sobered he understood that he was attacked on every side. Hugh of
Paris had declared that if Louis broke faith with him now he [Pg080]
would make an end to their league, and Louis knew that he would
be making a fierce enemy if he listened to the Normans; yet if he
refused, they would turn against him.
On the other hand, if he permitted Hugh to keep his new territory,
he was only strengthening a man who was his enemy at heart, and who
sooner or later would show his antagonism. Louis's own soldiers were
becoming very rebellious. They claimed over and over again that Rolf
had had no real right to the Norman lands, but since he had divided
them among his followers, all the more reason now that the conquerors,
the French owners of Normandy, should be put into possession of what
they had won back again at last. They demanded that the victors should
enforce their right, and not only expressed a wish for Bernard the
Dane's broad lands, but for his handsome young wife. They would not
allow that the Normans had any rights at all. When a rumor of such
wicked plans began to be whispered through Rouen and the villages,
it raised a great excitement. There would have been an insurrection
at once, if shrewd old Bernard had not again insisted upon patience
and submission. His wife even rebelled, and said that she would bury
herself in a convent; and Espriota, young Richard's mother, thriftily
resolved to provide herself with a protector, and married Sperling, a
rich miller of Vaudreuil.
Hugh of Paris was Bernard's refuge in these troubles, and now we see
what the old Dane had been planning all the time. Hugh had begun to
believe that there was no use in trying to hold his new [Pg081]
possessions of Normandy beyond the Seine, and that he had better
return to his old cordial alliance with the Normans and uphold Rolf
the Ganger's dukedom. So the Danish party, Christians and pagans, and
the Normans of the French party, and Hugh of Paris, all entered into a
magnificent plot against Louis. The Normans might have been contented
with expelling the intruders, and a renunciation of the rights Louis
had usurped, but Hugh the Great was very anxious to capture Louis
himself.
Besides Hugh of Paris and the Norman barons who upheld the cause of
young Richard, there was a third very important ally in the great
rebellion against King Louis of France. When Gorm a famous old king
of Denmark had died some years before, the successor to his throne
was Harold Blaatand or Bluetooth, a man of uncommonly fine character
for those times—a man who kept his promises and was noted for his
simplicity and good faith and loyalty to his word. Whatever reason may
have brought Harold to Normandy at this time, there he was, the firm
friend of the citizens of the Bayeux country, and we find him with his
army at Cherbourg.
All Normandy was armed and ready for a grand fight with the French,
though it appears that at first there was an attempt at a peaceful
conference. This went on very well at first, the opposing armies being
drawn up on either side of the river Dive, when who should appear but
Herluin of Montreuil, the insolent traitor who was more than suspected
of having caused the murder of William Longsword. Since then he had
ruled in Rouen as Louis's deputy and [Pg082] stirred up more hatred
against himself, but now he took a prominent place in the French
ranks, and neither Normans nor Danes could keep their tempers any
longer. So the peaceful conference was abruptly ended, and the fight
began.
Every thing went against the French: many counts were killed; the
golden eagle of Charlemagne and the silk hangings and banners of the
king's tent had only been brought for the good of these Normans, who
captured them. As for the king himself, he was taken prisoner; some
say that he was led away from the battle-field and secreted by a loyal
gentleman of that neighborhood, who hid him in a secluded bowery
island in the river near by, and that the poor gentleman's house and
goods were burnt and his wife and children seized, before he would
tell anything of the defeated monarch's hiding-place. There is another
story that Harold Blaatand and Louis met in hand-to-hand combat, and
the Dane led away the Frank as the prize of his own bravery. The king
escaped and was again captured and imprisoned in Rouen. No bragging
now of what he would do with the Normans, or who should take their
lands and their wives. Poor Louis was completely beaten, but there was
still a high spirit in the man and in his brave wife Gerberga, who
seems to have been his equal in courage and resource. After a while
Louis only regained his freedom by giving up his castle of Laon to
Hugh of Paris, and the successor of Charlemagne was reduced to the
pitiful poverty of being king only of Compiegne. Yet he was still
king, and nobody was more ready to give him the title than [Pg083]
Hugh of Paris himself, though the diplomatic treacheries went on as
usual.
Harold had made a triumphant progress through Normandy after the
great fight was over, and all the people were very grateful to him,
and it is said that he reëstablished the laws of Rolf, and confirmed
the authority of the boy-duke. We cannot understand very well at this
distance just why Harold should have been in Normandy at all with his
army to make himself so useful, but there he was, and unless one story
is only a repetition of the other, he came back again, twenty years
after, in the same good-natured way, and fought for the Normans again.
Poor Louis certainly had a very hard time, and for a while his pride
was utterly broken; but he was still young and hoped to retrieve his
unlucky fortunes. Richard, the young duke, was only thirteen years
old when Normandy broke faith with France. He had not yet earned his
title of the Fearless, which has gone far toward making him one of
the heroes of history, and was waiting to begin his real work and
influence in the dukedom. Louis had sympathy enough of a profitless
sort from his German and English neighbors. England sent an embassy
to demand his release, and Hugh of Paris refused most ungraciously.
Later, the king of the Germans or East Franks determined to invade
Hugh's territory, and would not even send a message or have any
dealings with him first; and when he found that the German army
was really assembling, the Count of Paris yielded. But, as we have
already seen, Louis had to give up a great piece of his [Pg084]
kingdom. As far as words went, he was king again. He had lost his
authority while he was in prison, but it was renewed with proper
solemnity, and Hugh was again faithful liegeman and homager of his
former prisoner. The other princes of Europe, at least those who were
neighbors, followed Hugh's example—all except one, if we may believe
the Norman historians. On the banks of the Epte, where Rolf had first
done homage to the French king, the Norman duchy was now set free
from any over-lordship, and made an independent country. The duke was
still called duke, and not king, yet he was completely the monarch of
Normandy, and need give no tribute nor obedience.
Before long, however, Richard, or his barons for him—wily Bernard the
Dane, and Bernard de Senlis, and the rest—commended the lands and men
of Normandy to the Count of Paris, benefactor and ally. The Norman
historians do not say much about this, for they were not so proud of
it as of their being made free from the rule of France. We are certain
that the Norman soldiers followed Hugh in his campaigns, for long
after this during the reign of Richard the Fearless there were some
charters and state papers written which are still preserved, and which
speak of Hugh of Paris as Richard's over-lord.
There are so few relics of that time that we must note the coinage of
the first Norman money in Richard's reign. The chronicles follow the
old fashion of the sagas in sounding the praises of one man—sometimes
according to him all the deeds of his ancestors besides; but,
unfortunately, they refer little to general history, and tell few
things about the [Pg085] people. We find Normandy and England coming
into closer relations in this reign, and the first mention of the
English kings and of affairs across the Channel, lends a new interest
to our story of the Normans. Indeed, to every Englishman and American
the roots and beginnings of English history are less interesting in
themselves than for their hints and explanations of later chapters and
events.
Before we end this account of Duke Richard's boyhood, we must take
a look at one appealing fragment of it which has been passed by in
the story of the wars and tumults and strife of parties. Once King
Louis was offered his liberty on the condition that he would allow
the Normans to take his son and heir Lothair as pledge of his return
and good behavior. No doubt the French king and Queen Gerberga had
a consciousness that they had not been very kind to Richard, and
so feared actual retaliation. But Gerberga offered, not the heir
to the throne, but her younger child Carloman, a puny, weak little
boy, and he was taken as hostage instead, and soon died in Rouen.
Miss Yonge has written a charming story called "The Little Duke," in
which she draws a touching picture of this sad little exile. It makes
Queen Gerberga appear very hard and cruel, and it seems as if she
must have been to let the poor child go among his enemies. We must
remember, though, that these times were very hard, and one cannot help
respecting the poor queen, who was very brave after all, and fought as
gallantly as any one to keep her besieged and struggling kingdom out
of the hands of its assailants. [Pg086]
We must pass over the long list of petty wars between Louis and
Hugh. Richard's reign was stormy to begin with, but for some years
before his death Normandy appears to have been tolerably quiet. Louis
had seen his darkest times when Normandy shook herself free from
French rule, and from that hour his fortunes bettered. There was one
disagreement between Otto of Germany and Louis, aided by the king
of Burgundy, against the two dukes, Hugh and Richard, and before
Louis died he won back again the greater part of his possessions at
Laon. Duke Hugh's glories were somewhat eclipsed for a time, and he
was excommunicated by the Archbishop of Rheims and took no notice
of that, but by and by when the Pope of Rome himself put him under
a ban, he came to terms. The Normans were his constant allies, but
there is not much to learn about their own military enterprises. The
enthusiastic Norman writers give a glowing account of the failure
of the confederate kings to capture Rouen, but say less about their
marauding tour through the duchies of Normandy and Hugh's dominions.
Rouen was a powerful city by this time, and a famous history belonged
to her already. There are some fragments left still of the Rouen of
that day, which is very surprising when we remember how battered and
beleaguered the old town was through century after century.
Every thing was apparently prospering with the king of France when
he suddenly died, only thirty-three years of age, in spite of his
tempestuous reign and always changing career. He must have felt like
a [Pg087] very old man, one would think, and somehow one imagines him
and Gerberga, his wife, as old people in their Castle of Laon. Lothair
was the next king, and Richard, who so lately was a child too, became
the elder ruler of his time. Hugh of Paris died two years later, and
the old enemy of Normandy, Arnulf of Flanders, soon followed him. The
king of Germany, Otto, outlived all these, but Richard lived longer
than he or his son.
[Illustration: ABBEY CHURCH OF ST. OUEN (ROUEN).]
[Pg088]
The duchy of France, Hugh's dominion, passed to his young son, Hugh
Capet, a boy of thirteen. When this Hugh grew up he did homage to
Lothair, but Richard gave his loyalty to Hugh of Paris's son. The
wars went on, and before many years went over Hugh Capet extinguished
the succession of Charlemagne's heirs to the throne of France, and
was crowned king himself, so beginning the reign of France proper;
as powerful and renowned a kingdom as Europe saw through many
generations. By throwing off the rule of German princes, and achieving
independence of the former French dynasty, an order of things began
that was not overthrown until our own day. Little by little the
French crown annexed the dominions of all its vassals, even the duchy
of Normandy, but that was not to be for many years yet. I hope we
have succeeded in getting at least a hint of the history of France
from the time it was the Gaul of the Roman empire; and the empire
of Charlemagne, and later, of the fragments of that empire, each a
province or kingdom under a ruler of its own, which were reunited in
one confederation under one king of France. All this time Europe is
under the religious rule of Rome, and in Richard the Fearless's later
years we find him the benefactor of the Church, living close by the
Minster of Fécamp and buried in its shadow at last. There was a deep
stone chest which was placed by Duke Richard's order near one of the
minster doors, where the rain might fall upon it that dropped from
the holy roof above. For many years, on Saturday evenings, the chest
was filled to the brim with [Pg089] wheat, a luxury in those days,
and the poor came and filled their measures and held out their hands
afterward for five shining pennies, while the lame and sick people
were visited in their homes by the almoner of the great church. There
was much talk about this hollowed block of stone, but when Richard
died in 996 at the end of his fifty-five years' reign, after a long,
lingering illness, his last command was that he should be buried in
the chest and lie "there where the foot should tread, and the dew and
the waters of heaven should fall." Beside this church of the Holy
Trinity at Fécamp he built the abbey of St. Wandville, the Rouen
cathedral, and the great church of the Benedictines at St. Ouen. New
structures have risen upon the old foundations, but Richard's name is
still connected with the places of worship that he cared for.
"Richard Sans-peur has long been our favorite hero," says Sir Francis
Palgrave, who has written perhaps the fullest account of the Third
Duke; "we have admired the fine boy, nursed on his father's knee
whilst the three old Danish warriors knelt and rendered their fealty.
During Richard's youth, adolescence, and age our interest in his
varied, active, energetic character has never flagged, and we go with
him in court and camp till the day of his death."
[Illustration]
[Pg090]
[Illustration]
V.
DUKE RICHARD THE GOOD.
"Then would he sing achievements high
And circumstance of chivalry."—SCOTT.
Richard the Fearless had several sons, and when he lay dying his
nobles asked him to say who should be his successor. "He who bears
my name," whispered the old duke, and added a moment later: "Let
the others take the oaths of fealty, acknowledge Richard as their
superior; and put their hands in his, and receive from him those lands
which I will name to you."
So Richard the Good came to his dukedom, with a rich inheritance in
every way from the father who had reigned so successfully, and his
brothers Geoffry, Mauger, William, and Robert, accepted their portions
of the dukedom, to which Richard added more lands of his own accord.
During this reign there were many changes, some very gradual
and natural ones, for Normandy was growing more French and less
Scandinavian all the time, and the relationship grew stronger and
stronger between vigorous young Normandy and troubled, failing
England. Later we shall see how our [Pg091] Normans gave a new
impulse to England, but already there are signs and forebodings of
what must come to pass in the days of Richard the Good's grandson,
William the Conqueror.
We first hear now of many names which are great names in Normandy
and England to this day. "It seems as if there were never any region
more peopled with men of known deeds, known names, known passions
and known crimes," says Palgrave; and the Norman annals abound with
historical titles "rendered illustrious by the illusions of time
and blazonry which imagination imparts." It is very strange how
few records there are, among the state papers in France, of all
this period. Every important public matter in England was carefully
recorded long before this, but with all the proverbial love of going
to law, and all the well-ordered priesthood, and good education of the
upper classes, there are only a few scattered charters until Normandy
is really merged in France. This almost corresponds to the absence,
in the literary world, of papers relating to Shakespeare, which is
such a puzzle to antiquarians. Here was a man well-known and beloved
both in his native village and the world of London, a man who must
have covered thousands of pages with writing, and written letters
and signed his name times without number, and yet not one of his
manuscripts and very few signatures can be found. Only the references
to him in contemporary literature remain to give us any facts at all
about the greatest of English writers. Of far less noteworthy men,
of his time and before that, we can make up [Pg092] reasonably full
biographies. And Normandy is known only through the records of other
nations, and the traditions and reports of romancing chroniclers.
There are no long lists of men and money, and no treasurer or general
of Rolf's, or Longsword's time has left us his accounts. Rolf's
brother, who went to Iceland while Rolf came to Normandy, in the
tyrannical reign of Harold Haarfager, established in that storm-bound
little country a nation of scholars and record-makers. Perhaps it was
easier to write there where the only enemies were ice and snow and
darkness and the fury of the sea and wind.
Yet we can guess at a great deal about the condition of Normandy.
There was so much going to and fro, such a lively commerce and
transportation of goods, that we know the old Roman roads had been
kept in good repair, and that many others must have been built as
the population increased. The famous fairs which were held make us
certain that there was a large business carried on, and besides the
maintenance and constant use of a large army, in some years there was
also a thrifty devotion to mercantile matters and agriculture. Foreign
artisans and manufacturers were welcomed to the Norman provinces, and
soon formed busy communities like the Flemish craftsmen, weavers and
leather-makers, at Falaise. The Normans had an instinctive liking for
pomp and splendor; so their tradesmen flourished, and their houses
became more and more elegant, and must be carved and gilded like the
dragon ships.
A merry, liberal duke was this Richard; fond of his court, and always
ready to uphold Normandy's [Pg093] honor and his own when there was
any fighting to be done. He had a great regard for his nobles, and we
begin to find a great deal said about gentlemen; the duke would have
only gentlemen for his chosen followers, and the aristocrats make
themselves felt more distinctly than before. The rule of the best is a
hard thing to manage, it sinks already into a rule of the lucky, the
pushing, or the favored in the Rouen court. The power and reign of
chivalry begins to blossom now far and wide.
We begin to hear rumors too on the other side that there were wrong
distinctions between man and man, and tyranny that grew hard to bear,
and one Norman resents the truth that his neighbor is a better and
richer man than he, and moreover has the right to make him a servant,
and to make laws for him. The Norman citizens were equal in civil
rights—that is to say, they were not taxed without their own consent,
need pay no tolls, and might hunt and fish; all could do these things
except the villeins[2] and peasants, who really composed the mass of
the native population, the descendants of those who lived in Normandy
before Rolf came there. Even the higher clergy did not form part of
the nobility and gentry at first, and in later years there was still a
difference in rank and privileges between the priests of Norwegian and
Danish race and the other ecclesiastics.
[2] Farm laborers; countrymen.
Before Richard the Good had been long on his throne there was a great
revolt and uprising of the peasantry, who evidently did not think that
their new [Pg094] duke deserved his surname at all. These people
conceived the idea of destroying the inequality of races, so that
Normandy should hold only one nation, as it already held one name.
We cannot help being surprised at the careful political organization
of the peasantry, and at finding that they established a regular
parliament with two representatives from every district. In all
the villages and hamlets, after the day's work was over, they came
together to talk over their wrongs or to listen to some speaker more
eloquent than his fellows. They "made a commune," which anticipates
later events in the history of France in a surprising way. Freeman
says that "such a constitution could hardly have been extemporized by
mere peasants," and believes that the disturbance was founded in a
loyalty to the local customs and rights which were fast being trampled
under foot, and that the rebels were only trying to defend their
time-honored inheritance. The liberty which they were eager to grasp
might have been a great good, scattered as it would have been over
a great extent of country, instead of being won by separate cities.
The ancient Norman constitutions of the Channel Islands, Jersey and
Guernsey and the rest, antiquated as they seem, breathe to-day a
spirit of freedom worthy of the air of England or Switzerland or
Norway.
The peasants clamored for their right to be equal with their
neighbors, and no doubt many a small landholder joined them, who did
not wish to swear fealty to his over-lord. In the /Roman de Rou/,
an old chronicle which keeps together many traditions about early
[Pg095] Normandy that else might have been forgotten, we find one of
these piteous harangues. Perhaps it is not authentic, but it gives the
spirit of the times so well that it ought to have a place here:
"The lords do nothing but evil; we cannot obtain either reason or
justice from them; they have all, they take all, eat all, and make us
live in poverty and suffering. Every day with us is a day of pain; we
gain nought by our labors, there are so many dues and services. Why do
we allow ourselves to be thus treated? Let us place ourselves beyond
their power; we too are men, we have the same limbs, the same height,
the same power of endurance, and we are a hundred to one. Let us swear
to defend each other; let us be firmly knit together, and no man shall
be lord over us; we shall be free from tolls and taxes, free to fell
trees, to take game and fish, and do as we will in all things, in the
wood, in the meadow, on the water!"
At this time the larger portion of Normandy was what used to be called
forest. That word meant something more than woodland; it belonged then
to tracts of wild country, woodland and moorland and marshes, and
these were the possession of the crown. The peasants had in the old
days a right, or a custom at any rate, of behaving as if the forests
were their own, but more and more they had been restricted, and the
unaccustomed yoke galled them bitterly. Besides their being forbidden
to hunt and fish in the forests, the water-ways were closed from them,
taxes imposed, and their time and labor demanded on the duke's lands.
There had been grants [Pg096] of these free tracts of country to
the new nobility, and with the lands the new lords claimed also the
service of the peasantry.
The people do not appear to have risen against the duke himself, so
much as against their immediate oppressors, and it was one of these
who was to be their punisher. You remember that Richard the Fearless'
mother, Espriota, married, in the troublous times of his boyhood,
a rich countryman called Sperling. They had a son called Raoul of
Ivry, who seems to have been high in power and favor with the second
Richard, his half-brother, and who now entered upon his cruel task
with evident liking. He had been brought up among the country-folk,
although he stood at this time next to the duke in office.