diff options
| author | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 05:16:28 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 05:16:28 -0700 |
| commit | 18e02a89ba161f1b813e44cb44260255226c2f13 (patch) | |
| tree | 41ed83e47860ed40f339e608a2007df370b691e1 /1066-h | |
Diffstat (limited to '1066-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 1066-h/1066-h.htm | 6277 |
1 files changed, 6277 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/1066-h/1066-h.htm b/1066-h/1066-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..291476a --- /dev/null +++ b/1066-h/1066-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,6277 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html + PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> +<head> +<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII" /> +<title>William the Conqueror, by Edward Augustus Freeman</title> + <style type="text/css"> +/*<![CDATA[ XML blockout */ +<!-- + P { margin-top: .75em; + margin-bottom: .75em; + } + P.gutsumm { margin-left: 5%;} + P.poetry {margin-left: 3%; } + .GutSmall { font-size: 0.7em; } + H1, H2 { + text-align: center; + margin-top: 2em; + margin-bottom: 2em; + } + H3, H4, H5 { + text-align: center; + margin-top: 1em; + margin-bottom: 1em; + } + BODY{margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%; + } + table { border-collapse: collapse; } +table {margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto;} + td { vertical-align: top; border: 1px solid black;} + td p { margin: 0.2em; } + .blkquot {margin-left: 4em; margin-right: 4em;} /* block indent */ + + .smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} + + .pagenum {position: absolute; + left: 92%; + font-size: small; + text-align: right; + font-weight: normal; + color: gray; + } + img { border: none; } + img.dc { float: left; width: 50px; height: 50px; } + p.gutindent { margin-left: 2em; } + div.gapspace { height: 0.8em; } + div.gapline { height: 0.8em; width: 100%; border-top: 1px solid;} + div.gapmediumline { height: 0.3em; width: 40%; margin-left:30%; + border-top: 1px solid; } + div.gapmediumdoubleline { height: 0.3em; width: 40%; margin-left:30%; + border-top: 1px solid; border-bottom: 1px solid;} + div.gapshortdoubleline { height: 0.3em; width: 20%; + margin-left: 40%; border-top: 1px solid; + border-bottom: 1px solid; } + div.gapdoubleline { height: 0.3em; width: 50%; + margin-left: 25%; border-top: 1px solid; + border-bottom: 1px solid;} + div.gapshortline { height: 0.3em; width: 20%; margin-left:40%; + border-top: 1px solid; } + .citation {vertical-align: super; + font-size: .8em; + text-decoration: none;} + img.floatleft { float: left; + margin-right: 1em; + margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; } + img.floatright { float: right; + margin-left: 1em; margin-top: 0.5em; + margin-bottom: 0.5em; } + img.clearcenter {display: block; + margin-left: auto; + margin-right: auto; margin-top: 0.5em; + margin-bottom: 0.5em} + --> + /* XML end ]]>*/ + </style> +</head> +<body> +<pre> + +The Project Gutenberg eBook, William the Conqueror, by Edward Augustus +Freeman + + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + + + + +Title: William the Conqueror + + +Author: Edward Augustus Freeman + + + +Release Date: March 20, 2013 [eBook #1066] +[This file was first posted on February 12, 1998] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ISO-646-US (US-ASCII) + + +***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WILLIAM THE CONQUEROR*** +</pre> +<p>Transcribed from the 1913 Macmillan and Co. edition by David +Price, email ccx074@pglaf.org</p> +<h1>WILLIAM THE CONQUEROR</h1> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p style="text-align: center"><span class="GutSmall">BY</span><br +/> +EDWARD A. FREEMAN<br /> +<span class="GutSmall">D.C.L., LL.D.</span></p> +<p style="text-align: center"><span class="GutSmall">REGIUS +PROFESSOR OF MODERN HISTORY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF +OXFORD</span></p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p style="text-align: center">MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED<br /> +ST. MARTIN’S SQUARE, LONDON</p> +<p style="text-align: center">1913</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p style="text-align: center"><span +class="GutSmall">COPYRIGHT</span></p> +<p style="text-align: center"><i>First Edition printed March</i> +1888.<br /> +<i>Reprinted July</i> 1888, 1890, 1894, 1898, 1903, 1907, +1913</p> +<h2>PREFACE</h2> +<p><span class="smcap">This</span> small volume, written as the +first of a series, is meant to fill quite another place from the +<i>Short History of the Norman Conquest</i>, by the same +author. That was a narrative of events reaching over a +considerable time. This is the portrait of a man in his +personal character, a man whose life takes up only a part of the +time treated of in the other work. We have now to look on +William as one who, though stranger and conqueror, is yet +worthily entitled to a place on the list of English +statesmen. There is perhaps no man before or after him +whose personal character and personal will have had so direct an +effect on the course which the laws and constitution of England +have taken since his time. Norman as a Conqueror, as a +statesman he is English, and, on this side of him at least, he +worthily begins the series.</p> +<p>16 <span class="smcap">St. Giles’</span>, <span +class="smcap">Oxford</span>,<br /> + 6<i>th</i> <i>February</i> +1888.</p> +<h2>CONTENTS</h2> +<table> +<tr> +<td><p> </p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span +class="GutSmall">PAGE</span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan="2"><p style="text-align: center">CHAPTER I</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">Introduction</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page1">1</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan="2"><p style="text-align: center">CHAPTER II</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">The Early Years of William</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page6">6</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan="2"><p style="text-align: center">CHAPTER III</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">William’s First Visit to +England</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page26">26</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan="2"><p style="text-align: center">CHAPTER IV</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">The Reign of William in +Normandy</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page34">34</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan="2"><p style="text-align: center">CHAPTER V</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">Harold’s Oath to +William</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page51">51</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan="2"><p style="text-align: center">CHAPTER VI</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">The Negotiations of Duke +William</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page63">63</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan="2"><p style="text-align: center">CHAPTER VII</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">William’s Invasion of +England</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page82">82</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan="2"><p style="text-align: center">CHAPTER VIII</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">The Conquest of England</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page100">100</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan="2"><p style="text-align: center">CHAPTER IX</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">The Settlement of England</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page122">122</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td colspan="2"><p style="text-align: center">CHAPTER X</p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">The Revolts against William</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page147">147</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p style="text-align: center">CHAPTER XI</p> +</td> +<td><p> </p> +</td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><p><span class="smcap">The Last Years of William</span></p> +</td> +<td><p style="text-align: right"><span class="indexpageno"><a +href="#page181">181</a></span></p> +</td> +</tr> +</table> +<h2><a name="page1"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 1</span>CHAPTER +I.<br /> +<span class="GutSmall">INTRODUCTION.</span></h2> +<p><span class="smcap">The</span> history of England, like the +land and its people, has been specially insular, and yet no land +has undergone deeper influences from without. No land has +owed more than England to the personal action of men not of +native birth. Britain was truly called another world, in +opposition to the world of the European mainland, the world of +Rome. In every age the history of Britain is the history of +an island, of an island great enough to form a world of +itself. In speaking of Celts or Teutons in Britain, we are +speaking, not simply of Celts and Teutons, but of Celts and +Teutons parted from their kinsfolk on the mainland, and brought +under the common influences of an island world. The land +has seen several settlements from outside, but the settlers have +always been brought under the spell of their insular +position. Whenever settlement has not meant displacement, +the new comers have been assimilated by the existing people of +the land. When it has meant displacement, they have still +become islanders, marked off from those whom they left behind by +characteristics which were the direct result of settlement in an +island world.</p> +<p>The history of Britain then, and specially the history of +England, has been largely a history of elements absorbed and +assimilated from without. But each of those elements has +done somewhat to modify the mass into which it was +absorbed. The English land and nation are not as they might +have been if they had never in later times absorbed the Fleming, +the French Huguenot, the German Palatine. Still less are +they as they might have been, if they had not in earlier times +absorbed the greater elements of the Dane and the Norman. +Both were assimilated; but both modified the character and +destiny of the people into whose substance they were +absorbed. The conquerors from Normandy were silently and +peacefully lost in the greater mass of the English people; still +we can never be as if the Norman had never come among us. +We ever bear about us the signs of his presence. Our +colonists have carried those signs with them into distant lands, +to remind men that settlers in America and Australia came from a +land which the Norman once entered as a conqueror. But that +those signs of his presence hold the place which they do hold in +our mixed political being, that, badges of conquest as they are, +no one feels them to be badges of conquest—all this comes +of the fact that, if the Norman came as a conqueror, he came as a +conqueror of a special, perhaps almost of an unique kind. +The Norman Conquest of England has, in its nature and in its +results, no exact parallel in history. And that it has no +exact parallel in history is largely owing to the character and +position of the man who wrought it. That the history of +England for the last eight hundred years has been what it has +been has largely come of the personal character of a single +man. That we are what we are to this day largely comes of +the fact that there was a moment when our national destiny might +be said to hang on the will of a single man, and that that man +was William, surnamed at different stages of his life and memory, +the Bastard, the Conqueror, and the Great.</p> +<p>With perfect fitness then does William the Norman, William the +Norman Conqueror of England, take his place in a series of +English statesmen. That so it should be is characteristic +of English history. Our history has been largely wrought +for us by men who have come in from without, sometimes as +conquerors, sometimes as the opposite of conquerors; but in +whatever character they came, they had to put on the character of +Englishmen, and to make their work an English work. From +whatever land they came, on whatever mission they came, as +statesmen they were English. William, the greatest of his +class, is still but a member of a class. Along with him we +must reckon a crowd of kings, bishops, and high officials in many +ages of our history. Theodore of Tarsus and Cnut of +Denmark, Lanfranc of Pavia and Anselm of Aosta, Randolf Flambard +and Roger of Salisbury, Henry of Anjou and Simon of Montfort, are +all written on a list of which William is but the foremost. +The largest number come in William’s own generation and in +the generations just before and after it. But the breed of +England’s adopted children and rulers never died out. +The name of William the Deliverer stands, if not beside that of +his namesake the Conqueror, yet surely alongside of the lawgiver +from Anjou. And we count among the later worthies of +England not a few men sprung from other lands, who did and are +doing their work among us, and who, as statesmen at least, must +count as English. As we look along the whole line, even +among the conquering kings and their immediate instruments, their +work never takes the shape of the rooting up of the earlier +institutions of the land. Those institutions are modified, +sometimes silently by the mere growth of events, sometimes +formally and of set purpose. Old institutions get new +names; new institutions are set up alongside of them. But +the old ones are never swept away; they sometimes die out; they +are never abolished. This comes largely of the absorbing +and assimilating power of the island world. But it comes no +less of personal character and personal circumstances, and +pre-eminently of the personal character of the Norman Conqueror +and of the circumstances in which he found himself.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>Our special business now is with the personal acts and +character of William, and above all with his acts and character +as an English statesman. But the English reign of William +followed on his earlier Norman reign, and its character was +largely the result of his earlier Norman reign. A man of +the highest natural gifts, he had gone through such a schooling +from his childhood upwards as falls to the lot of few +princes. Before he undertook the conquest of England, he +had in some sort to work the conquest of Normandy. Of the +ordinary work of a sovereign in a warlike age, the defence of his +own land, the annexation of other lands, William had his full +share. With the land of his overlord he had dealings of the +most opposite kinds. He had to call in the help of the +French king to put down rebellion in the Norman duchy, and he had +to drive back more than one invasion of the French king at the +head of an united Norman people. He added Domfront and +Maine to his dominions, and the conquest of Maine, the work as +much of statesmanship as of warfare, was the rehearsal of the +conquest of England. There, under circumstances strangely +like those of England, he learned his trade as conqueror, he +learned to practise on a narrower field the same arts which he +afterwards practised on a wider. But after all, +William’s own duchy was his special school; it was his life +in his own duchy which specially helped to make him what he +was. Surrounded by trials and difficulties almost from his +cradle, he early learned the art of enduring trials and +overcoming difficulties; he learned how to deal with men; he +learned when to smite and when to spare; and it is not a little +to his honour that, in the long course of such a reign as his, he +almost always showed himself far more ready to spare than to +smite.</p> +<p>Before then we can look at William as an English statesman, we +must first look on him in the land in which he learned the art of +statesmanship. We must see how one who started with all the +disadvantages which are implied in his earlier surname of the +Bastard came to win and to deserve his later surnames of the +Conqueror and the Great.</p> +<h2><a name="page6"></a><span class="pagenum">p. 6</span>CHAPTER +II.<br /> +<span class="GutSmall">THE EARLY YEARS OF WILLIAM.</span><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">A.D. 1028–1051.</span></h2> +<p><span class="smcap">If</span> William’s early reign in +Normandy was his time of schooling for his later reign in +England, his school was a stern one, and his schooling began +early. His nominal reign began at the age of seven years, +and his personal influence on events began long before he had +reached the usual years of discretion. And the events of +his minority might well harden him, while they could not corrupt +him in the way in which so many princes have been +corrupted. His whole position, political and personal, +could not fail to have its effect in forming the man. He +was Duke of the Normans, sixth in succession from Rolf, the +founder of the Norman state. At the time of his accession, +rather more than a hundred and ten years had passed since +plunderers, occasionally settlers, from Scandinavia, had changed +into acknowledged members of the Western or Karolingian +kingdom. The Northmen, changed, name and thing, into +<i>Normans</i>, were now in all things members of the Christian +and French-speaking world. But French as the Normans of +William’s day had become, their relation to the kings and +people of France was not a friendly one. At the time of the +settlement of Rolf, the western kingdom of the Franks had not yet +finally passed to the <i>Duces Francorum</i> at Paris; Rolf +became the man of the Karolingian king at Laon. France and +Normandy were two great duchies, each owning a precarious +supremacy in the king of the West-Franks. On the one hand, +Normandy had been called into being by a frightful dismemberment +of the French duchy, from which the original Norman settlement +had been cut off. France had lost in Rouen one of her +greatest cities, and she was cut off from the sea and from the +lower course of her own river. On the other hand, the +French and the Norman dukes had found their interest in a close +alliance; Norman support had done much to transfer the crown from +Laon to Paris, and to make the <i>Dux Francorum</i> and the +<i>Rex Francorum</i> the same person. It was the adoption +of the French speech and manners by the Normans, and their steady +alliance with the French dukes, which finally determined that the +ruling element in Gaul should be Romance and not Teutonic, and +that, of its Romance elements, it should be French and not +Aquitanian. If the creation of Normandy had done much to +weaken France as a duchy, it had done not a little towards the +making of France as a kingdom. Laon and its crown, the +undefined influence that went with the crown, the prospect of +future advance to the south, had been bought by the loss of Rouen +and of the mouth of the Seine.</p> +<p>There was much therefore at the time of William’s +accession to keep the French kings and the Norman dukes on +friendly terms. The old alliance had been strengthened by +recent good offices. The reigning king, Henry the First, +owed his crown to the help of William’s father +Robert. On the other hand, the original ground of the +alliance, mutual support against the Karolingian king, had passed +away. A King of the French reigning at Paris was more +likely to remember what the Normans had cost him as duke than +what they had done for him as king. And the alliance was +only an alliance of princes. The mutual dislike between the +people of the two countries was strong. The Normans had +learned French ways, but French and Normans had not become +countrymen. And, as the fame of Normandy grew, jealousy was +doubtless mingled with dislike. William, in short, +inherited a very doubtful and dangerous state of relations +towards the king who was at once his chief neighbour and his +overlord.</p> +<p>More doubtful and dangerous still were the relations which the +young duke inherited towards the people of his own duchy and the +kinsfolk of his own house. William was not as yet the Great +or the Conqueror, but he was the Bastard from the +beginning. There was then no generally received doctrine as +to the succession to kingdoms and duchies. Everywhere a +single kingly or princely house supplied, as a rule, candidates +for the succession. Everywhere, even where the elective +doctrine was strong, a full-grown son was always likely to +succeed his father. The growth of feudal notions too had +greatly strengthened the hereditary principle. Still no +rule had anywhere been laid down for cases where the late prince +had not left a full-grown son. The question as to +legitimate birth was equally unsettled. Irregular unions of +all kinds, though condemned by the Church, were tolerated in +practice, and were nowhere more common than among the Norman +dukes. In truth the feeling of the kingliness of the stock, +the doctrine that the king should be the son of a king, is better +satisfied by the succession of the late king’s bastard son +than by sending for some distant kinsman, claiming perhaps only +through females. Still bastardy, if it was often convenient +to forget it, could always be turned against a man. The +succession of a bastard was never likely to be quite undisputed +or his reign to be quite undisturbed.</p> +<p>Now William succeeded to his duchy under the double +disadvantage of being at once bastard and minor. He was +born at Falaise in 1027 or 1028, being the son of Robert, +afterwards duke, but then only Count of Hiesmois, by Herleva, +commonly called Arletta, the daughter of Fulbert the +tanner. There was no pretence of marriage between his +parents; yet his father, when he designed William to succeed him, +might have made him legitimate, as some of his predecessors had +been made, by a marriage with his mother. In 1028 Robert +succeeded his brother Richard in the duchy. In 1034 or 1035 +he determined to go on pilgrimage to Jerusalem. He called +on his barons to swear allegiance to his bastard of seven years +old as his successor in case he never came back. Their wise +counsel to stay at home, to look after his dominions and to raise +up lawful heirs, was unheeded. Robert carried his +point. The succession of young William was accepted by the +Norman nobles, and was confirmed by the overlord Henry King of +the French. The arrangement soon took effect. Robert +died on his way back before the year 1035 was out, and his son +began, in name at least, his reign of fifty-two years over the +Norman duchy.</p> +<p>The succession of one who was at once bastard and minor could +happen only when no one else had a distinctly better claim +William could never have held his ground for a moment against a +brother of his father of full age and undoubted legitimacy. +But among the living descendants of former dukes some were +themselves of doubtful legitimacy, some were shut out by their +profession as churchmen, some claimed only through females. +Robert had indeed two half-brothers, but they were young and +their legitimacy was disputed; he had an uncle, Robert Archbishop +of Rouen, who had been legitimated by the later marriage of his +parents. The rival who in the end gave William most trouble +was his cousin Guy of Burgundy, son of a daughter of his +grandfather Richard the Good. Though William’s +succession was not liked, no one of these candidates was +generally preferred to him. He therefore succeeded; but the +first twelve years of his reign were spent in the revolts and +conspiracies of unruly nobles, who hated the young duke as the +one representative of law and order, and who were not eager to +set any one in his place who might be better able to enforce +them.</p> +<p>Nobility, so variously defined in different lands, in Normandy +took in two classes of men. All were noble who had any +kindred or affinity, legitimate or otherwise, with the ducal +house. The natural children of Richard the Fearless were +legitimated by his marriage with their mother Gunnor, and many of +the great houses of Normandy sprang from her brothers and +sisters. The mother of William received no such exaltation +as this. Besides her son, she had borne to Robert a +daughter Adelaide, and, after Robert’s death, she married a +Norman knight named Herlwin of Conteville. To him, besides +a daughter, she bore two sons, Ode and Robert. They rose to +high posts in Church and State, and played an important part in +their half-brother’s history. Besides men whose +nobility was of this kind, there were also Norman houses whose +privileges were older than the amours or marriages of any duke, +houses whose greatness was as old as the settlement of Rolf, as +old that is as the ducal power itself. The great men of +both these classes were alike hard to control. A Norman +baron of this age was well employed when he was merely rebelling +against his prince or waging private war against a fellow +baron. What specially marks the time is the frequency of +treacherous murders wrought by men of the highest rank, often on +harmless neighbours or unsuspecting guests. But victims +were also found among those guardians of the young duke whose +faithful discharge of their duties shows that the Norman nobility +was not wholly corrupt. One indeed was a foreign prince, +Alan Count of the Bretons, a grandson of Richard the Fearless +through a daughter. Two others, the seneschal Osbern and +Gilbert Count of Eu, were irregular kinsmen of the duke. +All these were murdered, the Breton count by poison. Such a +childhood as this made William play the man while he was still a +child. The helpless boy had to seek for support of some +kind. He got together the chief men of his duchy, and took +a new guardian by their advice. But it marks the state of +things that the new guardian was one of the murderers of those +whom he succeeded. This was Ralph of Wacey, son of +William’s great-uncle, Archbishop Robert. Murderer as +he was, he seems to have discharged his duty faithfully. +There are men who are careless of general moral obligations, but +who will strictly carry out any charge which appeals to personal +honour. Anyhow Ralph’s guardianship brought with it a +certain amount of calm. But men, high in the young +duke’s favour, were still plotting against him, and they +presently began to plot, not only against their prince but +against their country. The disaffected nobles of Normandy +sought for a helper against young William in his lord King Henry +of Paris.</p> +<p>The art of diplomacy had never altogether slumbered since much +earlier times. The king who owed his crown to +William’s father, and who could have no ground of offence +against William himself, easily found good pretexts for meddling +in Norman affairs. It was not unnatural in the King of the +French to wish to win back a sea-board which had been given up +more than a hundred years before to an alien power, even though +that power had, for much more than half of that time, acted more +than a friendly part towards France. It was not unnatural +that the French people should cherish a strong national dislike +to the Normans and a strong wish that Rouen should again be a +French city. But such motives were not openly avowed then +any more than now. The alleged ground was quite +different. The counts of Chartres were troublesome +neighbours to the duchy, and the castle of Tillières had +been built as a defence against them. An advance of the +King’s dominions had made Tillières a neighbour of +France, and, as a neighbour, it was said to be a standing +menace. The King of the French, acting in concert with the +disaffected party in Normandy, was a dangerous enemy, and the +young Duke and his counsellors determined to give up +Tillières. Now comes the first distinct exercise of +William’s personal will. We are without exact dates, +but the time can be hardly later than 1040, when William was from +twelve to thirteen years old. At his special request, the +defender of Tillières, Gilbert Crispin, who at first held +out against French and Normans alike, gave up the castle to +Henry. The castle was burned; the King promised not to +repair it for four years. Yet he is said to have entered +Normandy, to have laid waste William’s native district of +Hiesmois, to have supplied a French garrison to a Norman rebel +named Thurstan, who held the castle of Falaise against the Duke, +and to have ended by restoring Tillières as a menace +against Normandy. And now the boy whose destiny had made +him so early a leader of men had to bear his first arms against +the fortress which looked down on his birth-place. Thurstan +surrendered and went into banishment. William could set +down his own Falaise as the first of a long list of towns and +castles which he knew how to win without shedding of blood.</p> +<p>When we next see William’s distinct personal action, he +is still young, but no longer a child or even a boy. At +nineteen or thereabouts he is a wise and valiant man, and his +valour and wisdom are tried to the uttermost. A few years +of comparative quiet were chiefly occupied, as a quiet time in +those days commonly was, with ecclesiastical affairs. One +of these specially illustrates the state of things with which +William had to deal. In 1042, when the Duke was about +fourteen, Normandy adopted the Truce of God in its later +shape. It no longer attempted to establish universal peace; +it satisfied itself with forbidding, under the strongest +ecclesiastical censures, all private war and violence of any kind +on certain days of the week. Legislation of this kind has +two sides. It was an immediate gain if peace was really +enforced for four days in the week; but that which was not +forbidden on the other three could no longer be denounced as in +itself evil. We are told that in no land was the Truce more +strictly observed than in Normandy. But we may be sure +that, when William was in the fulness of his power, the stern +weight of the ducal arm was exerted to enforce peace on Mondays +and Tuesdays as well as on Thursdays and Fridays.</p> +<p>It was in the year 1047 that William’s authority was +most dangerously threatened and that he was first called on to +show in all their fulness the powers that were in him. He +who was to be conqueror of Maine and conqueror of England was +first to be conqueror of his own duchy. The revolt of a +large part of the country, contrasted with the firm loyalty of +another part, throws a most instructive light on the internal +state of the duchy. There was, as there still is, a line of +severance between the districts which formed the first grant to +Rolf and those which were afterwards added. In these last a +lingering remnant of old Teutonic life had been called into fresh +strength by new settlements from Scandinavia. At the +beginning of the reign of Richard the Fearless, Rouen, the +French-speaking city, is emphatically contrasted with Bayeux, the +once Saxon city and land, now the headquarters of the Danish +speech. At that stage the Danish party was distinctly a +heathen party. We are not told whether Danish was still +spoken so late as the time of William’s youth. We can +hardly believe that the Scandinavian gods still kept any avowed +worshippers. But the geographical limits of the revolt +exactly fall in with the boundary which had once divided French +and Danish speech, Christian and heathen worship. There was +a wide difference in feeling on the two sides of the Dive. +The older Norman settlements, now thoroughly French in tongue and +manners, stuck faithfully to the Duke; the lands to the west rose +against him. Rouen and Evreux were firmly loyal to William; +Saxon Bayeux and Danish Coutances were the headquarters of his +enemies.</p> +<p>When the geographical division took this shape, we are +surprised at the candidate for the duchy who was put forward by +the rebels. William was a Norman born and bred; his rival +was in every sense a Frenchman. This was William’s +cousin Guy of Burgundy, whose connexion with the ducal house was +only by the spindle-side. But his descent was of +uncontested legitimacy, which gave him an excuse for claiming the +duchy in opposition to the bastard grandson of the tanner. +By William he had been enriched with great possessions, among +which was the island fortress of Brionne in the Risle. The +real object of the revolt was the partition of the duchy. +William was to be dispossessed; Guy was to be duke in the lands +east of Dive; the great lords of Western Normandy were to be left +independent. To this end the lords of the Bessin and the +Côtentin revolted, their leader being Neal, Viscount of +Saint-Sauveur in the Côtentin. We are told that the +mass of the people everywhere wished well to their duke; in the +common sovereign lay their only chance of protection against +their immediate lords. But the lords had armed force of the +land at their bidding. They first tried to slay or seize +the Duke himself, who chanced to be in the midst of them at +Valognes. He escaped; we hear a stirring tale of his +headlong ride from Valognes to Falaise. Safe among his own +people, he planned his course of action. He first sought +help of the man who could give him most help, but who had most +wronged him. He went into France; he saw King Henry at +Poissy, and the King engaged to bring a French force to +William’s help under his own command.</p> +<p>This time Henry kept his promise. The dismemberment of +Normandy might have been profitable to France by weakening the +power which had become so special an object of French jealousy; +but with a king the common interest of princes against rebellious +barons came first. Henry came with a French army, and +fought well for his ally on the field of +Val-ès-dunes. Now came the Conqueror’s first +battle, a tourney of horsemen on an open table-land just within +the land of the rebels between Caen and Mezidon. The young +duke fought well and manfully; but the Norman writers allow that +it was French help that gained him the victory. Yet one of +the many anecdotes of the battle points to a source of strength +which was always ready to tell for any lord against rebellious +vassals. One of the leaders of the revolt, Ralph of Tesson, +struck with remorse and stirred by the prayers of his knights, +joined the Duke just before the battle. He had sworn to +smite William wherever he found him, and he fulfilled his oath by +giving the Duke a harmless blow with his glove. How far an +oath to do an unlawful act is binding is a question which came up +again at another stage of William’s life.</p> +<p>The victory at Val-ès-dunes was decisive, and the +French King, whose help had done so much to win it, left William +to follow it up. He met with but little resistance except +at the stronghold of Brionne. Guy himself vanishes from +Norman history. William had now conquered his own duchy, +and conquered it by foreign help. For the rest of his +Norman reign he had often to strive with enemies at home, but he +had never to put down such a rebellion again as that of the lords +of western Normandy. That western Normandy, the truest +Normandy, had to yield to the more thoroughly Romanized lands to +the east. The difference between them never again takes a +political shape. William was now lord of all Normandy, and +able to put down all later disturbers of the peace. His +real reign now begins; from the age of nineteen or twenty, his +acts are his own. According to his abiding practice, he +showed himself a merciful conqueror. Through his whole +reign he shows a distinct unwillingness to take human life except +in fair fighting on the battle-field. No blood was shed +after the victory of Val-ès-dunes; one rebel died in +bonds; the others underwent no harder punishment than payment of +fines, giving of hostages, and destruction of their +castles. These castles were not as yet the vast and +elaborate structures which arose in after days. A single +strong square tower, or even a defence of wood on a steep mound +surrounded by a ditch, was enough to make its owner +dangerous. The possession of these strongholds made every +baron able at once to defy his prince and to make himself a +scourge to his neighbours. Every season of anarchy is +marked by the building of castles; every return of order brings +with it their overthrow as a necessary condition of peace.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>Thus, in his lonely and troubled childhood, William had been +schooled for the rule of men. He had now, in the rule of a +smaller dominion, in warfare and conquest on a smaller scale, to +be schooled for the conquest and the rule of a greater +dominion. William had the gifts of a born ruler, and he was +in no way disposed to abuse them. We know his rule in +Normandy only through the language of panegyric; but the facts +speak for themselves. He made Normandy peaceful and +flourishing, more peaceful and flourishing perhaps than any other +state of the European mainland. He is set before us as in +everything a wise and beneficent ruler, the protector of the poor +and helpless, the patron of commerce and of all that might profit +his dominions. For defensive wars, for wars waged as the +faithful man of his overlord, we cannot blame him. But his +main duty lay at home. He still had revolts to put down, +and he put them down. But to put them down was the first of +good works. He had to keep the peace of the land, to put +some cheek on the unruly wills of those turbulent barons on whom +only an arm like his could put any cheek. He had, in the +language of his day, to do justice, to visit wrong with sure and +speedy punishment, whoever was the wrong-doer. If a ruler +did this first of duties well, much was easily forgiven him in +other ways. But William had as yet little to be +forgiven. Throughout life he steadily practised some +unusual virtues. His strict attention to religion was +always marked. And his religion was not that mere lavish +bounty to the Church which was consistent with any amount of +cruelty or license. William’s religion really +influenced his life, public and private. He set an unusual +example of a princely household governed according to the rules +of morality, and he dealt with ecclesiastical matters in the +spirit of a true reformer. He did not, like so many princes +of his age, make ecclesiastical preferments a source of corrupt +gain, but promoted good men from all quarters. His own +education is not likely to have received much attention; it is +not clear whether he had mastered the rarer art of writing or the +more usual one of reading; but both his promotion of learned +churchmen and the care given to the education of some of his +children show that he at least valued the best attainments of his +time. Had William’s whole life been spent in the +duties of a Norman duke, ruling his duchy wisely, defending it +manfully, the world might never have known him for one of its +foremost men, but his life on that narrower field would have been +useful and honourable almost without a drawback. It was the +fatal temptation of princes, the temptation to territorial +aggrandizement, which enabled him fully to show the powers that +were in him, but which at the same time led to his moral +degradation. The defender of his own land became the +invader of other lands, and the invader could not fail often to +sink into the oppressor. Each step in his career as +Conqueror was a step downwards. Maine was a neighbouring +land, a land of the same speech, a land which, if the feelings of +the time could have allowed a willing union, would certainly have +lost nothing by an union with Normandy. England, a land +apart, a land of speech, laws, and feelings, utterly unlike those +of any part of Gaul, was in another case. There the +Conqueror was driven to be the oppressor. Wrong, as ever, +was punished by leading to further wrong.</p> +<p>With the two fields, nearer and more distant, narrower and +wider, on which William was to appear as Conqueror he has as yet +nothing to do. It is vain to guess at what moment the +thought of the English succession may have entered his mind or +that of his advisers. When William began his real reign +after Val-ès-dunes, Norman influence was high in +England. Edward the Confessor had spent his youth among his +Norman kinsfolk; he loved Norman ways and the company of Normans +and other men of French speech. Strangers from the favoured +lands held endless posts in Church and State; above all, Robert +of Jumièges, first Bishop of London and then Archbishop of +Canterbury, was the King’s special favourite and +adviser. These men may have suggested the thought of +William’s succession very early. On the other hand, +at this time it was by no means clear that Edward might not leave +a son of his own. He had been only a few years married, and +his alleged vow of chastity is very doubtful. +William’s claim was of the flimsiest kind. By English +custom the king was chosen out of a single kingly house, and only +those who were descended from kings in the male line were counted +as members of that house. William was not descended, even +in the female line, from any English king; his whole kindred with +Edward was that Edward’s mother Emma, a daughter of Richard +the Fearless, was William’s great-aunt. Such a +kindred, to say nothing of William’s bastardy, could give +no right to the crown according to any doctrine of succession +that ever was heard of. It could at most point him out as a +candidate for adoption, in case the reigning king should be +disposed and allowed to choose his successor. William or +his advisers may have begun to weigh this chance very early; but +all that is really certain is that William was a friend and +favourite of his elder kinsman, and that events finally brought +his succession to the English crown within the range of things +that might be.</p> +<p>But, before this, William was to show himself as a warrior +beyond the bounds of his own duchy, and to take seizin, as it +were, of his great continental conquest. William’s +first war out of Normandy was waged in common with King Henry +against Geoffrey Martel Count of Anjou, and waged on the side of +Maine. William undoubtedly owed a debt of gratitude to his +overlord for good help given at Val-ès-dunes, and excuses +were never lacking for a quarrel between Anjou and +Normandy. Both powers asserted rights over the intermediate +land of Maine. In 1048 we find William giving help to Henry +in a war with Anjou, and we hear wonderful but vague tales of his +exploits. The really instructive part of the story deals +with two border fortresses on the march of Normandy and +Maine. Alençon lay on the Norman side of the Sarthe; +but it was disloyal to Normandy. Brionne was still holding +out for Guy of Burgundy. The town was a lordship of the +house of Bellême, a house renowned for power and +wickedness, and which, as holding great possessions alike of +Normandy and of France, ranked rather with princes than with +ordinary nobles. The story went that William Talvas, lord +of Bellême, one of the fiercest of his race, had cursed +William in his cradle, as one by whom he and his should be +brought to shame. Such a tale set forth the noblest side of +William’s character, as the man who did something to put +down such enemies of mankind as he who cursed him. The +possessions of William Talvas passed through his daughter Mabel +to Roger of Montgomery, a man who plays a great part in +William’s history; but it is the disloyalty of the +burghers, not of their lord, of which we hear just now. +They willingly admitted an Angevin garrison. William in +return laid siege to Domfront on the Varenne, a strong castle +which was then an outpost of Maine against Normandy. A long +skirmishing warfare, in which William won for himself a name by +deeds of personal prowess, went on during the autumn and winter +(1048–49). One tale specially illustrates more than +one point in the feelings of the time. The two princes, +William and Geoffrey, give a mutual challenge; each gives the +other notice of the garb and shield that he will wear that he may +not be mistaken. The spirit of knight-errantry was coming +in, and we see that William himself in his younger days was +touched by it. But we see also that coat-armour was as yet +unknown. Geoffrey and his host, so the Normans say, shrink +from the challenge and decamp in the night, leaving the way open +for a sudden march upon Alençon. The disloyal +burghers received the duke with mockery of his birth. They +hung out skins, and shouted, “Hides for the +Tanner.” Personal insult is always hard for princes +to bear, and the wrath of William was stirred up to a pitch which +made him for once depart from his usual moderation towards +conquered enemies. He swore that the men who had jeered at +him should be dealt with like a tree whose branches are cut off +with the pollarding-knife. The town was taken by assault, +and William kept his oath. The castle held out; the hands +and feet of thirty-two pollarded burghers of Alençon were +thrown over its walls, and the threat implied drove the garrison +to surrender on promise of safety for life and limb. The +defenders of Domfront, struck with fear, surrendered also, and +kept their arms as well as their lives and limbs. William +had thus won back his own rebellious town, and had enlarged his +borders by his first conquest. He went farther south, and +fortified another castle at Ambrières; but +Ambrières was only a temporary conquest. Domfront +has ever since been counted as part of Normandy. But, as +ecclesiastical divisions commonly preserve the secular divisions +of an earlier time, Domfront remained down to the great French +Revolution in the spiritual jurisdiction of the bishops of Le +Mans.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>William had now shown himself in Maine as conqueror, and he +was before long to show himself in England, though not yet as +conqueror. If our chronology is to be trusted, he had still +in this interval to complete his conquest of his own duchy by +securing the surrender of Brionne; and two other events, both +characteristic, one of them memorable, fill up the same +time. William now banished a kinsman of his own name, who +held the great county of Mortain, <i>Moretoliam</i> or +<i>Moretonium</i>, in the diocese of Avranches, which must be +carefully distinguished from Mortagne-en-Perche, +<i>Mauritania</i> or <i>Moretonia</i> in the diocese of +Seez. This act, of somewhat doubtful justice, is noteworthy +on two grounds. First, the accuser of the banished count +was one who was then a poor serving-knight of his own, but who +became the forefather of a house which plays a great part in +English history, Robert surnamed the Bigod. Secondly, the +vacant county was granted by William to his own half-brother +Robert. He had already in 1048 bestowed the bishopric of +Bayeux on his other half-brother Odo, who cannot at that time +have been more than twelve years old. He must therefore +have held the see for a good while without consecration, and at +no time of his fifty years’ holding of it did he show any +very episcopal merits. This was the last case in +William’s reign of an old abuse by which the chief church +preferments in Normandy had been turned into means of providing +for members, often unworthy members, of the ducal family; and it +is the only one for which William can have been personally +responsible. Both his brothers were thus placed very early +in life among the chief men of Normandy, as they were in later +years to be placed among the chief men of England. But +William’s affection for his brothers, amiable as it may +have been personally, was assuredly not among the brighter parts +of his character as a sovereign.</p> +<p>The other chief event of this time also concerns the domestic +side of William’s life. The long story of his +marriage now begins. The date is fixed by one of the +decrees of the council of Rheims held in 1049 by Pope Leo the +Ninth, in which Baldwin Count of Flanders is forbidden to give +his daughter to William the Norman. This implies that the +marriage was already thought of, and further that it was looked +on as uncanonical. The bride whom William sought, Matilda +daughter of Baldwin the Fifth, was connected with him by some tie +of kindred or affinity which made a marriage between them +unlawful by the rules of the Church. But no genealogist has +yet been able to find out exactly what the canonical hindrance +was. It is hard to trace the descent of William and Matilda +up to any common forefather. But the light which the story +throws on William’s character is the same in any +case. Whether he was seeking a wife or a kingdom, he would +have his will, but he could wait for it. In William’s +doubtful position, a marriage with the daughter of the Count of +Flanders would be useful to him in many ways; and Matilda won her +husband’s abiding love and trust. Strange tales are +told of William’s wooing. Tales are told also of +Matilda’s earlier love for the Englishman Brihtric, who is +said to have found favour in her eyes when he came as envoy from +England to her father’s court. All that is certain is +that the marriage had been thought of and had been forbidden +before the next important event in William’s life that we +have to record.</p> +<p>Was William’s Flemish marriage in any way connected with +his hopes of succession to the English crown? Had there +been any available bride for him in England, it might have been +for his interest to seek for her there. But it should be +noticed, though no ancient writer points out the fact, that +Matilda was actually descended from Alfred in the female line; so +that William’s children, though not William himself, had +some few drops of English blood in their veins. William or +his advisers, in weighing every chance which might help his +interests in the direction of England, may have reckoned this +piece of rather ancient genealogy among the advantages of a +Flemish alliance. But it is far more certain that, between +the forbidding of the marriage and the marriage itself, a direct +hope of succession to the English crown had been opened to the +Norman duke.</p> +<h2><a name="page26"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +26</span>CHAPTER III.<br /> +<span class="GutSmall">WILLIAM’S FIRST VISIT TO +ENGLAND.</span><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">A.D. 1051–1052.</span></h2> +<p><span class="smcap">While</span> William was strengthening +himself in Normandy, Norman influence in England had risen to its +full height. The king was surrounded by foreign +favourites. The only foreign earl was his nephew Ralph of +Mentes, the son of his sister Godgifu. But three chief +bishoprics were held by Normans, Robert of Canterbury, William of +London, and Ulf of Dorchester. William bears a good +character, and won the esteem of Englishmen; but the unlearned +Ulf is emphatically said to have done “nought +bishoplike.” Smaller preferments in Church and State, +estates in all parts of the kingdom, were lavishly granted to +strangers. They built castles, and otherwise gave offence +to English feeling. Archbishop Robert, above all, was ever +plotting against Godwine, Earl of the West-Saxons, the head of +the national party. At last, in the autumn of 1051, the +national indignation burst forth. The immediate occasion +was a visit paid to the King by Count Eustace of Boulogne, who +had just married the widowed Countess Godgifu. The violent +dealings of his followers towards the burghers of Dover led to +resistance on their part, and to a long series of marches and +negotiations, which ended in the banishment of Godwine and his +son, and the parting of his daughter Edith, the King’s +wife, from her husband. From October 1051 to September +1052, the Normans had their own way in England. And during +that time King Edward received a visitor of greater fame than his +brother-in-law from Boulogne in the person of his cousin from +Rouen.</p> +<p>Of his visit we only read that “William Earl came from +beyond sea with mickle company of Frenchmen, and the king him +received, and as many of his comrades as to him seemed good, and +let him go again.” Another account adds that William +received great gifts from the King. But William himself in +several documents speaks of Edward as his lord; he must therefore +at some time have done to Edward an act of homage, and there is +no time but this at which we can conceive such an act being +done. Now for what was the homage paid? Homage was +often paid on very trifling occasions, and strange conflicts of +allegiance often followed. No such conflict was likely to +arise if the Duke of the Normans, already the man of the King of +the French for his duchy, became the man of the King of the +English on any other ground. Betwixt England and France +there was as yet no enmity or rivalry. England and France +became enemies afterwards because the King of the English and the +Duke of the Normans were one person. And this visit, this +homage, was the first step towards making the King of the English +and the Duke of the Normans the same person. The claim +William had to the English crown rested mainly on an alleged +promise of the succession made by Edward. This claim is not +likely to have been a mere shameless falsehood. That Edward +did make some promise to William—as that Harold, at a later +stage, did take some oath to William—seems fully proved by +the fact that, while such Norman statements as could be denied +were emphatically denied by the English writers, on these two +points the most patriotic Englishmen, the strongest partisans of +Harold, keep a marked silence. We may be sure therefore +that some promise was made; for that promise a time must be +found, and no time seems possible except this time of +William’s visit to Edward. The date rests on no +direct authority, but it answers every requirement. Those +who spoke of the promise as being made earlier, when William and +Edward were boys together in Normandy, forgot that Edward was +many years older than William. The only possible moment +earlier than the visit was when Edward was elected king in +1042. Before that time he could hardly have thought of +disposing of a kingdom which was not his, and at that time he +might have looked forward to leaving sons to succeed him. +Still less could the promise have been made later than the +visit. From 1053 to the end of his life Edward was under +English influences, which led him first to send for his nephew +Edward from Hungary as his successor, and in the end to make a +recommendation in favour of Harold. But in 1051–52 +Edward, whether under a vow or not, may well have given up the +hope of children; he was surrounded by Norman influences; and, +for the only time in the last twenty-four years of their joint +lives, he and William met face to face. The only difficulty +is one to which no contemporary writer makes any reference. +If Edward wished to dispose of his crown in favour of one of his +French-speaking kinsmen, he had a nearer kinsman of whom he might +more naturally have thought. His own nephew Ralph was +living in England and holding an English earldom. He had +the advantage over both William and his own older brother Walter +of Mantes, in not being a reigning prince elsewhere. We can +only say that there is evidence that Edward did think of William, +that there is no evidence that he ever thought of Ralph. +And, except the tie of nearer kindred, everything would suggest +William rather than Ralph. The personal comparison is +almost grotesque; and Edward’s early associations and the +strongest influences around him, were not vaguely French but +specially Norman. Archbishop Robert would plead for his own +native sovereign only. In short, we may be as nearly sure +as we can be of any fact for which there is no direct authority, +that Edward’s promise to William was made at the time of +William’s visit to England, and that William’s homage +to Edward was done in the character of a destined successor to +the English crown.</p> +<p>William then came to England a mere duke and went back to +Normandy a king expectant. But the value of his hopes, to +the value of the promise made to him, are quite another +matter. Most likely they were rated on both sides far above +their real value. King and duke may both have believed that +they were making a settlement which the English nation was bound +to respect. If so, Edward at least was undeceived within a +few months.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>The notion of a king disposing of his crown by his own act +belongs to the same range of ideas as the law of strict +hereditary succession. It implies that kingship is a +possession and not an office. Neither the heathen nor the +Christian English had ever admitted that doctrine; but it was +fast growing on the continent. Our forefathers had always +combined respect for the kingly house with some measure of choice +among the members of that house. Edward himself was not the +lawful heir according to the notions of a modern lawyer; for he +was chosen while the son of his elder brother was living. +Every English king held his crown by the gift of the great +assembly of the nation, though the choice of the nation was +usually limited to the descendants of former kings, and though +the full-grown son of the late king was seldom opposed. +Christianity had strengthened the election principle. The +king lost his old sanctity as the son of Woden; he gained a new +sanctity as the Lord’s anointed. But kingship thereby +became more distinctly an office, a great post, like a bishopric, +to which its holder had to be lawfully chosen and admitted by +solemn rites. But of that office he could be lawfully +deprived, nor could he hand it on to a successor either according +to his own will or according to any strict law of +succession. The wishes of the late king, like the wishes of +the late bishop, went for something with the electors. But +that was all. All that Edward could really do for his +kinsmen was to promise to make, when the time came, a +recommendation to the Witan in his favour. The Witan might +then deal as they thought good with a recommendation so unusual +as to choose to the kingship of England a man who was neither a +native nor a conqueror of England nor the descendant of any +English king.</p> +<p>When the time came, Edward did make a recommendation to the +Witan, but it was not in favour of William. The English +influences under which he was brought during his last fourteen +years taught him better what the law of England was and what was +the duty of an English king. But at the time of +William’s visit Edward may well have believed that he could +by his own act settle his crown on his Norman kinsman as his +undoubted successor in case he died without a son. And it +may be that Edward was bound by a vow not to leave a son. +And if Edward so thought, William naturally thought so yet more; +he would sincerely believe himself to be the lawful heir of the +crown of England, the sole lawful successor, except in one +contingency which was perhaps impossible and certainly +unlikely.</p> +<p>The memorials of these times, so full on some points, are +meagre on others. Of those writers who mention the bequest +or promise none mention it at any time when it is supposed to +have happened; they mention it at some later time when it began +to be of practical importance. No English writer speaks of +William’s claim till the time when he was about practically +to assert it; no Norman writer speaks of it till he tells the +tale of Harold’s visit and oath to William. We +therefore cannot say how far the promise was known either in +England or on the continent. But it could not be kept +altogether hid, even if either party wished it to be hid. +English statesmen must have known of it, and must have guided +their policy accordingly, whether it was generally known in the +country or not. William’s position, both in his own +duchy and among neighbouring princes, would be greatly improved +if he could be looked upon as a future king. As heir to the +crown of England, he may have more earnestly wooed the descendant +of former wearers of the crown; and Matilda and her father may +have looked more favourably on a suitor to whom the crown of +England was promised. On the other hand, the existence of +such a foreign claimant made it more needful than ever for +Englishmen to be ready with an English successor, in the royal +house or out of it, the moment the reigning king should pass +away.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>It was only for a short time that William could have had any +reasonable hope of a peaceful succession. The time of +Norman influence in England was short. The revolution of +September 1052 brought Godwine back, and placed the rule of +England again in English hands. Many Normans were banished, +above all Archbishop Robert and Bishop Ulf. The death of +Godwine the next year placed the chief power in the hands of his +son Harold. This change undoubtedly made Edward more +disposed to the national cause. Of Godwine, the man to whom +he owed his crown, he was clearly in awe; to Godwine’s sons +he was personally attached. We know not how Edward was led +to look on his promise to William as void. That he was so +led is quite plain. He sent for his nephew the +Ætheling Edward from Hungary, clearly as his intended +successor. When the Ætheling died in 1057, leaving a +son under age, men seem to have gradually come to look to Harold +as the probable successor. He clearly held a special +position above that of an ordinary earl; but there is no need to +suppose any formal act in his favour till the time of the +King’s death, January 5, 1066. On his deathbed Edward +did all that he legally could do on behalf of Harold by +recommending him to the Witan for election as the next +king. That he then either made a new or renewed an old +nomination in favour of William is a fable which is set aside by +the witness of the contemporary English writers. +William’s claim rested wholly on that earlier nomination +which could hardly have been made at any other time than his +visit to England.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>We have now to follow William back to Normandy, for the +remaining years of his purely ducal reign. The expectant +king had doubtless thoughts and hopes which he had not had +before. But we can guess at them only: they are not +recorded.</p> +<h2><a name="page34"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +34</span>CHAPTER IV.<br /> +<span class="GutSmall">THE REIGN OF WILLIAM IN +NORMANDY.</span><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">A.D. 1052–1063.</span></h2> +<p><span class="smcap">If</span> William came back from England +looking forward to a future crown, the thought might even then +flash across his mind that he was not likely to win that crown +without fighting for it. As yet his business was still to +fight for the duchy of Normandy. But he had now to fight, +not to win his duchy, but only to keep it. For five years +he had to strive both against rebellious subjects and against +invading enemies, among whom King Henry of Paris is again the +foremost. Whatever motives had led the French king to help +William at Val-ès-dunes had now passed away. He had +fallen back on his former state of abiding enmity towards +Normandy and her duke. But this short period definitely +fixed the position of Normandy and her duke in Gaul and in +Europe. At its beginning William is still the Bastard of +Falaise, who may or may not be able to keep himself in the ducal +chair, his right to which is still disputed. At the end of +it, if he is not yet the Conqueror and the Great, he has shown +all the gifts that were needed to win him either name. He +is the greatest vassal of the French crown, a vassal more +powerful than the overlord whose invasions of his duchy he has +had to drive back.</p> +<p>These invasions of Normandy by the King of the French and his +allies fall into two periods. At first Henry appears in +Normandy as the supporter of Normans in open revolt against their +duke. But revolts are personal and local; there is no +rebellion like that which was crushed at Val-ès-dunes, +spreading over a large part of the duchy. In the second +period, the invaders have no such starting-point. There are +still traitors; there are still rebels; but all that they can do +is to join the invaders after they have entered the land. +William is still only making his way to the universal good will +of his duchy: but he is fast making it.</p> +<p>There is, first of all, an obscure tale of a revolt of an +unfixed date, but which must have happened between 1048 and +1053. The rebel, William Busac of the house of Eu, is said +to have defended the castle of Eu against the duke and to have +gone into banishment in France. But the year that followed +William’s visit to England saw the far more memorable +revolt of William Count of Arques. He had drawn the +Duke’s suspicions on him, and he had to receive a ducal +garrison in his great fortress by Dieppe. But the garrison +betrayed the castle to its own master. Open revolt and +havoc followed, in which Count William was supported by the king +and by several other princes. Among them was Ingelram Count +of Ponthieu, husband of the duke’s sister Adelaide. +Another enemy was Guy Count of Gascony, afterwards Duke William +the Eighth of Aquitaine. What quarrel a prince in the +furthest corner of Gaul could have with the Duke of the Normans +does not appear; but neither Count William nor his allies could +withstand the loyal Normans and their prince. Count +Ingelram was killed; the other princes withdrew to devise greater +efforts against Normandy. Count William lost his castle and +part of his estates, and left the duchy of his free will. +The Duke’s politic forbearance at last won him the general +good will of his subjects. We hear of no more open revolts +till that of William’s own son many years after. But +the assaults of foreign enemies, helped sometimes by Norman +traitors, begin again the next year on a greater scale.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>William the ruler and warrior had now a short +breathing-space. He had doubtless come back from England +more bent than ever on his marriage with Matilda of +Flanders. Notwithstanding the decree of a Pope and a +Council entitled to special respect, the marriage was celebrated, +not very long after William’s return to Normandy, in the +year of the revolt of William of Arques. In the course of +the year 1053 Count Baldwin brought his daughter to the Norman +frontier at Eu, and there she became the bride of William. +We know not what emboldened William to risk so daring a step at +this particular time, or what led Baldwin to consent to it. +If it was suggested by the imprisonment of Pope Leo by +William’s countrymen in Italy, in the hope that a consent +to the marriage would be wrung out of the captive pontiff, that +hope was disappointed. The marriage raised much opposition +in Normandy. It was denounced by Archbishop Malger of +Rouen, the brother of the dispossessed Count of Arques. His +character certainly added no weight to his censures; but the same +act in a saint would have been set down as a sign of holy +boldness. Presently, whether for his faults or for his +merits, Malger was deposed in a synod of the Norman Church, and +William found him a worthier successor in the learned and holy +Maurilius. But a greater man than Malger also opposed the +marriage, and the controversy thus introduces us to one who fills +a place second only to that of William himself in the Norman and +English history of the time.</p> +<p>This was Lanfranc of Pavia, the lawyer, the scholar, the model +monk, the ecclesiastical statesman, who, as prior of the newly +founded abbey of Bec, was already one of the innermost +counsellors of the Duke. As duke and king, as prior, abbot, +and archbishop, William and Lanfranc ruled side by side, each +helping the work of the other till the end of their joint +lives. Once only, at this time, was their friendship broken +for a moment. Lanfranc spoke against the marriage, and +ventured to rebuke the Duke himself. William’s wrath +was kindled; he ordered Lanfranc into banishment and took a baser +revenge by laying waste part of the lands of the abbey. But +the quarrel was soon made up. Lanfranc presently left +Normandy, not as a banished man, but as the envoy of its +sovereign, commissioned to work for the confirmation of the +marriage at the papal court. He worked, and his work was +crowned with success, but not with speedy success. It was +not till six years after the marriage, not till the year 1059, +that Lanfranc obtained the wished for confirmation, not from Leo, +but from his remote successor Nicolas the Second. The sin +of those who had contracted the unlawful union was purged by +various good works, among which the foundation of the two stately +abbeys of Caen was conspicuous.</p> +<p>This story illustrates many points in the character of William +and of his time. His will is not to be thwarted, whether in +a matter of marriage or of any other. But he does not hurry +matters; he waits for a favourable opportunity. Something, +we know not what, must have made the year 1053 more favourable +than the year 1049. We mark also William’s relations +to the Church. He is at no time disposed to submit quietly +to the bidding of the spiritual power, when it interferes with +his rights or even when it crosses his will. Yet he is +really anxious for ecclesiastical reform; he promotes men like +Maurilius and Lanfranc; perhaps he is not displeased when the +exercise of ecclesiastical discipline, in the case of Malger, +frees him from a troublesome censor. But the worse side of +him also comes out. William could forgive rebels, but he +could not bear the personal rebuke even of his friend. +Under this feeling he punishes a whole body of men for the +offence of one. To lay waste the lands of Bec for the +rebuke of Lanfranc was like an ordinary prince of the time; it +was unlike William, if he had not been stirred up by a censure +which touched his wife as well as himself. But above all, +the bargain between William and Lanfranc is characteristic of the +man and the age. Lanfranc goes to Rome to support a +marriage which he had censured in Normandy. But there is no +formal inconsistency, no forsaking of any principle. +Lanfranc holds an uncanonical marriage to be a sin, and he +denounces it. He does not withdraw his judgement as to its +sinfulness. He simply uses his influence with a power that +can forgive the sin to get it forgiven.</p> +<p>While William’s marriage was debated at Rome, he had to +fight hard in Normandy. His warfare and his negotiations +ended about the same time, and the two things may have had their +bearing on one another. William had now to undergo a new +form of trial. The King of the French had never put forth +his full strength when he was simply backing Norman rebels. +William had now, in two successive invasions, to withstand the +whole power of the King, and of as many of his vassals as the +King could bring to his standard. In the first invasion, in +1054, the Norman writers speak rhetorically of warriors from +Burgundy, Auvergne, and Gascony; but it is hard to see any troops +from a greater distance than Bourges. The princes who +followed Henry seem to have been only the nearer vassals of the +Crown. Chief among them are Theobald Count of Chartres, of +a house of old hostile to Normandy, and Guy the new Count of +Ponthieu, to be often heard of again. If not Geoffrey of +Anjou himself, his subjects from Tours were also there. +Normandy was to be invaded on two sides, on both banks of the +Seine. The King and his allies sought to wrest from William +the western part of Normandy, the older and the more thoroughly +French part. No attack seems to have been designed on the +Bessin or the Côtentin. William was to be allowed to +keep those parts of his duchy, against which he had to fight when +the King was his ally at Val-ès-dunes.</p> +<p>The two armies entered Normandy; that which was to act on the +left of the Seine was led by the King, the other by his brother +Odo. Against the King William made ready to act himself; +eastern Normandy was left to its own loyal nobles. But all +Normandy was now loyal; the men of the Saxon and Danish lands +were as ready to fight for their duke against the King as they +had been to fight against King and Duke together. But +William avoided pitched battles; indeed pitched battles are rare +in the continental warfare of the time. War consists +largely in surprises, and still more in the attack and defence of +fortified places. The plan of William’s present +campaign was wholly defensive; provisions and cattle were to be +carried out of the French line of march; the Duke on his side, +the other Norman leaders on the other side, were to watch the +enemy and attack them at any favourable moment. The +commanders east of the Seine, Count Robert of Eu, Hugh of +Gournay, William Crispin, and Walter Giffard, found their +opportunity when the French had entered the unfortified town of +Mortemer and had given themselves up to revelry. Fire and +sword did the work. The whole French army was slain, +scattered, or taken prisoners. Ode escaped; Guy of Ponthieu +was taken. The Duke’s success was still easier. +The tale runs that the news from Mortemer, suddenly announced to +the King’s army in the dead of the night, struck them with +panic, and led to a hasty retreat out of the land.</p> +<p>This campaign is truly Norman; it is wholly unlike the simple +warfare of England. A traitorous Englishman did nothing or +helped the enemy; a patriotic Englishman gave battle to the enemy +the first time he had a chance. But no English commander of +the eleventh century was likely to lay so subtle a plan as this, +and, if he had laid such a plan, he would hardly have found an +English army able to carry it out. Harold, who refused to +lay waste a rood of English ground, would hardly have looked +quietly on while many roods of English ground were wasted by the +enemy. With all the valour of the Normans, what before all +things distinguished them from other nations was their +craft. William could indeed fight a pitched battle when a +pitched battle served his purpose; but he could control himself, +he could control his followers, even to the point of enduring to +look quietly on the havoc of their own land till the right +moment. He who could do this was indeed practising for his +calling as Conqueror. And if the details of the story, +details specially characteristic, are to be believed, William +showed something also of that grim pleasantry which was another +marked feature in the Norman character. The startling +message which struck the French army with panic was deliberately +sent with that end. The messenger sent climbs a tree or a +rock, and, with a voice as from another world, bids the French +awake; they are sleeping too long; let them go and bury their +friends who are lying dead at Mortemer. These touches bring +home to us the character of the man and the people with whom our +forefathers had presently to deal. William was the greatest +of his race, but he was essentially of his race; he was Norman to +the backbone.</p> +<p>Of the French army one division had been surprised and cut to +pieces, the other had left Normandy without striking a +blow. The war was not yet quite over; the French still kept +Tillières; William accordingly fortified the stronghold of +Breteuil as a cheek upon it. And he entrusted the command +to a man who will soon be memorable, his personal friend William, +son of his old guardian Osbern. King Henry was now glad to +conclude a peace on somewhat remarkable terms. William had +the king’s leave to take what he could from Count Geoffrey +of Anjou. He now annexed Cenomannian—that is just now +Angevin—territory at more points than one, but chiefly on +the line of his earlier advances to Domfront and +Ambrières. Ambrières had perhaps been lost; +for William now sent Geoffrey a challenge to come on the fortieth +day. He came on the fortieth day, and found +Ambrières strongly fortified and occupied by a Norman +garrison. With Geoffrey came the Breton prince Ode, and +William or Peter Duke of Aquitaine. They besieged the +castle; but Norman accounts add that they all fled on +William’s approach to relieve it.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>Three years of peace now followed, but in 1058 King Henry, +this time in partnership with Geoffrey of Anjou, ventured another +invasion of Normandy. He might say that he had never been +fairly beaten in his former campaign, but that he had been simply +cheated out of the land by Norman wiles. This time he had a +second experience of Norman wiles and of Norman strength +too. King and Count entered the land and ravaged far and +wide. William, as before, allowed the enemy to waste the +land. He watched and followed them till he found a +favourable moment for attack. The people in general +zealously helped the Duke’s schemes, but some traitors of +rank were still leagued with the Count of Anjou. While +William bided his time, the invaders burned Caen. This +place, so famous in Norman history, was not one of the ancient +cities of the land. It was now merely growing into +importance, and it was as yet undefended by walls or +castle. But when the ravagers turned eastward, William +found the opportunity that he had waited for. As the French +were crossing the ford of Varaville on the Dive, near the mouth +of that river, he came suddenly on them, and slaughtered a large +part of the army under the eyes of the king who had already +crossed. The remnant marched out of Normandy.</p> +<p>Henry now made peace, and restored Tillières. Not +long after, in 1060, the King died, leaving his young son Philip, +who had been already crowned, as his successor, under the +guardianship of William’s father-in-law Baldwin. +Geoffrey of Anjou and William of Aquitaine also died, and the +Angevin power was weakened by the division of Geoffrey’s +dominions between his nephews. William’s position was +greatly strengthened, now that France, under the new regent, had +become friendly, while Anjou was no longer able to do +mischief. William had now nothing to fear from his +neighbours, and the way was soon opened for his great continental +conquest. But what effect had these events on +William’s views on England? About the time of the +second French invasion of Normandy Earl Harold became beyond +doubt the first man in England, and for the first time a chance +of the royal succession was opened to him. In 1057, the +year before Varaville, the Ætheling Edward, the +King’s selected successor, died soon after his coming to +England; in the same year died the King’s nephew Earl Ralph +and Leofric Earl of the Mercians, the only Englishmen whose +influence could at all compare with that of Harold. +Harold’s succession now became possible; it became even +likely, if Edward should die while Edgar the son of the +Ætheling was still under age. William had no shadow +of excuse for interfering, but he doubtless was watching the +internal affairs of England. Harold was certainly watching +the affairs of Gaul. About this time, most likely in the +year 1058, he made a pilgrimage to Rome, and on his way back he +looked diligently into the state of things among the various +vassals of the French crown. His exact purpose is veiled in +ambiguous language; but we can hardly doubt that his object was +to contract alliances with the continental enemies of +Normandy. Such views looked to the distant future, as +William had as yet been guilty of no unfriendly act towards +England. But it was well to come to an understanding with +King Henry, Count Geoffrey, and Duke William of Aquitaine, in +case a time should come when their interests and those of England +would be the same. But the deaths of all those princes must +have put an end to all hopes of common action between England and +any Gaulish power. The Emperor Henry also, the firm ally of +England, was dead. It was now clear that, if England should +ever have to withstand a Norman attack, she would have to +withstand it wholly by her own strength, or with such help as she +might find among the kindred powers of the North.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>William’s great continental conquest is drawing nigh; +but between the campaign of Varaville and the campaign of Le Mans +came the tardy papal confirmation of William’s +marriage. The Duke and Duchess, now at last man and wife in +the eye of the Church, began to carry out the works of penance +which were allotted to them. The abbeys of Caen, +William’s Saint Stephen’s, Matilda’s Holy +Trinity, now began to arise. Yet, at this moment of +reparation, one or two facts seem to place William’s +government of his duchy in a less favourable light than +usual. The last French invasion was followed by +confiscations and banishments among the chief men of +Normandy. Roger of Montgomery and his wife Mabel, who +certainly was capable of any deed of blood or treachery, are +charged with acting as false accusers. We see also that, as +late as the day of Varaville, there were Norman traitors. +Robert of Escalfoy had taken the Angevin side, and had defended +his castle against the Duke. He died in a strange way, +after snatching an apple from the hand of his own wife. His +nephew Arnold remained in rebellion three years, and was simply +required to go to the wars in Apulia. It is hard to believe +that the Duke had poisoned the apple, if poisoned it was; but +finding treason still at work among his nobles, he may have too +hastily listened to charges against men who had done him good +service, and who were to do him good service again.</p> +<p>Five years after the combat at Varaville, William really began +to deserve, though not as yet to receive, the name of +Conqueror. For he now did a work second only to the +conquest of England. He won the city of Le Mans and the +whole land of Maine. Between the tale of Maine and the tale +of England there is much of direct likeness. Both lands +were won against the will of their inhabitants; but both +conquests were made with an elaborate show of legal right. +William’s earlier conquests in Maine had been won, not from +any count of Maine, but from Geoffrey of Anjou, who had occupied +the country to the prejudice of two successive counts, Hugh and +Herbert. He had further imprisoned the Bishop of Le Mans, +Gervase of the house of Bellême, though the King of the +French had at his request granted to the Count of Anjou for life +royal rights over the bishopric of Le Mans. The bishops of +Le Mans, who thus, unlike the bishops of Normandy, held their +temporalities of the distant king and not of the local count, +held a very independent position. The citizens of Le Mans +too had large privileges and a high spirit to defend them; the +city was in a marked way the head of the district. Thus it +commonly carried with it the action of the whole country. +In Maine there were three rival powers, the prince, the Church, +and the people. The position of the counts was further +weakened by the claims to their homage made by the princes on +either side of them in Normandy and Anjou; the position of the +Bishop, vassal, till Gervase’s late act, of the King only, +was really a higher one. Geoffrey had been received at Le +Mans with the good will of the citizens, and both Bishop and +Count sought shelter with William. Gervase was removed from +the strife by promotion to the highest place in the French +kingdom, the archbishopric of Rheims. The young Count +Herbert, driven from his county, commended himself to +William. He became his man; he agreed to hold his dominions +of him, and to marry one of his daughters. If he died +childless, his father-in-law was to take the fief into his own +hands. But to unite the old and new dynasties, +Herbert’s youngest sister Margaret was to marry +William’s eldest son Robert. If female descent went +for anything, it is not clear why Herbert passed by the rights of +his two elder sisters, Gersendis, wife of Azo Marquess of +Liguria, and Paula, wife of John of La Flèche on the +borders of Maine and Anjou. And sons both of Gersendis and +of Paula did actually reign at Le Mans, while no child either of +Herbert or of Margaret ever came into being.</p> +<p>If Herbert ever actually got possession of his country, his +possession of it was short. He died in 1063 before either +of the contemplated marriages had been carried out. William +therefore stood towards Maine as he expected to stand with regard +to England. The sovereign of each country had made a formal +settlement of his dominions in his favour. It was to be +seen whether those who were most immediately concerned would +accept that settlement. Was the rule either of Maine or of +England to be handed over in this way, like a mere property, +without the people who were to be ruled speaking their minds on +the matter? What the people of England said to this +question in 1066 we shall hear presently; what the people of +Maine said in 1063 we hear now. We know not why they had +submitted to the Angevin count; they had now no mind to merge +their country in the dominions of the Norman duke. The +Bishop was neutral; but the nobles and the citizens of Le Mans +were of one mind in refusing William’s demand to be +received as count by virtue of the agreement with Herbert. +They chose rulers for themselves. Passing by Gersendis and +Paula and their sons, they sent for Herbert’s aunt Biota +and her husband Walter Count of Mantes. Strangely enough, +Walter, son of Godgifu daughter of Æthelred, was a +possible, though not a likely, candidate for the rule of England +as well as of Maine. The people of Maine are not likely to +have thought of this bit of genealogy. But it was doubtless +present to the minds alike of William and of Harold.</p> +<p>William thus, for the first but not for the last time, claimed +the rule of a people who had no mind to have him as their +ruler. Yet, morally worthless as were his claims over +Maine, in the merely technical way of looking at things, he had +more to say than most princes have who annex the lands of their +neighbours. He had a perfectly good right by the terms of +the agreement with Herbert. And it might be argued by any +who admitted the Norman claim to the homage of Maine, that on the +failure of male heirs the country reverted to the overlord. +Yet female succession was now coming in. Anjou had passed +to the sons of Geoffrey’s sister; it had not fallen back to +the French king. There was thus a twofold answer to +William’s claim, that Herbert could not grant away even the +rights of his sisters, still less the rights of his people. +Still it was characteristic of William that he had a case that +might be plausibly argued. The people of Maine had fallen +back on the old Teutonic right. They had chosen a prince +connected with the old stock, but who was not the next heir +according to any rule of succession. Walter was hardly +worthy of such an exceptional honour; he showed no more energy in +Maine than his brother Ralph had shown in England. The city +was defended by Geoffrey, lord of Mayenne, a valiant man who +fills a large place in the local history. But no valour or +skill could withstand William’s plan of warfare. He +invaded Maine in much the same sort in which he had defended +Normandy. He gave out that he wished to win Maine without +shedding man’s blood. He fought no battles; he did +not attack the city, which he left to be the last spot that +should be devoured. He harried the open country, he +occupied the smaller posts, till the citizens were driven, +against Geoffrey’s will, to surrender. William +entered Le Mans; he was received, we are told, with joy. +When men make the best of a bad bargain, they sometimes persuade +themselves that they are really pleased. William, as ever, +shed no blood; he harmed none of the men who had become his +subjects; but Le Mans was to be bridled; its citizens needed a +castle and a Norman garrison to keep them in their new +allegiance. Walter and Biota surrendered their claims on +Maine and became William’s guests at Falaise. +Meanwhile Geoffrey of Mayenne refused to submit, and withstood +the new Count of Maine in his stronghold. William laid +siege to Mayenne, and took it by the favoured Norman argument of +fire. All Maine was now in the hands of the Conqueror.</p> +<p>William had now made a greater conquest than any Norman duke +had made before him. He had won a county and a noble city, +and he had won them, in the ideas of his own age, with +honour. Are we to believe that he sullied his conquest by +putting his late competitors, his present guests, to death by +poison? They died conveniently for him, and they died in +his own house. Such a death was strange; but strange things +do happen. William gradually came to shrink from no crime +for which he could find a technical defence; but no advocate +could have said anything on behalf of the poisoning of Walter and +Biota. Another member of the house of Maine, Margaret the +betrothed of his son Robert, died about the same time; and her at +least William had every motive to keep alive. One who was +more dangerous than Walter, if he suffered anything, only +suffered banishment. Of Geoffrey of Mayenne we hear no more +till William had again to fight for the possession of Maine.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>William had thus, in the year 1063, reached the height of his +power and fame as a continental prince. In a conquest on +Gaulish soil he had rehearsed the greater conquest which he was +before long to make beyond sea. Three years, eventful in +England, outwardly uneventful in Normandy, still part us from +William’s second visit to our shores. But in the +course of these three years one event must have happened, which, +without a blow being struck or a treaty being signed, did more +for his hopes than any battle or any treaty. At some +unrecorded time, but at a time which must come within these +years, Harold Earl of the West-Saxons became the guest and the +man of William Duke of the Normans.</p> +<h2><a name="page51"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +51</span>CHAPTER V.<br /> +<span class="GutSmall">HAROLD’S OATH TO WILLIAM.</span><br +/> +<span class="GutSmall">A.D. 1064?</span></h2> +<p><span class="smcap">The</span> lord of Normandy and Maine +could now stop and reckon his chances of becoming lord of England +also. While our authorities enable us to put together a +fairly full account of both Norman and English events, they throw +no light on the way in which men in either land looked at events +in the other. Yet we might give much to know what William +and Harold at this time thought of one another. Nothing had +as yet happened to make the two great rivals either national or +personal enemies. England and Normandy were at peace, and +the great duke and the great earl had most likely had no personal +dealings with one another. They were rivals in the sense +that each looked forward to succeed to the English crown whenever +the reigning king should die. But neither had as yet put +forward his claim in any shape that the other could look on as +any formal wrong to himself. If William and Harold had ever +met, it could have been only during Harold’s journey in +Gaul. Whatever negotiations Harold made during that journey +were negotiations unfriendly to William; still he may, in the +course of that journey, have visited Normandy as well as France +or Anjou. It is hard to avoid the thought that the tale of +Harold’s visit to William, of his oath to William, arose +out of something that happened on Harold’s way back from +his Roman pilgrimage. To that journey we can give an +approximate date. Of any other journey we have no date and +no certain detail. We can say only that the fact that no +English writer makes any mention of any such visit, of any such +oath, is, under the circumstances, the strongest proof that the +story of the visit and the oath has some kind of +foundation. Yet if we grant thus much, the story reads on +the whole as if it happened a few years later than the English +earl’s return from Rome.</p> +<p>It is therefore most likely that Harold did pay a second visit +to Gaul, whether a first or a second visit to Normandy, at some +time nearer to Edward’s death than the year 1058. The +English writers are silent; the Norman writers give no date or +impossible dates; they connect the visit with a war in Britanny; +but that war is without a date. We are driven to choose the +year which is least rich in events in the English annals. +Harold could not have paid a visit of several months to Normandy +either in 1063 or in 1065. Of those years the first was the +year of Harold’s great war in Wales, when he found how the +Britons might be overcome by their own arms, when he broke the +power of Gruffydd, and granted the Welsh kingdom to princes who +became the men of Earl Harold as well as of King Edward. +Harold’s visit to Normandy is said to have taken place in +the summer and autumn mouths; but the summer and autumn of 1065 +were taken up by the building and destruction of Harold’s +hunting-seat in Wales and by the greater events of the revolt and +pacification of Northumberland. But the year 1064 is a +blank in the English annals till the last days of December, and +no action of Harold’s in that year is recorded. It is +therefore the only possible year among those just before +Edward’s death. Harold’s visit and oath to +William may very well have taken place in that year; but that is +all.</p> +<p>We know as little for certain as to the circumstances of the +visit or the nature of the oath. We can say only that +Harold did something which enabled William to charge him with +perjury and breach of the duty of a vassal. It is +inconceivable in itself, and unlike the formal scrupulousness of +William’s character, to fancy that he made his appeal to +all Christendom without any ground at all. The Norman +writers contradict one another so thoroughly in every detail of +the story that we can look on no part of it as trustworthy. +Yet such a story can hardly have grown up so near to the alleged +time without some kernel of truth in it. And herein comes +the strong corroborative witness that the English writers, +denying every other charge against Harold, pass this one by +without notice. We can hardly doubt that Harold swore some +oath to William which he did not keep. More than this it +would be rash to say except as an avowed guess.</p> +<p>As our nearest approach to fixing the date is to take that +year which is not impossible, so, to fix the occasion of the +visit, we can only take that one among the Norman versions which +is also not impossible. All the main versions represent +Harold as wrecked on the coast of Ponthieu, as imprisoned, +according to the barbarous law of wreck, by Count Guy, and as +delivered by the intervention of William. If any part of +the story is true, this is. But as to the circumstances +which led to the shipwreck there is no agreement. Harold +assuredly was not sent to announce to William a devise of the +crown in his favour made with the consent of the Witan of England +and confirmed by the oaths of Stigand, Godwine, Siward, and +Leofric. Stigand became Archbishop in September 1052: +Godwine died at Easter 1053. The devise must therefore have +taken place, and Harold’s journey must have taken place, +within those few most unlikely months, the very time when Norman +influence was overthrown. Another version makes Harold go, +against the King’s warnings, to bring back his brother +Wulfnoth and his nephew Hakon, who had been given as hostages on +the return of Godwine, and had been entrusted by the King to the +keeping of Duke William. This version is one degree less +absurd; but no such hostages are known to have been given, and if +they were, the patriotic party, in the full swing of triumph, +would hardly have allowed them to be sent to Normandy. A +third version makes Harold’s presence the result of mere +accident. He is sailing to Wales or Flanders, or simply +taking his pleasure in the Channel, when he is cast by a storm on +the coast of Ponthieu. Of these three accounts we may +choose the third as the only one that is possible. It is +also one out of which the others may have grown, while it is hard +to see how the third could have arisen out of either of the +others. Harold then, we may suppose, fell accidentally into +the clutches of Guy, and was rescued from them, at some cost in +ransom and in grants of land, by Guy’s overlord Duke +William.</p> +<p>The whole story is eminently characteristic of William. +He would be honestly indignant at Guy’s base treatment of +Harold, and he would feel it his part as Guy’s overlord to +redress the wrong. But he would also be alive to the +advantage of getting his rival into his power on so honourable a +pretext. Simply to establish a claim to gratitude on the +part of Harold would be something. But he might easily do +more, and, according to all accounts, he did more. Harold, +we are told, as the Duke’s friend and guest, returns the +obligation under which the Duke has laid him by joining him in +one or more expeditions against the Bretons. The man who +had just smitten the Bret-Welsh of the island might well be asked +to fight, and might well be ready to fight, against the +Bret-Welsh of the mainland. The services of Harold won him +high honour; he was admitted into the ranks of Norman knighthood, +and engaged to marry one of William’s daughters. Now, +at any time to which we can fix Harold’s visit, all +William’s daughters must have been mere children. +Harold, on the other hand, seems to have been a little older than +William. Yet there is nothing unlikely in the engagement, +and it is the one point in which all the different versions, +contradicting each other on every other point, agree without +exception. Whatever else Harold promises, he promises this, +and in some versions he does not promise anything else.</p> +<p>Here then we surely have the kernel of truth round which a +mass of fable, varying in different reports, has gathered. +On no other point is there any agreement. The place is +unfixed; half a dozen Norman towns and castles are made the scene +of the oath. The form of the oath is unfixed; in some +accounts it is the ordinary oath of homage; in others it is an +oath of fearful solemnity, taken on the holiest relics. In +one well-known account, Harold is even made to swear on hidden +relics, not knowing on what he is swearing. Here is matter +for much thought. To hold that one form of oath or promise +is more binding than another upsets all true confidence between +man and man. The notion of the specially binding nature of +the oath by relies assumes that, in case of breach of the oath, +every holy person to whose relies despite has been done will +become the personal enemy of the perjurer. But the last +story of all is the most instructive. William’s +formal, and more than formal, religion abhorred a false oath, in +himself or in another man. But, so long as he keeps himself +personally clear from the guilt, he does not scruple to put +another man under special temptation, and, while believing in the +power of the holy relics, he does not scruple to abuse them to a +purpose of fraud. Surely, if Harold did break his oath, the +wrath of the saints would fall more justly on William. +Whether the tale be true or false, it equally illustrates the +feelings of the time, and assuredly its truth or falsehood +concerns the character of William far more than that of +Harold.</p> +<p>What it was that Harold swore, whether in this specially +solemn fashion or in any other, is left equally uncertain. +In any case he engages to marry a daughter of William—as to +which daughter the statements are endless—and in most +versions he engages to do something more. He becomes the +man of William, much as William had become the man of +Edward. He promises to give his sister in marriage to an +unnamed Norman baron. Moreover he promises to secure the +kingdom of England for William at Edward’s death. +Perhaps he is himself to hold the kingdom or part of it under +William; in any case William is to be the overlord; in the more +usual story, William is to be himself the immediate king, with +Harold as his highest and most favoured subject. Meanwhile +Harold is to act in William’s interest, to receive a Norman +garrison in Dover castle, and to build other castles at other +points. But no two stories agree, and not a few know +nothing of anything beyond the promise of marriage.</p> +<p>Now if William really required Harold to swear to all these +things, it must have been simply in order to have an occasion +against him. If Harold really swore to all of them, it must +have been simply because he felt that he was practically in +William’s power, without any serious intention of keeping +the oath. If Harold took any such oath, he undoubtedly +broke it; but we may safely say that any guilt on his part lay +wholly in taking the oath, not in breaking it. For he swore +to do what he could not do, and what it would have been a crime +to do, if he could. If the King himself could not dispose +of the crown, still less could the most powerful subject. +Harold could at most promise William his “vote and +interest,” whenever the election came. But no one can +believe that even Harold’s influence could have obtained +the crown for William. His influence lay in his being the +embodiment of the national feeling; for him to appear as the +supporter of William would have been to lose the crown for +himself without gaining it for William. Others in England +and in Scandinavia would have been glad of it. And the +engagements to surrender Dover castle and the like were simply +engagements on the part of an English earl to play the traitor +against England. If William really called on Harold to +swear to all this, he did so, not with any hope that the oath +would be kept, but simply to put his competitor as far as +possible in the wrong. But most likely Harold swore only to +something much simpler. Next to the universal agreement +about the marriage comes the very general agreement that Harold +became William’s man. In these two statements we have +probably the whole truth. In those days men took the +obligation of homage upon themselves very easily. Homage +was no degradation, even in the highest; a man often did homage +to any one from whom he had received any great benefit, and +Harold had received a very great benefit from William. Nor +did homage to a new lord imply treason to the old one. +Harold, delivered by William from Guy’s dungeon, would be +eager to do for William any act of friendship. The homage +would be little more than binding himself in the strongest form +so to do. The relation of homage could be made to mean +anything or nothing, as might be convenient. The man might +often understand it in one sense and the lord in another. +If Harold became the man of William, he would look on the act as +little more than an expression of good will and gratitude towards +his benefactor, his future father-in-law, his commander in the +Breton war. He would not look on it as forbidding him to +accept the English crown if it were offered to him. Harold, +the man of Duke William, might become a king, if he could, just +as William, the man of King Philip, might become a king, if he +could. As things went in those days, both the homage and +the promise of marriage were capable of being looked on very +lightly.</p> +<p>But it was not in the temper or in the circumstances of +William to put any such easy meaning on either promise. The +oath might, if needful, be construed very strictly, and William +was disposed to construe it very strictly. Harold had not +promised William a crown, which was not his to promise; but he +had promised to do that which might be held to forbid him to take +a crown which William held to be his own. If the man owed +his lord any duty at all, it was surely his duty not to thwart +his lord’s wishes in such a matter. If therefore, +when the vacancy of the throne came, Harold took the crown +himself, or even failed to promote William’s claim to it, +William might argue that he had not rightly discharged the duty +of a man to his lord. He could make an appeal to the world +against the new king, as a perjured man, who had failed to help +his lord in the matter where his lord most needed his help. +And, if the oath really had been taken on relics of special +holiness, he could further appeal to the religious feelings of +the time against the man who had done despite to the +saints. If he should be driven to claim the crown by arms, +he could give the war the character of a crusade. All this +in the end William did, and all this, we may be sure, he looked +forward to doing, when he caused Harold to become his man. +The mere obligation of homage would, in the skilful hands of +William and Lanfranc, be quite enough to work on men’s +minds, as William wished to work on them. To Harold +meanwhile and to those in England who heard the story, the +engagement would not seem to carry any of these +consequences. The mere homage then, which Harold could +hardly refuse, would answer William’s purpose nearly as +well as any of these fuller obligations which Harold would surely +have refused. And when a man older than William engaged to +marry William’s child-daughter, we must bear in mind the +lightness with which such promises were made. William could +not seriously expect that this engagement would be kept, if +anything should lead Harold to another marriage. The +promise was meant simply to add another count to the charges +against Harold when the time should come. Yet on this point +it is not clear that the oath was broken. Harold +undoubtedly married Ealdgyth, daughter of Ælfgar and widow +of Gruffydd, and not any daughter of William. But in one +version Harold is made to say that the daughter of William whom +he had engaged to marry was dead. And that one of +William’s daughters did die very early there seems little +doubt.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>Whatever William did Lanfranc no doubt at least helped to +plan. The Norman duke was subtle, but the Italian churchman +was subtler still. In this long series of schemes and +negotiations which led to the conquest of England, we are dealing +with two of the greatest recorded masters of statecraft. We +may call their policy dishonest and immoral, and so it was. +But it was hardly more dishonest and immoral than most of the +diplomacy of later times. William’s object was, +without any formal breach of faith on his own part, to entrap +Harold into an engagement which might be understood in different +senses, and which, in the sense which William chose to put upon +it, Harold was sure to break. Two men, themselves of +virtuous life, a rigid churchman and a layman of unusual +religious strictness, do not scruple to throw temptation in the +way of a fellow man in the hope that he will yield to that +temptation. They exact a promise, because the promise is +likely to be broken, and because its breach would suit their +purposes. Through all William’s policy a strong +regard for formal right as he chose to understand formal right, +is not only found in company with much practical wrong, but is +made the direct instrument of carrying out that wrong. +Never was trap more cunningly laid than that in which William now +entangled Harold. Never was greater wrong done without the +breach of any formal precept of right. William and Lanfranc +broke no oath themselves, and that was enough for them. But +it was no sin in their eyes to beguile another into engagements +which he would understand in one way and they in another; they +even, as their admirers tell the story, beguile him into +engagements at once unlawful and impossible, because their +interests would be promoted by his breach of those +engagements. William, in short, under the spiritual +guidance of Lanfranc, made Harold swear because he himself would +gain by being able to denounce Harold as perjured.</p> +<p>The moral question need not be further discussed; but we +should greatly like to know how far the fact of Harold’s +oath, whatever its nature, was known in England? On this +point we have no trustworthy authority. The English writers +say nothing about the whole matter; to the Norman writers this +point was of no interest. No one mentions this point, +except Harold’s romantic biographer at the beginning of the +thirteenth century. His statements are of no value, except +as showing how long Harold’s memory was cherished. +According to him, Harold formally laid the matter before the +Witan, and they unanimously voted that the oath—more, in +his version, than a mere oath of homage—was not +binding. It is not likely that such a vote was ever +formally passed, but its terms would only express what every +Englishman would feel. The oath, whatever its terms, had +given William a great advantage; but every Englishman would argue +both that the oath, whatever its terms, could not hinder the +English nation from offering Harold the crown, and that it could +not bind Harold to refuse the crown if it should be so +offered.</p> +<h2><a name="page63"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +63</span>CHAPTER VI.<br /> +<span class="GutSmall">THE NEGOTIATIONS OF DUKE +WILLIAM.</span><br /> +<span class="smcap">January</span>-<span +class="smcap">October</span> <span +class="GutSmall">1066.</span></h2> +<p><span class="smcap">If</span> the time that has been suggested +was the real time of Harold’s oath to William, its +fulfilment became a practical question in little more than a +year. How the year 1065 passed in Normandy we have no +record; in England its later months saw the revolt of +Northumberland against Harold’s brother Tostig, and the +reconciliation which Harold made between the revolters and the +king to the damage of his brother’s interests. Then +came Edward’s sickness, of which he died on January 5, +1066. He had on his deathbed recommended Harold to the +assembled Witan as his successor in the kingdom. The +candidate was at once elected. Whether William, Edgar, or +any other, was spoken of we know not; but as to the +recommendation of Edward and the consequent election of Harold +the English writers are express. The next day Edward was +buried, and Harold was crowned in regular form by Ealdred +Archbishop of York in Edward’s new church at +Westminster. Northumberland refused to acknowledge him; but +the malcontents were won over by the coming of the king and his +friend Saint Wulfstan Bishop of Worcester. It was most +likely now, as a seal of this reconciliation, that Harold married +Ealdgyth, the sister of the two northern earls Edwin and Morkere, +and the widow of the Welsh king Gruffydd. He doubtless +hoped in this way to win the loyalty of the earls and their +followers.</p> +<p>The accession of Harold was perfectly regular according to +English law. In later times endless fables arose; but the +Norman writers of the time do not deny the facts of the +recommendation, election, and coronation. They slur them +over, or, while admitting the mere facts, they represent each act +as in some way invalid. No writer near the time asserts a +deathbed nomination of William; they speak only of a nomination +at some earlier time. But some Norman writers represent +Harold as crowned by Stigand Archbishop of Canterbury. This +was not, in the ideas of those times, a trifling question. +A coronation was then not a mere pageant; it was the actual +admission to the kingly office. Till his crowning and +anointing, the claimant of the crown was like a bishop-elect +before his consecration. He had, by birth or election, the +sole right to become king; it was the coronation that made him +king. And as the ceremony took the form of an +ecclesiastical sacrament, its validity might seem to depend on +the lawful position of the officiating bishop. In England +to perform that ceremony was the right and duty of the Archbishop +of Canterbury; but the canonical position of Stigand was +doubtful. He had been appointed on the flight of Robert; he +had received the <i>pallium</i>, the badge of arch-episcopal +rank, only from the usurping Benedict the Tenth. It was +therefore good policy in Harold to be crowned by Ealdred, to +whose position there was no objection. This is the only +difference of fact between the English and Norman versions at +this stage. And the difference is easily explained. +At William’s coronation the king walked to the altar +between the two archbishops, but it was Ealdred who actually +performed the ceremony. Harold’s coronation doubtless +followed the same order. But if Stigand took any part in +that coronation, it was easy to give out that he took that +special part on which the validity of the rite depended.</p> +<p>Still, if Harold’s accession was perfectly lawful, it +was none the less strange and unusual. Except the Danish +kings chosen under more or less of compulsion, he was the first +king who did not belong to the West-Saxon kingly house. +Such a choice could be justified only on the ground that that +house contained no qualified candidate. Its only known +members were the children of the Ætheling Edward, young +Edgar and his sisters. Now Edgar would certainly have been +passed by in favour of any better qualified member of the kingly +house, as his father had been passed by in favour of King +Edward. And the same principle would, as things stood, +justify passing him by in favour of a qualified candidate not of +the kingly house. But Edgar’s right to the crown is +never spoken of till a generation or two later, when the +doctrines of hereditary right had gained much greater strength, +and when Henry the Second, great-grandson through his mother of +Edgar’s sister Margaret, insisted on his descent from the +old kings. This distinction is important, because Harold is +often called an usurper, as keeping out Edgar the heir by +birth. But those who called him an usurper at the time +called him so as keeping out William the heir by bequest. +William’s own election was out of the question. He +was no more of the English kingly house than Harold; he was a +foreigner and an utter stranger. Had Englishmen been minded +to choose a foreigner, they doubtless would have chosen Swegen of +Denmark. He had found supporters when Edward was chosen; he +was afterwards appealed to to deliver England from William. +He was no more of the English kingly house than Harold or +William; but he was grandson of a man who had reigned over +England, Northumberland might have preferred him to Harold; any +part of England would have preferred him to William. In +fact any choice that could have been made must have had something +strange about it. Edgar himself, the one surviving male of +the old stock, besides his youth, was neither born in the land +nor the son of a crowned king. Those two qualifications had +always been deemed of great moment; an elaborate pedigree went +for little; actual royal birth went for a great deal. There +was now no son of a king to choose. Had there been even a +child who was at once a son of Edward and a sister’s son of +Harold, he might have reigned with his uncle as his guardian and +counsellor. As it was, there was nothing to do but to +choose the man who, though not of kingly blood, had ruled England +well for thirteen years.</p> +<p>The case thus put seemed plain to every Englishman, at all +events to every man in Wessex, East-Anglia, and southern +Mercia. But it would not seem so plain in <i>other</i> +lands. To the greater part of Western Europe +William’s claim might really seem the better. William +himself doubtless thought his own claim the better; he deluded +himself as he deluded others. But we are more concerned +with William as a statesman; and if it be statesmanship to adapt +means to ends, whatever the ends may be, if it be statesmanship +to make men believe that the worse cause is the better, then no +man ever showed higher statesmanship than William showed in his +great pleading before all Western Christendom. It is a sign +of the times that it was a pleading before all Western +Christendom. Others had claimed crowns; none had taken such +pains to convince all mankind that the claim was a good +one. Such an appeal to public opinion marks on one side a +great advance. It was a great step towards the ideas of +International Law and even of European concert. It showed +that the days of mere force were over, that the days of subtle +diplomacy had begun. Possibly the change was not without +its dark side; it may be doubted whether a change from force to +fraud is wholly a gain. Still it was an appeal from the +mere argument of the sword to something which at least professed +to be right and reason. William does not draw the sword +till he has convinced himself and everybody else that he is +drawing it in a just cause. In that age the appeal +naturally took a religious shape. Herein lay its immediate +strength; herein lay its weakness as regarded the times to +come. William appealed to Emperor, kings, princes, +Christian men great and small, in every Christian land. He +would persuade all; he would ask help of all. But above all +he appealed to the head of Christendom, the Bishop of Rome. +William in his own person could afford to do so; where he +reigned, in Normandy or in England, there was no fear of Roman +encroachments; he was fully minded to be in all causes and over +all persons within his dominions supreme. While he lived, +no Pope ventured to dispute his right. But by acknowledging +the right of the Pope to dispose of crowns, or at least to judge +as to the right to crowns, he prepared many days of humiliation +for kings in general and specially for his own successors. +One man in Western Europe could see further than William, perhaps +even further than Lanfranc. The chief counsellor of Pope +Alexander the Second was the Archdeacon Hildebrand, the future +Gregory the Seventh. If William outwitted the world, +Hildebrand outwitted William. William’s appeal to the +Pope to decide between two claimants for the English crown +strengthened Gregory not a little in his daring claim to dispose +of the crowns of Rome, of Italy, and of Germany. Still this +recognition of Roman claims led more directly to the humiliation +of William’s successor in his own kingdom. Moreover +William’s successful attempt to represent his enterprise as +a holy war, a crusade before crusades were heard of, did much to +suggest and to make ready the way for the real crusades a +generation later. It was not till after William’s +death that Urban preached the crusade, but it was during +William’s life that Gregory planned it.</p> +<p>The appeal was strangely successful. William convinced, +or seemed to convince, all men out of England and Scandinavia +that his claim to the English crown was just and holy, and that +it was a good work to help him to assert it in arms. He +persuaded his own subjects; he certainly did not constrain +them. He persuaded some foreign princes to give him actual +help, some to join his muster in person; he persuaded all to help +him so far as not to hinder their subjects from joining him as +volunteers. And all this was done by sheer persuasion, by +argument good or bad. In adapting of means to ends, in +applying to each class of men that kind of argument which best +suited it, the diplomacy, the statesmanship, of William was +perfect. Again we ask, How far was it the statesmanship of +William, how far of Lanfranc? But a prince need not do +everything with his own hands and say everything with his own +tongue. It was no small part of the statesmanship of +William to find out Lanfranc, to appreciate him and to trust +him. And when two subtle brains were at work, more could be +done by the two working in partnership than by either working +alone.</p> +<p>By what arguments did the Duke of the Normans and the Prior of +Bec convince mankind that the worse cause was the better? +We must always remember the transitional character of the +age. England was in political matters in advance of other +Western lands; that is, it lagged behind other Western +lands. It had not gone so far on the downward course. +It kept far more than Gaul or even Germany of the old Teutonic +institutions, the substance of which later ages have won back +under new shapes. Many things were understood in England +which are now again understood everywhere, but which were no +longer understood in France or in the lands held of the French +crown. The popular election of kings comes foremost. +Hugh Capet was an elective king as much as Harold; but the French +kings had made their crown the most strictly hereditary of all +crowns. They avoided any interregnum by having their sons +crowned in their lifetime. So with the great fiefs of the +crown. The notion of kingship as an office conferred by the +nation, of a duchy or county as an office held under the king, +was still fully alive in England; in Gaul it was forgotten. +Kingdom, duchies, counties, had all become possessions instead of +offices, possessions passing by hereditary succession of some +kind. But no rule of hereditary succession was universally +or generally accepted. To this day the kingdoms of Europe +differ as to the question of female succession, and it is but +slowly that the doctrine of representation has ousted the more +obvious doctrine of nearness of kin. All these points were +then utterly unsettled; crowns, save of course that of the +Empire, were to pass by hereditary right; only what was +hereditary right? At such a time claims would be pressed +which would have seemed absurd either earlier or later. To +Englishmen, if it seemed strange to elect one who was not of the +stock of Cerdic, it seemed much more strange to be called on to +accept without election, or to elect as a matter of course, one +who was not of the stock of Cerdic and who was a stranger into +the bargain. Out of England it would not seem strange when +William set forth that Edward, having no direct heirs, had chosen +his near kinsman William as his successor. Put by itself, +that statement had a plausible sound. The transmission of a +crown by bequest belongs to the same range of ideas as its +transmission by hereditary right; both assume the crown to be a +property and not an office. Edward’s nomination of +Harold, the election of Harold, the fact that William’s +kindred to Edward lay outside the royal line of England, the fact +that there was, in the person of Edgar, a nearer kinsman within +that royal line, could all be slurred over or explained away or +even turned to William’s profit. Let it be that +Edward on his death-bed had recommended Harold, and that the +Witan had elected Harold. The recommendation was wrung from +a dying man in opposition to an earlier act done when he was able +to act freely. The election was brought about by force or +fraud; if it was free, it was of no force against William’s +earlier claim of kindred and bequest. As for Edgar, as few +people in England thought of him, still fewer out of England +would have ever heard of him. It is more strange that the +bastardy of William did not tell against him, as it had once told +in his own duchy. But this fact again marks the +transitional age. Altogether the tale that a man who was no +kinsman of the late king had taken to himself the crown which the +king had bequeathed to a kinsman, might, even without further +aggravation, be easily made to sound like a tale of wrong.</p> +<p>But the case gained tenfold strength when William added that +the doer of the wrong was of all men the one most specially bound +not to do it. The usurper was in any case William’s +man, bound to act in all things for his lord. Perhaps he +was more; perhaps he had directly sworn to receive William as +king. Perhaps he had promised all this with an oath of +special solemnity. It would be easy to enlarge on all these +further counts as making up an amount of guilt which William not +only had the right to chastise, but which he would be lacking in +duty if he failed to chastise. He had to punish the +perjurer, to avenge the wrongs of the saints. Surely all +who should help him in so doing would be helping in a righteous +work.</p> +<p>The answer to all this was obvious. Putting the case at +the very worst, assuming that Harold had sworn all that he is +ever said to have sworn, assuming that he swore it in the most +solemn way in which he is ever said to have sworn it, +William’s claim was not thereby made one whit better. +Whatever Harold’s own guilt might be, the people of England +had no share in it. Nothing that Harold had done could bar +their right to choose their king freely. Even if Harold +declined the crown, that would not bind the electors to choose +William. But when the notion of choosing kings had begun to +sound strange, all this would go for nothing. There would +be no need even to urge that in any case the wrong done by Harold +to William gave William a <i>casus belli</i> against Harold, and +that William, if victorious, might claim the crown of England, as +a possession of Harold’s, by right of conquest. In +fact William never claimed the crown by conquest, as conquest is +commonly understood. He always represented himself as the +lawful heir, unhappily driven to use force to obtain his +rights. The other pleas were quite enough to satisfy most +men out of England and Scandinavia. William’s work +was to claim the crown of which he was unjustly deprived, and +withal to deal out a righteous chastisement on the unrighteous +and ungodly man by whom he had been deprived of it.</p> +<p>In the hands of diplomatists like William and Lanfranc, all +these arguments, none of which had in itself the slightest +strength, were enough to turn the great mass of continental +opinion in William’s favour. But he could add further +arguments specially adapted to different classes of minds. +He could hold out the prospect of plunder, the prospect of lands +and honours in a land whose wealth was already proverbial. +It might of course be answered that the enterprise against +England was hazardous and its success unlikely. But in such +matters, men listen rather to their hopes than to their +fears. To the Normans it would be easy, not only to make +out a case against Harold, but to rake up old grudges against the +English nation. Under Harold the son of Cnut, Alfred, a +prince half Norman by birth, wholly Norman by education, the +brother of the late king, the lawful heir to the crown, had been +betrayed and murdered by somebody. A widespread belief laid +the deed to the charge of the father of the new king. This +story might easily be made a ground of national complaint by +Normandy against England, and it was easy to infer that Harold +had some share in the alleged crime of Godwine. It was easy +to dwell on later events, on the driving of so many Normans out +of England, with Archbishop Robert at their head. Nay, not +only had the lawful primate been driven out, but an usurper had +been set in his place, and this usurping archbishop had been made +to bestow a mockery of consecration on the usurping king. +The proposed aggression on England was even represented as a +missionary work, undertaken for the good of the souls of the +benighted islanders. For, though the English were +undoubtedly devout after their own fashion, there was much in the +ecclesiastical state of England which displeased strict churchmen +beyond sea, much that William, when he had the power, deemed it +his duty to reform. The insular position of England +naturally parted it in many things from the usages and feelings +of the mainland, and it was not hard to get up a feeling against +the nation as well as against its king. All this could not +really strengthen William’s claim; but it made men look +more favourably on his enterprise.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>The fact that the Witan were actually in session at +Edward’s death had made it possible to carry out +Harold’s election and coronation with extreme speed. +The electors had made their choice before William had any +opportunity of formally laying his claim before them. This +was really an advantage to him; he could the better represent the +election and coronation as invalid. His first step was of +course to send an embassy to Harold to call on him even now to +fulfil his oath. The accounts of this embassy, of which we +have no English account, differ as much as the different accounts +of the oath. Each version of course makes William demand +and Harold refuse whatever it had made Harold swear. These +demands and refusals range from the resignation of the kingdom to +a marriage with William’s daughter. And it is hard to +separate this embassy from later messages between the +rivals. In all William demands, Harold refuses; the +arguments on each side are likely to be genuine. Harold is +called on to give up the crown to William, to hold it of William, +to hold part of the kingdom of William, to submit the question to +the judgement of the Pope, lastly, if he will do nothing else, at +least to marry William’s daughter. Different writers +place these demands at different times, immediately after +Harold’s election or immediately before the battle. +The last challenge to a single combat between Harold and William +of course appears only on the eve of the battle. Now none +of these accounts come from contemporary partisans of Harold; +every one is touched by hostile feeling towards him. Thus +the constitutional language that is put into his mouth, almost +startling from its modern sound, has greater value. A King +of the English can do nothing without the consent of his +Witan. They gave him the kingdom; without their consent, he +cannot resign it or dismember it or agree to hold it of any man; +without their consent, he cannot even marry a foreign wife. +Or he answers that the daughter of William whom he promised to +marry is dead, and that the sister whom he promised to give to a +Norman is dead also. Harold does not deny the fact of his +oath—whatever its nature; he justifies its breach because +it was taken against is will, and because it was in itself of no +strength, as binding him to do impossible things. He does +not deny Edward’s earlier promise to William; but, as a +testament is of no force while the testator liveth, he argues +that it is cancelled by Edward’s later nomination of +himself. In truth there is hardly any difference between +the disputants as to matters of fact. One side admits at +least a plighting of homage on the part of Harold; the other side +admits Harold’s nomination and election. The real +difference is as to the legal effect of either. Herein +comes William’s policy. The question was one of +English law and of nothing else, a matter for the Witan of +England and for no other judges. William, by ingeniously +mixing all kinds of irrelevant issues, contrived to remove the +dispute from the region of municipal into that of international +law, a law whose chief representative was the Bishop of +Rome. By winning the Pope to his side, William could give +his aggression the air of a religious war; but in so doing, he +unwittingly undermined the throne that he was seeking and the +thrones of all other princes.</p> +<p>The answers which Harold either made, or which writers of his +time thought that he ought to have made, are of the greatest +moment in our constitutional history. The King is the doer +of everything; but he can do nothing of moment without the +consent of his Witan. They can say Yea or Nay to every +proposal of the King. An energetic and popular king would +get no answer but Yea to whatever he chose to ask. A king +who often got the answer of Nay, Nay, was in great danger of +losing his kingdom. The statesmanship of William knew how +to turn this constitutional system, without making any change in +the letter, into a despotism like that of Constantinople or +Cordova. But the letter lived, to come to light again on +occasion. The Revolution of 1399 was a falling back on the +doctrines of 1066, and the Revolution of 1688 was a falling back +on the doctrines of 1399. The principle at all three +periods is that the power of the King is strictly limited by law, +but that, within the limits which the law sets to his power, he +acts according to his own discretion. King and Witan stand +out as distinct powers, each of which needs the assent of the +other to its acts, and which may always refuse that assent. +The political work of the last two hundred years has been to +hinder these direct collisions between King and Parliament by the +ingenious conventional device of a body of men who shall be in +name the ministers of the Crown, but in truth the ministers of +one House of Parliament. We do not understand our own +political history, still less can we understand the position and +the statesmanship of the Conqueror, unless we fully take in what +the English constitution in the eleventh century really was, how +very modern-sounding are some of its doctrines, some of its +forms. Statesmen of our own day might do well to study the +meagre records of the Gemót of 1047. There is the +earliest recorded instance of a debate on a question of foreign +policy. Earl Godwine proposes to give help to Denmark, then +at war with Norway. He is outvoted on the motion of Earl +Leofric, the man of moderate politics, who appears as leader of +the party of non-intervention. It may be that in some +things we have not always advanced in the space of eight hundred +years.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>The negotiations of William with his own subjects, with +foreign powers, and with the Pope, are hard to arrange in +order. Several negotiations were doubtless going on at the +same time. The embassy to Harold would of course come first +of all. Till his demand had been made and refused, William +could make no appeal elsewhere. We know not whether the +embassy was sent before or after Harold’s journey to +Northumberland, before or after his marriage with Ealdgyth. +If Harold was already married, the demand that he should marry +William’s daughter could have been meant only in +mockery. Indeed, the whole embassy was so far meant in +mockery that it was sent without any expectation that its demands +would be listened to. It was sent to put Harold, from +William’s point of view, more thoroughly in the wrong, and +to strengthen William’s case against him. It would +therefore be sent at the first moment; the only statement, from a +very poor authority certainly, makes the embassy come on the +tenth day after Edward’s death. Next after the +embassy would come William’s appeal to his own subjects, +though Lanfranc might well be pleading at Rome while William was +pleading at Lillebonne. The Duke first consulted a select +company, who promised their own services, but declined to pledge +any one else. It was held that no Norman was bound to +follow the Duke in an attempt to win for himself a crown beyond +the sea. But voluntary help was soon ready. A meeting +of the whole baronage of Normandy was held at Lillebonne. +The assembly declined any obligation which could be turned into a +precedent, and passed no general vote at all. But the +barons were won over one by one, and each promised help in men +and ships according to his means.</p> +<p>William had thus, with some difficulty, gained the support of +his own subjects; but when he had once gained it, it was a +zealous support. And as the flame spread from one part of +Europe to another, the zeal of Normandy would wax keener and +keener. The dealings of William with foreign powers are +told us in a confused, piecemeal, and sometimes contradictory +way. We hear that embassies went to the young King Henry of +Germany, son of the great Emperor, the friend of England, and +also to Swegen of Denmark. The Norman story runs that both +princes promised William their active support. Yet Swegen, +the near kinsman of Harold, was a friend of England, and the same +writer who puts this promise into his mouth makes him send troops +to help his English cousin. Young Henry or his advisers +could have no motive for helping William; but subjects of the +Empire were at least not hindered from joining his banner. +To the French king William perhaps offered the bait of holding +the crown of England of him; but Philip is said to have +discouraged William’s enterprise as much as he could. +Still he did not hinder French subjects from taking a part in +it. Of the princes who held of the French crown, Eustace of +Boulogne, who joined the muster in person, and Guy of Ponthieu, +William’s own vassal, who sent his son, seem to have been +the only ones who did more than allow the levying of volunteers +in their dominions. A strange tale is told that Conan of +Britanny took this moment for bringing up his own forgotten +pretensions to the Norman duchy. If William was going to +win England, let him give up Normandy to him. He presently, +the tale goes, died of a strange form of poisoning, in which it +is implied that William had a hand. This is the story of +Walter and Biota over again. It is perhaps enough to say +that the Breton writers know nothing of the tale.</p> +<p>But the great negotiation of all was with the Papal +court. We might have thought that the envoy would be +Lanfranc, so well skilled in Roman ways; but William perhaps +needed him as a constant adviser by his own person. +Gilbert, Archdeacon of Lisieux, was sent to Pope Alexander. +No application could better suit papal interests than the one +that was now made; but there were some moral difficulties. +Not a few of the cardinals, Hildebrand tells us himself, argued, +not without strong language towards Hildebrand, that the Church +had nothing to do with such matters, and that it was sinful to +encourage a claim which could not be enforced without +bloodshed. But with many, with Hildebrand among them, the +notion of the Church as a party or a power came before all +thoughts of its higher duties. One side was carefully +heard; the other seems not to have been heard at all. We +hear of no summons to Harold, and the King of the English could +not have pleaded at the Pope’s bar without acknowledging +that his case was at least doubtful. The judgement of +Alexander or of Hildebrand was given for William. Harold +was declared to be an usurper, perhaps declared +excommunicated. The right to the English crown was declared +to be in the Duke of the Normans, and William was solemnly +blessed in the enterprise in which he was at once to win his own +rights, to chastise the wrong-doer, to reform the spiritual state +of the misguided islanders, to teach them fuller obedience to the +Roman See and more regular payment of its temporal dues. +William gained his immediate point; but his successors on the +English throne paid the penalty. Hildebrand gained his +point for ever, or for as long a time as men might be willing to +accept the Bishop of Rome as a judge in any matters. The +precedent by which Hildebrand, under another name, took on him to +dispose of a higher crown than that of England was now fully +established.</p> +<p>As an outward sign of papal favour, William received a +consecrated banner and a ring containing a hair of Saint +Peter. Here was something for men to fight for. The +war was now a holy one. All who were ready to promote their +souls’ health by slaughter and plunder might flock to +William’s standard, to the standard of Saint Peter. +Men came from most French-speaking lands, the Normans of Apulia +and Sicily being of course not slow to take up the quarrel of +their kinsfolk. But, next to his own Normandy, the lands +which sent most help were Flanders, the land of Matilda, and +Britanny, where the name of the Saxon might still be +hateful. We must never forget that the host of William, the +men who won England, the men who settled in England, were not an +exclusively Norman body. Not Norman, but <i>French</i>, is +the name most commonly opposed to <i>English</i>, as the name of +the conquering people. Each Norman severally would have +scorned that name for himself personally; but it was the only +name that could mark the whole of which he and his countrymen +formed a part. Yet, if the Normans were but a part, they +were the greatest and the noblest part; their presence alone +redeemed the enterprise from being a simple enterprise of +brigandage. The Norman Conquest was after all a Norman +Conquest; men of other lands were merely helpers. So far as +it was not Norman, it was Italian; the subtle wit of Lombard +Lanfranc and Tuscan Hildebrand did as much to overthrow us as the +lance and bow of Normandy.</p> +<h2><a name="page82"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +82</span>CHAPTER VII.<br /> +<span class="GutSmall">WILLIAM’S INVASION OF +ENGLAND.</span><br /> +<span class="smcap">August-December</span> <span +class="GutSmall">1066.</span></h2> +<p><span class="smcap">The</span> statesmanship of William had +triumphed. The people of England had chosen their king, and +a large part of the world had been won over by the arts of a +foreign prince to believe that it was a righteous and holy work +to set him on the throne to which the English people had chosen +the foremost man among themselves. No diplomatic success +was ever more thorough. Unluckily we know nothing of the +state of feeling in England while William was plotting and +pleading beyond the sea. Nor do we know how much men in +England knew of what was going on in other lands, or what they +thought when they heard of it. We know only that, after +Harold had won over Northumberland, he came back and held the +Easter Gemót at Westminster. Then in the words of +the Chronicler, “it was known to him that William Bastard, +King Edward’s kinsman, would come hither and win this +land.” This is all that our own writers tell us about +William Bastard, between his peaceful visit to England in 1052 +and his warlike visit in 1066. But we know that King Harold +did all that man could do to defeat his purposes, and that he was +therein loyally supported by the great mass of the English +nation, we may safely say by all, save his two brothers-in-law +and so many as they could influence.</p> +<p>William’s doings we know more fully. The military +events of this wonderful year there is no need to tell in +detail. But we see that William’s generalship was +equal to his statesmanship, and that it was met by equal +generalship on the side of Harold. Moreover, the luck of +William is as clear as either his statesmanship or his +generalship. When Harold was crowned on the day of the +Epiphany, he must have felt sure that he would have to withstand +an invasion of England before the year was out. But it +could not have come into the mind of Harold, William, or +Lanfranc, or any other man, that he would have to withstand two +invasions of England at the same moment.</p> +<p>It was the invasion of Harold of Norway, at the same time as +the invasion of William, which decided the fate of England. +The issue of the struggle might have gone against England, had +she had to strive against one enemy only; as it was, it was the +attack made by two enemies at once which divided her strength, +and enabled the Normans to land without resistance. The two +invasions came as nearly as possible at the same moment. +Harold Hardrada can hardly have reached the Yorkshire coast +before September; the battle of Fulford was fought on September +20th and that of Stamfordbridge on September 25th. William +landed on September 28th, and the battle of Senlac was fought on +October 14th. Moreover William’s fleet was ready by +August 12th; his delay in crossing was owing to his waiting for a +favourable wind. When William landed, the event of the +struggle in the North could not have been known in Sussex. +He might have had to strive, not with Harold of England, but with +Harold of Norway as his conqueror.</p> +<p>At what time of the year Harold Hardrada first planned his +invasion of England is quite uncertain. We can say nothing +of his doings till he is actually afloat. And with the +three mighty forms of William and the two Harolds on the scene, +there is something at once grotesque and perplexing in the way in +which an English traitor flits about among them. The +banished Tostig, deprived of his earldom in the autumn of 1065, +had then taken refuge in Flanders. He now plays a busy +part, the details of which are lost in contradictory +accounts. But it is certain that in May 1066 he made an +ineffectual attack on England. And this attack was most +likely made with the connivance of William. It suited +William to use Tostig as an instrument, and to encourage so +restless a spirit in annoying the common enemy. It is also +certain that Tostig was with the Norwegian fleet in September, +and that he died at Stamfordbridge. We know also that he +was in Scotland between May and September. It is therefore +hard to believe that Tostig had so great a hand in stirring up +Harold Hardrada to his expedition as the Norwegian story makes +out. Most likely Tostig simply joined the expedition which +Harold Hardrada independently planned. One thing is +certain, that, when Harold of England was attacked by two enemies +at once, it was not by two enemies acting in concert. The +interests of William and of Harold of Norway were as much opposed +to one another as either of them was to the interests of Harold +of England.</p> +<p>One great difficulty beset Harold and William alike. +Either in Normandy or in England it was easy to get together an +army ready to fight a battle; it was not easy to keep a large +body of men under arms for any long time without fighting. +It was still harder to keep them at once without fighting and +without plundering. What William had done in this way in +two invasions of Normandy, he was now called on to do on a +greater scale. His great and motley army was kept during a +great part of August and September, first at the Dive, then at +Saint Valery, waiting for the wind that was to take it to +England. And it was kept without doing any serious damage +to the lands where they were encamped. In a holy war, this +time was of course largely spent in appeals to the religious +feelings of the army. Then came the wonderful luck of +William, which enabled him to cross at the particular moment when +he did cross. A little earlier or later, he would have +found his landing stoutly disputed; as it was, he landed without +resistance. Harold of England, not being able, in his own +words, to be everywhere at once, had done what he could. He +and his brothers Gyrth and Leofwine undertook the defence of +southern England against the Norman; the earls of the North, his +brothers-in-law Edwin and Morkere, were to defend their own land +against the Norwegians. His own preparations were looked on +with wonder. To guard the long line of coast against the +invader, he got together such a force both by sea and land as no +king had ever got together before, and he kept it together for a +longer time than William did, through four months of inaction, +save perhaps some small encounters by sea. At last, early +in September, provisions failed; men were no doubt clamouring to +go back for the harvest, and the great host had to be +disbanded. Could William have sailed as soon as his fleet +was ready, he would have found southern England thoroughly +prepared to meet him. Meanwhile the northern earls had +clearly not kept so good watch as the king. Harold Hardrada +harried the Yorkshire coast; he sailed up the Ouse, and landed +without resistance. At last the earls met him in arms and +were defeated by the Northmen at Fulford near York. Four +days later York capitulated, and agreed to receive Harold +Hardrada as king. Meanwhile the news reached Harold of +England; he got together his housecarls and such other troops as +could be mustered at the moment, and by a march of almost +incredible speed he was able to save the city and all northern +England. The fight of Stamfordbridge, the defeat and death +of the most famous warrior of the North, was the last and +greatest success of Harold of England. But his northward +march had left southern England utterly unprotected. Had +the south wind delayed a little longer, he might, before the +second enemy came, have been again on the South-Saxon +coast. As it was, three days after Stamfordbridge, while +Harold of England was still at York, William of Normandy landed +without opposition at Pevensey.</p> +<p>Thus wonderfully had an easy path into England been opened for +William. The Norwegian invasion had come at the best moment +for his purposes, and the result had been what he must have +wished. With one Harold he must fight, and to fight with +Harold of England was clearly best for his ends. His work +would not have been done, if another had stepped in to chastise +the perjurer. Now that he was in England, it became a trial +of generalship between him and Harold. William’s +policy was to provoke Harold to fight at once. It was +perhaps Harold’s policy—so at least thought +Gyrth—to follow yet more thoroughly William’s own +example in the French invasions. Let him watch and follow +the enemy, let him avoid all action, and even lay waste the land +between London and the south coast, and the strength of the +invaders would gradually be worn out. But it might have +been hard to enforce such a policy on men whose hearts were +stirred by the invasion, and one part of whom, the King’s +own thegns and housecarls, were eager to follow up their victory +over the Northern with a yet mightier victory over the +Norman. And Harold spoke as an English king should speak, +when he answered that he would never lay waste a single rood of +English ground, that he would never harm the lands or the goods +of the men who had chosen him to be their king. In the +trial of skill between the two commanders, each to some extent +carried his point. William’s havoc of a large part of +Sussex compelled Harold to march at once to give battle. +But Harold was able to give battle at a place of his own +choosing, thoroughly suited for the kind of warfare which he had +to wage.</p> +<p>Harold was blamed, as defeated generals are blamed, for being +too eager to fight and not waiting for more troops. But to +any one who studies the ground it is plain that Harold needed, +not more troops, but to some extent better troops, and that he +would not have got those better troops by waiting. From +York Harold had marched to London, as the meeting-place for +southern and eastern England, as well as for the few who actually +followed him from the North and those who joined him on the +march. Edwin and Morkere were bidden to follow with the +full force of their earldoms. This they took care not to +do. Harold and his West-Saxons had saved them, but they +would not strike a blow back again. Both now and earlier in +the year they doubtless aimed at a division of the kingdom, such +as had been twice made within fifty years. Either Harold or +William might reign in Wessex and East-Anglia; Edwin should reign +in Northumberland and Mercia. William, the enemy of Harold +but no enemy of theirs, might be satisfied with the part of +England which was under the immediate rule of Harold and his +brothers, and might allow the house of Leofric to keep at least +an under-kingship in the North. That the brother earls held +back from the King’s muster is undoubted, and this +explanation fits in with their whole conduct both before and +after. Harold had thus at his command the picked men of +part of England only, and he had to supply the place of those who +were lacking with such forces as he could get. The lack of +discipline on the part of these inferior troops lost Harold the +battle. But matters would hardly have been mended by +waiting for men who had made up their minds not to come.</p> +<p>The messages exchanged between King and Duke immediately +before the battle, as well as at an earlier time, have been +spoken of already. The challenge to single combat at least +comes now. When Harold refused every demand, William called +on Harold to spare the blood of his followers, and decide his +claims by battle in his own person. Such a challenge was in +the spirit of Norman jurisprudence, which in doubtful cases +looked for the judgement of God, not, as the English did, by the +ordeal, but by the personal combat of the two parties. Yet +this challenge too was surely given in the hope that Harold would +refuse it, and would thereby put himself, in Norman eyes, yet +more thoroughly in the wrong. For the challenge was one +which Harold could not but refuse. William looked on +himself as one who claimed his own from one who wrongfully kept +him out of it. He was plaintiff in a suit in which Harold +was defendant; that plaintiff and defendant were both accompanied +by armies was an accident for which the defendant, who had +refused all peaceful means of settlement, was to blame. But +Harold and his people could not look on the matter as a mere +question between two men. The crown was Harold’s by +the gift of the nation, and he could not sever his own cause from +the cause of the nation. The crown was his; but it was not +his to stake on the issue of a single combat. If Harold +were killed, the nation might give the crown to whom they thought +good; Harold’s death could not make William’s claim +one jot better. The cause was not personal, but +national. The Norman duke had, by a wanton invasion, +wronged, not the King only, but every man in England, and every +man might claim to help in driving him out. Again, in an +ordinary wager of battle, the judgement can be enforced; here, +whether William slew Harold or Harold slew William, there was no +means of enforcing the judgement except by the strength of the +two armies. If Harold fell, the English army were not +likely to receive William as king; if William fell, the Norman +army was still less likely to go quietly out of England. +The challenge was meant as a mere blind; it would raise the +spirit of William’s followers; it would be something for +his poets and chroniclers to record in his honour; that was +all.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>The actual battle, fought on Senlac, on Saint Calixtus’ +day, was more than a trial of skill and courage between two +captains and two armies. It was, like the old battles of +Macedonian and Roman, a trial between two modes of warfare. +The English clave to the old Teutonic tactics. They fought +on foot in the close array of the shield-wall. Those who +rode to the field dismounted when the fight began. They +first hurled their javelins, and then took to the weapons of +close combat. Among these the Danish axe, brought in by +Cnut, had nearly displaced the older English broadsword. +Such was the array of the housecarls and of the thegns who had +followed Harold from York or joined him on his march. But +the treason of Edwin and Morkere had made it needful to supply +the place of the picked men of Northumberland with irregular +levies, armed almost anyhow. Of their weapons of various +kinds the bow was the rarest. The strength of the Normans +lay in the arms in which the English were lacking, in horsemen +and archers. These last seem to have been a force of +William’s training; we first hear of the Norman bowmen at +Varaville. These two ways of fighting were brought each one +to perfection by the leaders on each side. They had not yet +been tried against one another. At Stamfordbridge Harold +had defeated an enemy whose tactics were the same as his +own. William had not fought a pitched battle since +Val-ès-dunes in his youth. Indeed pitched battles, +such as English and Scandinavian warriors were used to in the +wars of Edmund and Cnut, were rare in continental warfare. +That warfare mainly consisted in the attack and defence of strong +places, and in skirmishes fought under their walls. But +William knew how to make use of troops of different kinds and to +adapt them to any emergency. Harold too was a man of +resources; he had gained his Welsh successes by adapting his men +to the enemy’s way of fighting. To withstand the +charge of the Norman horsemen, Harold clave to the national +tactics, but he chose for the place of battle a spot where those +tactics would have the advantage. A battle on the low +ground would have been favourable to cavalry; Harold therefore +occupied and fenced in a hill, the hill of Senlac, the site in +after days of the abbey and town of Battle, and there awaited the +Norman attack. The Norman horsemen had thus to make their +way up the hill under the shower of the English javelins, and to +meet the axes as soon as they reached the barricade. And +these tactics were thoroughly successful, till the inferior +troops were tempted to come down from the hill and chase the +Bretons whom they had driven back. This suggested to +William the device of the feigned flight; the English line of +defence was broken, and the advantage of ground was lost. +Thus was the great battle lost. And the war too was lost by +the deaths of Harold and his brothers, which left England without +leaders, and by the unyielding valour of Harold’s immediate +following. They were slain to a man, and south-eastern +England was left defenceless.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>William, now truly the Conqueror in the vulgar sense, was +still far from having full possession of his conquest. He +had military possession of part of one shire only; he had to look +for further resistance, and he met with not a little. But +his combined luck and policy served him well. He could put +on the form of full possession before he had the reality; he +could treat all further resistance as rebellion against an +established authority; he could make resistance desultory and +isolated. William had to subdue England in detail; he had +never again to fight what the English Chroniclers call a +<i>folk-fight</i>. His policy after his victory was +obvious. Still uncrowned, he was not, even in his own view, +king, but he alone had the right to become king. He had +thus far been driven to maintain his rights by force; he was not +disposed to use force any further, if peaceful possession was to +be had. His course was therefore to show himself stern to +all who withstood him, but to take all who submitted into his +protection and favour. He seems however to have looked for +a speedier submission than really happened. He waited a +while in his camp for men to come in and acknowledge him. +As none came, he set forth to win by the strong arm the land +which he claimed of right.</p> +<p>Thus to look for an immediate submission was not unnatural; +fully believing in the justice of his own cause, William would +believe in it all the more after the issue of the battle. +God, Harold had said, should judge between himself and William, +and God had judged in William’s favour. With all his +clear-sightedness, he would hardly understand how differently +things looked in English eyes. Some indeed, specially +churchmen, specially foreign churchmen, now began to doubt +whether to fight against William was not to fight against +God. But to the nation at large William was simply as +Hubba, Swegen, and Cnut in past times. England had before +now been conquered, but never in a single fight. Alfred and +Edmund had fought battle after battle with the Dane, and men had +no mind to submit to the Norman because he had been once +victorious. But Alfred and Edmund, in alternate defeat and +victory, lived to fight again; their people had not to choose a +new king; the King had merely to gather a new army. But +Harold was slain, and the first question was how to fill his +place. The Witan, so many as could be got together, met to +choose a king, whose first duty would be to meet William the +Conqueror in arms. The choice was not easy. +Harold’s sons were young, and not born +Æthelings. His brothers, of whom Gyrth at least must +have been fit to reign, had fallen with him. Edwin and +Morkere were not at the battle, but they were at the +election. But schemes for winning the crown for the house +of Leofric would find no favour in an assembly held in +London. For lack of any better candidate, the hereditary +sentiment prevailed. Young Edgar was chosen. But the +bishops, it is said, did not agree; they must have held that God +had declared in favour of William. Edwin and Morkere did +agree; but they withdrew to their earldoms, still perhaps +cherishing hopes of a divided kingdom. Edgar, as +king-elect, did at least one act of kingship by confirming the +election of an abbot of Peterborough; but of any general +preparation for warfare there is not a sign. The local +resistance which William met with shows that, with any combined +action, the case was not hopeless. But with Edgar for king, +with the northern earls withdrawing their forces, with the +bishops at least lukewarm, nothing could be done. The +Londoners were eager to fight; so doubtless were others; but +there was no leader. So far from there being another Harold +or Edmund to risk another battle, there was not even a leader to +carry out the policy of Fabius and Gyrth.</p> +<p>Meanwhile the Conqueror was advancing, by his own road and +after his own fashion. We must remember the effect of the +mere slaughter of the great battle. William’s own +army had suffered severely: he did not leave Hastings till he had +received reinforcements from Normandy. But to England the +battle meant the loss of the whole force of the south-eastern +shires. A large part of England was left helpless. +William followed much the same course as he had followed in +Maine. A legal claimant of the crown, it was his interest +as soon as possible to become a crowned king, and that in his +kinsman’s church at Westminster. But it was not his +interest to march straight on London and demand the crown, sword +in hand. He saw that, without the support of the northern +earls, Edgar could not possibly stand, and that submission to +himself was only a question of time. He therefore chose a +roundabout course through those south-eastern shires which were +wholly without means of resisting him. He marched from +Sussex into Kent, harrying the land as he went, to frighten the +people into submission. The men of Romney had before the +battle cut in pieces a party of Normans who had fallen into their +hands, most likely by sea. William took some undescribed +vengeance for their slaughter. Dover and its castle, the +castle which, in some accounts, Harold had sworn to surrender to +William, yielded without a blow. Here then he was +gracious. When some of his unruly followers set fire to the +houses of the town, William made good the losses of their +owners. Canterbury submitted; from thence, by a bold +stroke, he sent messengers who received the submission of +Winchester. He marched on, ravaging as he went, to the +immediate neighbourhood of London, but keeping ever on the right +bank of the Thames. But a gallant sally of the citizens was +repulsed by the Normans, and the suburb of Southwark was +burned. William marched along the river to +Wallingford. Here he crossed, receiving for the first time +the active support of an Englishman of high rank, Wiggod of +Wallingford, sheriff of Oxfordshire. He became one of a +small class of Englishmen who were received to William’s +fullest favour, and kept at least as high a position under him as +they had held before. William still kept on, marching and +harrying, to the north of London, as he had before done to the +south. The city was to be isolated within a cordon of +wasted lands. His policy succeeded. As no succours +came from the North, the hearts of those who had chosen them a +king failed at the approach of his rival. At Berkhampstead +Edgar himself, with several bishops and chief men, came to make +their submission. They offered the crown to William, and, +after some debate, he accepted it. But before he came in +person, he took means to secure the city. The beginnings of +the fortress were now laid which, in the course of +William’s reign, grew into the mighty Tower of London.</p> +<p>It may seem strange that when his great object was at last +within his grasp, William should have made his acceptance of it a +matter of debate. He claims the crown as his right; the +crown is offered to him; and yet he doubts about taking it. +Ought he, he asks, to take the crown of a kingdom of which he has +not as yet full possession? At that time the territory of +which William had even military possession could not have +stretched much to the north-west of a line drawn from Winchester +to Norwich. Outside that line men were, as William is made +to say, still in rebellion. His scruples were come over by +an orator who was neither Norman nor English, but one of his +foreign followers, Haimer Viscount of Thouars. The debate +was most likely got up at William’s bidding, but it was not +got up without a motive. William, ever seeking outward +legality, seeking to do things peaceably when they could be done +peaceably, seeking for means to put every possible enemy in the +wrong, wished to make his acceptance of the English crown as +formally regular as might be. Strong as he held his claim +to be by the gift of Edward, it would be better to be, if not +strictly chosen, at least peacefully accepted, by the chief men +of England. It might some day serve his purpose to say that +the crown had been offered to him, and that he had accepted it +only after a debate in which the chief speaker was an impartial +stranger. Having gained this point more, William set out +from Berkhampstead, already, in outward form, King-elect of the +English.</p> +<p>The rite which was to change him from king-elect into full +king took place in Eadward’s church of Westminster on +Christmas day, 1066, somewhat more than two months after the +great battle, somewhat less than twelve months after the death of +Edward and the coronation of Harold. Nothing that was +needed for a lawful crowning was lacking. The consent of +the people, the oath of the king, the anointing by the hands of a +lawful metropolitan, all were there. Ealdred acted as the +actual celebrant, while Stigand took the second place in the +ceremony. But this outward harmony between the nation and +its new king was marred by an unhappy accident. Norman +horsemen stationed outside the church mistook the shout with +which the people accepted the new king for the shout of men who +were doing him damage. But instead of going to his help, +they began, in true Norman fashion, to set fire to the +neighbouring houses. The havoc and plunder that followed +disturbed the solemnities of the day and were a bad omen for the +new reign. It was no personal fault of William’s; in +putting himself in the hands of subjects of such new and doubtful +loyalty, he needed men near at hand whom he could trust. +But then it was his doing that England had to receive a king who +needed foreign soldiers to guard him.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>William was now lawful King of the English, so far as outward +ceremonies could make him so. But he knew well how far he +was from having won real kingly authority over the whole +kingdom. Hardly a third part of the land was in his +obedience. He had still, as he doubtless knew, to win his +realm with the edge of the sword. But he could now go forth +to further conquests, not as a foreign invader, but as the king +of the land, putting down rebellion among his own subjects. +If the men of Northumberland should refuse to receive him, he +could tell them that he was their lawful king, anointed by their +own archbishop. It was sound policy to act as king of the +whole land, to exercise a semblance of authority where he had +none in fact. And in truth he was king of the whole land, +so far as there was no other king. The unconquered parts of +the land were in no mood to submit; but they could not agree on +any common plan of resistance under any common leader. Some +were still for Edgar, some for Harold’s sons, some for +Swegen of Denmark. Edwin and Morkere doubtless were for +themselves. If one common leader could have been found even +now, the throne of the foreign king would have been in no small +danger. But no such leader came: men stood still, or +resisted piecemeal, so the land was conquered piecemeal, and that +under cover of being brought under the obedience of its lawful +king.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>Now that the Norman duke has become an English king, his +career as an English statesman strictly begins, and a wonderful +career it is. Its main principle was to respect formal +legality wherever he could. All William’s purposes +were to be carried out, as far as possible, under cover of strict +adherence to the law of the land of which he had become the +lawful ruler. He had sworn at his crowning to keep the laws +of the land, and to rule his kingdom as well as any king that had +gone before him. And assuredly he meant to keep his +oath. But a foreign king, at the head of a foreign army, +and who had his foreign followers to reward, could keep that oath +only in its letter and not in its spirit. But it is +wonderful how nearly he came to keep it in the letter. He +contrived to do his most oppressive acts, to deprive Englishmen +of their lands and offices, and to part them out among strangers, +under cover of English law. He could do this. A +smaller man would either have failed to carry out his purposes at +all, or he could have carried them out only by reckless +violence. When we examine the administration of William +more in detail, we shall see that its effects in the long run +were rather to preserve than to destroy our ancient +institutions. He knew the strength of legal fictions; by +legal fictions he conquered and he ruled. But every legal +fiction is outward homage to the principle of law, an outward +protest against unlawful violence. That England underwent a +Norman Conquest did in the end only make her the more truly +England. But that this could be was because that conquest +was wrought by the Bastard of Falaise and by none other.</p> +<h2><a name="page100"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +100</span>CHAPTER VIII.<br /> +<span class="GutSmall">THE CONQUEST OF ENGLAND.</span><br /> +<span class="smcap">December</span> 1066-<span +class="smcap">March</span> <span +class="GutSmall">1070.</span></h2> +<p><span class="smcap">The</span> coronation of William had its +effect in a moment. It made him really king over part of +England; it put him into a new position with regard to the +rest. As soon as there was a king, men flocked to swear +oaths to him and become his men. They came from shires +where he had no real authority. It was most likely now, +rather than at Berkhampstead, that Edwin and Morkere at last made +up their minds to acknowledge some king. They became +William’s men and received again their lands and earldoms +as his grant. Other chief men from the North also submitted +and received their lands and honours again. But Edwin and +Morkere were not allowed to go back to their earldoms. +William thought it safer to keep them near himself, under the +guise of honour—Edwin was even promised one of his +daughters in marriage—but really half as prisoners, half as +hostages. Of the two other earls, Waltheof son of Siward, +who held the shires of Northampton and Huntingdon, and Oswulf who +held the earldom of Bernicia or modern Northumberland, we hear +nothing at this moment. As for Waltheof, it is strange if +he were not at Senlac; it is strange if he were there and came +away alive. But we only know that he was in William’s +allegiance a few months later. Oswulf must have held out in +some marked way. It was William’s policy to act as +king even where he had no means of carrying out his kingly +orders. He therefore in February 1067 granted the Bernician +earldom to an Englishman named Copsige, who had acted as +Tostig’s lieutenant. This implies the formal +deprivation of Oswulf. But William sent no force with the +new earl, who had to take possession as he could. That is +to say, of two parties in a local quarrel, one hoped to +strengthen itself by making use of William’s name. +And William thought that it would strengthen his position to let +at least his name be heard in every corner of the kingdom. +The rest of the story stands rather aloof from the main +history. Copsige got possession of the earldom for a +moment. He was then killed by Oswulf and his partisans, and +Oswulf himself was killed in the course of the year by a common +robber. At Christmas, 1067, William again granted or sold +the earldom to another of the local chiefs, Gospatric. But +he made no attempt to exercise direct authority in those parts +till the beginning of the year 1069.</p> +<p>All this illustrates William’s general course. +Crowned king over the land, he would first strengthen himself in +that part of the kingdom which he actually held. Of the +passive disobedience of other parts he would take no present +notice. In northern and central England William could +exercise no authority; but those lands were not in arms against +him, nor did they acknowledge any other king. Their earls, +now his earls, were his favoured courtiers. He could afford +to be satisfied with this nominal kingship, till a fit +opportunity came to make it real. He could afford to lend +his name to the local enterprise of Copsige. It would at +least be another count against the men of Bernicia that they had +killed the earl whom King William gave them.</p> +<p>Meanwhile William was taking very practical possession in the +shires where late events had given him real authority. His +policy was to assert his rights in the strongest form, but to +show his mildness and good will by refraining from carrying them +out to the uttermost. By right of conquest William claimed +nothing. He had come to take his crown, and he had +unluckily met with some opposition in taking it. The crown +lands of King Edward passed of course to his successor. As +for the lands of other men, in William’s theory all was +forfeited to the crown. The lawful heir had been driven to +seek his kingdom in arms; no Englishman had helped him; many +Englishmen had fought against him. All then were directly +or indirectly traitors. The King might lawfully deal with +the lands of all as his own. But in the greater part of the +kingdom it was impossible, in no part was it prudent, to carry +out this doctrine in its fulness. A passage in Domesday, +compared with a passage in the English Chronicles, shows that, +soon after William’s coronation, the English as a body, +within the lands already conquered, redeemed their lands. +They bought them back at a price, and held them as a fresh grant +from King William. Some special offenders, living and dead, +were exempted from this favour. The King took to himself +the estates of the house of Godwine, save those of Edith, the +widow of his revered predecessor, whom it was his policy to treat +with all honour. The lands too of those who had died on +Senlac were granted back to their heirs only of special favour, +sometimes under the name of alms. Thus, from the beginning +of his reign, William began to make himself richer than any king +that had been before him in England or than any other Western +king of his day. He could both punish his enemies and +reward his friends. Much of what he took he kept; much he +granted away, mainly to his foreign followers, but sometimes also +to Englishmen who had in any way won his favour. Wiggod of +Wallingford was one of the very few Englishmen who kept and +received estates which put them alongside of the great Norman +landowners. The doctrine that all land was held of the King +was now put into a practical shape. All, Englishmen and +strangers, not only became William’s subjects, but his men +and his grantees. Thus he went on during his whole +reign. There was no sudden change from the old state of +things to the new. After the general redemption of lands, +gradually carried out as William’s power advanced, no +general blow was dealt at Englishmen as such. They were +not, like some conquered nations, formally degraded or put under +any legal incapacities in their own land. William simply +distinguished between his loyal and his disloyal subjects, and +used his opportunities for punishing the disloyal and rewarding +the loyal. Such punishments and rewards naturally took the +shape of confiscations and grants of land. If punishment +was commonly the lot of the Englishman, and reward was the lot of +the stranger, that was only because King William treated all men +as they deserved. Most Englishmen were disloyal; most +strangers were loyal. But disloyal strangers and loyal +Englishmen fared according to their deserts. The final +result of this process, begun now and steadily carried on, was +that, by the end of William’s reign, the foreign king was +surrounded by a body of foreign landowners and office-bearers of +foreign birth. When, in the early days of his conquest, he +gathered round him the great men of his realm, it was still an +English assembly with a sprinkling of strangers. By the end +of his reign it had changed, step by step, into an assembly of +strangers with a sprinkling of Englishmen.</p> +<p>This revolution, which practically transferred the greater +part of the soil of England to the hands of strangers, was great +indeed. But it must not be mistaken for a sudden blow, for +an irregular scramble, for a formal proscription of Englishmen as +such. William, according to his character and practice, was +able to do all this gradually, according to legal forms, and +without drawing any formal distinction between natives and +strangers. All land was held of the King of the English, +according to the law of England. It may seem strange how +such a process of spoliation, veiled under a legal fiction, could +have been carried out without resistance. It was easier +because it was gradual and piecemeal. The whole country was +not touched at once, nor even the whole of any one +district. One man lost his land while his neighbour kept +his, and he who kept his land was not likely to join in the +possible plots of the other. And though the land had never +seen so great a confiscation, or one so largely for the behoof of +foreigners, yet there was nothing new in the thing itself. +Danes had settled under Cnut, and Normans and other Frenchmen +under Edward. Confiscation of land was the everyday +punishment for various public and private crimes. In any +change, such as we should call a change of ministry, as at the +fall and the return of Godwine, outlawry and forfeiture of lands +was the usual doom of the weaker party, a milder doom than the +judicial massacres of later ages. Even a conquest of +England was nothing new, and William at this stage contrasted +favourably with Cnut, whose early days were marked by the death +of not a few. William, at any rate since his crowning, had +shed the blood of no man. Men perhaps thought that things +might have been much worse, and that they were not unlikely to +mend. Anyhow, weakened, cowed, isolated, the people of the +conquered shires submitted humbly to the Conqueror’s +will. It needed a kind of oppression of which William +himself was never guilty to stir them into actual revolt.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>The provocation was not long in coming. Within three +months after his coronation, William paid a visit to his native +duchy. The ruler of two states could not be always in +either; he owed it to his old subjects to show himself among them +in his new character; and his absence might pass as a sign of the +trust he put in his new subjects. But the means which he +took to secure their obedience brought out his one weak +point. We cannot believe that he really wished to goad the +people into rebellion; yet the choice of his lieutenants might +seem almost like it. He was led astray by partiality for +his brother and for his dearest friend. To Bishop Ode of +Bayeux, and to William Fitz-Osbern, the son of his early +guardian, he gave earldoms, that of Kent to Odo, that of Hereford +to William. The Conqueror was determined before all things +that his kingdom should be united and obedient; England should +not be split up like Gaul and Germany; he would have no man in +England whose formal homage should carry with it as little of +practical obedience as his own homage to the King of the +French. A Norman earl of all Wessex or all Mercia might +strive after such a position. William therefore forsook the +old practice of dividing the whole kingdom into earldoms. +In the peaceful central shires he would himself rule through his +sheriffs and other immediate officers; he would appoint earls +only in dangerous border districts where they were needed as +military commanders. All William’s earls were in fact +<i>marquesses</i>, guardians of a march or frontier. Ode +had to keep Kent against attacks from the continent; William +Fitz-Osbern had to keep Herefordshire against the Welsh and the +independent English. This last shire had its own local +warfare. William’s authority did not yet reach over +all the shires beyond London and Hereford; but Harold had allowed +some of Edward’s Norman favourites to keep power +there. Hereford then and part of its shire formed an +isolated part of William’s dominions, while the lands +around remained unsubdued. William Fitz-Osbern had to guard +this dangerous land as earl. But during the King’s +absence both he and Ode received larger commissions as viceroys +over the whole kingdom. Ode guarded the South and William +the North and North-East. Norwich, a town dangerous from +its easy communication with Denmark, was specially under his +care. The nominal earls of the rest of the land, Edwin, +Morkere, and Waltheof, with Edgar, King of a moment, Archbishop +Stigand, and a number of other chief men, William took with him +to Normandy. Nominally his cherished friends and guests, +they went in truth, as one of the English Chroniclers calls them, +as hostages.</p> +<p>William’s stay in Normandy lasted about six +months. It was chiefly devoted to rejoicings and religious +ceremonies, but partly to Norman legislation. Rich gifts +from the spoils of England were given to the churches of +Normandy; gifts richer still were sent to the Church of Rome +whose favour had wrought so much for William. In exchange +for the banner of Saint Peter, Harold’s standard of the +Fighting-man was sent as an offering to the head of all +churches. While William was in Normandy, Archbishop +Maurilius of Rouen died. The whole duchy named Lanfranc as +his successor; but he declined the post, and was himself sent to +Rome to bring the pallium for the new archbishop John, a kinsman +of the ducal house. Lanfranc doubtless refused the see of +Rouen only because he was designed for a yet greater post in +England; the subtlest diplomatist in Europe was not sent to Rome +merely to ask for the pallium for Archbishop John.</p> +<p>Meanwhile William’s choice of lieutenants bore its fruit +in England. They wrought such oppression as William himself +never wrought. The inferior leaders did as they thought +good, and the two earls restrained them not. The earls +meanwhile were in one point there faithfully carrying out the +policy of their master in the building of castles; a work, which +specially when the work of Ode and William Fitz-Osbern, is always +spoken of by the native writers with marked horror. The +castles were the badges and the instruments of the Conquest, the +special means of holding the land in bondage. Meanwhile +tumults broke forth in various parts. The slaughter of +Copsige, William’s earl in Northumberland, took place about +the time of the King’s sailing for Normandy. In +independent Herefordshire the leading Englishman in those parts, +Eadric, whom the Normans called the <i>Wild</i>, allied himself +with the Welsh, harried the obedient lands, and threatened the +castle of Hereford. Nothing was done on either side beyond +harrying and skirmishes; but Eadric’s corner of the land +remained unsubdued. The men of Kent made a strange foreign +alliance with Eustace of Boulogne, the brother-in-law of Edward, +the man whose deeds had led to the great movement of +Edward’s reign, to the banishment and the return of +Godwine. He had fought against England on Senlac, and was +one of four who had dealt the last blow to the wounded +Harold. But the oppression of Ode made the Kentishmen glad +to seek any help against him. Eustace, now William’s +enemy, came over, and gave help in an unsuccessful attack on +Dover castle. Meanwhile in the obedient shires men were +making ready for revolt; in the unsubdued lands they were making +ready for more active defence. Many went beyond sea to ask +for foreign help, specially in the kindred lands of Denmark and +Northern Germany. Against this threatening movement +William’s strength lay in the incapacity of his enemies for +combined action. The whole land never rose at once, and +Danish help did not come at the times or in the shape when it +could have done most good.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>The news of these movements brought William back to England in +December. He kept the Midwinter feast and assembly at +Westminster; there the absent Eustace was, by a characteristic +stroke of policy, arraigned as a traitor. He was a foreign +prince against whom the Duke of the Normans might have led a +Norman army. But he had also become an English landowner, +and in that character he was accountable to the King and Witan of +England. He suffered the traitor’s punishment of +confiscation of lands. Afterwards he contrived to win back +William’s favour, and he left great English possessions to +his second wife and his son. Another stroke of policy was +to send an embassy to Denmark, to ward off the hostile purposes +of Swegen, and to choose as ambassador an English prelate who had +been in high favour with both Edward and Harold, Æthelsige, +Abbot of Ramsey. It came perhaps of his mission that Swegen +practically did nothing for two years. The envoy’s +own life was a chequered one. He lost William’s +favour, and sought shelter in Denmark. He again regained +William’s favour—perhaps by some service at the +Danish court—and died in possession of his abbey.</p> +<p>It is instructive to see how in this same assembly William +bestowed several great offices. The earldom of +Northumberland was vacant by the slaughter of two earls, the +bishopric of Dorchester by the peaceful death of its +bishop. William had no real authority in any part of +Northumberland, or in more than a small part of the diocese of +Dorchester. But he dealt with both earldom and bishopric as +in his own power. It was now that he granted Northumberland +to Gospatric. The appointment to the bishopric was the +beginning of a new system. Englishmen were now to give way +step by step to strangers in the highest offices and greatest +estates of the land. He had already made two Norman earls, +but they were to act as military commanders. He now made an +English earl, whose earldom was likely to be either nominal or +fatal. The appointment of Remigius of Fécamp to the +see of Dorchester was of more real importance. It is the +beginning of William’s ecclesiastical reign, the first step +in William’s scheme of making the Church his instrument in +keeping down the conquered. While William lived, no +Englishman was appointed to a bishopric. As bishoprics +became vacant by death, foreigners were nominated, and excuses +were often found for hastening a vacancy by deprivation. At +the end of William’s reign one English bishop only was +left. With abbots, as having less temporal power than +bishops, the rule was less strict. Foreigners were +preferred, but Englishmen were not wholly shut out. And the +general process of confiscation and regrant of lands was +vigorously carried out. The Kentish revolt and the general +movement must have led to many forfeitures and to further grants +to loyal men of either nation. As the English Chronicles +pithily puts it, “the King gave away every man’s +land.”</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>William could soon grant lands in new parts of England. +In February 1068 he for the first time went forth to warfare with +those whom he called his subjects, but who had never submitted to +him. In the course of the year a large part of England was +in arms against him. But there was no concert; the West +rose and the North rose; but the West rose first, and the North +did not rise till the West had been subdued. Western +England threw off the purely passive state which had lasted +through the year 1067. Hitherto each side had left the +other alone. But now the men of the West made ready for a +more direct opposition to the foreign government. If they +could not drive William out of what he had already won, they +would at least keep him from coming any further. Exeter, +the greatest city of the West, was the natural centre of +resistance; the smaller towns, at least of Devonshire and Dorset +entered into a league with the capital. They seem to have +aimed, like Italian cities in the like case, at the formation of +a civic confederation, which might perhaps find it expedient to +acknowledge William as an external lord, but which would maintain +perfect internal independence. Still, as Gytha, widow of +Godwine, mother of Harold, was within the walls of Exeter, the +movement was doubtless also in some sort on behalf of the House +of Godwine. In any case, Exeter and the lands and towns in +its alliance with Exeter strengthened themselves in every way +against attack.</p> +<p>Things were not now as on the day of Senlac, when Englishmen +on their own soil withstood one who, however he might cloke his +enterprise, was to them simply a foreign invader. But +William was not yet, as he was in some later struggles, the <i>de +facto</i> king of the whole land, whom all had acknowledged, and +opposition to whom was in form rebellion. He now held an +intermediate position. He was still an invader; for Exeter +had never submitted to him; but the crowned King of the English, +peacefully ruling over many shires, was hardly a mere invader; +resistance to him would have the air of rebellion in the eyes of +many besides William and his flatterers. And they could not +see, what we plainly see, what William perhaps dimly saw, that it +was in the long run better for Exeter, or any other part of +England, to share, even in conquest, the fate of the whole land, +rather than to keep on a precarious independence to the +aggravation of the common bondage. This we feel throughout; +William, with whatever motive, is fighting for the unity of +England. We therefore cannot seriously regret his +successes. But none the less honour is due to the men whom +the duty of the moment bade to withstand him. They could +not see things as we see them by the light of eight hundred +years.</p> +<p>The movement evidently stirred several shires; but it is only +of Exeter that we hear any details. William never used +force till he had tried negotiation. He sent messengers +demanding that the citizens should take oaths to him and receive +him within their walls. The choice lay now between +unconditional submission and valiant resistance. But the +chief men of the city chose a middle course which could gain +nothing. They answered as an Italian city might have +answered a Swabian Emperor. They would not receive the King +within their walls; they would take no oaths to him; but they +would pay him the tribute which they had paid to earlier +kings. That is, they would not have him as king, but only +as overlord over a commonwealth otherwise independent. +William’s answer was short; “It is not my custom to +take subjects on those conditions.” He set out on his +march; his policy was to overcome the rebellious English by the +arms of the loyal English. He called out the <i>fyrd</i>, +the militia, of all or some of the shires under his +obedience. They answered his call; to disobey it would have +needed greater courage than to wield the axe on Senlac. +This use of English troops became William’s custom in all +his later wars, in England and on the mainland; but of course he +did not trust to English troops only. The plan of the +campaign was that which had won Le Mans and London. The +towns of Dorset were frightfully harried on the march to the +capital of the West. Disunion at once broke out; the +leading men in Exeter sent to offer unconditional submission and +to give hostages. But the commonalty disowned the +agreement; notwithstanding the blinding of one of the hostages +before the walls, they defended the city valiantly for eighteen +days. It was only when the walls began to crumble away +beneath William’s mining-engines that the men of Exeter at +last submitted to his mercy. And William’s mercy +could be trusted. No man was harmed in life, limb, or +goods. But, to hinder further revolts, a castle was at once +begun, and the payments made by the city to the King were largely +raised.</p> +<p>Gytha, when the city yielded, withdrew to the Steep Holm, and +thence to Flanders. Her grandsons fled to Ireland; from +thence, in the course of the same year and the next, they twice +landed in Somerset and Devonshire. The Irish Danes who +followed them could not be kept back from plunder. +Englishmen as well as Normans withstood them, and the hopes of +the House of Godwine came to an end.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>On the conquest of Exeter followed the submission of the whole +West. All the land south of the Thames was now in +William’s obedience. Gloucestershire seems to have +submitted at the same time; the submission of Worcestershire is +without date. A vast confiscation of lands followed, most +likely by slow degrees. Its most memorable feature is that +nearly all Cornwall was granted to William’s brother Robert +Count of Mortain. His vast estate grew into the famous +Cornish earldom and duchy of later times. Southern England +was now conquered, and, as the North had not stirred during the +stirring of the West, the whole land was outwardly at +peace. William now deemed it safe to bring his wife to +share his new greatness. The Duchess Matilda came over to +England, and was hallowed to Queen at Westminster by Archbishop +Ealdred. We may believe that no part of his success gave +William truer pleasure. But the presence of the Lady was +important in another way. It was doubtless by design that +she gave birth on English soil to her youngest son, afterwards +the renowned King Henry the First. He alone of +William’s children was in any sense an Englishman. +Born on English ground, son of a crowned King and his Lady, +Englishmen looked on him as a countryman. And his father +saw the wisdom of encouraging such a feeling. Henry, +surnamed in after days the Clerk, was brought up with special +care; he was trained in many branches of learning unusual among +the princes of his age, among them in a thorough knowledge of the +tongue of his native land.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>The campaign of Exeter is of all William’s English +campaigns the richest in political teaching. We see how +near the cities of England came for a moment—as we shall +presently see a chief city of northern Gaul—to running the +same course as the cities of Italy and Provence. Signs of +the same tendency may sometimes be suspected elsewhere, but they +are not so clearly revealed. William’s later +campaigns are of the deepest importance in English history; they +are far richer in recorded personal actors than the siege of +Exeter; but they hardly throw so much light on the character of +William and his statesmanship. William is throughout ever +ready, but never hasty—always willing to wait when waiting +seems the best policy—always ready to accept a nominal +success when there is a chance of turning it into a real one, but +never accepting nominal success as a cover for defeat, never +losing an inch of ground without at once taking measures to +recover it. By this means, he has in the former part of +1068 extended his dominion to the Land’s End; before the +end of the year he extends it to the Tees. In the next year +he has indeed to win it back again; but he does win it back and +more also. Early in 1070 he was at last, in deed as well as +in name, full King over all England.</p> +<p>The North was making ready for war while the war in the West +went on, but one part of England did nothing to help the +other. In the summer the movement in the North took +shape. The nominal earls Edwin, Morkere, and Gospatric, +with the Ætheling Edgar and others, left William’s +court to put themselves at the head of the movement. Edwin +was specially aggrieved, because the king had promised him one of +his daughters in marriage, but had delayed giving her to +him. The English formed alliances with the dependent +princes of Wales and Scotland, and stood ready to withstand any +attack. William set forth; as he had taken Exeter, he took +Warwick, perhaps Leicester. This was enough for Edwin and +Morkere. They submitted, and were again received to +favour. More valiant spirits withdrew northward, ready to +defend Durham as the last shelter of independence, while Edgar +and Gospatric fled to the court of Malcolm of Scotland. +William went on, receiving the submission of Nottingham and York; +thence he turned southward, receiving on his way the submission +of Lincoln, Cambridge, and Huntingdon. Again he deemed it +his policy to establish his power in the lands which he had +already won rather than to jeopard matters by at once pressing +farther. In the conquered towns he built castles, and he +placed permanent garrisons in each district by granting estates +to his Norman and other followers. Different towns and +districts suffered in different degrees, according doubtless to +the measure of resistance met with in each. Lincoln and +Lincolnshire were on the whole favourably treated. An +unusual number of Englishmen kept lands and offices in city and +shire. At Leicester and Northampton, and in their shires, +the wide confiscations and great destruction of houses point to a +stout resistance. And though Durham was still untouched, +and though William had assuredly no present purpose of attacking +Scotland, he found it expedient to receive with all favour a +nominal submission brought from the King of Scots by the hands of +the Bishop of Durham.</p> +<p>If William’s policy ever seems less prudent than usual, +it was at the beginning of the next year, 1069. The extreme +North still stood out. William had twice commissioned +English earls of Northumberland to take possession if they +could. He now risked the dangerous step of sending a +stranger. Robert of Comines was appointed to the earldom +forfeited by the flight of Gospatric. While it was still +winter, he went with his force to Durham. By help of the +Bishop, he was admitted into the city, but he and his whole force +were cut off by the people of Durham and its neighbourhood. +Robert’s expedition in short led only to a revolt of York, +where Edgar was received and siege was laid to the castle. +William marched in person with all speed; he relieved the castle; +he recovered the city and strengthened it by a second castle on +the other side of the river. Still he thought it prudent to +take no present steps against Durham. Soon after this came +the second attempt of Harold’s sons in the West.</p> +<p>Later in this year William’s final warfare for the +kingdom began. In August, 1069 the long-promised help from +Denmark came. Swegen sent his brother Osbeorn and his sons +Harold and Cnut, at the head of the whole strength of Denmark and +of other Northern lands. If the two enterprises of +Harold’s sons had been planned in concert with their Danish +kinsmen, the invaders or deliverers from opposite sides had +failed to act together. Nor are Swegen’s own objects +quite clear. He sought to deliver England from William and +his Normans, but it is not so plain in whose interest he +acted. He would naturally seek the English crown for +himself or for one of his sons; the sons of Harold he would +rather make earls than kings. But he could feel no interest +in the kingship of Edgar. Yet, when the Danish fleet +entered the Humber, and the whole force of the North came to meet +it, the English host had the heir of Cerdic at its head. It +is now that Waltheof the son of Siward, Earl of Northampton and +Huntingdon, first stands out as a leading actor. Gospatric +too was there; but this time not Edwin and Morkere. Danes +and English joined and marched upon York; the city was occupied; +the castles were taken; the Norman commanders were made +prisoners, but not till they had set fire to the city and burned +the greater part of it, along with the metropolitan +minster. It is amazing to read that, after breaking down +the castles, the English host dispersed, and the Danish fleet +withdrew into the Humber.</p> +<p>England was again ruined by lack of concert. The news of +the coming of the Danes led only to isolated movements which were +put down piecemeal. The men of Somerset and Dorset and the +men of Devonshire and Cornwall were put down separately, and the +movement in Somerset was largely put down by English +troops. The citizens of Exeter, as well as the Norman +garrison of the castle, stood a siege on behalf of William. +A rising on the Welsh border under Eadric led only to the burning +of Shrewsbury; a rising in Staffordshire was held by William to +call for his own presence. But he first marched into +Lindesey, and drove the crews of the Danish ships across into +Holderness; there he left two Norman leaders, one of them his +brother Robert of Mortain and Cornwall; he then went westward and +subdued Staffordshire, and marched towards York by way of +Nottingham. A constrained delay by the Aire gave him an +opportunity for negotiation with the Danish leaders. +Osbeorn took bribes to forsake the English cause, and William +reached and entered York without resistance. He restored +the castles and kept his Christmas in the half-burned city. +And now William forsook his usual policy of clemency. The +Northern shires had been too hard to win. To weaken them, +he decreed a merciless harrying of the whole land, the direct +effects of which were seen for many years, and which left its +mark on English history for ages. Till the growth of modern +industry reversed the relative position of Northern and Southern +England, the old Northumbrian kingdom never fully recovered from +the blow dealt by William, and remained the most backward part of +the land. Herein comes one of the most remarkable results +of William’s coming. His greatest work was to make +England a kingdom which no man henceforth thought of +dividing. But the circumstances of his conquest of Northern +England ruled that for several centuries the unity of England +should take the form of a distinct preponderance of Southern +England over Northern. William’s reign strengthened +every tendency that way, chiefly by the fearful blow now dealt to +the physical strength and well-being of the Northern +shires. From one side indeed the Norman Conquest was truly +a Saxon conquest. The King of London and Winchester became +more fully than ever king over the whole land.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>The Conqueror had now only to gather in what was still left to +conquer. But, as military exploits, none are more memorable +than the winter marches which put William into full possession of +England. The lands beyond Tees still held out; in January +1070 he set forth to subdue them. The Earls Waltheof and +Gospatric made their submission, Waltheof in person, Gospatric by +proxy. William restored both of them to their earldoms, and +received Waltheof to his highest favour, giving him his niece +Judith in marriage. But he systematically wasted the land, +as he had wasted Yorkshire. He then returned to York, and +thence set forth to subdue the last city and shire that held +out. A fearful march led him to the one remaining fragment +of free England, the unconquered land of Chester. We know +not how Chester fell; but the land was not won without fighting, +and a frightful harrying was the punishment. In all this we +see a distinct stage of moral downfall in the character of the +Conqueror. Yet it is thoroughly characteristic. All +is calm, deliberate, politic. William will have no more +revolts, and he will at any cost make the land incapable of +revolt. Yet, as ever, there is no blood shed save in +battle. If men died of hunger, that was not William’s +doing; nay, charitable people like Abbot Æthelwig of +Evesham might do what they could to help the sufferers. But +the lawful king, kept so long out of his kingdom, would, at +whatever price, be king over the whole land. And the great +harrying of the northern shires was the price paid for +William’s kingship over them.</p> +<p>At Chester the work was ended which had begun at +Pevensey. Less than three years and a half, with intervals +of peace, had made the Norman invader king over all +England. He had won the kingdom; he had now to keep +it. He had for seventeen years to deal with revolts on both +sides of the sea, with revolts both of Englishmen and of his own +followers. But in England his power was never shaken; in +England he never knew defeat. His English enemies he had +subdued; the Danes were allowed to remain and in some sort to +help in his work by plundering during the winter. The King +now marched to the Salisbury of that day, the deeply fenced hill +of Old Sarum. The men who had conquered England were +reviewed in the great plain, and received their rewards. +Some among them had by failures of duty during the winter marches +lost their right to reward. Their punishment was to remain +under arms forty days longer than their comrades. William +could trust himself to the very mutineers whom he had picked out +for punishment. He had now to begin his real reign; and the +champion of the Church had before all things to reform the evil +customs of the benighted islanders, and to give them shepherds of +their souls who might guide them in the right way.</p> +<h2><a name="page122"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +122</span>CHAPTER IX.<br /> +<span class="GutSmall">THE SETTLEMENT OF ENGLAND.</span><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">1070–1086.</span></h2> +<p><span class="smcap">England</span> was now fully conquered, +and William could for a moment sit down quietly to the rule of +the kingdom that he had won. The time that immediately +followed is spoken of as a time of comparative quiet, and of less +oppression than the times either before or after. Before +and after, warfare, on one side of the sea or the other, was the +main business. Hitherto William has been winning his +kingdom in arms. Afterwards he was more constantly called +away to his foreign dominions, and his absence always led to +greater oppression in England. Just now he had a moment of +repose, when he could give his mind to the affairs of Church and +State in England. Peace indeed was not quite +unbroken. Events were tending to that famous revolt in the +Fenland which is perhaps the best remembered part of +William’s reign. But even this movement was merely +local, and did not seriously interfere with William’s +government. He was now striving to settle the land in +peace, and to make his rule as little grievous to the conquered +as might be. The harrying of Northumberland showed that he +now shrank from no harshness that would serve his ends; but from +mere purposeless oppression he was still free. Nor was he +ever inclined to needless change or to that scorn of the +conquered which meaner conquerors have often shown. He +clearly wished both to change and to oppress as little as he +could. This is a side of him which has been greatly +misunderstood, largely through the book that passes for the +History of Ingulf Abbot of Crowland. Ingulf was +William’s English secretary; a real history of his writing +would be most precious. But the book that goes by his name +is a forgery not older than the fourteenth century, and is in all +points contradicted by the genuine documents of the time. +Thus the forger makes William try to abolish the English language +and order the use of French in legal writings. This is pure +fiction. The truth is that, from the time of +William’s coming, English goes out of use in legal +writings, but only gradually, and not in favour of French. +Ever since the coming of Augustine, English and Latin had been +alternative tongues; after the coming of William English becomes +less usual, and in the course of the twelfth century it goes out +of use in favour of Latin. There are no French documents +till the thirteenth century, and in that century English begins +again. Instead of abolishing the English tongue, William +took care that his English-born son should learn it, and he even +began to learn it himself. A king of those days held it for +his duty to hear and redress his subjects’ complaints; he +had to go through the land and see for himself that those who +acted in his name did right among his people. This earlier +kings had done; this William wished to do; but he found his +ignorance of English a hindrance. Cares of other kinds +checked his English studies, but he may have learned enough to +understand the meaning of his own English charters. Nor did +William try, as he is often imagined to have done, to root out +the ancient institutions of England, and to set up in their stead +either the existing institutions of Normandy or some new +institutions of his own devising. The truth is that with +William began a gradual change in the laws and customs of +England, undoubtedly great, but far less than is commonly +thought. French names have often supplanted English, and +have made the amount of change seem greater than it really +was. Still much change did follow on the Norman Conquest, +and the Norman Conquest was so completely William’s own act +that all that came of it was in some sort his act also. But +these changes were mainly the gradual results of the state of +things which followed William’s coming; they were but very +slightly the results of any formal acts of his. With a +foreign king and foreigners in all high places, much practical +change could not fail to follow, even where the letter of the law +was unchanged. Still the practical change was less than if +the letter of the law had been changed as well. English law +was administered by foreign judges; the foreign grantees of +William held English land according to English law. The +Norman had no special position as a Norman; in every rank except +perhaps the very highest and the very lowest, he had Englishmen +to his fellows. All this helped to give the Norman Conquest +of England its peculiar character, to give it an air of having +swept away everything English, while its real work was to turn +strangers into Englishmen. And that character was impressed +on William’s work by William himself. The king +claiming by legal right, but driven to assert his right by the +sword, was unlike both the foreign king who comes in by peaceful +succession and the foreign king who comes in without even the +pretext of law. The Normans too, if born soldiers, were +also born lawyers, and no man was more deeply impressed with the +legal spirit than William himself. He loved neither to +change the law nor to transgress the law, and he had little need +to do either. He knew how to make the law his instrument, +and, without either changing or transgressing it, to use it to +make himself all-powerful. He thoroughly enjoyed that +system of legal fictions and official euphemisms which marks his +reign. William himself became in some sort an Englishman, +and those to whom he granted English lands had in some sort to +become Englishmen in order to hold them. The Norman stepped +into the exact place of the Englishman whose land he held; he +took his rights and his burthens, and disputes about those rights +and burthens were judged according to English law by the witness +of Englishmen. Reigning over two races in one land, William +would be lord of both alike, able to use either against the other +in case of need. He would make the most of everything in +the feelings and customs of either that tended to strengthen his +own hands. And, in the state of things in which men then +found themselves, whatever strengthened William’s hands +strengthened law and order in his kingdom.</p> +<p>There was therefore nothing to lead William to make any large +changes in the letter of the English law. The powers of a +King of the English, wielded as he knew how to wield them, made +him as great as he could wish to be. Once granting the +original wrong of his coming at all and bringing a host of +strangers with him, there is singularly little to blame in the +acts of the Conqueror. Of bloodshed, of wanton interference +with law and usage, there is wonderfully little. Englishmen +and Normans were held to have settled down in peace under the +equal protection of King William. The two races were +drawing together; the process was beginning which, a hundred +years later, made it impossible, in any rank but the highest and +the lowest, to distinguish Norman from Englishman. Among +the smaller landowners and the townsfolk this intermingling had +already begun, while earls and bishops were not yet so +exclusively Norman, nor had the free churls of England as yet +sunk so low as at a later stage. Still some legislation was +needed to settle the relations of the two races. King +William proclaimed the “renewal of the law of King +Edward.” This phrase has often been misunderstood; it +is a common form when peace and good order are restored after a +period of disturbance. The last reign which is looked back +to as to a time of good government becomes the standard of good +government, and it is agreed between king and people, between +contending races or parties, that things shall be as they were in +the days of the model ruler. So we hear in Normandy of the +renewal of the law of Rolf, and in England of the renewal of the +law of Cnut. So at an earlier time Danes and Englishmen +agreed in the renewal of the law of Edgar. So now Normans +and Englishmen agreed in the renewal of the law of Edward. +There was no code either of Edward’s or of William’s +making. William simply bound himself to rule as Edward had +ruled. But in restoring the law of King Edward, he added, +“with the additions which I have decreed for the advantage +of the people of the English.”</p> +<p>These few words are indeed weighty. The little +legislation of William’s reign takes throughout the shape +of additions. Nothing old is repealed; a few new enactments +are set up by the side of the old ones. And these words +describe, not only William’s actual legislation, but the +widest general effect of his coming. The Norman Conquest +did little towards any direct abolition of the older English laws +or institutions. But it set up some new institutions +alongside of old ones; and it brought in not a few names, habits, +and ways of looking at things, which gradually did their +work. In England no man has pulled down; many have added +and modified. Our law is still the law of King Edward with +the additions of King William. Some old institutions took +new names; some new institutions with new names sprang up by the +side of old ones. Sometimes the old has lasted, sometimes +the new. We still have a <i>king</i> and not a <i>roy</i>; +but he gathers round him a <i>parliament</i> and not a +<i>vitenagemót</i>. We have a <i>sheriff</i> and not +a <i>viscount</i>; but his district is more commonly called a +<i>county</i> than a <i>shire</i>. But <i>county</i> and +<i>shire</i> are French and English for the same thing, and +“parliament” is simply French for the “deep +speech” which King William had with his Witan. The +National Assembly of England has changed its name and its +constitution more than once; but it has never been changed by any +sudden revolution, never till later times by any formal +enactment. There was no moment when one kind of assembly +supplanted another. And this has come because our Conqueror +was, both by his disposition and his circumstances, led to act as +a preserver and not as a destroyer.</p> +<p>The greatest recorded acts of William, administrative and +legislative, come in the last days of his reign. But there +are several enactments of William belonging to various periods of +his reign, and some of them to this first moment of peace. +Here we distinctly see William as an English statesman, as a +statesman who knew how to work a radical change under +conservative forms. One enactment, perhaps the earliest of +all, provided for the safety of the strangers who had come with +him to subdue and to settle in the land. The murder of a +Norman by an Englishman, especially of a Norman intruder by a +dispossessed Englishman, was a thing that doubtless often +happened. William therefore provides for the safety of +those whom he calls “the men whom I brought with me or who +have come after me;” that is, the warriors of Senlac, +Exeter, and York. These men are put within his own peace; +wrong done to them is wrong done to the King, his crown and +dignity. If the murderer cannot be found, the lord and, +failing him, the hundred, must make payment to the King. Of +this grew the presentment of <i>Englishry</i>, one of the few +formal badges of distinction between the conquering and the +conquered race. Its practical need could not have lasted +beyond a generation or two, but it went on as a form ages after +it had lost all meaning. An unknown corpse, unless it could +be proved that the dead man was English, was assumed to be that +of a man who had come with King William, and the fine was +levied. Some other enactments were needed when two nations +lived side by side in the same land. As in earlier times, +Roman and barbarian each kept his own law, so now for some +purposes the Frenchman—“Francigena”—and +the Englishman kept their own law. This is chiefly with +regard to the modes of appealing to God’s judgement in +doubtful cases. The English did this by ordeal, the Normans +by wager of battle. When a man of one nation appealed a man +of the other, the accused chose the mode of trial. If an +Englishman appealed a Frenchman and declined to prove his charge +either way, the Frenchman might clear himself by oath. But +these privileges were strictly confined to Frenchmen who had come +with William and after him. Frenchmen who had in +Edward’s time settled in England as the land of their own +choice, reckoned as Englishmen. Other enactments, fresh +enactments of older laws, touched both races. The slave +trade was rife in its worst form; men were sold out of the land, +chiefly to the Danes of Ireland. Earlier kings had +denounced the crime, and earlier bishops had preached against +it. William denounced it again under the penalty of +forfeiture of all lands and goods, and Saint Wulfstan, the Bishop +of Worcester, persuaded the chief offenders, Englishmen of +Bristol, to give up their darling sin for a season. Yet in +the next reign Anselm and his synod had once more to denounce the +crime under spiritual penalties, when they had no longer the +strong arm of William to enforce them.</p> +<p>Another law bears more than all the personal impress of +William. In it he at once, on one side, forestalls the most +humane theories of modern times, and on the other sins most +directly against them. His remarkable unwillingness to put +any man to death, except among the chances of the battle-field, +was to some extent the feeling of his age. With him the +feeling takes the shape of a formal law. He forbids the +infliction of death for any crime whatever. But those who +may on this score be disposed to claim the Conqueror as a +sympathizer will be shocked at the next enactment. Those +crimes which kings less merciful than William would have punished +with death are to be punished with loss of eyes or other foul and +cruel mutilations. Punishments of this kind now seem more +revolting than death, though possibly, now as then, the sufferer +himself might think otherwise. But in those days to +substitute mutilation for death, in the case of crimes which were +held to deserve death, was universally deemed an act of +mercy. Grave men shrank from sending their fellow-creatures +out of the world, perhaps without time for repentance; but +physical sympathy with physical suffering had little place in +their minds. In the next century a feeling against bodily +mutilation gradually comes in; but as yet the mildest and most +thoughtful men, Anselm himself, make no protest against it when +it is believed to be really deserved. There is no sign of +any general complaint on this score. The English Chronicler +applauds the strict police of which mutilation formed a part, and +in one case he deliberately holds it to be the fitting punishment +of the offence. In fact, when penal settlements were +unknown and legal prisons were few and loathsome, there was +something to be said for a punishment which disabled the criminal +from repeating his offence. In William’s +jurisprudence mutilation became the ordinary sentence of the +murderer, the robber, the ravisher, sometimes also of English +revolters against William’s power. We must in short +balance his mercy against the mercy of Kirk and Jeffreys.</p> +<p>The ground on which the English Chronicler does raise his wail +on behalf of his countrymen is the special jurisprudence of the +forests and the extortions of money with which he charges the +Conqueror. In both these points the royal hand became far +heavier under the Norman rule. In both William’s +character grew darker as he grew older. He is charged with +unlawful exactions of money, in his character alike of sovereign +and of landlord. We read of his sharp practice in dealing +with the profits of the royal demesnes. He would turn out +the tenant to whom he had just let the land, if another offered a +higher rent. But with regard to taxation, we must remember +that William’s exactions, however heavy at the time, were a +step in the direction of regular government. In those days +all taxation was disliked. Direct taking of the +subject’s money by the King was deemed an extraordinary +resource to be justified only by some extraordinary emergency, to +buy off the Danes or to hire soldiers against them. Men +long after still dreamed that the King could “live of his +own,” that he could pay all expenses of his court and +government out of the rents and services due to him as a +landowner, without asking his people for anything in the +character of sovereign. Demands of money on behalf of the +King now became both heavier and more frequent. And another +change which had long been gradually working now came to a +head. When, centuries later, the King was bidden to +“live of his own,” men had forgotten that the land of +the King had once been the land of the nation. In all +Teutonic communities, great and small, just as in the city +communities of Greece and Italy, the community itself was a chief +landowner. The nation had its <i>folkland</i>, its <i>ager +publicus</i>, the property of no one man but of the whole +state. Out of this, by the common consent, portions might +be cut off and <i>booked</i>—granted by a written +document—to particular men as their own +<i>bookland</i>. The King might have his private estate, to +be dealt with at his own pleasure, but of the <i>folkland</i>, +the land of the nation, he was only the chief administrator, +bound to act by the advice of his Witan. But in this case +more than in others, the advice of the Witan could not fail to +become formal; the <i>folkland</i>, ever growing through +confiscations, ever lessening through grants, gradually came to +be looked on as the land of the King, to be dealt with as he +thought good. We must not look for any change formally +enacted; but in Edward’s day the notion of <i>folkland</i>, +as the possession of the nation and not of the King, could have +been only a survival, and in William’s day even the +survival passed away. The land which was practically the +land of King Edward became, as a matter of course, <i>Terra +Regis</i>, the land of King William. That land was now +enlarged by greater confiscations and lessened by greater grants +than ever. For a moment, every lay estate had been part of +the land of William. And far more than had been the land of +the nation remained the land of the King, to be dealt with as he +thought good.</p> +<p>In the tenure of land William seems to have made no formal +change. But the circumstances of his reign gave increased +strength to certain tendencies which had been long afloat. +And out of them, in the next reign, the malignant genius of +Randolf Flambard devised a systematic code of oppression. +Yet even in his work there is little of formal change. +There are no laws of William Rufus. The so called feudal +incidents, the claims of marriage, wardship, and the like, on the +part of the lord, the ancient <i>heriot</i> developed into the +later <i>relief</i>, all these things were in the germ under +William, as they had been in the germ long before him. In +the hands of Randolf Flambard they stiffen into established +custom; their legal acknowledgement comes from the charter of +Henry the First which promises to reform their abuses. Thus +the Conqueror clearly claimed the right to interfere with the +marriages of his nobles, at any rate to forbid a marriage to +which he objected on grounds of policy. Under Randolf +Flambard this became a regular claim, which of course was made a +means of extorting money. Under Henry the claim is +regulated and modified, but by being regulated and modified, it +is legally established.</p> +<p>The ordinary administration of the kingdom went on under +William, greatly modified by the circumstances of his reign, but +hardly at all changed in outward form. Like the kings that +were before him, he “wore his crown” at the three +great feasts, at Easter at Winchester, at Pentecost at +Westminster, at Christmas at Gloucester. Like the kings +that were before him, he gathered together the great men of the +realm, and when need was, the small men also. Nothing seems +to have been changed in the constitution or the powers of the +assembly; but its spirit must have been utterly changed. +The innermost circle, earls, bishops, great officers of state and +household, gradually changed from a body of Englishmen with a few +strangers among them into a body of strangers among whom two or +three Englishmen still kept their places. The result of +their “deep speech” with William was not likely to be +other than an assent to William’s will. The ordinary +freeman did not lose his abstract right to come and shout +“Yea, yea,” to any addition that King William made to +the law of King Edward. But there would be nothing to tempt +him to come, unless King William thought fit to bid him. +But once at least William did gather together, if not every +freeman, at least all freeholders of the smallest account. +On one point the Conqueror had fully made up his mind; on one +point he was to be a benefactor to his kingdom through all +succeeding ages. The realm of England was to be one and +indivisible. No ruler or subject in the kingdom of England +should again dream that that kingdom could be split +asunder. When he offered Harold the underkingship of the +realm or of some part of it, he did so doubtless only in the full +conviction that the offer would be refused. No such offer +should be heard of again. There should be no such division +as had been between Cnut and Edmund, between Harthacnut and the +first Harold, such as Edwin and Morkere had dreamed of in later +times. Nor should the kingdom be split asunder in that +subtler way which William of all men best understood, the way in +which the Frankish kingdoms, East and West, had split +asunder. He would have no dukes or earls who might become +kings in all but name, each in his own duchy or earldom. No +man in his realm should be to him as he was to his overlord at +Paris. No man in his realm should plead duty towards an +immediate lord as an excuse for breach of duty towards the lord +of that immediate lord. Hence William’s policy with +regard to earldoms. There was to be nothing like the great +governments which had been held by Godwine, Leofric, and Siward; +an Earl of the West-Saxons or the Northumbrians was too like a +Duke of the Normans to be endured by one who was Duke of the +Normans himself. The earl, even of the king’s +appointment, still represented the separate being of the district +over which he was set. He was the king’s +representative rather than merely his officer; if he was a +magistrate and not a prince, he often sat in the seat of former +princes, and might easily grow into a prince. And at last, +at the very end of his reign, as the finishing of his work, he +took the final step that made England for ever one. In 1086 +every landowner in England swore to be faithful to King William +within and without England and to defend him against his +enemies. The subject’s duty to the King was to any +duty which the vassal might owe to any inferior lord. When +the King was the embodiment of national unity and orderly +government, this was the greatest of all steps in the direction +of both. Never did William or any other man act more +distinctly as an English statesman, never did any one act tell +more directly towards the later making of England, than this +memorable act of the Conqueror. Here indeed is an addition +which William made to the law of Edward for the truest good of +the English folk. And yet no enactment has ever been more +thoroughly misunderstood. Lawyer after lawyer has set down +in his book that, at the assembly of Salisbury in 1086, William +introduced “the feudal system.” If the words +“feudal system” have any meaning, the object of the +law now made was to hinder any “feudal system” from +coming into England. William would be king of a kingdom, +head of a commonwealth, personal lord of every man in his realm, +not merely, like a King of the French, external lord of princes +whose subjects owed him no allegiance. This greatest +monument of the Conqueror’s statesmanship was carried into +effect in a special assembly of the English nation gathered on +the first day of August 1086 on the great plain of +Salisbury. Now, perhaps for the first time, we get a +distinct foreshadowing of Lords and Commons. The Witan, the +great men of the realm, and “the landsitting men,” +the whole body of landowners, are now distinguished. The +point is that William required the personal presence of every man +whose personal allegiance he thought worth having. Every +man in the mixed assembly, mixed indeed in race and speech, the +King’s own men and the men of other lords, took the oath +and became the man of King William. On that day England +became for ever a kingdom one and indivisible, which since that +day no man has dreamed of parting asunder.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>The great assembly of 1086 will come again among the events of +William’s later reign; it comes here as the last act of +that general settlement which began in 1070. That +settlement, besides its secular side, has also an ecclesiastical +side of a somewhat different character. In both +William’s coming brought the island kingdom into a closer +connexion with the continent; and brought a large displacement of +Englishmen and a large promotion of strangers. But on the +ecclesiastical side, though the changes were less violent, there +was a more marked beginning of a new state of things. The +religious missionary was more inclined to innovate than the +military conqueror. Here William not only added but +changed; on one point he even proclaimed that the existing law of +England was bad. Certainly the religious state of England +was likely to displease churchmen from the mainland. The +English Church, so directly the child of the Roman, was, for that +very reason, less dependent on her parent. She was a free +colony, not a conquered province. The English Church too +was most distinctly national; no land came so near to that ideal +state of things in which the Church is the nation on its +religious side. Papal authority therefore was weaker in +England than elsewhere, and a less careful line was drawn between +spiritual and temporal things and jurisdictions. Two +friendly powers could take liberties with each other. The +national assemblies dealt with ecclesiastical as well as with +temporal matters; one indeed among our ancient laws blames any +assembly that did otherwise. Bishop and earl sat together +in the local <i>Gemót</i>, to deal with many matters +which, according to continental ideas, should have been dealt +with in separate courts. And, by what in continental eyes +seemed a strange laxity of discipline, priests, bishops, members +of capitular bodies, were often married. The English +diocesan arrangements were unlike continental models. In +Gaul, by a tradition of Roman date, the bishop was bishop of the +city. His diocese was marked by the extent of the civil +jurisdiction of the city. His home, his head church, his +<i>bishopstool</i> in the head church, were all in the +city. In Teutonic England the bishop was commonly bishop, +not of a city but of a tribe or district; his style was that of a +tribe; his home, his head church, his bishopstool, might be +anywhere within the territory of that tribe. Still, on the +greatest point of all, matters in England were thoroughly to +William’s liking; nowhere did the King stand forth more +distinctly as the Supreme Governor of the Church. In +England, as in Normandy, the right of the sovereign to the +investiture of ecclesiastical benefices was ancient and +undisputed. What Edward had freely done, William went on +freely doing, and Hildebrand himself never ventured on a word of +remonstrance against a power which he deemed so wrongful in the +hands of his own sovereign. William had but to stand on the +rights of his predecessors. When Gregory asked for homage +for the crown which he had in some sort given, William answered +indeed as an English king. What the kings before him had +done for or paid to the Roman see, that would he do and pay; but +this no king before him had ever done, nor would he be the first +to do it. But while William thus maintained the rights of +his crown, he was willing and eager to do all that seemed needful +for ecclesiastical reform. And the general result of his +reform was to weaken the insular independence of England, to make +her Church more like the other Churches of the West, and to +increase the power of the Roman Bishop.</p> +<p>William had now a fellow-worker in his taste. The subtle +spirit which had helped to win his kingdom was now at his side to +help him to rule it. Within a few months after the taking +of Chester Lanfranc sat on the throne of Augustine. As soon +as the actual Conquest was over, William began to give his mind +to ecclesiastical matters. It might look like sacrilege +when he caused all the monasteries of England to be +harried. But no harm was done to the monks or to their +possessions. The holy houses were searched for the hoards +which the rich men of England, fearing the new king, had laid up +in the monastic treasuries. William looked on these hoards +as part of the forfeited goods of rebels, and carried them off +during the Lent of 1070. This done, he sat steadily down to +the reform of the English Church.</p> +<p>He had three papal legates to guide him, one of whom, +Ermenfrid, Bishop of Sitten, had come in on a like errand in the +time of Edward. It was a kind of solemn confirmation of the +Conquest, when, at the assembly held at Winchester in 1070, the +King’s crown was placed on his head by Ermenfrid. The +work of deposing English prelates and appointing foreign +successors now began. The primacy of York was regularly +vacant; Ealdred had died as the Danes sailed up the Humber to +assault or to deliver his city. The primacy of Canterbury +was to be made vacant by the deposition of Stigand. His +canonical position had always been doubtful; neither Harold nor +William had been crowned by him; yet William had treated him +hitherto with marked courtesy, and he had consecrated at least +one Norman bishop, Remigius of Dorchester. He was now +deprived both of the archbishopric and of the bishopric of +Winchester which he held with it, and was kept under restraint +for the rest of his life. According to foreign canonical +rules the sentence may pass as just; but it marked a stage in the +conquest of England when a stout-hearted Englishman was removed +from the highest place in the English Church to make way for the +innermost counsellor of the Conqueror. In the Pentecostal +assembly, held at Windsor, Lanfranc was appointed archbishop; his +excuses were overcome by his old master Herlwin of Bec; he came +to England, and on August 15, 1070 he was consecrated to the +primacy.</p> +<p>Other deprivations and appointments took place in these +assemblies. The see of York was given to Thomas, a canon of +Bayeux, a man of high character and memorable in the local +history of his see. The abbey of Peterborough was vacant by +the death of Brand, who had received the staff from the uncrowned +Eadgar. It was only by rich gifts that he had turned away +the wrath of William from his house. The Fenland was +perhaps already stirring, and the Abbot of Peterborough might +have to act as a military commander. In this case the +prelate appointed, a Norman named Turold, was accordingly more of +a soldier than of a monk. From these assemblies of 1070 the +series of William’s ecclesiastical changes goes on. +As the English bishops die or are deprived, strangers take their +place. They are commonly Normans, but Walcher, who became +Bishop of Durham in 1071, was one of those natives of Lorraine +who had been largely favoured in Edward’s day. At the +time of William’s death Wulfstan was the only Englishman +who kept a bishopric. Even his deprivation had once been +thought of. The story takes a legendary shape, but it +throws an important light on the relations of Church and State in +England. In an assembly held in the West Minster Wulfstan +is called on by William and Lanfranc to give up his staff. +He refuses; he will give it back to him who gave it, and places +it on the tomb of his dead master Edward. No of his enemies +can move it. The sentence is recalled, and the staff yields +to his touch. Edward was not yet a canonized saint; the +appeal is simply from the living and foreign king to the dead and +native king. This legend, growing up when Western Europe +was torn in pieces by the struggle about investitures, proves +better than the most authentic documents how the right which +Popes denied to Emperors was taken for granted in the case of an +English king. But, while the spoils of England, temporal +and spiritual, were thus scattered abroad among men of the +conquering race, two men at least among them refused all share in +plunder which they deemed unrighteous. One gallant Norman +knight, Gulbert of Hugleville, followed William through all his +campaigns, but when English estates were offered as his reward, +he refused to share in unrighteous gains, and went back to the +lands of his fathers which he could hold with a good +conscience. And one monk, Wimund of Saint-Leutfried, not +only refused bishoprics and abbeys, but rebuked the Conqueror for +wrong and robbery. And William bore no grudge against his +censor, but, when the archbishopric of Rouen became vacant, he +offered it to the man who had rebuked him. Among the +worthies of England Gulbert and Wimund can hardly claim a place, +but a place should surely be theirs among the men whom England +honours.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>The primacy of Lanfranc is one of the most memorable in our +history. In the words of the parable put forth by Anselm in +the next reign, the plough of the English Church was for +seventeen years drawn by two oxen of equal strength. By +ancient English custom the Archbishop of Canterbury was the +King’s special counsellor, the special representative of +his Church and people. Lanfranc cannot be charged with any +direct oppression; yet in the hands of a stranger who had his +spiritual conquest to make, the tribunitian office of former +archbishops was lost in that of chief minister of the +sovereign. In the first action of their joint rule, the +interest of king and primate was the same. Lanfranc sought +for a more distinct acknowledgement of the superiority of +Canterbury over the rival metropolis of York. And this fell +in with William’s schemes for the consolidation of the +kingdom. The political motive is avowed. +Northumberland, which had been so hard to subdue and which still +lay open to Danish invaders or deliverers, was still +dangerous. An independent Archbishop of York might +consecrate a King of the Northumbrians, native or Danish, who +might grow into a King of the English. The Northern +metropolitan had unwillingly to admit the superiority, and +something more, of the Southern. The caution of William and +his ecclesiastical adviser reckoned it among possible chances +that even Thomas of Bayeux might crown an invading Cnut or Harold +in opposition to his native sovereign and benefactor.</p> +<p>For some of his own purposes, William had perhaps chosen his +minister too wisely. The objects of the two colleagues were +not always the same. Lanfranc, sprung from Imperialist +Pavia, was no zealot for extravagant papal claims. The +caution with which he bore himself during the schism which +followed the strife between Gregory and Henry brought on him more +than one papal censure. Yet the general tendency of his +administration was towards the growth of ecclesiastical, and even +of papal, claims. William never dreamed of giving up his +ecclesiastical supremacy or of exempting churchmen from the +ordinary power of the law. But the division of the civil +and ecclesiastical jurisdiction, the increased frequency of +synods distinct from the general assemblies of the +realm—even though the acts of those synods needed the royal +assent—were steps towards that exemption of churchmen from +the civil power which was asserted in one memorable saying +towards the end of William’s own reign. William could +hold his own against Hildebrand himself; yet the increased +intercourse with Rome, the more frequent presence of Roman +Legates, all tended to increase the papal claims and the +deference yielded to them. William refused homage to +Gregory; but it is significant that Gregory asked for it. +It was a step towards the day when a King of England was glad to +offer it. The increased strictness as to the marriage of +the clergy tended the same way. Lanfranc did not at once +enforce the full rigour of Hildebrand’s decrees. +Marriage was forbidden for the future; the capitular clergy had +to part from their wives; but the vested interest of the parish +priest was respected. In another point William directly +helped to undermine his own authority and the independence of his +kingdom. He exempted his abbey of the Battle from the +authority of the diocesan bishop. With this began a crowd +of such exemptions, which, by weakening local authority, +strengthened the power of the Roman see. All these things +helped on Hildebrand’s great scheme which made the clergy +everywhere members of one distinct and exclusive body, with the +Roman Bishop at their head. Whatever tended to part the +clergy from other men tended to weaken the throne of every +king. While William reigned with Lanfranc at his side, +these things were not felt; but the seed was sown for the +controversy between Henry and Thomas and for the humiliation of +John.</p> +<p>Even those changes of Lanfranc’s primacy which seem of +purely ecclesiastical concern all helped, in some way to increase +the intercourse between England and the continent or to break +down some insular peculiarity. And whatever did this +increased the power of Rome. Even the decree of 1075 that +bishoprics should be removed to the chief cities of their +dioceses helped to make England more like Gaul or Italy. So +did the fancy of William’s bishops and abbots for +rebuilding their churches on a greater scale and in the last +devised continental style. All tended to make England less +of another world. On the other hand, one insular +peculiarity well served the purposes of the new primate. +Monastic chapters in episcopal churches were almost unknown out +of England. Lanfranc, himself a monk, favoured monks in +this matter also. In several churches the secular canons +were displaced by monks. The corporate spirit of the +regulars, and their dependence on Rome, was far stronger than +that of the secular clergy. The secular chapters could be +refractory, but the disputes between them and their bishops were +mainly of local importance; they form no such part of the general +story of ecclesiastical and papal advance as the long tale of the +quarrel between the archbishops and the monks of Christ +Church.</p> +<p>Lanfranc survived William, and placed the crown on the head of +his successor. The friendship between king and archbishop +remained unbroken through their joint lives. +Lanfranc’s acts were William’s acts; what the Primate +did must have been approved by the King. How far +William’s acts were Lanfranc’s acts it is less easy +to say. But the Archbishop was ever a trusted minister, and +a trusted counsellor, and in the King’s frequent absences +from England, he often acted as his lieutenant. We do not +find him actually taking a part in warfare, but he duly reports +military successes to his sovereign. It was William’s +combined wisdom and good luck to provide himself with a +counsellor than whom for his immediate purposes none could be +better. A man either of a higher or a lower moral level +than Lanfranc, a saint like Anselm or one of the mere worldly +bishops of the time, would not have done his work so well. +William needed an ecclesiastical statesman, neither unscrupulous +nor over-scrupulous, and he found him in the lawyer of Pavia, the +doctor of Avranches, the monk of Bec, the abbot of Saint +Stephen’s. If Lanfranc sometimes unwittingly +outwitted both his master and himself, if his policy served the +purposes of Rome more than suited the purposes of either, that is +the common course of human affairs. Great men are apt to +forget that systems which they can work themselves cannot be +worked by smaller men. From this error neither William nor +Lanfranc was free. But, from their own point of view, it +was their only error. Their work was to subdue England, +soul and body; and they subdued it. That work could not be +done without great wrong: but no other two men of that day could +have done it with so little wrong. The shrinking from +needless and violent change which is so strongly characteristic +of William, and less strongly of Lanfranc also, made their work +at the time easier to be done; in the course of ages it made it +easier to be undone.</p> +<h2><a name="page147"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +147</span>CHAPTER X.<br /> +<span class="GutSmall">THE REVOLTS AGAINST WILLIAM.</span><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">1070–1086.</span></h2> +<p><span class="smcap">The</span> years which saw the settlement +of England, though not years of constant fighting like the two +years between the march to Exeter and the fall of Chester, were +not years of perfect peace. William had to withstand foes +on both sides of the sea, to withstand foes in his own household, +to undergo his first defeat, to receive his first wound in +personal conflict. Nothing shook his firm hold either on +duchy or kingdom; but in his later years his good luck forsook +him. And men did not fail to connect this change in his +future with a change in himself, above all with one deed of blood +which stands out as utterly unlike all his other recorded +acts.</p> +<p>But the amount of warfare which William had to go through in +these later years was small compared with the great struggles of +his earlier days. There is no tale to tell like the war of +Val-ès-dunes, like the French invasions of Normandy, like +the campaigns that won England. One event only of the +earlier time is repeated almost as exactly as an event can be +repeated. William had won Maine once; he had now to win it +again, and less thoroughly. As Conqueror his work is done; +a single expedition into Wales is the only campaign of this part +of his life that led to any increase of territory.</p> +<p>When William sat down to the settlement of his kingdom after +the fall of Chester, he was in the strictest sense full king over +all England. For the moment the whole land obeyed him; at +no later moment did any large part of the land fail to obey +him. All opposition was now revolt. Men were no +longer keeping out an invader; when they rose, they rose against +a power which, however wrongfully, was the established government +of the land. Two such movements took place. One was a +real revolt of Englishmen against foreign rule. The other +was a rebellion of William’s own earls in their own +interests, in which English feeling went with the King. +Both were short sharp struggles which stand out boldly in the +tale. More important in the general story, though less +striking in detail, are the relations of William to the other +powers in and near the isle of Britain. With the crown of +the West-Saxon kings, he had taken up their claims to supremacy +over the whole island, and probably beyond it. And even +without such claims, border warfare with his Welsh and Scottish +neighbours could not be avoided. Counting from the +completion of the real conquest of England in 1070, there were in +William’s reign three distinct sources of +disturbance. There were revolts within the kingdom of +England. There was border warfare in Britain. There +were revolts in William’s continental dominions. And +we may add actual foreign warfare or threats of foreign warfare, +affecting William, sometimes in his Norman, sometimes in his +English character.</p> +<p>With the affairs of Wales William had little personally to +do. In this he is unlike those who came immediately before +and after him. In the lives of Harold and of William Rufus +personal warfare against the Welsh forms an important part. +William the Great commonly left this kind of work to the earls of +the frontier, to Hugh of Chester, Roger of Shrewsbury, and to his +early friend William of Hereford, so long as that fierce +warrior’s life lasted. These earls were ever at war +with the Welsh princes, and they extended the English kingdom at +their cost. Once only did the King take a personal share in +the work, when he entered South Wales, in 1081. We hear +vaguely of his subduing the land and founding castles; we see +more distinctly that he released many subjects who were in +British bondage, and that he went on a religious pilgrimage to +Saint David’s. This last journey is in some accounts +connected with schemes for the conquest of Ireland. And in +one most remarkable passage of the English Chronicle, the writer +for once speculates as to what might have happened but did +not. Had William lived two years longer, he would have won +Ireland by his wisdom without weapons. And if William had +won Ireland either by wisdom or by weapons, he would assuredly +have known better how to deal with it than most of those who have +come after him. If any man could have joined together the +lands which God has put asunder, surely it was he. This +mysterious saying must have a reference to some definite act or +plan of which we have no other record. And some slight +approach to the process of winning Ireland without weapons does +appear in the ecclesiastical intercourse between England and +Ireland which now begins. Both the native Irish princes and +the Danes of the east coast begin to treat Lanfranc as their +metropolitan, and to send bishops to him for consecration. +The name of the King of the English is never mentioned in the +letters which passed between the English primate and the kings +and bishops of Ireland. It may be that William was biding +his time for some act of special wisdom; but our speculations +cannot go any further than those of the Peterborough +Chronicler.</p> +<p>Revolt within the kingdom and invasion from without both began +in the year in which the Conquest was brought to an end. +William’s ecclesiastical reforms were interrupted by the +revolt of the Fenland. William’s authority had never +been fully acknowledged in that corner of England, while he wore +his crown and held his councils elsewhere. But the place +where disturbances began, the abbey of Peterborough, was +certainly in William’s obedience. The warfare made +memorable by the name of Hereward began in June 1070, and a +Scottish harrying of Northern England, the second of five which +are laid to the charge of Malcolm, took place in the same year, +and most likely about the same time. The English movement +is connected alike with the course of the Danish fleet and with +the appointment of Turold to the abbey of Peterborough. +William had bribed the Danish commanders to forsake their English +allies, and he allowed them to ravage the coast. A later +bribe took them back to Denmark; but not till they had shown +themselves in the waters of Ely. The people, largely of +Danish descent, flocked to them, thinking, as the Chronicler +says, that they would win the whole land. The movement was +doubtless in favour of the kingship of Swegen. But nothing +was done by Danes and English together save to plunder +Peterborough abbey. Hereward, said to have been the nephew +of Turold’s English predecessor, doubtless looked on the +holy place, under a Norman abbot, as part of the enemy’s +country.</p> +<p>The name of Hereward has gathered round it such a mass of +fiction, old and new, that it is hard to disentangle the few +details of his real history. His descent and birth-place +are uncertain; but he was assuredly a man of Lincolnshire, and +assuredly not the son of Earl Leofric. For some unknown +cause, he had been banished in the days of Edward or of +Harold. He now came back to lead his countrymen against +William. He was the soul of the movement of which the abbey +of Ely became the centre. The isle, then easily defensible, +was the last English ground on which the Conqueror was defied by +Englishmen fighting for England. The men of the Fenland +were zealous; the monks of Ely were zealous; helpers came in from +other parts of England. English leaders left their shelter +in Scotland to share the dangers of their countrymen; even Edwin +and Morkere at last plucked up heart to leave William’s +court and join the patriotic movement. Edwin was pursued; +he was betrayed by traitors; he was overtaken and slain, to +William’s deep grief, we are told. His brother +reached the isle, and helped in its defence. William now +felt that the revolt called for his own presence and his full +energies. The isle was stoutly attacked and stoutly +defended, till, according to one version, the monks betrayed the +stronghold to the King. According to another, Morkere was +induced to surrender by promises of mercy which William failed to +fulfil. In any case, before the year 1071 was ended, the +isle of Ely was in William’s hands. Hereward alone +with a few companions made their way out by sea. William +was less merciful than usual; still no man was put to +death. Some were mutilated, some imprisoned; Morkere and +other chief men spent the rest of their days in bonds. The +temper of the Conqueror had now fearfully hardened. Still +he could honour a valiant enemy; those who resisted to the last +fared best. All the legends of Hereward’s later days +speak of him as admitted to William’s peace and +favour. One makes him die quietly, another kills him at the +hands of Norman enemies, but not at William’s bidding or +with William’s knowledge. Evidence a little better +suggests that he bore arms for his new sovereign beyond the sea; +and an entry in Domesday also suggests that he held lands under +Count Robert of Mortain in Warwickshire. It would suit +William’s policy, when he received Hereward to his favour, +to make him exchange lands near to the scene of his exploits for +lands in a distant shire held under the lordship of the +King’s brother.</p> +<p>Meanwhile, most likely in the summer months of 1070, Malcolm +ravaged Cleveland, Durham, and other districts where there must +have been little left to ravage. Meanwhile the +Ætheling Edgar and his sisters, with other English exiles, +sought shelter in Scotland, and were hospitably received. +At the same time Gospatric, now William’s earl in +Northumberland, retaliated by a harrying of Scottish Cumberland, +which provoked Malcolm to greater cruelties. It was said +that there was no house in Scotland so poor that it had not an +English bondman. Presently some of Malcolm’s English +guests joined the defenders of Ely; those of highest birth stayed +in Scotland, and Malcolm, after much striving, persuaded Margaret +the sister of Edgar to become his wife. Her praises are +written in Scottish history, and the marriage had no small share +in the process which made the Scottish kings and the lands which +formed their real kingdom practically English. The sons and +grandsons of Margaret, sprung of the Old-English kingly house, +were far more English within their own realm than the Norman and +Angevin kings of Southern England. But within the English +border men looked at things with other eyes. Thrice again +did Malcolm ravage England; two and twenty years later he was +slain in his last visit of havoc. William meanwhile and his +earls at least drew to themselves some measure of loyalty from +the men of Northern England as the guardians of the land against +the Scot.</p> +<p>For the present however Malcolm’s invasion was only +avenged by Gospatric’s harrying in Cumberland. The +year 1071 called William to Ely; in the early part of 1072 his +presence was still needed on the mainland; in August he found +leisure for a march against Scotland. He went as an English +king, to assert the rights of the English crown, to avenge wrongs +done to the English land; and on such an errand Englishmen +followed him gladly. Eadric, the defender of Herefordshire, +had made his peace with the King, and he now held a place of high +honour in his army. But if William met with any armed +resistance on his Scottish expedition, it did not amount to a +pitched battle. He passed through Lothian into Scotland; he +crossed Forth and drew near to Tay, and there, by the round tower +of Abernethy, the King of Scots swore oaths and gave hostages and +became the man of the King of the English. William might +now call himself, like his West-Saxon predecessors, +<i>Bretwalda</i> and <i>Basileus</i> of the isle of +Britain. This was the highest point of his fortune. +Duke of the Normans, King of the English, he was undisputed lord +from the march of Anjou to the narrow sea between Caithness and +Orkney.</p> +<p>The exact terms of the treaty between William’s royal +vassal and his overlord are unknown. But one of them was +clearly the removal of Edgar from Scotland. Before long he +was on the continent. William had not yet learned that +Edgar was less dangerous in Britain than in any other part of the +world, and that he was safest of all in William’s own +court. Homage done and hostages received, the Lord of all +Britain returned to his immediate kingdom. His march is +connected with many legendary stories. In real history it +is marked by the foundation of the castle of Durham, and by the +Conqueror’s confirmation of the privileges of the palatine +bishops. If all the earls of England had been like the +earls of Chester, and all the bishops like the bishops of Durham, +England would assuredly have split up, like Germany, into a loose +federation of temporal and spiritual princes. This it was +William’s special work to hinder; but he doubtless saw that +the exceptional privileges of one or two favoured lordships, +standing in marked contrast to the rest, would not really +interfere with his great plan of union. And William would +hardly have confirmed the sees of London or Winchester in the +privileges which he allowed to the distant see of Durham. +He now also made a grant of earldoms, the object of which is less +clear than that of most of his actions. It is not easy to +say why Gospatric was deprived of his earldom. His former +acts of hostility to William had been covered by his pardon and +reappointment in 1069; and since then he had acted as a loyal, if +perhaps an indiscreet, guardian of the land. Two greater +earldoms than his had become vacant by the revolt, the death, the +imprisonment, of Edwin and Morkere. But these William had +no intention of filling. He would not have in his realm +anything so dangerous as an earl of the Mercian’s or the +Northumbrians in the old sense, whether English or Norman. +But the defence of the northern frontier needed an earl to rule +Northumberland in the later sense, the land north of the +Tyne. And after the fate of Robert of Comines, William +could not as yet put a Norman earl in so perilous a post. +But the Englishman whom he chose was open to the same charges as +the deposed Gospatric. For he was Waltheof the son of +Siward, the hero of the storm of York in 1069. Already Earl +of Northampton and Huntingdon, he was at this time high in the +King’s personal favour, perhaps already the husband of the +King’s niece. One side of William’s policy +comes out here. Union was sometimes helped by +division. There were men whom William loved to make great, +but whom he had no mind to make dangerous. He gave them +vast estates, but estates for the most part scattered over +different parts of the kingdom. It was only in the border +earldoms and in Cornwall that he allowed anything at all near to +the lordship of a whole shire to be put in the hands of a single +man. One Norman and one Englishman held two earldoms +together; but they were earldoms far apart. Roger of +Montgomery held the earldoms of Shrewsbury and Sussex, and +Waltheof to his midland earldom of Northampton and Huntingdon now +added the rule of distant Northumberland. The men who had +fought most stoutly against William were the men whom he most +willingly received to favour. Eadric and Hereward were +honoured; Waltheof was honoured more highly. He ranked +along with the greatest Normans; his position was perhaps higher +than any but the King’s born kinsmen. But the whole +tale of Waltheof is a problem that touches the character of the +king under whom he rose and fell. Lifted up higher than any +other man among the conquered, he was the one man whom William +put to death on a political charge. It is hard to see the +reasons for either his rise or his fall. It was doubtless +mainly his end which won him the abiding reverence of his +countrymen. His valour and his piety are loudly +praised. But his valour we know only from his one personal +exploit at York; his piety was consistent with a base +murder. In other matters, he seems amiable, irresolute, and +of a scrupulous conscience, and Northumbrian morality perhaps saw +no great crime in a murder committed under the traditions of a +Northumbrian deadly feud. Long before Waltheof was born, +his grandfather Earl Ealdred had been killed by a certain +Carl. The sons of Carl had fought by his side at York; but, +notwithstanding this comradeship, the first act of +Waltheof’s rule in Northumberland was to send men to slay +them beyond the bounds of his earldom. A crime that was +perhaps admired in Northumberland and unheard of elsewhere did +not lose him either the favour of the King or the friendship of +his neighbour Bishop Walcher, a reforming prelate with whom +Waltheof acted in concert. And when he was chosen as the +single exception to William’s merciful rule, it was not for +this undoubted crime, but on charges of which, even if guilty, he +might well have been forgiven.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>The sojourn of William on the continent in 1072 carries us out +of England and Normandy into the general affairs of Europe. +Signs may have already showed themselves of what was coming to +the south of Normandy; but the interest of the moment lay in the +country of Matilda. Flanders, long the firm ally of +Normandy, was now to change into a bitter enemy. Count +Baldwin died in 1067; his successor of the same name died three +years later, and a war followed between his widow Richildis, the +guardian of his young son Arnulf, and his brother Robert the +Frisian. Robert had won fame in the East; he had received +the sovereignty of Friesland—a name which takes in Holland +and Zealand—and he was now invited to deliver Flanders from +the oppressions of Richildis. Meanwhile, Matilda was acting +as regent of Normandy, with Earl William of Hereford as her +counsellor. Richildis sought help of her son’s two +overlords, King Henry of Germany and King Philip of France. +Philip came in person; the German succours were too late. +From Normandy came Earl William with a small party of +knights. The kings had been asked for armies; to the Earl +she offered herself, and he came to fight for his bride. +But early in 1071 Philip, Arnulf, and William, were all +overthrown by Robert the Frisian in the battle of Cassel. +Arnulf and Earl William were killed; Philip made peace with +Robert, henceforth undisputed Count of Flanders.</p> +<p>All this brought King William to the continent, while the +invasion of Malcolm was still unavenged. No open war +followed between Normandy and Flanders; but for the rest of their +lives Robert and William were enemies, and each helped the +enemies of the other. William gave his support to Baldwin +brother of the slain Arnulf, who strove to win Flanders from +Robert. But the real interest of this episode lies in the +impression which was made in the lands east of Flanders. In +the troubled state of Germany, when Henry the Fourth was striving +with the Saxons, both sides seem to have looked to the Conqueror +of England with hope and with fear. On this matter our +English and Norman authorities are silent, and the notices in the +contemporary German writers are strangely unlike one +another. But they show at least that the prince who ruled +on both sides of the sea was largely in men’s +thoughts. The Saxon enemy of Henry describes him in his +despair as seeking help in Denmark, France, Aquitaine, and also +of the King of the English, promising him the like help, if he +should ever need it. William and Henry had both to guard +against Saxon enmity, but the throne at Winchester stood firmer +than the throne at Goslar. But the historian of the +continental Saxons puts into William’s mouth an answer +utterly unsuited to his position. He is made, when in +Normandy, to answer that, having won his kingdom by force, he +fears to leave it, lest he might not find his way back +again. Far more striking is the story told three years +later by Lambert of Herzfeld. Henry, when engaged in an +Hungarian war, heard that the famous Archbishop Hanno of +Köln had leagued with William <i>Bostar</i>—so is his +earliest surname written—King of the English, and that a +vast army was coming to set the island monarch on the German +throne. The host never came; but Henry hastened back to +guard his frontier against <i>barbarians</i>. By that +phrase a Teutonic writer can hardly mean the insular part of +William’s subjects.</p> +<p>Now assuredly William never cherished, as his successor +probably did, so wild a dream as that of a kingly crowning at +Aachen, to be followed perhaps by an imperial crowning at +Rome. But that such schemes were looked on as a practical +danger against which the actual German King had to guard, at +least shows the place which the Conqueror of England held in +European imagination.</p> +<p>For the three or four years immediately following the +surrender of Ely, William’s journeys to and fro between his +kingdom and his duchy were specially frequent. Matilda +seems to have always stayed in Normandy; she is never mentioned +in England after the year of her coronation and the birth of her +youngest son, and she commonly acted as regent of the +duchy. In the course of 1072 we see William in England, in +Normandy, again in England, and in Scotland. In 1073 he was +called beyond sea by a formidable movement. His great +continental conquest had risen against him; Le Mans and all Maine +were again independent. City and land chose for them a +prince who came by female descent from the stock of their ancient +counts. This was Hugh the son of Azo Marquess of Liguria +and of Gersendis the sister of the last Count Herbert. The +Normans were driven out of Le Mans; Azo came to take possession +in the name of his son, but he and the citizens did not long +agree. He went back, leaving his wife and son under the +guardianship of Geoffrey of Mayenne. Presently the men of +Le Mans threw off princely rule altogether and proclaimed the +earliest <i>commune</i> in Northern Gaul. Here then, as at +Exeter, William had to strive against an armed commonwealth, and, +as at Exeter, we specially wish to know what were to be the +relations between the capital and the county at large. The +mass of the people throughout Maine threw themselves zealously +into the cause of the commonwealth. But their zeal might +not have lasted long, if, according to the usual run of things in +such cases, they had simply exchanged the lordship of their +hereditary masters for the corporate lordship of the citizens of +Le Mans. To the nobles the change was naturally +distasteful. They had to swear to the <i>commune</i>, but +many of them, Geoffrey for one, had no thought of keeping their +oaths. Dissensions arose; Hugh went back to Italy; Geoffrey +occupied the castle of Le Mans, and the citizens dislodged him +only by the dangerous help of the other prince who claimed the +overlordship of Maine, Count Fulk of Anjou.</p> +<p>If Maine was to have a master from outside, the lord of Anjou +hardly promised better than the lord of Normandy. But men +in despair grasp at anything. The strange thing is that +Fulk disappears now from the story; William steps in +instead. And it was at least as much in his English as in +his Norman character that the Duke and King won back the revolted +land. A place in his army was held by English warriors, +seemingly under the command of Hereward himself. Men who +had fought for freedom in their own land now fought at the +bidding of their Conqueror to put down freedom in another +land. They went willingly; the English Chronicler describes +the campaign with glee, and breaks into verse—or +incorporates a contemporary ballad—at the tale of English +victory. Few men of that day would see that the cause of +Maine was in truth the cause of England. If York and Exeter +could not act in concert with one another, still less could +either act in concert with Le Mans. Englishmen serving in +Maine would fancy that they were avenging their own wrongs by +laying waste the lands of any man who spoke the French +tongue. On William’s part, the employment of +Englishmen, the employment of Hereward, was another stroke of +policy. It was more fully following out the system which +led Englishmen against Exeter, which led Eadric and his comrades +into Scotland. For in every English soldier whom William +carried into Maine he won a loyal English subject. To men +who had fought under his banners beyond the sea he would be no +longer the Conqueror but the victorious captain; they would need +some very special oppression at home to make them revolt against +the chief whose laurels they had helped to win. As our own +gleeman tells the tale, they did little beyond harrying the +helpless land; but in continental writers we can trace a regular +campaign, in which we hear of no battles, but of many +sieges. William, as before, subdued the land piecemeal, +keeping the city for the last. When he drew near to Le +Mans, its defenders surrendered at his summons, to escape fire +and slaughter by speedy submission. The new <i>commune</i> +was abolished, but the Conqueror swore to observe all the ancient +rights of the city.</p> +<p>All this time we have heard nothing of Count Fulk. +Presently we find him warring against nobles of Maine who had +taken William’s part, and leaguing with the Bretons against +William himself. The King set forth with his whole force, +Norman and English; but peace was made by the mediation of an +unnamed Roman cardinal, abetted, we are told, by the chief Norman +nobles. Success against confederated Anjou and Britanny +might be doubtful, with Maine and England wavering in their +allegiance, and France, Scotland, and Flanders, possible enemies +in the distance. The rights of the Count of Anjou over +Maine were formally acknowledged, and William’s eldest son +Robert did homage to Fulk for the county. Each prince +stipulated for the safety and favour of all subjects of the other +who had taken his side. Between Normandy and Anjou there +was peace during the rest of the days of William; in Maine we +shall see yet another revolt, though only a partial one.</p> +<p>William went back to England in 1073. In 1074 he went to +the continent for a longer absence. As the time just after +the first completion of the Conquest is spoken of as a time when +Normans and English were beginning to sit down side by side in +peace, so the years which followed the submission of Ely are +spoken of as a time of special oppression. This fact is not +unconnected with the King’s frequent absences from +England. Whatever we say of William’s own position, +he was a check on smaller oppressors. Things were always +worse when the eye of the great master was no longer +watching. William’s one weakness was that of putting +overmuch trust in his immediate kinsfolk and friends. Of +the two special oppressors, William Fitz-Osbern had thrown away +his life in Flanders; but Bishop Ode was still at work, till +several years later his king and brother struck him down with a +truly righteous blow.</p> +<p>The year 1074, not a year of fighting, was pro-eminently a +year of intrigue. William’s enemies on the continent +strove to turn the representative of the West-Saxon kings to help +their ends. Edgar flits to and fro between Scotland and +Flanders, and the King of the French tempts him with the offer of +a convenient settlement on the march of France, Normandy, and +Flanders. Edgar sets forth from Scotland, but is driven +back by a storm; Malcolm and Margaret then change their minds, +and bid him make his peace with King William. William +gladly accepts his submission; an embassy is sent to bring him +with all worship to the King in Normandy. He abides for +several years in William’s court contented and despised, +receiving a daily pension and the profits of estates in England +of no great extent which the King of a moment held by the grant +of a rival who could afford to be magnanimous.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>Edgar’s after-life showed that he belonged to that class +of men who, as a rule slothful and listless, can yet on occasion +act with energy, and who act most creditably on behalf of +others. But William had no need to fear him, and he was +easily turned into a friend and a dependant. Edgar, first +of Englishmen by descent, was hardly an Englishman by +birth. William had now to deal with the Englishman who +stood next to Edgar in dignity and far above him in personal +estimation. We have reached the great turning-point in +William’s reign and character, the black and mysterious +tale of the fate of Waltheof. The Earl of Northumberland, +Northampton, and Huntingdon, was not the only earl in England of +English birth. The earldom of the East-Angles was held by a +born Englishman who was more hateful than any stranger. +Ralph of Wader was the one Englishman who had fought at +William’s side against England. He often passes for a +native of Britanny, and he certainly held lands and castles in +that country; but he was Breton only by the mother’s +side. For Domesday and the Chronicles show that he was the +son of an elder Earl Ralph, who had been <i>staller</i> or master +of the horse in Edward’s days, and who is expressly said to +have been born in Norfolk. The unusual name suggests that +the elder Ralph was not of English descent. He survived the +coming of William, and his son fought on Senlac among the +countrymen of his mother. This treason implies an +unrecorded banishment in the days of Edward or Harold. +Already earl in 1069, he had in that year acted vigorously for +William against the Danes. But he now conspired against him +along with Roger, the younger son of William Fitz-Osbern, who had +succeeded his father in the earldom of Hereford, while his Norman +estates had passed to his elder brother William. What +grounds of complaint either Ralph or Roger had against William we +know not; but that the loyalty of the Earl of Hereford was +doubtful throughout the year 1074 appears from several letters of +rebuke and counsel sent to him by the Regent Lanfranc. At +last the wielder of both swords took to his spiritual arms, and +pronounced the Earl excommunicate, till he should submit to the +King’s mercy and make restitution to the King and to all +men whom he had wronged. Roger remained stiff-necked under +the Primate’s censure, and presently committed an act of +direct disobedience. The next year, 1075, he gave his +sister Emma in marriage to Earl Ralph. This marriage the +King had forbidden, on some unrecorded ground of state +policy. Most likely he already suspected both earls, and +thought any tie between them dangerous. The notice shows +William stepping in to do, as an act of policy, what under his +successors became a matter of course, done with the sole object +of making money. The <i>bride-ale</i>—the name that +lurks in the modern shape of <i>bridal</i>—was held at +Exning in Cambridgeshire; bishops and abbots were guests of the +excommunicated Roger; Waltheof was there, and many Breton +comrades of Ralph. In their cups they began to plot how +they might drive the King out of the kingdom. Charges, both +true and false, were brought against William; in a mixed +gathering of Normans, English, and Bretons, almost every act of +William’s life might pass as a wrong done to some part of +the company, even though some others of the company were his +accomplices. Above all, the two earls Ralph and Roger made +a distinct proposal to their fellow-earl Waltheof. King +William should be driven out of the land; one of the three should +be King; the other two should remain earls, ruling each over a +third of the kingdom. Such a scheme might attract earls, +but no one else; it would undo William’s best and greatest +work; it would throw back the growing unity of the kingdom by all +the steps that it had taken during several generations.</p> +<p>Now what amount of favour did Waltheof give to these +schemes? Weighing the accounts, it would seem that, in the +excitement of the bride-ale, he consented to the treason, but +that he thought better of it the next morning. He went to +Lanfranc, at once regent and ghostly father, and confessed to him +whatever he had to confess. The Primate assigned his +penitent some ecclesiastical penances; the Regent bade the Earl +go into Normandy and tell the whole tale to the King. +Waltheof went, with gifts in hand; he told his story and craved +forgiveness. William made light of the matter, and kept +Waltheof with him, but seemingly not under restraint, till he +came back to England.</p> +<p>Meanwhile the other two earls were in open rebellion. +Ralph, half Breton by birth and earl of a Danish land, asked help +in Britanny and Denmark. Bretons from Britanny and Bretons +settled in England flocked to him. King Swegen, now almost +at the end of his reign and life, listened to the call of the +rebels, and sent a fleet under the command of his son Cnut, the +future saint, together with an earl named Hakon. The revolt +in England was soon put down, both in East and West. The +rebel earls met with no support save from those who were under +their immediate influence. The country acted zealously for +the King. Lanfranc could report that Earl Ralph and his +army were fleeing, and that the King’s men, French and +English, were chasing them. In another letter he could add, +with some strength of language, that the kingdom was cleansed +from the filth of the Bretons. At Norwich only the castle +was valiantly defended by the newly married Countess Emma. +Roger was taken prisoner; Ralph fled to Britanny; their followers +were punished with various mutilations, save the defenders of +Norwich, who were admitted to terms. The Countess joined +her husband in Britanny, and in days to come Ralph did something +to redeem so many treasons by dying as an armed pilgrim in the +first crusade.</p> +<p>The main point of this story is that the revolt met with no +English support whatever. Not only did Bishop Wulfstan +march along with his fierce Norman brethren Ode and Geoffrey; the +English people everywhere were against the rebels. For this +revolt offered no attraction to English feeling; had the +undertaking been less hopeless, nothing could have been gained by +exchanging the rule of William for that of Ralph or Roger. +It might have been different if the Danes had played their part +better. The rebellion broke out while William was in +Normandy; it was the sailing of the Danish fleet which brought +him back to England. But never did enterprise bring less +honour on its leaders than this last Danish voyage up the +Humber. All that the holy Cnut did was to plunder the +minster of Saint Peter at York and to sail away.</p> +<p>His coming however seems to have altogether changed the +King’s feelings with regard to Waltheof. As yet he +had not been dealt with as a prisoner or an enemy. He now +came back to England with the King, and William’s first act +was to imprison both Waltheof and Roger. The imprisonment +of Roger, a rebel taken in arms, was a matter of course. As +for Waltheof, whatever he had promised at the bride-ale, he had +done no disloyal act; he had had no share in the rebellion, and +he had told the King all that he knew. But he had listened +to traitors, and it might be dangerous to leave him at large when +a Danish fleet, led by his old comrade Cnut, was actually +afloat. Still what followed is strange indeed, specially +strange with William as its chief doer.</p> +<p>At the Midwinter Gemót of 1075–1076 Roger and +Waltheof were brought to trial. Ralph was condemned in +absence, like Eustace of Boulogne. Roger was sentenced to +forfeiture and imprisonment for life. Waltheof made his +defence; his sentence was deferred; he was kept at Winchester in +a straiter imprisonment than before. At the Pentecostal +Gemót of 1076, held at Westminster, his case was again +argued, and he was sentenced to death. On the last day of +May the last English earl was beheaded on the hills above +Winchester.</p> +<p>Such a sentence and execution, strange at any time, is +specially strange under William. Whatever Waltheof had +done, his offence was lighter than that of Roger; yet Waltheof +has the heavier and Roger the lighter punishment. With +Scroggs or Jeffreys on the bench, it might have been argued that +Waltheof’s confession to the King did not, in strictness of +law, wipe out the guilt of his original promise to the +conspirators; but William the Great did not commonly act after +the fashion of Scroggs and Jeffreys. To deprive Waltheof of +his earldom might doubtless be prudent; a man who had even +listened to traitors might be deemed unfit for such a +trust. It might be wise to keep him safe under the +King’s eye, like Edwin, Morkere, and Edgar. But why +should he be picked out for death, when the far more guilty Roger +was allowed to live? Why should he be chosen as the one +victim of a prince who never before or after, in Normandy or in +England, doomed any man to die on a political charge? These +are questions hard to answer. It is not enough to say that +Waltheof was an Englishman, that it was William’s policy +gradually to get rid of Englishmen in high places, and that the +time was now come to get rid of the last. For such a policy +forfeiture, or at most imprisonment, would have been +enough. While other Englishmen lost lands, honours, at most +liberty, Waltheof alone lost his life by a judicial +sentence. It is likely enough that many Normans hungered +for the lands and honours of the one Englishman who still held +the highest rank in England. Still forfeiture without death +might have satisfied even them. But Waltheof was not only +earl of three shires; he was husband of the King’s near +kinswoman. We are told that Judith was the enemy and +accuser of her husband. This may have touched +William’s one weak point. Yet he would hardly have +swerved from the practice of his whole life to please the bloody +caprice of a niece who longed for the death of her husband. +And if Judith longed for Waltheof’s death, it was not from +a wish to supply his place with another. Legend says that +she refused a second husband offered her by the King; it is +certain that she remained a widow.</p> +<p>Waltheof’s death must thus remain a mystery, an isolated +deed of blood unlike anything else in William’s life. +It seems to have been impolitic; it led to no revolt, but it +called forth a new burst of English feeling. Waltheof was +deemed the martyr of his people; he received the same popular +canonization as more than one English patriot. Signs and +wonders were wrought at his tomb at Crowland, till displays of +miraculous power which were so inconsistent with loyalty and good +order were straitly forbidden. The act itself marks a stage +in the downward course of William’s character. In +itself, the harrying of Northumberland, the very invasion of +England, with all the bloodshed that they caused, might be deemed +blacker crimes than the unjust death of a single man. But +as human nature stands, the less crime needs a worse man to do +it. Crime, as ever, led to further crime and was itself the +punishment of crime. In the eyes of William’s +contemporaries the death of Waltheof, the blackest act of +William’s life, was also its turning-point. From the +day of the martyrdom on Saint Giles’ hill the magic of +William’s name and William’s arms passed away. +Unfailing luck no longer waited on him; after Waltheof’s +death he never, till his last campaign of all, won a battle or +took a town. In this change of William’s fortunes the +men of his own day saw the judgement of God upon his crime. +And in the fact at least they were undoubtedly right. +Henceforth, though William’s real power abides unshaken, +the tale of his warfare is chiefly a tale of petty defeats. +The last eleven years of his life would never have won him the +name of Conqueror. But in the higher walk of policy and +legislation never was his nobler surname more truly +deserved. Never did William the Great show himself so truly +great as in these later years.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>The death of Waltheof and the popular judgement on it suggest +another act of William’s which cannot have been far from it +in point of time, and about which men spoke in his own day in the +same spirit. If the judgement of God came on William for +the beheading of Waltheof, it came on him also for the making of +the New Forest. As to that forest there is a good deal of +ancient exaggeration and a good deal of modern +misconception. The word <i>forest</i> is often +misunderstood. In its older meaning, a meaning which it +still keeps in some parts, a forest has nothing to do with +trees. It is a tract of land put outside the common law and +subject to a stricter law of its own, and that commonly, probably +always, to secure for the King the freer enjoyment of the +pleasure of hunting. Such a forest William made in +Hampshire; the impression which it made on men’s minds at +the time is shown by its having kept the name of the New Forest +for eight hundred years. There is no reason to think that +William laid waste any large tract of specially fruitful country, +least of all that he laid waste a land thickly inhabited; for +most of the Forest land never can have been such. But it is +certain from Domesday and the Chronicle that William did +<i>afforest</i> a considerable tract of land in Hampshire; he set +it apart for the purposes of hunting; he fenced it in by special +and cruel laws—stopping indeed short of death—for the +protection of his pleasures, and in this process some men lost +their lands, and were driven from their homes. Some +destruction of houses is here implied; some destruction of +churches is not unlikely. The popular belief, which hardly +differs from the account of writers one degree later than +Domesday and the Chronicle, simply exaggerates the extent of +destruction. There was no such wide-spread laying waste as +is often supposed, because no such wide-spread laying waste was +needed. But whatever was needed for William’s purpose +was done; and Domesday gives us the record. And the act +surely makes, like the death of Waltheof, a downward stage in +William’s character. The harrying of Northumberland +was in itself a far greater crime, and involved far more of human +wretchedness. But it is not remembered in the same way, +because it has left no such abiding memorial. But here +again the lesser crime needed a worse man to do it. The +harrying of Northumberland was a crime done with a political +object; it was the extreme form of military severity; it was not +vulgar robbery done with no higher motive than to secure the +fuller enjoyment of a brutal sport. To this level William +had now sunk. It was in truth now that hunting in England +finally took the character of a mere sport. Hunting was no +new thing; in an early state of society it is often a necessary +thing. The hunting of Alfred is spoken of as a grave matter +of business, as part of his kingly duty. He had to make war +on the wild beasts, as he had to make war on the Danes. The +hunting of William is simply a sport, not his duty or his +business, but merely his pleasure. And to this pleasure, +the pleasure of inflicting pain and slaughter, he did not scruple +to sacrifice the rights of other men, and to guard his enjoyment +by ruthless laws at which even in that rough age men +shuddered.</p> +<p>For this crime the men of his day saw the punishment in the +strange and frightful deaths of his offspring, two sons and a +grandson, on the scene of his crime. One of these himself +he saw, the death of his second son Richard, a youth of great +promise, whose prolonged life might have saved England from the +rule of William Rufus. He died in the Forest, about the +year 1081, to the deep grief of his parents. And Domesday +contains a touching entry, how William gave back his land to a +despoiled Englishman as an offering for Richard’s soul.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>The forfeiture of three earls, the death of one, threw their +honours and estates into the King’s hands. Another +fresh source of wealth came by the death of the Lady Edith, who +had kept her royal rank and her great estates, and who died while +the proceedings against Waltheof were going on. It was not +now so important for William as it had been in the first years of +the Conquest to reward his followers; he could now think of the +royal hoard in the first place. Of the estates which now +fell in to the Crown large parts were granted out. The +house of Bigod, afterwards so renowned as Earls of Norfolk, owe +their rise to their forefather’s share in the forfeited +lands of Earl Ralph. But William kept the greater part to +himself; one lordship in Somerset, part of the lands of the Lady, +he gave to the church of Saint Peter at Rome. Of the three +earldoms, those of Hereford and East-Anglia were not filled up; +the later earldoms of those lands have no connexion with the +earls of William’s day. Waltheof’s southern +earldoms of Northampton and Huntingdon became the dowry of his +daughter Matilda; that of Huntingdon passed to his descendants +the Kings of Scots. But Northumberland, close on the +Scottish border, still needed an earl; but there is something +strange in the choice of Bishop Walcher of Durham. It is +possible that this appointment was a concession to English +feeling stirred to wrath at the death of Waltheof. The days +of English earls were over, and a Norman would have been looked +on as Waltheof’s murderer. The Lotharingian bishop +was a stranger; but he was not a Norman, and he was no oppressor +of Englishmen. But he was strangely unfit for the +place. Not a fighting bishop like Ode and Geoffrey, he was +chiefly devoted to spiritual affairs, specially to the revival of +the monastic life, which had died out in Northern England since +the Danish invasions. But his weak trust in unworthy +favourites, English and foreign, led him to a fearful and +memorable end. The Bishop was on terms of close friendship +with Ligulf, an Englishman of the highest birth and uncle by +marriage to Earl Waltheof. He had kept his estates; but the +insolence of his Norman neighbours had caused him to come and +live in the city of Durham near his friend the Bishop. His +favour with Walcher roused the envy of some of the Bishop’s +favourites, who presently contrived his death. The Bishop +lamented, and rebuked them; but he failed to “do +justice,” to punish the offenders sternly and +speedily. He was therefore believed to be himself guilty of +Ligulf’s death. One of the most striking and +instructive events of the time followed. On May 14, 1080, a +full Gemót of the earldom was held at Gateshead to deal +with the murder of Ligulf. This was one of those rare +occasions when a strong feeling led every man to the +assembly. The local Parliament took its ancient shape of an +armed crowd, headed by the noblest Englishmen left in the +earldom. There was no vote, no debate; the shout was +“Short rede good rede, slay ye the Bishop.” And +to that cry, Walcher himself and his companions, the murderers of +Ligulf among them, were slaughtered by the raging multitude who +had gathered to avenge him.</p> +<p>The riot in which Walcher died was no real revolt against +William’s government. Such a local rising against a +local wrong might have happened in the like case under Edward or +Harold. No government could leave such a deed unpunished; +but William’s own ideas of justice would have been fully +satisfied by the blinding or mutilation of a few +ringleaders. But William was in Normandy in the midst of +domestic and political cares. He sent his brother Ode to +restore order, and his vengeance was frightful. The land +was harried; innocent men were mutilated and put to death; others +saved their lives by bribes. Earl after earl was set over a +land so hard to rule. A certain Alberie was appointed, but +he was removed as unfit. The fierce Bishop Geoffrey of +Coutances tried his hand and resigned. At the time of +William’s death the earldom was held by Geoffrey’s +nephew Robert of Mowbray, a stern and gloomy stranger, but whom +Englishmen reckoned among “good men,” when he guarded +the marches of England against the Scot.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>After the death of Waltheof William seems to have stayed in +Normandy for several years. His ill luck now began. +Before the year 1076 was out, he entered, we know not why, on a +Breton campaign. But he was driven from Dol by the combined +forces of Britanny and France; Philip was ready to help any enemy +of William. The Conqueror had now for the first time +suffered defeat in his own person. He made peace with both +enemies, promising his daughter Constance to Alan of +Britanny. But the marriage did not follow till ten years +later. The peace with France, as the English Chronicle +says, “held little while;” Philip could not resist +the temptation of helping William’s eldest son Robert when +the reckless young man rebelled against his father. With +most of the qualities of an accomplished knight, Robert had few +of those which make either a wise ruler or an honest man. A +brave soldier, even a skilful captain, he was no general; ready +of speech and free of hand, he was lavish rather than +bountiful. He did not lack generous and noble feelings; but +of a steady course, even in evil, he was incapable. As a +ruler, he was no oppressor in his own person; but sloth, +carelessness, love of pleasure, incapacity to say No, failure to +do justice, caused more wretchedness than the oppression of those +tyrants who hinder the oppressions of others. William would +not set such an one over any part of his dominions before his +time, and it was his policy to keep his children dependent on +him. While he enriched his brothers, he did not give the +smallest scrap of the spoils of England to his sons. But +Robert deemed that he had a right to something greater than +private estates. The nobles of Normandy had done homage to +him as William’s successor; he had done homage to Fulk for +Maine, as if he were himself its count. He was now stirred +up by evil companions to demand that, if his father would not +give him part of his kingdom—the spirit of Edwin and +Morkere had crossed the sea—he would at least give him +Normandy and Maine. William refused with many pithy +sayings. It was not his manner to take off his clothes till +he went to bed. Robert now, with a band of discontented +young nobles, plunged into border warfare against his +father. He then wandered over a large part of Europe, +begging and receiving money and squandering all that he +got. His mother too sent him money, which led to the first +quarrel between William and Matilda after so many years of +faithful union. William rebuked his wife for helping his +enemy in breach of his orders: she pleaded the mother’s +love for her first-born. The mother was forgiven, but her +messenger, sentenced to loss of eyes, found shelter in a +monastery.</p> +<p>At last in 1079 Philip gave Robert a settled dwelling-place in +the border-fortress of Gerberoi. The strife between father +and son became dangerous. William besieged the castle, to +undergo before its walls his second defeat, to receive his first +wound, and that at the hands of his own son. Pierced in the +hand by the lance of Robert, his horse smitten by an arrow, the +Conqueror fell to the ground, and was saved only by an +Englishman, Tokig, son of Wiggod of Wallingford, who gave his +life for his king. It seems an early softening of the tale +which says that Robert dismounted and craved his father’s +pardon; it seems a later hardening which says that William +pronounced a curse on his son. William Rufus too, known as +yet only as the dutiful son of his father, was wounded in his +defence. The blow was not only grievous to William’s +feelings as a father; it was a serious military defeat. The +two wounded Williams and the rest of the besiegers escaped how +they might, and the siege of Gerberoi was raised.</p> +<p>We next find the wise men of Normandy debating how to make +peace between father and son. In the course of the year +1080 a peace was patched up, and a more honourable sphere was +found for Robert’s energies in an expedition into +Scotland. In the autumn of the year of Gerberoi Malcolm had +made another wasting inroad into Northumberland. With the +King absent and Northumberland in confusion through the death of +Walcher, this wrong went unavenged till the autumn of 1080. +Robert gained no special glory in Scotland; a second quarrel with +his father followed, and Robert remained a banished man during +the last seven years of William’s reign.</p> +<p>In this same year 1080 a synod of the Norman Church was held, +the Truce of God again renewed which we heard of years ago. +The forms of outrage on which the Truce was meant to put a cheek, +and which the strong hand of William had put down more thoroughly +than the Truce would do, had clearly begun again during the +confusions caused by the rebellion of Robert.</p> +<p>The two next years, 1081–1082, William was in +England. His home sorrows were now pressing heavily on +him. His eldest son was a rebel and an exile; about this +time his second son died in the New Forest; according to one +version, his daughter, the betrothed of Edwin, who had never +forgotten her English lover, was now promised to the Spanish King +Alfonso, and died—in answer to her own prayers—before +the marriage was celebrated. And now the partner of +William’s life was taken from him four years after his one +difference with her. On November 3, 1083, Matilda died +after a long sickness, to her husband’s lasting +grief. She was buried in her own church at Caen, and +churches in England received gifts from William on behalf of her +soul.</p> +<p>The mourner had soon again to play the warrior. Nearly +the whole of William’s few remaining years were spent in a +struggle which in earlier times he would surely have ended in a +day. Maine, city and county, did not call for a third +conquest; but a single baron of Maine defied William’s +power, and a single castle of Maine held out against him for +three years. Hubert, Viscount of Beaumont and Fresnay, +revolted on some slight quarrel. The siege of his castle of +Sainte-Susanne went on from the death of Matilda till the last +year but one of William’s reign. The tale is full of +picturesque detail; but William had little personal share in +it. The best captains of Normandy tried their strength in +vain against this one donjon on its rock. William at last +made peace with the subject who was too strong for him. +Hubert came to England and received the King’s +pardon. Practically the pardon was the other way.</p> +<p>Thus for the last eleven years of his life William ceased to +be the Conqueror. Engaged only in small enterprises, he was +unsuccessful in all. One last success was indeed in store +for him; but that was to be purchased with his own life. As +he turned away in defeat from this castle and that, as he felt +the full bitterness of domestic sorrow, he may have thought, as +others thought for him, that the curse of Waltheof, the curse of +the New Forest, was ever tracking his steps. If so, his +crimes were done in England, and their vengeance came in +Normandy. In England there was no further room for his +mission as Conqueror; he had no longer foes to overcome. He +had an act of justice to do, and he did it. He had his +kingdom to guard, and he guarded it. He had to take the +great step which should make his kingdom one for ever; and he +had, perhaps without fully knowing what he did, to bid the +picture of his reign be painted for all time as no reign before +or after has been painted.</p> +<h2><a name="page181"></a><span class="pagenum">p. +181</span>CHAPTER XI.<br /> +<span class="GutSmall">THE LAST YEARS OF WILLIAM.</span><br /> +<span class="GutSmall">1081–1087.</span></h2> +<p><span class="smcap">Of</span> two events of these last years +of the Conqueror’s reign, events of very different degrees +of importance, we have already spoken. The Welsh expedition +of William was the only recorded fighting on British ground, and +that lay without the bounds of the kingdom of England. +William now made Normandy his chief dwelling-place, but he was +constantly called over to England. The Welsh campaign +proves his presence in England in 1081; he was again in England +in 1082, but he went back to Normandy between the two +visits. The visit of 1082 was a memorable one; there is no +more characteristic act of the Conqueror than the deed which +marks it. The cruelty and insolence of his brother Ode, +whom he had trusted so much more than he deserved, had passed all +bounds. In avenging the death of Walcher he had done deeds +such as William never did himself or allowed any other man to +do. And now, beguiled by a soothsayer who said that one of +his name should be the next Pope, he dreamed of succeeding to the +throne of Gregory the Seventh. He made all kinds of +preparations to secure his succession, and he was at last about +to set forth for Italy at the head of something like an +army. His schemes were by no means to the liking of his +brother. William came suddenly over from Normandy, and met +Ode in the Isle of Wight. There the King got together as +many as he could of the great men of the realm. Before them +he arraigned Ode for all his crimes. He had left him as the +lieutenant of his kingdom, and he had shown himself the common +oppressor of every class of men in the realm. Last of all, +he had beguiled the warriors who were needed for the defence of +England against the Danes and Irish to follow him on his wild +schemes in Italy. How was he to deal with such a brother, +William asked of his wise men.</p> +<p>He had to answer himself; no other man dared to speak. +William then gave his judgement. The common enemy of the +whole realm should not be spared because he was the King’s +brother. He should be seized and put in ward. As none +dared to seize him, the King seized him with his own hands. +And now, for the first time in England, we hear words which were +often heard again. The bishop stained with blood and +sacrilege appealed to the privileges of his order. He was a +clerk, a bishop; no man might judge him but the Pope. +William, taught, so men said, by Lanfranc, had his answer +ready. “I do not seize a clerk or a bishop; I seize +my earl whom I set over my kingdom.” So the Earl of +Kent was carried off to a prison in Normandy, and Pope Gregory +himself pleaded in vain for the release of the Bishop of +Bayeux.</p> +<p>The mind of William was just now mainly given to the affairs +of his island kingdom. In the winter of 1083 he hastened +from the death-bed of his wife to the siege of Sainte-Susanne, +and thence to the Midwinter Gemót in England. The +chief object of the assembly was the specially distasteful one of +laying on of a tax. In the course of the next year, six +shillings was levied on every hide of land to meet a pressing +need. The powers of the North were again threatening; the +danger, if it was danger, was greater than when Waltheof smote +the Normans in the gate at York. Swegen and his successor +Harold were dead. Cnut the Saint reigned in Denmark, the +son-in-law of Robert of Flanders. This alliance with +William’s enemy joined with his remembrance of his own two +failures to stir up the Danish king to a yearning for some +exploit in England. English exiles were still found to urge +him to the enterprise. William’s conquest had +scattered banished or discontented Englishmen over all +Europe. Many had made their way to the Eastern Rome; they +had joined the Warangian guard, the surest support of the +Imperial throne, and at Dyrrhachion, as on Senlac, the axe of +England had met the lance of Normandy in battle. Others had +fled to the North; they prayed Cnut to avenge the death of his +kinsman Harold and to deliver England from the yoke of +men—so an English writer living in Denmark spoke of +them—of Roman speech. Thus the Greek at one end of +Europe, the Norman at the other, still kept on the name of +Rome. The fleet of Denmark was joined by the fleet of +Flanders; a smaller contingent was promised by the devout and +peaceful Olaf of Norway, who himself felt no call to take a share +in the work of war.</p> +<p>Against this danger William strengthened himself by the help +of the tax that he had just levied. He could hardly have +dreamed of defending England against Danish invaders by English +weapons only. But he thought as little of trusting the work +to his own Normans. With the money of England he hired a +host of mercenaries, horse and foot, from France and Britanny, +even from Maine where Hubert was still defying him at +Sainte-Susanne. He gathered this force on the mainland, and +came back at its head, a force such as England had never before +seen; men wondered how the land might feed them all. The +King’s men, French and English, had to feed them, each man +according to the amount of his land. And now William did +what Harold had refused to do; he laid waste the whole coast that +lay open to attack from Denmark and Flanders. But no Danes, +no Flemings, came. Disputes arose between Cnut and his +brother Olaf, and the great enterprise came to nothing. +William kept part of his mercenaries in England, and part he sent +to their homes. Cnut was murdered in a church by his own +subjects, and was canonized as <i>Sanctus Canutus</i> by a Pope +who could not speak the Scandinavian name.</p> +<p>Meanwhile, at the Midwinter Gemót of 1085–1086, +held in due form at Gloucester, William did one of his greatest +acts. “The King had mickle thought and sooth deep +speech with his Witan about his land, how it were set and with +whilk men.” In that “deep speech,” so +called in our own tongue, lurks a name well known and dear to +every Englishman. The result of that famous parliament is +set forth at length by the Chronicler. The King sent his +men into each shire, men who did indeed set down in their writ +how the land was set and of what men. In that writ we have +a record in the Roman tongue no less precious than the Chronicles +in our own. For that writ became the Book of Winchester, +the book to which our fathers gave the name of Domesday, the book +of judgement that spared no man.</p> +<p>The Great Survey was made in the course of the first seven +months of the year 1086. Commissioners were sent into every +shire, who inquired by the oaths of the men of the hundreds by +whom the land had been held in King Edward’s days and what +it was worth then, by whom it was held at the time of the survey +and what it was worth then; and lastly, whether its worth could +be raised. Nothing was to be left out. “So +sooth narrowly did he let spear it out, that there was not a hide +or a yard of land, nor further—it is shame to tell, and it +thought him no shame to do—an ox nor a cow nor a swine was +left that was not set in his writ.” This kind of +searching inquiry, never liked at any time, would be specially +grievous then. The taking of the survey led to disturbances +in many places, in which not a few lives were lost. While +the work was going on, William went to and fro till he knew +thoroughly how this land was set and of what men. He had +now a list of all men, French and English, who held land in his +kingdom. And it was not enough to have their names in a +writ; he would see them face to face. On the making of the +survey followed that great assembly, that great work of +legislation, which was the crown of William’s life as a +ruler and lawgiver of England. The usual assemblies of the +year had been held at Winchester and Westminster. An +extraordinary assembly was held in the plain of Salisbury on the +first day of August. The work of that assembly has been +already spoken of. It was now that all the owners of land +in the kingdom became the men of the King; it was now that +England became one, with no fear of being again parted +asunder.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>The close connexion between the Great Survey and the law and +the oath of Salisbury is plain. It was a great matter for +the King to get in the gold certainly and, we may add, +fairly. William would deal with no man otherwise than +according to law as he understood the law. But he sought +for more than this. He would not only know what this land +could be made to pay; he would know the state of his kingdom in +every detail; he would know its military strength; he would know +whether his own will, in the long process of taking from this man +and giving to that, had been really carried out. Domesday +is before all things a record of the great confiscation, a record +of that gradual change by which, in less than twenty years, the +greater part of the land of England had been transferred from +native to foreign owners. And nothing shows like Domesday +in what a formally legal fashion that transfer was carried +out. What were the principles on which it was carried out, +we have already seen. All private property in land came +only from the grant of King William. It had all passed into +his hands by lawful forfeiture; he might keep it himself; he +might give it back to its old owner or grant it to a new +one. So it was at the general redemption of lands; so it +was whenever fresh conquests or fresh revolts threw fresh lands +into the King’s hands. The principle is so thoroughly +taken for granted, that we are a little startled to find it +incidentally set forth in so many words in a case of no special +importance. A priest named Robert held a single yardland in +alms of the King; he became a monk in the monastery of +Stow-in-Lindesey, and his yardland became the property of the +house. One hardly sees why this case should have been +picked out for a solemn declaration of the general law. +Yet, as “the day on which the English redeemed their +lands” is spoken of only casually in the case of a +particular estate, so the principle that no man could hold lands +except by the King’s grant (“Non licet terram alicui +habere nisi regis concessu”) is brought in only to +illustrate the wrongful dealing of Robert and the monks of Stow +in the case of a very small holding indeed.</p> +<p>All this is a vast system of legal fictions; for +William’s whole position, the whole scheme of his +government, rested on a system of legal fictions. Domesday +is full of them; one might almost say that there is nothing else +there. A very attentive study of Domesday might bring out +the fact that William was a foreign conqueror, and that the book +itself was a record of the process by which he took the lands of +the natives who had fought against him to reward the strangers +who had fought for him. But nothing of this kind appears on +the surface of the record. The great facts of the Conquest +are put out of sight. William is taken for granted, not +only as the lawful king, but as the immediate successor of +Edward. The “time of King Edward” and the +“time of King William” are the two times that the law +knows of. The compilers of the record are put to some +curious shifts to describe the time between “the day when +King Edward was alive and dead” and the day “when +King William came into England.” That coming might +have been as peaceful as the coming of James the First or George +the First. The two great battles are more than once +referred to, but only casually in the mention of particular +persons. A very sharp critic might guess that one of them +had something to do with King William’s coming into +England; but that is all. Harold appears only as Earl; it +is only in two or three places that we hear of a “time of +Harold,” and even of Harold “seizing the +kingdom” and “reigning.” These two or +three places stand out in such contrast to the general language +of the record that we are led to think that the scribe must have +copied some earlier record or taken down the words of some +witness, and must have forgotten to translate them into more +loyal formulæ. So in recording who held the land in +King Edward’s day and who in King William’s, there is +nothing to show that in so many cases the holder under Edward had +been turned out to make room for the holder under William. +The former holder is marked by the perfectly colourless word +“ancestor” (“antecessor”), a word as yet +meaning, not “forefather,” but +“predecessor” of any kind. In Domesday the word +is most commonly an euphemism for “dispossessed +Englishman.” It is a still more distinct euphemism +where the Norman holder is in more than one place called the +“heir” of the dispossessed Englishmen.</p> +<p>The formulæ of Domesday are the most speaking witness to +the spirit of outward legality which ruled every act of +William. In this way they are wonderfully instructive; but +from the formulæ alone no one could ever make the real +facts of William’s coming and reign. It is the +incidental notices which make us more at home in the local and +personal life of this reign than of any reign before or for a +long time after. The Commissioners had to report whether +the King’s will had been everywhere carried out, whether +every man, great and small, French and English, had what the King +meant him to have, neither more nor less. And they had +often to report a state of things different from what the King +had meant to be. Many men had not all that King William had +meant them to have, and many others had much more. Normans +had taken both from Englishmen and from other Normans. +Englishmen had taken from Englishmen; some had taken from +ecclesiastical bodies; some had taken from King William himself; +nay King William himself holds lands which he ought to give up to +another man. This last entry at least shows that William +was fully ready to do right, according to his notions of +right. So also the King’s two brothers are set down +among the chief offenders. Of these unlawful holdings of +land, marked in the technical language of the Survey as +<i>invasiones</i> and <i>occupationes</i>, many were doubtless +real cases of violent seizure, without excuse even according to +William’s reading of the law. But this does not +always follow, even when the language of the Survey would seem to +imply it. Words implying violence, <i>per vim</i> and the +like, are used in the legal language of all ages, where no force +has been used, merely to mark a possession as illegal. We +are startled at finding the Apostle Paul set down as one of the +offenders; but the words “sanctus Paulus invasit” +mean no more than that the canons of Saint Paul’s church in +London held lands to which the Commissioners held that they had +no good title. It is these cases where one man held land +which another claimed that gave opportunity for those personal +details, stories, notices of tenures and customs, which make +Domesday the most precious store of knowledge of the time.</p> +<p>One fruitful and instructive source of dispute comes from the +way in which the lands in this or that district were commonly +granted out. The in-comer, commonly a foreigner, received +all the lands which such and such a man, commonly a dispossessed +Englishman, held in that shire or district. The grantee +stepped exactly into the place of the <i>antecessor</i>; he +inherited all his rights and all his burthens. He inherited +therewith any disputes as to the extent of the lands of the +<i>antecessor</i> or as to the nature of his tenure. And +new disputes arose in the process of transfer. One common +source of dispute was when the former owner, besides lands which +were strictly his own, held lands on lease, subject to a +reversionary interest on the part of the Crown or the +Church. The lease or sale—<i>emere</i> is the usual +word—of Church lands for three lives to return to the +Church at the end of the third life was very common. If the +<i>antecessor</i> was himself the third life, the grantee, his +<i>heir</i>, had no claim to the land; and in any case he could +take in only with all its existing liabilities. But the +grantee often took possession of the whole of the land held by +the <i>antecessor</i>, as if it were all alike his own. A +crowd of complaints followed from all manner of injured persons +and bodies, great and small, French and English, lay and +clerical. The Commissioners seem to have fairly heard all, +and to have fairly reported all for the King to judge of. +It is their care to do right to all men which has given us such +strange glimpses of the inner life of an age which had none like +it before or after.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>The general Survey followed by the general homage might seem +to mark William’s work in England, his work as an English +statesman, as done. He could hardly have had time to +redress the many cases of wrong which the Survey laid before him; +but he was able to wring yet another tax out of the nation +according to his new and more certain register. He then, +for the last time, crossed to Normandy with his new hoard. +The Chronicler and other writers of the time dwell on the +physical portents of these two years, the storms, the fires, the +plagues, the sharp hunger, the deaths of famous men on both sides +of the sea. Of the year 1087, the last year of the +Conqueror, it needs the full strength of our ancient tongue to +set forth the signs and wonders. The King had left England +safe, peaceful, thoroughly bowed down under the yoke, cursing the +ruler who taxed her and granted away her lands, yet half blessing +him for the “good frith” that he made against the +murderer, the robber, and the ravisher. But the land that +he had won was neither to see his end nor to shelter his +dust. One last gleam of success was, after so many +reverses, to crown his arms; but it was success which was indeed +unworthy of the Conqueror who had entered Exeter and Le Mans in +peaceful triumph. And the death-blow was now to come to him +who, after so many years of warfare, stooped at last for the +first time to cruel and petty havoc without an object.</p> +<p>The border-land of France and Normandy, the French Vexin, the +land of which Mantes is the capital, had always been disputed +between kingdom and duchy. Border wars had been common; +just at this time the inroads of the French commanders at Mantes +are said to have been specially destructive. William not +only demanded redress from the King, but called for the surrender +of the whole Vexin. What followed is a familiar +story. Philip makes a foolish jest on the bodily state of +his great rival, unable just then to carry out his threats. +“The King of the English lies in at Rouen; there will be a +great show of candles at his churching.” As at +Alençon in his youth, so now, William, who could pass by +real injuries, was stung to the uttermost by personal +mockery. By the splendour of God, when he rose up again, he +would light a hundred thousand candles at Philip’s +cost. He kept his word at the cost of Philip’s +subjects. The ballads of the day told how he went forth and +gathered the fruits of autumn in the fields and orchards and +vineyards of the enemy. But he did more than gather fruits; +the candles of his churching were indeed lighted in the burning +streets of Mantes. The picture of William the Great +directing in person mere brutal havoc like this is strange even +after the harrying of Northumberland and the making of the New +Forest. Riding to and fro among the flames, bidding his men +with glee to heap on the fuel, gladdened at the sight of burning +houses and churches, a false step of his horse gave him his +death-blow. Carried to Rouen, to the priory of Saint +Gervase near the city, he lingered from August 15 to September 7, +and then the reign and life of the Conqueror came to an +end. Forsaken by his children, his body stripped and well +nigh forgotten, the loyalty of one honest knight, Herlwin of +Conteville, bears his body to his grave in his own church at +Caen. His very grave is disputed—a dispossessed +<i>antecessor</i> claims the ground as his own, and the dead body +of the Conqueror has to wait while its last resting-place is +bought with money. Into that resting-place force alone can +thrust his bulky frame, and the rites of his burial are as wildly +cut short as were the rites of his crowning. With much +striving he had at last won his seven feet of ground; but he was +not to keep it for ever. Religious warfare broke down his +tomb and scattered his bones, save one treasured relic. +Civil revolution swept away the one remaining fragment. And +now, while we seek in vain beneath the open sky for the rifled +tombs of Harold and of Waltheof, a stone beneath the vault of +Saint Stephen’s still tells us where the bones of William +once lay but where they lie no longer.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>There is no need to doubt the striking details of the death +and burial of the Conqueror. We shrink from giving the same +trust to the long tale of penitence which is put into the mouth +of the dying King. He may, in that awful hour, have seen +the wrong-doing of the last one-and-twenty years of his life; he +hardly threw his repentance into the shape of a detailed +autobiographical confession. But the more authentic sayings +and doings of William’s death-bed enable us to follow his +course as an English statesman almost to his last moments. +His end was one of devotion, of prayers and almsgiving, and of +opening of the prison to them that were bound. All save one +of his political prisoners, English and Norman, he willingly set +free. Morkere and his companions from Ely, Walfnoth son of +Godwine, hostage for Harold’s faith, Wulf son of Harold and +Ealdgyth, taken, we can hardly doubt, as a babe when Chester +opened its gates to William, were all set free; some indeed were +put in bonds again by the King’s successor. But Ode +William would not set free; he knew too well how many would +suffer if he were again let loose upon the world. But love +of kindred was still strong; at last he yielded, sorely against +his will, to the prayers and pledges of his other brother. +Ode went forth from his prison, again Bishop of Bayeux, soon +again to be Earl of Kent, and soon to prove William’s +foresight by his deeds.</p> +<p>William’s disposal of his dominions on his death-bed +carries on his political history almost to his last breath. +Robert, the banished rebel, might seem to have forfeited all +claims to the succession. But the doctrine of hereditary +right had strengthened during the sixty years of William’s +life. He is made to say that, though he foresees the +wretchedness of any land over which Robert should be the ruler, +still he cannot keep him out of the duchy of Normandy which is +his birthright. Of England he will not dare to dispose; he +leaves the decision to God, seemingly to Archbishop Lanfranc as +the vicar of God. He will only say that his wish is for his +son William to succeed him in his kingdom, and he prays Lanfranc +to crown him king, if he deem such a course to be right. +Such a message was a virtual nomination, and William the Red +succeeded his father in England, but kept his crown only by the +help of loyal Englishmen against Norman rebels. William +Rufus, it must be remembered, still under the tutelage of his +father and Lanfranc, had not yet shown his bad qualities; he was +known as yet only as the dutiful son who fought for his father +against the rebel Robert. By ancient English law, that +strong preference which was all that any man could claim of right +belonged beyond doubt to the youngest of William’s sons, +the English Ætheling Henry. He alone was born in the +land; he alone was the son of a crowned King and his Lady. +It is perhaps with a knowledge of what followed that William is +made to bid his youngest son wait while his eldest go before him; +that he left him landless, but master of a hoard of silver, there +is no reason to doubt. English feeling, which welcomed +Henry thirteen years later, would doubtless have gladly seen his +immediate accession; but it might have been hard, in dividing +William’s dominions, to have shut out the second son in +favour of the third. And in the scheme of events by which +conquered England was to rise again, the reign of Rufus, at the +moment the darkest time of all, had its appointed share.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p>That England could rise again, that she could rise with a new +life, strengthened by her momentary overthrow, was before all +things owing to the lucky destiny which, if she was to be +conquered, gave her William the Great as her Conqueror. It +is as it is in all human affairs. William himself could not +have done all that he did, wittingly and unwittingly, unless +circumstances had been favourable to him; but favourable +circumstances would have been useless, unless there had been a +man like William to take advantage of them. What he did, +wittingly or unwittingly, he did by virtue of his special +position, the position of a foreign conqueror veiling his +conquest under a legal claim. The hour and the man were +alike needed. The man in his own hour wrought a work, +partly conscious, partly unconscious. The more clearly any +man understands his conscious work, the more sure is that +conscious work to lead to further results of which he dreams +not. So it was with the Conqueror of England. His +purpose was to win and to keep the kingdom of England, and to +hand it on to those who should come after him more firmly united +than it had ever been before. In this work his spirit of +formal legality, his shrinking from needless change, stood him in +good stead. He saw that as the kingdom of England could +best be won by putting forth a legal claim to it, so it could +best be kept by putting on the character of a legal ruler, and +reigning as the successor of the old kings seeking the unity of +the kingdom; he saw, from the example both of England and of +other lands, the dangers which threatened that unity; he saw what +measures were needed to preserve it in his own day, measures +which have preserved it ever since. Here is a work, a +conscious work, which entitles the foreign Conqueror to a place +among English statesmen, and to a place in their highest +rank. Further than this we cannot conceive William himself +to have looked. All that was to come of his work in future +ages was of necessity hidden from his eyes, no less than from the +eyes of smaller men. He had assuredly no formal purpose to +make England Norman; but still less had he any thought that the +final outcome of his work would make England on one side more +truly English than if he had never crossed the sea. In his +ecclesiastical work he saw the future still less clearly. +He designed to reform what he deemed abuses, to bring the English +Church into closer conformity with the other Churches of the +West; he assuredly never dreamed that the issue of his reform +would be the strife between Henry and Thomas and the humiliation +of John. His error was that of forgetting that he himself +could wield powers, that he could hold forces in check, which +would be too strong for those who should come after him. At +his purposes with regard to the relations of England and Normandy +it would be vain to guess. The mere leaving of kingdom and +duchy to different sons would not necessarily imply that he +designed a complete or lasting separation. But assuredly +William did not foresee that England, dragged into wars with +France as the ally of Normandy, would remain the lasting rival of +France after Normandy had been swallowed up in the French +kingdom. If rivalry between England and France had not come +in this way, it would doubtless have come in some other way; but +this is the way in which it did come about. As a result of +the union of Normandy and England under one ruler, it was part of +William’s work, but a work of which William had no +thought. So it was with the increased connexion of every +kind between England and the continent of Europe which followed +on William’s coming. With one part of Europe indeed +the connexion of England was lessened. For three centuries +before William’s coming, dealings in war and peace with the +Scandinavian kingdoms had made up a large part of English +history. Since the baffled enterprise of the holy Cnut, our +dealings with that part of Europe have been of only secondary +account.</p> +<p>But in our view of William as an English statesman, the main +feature of all is that spirit of formal legality of which we have +so often spoken. Its direct effects, partly designed, +partly undesigned, have affected our whole history to this +day. It was his policy to disguise the fact of conquest, to +cause all the spoils of conquest to be held, in outward form, +according to the ancient law of England. The fiction became +a fact, and the fact greatly helped in the process of fusion +between Normans and English. The conquering race could not +keep itself distinct from the conquered, and the form which the +fusion took was for the conquerors to be lost in the greater mass +of the conquered. William founded no new state, no new +nation, no new constitution; he simply kept what he found, with +such modifications as his position made needful. But +without any formal change in the nature of English kingship, his +position enabled him to clothe the crown with a practical power +such as it had never held before, to make his rule, in short, a +virtual despotism. These two facts determined the later +course of English history, and they determined it to the lasting +good of the English nation. The conservative instincts of +William allowed our national life and our national institutions +to live on unbroken through his conquest. But it was before +all things the despotism of William, his despotism under legal +forms, which preserved our national institutions to all +time. As a less discerning conqueror might have swept our +ancient laws and liberties away, so under a series of native +kings those laws and liberties might have died out, as they died +out in so many continental lands. But the despotism of the +crown called forth the national spirit in a conscious and +antagonistic shape; it called forth that spirit in men of both +races alike, and made Normans and English one people. The +old institutions lived on, to be clothed with a fresh life, to be +modified as changed circumstances might make needful. The +despotism of the Norman kings, the peculiar character of that +despotism, enabled the great revolution of the thirteenth century +to take the forms, which it took, at once conservative and +progressive. So it was when, more than four centuries after +William’s day, England again saw a despotism carried on +under the forms of law. Henry the Eighth reigned as William +had reigned; he did not reign like his brother despots on the +continent; the forms of law and freedom lived on. In the +seventeenth century therefore, as in the thirteenth, the forms +stood ready to be again clothed with a new life, to supply the +means for another revolution, again at once conservative and +progressive. It has been remarked a thousand times that, +while other nations have been driven to destroy and to rebuild +the political fabric, in England we have never had to destroy and +to rebuild, but have found it enough to repair, to enlarge, and +to improve. This characteristic of English history is +mainly owing to the events of the eleventh century, and owing +above all to the personal agency of William. As far as +mortal man can guide the course of things when he is gone, the +course of our national history since William’s day has been +the result of William’s character and of William’s +acts. Well may we restore to him the surname that men gave +him in his own day. He may worthily take his place as +William the Great alongside of Alexander, Constantine, and +Charles. They may have wrought in some sort a greater work, +because they had a wider stage to work it on. But no man +ever wrought a greater and more abiding work on the stage that +fortune gave him than he</p> +<blockquote><p>“Qui dux Normannis, qui Cæsar +præfuit Anglis.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p>Stranger and conqueror, his deeds won him a right to a place +on the roll of English statesmen, and no man that came after him +has won a right to a higher place.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p style="text-align: center">THE END.</p> + +<div class="gapspace"> </div> +<p style="text-align: center"><i>Printed by</i> R. & R. <span +class="smcap">Clarke</span>, <span class="smcap">Limited</span>, +<i>Edinburgh</i>.</p> +<p>***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WILLIAM THE CONQUEROR***</p> +<pre> + + +***** This file should be named 1066-h.htm or 1066-h.zip****** + + +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: +http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/1/0/6/1066 + + + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at + www.gutenberg.org/license. + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at 809 +North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email +contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the +Foundation's web site and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. +To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. +</pre></body> +</html> |