arms and in arts we owe them! Fathers of the Provencal poetry
they, far more than even the Scandinavian scalds, have influenced the
literature of Christian Europe. The most ancient chronicle of the Cid
was written in Arabic, a little before the Cid’s death, by two of his
pages, who were Mnssulmans. The medical science of the Moors for six
centuries enlightened Europe, and their metaphysics were adopted in
nearly all the Christian universities.
[35] Billingsgate. See Note (C), at the end of the volume.
[36] London received a charter from William at the instigation of the
Norman Bishop of London; but it probably only confirmed the previous
municipal constitution, since it says briefly, “I grant you all to be as
law-worthy as ye were in the days of King Edward.” The rapid increase,
however, of the commercial prosperity and political importance of London
after the Conquest, is attested in many chronicles, and becomes
strikingly evident even on the surface of history.
[37] There seems good reason for believing that a keep did stand where
the Tower stands, before the Conquest, and that William’s edifice spared
some of its remains. In the very interesting letter from John Bayford
relating to the city of London (Lel. Collect. lviii.), the writer, a
thorough master of his subject, states that “the Romans made a public
military way, that of Watling Street, from the Tower to Ludgate, in a
straight line, at the end of which they built stations or citadels, one
of which was where the White Tower now stands.” Bayford adds that “when
the White Tower was fitted up for the reception of records, there
remained many Saxon inscriptions.”
[38] Rude-lane. Lad-lane.--BAYFORD.
[39] Fitzstephen.
[40] Camden.
[41] BAYFORD, Leland’s Collectanea, p. lviii.
[42] Ludgate (Leod-gate).--VERSTEGAN.
[43] See Note (D), at the end of the volume.
[44] Massere, merchant, mercer.
[45] Fitzstephen.
[46] Meuse. Apparently rather a hawk hospital, from Muta (Camden). Du
Fresne, in his Glossary, says, Muta is in French Le Meue, and a disease
to which the hawk was subject on changing its feathers.
[47] Scotland-yard.--STRYPE.
[48] The first bridge that connected Thorney Isle with the mainland is
said to have been built by Matilda, wife of Henry I.
[49] We give him that title, which this Norman noble generally bears in
the Chronicles, though Palgrave observes that he is rather to be styled
Earl of the Magesetan (the Welch Marches).
[50] Eadigan.--S. TURNER, vol. i. p. 274.
[51] The comparative wealth of London was indeed considerable. When, in
1018, all the rest of England was taxed to an amount considered
stupendous, viz., 71,000 Saxon pounds, London contributed 11,000 pounds
besides.
[52] Complin. the second vespers.
[53] CAMDEN--A church was built out of the ruins of that temple by
Sibert, King of the East Saxons; and Canute favoured much the small
monastery attached to it (originally established by Dunstan for twelve
Benedictines), on account of its Abbot Wulnoth, whose society pleased
him. The old palace of Canute, in Thorney Isle, had been destroyed by
fire.
[54] See note to PLUQUET’s Roman de Rou, p. 285. N.B.--Whenever the
Roman de Rou is quoted in these pages it is from the excellent edition of
M. Pluquet.
[55] Pardex or Parde, corresponding to the modern French expletive,
pardie.
[56] Quen, or rather Quens; synonymous with Count in the Norman
Chronicles. Earl Godwin is strangely styled by Wace, Quens Qwine.
[57] “Good, good, pleasant son,--the words of the poet sound gracefully
on the lips of the knight.”
[58] A sentiment variously assigned to William and to his son Henry the
Beau Clerc.
[59] Mallet is a genuine Scandinavian name to this day.
[60] Rou--the name given by the French to Rollo, or Rolf-ganger, the
founder of the Norman settlement.
[61] Pious severity to the heterodox was a Norman virtue. William of
Poictiers says of William, “One knows with what zeal he pursued and
exterminated those who thought differently;” i.e., on transubstantiation.
But the wise Norman, while flattering the tastes of the Roman Pontiff in
such matters, took special care to preserve the independence of his
Church from any undue dictation.
[62] A few generations later this comfortable and decent fashion of
night-gear was abandoned; and our forefathers, Saxon and Norman, went to
bed in puris naturalibus, like the Laplanders.
[63] Most of the chroniclers merely state the parentage within the
forbidden degrees as the obstacle to William’s marriage with Matilda; but
the betrothal or rather nuptials of her mother Adele with Richard III.
(though never consummated), appears to have been the true canonical
objection.--See note to Wace, p. 27. Nevertheless, Matilda’s mother,
Adele, stood in the relation of aunt to William, as widow of his father’s
elder brother, “an affinity,” as is observed by a writer in the
“Archaeologia,” “quite near enough to account for, if not to justify, the
interference of the Church.”--Arch. vol. xxxii. p. 109.
[64] It might be easy to show, were this the place, that though the
Saxons never lost their love of liberty, yet that the victories which
gradually regained the liberty from the gripe of the Anglo-Norman kings,
were achieved by the Anglo-Norman aristocracy. And even to this day, the
few rare descendants of that race (whatever their political faction),
will generally exhibit that impatience of despotic influence, and that
disdain of corruption, which characterise the homely bonders of Norway,
in whom we may still recognise the sturdy likeness of their fathers;
while it is also remarkable that the modern inhabitants of those portions
of the kingdom originally peopled by their kindred Danes, are,
irrespective of mere party divisions, noted for their intolerance of all
oppression, and their resolute independence of character; to wit,
Yorkshire, Norfolk, Cumberland, and large districts in the Scottish
Lowlands.
[65] Ex pervetusto codice, MS. Chron. Bec. in Vit. Lanfranc, quoted in
the “Archaeologia,” vol. xxxii. p. 109. The joke, which is very poor,
seems to have turned upon pede and quadrupede; it is a little altered in
the text.
[66] Ord. Vital. See Note on Lanfranc, at the end of the volume.
[67] Siward was almost a giant (pene gigas statures). There are some
curious anecdotes of this hero, immortalised by Shakspere, in the Bromton
Chronicle. His grandfather is said to have been a bear, who fell in love
with a Danish lady; and his father, Beorn, retained some of the traces of
the parental physiognomy in a pair of pointed ears. The origin of this
fable seems evident. His grandfather was a Berserker; for whether that
name be derived, as is more generally supposed, from bare-sark,--or
rather from bear-sark, that is, whether this grisly specimen of the
Viking genus fought in his shirt or his bearskin, the name equally lends
itself to those mystifications from which half the old legends, whether
of Greece or Norway, are derived.
[68] Wace.
[69] See Note (E), at the end of the volume (foot-note on the date of
William’s marriage).
[70] Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.
[71] Some writers say fifty.
[72] Hovenden.
[73] Bodes, i.e. messengers.
[74] Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.
[75] Or Fleur-de-lis, which seems to have been a common form of ornament
with the Saxon kings.
[76] Bayeux Tapestry.
[77] See note (F), at the end of the volume.
[78] The York Chronicle, written by an Englishman, Stubbs, gives this
eminent person an excellent character as peacemaker. “He could make the
warmest friends of foes the most hostile.” “De inimicissimis,
amicissimos faceret.” This gentle priest had yet the courage to curse
the Norman Conqueror in the midst of his barons. That scene is not
within the range of this work, but it is very strikingly told in the
Chronicle.
[79] Heralds, though probably the word is Saxon, were not then known in
the modern acceptation of the word. The name given to the messenger or
envoy who fulfilled that office was bode or nuncius. See Note (G), at
the end of the volume.
[80] When the chronicler praises the gift of speech, he unconsciously
proves the existence of constitutional freedom.
[81] Recent Danish historians have in vain endeavoured to detract from
the reputation of Canute as an English monarch. The Danes are,
doubtless, the best authorities for his character in Denmark. But our
own English authorities are sufficiently decisive as to the personal
popularity of Canute in this country, and the affection entertained for
his laws.
[82] Some of our historians erroneously represent Harold as the eldest
son. But Florence, the best authority we have, in the silence of the
Saxon Chronicle, as well as Knyghton, distinctly states Sweyn to be the
eldest; Harold was the second, and Tostig was the third. Sweyn’s
seniority seems corroborated by the greater importance of his earldom.
The Norman chroniclers, in their spite to Harold, wish to make him junior
to Tostig--for the reasons evident at the close of this work. And the
Norwegian chronicler, Snorro Sturleson, says that Harold was the youngest
of all the sons; so little was really known, or cared to be accurately
known, of that great house which so nearly founded a new dynasty of
English kings.
[83] Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, A. D. 1043. “Stigand was deposed from his
bishopric, and all that he possessed was seized into the King’s hands,
because he was received to his mother’s counsel, and she went just as he
advised her, as people thought.” The saintly Confessor dealt with his
bishops as summarily as Henry VIII. could have done, after his quarrel
with the Pope.
[84] The title of Basileus was retained by our kings so late as the time
of John, who styled himself “Totius Insulae Britannicae
Basileus.”--AGARD: On the Antiquity of Shires in England, op. Hearne,
Cur. Disc.
[85] Sharon Turner.
[86] See the Introduction to PALGRAVE’s History of the Anglo-Saxons,
from which this description of the Witan is borrowed so largely, that I
am left without other apology for the plagiarism, than the frank
confession, that if I could have found in others, or conceived from my
own resources, a description half as graphic and half as accurate, I
would only have plagiarised to half the extent I have done.
[87] Girald. Gambrensis.
[88] Palgrave omits, I presume accidentally, these members of the Witan,
but it is clear from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle that the London “lithsmen”
were represented in the great National Witans, and helped to decide the
election even of kings.
[89] By Athelstan’s law, every man was to have peace going to and from
the Witan, unless he was a thief.--WILKINS, p. 187.
[90] Goda, Edward’s sister, married first Rolf’s father, Count of
Nantes; secondly, the Count of Boulogne.
[91] More correctly of Oxford, Somerset, Berkshire, Gloucester, and
Hereford.
[92] Yet how little safe it is for the great to despise the low-born.
This very Richard, son of Scrob, more euphoniously styled by the Normans
Richard Fitz-Scrob, settled in Herefordshire (he was probably among the
retainers of Earl Rolf), and on William’s landing, became the chief and
most active supporter of the invader in those districts. The sentence of
banishment seems to have been mainly confined to the foreigners about the
Court--for it is clear that many Norman landowners and priests were still
left scattered throughout the country.
[93] SENECA, Thyest. Act ii.--“He is a king who fears nothing; that
kingdom every man gives to himself.”
[94] Scin-laeca, literally a shining corpse; a species of apparition
invoked by the witch or wizard.--See SHARON TURNER on The Superstitions
of the Anglo-Saxons, b. ii. c. 14.
[95] Galdra, magic.
[96] Fylgia, tutelary divinity. See Note (H), at the end of the volume.
[97] Morthwyrtha, worshipper of the dead.
[98] It is a disputed question whether the saex of the earliest Saxon
invaders was a long or short curved weapon,--nay, whether it was curved
or straight; but the author sides with those who contend that it was a
short, crooked weapon, easily concealed by a cloak, and similar to those
depicted on the banner of the East Saxons.
[99] See Note (K), at the end of the volume.
[100] Saxon Chronicle, Florence Wigorn. Sir F. Palgrave says that the
title of Childe is equivalent to that of Atheling. With that remarkable
appreciation of evidence which generally makes him so invaluable as a
judicial authority where accounts are contradictory, Sir F. Palgrave
discards with silent contempt the absurd romance of Godwin’s station of
herdsman, to which, upon such very fallacious and flimsy authorities,
Thierry and Sharon Turner have been betrayed into lending their
distinguished names.
[101] This first wife Thyra, was of very unpopular repute with the
Saxons. She was accused of sending young English persons as slaves into
Denmark, and is said to have been killed by lightning.
[102] It is just, however, to Godwin to say, that there is no proof of
his share in this barbarous transaction; the presumptions, on the
contrary, are in his favour; but the authorities are too contradictory,
and the whole event too obscure, to enable us unhesitatingly to confirm
the acquittal he received in his own age, and from his own national
tribunal.
[103] Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.
[104] William of Malmesbury.
[105] So Robert of Gloucester says pithily of William, “Kyng Wylliam was
to mild men debonnere ynou.”--HEARNE, v. ii. p. 309.
[106] This kiss of peace was held singularly sacred by the Normans, and
all the more knightly races of the continent. Even the craftiest
dissimulator, designing fraud, and stratagem, and murder to a foe, would
not, to gain his ends, betray the pledge of the kiss of peace. When Henry
II. consented to meet Becket after his return from Rome, and promised to
remedy all of which his prelate complained, he struck prophetic dismay
into Becket’s heart by evading the kiss of peace.
[107] SNORRO STURLESON’s Heimskringla.--Laing’s Translation, p. 75-77.
[108] The gre-hound was so called from hunting the gre or badger.
[109] The spear and the hawk were as the badges of Saxon nobility; and a
thegn was seldom seen abroad without the one on his left wrist, the other
in his right hand.
[110] BED Epist. ad Egbert.
[111] TEGNER’s Frithiof.
[112] Some of the chroniclers say that he married the daughter of
Gryffyth, the king of North Wales, but Gryffyth certainly married Algar’s
daughter, and that double alliance could not have been permitted. It was
probably, therefore, some more distant kinswoman of Gryffyth’s that was
united to Algar.
[113] The title of queen is employed in these pages, as one which our
historians have unhesitatingly given to the consorts of our Saxon kings;
but the usual and correct designation of Edward’s royal wife, in her own
time, would be, Edith the Lady.
[114] ETHEL. De Gen. Reg. Ang.
[115] AILRED, De Vit. Edward Confess.
[116] Ingulfus.
[117] The clergy (says Malmesbury), contented with a very slight share
of learning, could scarcely stammer out the words of the sacraments; and
a person who understood grammar was an object of wonder and astonishment.
Other authorities, likely to be impartial, speak quite as strongly as to
the prevalent ignorance of the time.
[118] House-carles in the royal court were the body-guard, mostly, if
not all, of Danish origin. They appear to have been first formed, or at
least employed, in that capacity by Canute. With the great earls, the
house-carles probably exercised the same functions; but in the ordinary
acceptation of the word in families of lower rank, house-carle was a
domestic servant.
[119] This was cheap. For Agelnoth, Archbishop of Canterbury, gave the
Pope 6000 lb. weight of silver for the arm of St. Augustine.--MALMESBURY.
[120] William of Malmesbury says, that the English, at the time of the
Conquest, loaded their arms with gold bracelets, and adorned their skins
with punctured designs, i.e., a sort of tattooing. He says, that they
then wore short garments, reaching to the mid-knee; but that was a Norman
fashion, and the loose robes assigned in the text to Algar were the old
Saxon fashion, which made but little distinction between the dress of
women and that of men.
[121] And in England, to this day, the descendants of the Anglo-Danes,
in Cumberland and Yorkshire, are still a taller and bonier race than
those of the Anglo-Saxons, as in Surrey and Sussex.
[122] Very few of the greater Saxon nobles could pretend to a lengthened
succession in their demesnes. The wars with the Danes, the many
revolutions which threw new families uppermost, the confiscations and
banishments, and the invariable rule of rejecting the heir, if not of
mature years at his father’s death, caused rapid changes of dynasty in
the several earldoms. But the family of Leofric had just claims to a
very rare antiquity in their Mercian lordship. Leofric was the sixth
Earl of Chester and Coventry, in lineal descent from his namesake,
Leofric the First; he extended the supremacy of his hereditary lordship
over all Mercia. See DUGDALE, Monast. vol. iii. p. 102; and PALGRAVE’s
Commonwealth, Proofs and Illustrations, p. 291.
[123] AILRED de Vit. Edw.
[124] Dunwich, now swallowed up by the sea.--Hostile element to the
house of Godwin.
[125] Windsor.
[126] The chronicler, however, laments that the household ties, formerly
so strong with the Anglo-Saxon, had been much weakened in the age prior
to the Conquest.
[127] Some authorities state Winchester as the scene of these memorable
festivities. Old Windsor Castle is supposed by Mr. Lysons to have
occupied the site of a farm of Mr. Isherwood’s surrounded by a moat,
about two miles distant from New Windsor. He conjectures that it was
still occasionally inhabited by the Norman kings till 1110. The ville
surrounding it only contained ninety-five houses, paying gabel-tax, in
the Norman survey.
[128] AILRED, de Vit. Edward. Confess.
[129] “Is it astonishing,” asked the people (referring to Edward’s
preference of the Normans), “that the author and support of Edward’s
reign should be indignant at seeing new men from a foreign nation raised
above him, and yet never does he utter one harsh word to the man whom he
himself created king?”--HAZLITT’s THIERRY, vol. i. p. 126.
This is the English account (versus the Norman). There can be little
doubt that it is the true one.
[130] Henry of Huntingdon, etc.
[131] Henry of Huntingdon; Bromt. Chron., etc.
[132] Hoveden.
[133] The origin of the word leach (physician), which has puzzled some
inquirers, is from lids or leac, a body. Leich is the old Saxon word for
surgeon.
[134] Sharon Turner, vol. i. p. 472.
[135] Fosbrooke.
[136] Aegir, the Scandinavian god of the ocean. Not one of the Aser, or
Asas (the celestial race), but sprung from the giants. Ran or Rana, his
wife, a more malignant character, who caused shipwrecks, and drew to
herself, by a net, all that fell into the sea. The offspring of this
marriage were nine daughters, who became the Billows, the Currents, and
the Storms.
[137] Frilla, the Danish word for a lady who, often with the wife’s
consent, was added to the domestic circle by the husband. The word is
here used by Hilda in a general sense of reproach. Both marriage and
concubinage were common amongst the Anglo-Saxon priesthood, despite the
unheeded canons; and so, indeed, they were with the French clergy.
[138] Hilda, not only as a heathen, but as a Dane, would be no favourer
of monks; they were unknown in Denmark at that time, and the Danes held
them in odium.--Ord Vital., lib. vii.
[139] Chron. Knyghton.
[140] Weyd-month. Meadow month, June.
[141] Cumen-hus. Tavern.
[142] Fitzstephen.
[143] William of Malmesbury speaks with just indignation of the
Anglo-Saxon custom of selling female servants, either to public
prostitution, or foreign slavery.
[144] It will be remembered that Algar governed Wessex, which
principality included Kent, during the year of Godwin’s outlawry.
[145] Trulofa, from which comes our popular corruption “true lover’s
knot;” a vetere Danico trulofa, i.e., fidem do, to pledge faith.--HICKE’s
Thesaur.
“A knot, among the ancient northern nations, seems to have been the
emblem of love, faith, and friendship.”--BRANDE’s Pop. Antiq.
[146] The Saxon Chronicle contradicts itself as to Algar’s outlawry,
stating in one passage that he was outlawed without any kind of guilt,
and in another that he was outlawed as swike, or traitor, and that he
made a confession of it before all the men there gathered. His treason,
however, seems naturally occasioned by his close connection with
Gryffyth, and proved by his share in that King’s rebellion. Some of our
historians have unfairly assumed that his outlawry was at Harold’s
instigation. Of this there is not only no proof, but one of the best
authorities among the chroniclers says just the contrary--that Harold did
all he could to intercede for him; and it is certain that he was fairly
tried and condemned by the Witan, and afterwards restored by the
concurrent articles of agreement between Harold and Leofric. Harold’s
policy with his own countrymen stands out very markedly prominent in the
annals of the time; it was invariably that of conciliation.
[147] Saxon Chron., verbatim.
[148] Hume.
[149] “The chaste who blameless keep unsullied fame,
Transcend all other worth, all other praise.
The Spirit, high enthroned, has made their hearts
His sacred temple.”
SHARON TURNER’s Translation of Aldhelm, vol. iii. p. 366. It is curious
to see how, even in Latin, the poet preserves the alliterations that
characterised the Saxon muse.
[150] Slightly altered from Aldhelm.
[151] It is impossible to form any just view of the state of parties,
and the position of Harold in the later portions of this work, unless the
reader will bear constantly in mind the fact that, from the earliest
period, minors were set aside as a matter of course, by the Saxon
customs. Henry observes that, in the whole history of the Heptarchy,
there is but one example of a minority, and that a short and unfortunate
one; so, in the later times, the great Alfred takes the throne, to the
exclusion of the infant son of his elder brother. Only under very
peculiar circumstances, backed, as in the case of Edmund Ironsides, by
precocious talents and manhood on the part of the minor, were there
exceptions to the general laws of succession. The same rule obtained
with the earldoms; the fame, power, and popularity of Siward could not
transmit his Northumbrian earldom to his infant son Waltheof, so gloomily
renowned in a subsequent reign.
[152] Bayeux Tapestry.
[153] Indeed, apparently the only monastic order in England.
[154] See Note to Robert of Gloucester, vol. ii. p. 372.
[155] The Saxon priests were strictly forbidden to bear arms.--SPELM.
Concil. p. 238.
It is mentioned in the English Chronicles, as a very extraordinary
circumstance, that a bishop of Hereford, who had been Harold’s chaplain,
did actually take sword and shield against the Welch. Unluckily, this
valiant prelate was slain so soon, that it was no encouraging example.
[156] See Note (K), at the end of the volume.
[157] The Normans and French detested each other; and it was the Norman
who taught to the Saxon his own animosities against the Frank. A very
eminent antiquary, indeed, De la Rue, considered that the Bayeux tapestry
could not be the work of Matilda, or her age, because in it the Normans
are called French. But that is a gross blunder on his part; for William,
in his own charters, calls the Normans “Franci.” Wace, in his “Roman de
Rou,” often styles the Normans “French;” and William of Poitiers, a
contemporary of the Conqueror, gives them also in one passage the same
name. Still, it is true that the Normans were generally very tenacious
of their distinction from their gallant but hostile neighbours.
[158] The present town and castle of Conway.
[159] See CAMDEN’s Britannia, “Caernarvonshire.”
[160] When (A.D. 220) the bishops, Germanicus, and Lupus, headed the
Britons against the Picts and Saxons, in Easter week, fresh from their
baptism in the Alyn, Germanicus ordered them to attend to his war-cry,
and repeat it; he gave “Alleluia.” The hills so loudly re-echoed the
cry, that the enemy caught panic, and fled with great slaughter. Maes
Garmon, in Flintshire, was the scene of the victory.
[161] The cry of the English at the onset of battle was “Holy Crosse,
God Almighty;” afterwards in fight, “Ouct, ouct,” out, out.--HEARNE’s
Disc. Antiquity of Motts.
The latter cry, probably, originated in the habit of defending their
standard and central posts with barricades and closed shields; and thus,
idiomatically and vulgarly, signified “get out.”
[162] Certain high places in Wales, of which this might well be one,
were so sacred, that even the dwellers in the immediate neighbourhood
never presumed to approach them.
[163] See Note (L), at the end of the volume.
[164] See Note (M), at the end of the volume.
[165] The Welch seem to have had a profusion of the precious metals very
disproportioned to the scarcity of their coined money. To say nothing of
the torques, bracelets, and even breastplates of gold, common with their
numerous chiefs, their laws affix to offences penalties which attest the
prevalent waste both of gold and silver. Thus, an insult to a sub-king of
Aberfraw is atoned by a silver rod as thick as the King’s little finger,
which is in length to reach from the ground to his mouth when sitting;
and a gold cup, with a cover as broad as the King’s face, and the
thickness of a ploughman’s nail, or the shell of a goose’s egg. I
suspect that it was precisely because the Welch coined little or no
money, that the metals they possessed became thus common in domestic use.
Gold would have been more rarely seen, even amongst the Peruvians, had
they coined it into money.
[166] Leges Wallicae.
[167] Mona, or Anglesea.
[168] Ireland.
[169] The Welch were then, and still are, remarkable for the beauty of
their teeth. Giraldus Cambrensis observes, as something very
extraordinary, that they cleaned them.
[170] I believe it was not till the last century that a good road took
the place of this pass.
[171] The Saxons of Wessex seem to have adopted the Dragon for their
ensign, from an early period. It was probably for this reason that it
was assumed by Edward Ironsides, as the hero of the Saxons; the
principality of Wessex forming the most important portion of the pure
Saxon race, while its founder was the ancestor of the imperial house of
the Basileus of Britain. The dragon seems also to have been a Norman
ensign. The lions or leopards, popularly assigned to the Conqueror, are
certainly a later invention. There is no appearance of them on the
banners and shields of the Norman army in the Bayeux tapestry. Armorial
bearings were in use amongst the Welch, and even the Saxons, long before
heraldry was reduced to a science by the Franks and Normans. And the
dragon, which is supposed by many critics to be borrowed from the east,
through the Saracens, certainly existed as an armorial ensign with the
Cymrians before they could have had any obligation to the songs and
legends of that people.
[172] “In whose time the earth brought forth double, and there was
neither beggar nor poor man from the North to the South Sea.” POWELL’s
Hist. of Wales, p. 83.
[173] “During the military expeditions made in our days against South
Wales, an old Welchman, at Pencadair, who had faithfully adhered to him
(Henry II.), being desired to give his opinion about the royal army, and
whether he thought that of the rebels would make resistance, and what he
thought would be the final event of this war, replied: ‘This nation, O
King, may now, as in former times, be harassed, and, in a great measure,
be weakened and destroyed by you and other powers; and it will often
prevail by its laudable exertions, but it can never be totally subdued by
the wrath of man, unless the wrath of God shall concur. Nor do I think
that any other nation than this of Wales, or any other language (whatever
may hereafter come to pass), shall in the day of severe examination
before the Supreme Judge answer for this corner of the earth!’”--HOARE’s
Giraldus Cambrensis, vol. i. p. 361.
[174] Gryffyth left a son, Caradoc; but he was put aside as a minor,
according to the Saxon customs.
[175] Bromton Chron., Knyghton, Walsingham, Hoveden, etc.
[176] Bromton, Knyghton, etc.
[177] The word “decimated” is the one generally applied by the
historians to the massacre in question; and it is therefore retained
here. But it is not correctly applied, for that butchery was
perpetrated, not upon one out of ten, but nine out of ten.
[178] The above reasons for Harold’s memorable expedition are sketched
at this length, because they suggest the most probable motives which
induced it, and furnish, in no rash and inconsiderate policy, that key to
his visit, which is not to be found in chronicler or historian.
[179] See Note (N).
[180] Faul was an evil spirit much dreaded by the Saxons. Zabulus and
Diabolus (the Devil) seem to have been the same.
[181] Ygg-drassill, the mystic Ash-tree of Life, or symbol of the earth,
watered by the Fates.--See Note (O.)
[182] Mimir, the most celebrated of the giants. The Vaner, with whom he
was left as a hostage, cut off his head. Odin embalmed it by his seid,
or magic art, pronounced over it mystic runes, and, ever after, consulted
it on critical occasions.
[183] Asa-Lok or Loke--(distinct from Utgard-Lok, the demon of the
Infernal Regions)--descended from the Giants, but received among the
celestial Deities; a treacherous and malignant Power fond of assuming
disguises and plotting evil-corresponding in his attributes with our
“Lucifer.” One of his progeny was Hela, the Queen of Hell.
[184] “A hag dwells in a wood called Janvid, the Iron Wood, the mother
of many gigantic sons shaped like wolves; there is one of a race more
fearful than all, named ‘Managarm.’ He will be filled with the blood of
men who draw near their end, and will swallow up the moon and stain the
heavens and the hearth with blood.”--From the Prose Edda. In the
Scandinavian poetry, Managarm is sometimes the symbol of war, and the
“Iron Wood” a metaphor for spears.
[185] “Wolf Month,” January.
[186] Bayeux tapestry.
[187] Roman de Rou, see part ii. 1078.
[188] Belrem, the present Beaurain, near Montreuil.
[189] Roman de Rou, part ii. 1079.
[190] William of Poitiers, “apud Aucense Castrum.”
[191] As soon as the rude fort of the middle ages admitted something of
magnificence and display, the state rooms were placed in the third story
of the inner court, as being the most secure.
[192] A manor (but not, alas! In Normandy) was held by one of his cooks,
on the tenure of supplying William with a dish of dillegrout.
[193] The Council of Cloveshoe forbade the clergy to harbour poets,
harpers, musicians, and buffoons.
[194] ORD. VITAL.
[195] Canute made his inferior strength and stature his excuse for not
meeting Edward Ironsides in single combat.
[196] Odo’s licentiousness was, at a later period, one of the alleged
causes of his downfall, or rather against his release from the prison to
which he had been consigned. He had a son named John, who distinguished
himself under Henry I.--ORD. VITAL. lib. iv.
[197] William of Poitiers, the contemporary Norman chronicler, says of
Harold, that he was a man to whom imprisonment was more odious than
shipwreck.
[198] In the environs of Bayeux still may perhaps linger the sole
remains of the Scandinavian Normans, apart from the gentry. For
centuries the inhabitants of Bayeux and its vicinity were a class
distinct from the Franco-Normans, or the rest of Neustria; they submitted
with great reluctance to the ducal authority, and retained their old
heathen cry of Thor-aide, instead of Dieu-aide!
[199] Similar was the answer of Goodyn the Bishop of Winchester,
ambassador from Henry VIII. to the French King. To this day the English
entertain the same notion of forts as Harold and Goodyn.
[200] See Mr. Wright’s very interesting article on the “Condition of the
English Peasantry,” etc., Archaeologia, vol. xxx. pp. 205-244. I must,
however, observe, that one very important fact seems to have been
generally overlooked by all inquirers, or, at least, not sufficiently
enforced, viz., that it was the Norman’s contempt for the general mass of
the subject population which more, perhaps, than any other cause, broke
up positive slavery in England. Thus the Norman very soon lost sight of
that distinction the Anglo-Saxons had made between the agricultural ceorl
and the theowe; i.e., between the serf of the soil and the personal
slave. Hence these classes became fused in each other, and were
gradually emancipated by the same circumstances. This, be it remarked,
could never have taken place under the Anglo-Saxon laws, which kept
constantly feeding the class of slaves by adding to it convicted felons
and their children. The subject population became too necessary to the
Norman barons, in their feuds with each other, or their king, to be long
oppressed; and, in the time of Froissart, that worthy chronicler ascribes
the insolence, or high spirit, of le menu peuple to their grand aise, et
abondance de biens.
[201] Twelve o’clock.
[202] Six A.M.
[203] A celebrated antiquary, in his treatise in the “Archaeologia,” on
the authenticity of the Bayeux tapestry, very justly invites attention to
the rude attempt of the artist to preserve individuality in his
portraits; and especially to the singularly erect bearing of the Duke, by
which he is at once recognised wherever he is introduced. Less pains are
taken with the portrait of Harold; but even in that a certain elegance of
proportion, and length of limb, as well as height of stature, are
generally preserved.
[204] Bayeux tapestry.
[205] AIL. de Vit. Edw.--Many other chroniclers mention this legend, of
which the stones of Westminster Abbey itself prated, in the statues of
Edward and the Pilgrim, placed over the arch in Dean’s Yard.
[206] This ancient Saxon lay, apparently of the date of the tenth or
eleventh century, may be found, admirably translated by Mr. George
Stephens, in the Archaeologia, vol. xxx. p. 259. In the text the poem is
much abridged, reduced into rhythm, and in some stanzas wholly altered
from the original. But it is, nevertheless, greatly indebted to Mr.
Stephens’s translation, from which several lines are borrowed verbatim.
The more careful reader will note the great aid given to a rhymeless
metre by alliteration. I am not sure that this old Saxon mode of verse
might not be profitably restored to our national muse.
[207] People.
[208] Heaven.
[209] Omen.
[210] The Eastern word Satraps (Satrapes) made one of the ordinary and
most inappropriate titles (borrowed, no doubt, from the Byzantine Court),
by which the Saxons, in their Latinity, honoured their simple nobles.
[211] Afterwards married to Malcolm of Scotland, through whom, by the
female line, the present royal dynasty of England assumes descent from
the Anglo-Saxon kings.
[212] By his first wife; Aldyth was his second.
[213] Flor. Wig.
[214] This truth has been overlooked by writers, who have maintained the
Atheling’s right as if incontestable. “An opinion prevailed,” says
Palgrave, “Eng. Commonwealth,” pp. 559, 560, “that if the Atheling was
born before his father and mother were ordained to the royal dignity, the
crown did not descend to the child of uncrowned ancestors. “Our great
legal historian quotes Eadmer, “De Vit. Sanct. Dunstan,” p. 220, for the
objection made to the succession of Edward the Martyr, on this score.
[215] See the judicious remarks of Henry, “Hist. of Britain,” on this
head. From the lavish abuse of oaths, perjury had come to be reckoned
one of the national vices of the Saxon.
[216] And so, from Gryffyth, beheaded by his subjects, descended Charles
Stuart.
[217] Brompt. Chron.
[218] See Note P.
[219] It seems by the coronation service of Ethelred II. still extant,
that two bishops officiated in the crowning of the King; and hence,
perhaps, the discrepancy in the chronicles, some contending that Harold
was crowned by Alred, others, by Stigand. It is noticeable, however,
that it is the apologists of the Normans who assign that office to
Stigand, who was in disgrace with the Pope, and deemed no lawful bishop.
Thus in the Bayeux tapestry the label, “Stigand,” is significantly
affixed to the officiating prelate, as if to convey insinuation that
Harold was not lawfully crowned. Florence, by far the best authority,
says distinctly, that Harold was crowned by Alred. The ceremonial of the
coronation described in the text, is for the most part given on the
authority of the “Cotton MS.” quoted by Sharon Turner, vol. iii. p. 151.
[220] Introduced into our churches in the ninth century.
[221] The Wyn-month: October.
[222] “Snorro Sturleson.” Laing.
[223] The Vaeringers, or Varangi, mostly Northmen; this redoubtable
force, the Janissaries of the Byzantine empire, afforded brilliant field,
both of fortune and war, to the discontented spirits, or outlawed heroes
of the North. It was joined afterwards by many of the bravest and best
born of the Saxon nobles, refusing to dwell under the yoke of the Norman.
Scott, in “Count Robert of Paris,” which, if not one of his best
romances, is yet full of truth and beauty, has described this renowned
band with much poetical vigor and historical fidelity.
[224] Laing’s Snorro Sturleson.--“The old Norwegian ell was less than the
present ell; and Thorlasius reckons, in a note on this chapter, that
Harold’s stature would be about four Danish ells; viz. about eight
feet.”--Laing’s note to the text. Allowing for the exaggeration of the
chronicler, it seems probable, at least, that Hardrada exceeded seven
feet. Since (as Laing remarks in the same note), and as we shall see
hereafter, “our English Harold offered him, according to both English and
Danish authority, seven feet of land for a grave, or as much more as his
stature, exceeding that of other men, might require.”
[225] Snorro Sturleson. See Note Q.
[226] Snorro Sturleson.
[227] Hoveden.
[228] Holinshed. Nearly all chroniclers (even, with scarce an
exception, those most favouring the Normans), concur in the abilities and
merits of Harold as a king.
[229] “Vit. Harold. Chron. Ang. Norm.” ii, 243.
[230] Hoveden.
[231] Malmesbury.
[232] Supposed to be our first port for shipbuilding.--FOSBROOKE, p.
320.
[233] Pax.
[234] Some of the Norman chroniclers state that Robert, Archbishop of
Canterbury, who had been expelled from England at Godwin’s return, was
Lanfranc’s companion in this mission; but more trustworthy authorities
assure us that Robert had been dead some years before, not long surviving
his return into Normandy.
[235] Saxon Chronicle.
[236] Saxon Chronicle.--“When it was the nativity of St. Mary, then were
the men’s provisions gone, and no man could any longer keep them there.”
[237] It is curious to notice how England was represented as a country
almost heathen; its conquest was regarded quite as a pious, benevolent
act of charity--a sort of mission for converting the savages. And all
this while England was under the most slavish ecclesiastical domination,
and the priesthood possessed a third of its land! But the heart of
England never forgave that league of the Pope with the Conqueror; and the
seeds of the Reformed Religion were trampled deep into the Saxon soil by
the feet of the invading Norman.
[238] WILLIAM OF POITIERS.--The naive sagacity of this bandit argument,
and the Norman’s contempt for Harold’s deficiency in “strength of mind,”
are exquisite illustrations of character.
[239] Snorro Sturleson.
[240] Does any Scandinavian scholar know why the trough was so
associated with the images of Scandinavian witchcraft? A witch was
known, when seen behind, by a kind of trough-like shape; there must be
some symbol, of very ancient mythology, in this superstition!
[241] Snorro Sturleson.
[242] Snorro Sturleson.
[243] So Thierry translates the word: others, the Land-ravager. In
Danish, the word is Land-ode, in Icelandic, Land-eydo.--Note to Thierry’s
“Hist. of the Conq. of England,” book iii. vol. vi. p. 169 (of Hazlitt’s
translation).
[244] Snorro Sturleson.
[245] See Snorro Sturleson for this parley between Harold in person and
Tostig. The account differs from the Saxon chroniclers, but in this
particular instance is likely to be as accurate.
[246] Snorro Sturleson.
[247] Snorro Sturleson.
[248] Sharon Turner’s Anglo-Saxons, vol. ii. p. 396. Snorro Sturleson.
[249] Snorro Sturleson.
[250] The quick succession of events allowed the Saxon army no time to
bury the slain; and the bones of the invaders whitened the field of
battle for many years afterwards.
[251] It may be said indeed, that, in the following reign, the Danes
under Osbiorn (brother of King Sweyn), sailed up the Humber; but it was
to assist the English, not to invade them. They were bought off by the
Normans,--not conquered.
[252] The Saxons sat at meals with their heads covered.
[253] Henry.
[254] Palgrave--“Hist. of Anglo-Saxons.”
[255] Palgrave--“Hist. of Anglo-Saxons.”
[256] The battle-field of Hastings seems to have been called Senlac,
before the Conquest, Sanguelac after it.
[257] Traitor-messenger.
[258] “Ne meinent od els chevalier,
Varlet a pie De eskuier;
Ne nul d’els n’a armes portee,
Forz sol escu, lance, et espee.”
Roman de Rou, Second Part, v. 12, 126.
[259] “Ke d’une angarde [eminence] u ils ‘estuient
Cels de l’ost virent, ki pres furent.”
Roman de Rou, Second Part, v. 12, 126.
[260] Midnight.
[261] This counsel the Norman chronicler ascribes to Gurth, but it is so
at variance with the character of that hero, that it is here assigned to
the unscrupulous intellect of Haco.
[262] Osborne--(Asbiorn),--one of the most common of Danish and
Norwegian names. Tonstain, Toustain, or Tostain, the same as Tosti, or
Tostig,--Danish. (Harold’s brother is called Tostain or Toustain, in the
Norman chronicles). Brand, a name common to Dane or Norwegian--Bulmer is
a Norwegian name, and so is Bulver or Bolvaer--which is, indeed, so
purely Scandinavian that it is one of the warlike names given to Odin
himself by the Norse-scalds. Bulverhithe still commemorates the landing
of a Norwegian son of the war-god. Bruce, the ancestor of the deathless
Scot, also bears in that name, more illustrious than all, the proof of
his Scandinavian birth.
[263] This mail appears in that age to have been sewn upon linen or
cloth. In the later age of the crusaders, it was more artful, and the
links supported each other, without being attached to any other material.
[264] Bayeux tapestry.
[265] The cross-bow is not to be seen in the Bayeux tapestry--the Norman
bows are not long.
[266] Roman de Rou.
[267] William of Poitiers.
[268] Dieu nous aide.
[269] Thus, when at the battle of Barnet, Earl Warwick, the king-maker,
slew his horse and fought on foot, he followed the old traditional
customs of Saxon chiefs.
[270] “Devant li Dus alout cantant
De Karlemaine e de Rollant,
Ed ‘Olever e des Vassalls
Ki morurent en Ronchevals.”
Roman de Rou, Part ii. I. 13, 151.
Much research has been made by French antiquaries, to discover the old
Chant de Roland, but in vain.
[271] W. PICT. Chron. de Nor.
[272] For, as Sir F. Palgrave shrewdly conjectures, upon the
dismemberment of the vast earldom of Wessex, on Harold’s accession to the
throne, that portion of it comprising Sussex (the old government of his
grandfather Wolnoth) seems to have been assigned to Gurth.
[273] Harold’s birthday was certainly the 14th of October. According to
Mr. Roscoe, in his “Life of William the Conqueror,” William was born also
on the 14th of October.
[274] William Pict.
[275] Thus Wace,
“Guert (Gurth) vit Engleiz amenuisier,
Vi K’il n’i ont nul recovrier,” etc.
“Gurth saw the English diminish, and that there was no hope to retrieve
the day; the Duke pushed forth with such force, that he reached him, and
struck him with great violence (par grant air). I know not if he died by
the stroke, but it is said that it laid him low.”
[276] The suggestions implied in the text will probably be admitted as
correct; when we read in the Saxon annals of the recognition of the dead,
by peculiar marks on their bodies; the obvious, or at least the most
natural explanation of those signs, is to be found in the habit of
puncturing the skin, mentioned by the Malmesbury chronicler.
[277] The contemporary Norman chronicler, William of Poitiers. See Note
(R).
[278] See Note (R).
[279] “Rex magnus parva jacet hic Gulielmus in urna--
Sufficit et magno parva Domus Domino.”
From William the Conqueror’s epitaph (ap-Gemiticen). His bones are said
to have been disinterred some centuries after his death.
[280] Thomson’s Essay on Magna Charta.
[281] Orderic. Vital. lib. 4.
[282] The date of William’s marriage has been variously stated in
English and Norman history, but is usually fixed in 1051-2. M. Pluquet,
however, in a note to his edition of the “Roman de Rou,” says that the
only authority for the date of that marriage is in the Chronicle of
Tours, and it is there referred to 1053. It would seem that the Papal
excommunication was not actually taken off till 1059; nor the formal
dispensation for the marriage granted till 1063.
[283] For authorities for the above sketch, and for many interesting
details of Lanfranc’s character, see Orderic. Vital. Hen. de Knyghton,
lib. ii. Gervasius; and the life of Lanfranc, to be found in the
collection of his Works, etc.
[284] Pigott’s Scand. Mythol. p. 380. Half. Vand. Saga.
[285] “Suthsaxonum Ministrum Wolfnothem.” Flor. Wig.
[286] Asser. de Reb. Gest. Alf. pp. 17, 18.
[287] Camden, Caernarvonshire.
[288] Pennant’s Wales, vol. ii. p. 146.
[289] The ruins still extant are much diminished since the time even of
Pownall or Pennant; and must be indeed inconsiderable, compared with the
buildings or walls which existed at the date of my tale.
[290] Johann. ap. Acad. Celt. tom. iii. p. 151.
[291] William of Poitiers.
[292] He is considered to refer to such bequest in one of his charters:
“Devicto Harlodo rege cum suis complicibus qui michi regnum prudentia
Domini destinatum, et beneficio concessionis Domini et cognati mei
gloriosi regis Edwardi concessum conati sunt auferre.”--FORESTINA, A. 3.
But William’s word is certainly not to be taken, for he never scrupled to
break it; and even in these words he does not state that it was left him
by Edward’s will, but destined and given to him--words founded, perhaps,
solely on the promise referred to, before Edward came to the throne,
corroborated by some messages in the earlier years of his reign, through
the Norman Archbishop of Canterbury, who seems to have been a notable
intriguer to that end.
[293] Palgrave, “Commonwealth,” 560.
[294] “Quo tumulato, subregulus Haroldus Godwin Ducis filius, quem rex
ante suam decessionem regni successorem elegerat, a totius Angliae
primatibus, ad regale culmen electus, die eodem ab Aldredo Eboracensi
Archiepiscopo in regem est honorifice consecratus.”--FLOR. Wig.
[295] Some of these Norman chroniclers tell an absurd story of Harold’s
seizing the crown from the hand of the bishop, and putting it himself on
his head. The Bayeux Tapestry, which is William’s most connected apology
for his claim, shows no such violence; but Harold is represented as
crowned very peaceably. With more art, (as I have observed elsewhere,)
the Tapestry represents Stigand as crowning him instead of Alred; Stigand
being at that time under the Pope’s interdict.
[296] Edward died Jan. 5th. Harold’s coronation is said to have taken
place Jan. the 12th; but there is no very satisfactory evidence as to the
precise day; indeed some writers would imply that he was crowned the day
after Edward’s death, which is scarcely possible.
[297] Vit. Harold. Chron. Ang. Norm.
[298] Laing’s Note to Snorro Sturleson, vol. iii. p. 101.
[299] This William Mallet was the father of Robert Mallet, founder of
the Priory of Eye, in Suffolk (a branch of the House of Mallet de
Graville).--PLUQUET. He was also the ancestor of the great William
Mallet (or Malet, as the old Scandinavian name was now corruptly spelt),
one of the illustrious twenty-five “conservators” of Magna Charta. The
family is still extant; and I have to apologise to Sir Alexander Malet,
Bart. (Her Majesty’s Minister at Stutgard), Lieut.-Col. Charles St. Lo
Malet, the Rev. William Windham Malet (Vicar of Ardley), and other
members of that ancient House, for the liberty taken with the name of
their gallant forefather.
THE END.