THE REBELLION OF BISHOP ODO (1088).

=Source.=--William of Malmesbury, _De gestis regum Anglorum_, ed.

Stubbs, vol. ii., p. 360. (Rolls Series.)

At the beginning of Spring the first struggle was against Odo, the

king’s uncle, bishop of Bayeux. For when, as I have related, on his

release from prison, he had established his nephew Robert in the duchy

of Normandy, he came to England and received from the king the earldom

of Kent; but seeing how all things in England were administered not

according to his will as before (for the control of public affairs

had been entrusted to William bishop of Durham), he was smitten with

jealousy, and himself deserting the king, he intrigued also with

many others, urging that Robert was of an easier disposition and had

tempered his youthful excesses with great hardships, and therefore

deserved the realm; William, on the other hand, carefully brought up as

he was, and overbearing and brutal, as his face itself proved, would

set at nought all right and justice; soon they would lose the honours

so strenuously won; they would have gained nothing by the father’s

death, if the son slew those whom the father had imprisoned. These

complaints were first made in secret by him and Roger of Montgomery,

and by Geoffrey bishop of Coutances, with his nephew Robert earl

of Northumberland; afterwards they interchanged letters and plotted

openly. Even William bishop of Durham, the king’s confidant, had joined

in their treason; a source of grave concern to the king, it is said,

because he at once lost a friend and was deprived of supplies from

the distant provinces. Thereupon Odo conveyed booty of all kinds to

Rochester, laying waste the king’s demesnes in Kent, and especially

the lands of the archbishop, against whom he breathed an undying

hatred, since, as he alleged, it was by the archbishop’s advice that

his brother had cast him into prison. This charge was true enough, for

when the elder William had complained to Lanfranc of his brother’s

desertion, Lanfranc said, “Seize and imprison him!” “What!” he replied,

“he is a clerk.” To which the archbishop rejoined, with playful wit,

“weighing the objection with nice antitheses,” as Persius remarks,

“You will not be laying hands on the bishop of Bayeux, you will be

committing to prison the earl of Kent.” Bishop Geoffrey, with his

nephew, ravaging Bath and Berkeley and part of Wiltshire, gathered

his forces at Bristol. Roger of Montgomery, sending his troops with

Welshmen from Shrewsbury plundered Worcestershire, and was now

threatening Worcester, when the king’s knights who guarded the city,

relying on the blessing of bishop Wulstan, to whom the keeping of

the castle had been committed, few though they were, put to flight

their numerous opponents, wounding and killing many, and taking some

prisoners. At the same time Roger Bigod at Norwich and Hugh Grantmesnil

at Leicester were ravaging each his own country. In vain, however,

did the whole strength of rebellion rage against the king, who lacked

neither wisdom nor good fortune. Seeing well-nigh all the Normans

leagued together in one wild revolt, he summoned by letters of request

such trusty and stout Englishmen as were still left, and complaining

to them of his wrongs, bound them in fealty to him by promises of good

laws, relief from taxation and the right of free chase. With equal

skill he won over Roger of Montgomery, who, concealing his treachery,

was riding with him. Taking him aside, he heaped reproaches upon him,

saying he would gladly abdicate, if Roger and the others whom his

father had left as his guardians thought fit; he failed to understand

why they were so outrageous; if they wanted money, they might have what

they chose; if an increase of their inheritances, be it so; indeed they

might have what they wished. Only they must take care not to imperil

the validity of his father’s decision; for if they chose to defy it in

his case, they must beware of the precedent in their own case; for he

who had made him king had made them earls. Stirred by these words and

promises, the chief rebel, after Odo, was the first to fall away. So

the king, marching at once against the traitors, stormed his uncle’s

castles of Tonbridge and Pevensey, captured Odo in the latter and

forced him to swear that he would leave England and give up Rochester.

To accomplish the same he sent him in advance with a loyal guard,

himself following slowly. Now at that time there was at Rochester

almost the whole of the younger nobility of England and Normandy; three

sons of earl Roger, the younger Eustace of Boulogne and many others

whom I need not specify. The royal guards of the bishop were few and

unarmed, for who would suspect treachery in his company? They leapt

down before the walls, calling to the townsmen to open the gates; it

was the will of the bishop, there with them; it was the command of

the king, though absent. But they, seeing that the bishop’s aspect

discountenanced the speaker’s words, suddenly opened the gates, rushed

out, took horse and carried them all away bound, with the bishop.

Reports of the event speedily reached the king, whose reverse stiffened

his purpose; smothering his wrath, he summoned his Englishmen, and bade

them gather all their countrymen for the siege, unless they would earn

the name of “nithing” (that is, worthless). The English, who reckoned

nothing more disgraceful than to be branded with this dishonourable

term, flocked in multitudes to the king and made his host invincible.

The townsmen could no longer avoid submission, realising that a band of

men, however noble, however compact, could avail nothing against the

king of England. Odo, taken a second time, abjured England for ever;

the bishop of Durham of his own will crossed the sea, the king, out of

regard for past friendship, suffering him to escape harmless; while the

rest were all admitted to fealty.

The Normans in England (1066-1154) · 第 70 / 111 题