His monastic biographer (Æth. Riev. X Scriptt. 388) says by way of

praise, “Cuncta regni negotia Ducibus proceribusque [to Earl Harold

and the Witan] committens, totum se divinis mancipat obsequiis. Quantò

autem se corporalibus subtrahebat, tantò luminosius se spiritalibus

indidit theoriis.”

Footnote 52:

See vol. i. p. 327.

Footnote 53:

Vita Eadw. 396. “Si ratio aliquem suscitaret animi motum, leonini

videbatur terroris, iram tamen non prodebat jurgiis.” We shall

presently come across a ludicrous example of his “nobilis ira,”

venting itself in an oath. Possibly the reference may partly be to his

abstinence, like that of Saint Lewis, from the French, and generally

southern, vice of reviling God and the Saints. See Joinville, p. 120

ed. Du Cange, 1668; p. 217 ed. Michel, 1858.

Footnote 54:

I allude to his wish, frustrated by Godwine, to subject Dover to

military chastisement (Chron. Petrib. 1048. Cf. the dealings of the

Emperor Theodosius with Thessalonica and Antioch), and his wish,

frustrated by Harold, to wage war with the Northumbrians on behalf of

Tostig in 1065. Vita Eadw. 423.

Footnote 55:

See vol. i. pp. 328, 330, 383, 635.

Footnote 56:

Vita Eadw. 414. “Benignissimus Rex Ædwardus ... plurimum temporis

exigebat circa saltus et silvas in venationum jocunditate. Divinis

enim expeditus officiis, quibus libenter quotidianâ intendebat

devotione, jocundabatur plurimum coram se allatis accipitribus vel

hujus generis avibus, vel certè delectabatur applausibus multorum

motuum canibus. His et talibus interdum deducebat diem, et in his

tantummodo ex naturâ videbatur aliquam mundi captare delectationem.”

So William of Malmesbury (ii. 220), in a passage which, like several

others, makes one think that he had this Life of Eadward before him.

“Unum erat quo in sæculo animum oblectaret suum, cursus canum

velocium, quorum circa saltus latratibus solebat lætus applaudere;

volatus volucrum quorum natura est de cognatis avibus prædas agere. Ad

hæc exercitia continuis diebus, post audita manè divina officia,

intendebat.” He retained these tastes to the last. In 1065 Harold

built a house at Portskewet as a hunting-seat for the King. Chronn.

Ab. and Wig., and Flor. Wig. in anno.

Footnote 57:

For these two beautiful stories of Saint Anselm, see his Life by John

of Salisbury, Anglia Sacra, ii. 165.

Footnote 58:

It is not clear whether Eadward did not take the same delight as Queen

Elizabeth in another form of animal torture. There is something

suspicious in part of the royal dues paid by the city of Norwich,

“ursum et sex canes _ad ursum_ [a very business-like phrase].”

Domesday, ii. 117. Cf. Will. Fitz-Stephen, Giles, i. 180.

Footnote 59:

Will. Malms. ii. 196. “Dum quâdam vice venatum isset, et agrestis

quidam stabulata illa quibus in casses cervi urgentur confudisset,

ille _suâ nobili percitus irâ_, ‘Per Deum’ inquit ‘et Matrem ejus,

tantumdem tibi nocebo si potero.’” William’s whole comment is very

curious. This story has been made good use of by Lord Lytton, in his

romance of “Harold,” which, if the sentimental and supernatural parts

be struck out, forms a narrative more accurate than most so-called

histories of the time. For a somewhat similar tale see Motley, United

Netherlands, iii. 172.

Footnote 60:

Vita Eadw. 396. “Hominis persona erat decentissima, discretæ

proceritatis, capillis et barbâ canitie insignis lacteâ, facie plenâ

et cute roseâ, manibus macris et niveis, longis quoque interlucentibus

digitis, reliquo corpore toto integer et regius homo.” William of

Malmesbury (ii. 220) seems again to copy the Biographer; “Erat

_discretæ proceritatis_, barbâ et capillis cygneus, facie roseus, toto

corpore lacteus, membrorum habitudine commodâ peridoneus.” Eadward was

seemingly an _albino_.

Footnote 61:

In the Bayeux Tapestry Eadward and one or two others are represented

with long beards. William and Harold, and the mass of their respective

countrymen, are represented according to the later fashions described

in the text.

Footnote 62:

Vita Eadw. 396. “Cunctis poscentibus aut benignè daret aut benignè

negaret, ita et ut benigna negatio plurima videretur largitio.”

Footnote 63:

Ib. 415. So Will. Malms. ii. 220.

Footnote 64:

Ib. 396. “In frequentiâ verè se Regem et dominum, in privato, salvâ

quidem regiâ majestate, agebat se suis ut consocium.”

Footnote 65:

Vita Eadw. 415. “Inter ipsa divinorum mysteriorum et missarum

sacrosancta officia agninâ mansuetudine stabat, et mente tranquillâ

cunctis fidelibus spectabilis Christicola, inter quæ, nisi

interpellaretur, rarissimè cui loquebatur.” Compare the opposite

description given of Henry the Second, who always talked of public

affairs during mass (Gir. Camb. Exp. Hib. i. 46. p. 305 Dimock), and

the curious story of his holding a discourse at such a moment with

Saint Thomas of Canterbury himself, as told by Roger of Pontigny

(Giles, i. 132). It is however somewhat differently told by William

Fitz-Stephen (ib. i. 218). See Gentleman’s Magazine, April, 1860, p.

386.

The Ayenbite of Inwyt (p. 20 ed. Morris) reproves this practice as a

common fault. “And huanne þe ssoldest yhere his messe oþer his sermon

at cherche, þou iangledest and bourdedest to-vor God.”

Footnote 66:

Vita Eadw. 414. “Abbates religiosos et monachos, _potissimum autem

transmarinos_ ... quam benignè susceperit.” So Will. Malms. 220;

“Pauperibus hospitibusque, _maximè transmarinis_ et religiosis,

benignus appellando, munificus dando.” See Appendix C.

Footnote 67:

Vit. Eadw. 399. “Quum prædictus sanctæ memoriæ Ædwardus Rex

repatriaret à Franciâ, ex eâdem gente comitati sunt quamplures non

ignobiles viri, quos plurimis honoribus ditatos secum retinuit idem

Rex, utpote compos totius regni, ordinariosque constituit secretorum

consilii sui, et rectores rerum regalis palatii.” It is remarkable how

seldom, especially in the early part of Eadward’s reign, the

foreigners appear to sign charters. They were doubtless jealously

watched.

Footnote 68:

Vol. i. p. 584.

Footnote 69:

Vol. i. p. 593.

Footnote 70:

See above, p. 15.

Footnote 71:

Will. Malms. ii. 197. See Appendix D.

Footnote 72:

See above, p. 9.

Footnote 73:

See vol. i. p. 471. The French biographer of Eadward says (p. 57):—

“Godwin k’out mis entente

Cunquere tresor e rente,

Mut fu garniz e estorez

D’or e de argent dunt out asez,

Ke par plaiz e par achatz

De grant aver out fait purchaz;

Mut out cunquis par boesdie

Plus ke par chivalerie.”

Footnote 74:

See Appendix E.

Footnote 75:

A Godwine appears (W. Thorn. X Scriptt. 2224) as a benefactor of

Christ Church, Canterbury. This may be the great Earl, or it may be

the Godwine whose marriage settlement we have in Cod. Dipl. iv. 10.

Footnote 76:

This comes out nowhere more emphatically than in the comparatively

hostile Abingdon Chronicle, 1052.

Footnote 77:

Vita Eadw. 408. cf. Fl. Wig. 1066.

Footnote 78:

See the Peterborough Chronicler’s character of William, under the year

1087.

Footnote 79:

Ib. 1135.

Footnote 80:

Will. Malms. iv. 314.

Footnote 81:

Ord. Vit. 672 B.

Footnote 82:

Vit. Eadw. 408.

Footnote 83:

Fl. Wig. 1048, 1049.

Footnote 84:

“When the chronicler praises the gift of speech, he unconsciously

proves the existence of constitutional freedom.” Lytton, Harold, i.

165.

Footnote 85:

I attribute the Danish names in Godwine’s family to the influence of

Gytha rather than to any Danish tastes prevalent at the Court of Cnut,

because the Danes settled in England seem to have so often adopted

English names for their children. See vol. i. pp. 580, 591.

Footnote 86:

I should perhaps have done better had I used the English form of this

name throughout, as _Swegen_ is clearly more correct etymologically

than Svein, Sven, or Swend. It may however be convenient to

distinguish the English and Danish bearers of the name.

Footnote 87:

On the sons and daughters of Godwine, see Appendix F.

Footnote 88:

Cod. Dipl. iv. 74. This charter must be early in the year 1043,

earlier at least than the Gemót which we shall presently see was held

in November. Swegen was therefore probably appointed in the Gemót at

which Eadward was finally established as King. Another charter, of

1044 (Cod. Dipl. iv. 80), signed by Harold, Leofwine, Swegen, Tostig,

and Gyrth, all with the rank of “Dux,” is deservedly marked as

doubtful by Mr. Kemble.

Footnote 89:

See vol. i. p. 580, and Appendix G, on the Great Earldoms. His first

signature is in 1045. Cod. Dipl. iv. 97.

Footnote 90:

Fl. Wig. 1051.

Footnote 91:

Chronn. Ab. and Wig. 1065. See Appendix D.

Footnote 92:

Vita Eadw. 408. “Virtute corporis et animi in populo præstabat ut

alter Judas Machabæus.”

Footnote 93:

In the Bayeux Tapestry Harold is represented as lifting the Norman

soldiers from the quicksands with the greatest ease.

Footnote 94:

Vita Eadw. 409. “Uterque [the writer is comparing Harold and Tostig]

satis pulcro et venusto corpore et, ut conjicimus, non inæquali

robore, non disparis audaciæ. Sed major natu Haroldus procerior

staturâ, patris satis [these words are clearly corrupt] infinitis

laboribus, vigiliis et inediâ, multâ animi lenitate et promptiori

sapientiâ.”

Footnote 95:

See vol. i. p. 640.

Footnote 96:

De Inv. c. 14. “Tum ... astutiâ et legum terræ peritiâ, tum quia se

talem gerebat quod non solum Angli, verum etiam Normanni et Gallici

imprimis invidebant pulcritudini et prudentiæ, militiæ et sagacitati.”

Footnote 97:

Vita Eadw. 409. “Multum obloquia perferre, nam non facile prodere, non

facile quoque, et in civem sive compatriotum, ut reor, nusquam,

ulcisci.” Compare the character of Edward the First,

“Totus Christo traditur Rex noster Edwardus;

Velox est ad veniam, ad vindictam tardus.”

Political Songs (Camd. Soc.), p. 163.

Footnote 98:

See the poem in the Chronicles. So Snorro (Ant. Celt. Scand. 189.

Laing, iii. 75), while strangely making Harold the youngest of the

family and hardly realizing his position in the Kingdom, bears ample

testimony to the kindly relations existing between him and the King.

He is there called Eadward’s “foster son.” The Biographer (p. 433)

calls him “nutricius suus frater.”

Footnote 99:

Vita Eadw. 410; a passage which I shall have to refer to again.

Footnote 100:

I refer both to Harold’s own proceedings at Waltham and to the general

promotion of Germans under this reign. See Stubbs, De Inv. ix.

Footnote 101:

See Appendix E.

Footnote 102:

See William of Malmesbury’s Life of Wulfstan, Angl. Sacr. ii. 248,

253.

Footnote 103:

He was however a benefactor to the Abbey of Peterborough. The local

historian Hugo Candidus says (p. 44. ap. Sparke), “Comes Haroldus

dedit Cliftune et terram in Londone juxta monasterium Sancti Pauli,

juxta portum qui vocatur Etheredishythe.” Harold’s connexion with

London should be noticed. It was also at his advice that King Eadward

made a grant to Abingdon (Hist. Mon. Ab. i. 469), and that a Thegn

named Thurkill, of whom we shall hear again, commended himself to the

same church (Ib. i. 484).

Footnote 104:

Vita Eadw. 409. “Cum quovis, quem fidelem putaret, interdum

communicare consilium operis sui, et hoc interdum adeò differre, si

debet duci, ut minùs conducibile à quibusdam videretur fore suæ

commoditati.”

Footnote 105:

Ib. 410. “Uterque [Harold and Tostig] interdum quædam simulare adeò

egregiè, ut qui eos non noverit incertius nil æstimare poterit.” In

connexion with this curious passage I may quote a singular

exaggeration from an unknown author; it is found in a marginal note on

one of the manuscripts of the Winchester Annals (Luard, 27); “Haroldus

Rex, si sapientèr ageret quidquid agebat furore, nullus hominum illum

[sic] resisteret. Sed adeò erat animi inconstantis, quod nullus suorum

se credidit illi.” Yet “sapientèr” is the adverb which the Biographer

specially applies to Harold, in distinction to the “fortitèr” of

Tostig.

Footnote 106:

The charge of rashness as brought against Harold during the last scene

of his life I shall discuss elsewhere. I here add the Biographer’s

disclaimer (Vita Eadw. 409); “Porro de vitio præcipitationis sive

levitatis, quis hunc vel illum sive quemvis de Godwino patre genitum,

sive ejus disciplinâ et studio educatum arguerit?” There is a very

remarkable passage further on (p. 422), in which the Biographer says

that Harold was “ad sacramenta nimis (proh dolor) prodigus.” The

allusion clearly is to Harold’s oath to William, which the Biographer

never distinctly mentions.

Footnote 107:

I refer of course to the tale of Eadgyth Swanneshals, of which I shall

have to speak again more than once.

Footnote 108:

See vol. i. p. 577.

Footnote 109:

Chron. Ab. Cant. 1044. Petrib. 1043. I shall discuss the exact date

afterwards.

Footnote 110:

Vita Eadw. 415. She sat at his feet, unless he lifted her up to sit at

his side. This must be compared with the account of the legislation

about West-Saxon Kings’ wives after the crime of Eadburh (Asser, M. H.

B. 471 B). She had shown personal kindness to the Biographer (427);

“Scribes Reginam primo tibi subvenientem,

Et quicquid scribes, laus et honor sit ei.”

This perhaps gave occasion for the more elaborate and better known

description in the false Ingulf.

William of Malmesbury’s account of her (ii. 197) is singular; “Femina

in cujus pectore omnium liberalium artium esset gymnasium, sed parvum

in mundanis rebus ingenium; quam quum videres, si literas stuperes,

modestiam certè animi et speciem corporis desiderares.”

Footnote 111:

Hist. Rams. cxiv. (p. 457). Abbot Ælfwine, wishing to obtain certain

lands bequeathed to the monastery by one Æthelwine the Black, but

which were withheld from it by one Ælfric the son of Wihtgar,

“apposuit quoque de divitis crumenæ dispendio viginti marcas auri,

quibus gratiam Regis mercaretur, Ædthithæ [sic] quippe Reginæ

sedulitatem quinque marcarum auri pretio exegit interponi, ut pias

ejus preces regiis auribus fideliter importaret.” So again, in a

charter of 1060 in Cod. Dipl. iv. 142, Eadgyth lays claim to certain

lands claimed by the Abbey of Peterborough, but on the intercession of

her husband and her brothers Harold and Tostig (none of whom seem to

have taken anything), and on the gift of twenty marks and certain

church ornaments, she is induced to confirm the grant. That she looked

carefully after her rents in money, kine, and honey, and after the men

who stole her horse, is no blame to her (Cod. Dipl. iv. 257).

Footnote 112:

Will. Pict. 199 A, B (Duchesne).

Footnote 113:

Flor. Wig. 1065.

Footnote 114:

See Appendix B.

Footnote 115:

Vita Eadw. 431, (cf. 433).

Footnote 116:

Ibid. 403. See below.

Footnote 117:

Godgifu was the sister of Thorold the Sheriff, founder of the Priory

of Spalding. See John of Peterborough, a. 1052. p. 49. Giles. The

legend of her riding naked through Coventry is found in Bromton (949),

and Knighton (2334). They do not mention peeping Tom, who, it is some

comfort to think, must at any rate have been one of King Eadward’s

Frenchmen.

Footnote 118:

See Will. Malms. ii. 196. Cf. Æthel. Riev. 389. Chron. Evesham. 84.

This last writer extends Leofric’s authority to the borders of

Scotland. Did Cumberland reach to the Ribble in those days?

Footnote 119:

“Stow sub promontorio Lincolniæ.” Bromton, 949. See the charters of

Bishop Wulfwig, Cod. Dipl. iv. 290. The church was not built by

Leofric, but by Eadnoth the Second, Bishop of Dorchester (1034–1050);

Leofric’s benefaction took the form of ornaments. See Flor. Wig. 1057,

where he calls Stow “locus famosus qui Sanctæ Mariæ Stou Anglicè,

Latinè verò Sanctæ Mariæ Locus appellatur.” The antiquity of part of

the church is indisputable, but a more wretched village cannot be

found.

A document, professing to be a petition from Godgifu to Pope Victor,

praying for the confirmation of her gifts to Stow, is marked doubtful

by Mr. Kemble (Cod. Dipl. iv. 168), doubtless on good grounds. But I

do not understand his date, 1060–1066, as the Popedom of Victor the

Second was from 1055 to 1057. Siward, who died early in 1055, could

hardly have signed an address to Pope Victor.

Footnote 120:

See vol. i. p. 539.

Footnote 121:

See vol. i. p. 588.

Footnote 122:

See Appendix G.

Footnote 123:

Vita Eadw. 421, 422.

Footnote 124:

See Chronn. 1055.

Footnote 125:

See vol. i. p. 274.

Footnote 126:

See Appendix G.

Footnote 127:

Chron. 1051.

Footnote 128:

Chron. 1055.

Footnote 129:

Cod. Dipl. vi. 203.

Footnote 130:

For the earliest example, one of 1020, see Kemble, Archæological

Journal, xiv. 61, 62.

Footnote 131:

See vol. i. p. 102.

Footnote 132:

See vol. i. p. 499.

Footnote 133:

See vol. i. p. 564.

Footnote 134:

Orkneyinga Saga, Ant. Celt. Scand. 172 et seqq. Robertson, i. 114.

Burton, i. 369.

Footnote 135:

Fordun, iv. 44. Robertson, i. 116. Marianus Scotus (Pertz, v. 557)

says expressly, “Donnchad Rex Scotiæ in autumno occiditur a duce suo

Macbethad mac Finnloech, cui successit in regnum annis xvii.”

Footnote 136:

Fordun, u. s. “Consanguinea Siwardi Comitis.”

Footnote 137:

Robertson, i. 120 et seqq. Burton, i. 371–2.

Footnote 138:

Innes, Scotland in the Middle Ages, p. 118.

Footnote 139:

Marianus (Pertz, v. 558). “Rex Scottiæ Macbethad Romæ argentum

pauperibus seminando distribuit.” Florence (1050) leaves out the word

“pauperibus,” and changes “seminando” into “spargendo.” The change can

hardly be undesigned, and of the influence of money at Rome we shall

hear presently in the case of Bishop Ulf. Chron. Petrib. 1047. John of

Peterborough (48) combines the two readings, saying, “Machetus Rex

Scotorum Romæ argentum spargendo pauperibus distribuit.”

Footnote 140:

See Robertson, i. 122. Burton, i. 373.

Footnote 141:

See vol. i. p. 36.

Footnote 142:

See vol. i. p. 564.

Footnote 143:

Ann. Camb. 1039. Brut y Tywysogion, 1037.

Footnote 144:

Brut. 1040, 1042. Ann. Camb. 1039–1047. In one battle in 1040 Gruffydd

seems to have been taken prisoner by the Danes of Dublin. But the

whole narrative is very confused. See the entries under 1041 and 1042.

Footnote 145:

Brut, 1042. Ann. Camb. 1045?

Footnote 146:

See above, p. 40.

Footnote 147:

See above, p. 41.

Footnote 148:

See above, p. 18.

Footnote 149:

Æthel. R. 375. “Tunc elevatus est sol et luna stetit in ordine suo,

quando, Edwardo gloriâ et honore coronato, sacerdotes sapientiâ et

sanctitate fulgebant, monasteria omni relligione pollebant, clerus in

officio suo, populus stabat in gradu suo; videbatur etiam terra

fecundior, aer salubrior, sol serenior, maris unda pacatior. Quoniam

diu Rege pacifico regnante in uno vinculo pacis omnia convenirent, ut

nihil pestilentiosum esset in aere, nihil in mari tempestuosum, in

terrâ nihil infecundum, nihil inordinatum in clero, nihil in plebe

tumultuosum.” It would be endless to contrast all these details with

those found in the Chronicles and the Biographer. Even William of

Malmesbury, comparatively sober as he is, goes too far when he says

(ii. 196), “Denique eo regnante, nullus tumultus domesticus qui non

citò comprimeretur, nullum bellum forinsecùs, omnia domi forisque

quieta, omnia tranquilla.”

Footnote 150:

“Forðam heo hit heold ǽr to fæste wið hine,” say the Abingdon,

Peterborough, and Canterbury Chronicles. Worcester is more explicit;

“Forþan þe heo wæs æror þam cynge hire suna swiðe heard, _þæt heo him

læsse dyde þonne he wolde_, ær þam þe he cyng wære, and eac syððan.”

This is translated by Florence; “Vel quia priusquam Rex esset

effectus, vel post, _minus quam volebat illi dederat_, et ei valdè

dura exstiterat;” and by Roger of Wendover, “eo quod priusquam Rex

fuerat, _nihil illi contulerat quod petebat_” (i. 482). William of

Malmesbury says (ii. 196), “Mater ‘Angustos filii jamdudum riserat

annos,’ nihil umquam de suo largita.” He then gives the reason, namely

her preference for Cnut over Æthelred.

Footnote 151:

See vol. i. p. 454.

Footnote 152:

See vol. i. pp. 544, 555, 559.

Footnote 153:

See vol. i. p. 545 et seqq.

Footnote 154:

See vol. i. pp. 535, 561.

Footnote 155:

See the writ quoted at vol. i. p. 580, which cannot belong to the

_first_ reign of Harthacnut in Wessex only.

Footnote 156:

Besides land, the Abingdon Chronicle speaks of her wealth “on golde

and on seolfre and on unasecgendlicum þingum.” So that of Worcester

says of her treasures, “þa wæron unatellendlice.” So Florence;

“quicquid in auro, argento, gemmis, lapidibus, aliisve rebus pretiosum

habuerat.”

Footnote 157:

Will. Malms. ii. 196. “Congestis undecumque talentis crumenas

infecerat, pauperum oblita; quibus non patiebatur dari nummum ne

diminueret numerum. Itaque _quod injustè coacervârat_ non inhonestè

ablatum, ut egenorum proficeret compendio _et fisco sufficeret

regio_.” Though accepting this account (hæc referentibus etsi plurimum

fides haberi debeat), he goes on, as he does elsewhere (ii. 181. see

vol. i. p. 487), to speak of her bounty to monasteries, especially at

Winchester.

Footnote 158:

A meeting of the Witan is implied in the language of the Worcester

Chronicle, “Man gerædde þan cynge þæt he rád of Gleawcestre,” and in

the presence and consent of the three Earls—“ut illi [Leofricus,

Godwinus, et Siwardus] consilium ei dederant,” as Florence says.

Footnote 159:

See vol. i. p. 539.

Footnote 160:

See vol. i. p. 588.

Footnote 161:

So says the Worcester Chronicle, followed by Florence; “He rád of

Gleawcestre, and Leofric eorl and Godwine eorl and Sigwarð eorl mid

heora genge, to Wincestre;” “Festinato Rex cum comitibus Leofrico,

Godwino, et Siwardo de civitate Glawornâ Wintoniam venit.” The other

Chronicles do not imply the King’s personal presence; “se cyng let

geridan,” &c.

Footnote 162:

Chron. Wig. “On únwær on þa hlæfdian.” Flor. Wig. “Venit improvise.”

Footnote 163:

Chronn. Ab., Petrib., Cant. “Se cyng let geridan ealle þa land þe his

modor ahte him to handa.” The Worcester Chronicler says nothing of the

land.

Footnote 164:

Flor. Wig. “Verumtamen sufficienter ei ministrari necessaria præcepit

et illam ibidem quietam manere jussit.”

Footnote 165:

Emma signs a charter of her son’s during this year 1043 (Cod. Dipl.

iv. 74), which therefore belongs to an earlier Gemót than this of

November, probably to one held at Winchester at the time of the

coronation. From this time we find her signing only a few private

documents (Cod. Dipl. iv. 86, 116) and documents connected with the

Church of Winchester (iv. 90, 93). After her son’s marriage she seems

not to sign her son’s charters at all. The documents at iv. 80, 99 are

doubtful or spurious. On the Legend of Emma see Appendix H.

Footnote 166:

See above, p. 10.

Footnote 167:

Adam of Bremen, iii. 13.

Footnote 168:

Chronn. and Flor. Wig. 1044, 1045, 1046, 1047. All dates are given.

Footnote 169:

De Inv. 14. “Adelstanus ... degenerans à patris astutiâ et

sapientiâ ... multa ex his perdidit, et inter cetera Waltham.” This

may however only mean that he squandered his estate. His son Esegar

was Staller two years later. See Professor Stubbs’ note, and vol. i.

p. 591.

Footnote 170:

Chron. Wig. 1045. Flor. Wig. 1044. If Gunhild’s sons were old enough

to be dangerous, they must have been the children of Hakon who died in

1030. The names Heming and Thurkill have already appeared as those of

a pair of brothers. Vol. i. p. 376. Cf. Knytlinga Saga, ap. Johnston,

Ant. Celt. Scand. 105.

Footnote 171:

On this Harold see vol. i. p. 476. The signature to a charter of

Bishop Lyfing’s, 1042 (Cod. Dipl. iv. 69), must be his.

Footnote 172:

Adam Brem. ii. 75. “Caussa mortis ea fuit quod de regali stirpe

Danorum genitus, propior sceptro videbatur quam Magnus.”

Footnote 173:

The Chronica Sclavica, c. 13, makes Godescalc leave England after the

death of Cnut (vol. i. 649, 494), but Adam (u. s.) puts his departure

after the death of Cnut _and his sons_. If this last account be

correct, it looks very much as if Godescalc was banished. According to

Saxo (p. 204), he served for some time under Swend in his war with

Magnus. Saxo also (p. 208) marries him to Siritha (Sigrid?) a natural

daughter of Swend, but the national Chronicle distinctly makes his

wife Demmyn, Cnut’s sister or daughter, alive at the time of his

death.

These banishments probably helped, along with the displaced massacre

of Saint Brice, to form the groundwork for the legend of the general

expulsion or massacre of Danes in England. See vol. i. p. 592.

Footnote 174:

See vol. i. p. 473.

Footnote 175:

See vol. i. p. 563.

Footnote 176:

A private document in Cod. Dipl. iv. 116 is signed by “Stigand p̃.” It

is assigned to the year 1049, but this date must be wrong, as it is

signed by Ælfweard Bishop of London, who died in 1044. As it is signed

by Eadward and Emma, it must belong to the early Gemót of 1043, that

at which Stigand received his appointment as Bishop and Swegen as

Earl.

Footnote 177:

Chron. Ab. 1043. Chronn. Petrib. and Cant. 1042.

Footnote 178:

Chron. Ab. “And raðe þǽs man sette Stigant of his bisceoprice, and nam

eal þæt he ahte þam cinge to handa; forðam he wæs nehst his modor

rǽde, and heo for swá swá he hire rædde; þæs ðe men wendon.”

Footnote 179:

Chron. Petrib. 1048.

Footnote 180:

See vol. i. p. 320. Chron. Ab. 1050.

Footnote 181:

See vol. i. p. 565. Vita Eadw. p. 399.

Footnote 182:

In very much later times, in the fifteenth century, we find

Parliament, King, and Chapter all combining in the appointment of

Bishops, in a way which would rather surprise us now. The House of

Commons petitions the King to recommend a particular person to the

Chapter. Two such applications were made in favour of Archbishop

Bourchier, at different stages of his advancement. See Hook, Lives of

Archbishops, v. 276, 282. The order in Eadward’s time was different,

as the Chapter seems, sometimes at least, to have first elected and

then to have asked the confirmation of King and Witan. But the

principle is much the same. At all events, in the eleventh century,

though the papal veto was just beginning to be heard of, a papal

provision was quite unknown.

Footnote 183:

See Lingard, Anglo-Saxon Church, i. 94, where the whole matter is very

fairly stated. Investiture by the staff is implied in the famous

legend of Saint Wulfstan at the tomb of Eadward.

Footnote 184:

Chron. Petrib. 1047.

Footnote 185:

See vol. i. pp. 563, 588.

Footnote 186:

Chron. Ab. 1044. Petrib. 1043. “Forðam se arcebiscop wende þæt hit sum

oðer man _abiddan wolde, oþþe gebicgan_, þe he wyrs truwode and uðe,

gif hit ma manna wiste.”

Footnote 187:

Ib. “Be þæs cynges leafe, and ræde, and Godwines eorles. Hit wæs elles

feawum mannum cuð ær hit gedón wæs.” So William of Malmesbury, ii.

197. “Ante cum Rege tantùm et Comite communicato consilio, ne quis ad

tantum fastigium aspiraret indignus, vel prece vel pretio.”

Footnote 188:

He was consecrated to the see of Upsala, according to Professor Stubbs

(Ep. Succ. p. 20) and Dean Hook (i. 491); to Rochester, according to

the Abingdon History (i. 452). But Florence (1049) calls him

“Siwardus, Edsii Dorubernensis archiepiscopi chorepiscopus.” William

of Malmesbury (De Gest. Pont. 116) has a strange story, how Siward was

to succeed Eadsige, but treating him harshly, and not even allowing

him enough to eat, was deprived of the succession to the

Archbishoprick, and had to content himself with Rochester—“quo

leviaret verecundiam, quo detrimentum consolaretur.” Siward signs

charters with the title of Archbishop, Cod. Dipl. iv. 96, 103, 105; as

Bishop only in iv. 99; as Abbot only in a very doubtful charter, iv.

102. See also Hen. Hunt. M. H. B. 759 B. Angl. Sacr. i. 106. Bromton,

938.

Footnote 189:

Chron. Ab. 1048. Chron. Wig. 1050. Fl. Wig. 1049. See Hist. Ab. i.

461. Siward was a benefactor to his abbey, and fills a considerable

place in its history.

Footnote 190:

Chron. Ab. 1048. Petrib. 1046.

Footnote 191:

See vol. i. p. 568.

Footnote 192:

Chron. Wig. 1045. Fl. Wig. 1044. Hist. Eves. p. 85. Hist. Ram. c. 104.

Footnote 193:

Fl. Wig. u. s. “Ablatis ex maximâ parte libris et ornamentis, quæ ipse

eidem contulerat loco, et quædam, ut fertur, quæ alii contulerant.”

Cf. Hist. Rams. u. s. But the Evesham historian, who uses very strong

language against the monks of his own house, does not charge Ælfweard

with more than transferring his intended gifts from Evesham to Ramsey;

“quæ huic loco offerre cogitabat, versâ vice præfatæ ecclesiæ Ramesiæ

omnia condonabat.” Hist. Eves. p. 85.

Footnote 194:

Chron. Wig. 1045. Fl. Wig. 1044. Hist. Eves. p. 86. Mannig rebuilt the

church (Chronn. Ab. and Wig. 1054), and continued Abbot till 1066,

when he died, having been for some time disabled by palsy.

Footnote 195:

Will. Malm. Gest. Pont. 134 b. He is there spoken of simply as a monk

of Jumièges, but from the Biographer (399) and from the Nova Chronica

Normanniæ, A. 1037, it appears that he had been Abbot. (See Neustria

Pia, p. 309.) He became Abbot in 1037, and began the church in 1040.

William himself, in his History (ii. 199), speaks of his building as

“Ecclesia Sanctæ Mariæ, quam ipse præcipuo et sumptuoso opere

construxerat.” He begins to sign as Bishop in 1046. Cod. Dipl. iv.

110.

Footnote 196:

William of Malmesbury (Gest. Pont. 116) makes Robert’s influence with

Eadward the recompense of some services done to him in Normandy. He

goes on, “Is ergo et amore antiquo et recenti honore primas partes in

consiliis regalibus vendicabat, quos vellet deponeret, quos liberet,

sublimaret.”

Footnote 197:

Ann. Wint. 21, Luard. “Tanti fuit homo ille in oculis Regis ut si

diceret nigram cornicem esse candidam Rex citiùs ori illius quam

oculis suis crederet.”

Footnote 198:

Vita Eadw. 400. So William of Malmesbury (u. s.); “Ille contra

pertinaciùs insistere, donec præcipuos optimates, Godwinum dico et

filios ejus, proditionis apud Regem accusatos Angliâ expelleret.

Expulsionis aliæ quoque fuere caussæ, et alii auctores, sicut aliàs

non tacuimus. Sed ille clariùs classicum cecinit, instantiùs

accusavit.”

Footnote 199:

See vol. i. p. 573.

Footnote 200:

Bishop Godwin (Cat. of Bishops, p. 25) says truly, but without fully

understanding the force of his own words; “This man is said to have

laid the first foundation of the Normans conquest in England.”

Footnote 201:

Chron. Petrib. 1043. Fl. Wig. 1044.

Footnote 202:

See above, p. 63.

Footnote 203:

See above, p. 18.

Footnote 204:

Snorro, Saga of Magnus, 33, of Harold, 18 (Laing, ii. 391. iii. 17).

Chron. Roskild. Lang. i. 377. Saxo, 203.

Footnote 205:

Saxo, 204.

Footnote 206:

See vol. i. p. 649.

Footnote 207:

Saxo, 203. Swend. Agg. c. 5 (Lang. i. 56). So Adam Brem. ii. 75;

“Magnus autem Rex pro justitiâ et fortitudine carus fuit Danis, verùm

Sclavis terribilis, qui post mortem Chnut Daniam infestabant.”

Footnote 208:

Snorro, Magnus, 38 (Laing, ii. 397). Ant. Celt. Scand. 184.

Footnote 209:

Snorro, Ant. Celt. Scand. 185. “Var þat þá rád her allra landsmanna at

taka mik till Konungs her í Englandi.”

Footnote 210:

Does this mean that Eadward meant to meet Magnus in single combat?

Footnote 211:

Chron. Ab. 1044, 1045. Chron. Petrib. 1043.

Footnote 212:

Chron. Ab. 1045. “And þar wæs swa mycel here gegæderod swa nan man ne

geseh, sciphere nænne maran on þysan lande.”

Footnote 213:

For the life of Harold Hardrada our chief authority is his Saga in

Snorro, which will be found in the third volume of Laing’s

Translation. It fits in better than might have been expected with

authentic history. There are also notices in Adam of Bremen and the

Danish writers.

Footnote 214:

See Finlay, Byz. Emp. i. 466.

Footnote 215:

See vol. i. p. 577, and above, p. 44.

Footnote 216:

Adam Brem. iii. 16. “Erat vir potens et clarus victoriis, qui prius in

Græciâ et in Scythiæ regionibus multa contra barbaros prœlia

confecit.” For some legends, see Saxo, 205.

Footnote 217:

See Finlay, i. 487.

Footnote 218:

Ib.

Footnote 219:

It is worth noticing that the reigning Emperor Constantine Monomachos

had a hand in restoring the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. It would be

singular indeed if Harold Hardrada were in any way the instrument of

his bounty. See Finlay, i. 503.

Footnote 220:

So says the Saga, but it is hard to say who is meant by this niece of

Zôê. It is possible that, if there be any truth in the story, some

niece or other kinswoman of Constantine is intended. William of

Malmesbury (iii. 260) gives another turn to the story. He was “pro

stupro illustris fœminæ leoni objectus.” Of course he kills the beast.

In Saxo (205) the crime becomes murder, and the lion is exchanged for

a dragon.

Footnote 221:

Snorro, Harold, c. 18 (Laing, iii. 17).

Footnote 222:

Chron. Wig. 1046. “On þam geare gegaderade Eadward cyng mycele

scypferde on Sandwic, þurh Magnus þreatunge on Norwegon; ac his gewinn

and Swegenes on Denmarcon geletton þæt he her ne com.” So Fl. Wig.

1045. Rog. Wend. i. 483.

Footnote 223:

Chron. Ab. 1044. Petrib. 1043. Cant. 1045. But 1043 in Peterborough

really means 1045, and the 1044 of Abingdon takes in the whole

Christmas season running into the next year. The Hyde writer (288),

amusingly enough, places the marriage after Godwine’s return in 1052.

Eadward “adveniens multâ probitate multâque animi industriâ cœpit

florere, et _Normannos quos adduxerat principes per Angliam

constituere_; contra hunc quoque Comes Godwinus, pacis inimicus,

tentans rebellare, irâ commotus, Angliâ discessit, moxque repatrians

usque in ipsam metropolim Londoniam classem suam advexit. Denique _se

non posse prævalere animadvertens_, pacem cum Edwardo statuit

componere, et ut nullius rebellionis suspicio remaneret, filiam suam

Editham nomine ei matrimonio copulavit, filiumque suum Haroldum ejus

dapiferum constituit.”

Footnote 224:

See above, p. 36.

Footnote 225:

This legend occurs in the Vita Eadwardi, p. 394. It is of course not

omitted by the professed hagiographers. See Appendix B.

Footnote 226:

See above, p. 41.

Footnote 227:

See Gisa’s narrative in Hunter’s Ecclesiastical Documents, pp. 15, 16.

Compare the promotion of Savaric to the same see by the less kindly

influence of a later Emperor. Canon. Well. ap. Angl. Sacr. i. 563.

Footnote 228:

Hist. Rams. c. 75. (p. 434). “Quum esset bonæ vitæ et prudentiæ

laudabilis, genuinâ tum animi feritate, utpote Teutonicus natione,

damnum aliquod suæ attulit laudi.” His appointment is more remarkable,

as he succeeded Wulfsige who died at Assandun (vol. i. p. 432), so

that he must have been promoted very early in Cnut’s reign, before his

connexion with Conrad began. Wythmann got into all kinds of trouble

with his monks, and at last, after a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, died a

solitary. His story in the Ramsey History is worth reading.

Footnote 229:

See vol. i. p. 178.

Footnote 230:

Chron. Ab. 1045. “Eadward cyng geaf Heramanne his preoste þæt

bisceoprice.” Chron. Wig. 1046. “Man sette Hereman on his setle,” an

expression implying the consent of the Witan. Florence says, “Regis

capellanus Herimannus, de Lotharingiâ oriundus.”

Footnote 231:

Fl. Wig. 1031. Will. Malms. Gest. Pont. 145 _b_.

Footnote 232:

“Vir prudentissimus Livingus,” says Florence (1031); “Omnibus quæ

injuncta fuerant, sapientèr et mirificè ante adventum Regis

consummatis,” says William.

Footnote 233:

Will. Malms. Gest. Pont. 145 _b_. Cf. Gest. Regg. iii. 300.

Footnote 234:

See vol. i. p. 563.

Footnote 235:

See above, p. 7.

Footnote 236:

Will. Malms. u. s. “Ambitiosus et protervus ecclesiasticarum legum

tyrannus, ut fertur, invictus, qui nihil pensi haberet, quominùs omni

voluntati suæ assisteret.”

Footnote 237:

Will. Malms. u. s. “A majoribus accepimus, quum ille spiritum

efflaret, tum horrisonum crepitum per totam Angliam auditum, ut ruina

et finis totius putaretur orbis.” The loss of men like Lyfing is

indeed the ruin of nations.

Footnote 238:

Will. Malms. (u. s.), who speaks of his gifts to the monastery, and of

the services still said for him, “ut hodieque xv. graduum psalmos

continuatâ per successores consuetudine pro ejus decantent quiete.”

Footnote 239:

“Lyfing se wordsnotera biscop.” He adds, “he hæfde iii. biscoprice an

on Defenascire, and on Cornwalon, and on Wigracestre.” So Florence

calls him “Hwicciorum, Domnaniæ, et Cornubiæ præsul.” In the

Peterborough Chronicle he is “biscop on Defenascire,” which the

Canterbury Chronicler, using the language of his own age, turns into

“biscop of Exceastre.”

Footnote 240:

Flor. Wig. 1046. “Regis cancellario Leofrico Brytonico mox

Cridiatunensis et Cornubiensis datus est præsulatus.”

Footnote 241:

Will. Malms. Gest. Pont. 145 _b_. “Lefricus apud Lotharingos altus et

doctus.”

Footnote 242:

See vol. i. p. 320.

Footnote 243:

See vol. i. p. 353.

Footnote 244:

Will. Malms. u. s. He again speaks of Æthelstan’s walls. See vol. i.

pp. 337–340.

Footnote 245:

See vol. i. pp. 345, 346.

Footnote 246:

Such a personal installation seems to be the meaning of the

description in the foundation charter of the new see of Exeter, in

Cod. Dipl. iv. 118. The Charter is doubtful, but it may probably be

trusted for a fact of this kind. Cf. Will. Malms. iii. 300.

Footnote 247:

See the whole subject fully illustrated by Professor Stubbs in the

Preface to the _De Inventione_, p. ix. et seqq.

The rule of Chrodegang will be found at length in D’Achery’s

Spicilegium, i. 565 et seqq.

Footnote 248:

Cap. 53. “Ut Canonici cucullos monachorum non induant.”

Footnote 249:

See Stubbs, De Inventione, p. x.

Footnote 250:

Will. Malms. Gest. Pont. 145 _b_. “Canonicos statuit qui, _contra

morem Anglorum_, ad formam Lotharingorum uno triclinio comederent, uno

cubiculo cubitarent. Transmissa est hujuscemodi regula ad posteros,

quamvis pro luxu temporum nonnullâ jam ex parte deciderit, habentque

clerici œconomum ab episcopo constitutum, qui eis diatim necessaria

victui, annuatim amictui commoda suggerat.”

Footnote 251:

See vol. i. p. 353.

Footnote 252:

The name of Ealdred will be constantly recurring in our history for

the next twenty-three years. His general life and character are

described by William of Malmesbury, De Gest Pont. 154, and Thomas

Stubbs, Gest. Pont. Eb. X Scriptt. 1700 et seqq.

Footnote 253:

T. Stubbs, u. s. “Iste apud Regem Edwardum tantæ erat auctoritatis, ut

cum eo mortales inimicos reconciliaret et de inimicissimis amicissimos

faceret.”

Footnote 254:

The reconciliation of Gruffydd appears from his acting immediately

afterwards in concert with Earl Swegen. That Ealdred brought about

this present reconciliation is not distinctly stated, but it quite

falls in with his general character, and with the fact that he played

a prominent part in a later reconciliation between Eadward and

Gruffydd. The success of Ealdred in reconciling both Swegen and

Gruffydd to the King is specially commented on by Thomas Stubbs, the

biographer of the Archbishops of York (X Scriptt. 1701). Now Stubbs

wrote more than three hundred years after the time; still he is not a

romancer like Bromton or Knighton, but a really honest and careful

writer, and he doubtless had access to materials which are now lost or

unprinted. He may indeed refer to the later reconciliation in 1056,

but the combination of the names of Swegen and Gruffydd might lead us

to think that he was speaking of some event at this time.

Footnote 255:

Chron. Ab. 1046. “Her on þysum geare for Swegn eorl into Wealan, and

Griffin se Norþerna cyng forð mid him, and him man gislode.” In Ann.

Camb. 1046 we read, “Seditio magna orta fuit inter Grifud filium

Lewelin et Grifud filium Riderch.” Or possibly the expedition may be

that recorded under the next year, when Gruffydd ap Llywelyn ravaged

all South Wales in revenge for the treacherous slaughter of one

hundred and forty of his nobles. In any case the two independent

accounts exactly fit in to one another.

Footnote 256:

Chron. Ab. 1046. “þa he hamwerdes wæs þa het he feccan him to þa

abbedessan on Leomynstre, and hæfde hi þa while þe him geliste, and

let hi syððan faran ham.”

Footnote 257:

Florence does not mention the affair of Swegen and Eadgifu in its

chronological order, but refers to it when he describes the return of

Swegen in 1049. “Suanus ... qui, relictâ prius Angliâ, eo quod Edgivam

Leonensis monasterii abbatissam, quam corruperat, in matrimonium,

habere non licuerit, Danemarciam adierat.” So the Worcester Chronicle,

which does not mention Eadgifu, says, under 1050, “Swegen Eorl, þe fór

ær of þisan lande to Denmarcon, and þær forworhte hine wið Denum.”

Abingdon, the only Chronicle which mentions Eadgifu, does not speak

directly of Swegen’s departure, but implies it under 1049. Mr. St.

John (ii. 148 et seqq.) works up the story into an elaborate romance,

with a glowing description of the beauty, accomplishments, and

wickedness of Eadgifu and of nuns in general. M. de Bonnechose (ii.

85) tells us, “Sweyn _cinquième_ fils de Godwin, fit violence (?) à

_Elgive_, abbesse de Leominster; banni par le roi pour ce crime,” &c.

Footnote 258:

See vol. i. p. 279.

Footnote 259:

Chronn. Petrib. 1045. Cant. 1046. “On ðam ilcan geare ferde Swegen

eorl ut to Baldewines lande to Brycge, and wunode þær ealne winter,

and wende þa to sumere út.” “Út” means, of course, to Denmark. William

of Malmesbury says (ii. 200), “Swanus, perversi ingenii et infidi in

Regem, multotiens à patre et fratre Haroldo descivit, et pirata

factus, prædis marinis virtutes majorum polluit.” Whom did William

look on as the forefathers of Swegen?

Footnote 260:

Chron. Petrib. 1046. Swegen on his return asks for their restoration.

Footnote 261:

Will. Malms. ii. 196. “Leofricus ... monasteria multa constituit ...

_Leonense_, et nonnulla alia.” So Flor. Wig. 1057. On Leominster see

Monasticon, iv. 51.

Footnote 262:

Leominster Monastery had no existence in the time of Henry the First,

when it was a “dirutum monasterium” which that King granted to his new

Abbey of Reading (Will. Malms. Gest. Pont. Scriptt. p. Bed. 144). I

infer also from Domesday (180) that the house had no corporate being

at the time of the Survey. Leominster was then held by the King; in

King Eadward’s time it had been held by Queen Eadgyth. The monastery

is only casually mentioned; it holds no land, but a rent seems to be

reserved for the “victus monialium.” These facts together seem to me

to show that the society was dissolved, a certain rent being set aside

for the surviving members, like the pensions granted at the general

Dissolution under Henry the Eighth. See Appendix E.

Footnote 263:

Chronn. Ab. 1046. Wig. 1047. “Man utlagode Osgod stallere.” Chron.

Petrib. 1044. “On þis ilcan geare wearð aflemed ut Osgot Clapa.”

Chron. Cant. 1045. “And Osgod Clapa wærð ut adriven.” The difference

of expression in the different Chronicles is remarkable. On “ut

adriven,” see vol. i. p. 561. Florence, 1046, says, “Osgodus Clapa

expellitur Angliâ.”

Footnote 264:

See above, p. 7.

Footnote 265:

The Abingdon Chronicle says “on þis ylcan geare man geútlagode Osgod

Clapan _foran to middanwintre_.”

Footnote 266:

This is implied in the narrative of Florence, 1049. “Osgodus autem ...

Danemarciam rediit.”

Footnote 267:

See vol. i. p. 466.

Footnote 268:

Snorro, Harold, 21 (Laing, iii. 19).

Footnote 269:

Ibid. 26, 28 (Laing, iii. 25, 27).

Footnote 270:

The application of Swend and the refusal by the Witan come from the

Worcester Chronicle, 1048. “And Swegen eac sende hider, bead him

fylstes ongeon Magnus Norwega cyng; þæt man sceolde sendan L. scypa

him to fultume; ac hit þuhte unræd _eallum folce_; and hit wearð þa

gelet, þurh þæt þe Magnus hæfde mycel scypecræft.” The personal share

of Godwine and Leofric in the debate comes from Florence, 1047. “Tunc

comes Godwinus consilium Regi dedit ut saltem L. naves militibus

instructas ei mitteret; sed quia Leofrico comiti _et omni populo_ id

non videbatur consilium, nullam ei mittere voluit.”

Footnote 271:

Flor. Wig. 1047.

Footnote 272:

Snorro, Harold, 30 (Laing, iii. 29).

Footnote 273:

Saxo, 204. Cf. vol. i. p. 257.

Footnote 274:

For a mythical version of the death of Magnus, mixed up with a story

of a vision of Eadward’s, see Æthel. Riev. X Scriptt. 378.

Footnote 275:

See above, p. 73.

Footnote 276:

Flor. Wig. 1048. I insert this story with a certain amount of fear and

trembling, as it reads so like a mere repetition of what happened the

year before. Still the authority of Florence is high, and it is not

unlikely that Swend, in his new circumstances, might make a second

application.

Footnote 277:

Fl. Wig. 1048. “Haroldus ... nuntios ad Regem Eadwardum misit et pacem

amicitiamque illi obtulit, et recepit.”

Footnote 278:

See below, p. 98.

Footnote 279:

Chron. Ab. 1046. Fl. Wig. 1047. Chron. Wig. 1048. It was after

Candlemas, i. e. of 1047.

Footnote 280:

Chronn. Ab. 1048. Wig. 1049. Fl. Wig. 1048.

Footnote 281:

Chron. Wig. 1049. “Þæt wilde fyr on Deorbyscire micel yfel dide.”

Florence (1048) calls it “ignis aërius, vulgo dictus silvaticus.”

Footnote 282:

Chronn. Ab. 1047. Wig. 1048. Petrib. 1045. Cant. 1046. Fl. Wig. 1047.

By some extraordinary confusion Florence places here the death of

Eadmund, Bishop of Durham, and the succession of Eadred, which

happened in 1041. See vol. i. pp. 588–9.

Footnote 283:

Chron. Ab. 1048. Chron. Petrib. 1046. These clearly refer to the same

event. I hardly understand Mr. Thorpe’s note to his Translation of the

Chronicles, p. 137. “This predatory expedition, assigned here to the

year 1046, is of a much earlier date”—one seemingly before the year

1000. This is because a Lothen and an Yrling occur in the story of

Olaf Tryggwesson. But the Chronicler could hardly be mistaken on such

a point. Lappenberg (499. Thorpe, ii. 239) seems to have no doubt on

the matter.

Footnote 284:

“Godwines Rath wurde bald als der richtige erkannt.” Lappenberg, 499.

Footnote 285:

I make up the details by joining the narratives of the two Chronicles.

Both mention Sandwich; but the Peterborough Chronicle alone speaks of

the vast booty.

Footnote 286:

Chron. Ab. 1048. “Man gehergode Sandwic and Wiht, and ofslohan þa

betsta men þe þa wæron.”

Footnote 287:

Chron. Petrib. 1046. “And wendon þa onbuton Tenet, and woldon þær þet

ilce don; ac þet landfolc hardlice wiðstodon, and forwerndon heom

ægðer ge upganges ge wæteres, and aflymdon hi þanon mid ealle.” The

refusal of water is remarkable. Probably in other cases the landfolk

had to provide provisions out of sheer fear.

Footnote 288:

Chron. Petrib. u. s.

Footnote 289:

Chron. Ab. 1048. “And Eadward cining and þa eorlas foran æfter þam út

mid heore scypun.” Eadward had been on board the fleet once before

(see p. 74), but that time he saw no service.

Footnote 290:

Chron. Petrib. 1046.

Footnote 291:

See vol. i. pp. 313, 330, 633.

Footnote 292:

Lamb. Herz. 1047.

Footnote 293:

See above, p. 17.

Footnote 294:

See the Life of Leo by the contemporary Archdeacon Wibert, in

Muratori, iii. 282.

Footnote 295:

The intervention of Hildebrand, as told by Otto of Freisingen in his

Annals, lib. vi. c. 33, seems apocryphal, as Muratori remarks in his

note, iii. 292. But the germ of the story is to be found in Wibert;

Leo entered Rome barefoot, and though he announced his appointment by

the Emperor, he demanded the assent of the clergy and people before he

entered on his office.

Footnote 296:

On this war see Hermannus Contractus, 1044–1050. Lambert, 1044–1050.

Sigebert, 1044–1049 (ap. Pertz, vi. 358–9). Ann. Leodienses (ap.

Pertz, iv. 19, 20). Otto Fris. Chron. vi. 33. Conrad Ursp. 1045–9 (p.

229, ed. 1537). Annalista Saxo (ap. Pertz, vol. vi. p. 689). Struvius,

i. 352. The destruction of the palace is mentioned in our own Abingdon

and Worcester Chronicles, 1049, 1050; “Se casere gaderode unarimedlice

fyrde ongean Baldewine of Brycge þurh þæt þæt he bræc þæne pallant æt

Neomagan, and eac fela oðra unþanca þe he him dyde.” So Florence,

1049; “Quod apud Neomagum suum palatium combussisset atque fregisset

pulcherrimum.” The year of its destruction was 1046, according to

Lambert (“Inter alias quas rei publicæ intulit clades, Neumago domum

regiam miri et incomparabilis operis incendit”), 1047 according to

Sigebert, (“Godefridus palatium Neomagi incendit et irreparabiliter

destruit”). Both writers speak of the destruction of the church of

Verdun; Lambert adds the singular penance of Godfrey, which must have

followed his submission in 1049. “Post modicum facti in tantum

pœnituit, ut publicè se verberari faceret, et capillos suos ne

tonderentur [one is reminded of the Merwings] multâ pecuniâ redimeret,

sumptus ad reædificandam ecclesiam daret, et in opere cæmentario per

seipsum plerumque vilis mancipii ministerio functus deserviret.” Abbot

Hugh in the Verdun Chronicle (Labbe, i. 190) makes the destruction at

Verdun still more extensive; “Templum Sanctæ Mariæ à Duce Godefrido et

Balduino succensum est, vasa sacra ablata, civitasque destructa, viii.

Kal. Nov.” So in another Verdun Chronicle (ib. 401); “1048 Civitas

Virdunensis a Duce Godefrido et Balduino Comite deprædatur et unà cum

Monasterio Sanctæ Mariæ incenditur.”

Footnote 297:

Florence (1049) seems pointedly to distinguish the relations in which

Swend and Eadward stood to the Emperor. “Suanus ... ut Imperator illi

_mandârat_, cum suâ classe ibi affuit, et eâ vice fidelitatem

Imperatori juravit. Misit quoque ad Regem Anglorum Eadwardum et

_rogavit_ illum ne Baldwinum permitteret effugere, si vellet ad mare

fugere.”

Footnote 298:

Flor. Wig. 1049. Chronn. Ab. and Wig. ib. “þæt he ne geþafode þæt he

him on wætere ne ætburste.”

Footnote 299:

See vol. i. pp. 229, 245.

Footnote 300:

Chronn. Ab. and Wig. “þæt se casere hæfde of Baldwine eall þæt he

wolde.” The reconciliation was at Aachen. Sigebert, 1049. Hermann,

1050. Lambert seems to confound this reconciliation with the later

synod at Mainz. William of Poitiers boldly turns the tables; the

father-in-law of Duke William could not have made submission even to

an Emperor; “Nomine siquidem Romani Imperii miles fuit, re decus et

gloria summa consiliorum in summâ necessitudine ... Est enim et

nationibus procul remotis notissimum quam frequentibus, quamque

gravibus bellis Imperatorum immanitatem fatigaverit, pace demum ad

conditiones ipsius arbitratu dictatas compositâ, quum Regum dominos

terræ ipsorum nonnullâ parte mulctaverit violenter extortâ, sua quæque

vel inexpugnatâ vel indefessâ potiùs manu tutam.” Giles, 90. Duchesne,

183 D.

Footnote 301:

See pp. 88, 90.

Footnote 302:

Chron. Ab. 1049. “He com hider mid hiwunge, cwæð þæt he wolde his man

beon.”

Footnote 303:

Chron. Petrib. 1046. “And com Swegn eorl in mid vii. scypum to

Bosenham, et griðode wið þone cyng, and behet man him þæt he moste

wurðe [beon] ælc þæra þinga þe he ǽr ahte.

Footnote 304:

Chron. Petrib. 1046. “Da wiðlæg Harold eorl his broðor and Beorn eorl

þæt he ne moste beon nan þære þinga wurðe þe se cyng him geunnen

hæfde.” So Chron. Ab. 1049. The Worcester Chronicle and Florence do

not mention this opposition of Harold and Beorn.

Footnote 305:

See vol. i. p. 370.

Footnote 306:

“Fóron fela scypa hám,” says the Worcester Chronicle; but Abingdon

puts it more distinctly; “And þa se cing lyfde eallon Myrceon ham; and

hig swa dydon.”

Footnote 307:

Abingdon and Worcester mention Godwine’s going with forty-two ships,

but Peterborough has more distinctly, “Ða ge[wende] Godwine eorl west

onbuton mid þæs cynges ii. scipum þan anan steorde Harold eorl and þan

oðran Tostig his broðor, and landesmanna sciþa xlii.”

Footnote 308:

The first certainly authentic signature of Tostig seems to be in this

year. Cod. Dipl. iv. 115. The charter, after the signatures of

Godwine, Leofric and Siward, has those of “Harold Dux,” “Beorn Dux,”

“Tosti nobilis,” “Leowine nobilis.” Leofwine must have been very

young.

Footnote 309:

Chron. Petrib. “Ða scyfte man _Harold_ eorl úp þæs cynges scipe þe

Harold eorl ǽr steorde.” Mr. Earle’s conjecture that for “Harold eorl”

we should read “Beorn eorl” is absolutely necessary to make sense of

the passage. Parallel Chronicles, 343.

Footnote 310:

Was it some feeling that a brother’s life had been at least in

jeopardy that led William of Malmesbury, or those whom he followed,

into the strange statement (ii. 200), “Pro conscientiâ Brunonis

cognati interempti, _et, ut quidam dicunt, fratris_”?

Footnote 311:

Chron. Ab. “Þa wende Beorn for þære sibbe þæt he him swican nolde.” So

Wig.

Footnote 312:

“To Dertamuðan,” Chronn. Ab. and Wig. “to Axamuðan,” Chron. Petrib.

Footnote 313:

The personal share of Harold in the burial comes from the Abingdon

Chronicle, the one least favourable to Godwine. Peterborough, so

strongly Godwinist, is silent.

Footnote 314:

Chron. Ab. “And se cing þa and eall here cwæðon Swegen for niðing.”

Cf. Chron. Petrib. 1088. “Ða se cyng ... sende ofer eall Englalande,

and bead þæt ælc man þe wære unniðing sceolde cúman to hé.” Will.

Malms. iv. 306. “Jubet ut compatriotas advocent ad obsidionem venire,

nisi si qui velint sub nomine Niðing, quod _nequam_ sonat, remanere.”

Matt. Paris. p. 15 (Wats); “Absque morâ ut ad obsidionem veniant

jubet; nisi velint sub nomine _Nithing_, quod Latinè _nequam_ sonat,

recenseri. Angli, qui nihil contumeliosius et vilius æstimant quam

hujusmodi ignominioso vocabulo notari, catervatim ad Regem

confluentes,” &c.

Footnote 315:

On military Assemblies, Macedonian, Ætolian, and even Achaian, see

Hist. Fed. Gov. i. pp. 413, 511, 549.

Footnote 316:

See vol. i. p. 404.

Footnote 317:

See vol. i. p. 86.

Footnote 318:

_Here_, which implies a standing force, very often a paid force, not

_fyrd_, the general levy of the country.

Footnote 319:

See vol. i. p. 109.

Footnote 320:

On the Housecarls, as a later and inferior form of the _Comitatus_,

see vol. i. p. 490.

Footnote 321:

“Lytel ær þan” (namely the second burial of Beorn), the men of

Hastings set forth, according to the Worcester Chronicle, the only one

which mentions their exploit.

Footnote 322:

So I understand the words of the Worcester Chronicle. The men of

Hastings go after Swegen and take “his twa scypa”—the only ships he

then had. To explain his having only two ships the writer adds, “ehta

scypa he hæfde ær he Beorn beswice; syððan hine forleton ealle buton

twam.” The only meaning of these words seems to be that which I have

given, though it involves the difficulty as to the personal escape of

Swegen. But it is clear that Florence took them differently;

“Dimiserunt illum sex naves, quarum duas paullò post cœperunt

Hastingenses ... Swanus verò ad Flandriam duabus fugiens navibus ibi

mansit.” This accounts for his escape, but I cannot see how “his twa

scypa” can mean two of the ships which had left him. The Abingdon

Chronicle also mentions the desertion of the six ships, but not the

exploit of the Hastings men.

For other examples of the vigorous action of the men of the “Cinque

Ports” in 1293 and 1297, see Walter of Hemingburgh, vol. ii. pp. 41,

158 (Hist. Soc. Ed.).

Footnote 323:

Chron. Ab. “And þar wunode mid Baldwine.” Chron. Petrib. “And Swegen

gewende þa east to Baldewines lande, and sæt þær ealne winter on

Brycge mid his fullan griðe.”

Footnote 324:

Chron. Wig. 1050. “Swein eorl bæd Beorn eorl mid facne,” “ær he Beorn

beswice.” Chron. Ab. 1049. “ær he Beorn amyrðrode.”

Footnote 325:

See vol. i. p. 588.

Footnote 326:

I think that by comparing the Abingdon Chronicle under 1050 with the

Peterborough Chronicle under 1047, it will appear that Swegen was

reinstated in this Gemót of Midlent 1050, one which I shall have to

mention again.

Footnote 327:

Flor. Wig. “Swanus ... ibi mansit, quoad Wigornensis episcopus

Aldredus illum reduceret, et cum Rege pacificaret.” This seems to

imply that Ealdred brought him over in person.

Footnote 328:

The old diocese of Worcester took in the shires of Worcester and

Gloucester and part of Warwick. Of these Gloucestershire was in

Swegen’s Earldom, the rest in Leofric’s.

Footnote 329:

The reconciliation of Swegen with Eadward is mentioned by Thomas

Stubbs (see above, p. 87) as an instance of the peacemaking powers of

Ealdred, along with that of Gruffydd.

Footnote 330:

It is clear that the details of the murder could come only from Swegen

himself, as his accomplices were killed by the Hastings men. Ealdred

would be the obvious person for Swegen to confess them to. I do not

suspect the Bishop of betraying the secrets of the confessional. A

public crime like that of Swegen was doubtless followed by a public

confession.

Footnote 331:

See above, pp. 90, 100.

Footnote 332:

Four, according to the Worcester Chronicle, two, according to

Florence. The Abingdon Chronicle does not mention this last incident,

and that of Peterborough passes by the whole story of Osgod.

Footnote 333:

Chron. Wig. “þa man ofsloh begeondan sæ.” Flor. Wig. “Quæ in

transmarinis partibus captæ sunt, occisis omnibus qui in illis erant.”

Footnote 334:

Chron. Wig. “On Wylisce Axa.” Flor. Wig. “Ostium intrantes Sabrinæ, in

loco qui dicitur _Wylesc Eaxan_ appulerunt.” The “Welsh Axe” is of

course the Usk. The rivers of the same name in Somersetshire and

Devonshire had ceased to be looked on as Welsh.

Footnote 335:

On the details of this perplexing campaign, see Appendix I.

Footnote 336:

Ralph’s signatures seem to begin in 1050. See Cod. Dipl. iv. 123, 125.

That in 121 is more doubtful. That in 113 Mr. Kemble marks as

doubtful, but refers it to 1044–1047. But it must be spurious. It

makes Eadsige Archbishop and Ælfgar Earl at the same time, as also

Tostig, who was not an Earl till long after. See Appendix G.

Footnote 337:

Chron. Wig. 1050. “And hi comon unwær on heom, on ealne ærne morgen,

and fela godra manna þær ofslagon; and þa oþre ætburston forð mid þam

biscope.”

Footnote 338:

“Þæt micele mynster æt Rémys,” says the Worcester Chronicle, which

might seem to mean the Metropolitan church; but Florence makes it

plain that the Abbey is meant; “Rogatu eximiæ religionis Abbatis

Herimari.... sancti Remigii Francorum apostoli monasterium, Remis

constitutum, maximo cum honore dedicavit.” Cf. Will. Gem. vii. 15.

Footnote 339:

Ord. Vit. 575 A.

Footnote 340:

The presence of the Emperor is asserted by the Worcester Chronicle;

“Þær wæs se Papa Leo and se Casere.” Florence does not speak of the

Emperor, but says that Leo took with him “præfectum et digniores

quosdam Romuleæ urbis.”

Footnote 341:

Chron. Petrib. 1046. “Þær wæs on Leo se Papa and se arcebiscop of

Burgundia and se arcebiscop of Bysincun and se arcebiscop of Treviris,

and se arcebiscop of Remis, and manig mann þærto ge hadode ge læwede.”

Footnote 342:

Chron. Petrib. 1046. “Eadward cyng sende þider Dudoce [the Abbots only

and not Dudoc are mentioned by the Worcester Chronicle, 1050] ... þæt

hi sceolden þam cynge cyðan hwæt þær to Christendome gecoren wære.”

Footnote 343:

Lambert, 1050 (see above, p. 99). Herm. Contr. 1050.

Footnote 344:

See above, p. 68.

Footnote 345:

Chron. Ab. 1049. “Forðferde Eadnoð se goda biscop on Oxnafordscire.”

The same words seem to have dropped out of the Worcester Chronicle.

Footnote 346:

Chron. Ab. 1049. “Eadwerd cing geaf Ulfe his preoste þæt biscoprice,

and hit yfele beteah.” Chron. Wig. 1050. “Ac he wæs syððan of adryfon,

forþan þe he ne gefremede naht biscoplices þæron, swa þæt us sceamað

hit nu mare to tellanne.” Flor. Wig. “Regis capellanus Ulfus genere

Nortmannus.”

Footnote 347:

See vol. i. p. 368.

Footnote 348:

See vol. i. p. 570.

Footnote 349:

Chron. Petrib. 1047. “Her on þisum geare wæs mycel gemót on Lundene to

midfestene, and man sette ut ix. litsmanna scipa, and fif belifan wið

æftan.” The Abingdon Chronicle, 1049, to much the same account as that

just quoted, adds the words, “and se cyng heom behet xii. monað gyld.”

Footnote 350:

Chron. Ab. 1050 (the chronology of this Chronicle is utterly

confused); “and man _geinlagode_ Swegen Eorl.”

Footnote 351:

See above, p. 108.

Footnote 352:

Chron. Ab. 1049. “On þæs cinges ærende.”

Footnote 353:

See the charter in Cod. Dipl. iv. 173, and the accounts in Æthelred of

Rievaux, 379. Estorie de S. Ædward, 65 et seqq.

Footnote 354:

Besides the many exalted persons who followed the example of Cnut,

some of whose pilgrimages are of historical importance, the prevalence

of the fashion is shown by its incidental mention in more than one

charter. Thus in Cod. Dipl. iv. 140 we find the mention of the Roman

pilgrimage of a Lincolnshire Thegn whose name of Anskill or Anscytel

witnesses to his Danish origin. (The charter may be quoted for such a

point as this, though there is clearly something wrong in the

signature of “Wulfwinus _Lincolniensis_ episcopus.”) And at p. 141 we

find “Leofgyva femina Lundonica” (a holder of property in

Lincolnshire) dying on her way to Jerusalem.

Footnote 355:

Chron. Petrib. 1047. “On þysum ilcan geare wæs se myccla sinoð on

Rome”—like our own “mycel gemót” just before.

Footnote 356:

Ib. “Hi comon þyder on Easter æfen.”

Footnote 357:

Vita Lanfr. c. 10. ap. Giles, i. 288. Will. Malms. iii. 284. Sig.

Gemb. 1051. See Milman, Latin Christianity, iii. 24.

Footnote 358:

Æthel. Riev. ap. X Scriptt. 381. If the letter there given be genuine,

the dispensation was granted by the authority of the synod as well as

of the Pope. Eadward was either to build a new or restore an old

monastery of Saint Peter; “aut novum construas aut vetustum augeas et

emendes.” Cf. the French Life, 1601 et seqq., where the Bishops are

both quartered on wrong sees, Ealdred prematurely at York, Hermann at

Winchester. The story does not occur in the contemporary Life, p. 417.

Footnote 359:

See the first letter in Dr. Giles’ collection, p. 17.

Footnote 360:

Our ancient tongue appears to advantage in the pithy narrative of this

affair given in the Peterborough Chronicle (1047); “And eft se Papa

hæfde sinoð on Uercel, and Ulf biscop com þærto; and forneah man

sceolde tobrecan his stef, gif he ne sealde þe mare gersuman; forðan

he ne cuðe don his gerihte swa wel swa he sceolde.” Florence passes by

the story; his Latin would be feeble after such vigorous English.

Footnote 361:

See above, p. 54.

Footnote 362:

Chron. Petrib. 1047. Flor. Wig. 1050.

Footnote 363:

Vita Eadw. 400. Ælfric was “secundum canonica instituta electus,” by a

“petitio et electio ecclesiastici conventûs.”

Footnote 364:

Ibid. 399. “Ex supradicti ducis Godwini stirpe.”

Footnote 365:

Ib. 399–400. “Quem tam totius ecclesiæ universales filii quam ipsius

monasterii monachi in archipræsulem sibi exposcunt dari, huncque et

affectu communi et petitione eligunt præesse regulari. Mittunt etiam

ad supradictum Godwinum, qui regio favore in eâ dominabatur parte

regni, commonent eum generis sui, precantur ut ex affectu

propinquitatis Regem adeat, et hunc, utpote in eâdem ecclesiâ nutritum

et secundum canonica instituta electum, sibi pontificem annuat.

Promittit fideliter pro viribus suis Dux inclitus, Regemque adiens

innotescit petitionem et electionem ecclesiastici conventûs.”

Footnote 366:

Chron. Ab. 1050. “þa hæfde Eadward cing witenagemot on Lunden to

Midlencten, and sette Hrodberd to arcebiscop to Cantwarebyrig, and

Sperhafoc abbud to Lunden, and geaf Roðulfe biscop his mæge þæt

abbudrice on Abbandune.”

Footnote 367:

See the Abingdon History, i. 463. He was a monk of Saint Eadmund’s,

and was charged with alienating some of the lordships of the house to

Stigand. The account of his promotion to London I do not fully

understand; “Spearhavoc autem a Rege civitati Lundonensi [civitatis

Lundonensis?] eodem prædictæ pactionis anno, in episcopatum promotus,

dum auri gemmarumque electarum pro coronâ _imperiali_ cudendâ, Regis

ejusdem assignatione receptam haberet copiam.” Was Saint Eadward’s

favour purchased by the materials of an earthly crown?

Footnote 368:

Chron. Petrib. 1048. “Mid þæs cinges gewrite and insegle.” See above,

p. 67.

Footnote 369:

Rudolf’s kindred to the King is asserted more positively in the local

Chronicle just quoted than in the local History (463); “Inde Rodulfum

quemdam longævum abbatis loco ponendum Rex transmisit, qui episcopatum

apud Norweiam gentem diu moderans, et tandem ab hujusmodi fasce

privatum se agere malens, ad Regem ipsum suum, ut ferebatur, cognatum

venit; a quo et susceptus est.”

Footnote 370:

Rudolf, in any of its forms, is not an usual English name, but it

might occur, like the rare names of Carl and Lothar (Hloðhære). See

vol. i. p. 334.

Footnote 371:

Adam Brem. iii. 16. “Rex Haraldus crudelitate suâ omnes tyrannorum

excessit furores. Multæ ecclesiæ per illum virum dirutæ, multi

Christiani ab illo per supplicia sunt necati.... Itaque multis

imperans nationibus, propter avaritiam et crudelitatem suam omnibus

erat invisus.” He goes on to give a full account of Harold’s dealings

with the Archbishop of Trondhjem.

Footnote 372:

Hist. Mon. Ab. 463. “Ut vero tam Dei quam sui respectu eum monachi

reciperent honorificèque tractarent, utpote summâ canitie jam maturum,

eo discedente, licere eis dedit quem de suis vellent, potiùs

successorem eligere. Paretur Regi. Reverentiæ subjectio debitæ a

fratribus viro competenter impenditur. At ipsos regia nequaquam

fefellit in posterum promissio.” Rudolf survived only two years.

Footnote 373:

Chron. Petrib. 1048. “Þæs sylfan Lentenes he for to Rome æfter his

pallium.... Ða com se arcebiscop fram Rome ane dæge ǽr Sc̃s Petrus

mæsse æfene, and gesæt his arcebiscopstol at Xp̃es cyrcean on Sc̃s

Petrus mæssedæg, _and sona þæs to þam cyng gewænde_.”

Footnote 374:

The Peterborough Chronicle (1048) is here again very graphic; “Ða com

Sparhafoc abbod to him mid þæs cynges gewrite and insegle (see above,

p. 120); to þan þet he hine hadian sceolde to biscop into Lundene. Þa

wiðcweð se arcebiscop, and cwæð þet se papa hit him forboden hæfde.”

Footnote 375:

Chron. Petrib. The pithy narrative of this writer is cut much shorter

in the Worcester Chronicler (1051), followed by Florence;

“Spearhafoc ... feng to þan biscoprice on Lundene, and hit wæs eft of

him genumen ær he gehadod wære.” Florence turns this into, “Antequam

esset consecratus, a Rege Eadwardo est ejectus.” Now the Chronicles do

not at all imply that the refusal of Robert was at all the King’s

personal act. Florence is perhaps confounding this business with the

final expulsion of Spearhafoc later in the year, which he however

places under another year.

Footnote 376:

Chron. Petrib. 1048. “Ða gewende se abbod to Lundene, and sæt on þam

biscoprice, þe _se cyng him ær geunnan hæfde be his fulre leafe_.”

This is one of those little touches which show the sympathies of the

writer.

Footnote 377:

Chron. Petrib. 1048. “Ealne þone sumor and þone hærfest.”

Footnote 378:

Chron. Ab. 1050. “And þæs ylcan geare he settle ealle þa litsmen of

male.”

Footnote 379:

Chron. Wig. 1052. “On þan ylcan geare aléde Eadward cyng þæt heregyld

þæt Æþelred cyng ær astealde; þæt was on þam nigon and þrittigoðan

geare þæs þe he hit ongunnon hæfde.” Flor. Wig. 1051. “Rex Eadwardus

absolvit Anglos a gravi vectigali tricesimo octavo anno ex quo pater

suus Rex Ægelredus primitus id Danicis solidariis solvi mandârat.” See

vol. i. p. 391. The _Heregyld_ is a tax for the maintenance of the

_here_ or standing army as distinguished from the _fyrd_ or militia.

Footnote 380:

Chron. Wig. 1052. “Þæt gyld gedrehte ealle Engla þeode on swa langum

fyrste swa hit bufan her awriten is; ðæt was æfre ætforan oðrum gyldum

þe man myslice geald, and men mid menigfealdlice drehte.”

Footnote 381:

See Bromton, 942. Estoire de S. Ædward, 919 et seqq. Leofric is also

Eadward’s partner in another vision. Æthel. Riev. X Scriptt. 389.

Bromton, 949.

Footnote 382:

See Appendix K.

Footnote 383:

See vol. i. p. 366.

Footnote 384:

There is a grant of lands to Godwine (uni meo fideli Duci nuncupato

nomine Godwino) as late as 1050. Cod. Dipl. iv. 123. The description

of the grantee as “Dux” of course identifies him with the Earl.

Footnote 385:

The only absolutely certain instances that I can find at this time are

the signatures of Earl Ralph in 1050. See above, p. 111. His name is

added to doubtful charters at pp. 113, 121, and another doubtful one

is signed by Robert the son of Wimarc, of whom more anon. The

signatures of ecclesiastics, Rægnbold the Chancellor and others, are

more common.

Footnote 386:

Ralph’s wife bore the name of Gytha, and their son was named Harold.

Robert the son of Wimarc had also a son named Swegen, afterwards

famous in Domesday. See Ellis, i. 433, 489. ii. 117. These names

certainly point to a certain identification with England, and suggest

the idea that the sons of Ralph and Robert were godsons of the two

sons of Godwine.

Footnote 387:

See vol. i. p. 570.

Footnote 388:

See vol. i. p. 281.

Footnote 389:

“Nescia gens belli solamina spernit equorum,” says Guy of Amiens of

the English (Giles, p. 38), but his following lines are, however

unwittingly, a noble panegyric.

Footnote 390:

Thuc. iv. 40. ἀπεκρίνατο αὐτῷ πολλοῦ ἂν ἄξιον εἶναι τὸν ἄτρακτον

(λέγων τὸν ὀϊστὸν), εἰ τοὺς ἀγαθοὺς διεγίγνωσκε.

Footnote 391:

Vita Eadw. 400. “Totius ecclesiæ filiis hanc injuriam pro nisu suo

reclamantibus.”

Footnote 392:

Vita Eadw. 401. See vol. i. pp. 543, 573.

Footnote 393:

Vita Eadw. 400. See Appendix E.

Footnote 394:

See vol. i. p. 584.

Footnote 395:

Ord. Vit. 487 D, 655 C.

Footnote 396:

A daughter of Æthelred and Emma must have been thirty-five years old

at this time, and she may have been forty-seven. Considering the

position held by her son, Godgifu is likely to have been approaching

the more advanced age of the two.

Footnote 397:

Will. Malms. ii. 199. “Collocutus cum eo, et re impetratâ quam

petierat.” This perhaps comes from Chron. Petrib. 1048; “And spæc wið

hine þæt þæt he þa wolde.”

Footnote 398:

Chronn. Wig. 1052, Petrib. 1048. See vol. i. p. 588.

Footnote 399:

I reserve an examination of the authorities for this narrative for the

Appendix. See Note L. I here refer to the Chronicles only for details.

Footnote 400:

Chron. Petrib. 1048. “Ða he wæs sume mila oððe mare beheonan Dofran,

þa dyde he on his byrnan, and his geferan ealle, and foran to Dofran.”

Footnote 401:

Thirty-one, reckoning from Godwine’s appointment as Earl of the

West-Saxons in 1020. See vol. i. p. 469. If Godwine really became Earl

of Kent in 1017 or 1018 (see vol. i. p. 451) two or three years more

must be added.

Footnote 402:

Chron. Petrib. “Þa com an his manna, and wolde wician æt anes bundan

huse, his unðances, and gewundode þone husbundon, and se husbunda

ofsloh þone oðerne.” So Will. Malms. ii. 199; “Unus antecursorum ejus

ferociùs cum cive agens, et vulnere magis quam prece hospitium

exigens, illum in sui excidium invitavit.” I do not know why Mr. Hardy

says that William implies that all this happened at Canterbury. Surely

“per Doroberniam” means Dover.

Footnote 403:

Chron. Petrib. “Ða wearð Eustatius uppon his horse, and his gefeoran

uppon heora, and ferdon to þam husbundon, and ofslogon hine binnan his

agenan heorðæ.” It shows how impossible it seemed to a French noble of

that age to strike a blow except on horseback, that Eustace and his

companions mounted their horses at such a moment as this, when one

would have thought that horses were distinctly in the way.

Footnote 404:

Chron. Petrib. 1048. “Forþan Eustatius hæfde gecydd þam cynge þet hit

sceolde beon mare gylt þære burhwaru þonne his. Ac hit næs na swa.” So

Will. Malms. “Inde ad curiam pedem referens, nactusque secretum, suæ

partis patronus assistens, iram Regis in Anglos exacuit.”

Footnote 405:

Herod, vii. 104. ἔπεστι γάρ σφι δεσπότης νόμος, τὸν ὑποδειμαίνουσι

πολλῷ ἔτι μᾶλλον ἢ οἱ σοὶ σέ· ποιεῦσι γῶν τὰ ἂν ἐκεῖνος ἀνώγῃ.

Footnote 406:

Chron. Petrib. 1048. “And wearð se cyng swyþe gram wið þa burhware.”

Footnote 407:

See above, p. 26.

Footnote 408:

“Baldwines mage” says the Worcester Chronicler; Florence (1051) alters

this into “filia.” The Biographer of Eadward, p. 404, says “soror,”

making her Eadward’s niece, which is hard to understand. It is from

this passage that we learn that all this happened just at the very

time of Tostig’s marriage; “Acciderant hæc in ipsis nuptiis filii sui

ducis Tostini.” The title of “Dux” is premature.

Footnote 409:

Chron. Petrib. “And ofsænde se cyng Godwine eorl, and bæd hine faran

into Cent mid unfriða to Dofran.” The full force of the word “unfriða”

may be understood by its being so constantly applied to the Danish

armies and fleets. See vol. i. p. 327. So William of Malmesbury (ii.

199); “Quamvis Rex jussisset illum continuò cum exercitu in Cantiam

proficisci, in Dorobernenses graviter ulturum.”

Footnote 410:

See vol. i. p. 580.

Footnote 411:

Chron. Petrib. “And se eorl nolde na geðwærian þære infare; forþan him

wæs lað to amyrrene his agene folgað.” One might be tempted to believe

that this last word implied some special connexion between Godwine and

Dover, were it not that we directly after read, “on Swegenes eorles

folgoðe,” where it can hardly mean more than that the place was within

his jurisdiction as Earl. The very first entry in Domesday represents

Godwine as receiving a third of the royal revenues in Dover, but this

was of course simply his regular revenue as Earl. The relations of the

townsmen to the Crown are rather minutely described. They held their

privileges by providing twenty ships yearly for fifteen days; each had

a crew of twenty-one men. There is not a word to show that the demands

of Eustace and his followers were other than utterly illegal.

Footnote 412:

I get my speech from William of Malmesbury (ii. 119), whose account is

very clear and full, and thoroughly favourable to Godwine. “Intellexit

vir acrioris ingenii, unius tantùm partis auditis allegationibus, non

debere proferri sententiam. Itaque ... restitit, et quòd omnes

alienigenas apud Regis gratiam invalescere invideret, et quòd

compatriotis amicitiam præstare vellet. Præterea videbatur ejus

responsio in rectitudinem propensior, ut magnates illius castelli

blandè in curiâ Regis de seditione convenirentur; si se possent

explacitare, illæsi abirent; si nequirent, pecuniâ vel corporum suorum

dispendio, Regi cujus pacem infregerant, et Comiti quem læserant,

satisfacerent: iniquum videri ut quos tutari debeas, eos ipse

potissimum inauditos adjudices.” Here are the words which either

tradition put into the mouth of Godwine, or else which a hostile

historian deliberately conceived as most in keeping with his

character. Who would recognize in this assertor of the purest

principles of right the object of the savage invectives of William of

Poitiers?

Footnote 413:

Will. Malms. ii. 199. “Ita tunc discessum, Godwino parvi pendente

Regis furorem quasi momentaneum.” On these occasional fits of wrath on

the part of Eadward, see above, p. 23.

Footnote 414:

The revival of the story about Ælfred and the special part played by

Archbishop Robert comes from the Biographer of Eadward. I shall

discuss this point in Appendix L.

Footnote 415:

The summoning of the Witan is distinctly set forth in the Peterborough

Chronicle; “Ða sende se cyng æftre eallon his witan, and bead heom

cuman to Gleaweceastre neh þære æfter Sc̃a Maria mæssan.” The charge

against Godwine comes from the Life of Eadward, p. 401; “Ergò

perturbato Rege de talibus plus justo, convenerunt de totâ Britanniâ

[did any Scottish or Welsh princes appear?] quique potentes et duces

Glaucestræ regio palatio, ubique in eo querimoniam talium habente,

perlata est in insontem Ducem tanti criminis accusatio.”

Footnote 416:

Richard, the son of Scrob or Scrupe, and son-in-law of Robert the

Deacon (Flor. Wig. 1052), appears in Domesday, 186 _b_. His son

Osbern, of whom we shall hear again, appears repeatedly in Domesday as

a great landowner in Herefordshire and elsewhere. See 176 _b_, 180,

186 _b_, 260.

Footnote 417:

See the entries in the Chronicles, Wig. 1066, Petrib. 1087, 1137. In

all these passages the building of castles is reckoned among the chief

grievances of the reign of the Conqueror and of the anarchy of the

time of Stephen. Compare Giraldus’ description of Ireland, after the

invasions in the time of Henry the Second. (Exp. Hib. ii. 34. vol. v.

p. 865 Dimock); “Insula Hibernica, de mari usque ad mare, ex toto

subacta et _incastellata_.” Cf. ii. 38, 39.

Footnote 418:

On the different developements of fortification in England, see vol.

i. pp. 64, 338. The Norman castle makes the _fifth_ stage.

Footnote 419:

See vol. i. pp. 99–101.

Footnote 420:

I shall have to speak of this destruction of castles in Normandy when

I come to deal with the reign of William in that country. This is the

real cause why Normandy contains so few castles earlier than the

twelfth century. I can see no reason whatever to believe that the

castles of the eleventh century, either in Normandy or in England,

were commonly of wood. The temporary wooden towers which were often

used in the military art of the time, and which sometimes are called

castles, are also sometimes pointedly distinguished from the permanent

stone fortresses. Thus in the Angevin Chronicle in Labbé, i. 286, 287,

we read how in 1025 Count Odo of Chartres (see vol. i. p. 509, and in

the next chapter) besieged the castle which Fulk of Anjou had built as

an ἐπιτειχισμός against Tours (contra civitatem Turonicam firmaverat),

and “turrem _ligneam_ miræ altitudinis super domgionem ipsius castri

erexit.” The donjon itself was surely of stone. We shall find other

evidence of the same kind in the next Chapter. Stone was also fast

coming into use for domestic as well as for military and

ecclesiastical buildings. Avesgaud, Bishop of Le Mans, rebuilt in

stone both the episcopal palace and also a hospital; before him they

had been of wood—“quæ antea ligneæ fuerat, petrinas ... constituit.”

Gest. Ep. Cenom. ap. Mabillon, Vetera Analecta, iii. 300*.

Footnote 421:

The word “castel” evidently appears at this stage to denote some new

thing, quite distinct from the familiar “burh” of earlier times. So

Orderic (511 C), in speaking of the rarity of castles in England

before the Norman Conquest, speaks of the name as something specially

French; “Munitiones (_quas castella Galli nuncupant_) Anglicis

provinciis paucissimæ fuerant.” He adds, “ob hoc Angli, licet

bellicosi fuerint et audaces, ad resistendum tamen inimicis

exstiterant debiliores.”

Footnote 422:

Chron. Petrib. 1048. “þa hæfdon þa _Welisce menn_ gewroht ænne castel

on Herefordscire on Swegenes eorles folgoðe, and wrohton ælc þæra

harme and bismere þæs cynges mannan þær abutan þe hi mihton.” These

Welshmen are undoubtedly Frenchmen (see Earle, p. 345. Lingard, i.

337. Lappenberg, 508); Britons did not build castles, nor were they on

such terms of friendly intercourse with King Eadward. William of

Malmesbury’s misconception of the whole passage (ii. 199) is amusing;

“ut Walenses compescerent qui, tyrannidem in Regem meditantes, oppidum

in pago Herefordensi obfirmaverant, ubi tunc Swanus, unus ex filiis

Godwini, militiæ prætendebat excubias.” This last is simply a

misunderstanding of the words “on Swegenes eorles folgoðe,” which

seems merely to mean “within Swegen’s government.”

Footnote 423:

Beverstone appears in Domesday (163) only as an appendage to the royal

lordship of Berkeley, and is not mentioned as a possession of Godwine.

Otherwise one would have expected to find one of the Earl’s many

houses chosen as the place of meeting. But perhaps the suggestion in

the text may explain matters.

On the other hand the mysterious connexion between Godwine and

Berkeley (see Appendix E) must not be forgotten.

Footnote 424:

See above, p. 104.

Footnote 425:

Chron. Petrib. 1048. “Ða com Godwine eorl and Swegen eorl and Harold

eorl togædere æt Byferesstane and manig mann mid heom, to ðon þæt hi

woldon faran to heora cyne-hlaforde, and to þam witan eallon þe mid

him gegaderode wæron, þæt hi þæs cynges ræd hæfdon, and his fultum,

and ealra witena, hu hi mihton þæs cynges bismer awrecan and ealles

þeodscipes.”

Footnote 426:

Vita Eadw. 401. “Quod ubi per quosdam fideles comperit [Godwinus],

missis legatis, pacem Regis petivit, legem purgandi se de objecto

crimine frustrà prætulit.”

Footnote 427:

Chron. Petrib. “Ða wæron þa Wælisce menn ætforan mid þam cynge, and

forwregdon þa eorlas þæt hi ne moston cuman on his eagon gesihðe,

forðan hi sædon þæt hi woldon cuman þider for þes cynges swicdome.”

Footnote 428:

Vita Eadw. p. 401. “Nam adeo super hujus sceleris fide animum Rex

induxerat ut nec verbum aliquod oblatæ purgationis audire posset.”

Footnote 429:

Chron. Wig. 1052. “Ealle gearwe to wige ongean þone cyng, buton man

ageafe Eustatsius and his men heom to handsceofe, and eac þa

Frencyscan þe _on þan castelle_ wæron.” “The castle” undoubtedly means

Richard’s Castle, as it must mean in the entry of the next year in the

same Chronicle. The Frenchmen in the castle are distinguished from

Eustace and his men. So Lappenberg, 508. Florence (1051) clearly

misunderstood the passage when he translated it “insuper et Nortmannos

et Bononienses qui castellum in Doruverniæ clivo tenuerant.” It shows

the impression which Richard’s Castle had made on men’s mind that it

was known generally as “the castle,” and this reference by the

Worcester Chronicler to a part of the story which he has not himself

given at length is a strong confirmation of the truth of the

Peterborough narrative.

Footnote 430:

Rog. Wend. iii. 294. “Juraverunt super majus altare, quod, si Rex

leges et libertates jam dictas concedere diffugeret, ipsi ei guerram

tamdiu moverent et ab ejus fidelitate se subtraherent.”

Footnote 431:

Flor. Wig. 1051. “Ob id autem ad tempus Rex perterritus, et in angore

magno constitutus, quid ageret ignorabat penitus. Sed ubi exercitum

Comitum Leofrici, Siwardi, et Radulfi adventare comperit, se

nullatenus Eustatium aliosque requisitos traditurum constanter

respondit.”

Footnote 432:

See vol. i. p. 534 et seqq.

Footnote 433:

Chron. Wig. 1052. “Wurdan þa ealle swa anræde mid þam cynge, þæt hy

woldon Godwines fyrde gesecan, gif se cyng þæt wolde.”

Footnote 434:

Chron. Petrib. 1048. “And wæs þam eorle Godwine and his sunan gecydd,

þæt se cyng and þa menn þe mid him wæron woldon rædon on hi. And hi

trymedon gefæstlice ongean, þæh him lað wære þæt hi ongean heora

_cyne-hlaford_ standan sceoldon.”

Footnote 435:

See the splendid panegyric of William of Malmesbury on this region in

the Gesta Pontificum (Scriptt. p. Bedam, 161). He especially speaks of

the abundance of the vineyards and the excellence of the wine, which

was not sour, as seemingly other English wine was, but as good as that

of France. No wine is now grown in the vale of Severn, but there is

excellent cider and perry.

On the prospect here spoken of see Sydney Smith’s Sketches of Moral

Philosophy, p. 218.

Footnote 436:

See above, p. 110.

Footnote 437:

For descriptions of these two remarkable monuments of primæval times,

by Dr. Thurnam and Professor C. C. Babington, see the Archæological

Journal, vol. xi. (1854), pp. 315, 328.

Footnote 438:

Childe Harold, ii. 84;

“Spirit of Freedom, when on Phyle’s brow

Thou sat’st with Thrasybulus and his train,” &c.

Footnote 439:

See vol. i. p. 539.

Footnote 440: