diff options
| author | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-01-22 04:36:33 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-01-22 04:36:33 -0800 |
| commit | bd7af1a7baaff0b12d7e0f616fb20a12579bab15 (patch) | |
| tree | 2fe2c24cfb75dc62f59786d7277d497907cd3cb9 /old/67458-0.txt | |
| parent | 1804ebf597188b46f314ef1108d155902863dc84 (diff) | |
Diffstat (limited to 'old/67458-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/67458-0.txt | 28520 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 28520 deletions
diff --git a/old/67458-0.txt b/old/67458-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 64b2676..0000000 --- a/old/67458-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,28520 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Reign of William Rufus and the -Accession of Henry the First, Volume I (of 2), by Edward Augustus -Freeman - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world 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. If you are not located in the United States, you -will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before -using this eBook. - -Title: The Reign of William Rufus and the Accession of Henry the First, - Volume I (of 2) - -Author: Edward Augustus Freeman - -Release Date: February 21, 2022 [eBook #67458] - -Language: English - -Produced by: Carol Brown, MWS and the Online Distributed Proofreading - Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from - images generously made available by The Internet - Archive/Canadian Libraries) - -*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE REIGN OF WILLIAM RUFUS -AND THE ACCESSION OF HENRY THE FIRST, VOLUME I (OF 2) *** - - - - - -THE REIGN OF WILLIAM RUFUS. - - - - -London - -HENRY FROWDE - -[Illustration: Colophon] - -OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE - -7 PATERNOSTER ROW - - - - -THE - -REIGN OF WILLIAM RUFUS - -AND THE - -ACCESSION OF HENRY THE FIRST. - - - - -BY - -EDWARD A. FREEMAN, M.A., HON. D.C.L., LL.D. - -HONORARY FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE. - - - - -_IN TWO VOLUMES._ - -VOLUME I. - - - - -Oxford: - -AT THE CLARENDON PRESS. - -1882. - -[_All rights reserved._] - - - - -PREFACE. - - -I have now been able to carry out the design which I spoke of in the -Prefaces to the fifth volume and to the second edition of the fourth -volume of my History of the Norman Conquest. I have endeavoured to -work out in detail the two sides of the memorable years with which I -deal in these volumes, their deep importance for general and specially -for constitutional history, and their rich store of personal and local -narrative. In the former aspect, I believe I may claim to be the first -to have dealt at length with the history of Bishop William of -Saint-Calais, a history of deep constitutional importance in itself, -and more important still with reference to the career of Anselm. It is -no small matter to be able to show that it was not Anselm, but -Anselm’s enemy, who was the first to appeal from an English court to -the see of Rome. In this matter I have, I trust, brought out into its -full importance a piece of history which has never, as far as I know, -been told at length by any modern writer, though Dr. Stubbs has shown -full appreciation of its constitutional bearings. Of less importance, -but still more novel, is the mission of Abbot Jeronto to England, to -which I have never seen any reference in any modern writer whatever. -With regard to the career of Randolf Flambard, I have now worked out -more fully many points which have been already spoken of both by -myself and by Dr. Stubbs; but I cannot claim to have brought forward -anything of great moment that is absolutely new. - -In the part which consists of military and other narrative, I have, as -usual, given all the attention that I could to the topography. I have -visited every place that I could, and I have generally in so doing had -the help of friends, often with more observant eyes than my own. I -must specially thank Mr. James Parker for his help in Normandy and -Maine, the Rev. J. T. Fowler of Durham for his help in Normandy, -Maine, and Northumberland, Mr. G. T. Clark in Shropshire, Mr. F. H. -Dickinson at Ilchester, the Rev. William Hunt at Bristol, and the Rev. -W. R. W. Stephens in Sussex and Kent. I have also to thank His Grace -the Duke of Norfolk for free access to Arundel castle, and M. Henri -Chardon of Le Mans for much valuable help in that city. And, above -all, I must again thank Mr. James Parker for much more than help in -preparing the maps and plans which illustrate the book. Without him -they could not have been done at all. - -In North Wales and in some parts of Normandy and France I was left to -my own inquiries. In South Wales I made no particular researches for -this volume; but I hope that an old-standing knowledge of a large part -of that country may not have been useless. Where I feel a real -deficiency is in Hampshire. I could not have made any minute inquiries -there without delaying the publication of the book for many months. -But I have in former years been at Portchester, and I have seen -something of the New Forest. And I feel pretty certain that no amount -of local research can throw any real light on the death of William -Rufus, unless indeed in the way of showing how local legends grew up. -But something might perhaps be done more minutely to illustrate the -landing and march of Duke Robert in 1101. - -On this last point the place of the conference between Henry and -Robert is satisfactorily fixed in the new text of Wace published by -Dr. Andresen. I did not come across his volumes till most of the -references to Wace had been copied and printed from the edition of -Pluquet. But in the course of revision I was able in some cases to -refer to Andresen also. His text is clearly a better one than that of -Pluquet. But I cannot say that I have learned much from his notes, -perhaps from the singularly repulsive way in which they are printed. -Another German writer, Dr. Liebermann, has done good service to my -period by publishing several unpublished chronicles to which I have -often referred. Those of Saint Edmundsbury are of very considerable -local importance. But there are other things that want printing. I -hear from Mr. E. C. Waters that there lurks in manuscript a cartulary -of Colchester Abbey, which contains distinct proof that Henry the -First spoke English familiarly. I have never doubted the fact, which -has always seemed to me as clear as anything that rested on mere -inference can be. But it is something to know that there is direct -witness to the fact, though it would be more satisfactory if one could -refer to that witness for oneself. In the story, as told me by Mr. -Waters, a document partly in English is produced in the Kings -presence; the clerk in whose hands it is put breaks down at the -English part; the King takes the parchment, and reads and explains it -with ease. - -I may mention one point with regard to topography in Normandy and -Maine. I have now carefully written the names of all places in -Normandy, Maine, and the neighbouring lands, according to the forms -now received, as they appear for instance on the French Ordnance map. -I am sure that people constantly read names like “Willelmus de Sancto -Carilepho,” “Robertus de Mellento,” without clearly taking in that -“Sanctus Carilephus,” “Mellentum”, &c. are names of real places, as -real as any town in England. When one reads, as I have read, of -“Bishop Karilef,” “the Honour of the Eagle,” and so forth, it is plain -that those who write in that way have no clear notion of Saint-Calais -and Laigle as real places. Yet all these towns are still there; to -most of them the railway is open, and there are trains. On the other -hand, the confusions of French writers about English places are, if -possible, more amazing. A German writer, meanwhile, is pretty sure to -know where any place, either in France or England, is, though he may -be sometimes a little lifeless in his way of dealing with it. - -I have now pretty well done with the history of the Norman Conquest of -England, except so far as I still hope to put forth my story on a -scale intermediate between five――or rather seven――large volumes and -one very small one. But I should be well pleased to go on with another -piece of history of the same date, the essential importance of which -and its close connexion with that with which I have been dealing is -being always brought more and fully home to me. The Norman in the -great island of the Ocean and the Norman in the great island of the -Mediterranean naturally form companion pieces. I have made some -acquaintance with the Rogers and Williams of Sicily in their own home, -and I should be well pleased to make that acquaintance more intimate. -Palermo follows naturally on Winchester and Rouen. The pleasure-house -of William the Bad is the skeleton of the Conqueror’s Tower with a -wholly different life breathed into it by Saracenic artists. But the -points of view from which we may approach Sicily, the meeting-place of -the nations, and the rich and various sources of interest which are -supplied by the history of that illustrious island, are simply -endless. - -In all technical points these volumes follow the exact pattern of the -History of the Norman Conquest. And I take a knowledge of that work -for granted, and I assume all points which I believe myself to have -explained or established in it. But I have added to these volumes, -what I have not added to any of their predecessors, a Chronological -Summary, distinct from the Table of Contents. It is, I think, a -necessary companion to a narrative in which I could not strictly -follow chronological order, but had to keep several contemporary lines -of story distinct. Alongside of the History of William Rufus I set his -Annals. - - - - - CONTENTS. - - - CHAPTER I. - - INTRODUCTION. - - A. D. PAGE - - Character of the reign of William Rufus 3 - The Norman Conquest in one sense completed, in - another undone 3 - Feudal developement under Rufus and Flambard 4 - Growth of anti-feudal tendencies 4 - Extension of the power of England at home 4 - Beginning of rivalry between England and France 5 - Change in the European position of England 5 - Personal character of William Rufus 5-6 - His companions and adversaries; Anselm and Helias 6 - Last warfare between Normans and English; results - of the struggle 6-7 - The Norman kingship becomes English 7 - Effects of the French war 7 - Scheme of the work 8 - - - CHAPTER II. - - THE EARLY DAYS OF WILLIAM RUFUS. 1087-1090. - - Character of the accession of Rufus; general - acceptance without formal election 9-10 - - - § 1. _The Coronation and Acknowledgement of William Rufus. - September, 1087._ - - Rufus the enemy of the Church, yet his election - specially ecclesiastical 10 - Wishes of the late King in his favour 11 - Special agency of Lanfranc 12 - Sept. 8, William Rufus leaves his father’s death-bed and - 1087. hastens to England 12-13 - He brings with him Morkere and Wulfnoth, and - again imprisons them 13-14 - Duncan and Wulf set free by Robert 13 - Meeting of William and Lanfranc 15 - Sept. 26. Coronation of William Rufus at Westminster 15 - His special oath 16 - Dec. 1087- His gifts to churches and to the poor 17-18 - Jan.1088. The Christmas Assembly; Odo restored to his - earldom 18-19 - Special circumstances of William’s accession; no - other available choice; comparison between - William and Robert 19-22 - - - § 2. _The Rebellion against William Rufus. - March-November, 1088._ - - Beginning of the rebellion; discontent of Odo; - influence of William of Saint-Calais 22-24 - March, 1088. Gatherings of the rebels; speech of Odo; - arguments on behalf of Robert 24-26 - Comparison of the elder and younger William 26-27 - Geoffrey of Coutances joins the rebels 27 - Treason of the Bishop of Durham; different - statements of his conduct 28-29 - March, 1088. Early movements in Kent and Sussex 29 - The Bishop forsakes the King; his temporalities - seized 30 - He is summoned to the King’s court; action of - Ralph Paganel 31 - March-May, Lands of the bishopric laid waste 32 - 1088. - April 16. The Easter Assembly; the rebels refuse to come 32 - List of the rebels 33-35 - Loyalty of Earl Hugh of Chester 34 - Ravages of the rebels; of Bishop William, Roger - Bigod, and Hugh of Grantmesnil 35-36 - History and description of Bristol 36-40 - Bristol occupied by Bishop Geoffrey; his works; - ravages of William of Eu and Robert of Mowbray 40-41 - Robert of Mowbray burns Bath 41-42 - His siege and defeat at Ilchester 42-44 - William of Eu plunders in Gloucestershire; - history and description of Berkeley 44-46 - Rebel centre at Hereford; action of Earl Roger 46-47 - The rebels march on Worcester; history and - description of the city 47-49 - Action of Wulfstan; deliverance of Worcester 48-51 - Movements of Odo in Kent; he occupies Rochester 52 - Rochester, Tunbridge, and Pevensey 52-53 - The war at Rochester; history and description of - the city and castle 52-56 - Duke Robert sends over Eustace of Boulogne and - Robert of Bellême 56 - The three sons of Earl Roger 57 - Earl Roger at Arundel; history and description of - the castle 58-59 - William of Warren; his earldom of Surrey; his - loyalty; he keeps Lewes 59-60 - The King wins over Earl Roger 60-61 - Robert of Mortain holds Pevensey against the King 62 - Loyal Normans; Robert Fitz-hamon 62 - The Church and the people for the King 63 - William’s proclamations and promises; the English - arm for him 63-65 - Meeting of the English army at London; William - accepted as English king 65-67 - William’s march; English hatred of Odo 67 - Taking of Tunbridge castle 68-70 - March towards Rochester; Odo at Pevensey 70 - Duke Robert fails to help the rebels 71 - The English besiege Odo in Pevensey 72-73 - Robert at last sends help; the Norman landing - hindered by the English 74-75 - Alleged death of William of Warren 76 - Pevensey surrenders; terms granted to Odo; - Rochester to be surrendered 76 - The garrison of Rochester refuse to surrender; - Odo taken prisoner by his own party 77 - William’s _Niðing_ proclamation; second English - muster 78 - Siege of Rochester; straits of the besieged; they - agree to surrender 79-80 - Lesson of the war; the King stronger than any one - noble; the unity of England 80-81 - The King refuses terms to the besieged 81 - Pleadings for the besieged, Odo and others; the - King grants terms 82-85 - The honours of war refused to Odo; his - humiliation; he leaves England 87-89 - June 4, The Whitsun Assembly; confiscations and grants; - 1088. amnesty of the chief rebels 88 - The Bishop of Durham again summoned 89 - His dealings with Counts Alan and Odo; he comes - with a safe-conduct 90-91 - The Bishop’s ecclesiastical claims; he goes back to - Durham 91-92 - Sept. 8 Agreement between the Bishop and the Counts 92-93 - Nov. 2. Meeting at Salisbury; trial of the Bishop; he - denies the authority of the court 95-97 - Lanfranc and William of Saint-Calais 97 - The charge and the Bishop’s answer 98-99 - Lanfranc and Geoffrey of Coutances 100-101 - Debate in the Bishop’s absence; constitution - of the court 100-101 - Debate on the word _fief_ 102 - The Bishop’s seven counsellors 103 - He appeals to Rome; character of the appeal; - position of Lanfranc 103-106 - The sentence pronounced; he renews his appeal 106-107 - Dialogue between the King and the Bishop; - intervention of Count Alan 107-109 - The Bishop appeals again; the final sentence 109-110 - The Bishop’s demand for money; answer of - Lanfranc 110-111 - The King’s offer; the Bishop gives sureties 111-112 - Question of the safe-conduct; charges of the - Bishop’s men 112-113 - Conditions of the Bishop’s leaving England 113-114 - Nov. 14 Durham castle surrendered to the King 114 - Nov. 21-26 The Bishop’s voyage delayed 115 - New charges and summonses; the Bishop’s - dealings with Osmund and Walkelin 116-117 - He at last sails to Normandy; his reception by - Duke Robert 117 - Character and importance of the story; William - of Saint-Calais the first to appeal to Rome 117-119 - Behaviour of the King, of Lanfranc, and of the - lesser actors 119-120 - State of Wales; Rhys restored by a fleet from - Ireland 121 - Gruffydd son of Cynan attacks Rhuddlan 122 - Action of Robert of Rhuddlan; he returns to - North Wales 123 - Robert at Dwyganwy; description and history of - the place 123-124 - July 3 Approach of Gruffydd’s fleet; death of Robert - of Rhuddlan 124-127 - His burial and epitaph 127-129 - End of the Norman Conquest; its confirmation - and undoing 129-130 - Tendencies to union; the new dynasty and - nobility accepted in an English character 131-132 - Rufus’ breach of his promises; his general - oppression; no oppression of the English as - such 132-133 - His employment of mercenaries; their presence - helps the fusion of races 133-134 - Sale of ecclesiastical offices; prolongation - of vacancies 134-135 - Restoration of Thurstan of Glastonbury 135 - Sept. 25 Death of Geoffrey Bishop of Chichester 135 - Death of Abbot Scotland of Saint Augustine’s, - Abbot Ælfsige of Bath, and Bishop Gisa of - Wells 136 - 1088-1122 The bishopric of Somerset granted to John of - Tours; he removes the see to Bath 136-137 - He obtains the temporal lordship of Bath 137 - Complaints of the canons of Wells and the monks - of Bath 138-139 - Guy forced on the monks of Saint Augustine’s; - disturbances and their punishment 139-140 - - - § 3. _Character of William Rufus._ - - May 24, Death and burial of Lanfranc; his position - 1089 in England and Normandy 140-142 - Change for the worse in the King’s character; - rebukes of Lanfranc 142-143 - Personal description of William Rufus 143-144 - His conduct in youth; his filial duty; his - conduct during the rebellion 145-146 - General charges against William Rufus; his - marked personality 147 - His alleged firmness of purpose; his lack of - real steadiness; his unfinished campaigns 148-149 - His alleged magnanimity; his boundless pride; - story of the chamberlain 149-151 - His alleged liberality; his wastefulness 151-152 - His rewards to the loyal troops after the - rebellion 152 - His extortions 153 - His generally strict government 153 - His lavishness to his foreign mercenaries 153-154 - 1108 They are restrained by the statute of Henry 154 - Stricter forest laws; story of the fifty - English acquitted by ordeal 155-157 - Special vices of Rufus; old and new fashions - of dress 157-159 - His irreligion; his favour to the Jews 159-161 - True position of the Jews in England 160 - Dispute between Jews and Christians 162 - He makes the converted Jews turn back; story - of the convert Stephen 162-165 - William’s defiance of God and the saints; - frequency of blasphemy 165-167 - Redeeming features in Rufus; little personal - cruelty; respect for his father’s memory 167-169 - His chivalrous spirit; his word when kept; and - when broken 169-171 - Chivalry a new thing; William Rufus marks the - beginning of a new æra 169-171 - Illustrations of the chivalrous character 171-174 - Grouping of events in the reign of Rufus 174 - - - CHAPTER III. - - THE FIRST WARS OF WILLIAM RUFUS. - 1090-1092. - - Character of the year 1089; natural phænomena 175-176 - August 11, The great earthquake 176 - 1089 Character of the year 1090; beginnings of - foreign adventure and domestic oppression 177 - The years 1090-1091; affairs of Normandy, - Scotland, and Cumberland 177 - Connexion of English and Norman history; the - same main actors in both 177 - Contrast between England and Normandy as to - private war 178 - The old and the new generation 179 - History of Robert of Bellême 179-181 - His character; his engineering skill; his - special and wanton cruelty 181-183 - His enmity towards Helias, Abbot Ralph, and - others 183-184 - 1110 His final imprisonment by Henry 184 - History and character of Robert Count of Meulan - and Earl of Leicester 184-187 - His fame for wisdom and influence with Rufus - and Henry 185-186 - 1118 Story of his death-bed 187 - - - § 1. _Normandy under Robert. 1087-1090._ - - State of Normandy; interest of those who held - lands in both countries 188-189 - Temptations to invasion 188-189 - Character of Robert; his weak good-nature and - lack of justice 190-191 - Spread of vice and evil fashions 191 - Building of castles; garrisons kept by the - Conqueror in the castles of the nobles 192 - Robert of Bellême and others drive out the - Duke’s forces 193 - Robert’s lavish grants; Ivry; Brionne 194 - The Ætheling Henry claims his mother’s lands 195 - He buys the Côtentin and Avranchin; his firm - rule 196-197 - Summer, Henry goes to England; William - 1088 promises him his mother’s lands 197 - He seizes them again; and grants them to Robert - Fitz-hamon 198 - Autumn, Influence of Odo with Robert 198 - 1088 Henry comes back to Normandy with Robert of - Bellême; they are seized and imprisoned 199 - Earl Roger makes war on the Duke; his - fortresses 199-200 - Odo’s exhortation to Robert 200-202 - Affairs of Maine; relations with Fulk of Anjou 202-204 - Robert acknowledged in Maine 204 - Chief men of the county; Bishop Howel, Geoffrey - of Mayenne, Helias of La Flèche 205 - April 21, Appointment of Howel to the see of Le Mans; - 1085 his loyalty to the Norman dukes 205-208 - Temporal relations to the see of Le Mans 207 - Robert before Le Mans; general submission of - the county 208-209 - Aug.-Sept. Ballon holds out; description of the place; - 1088 siege and surrender of the castle 209-211 - Robert attacks Saint Cenery; description and - history of the place 211-215 - Geroy and his descendants; Saint Cenery seized - by Mabel 214-215 - Siege and surrender of Saint Cenery; blinding - of Robert Carrel 215-217 - Castle granted to Robert grandson of Geroy 217 - Surrender of Alençon, Bellême, and other - castles; Robert disbands his army 218-219 - Robert of Bellême set free at his father’s - request 219-220 - Henry set free; his good government of - Coutances and Avranches 220-222 - - - § 2. _The First Successes of William Rufus. 1090._ - - Easter, Schemes of William Rufus; assembly at - 1090 Winchester; the King’s speech; war voted by - the Witan 221-224 - William stays in England; his policy; his - advantages in his struggle with Robert 224-226 - Power of William’s wealth; mercenaries; bribes 226-227 - Submission of Saint Valery; beginning of - English action on the continent 227-228 - Submission of various castles; Aumale, Eu, - Gournay, Longueville; description of Gournay - and Longueville 228-231 - Ralph of Toesny and Count William of Evreux; - their kindred; enmity of their wives 231-232 - Heloise of Evreux and Isabel of Toesny 232-234 - War between Ralph and Count William; Ralph - vainly asks help of the Duke; he submits to - King William 234 - Helias of Saint-Saens; he marries Robert’s - natural daughter 235 - His faithfulness; importance of his castles; - Saint-Saens, Bures, and Arques 236-237 - William’s dealings with France; Robert asks - help of Philip; Philip sets out, but is - bribed to go back 237-239 - The first English subsidy; first direct - dealings between England and France; results - of Rufus’ dealings with Philip 239-241 - Private wars not interrupted by the invasion; - action of Robert of Bellême 241-242 - Robert of Meulan imprisoned and set free 243 - Duke Robert takes Brionne 244 - November, Movement at Rouen; the municipal spirit; influence - 1090 of Conan; his treaty with William Rufus 245-247 - A day fixed for the surrender to William; Duke - Robert sends for help 248 - November 3. Henry and Robert of Bellême come to the help of - Duke Robert 248-249 - Rouen in the eleventh century 249-253 - Fright of Duke Robert; division in the city; - Henry sends Duke Robert away 253-256 - Gilbert of Laigle enters Rouen; slaughter of - the citizens; Conan taken prisoner 256 - Conan put to death by Henry 257-260 - Robert brought back; treatment of the citizens; - imprisonment of William son of Ansgar 260-261 - November Count William of Evreux marches against - Conches 261-266 - Siege of Conches; settlement of the county of - Evreux on Roger of Conches 262-268 - The three dreams; death of Roger of Conches 268-270 - 1100-1108 Later history of Ralph and William and their - wives 270-271 - Orderic’s picture of Normandy; his English - feelings 271-272 - - - § 3. _Personal Coming of William Rufus. 1091._ - - Christmas, Assembly at Westminster 273 - 1090 - Feb. 1091 The King crosses to Normandy 273 - January Duke Robert helps Robert of Bellême; siege of - Courcy 273-274 - The siege raised at the news of William’s coming 274 - Treaty of Caen; cession of Norman territory to - William 275-276 - Saint Michael’s Mount passes to William, the - rest of the Côtentin and Maine to Robert; - agreement to despoil Henry 277-279 - Settlement of the English and Norman succession; - growth of the doctrine of legitimacy 279-280 - Dealings with Henry and Eadgar; Eadgar banished - from Normandy; he goes to Scotland 280-282 - Partisans on each side to be restored 282 - The treaty sworn to; it stands but a little - while 283 - Lent, 1091 Robert and William march against Henry 283 - Henry’s preparations; Hugh of Chester and others - surrender their castles 283 - Henry defends himself on Saint Michael’s Mount; - he is welcomed by the monks 284-285 - Siege of the Mount; its position; character of - the siege 285-287 - Personal anecdotes; story of Rufus and the - knight who unhorsed him 287-290 - Contrast between William and Robert; Henry - allowed to take water, and William’s answer 291-292 - Feb. 1091 Henry surrenders 292-293 - Aug. 1091 William returns to England with his brothers 293 - Stories of Henry’s adventures; evidence for his - presence in England in 1091 293-295 - - - § 4. _The Scottish Expedition of William Rufus. - August-October, 1091._ - - May, 1091 Affairs of Scotland; Malcolm’s invasion of - Northumberland; he is driven back 295-297 - Aug. 1091 William and Robert in England; relations - between Robert and Malcolm; stronger side - of Robert and Eadgar 297-298 - September 3 William’s march; state of Durham; restoration - of Bishop William; his renewed influence 298-300 - Michaelmas Loss of William’s ships 300 - The kings by the Scots’ Water; mediation of - Robert and Eadgar; Malcolm does homage to - William 301-304 - Questions as to the betrothal of Margaret and - the earldom of Lothian 303-304 - Return of William; signatures to the Durham - charters 305-306 - December 23 Fresh disputes between William and Robert; - Robert and Eadgar leave England 306-307 - October 15 Fall of the tower at Winchcombe 307 - October 17 Great wind in London 308 - 1092 Fire in London 308 - March 28 Consecration of the church of Salisbury 308-309 - April 10 The tower and roof blown down 309 - May 9 Completion of Lincoln minster; the church ready - for consecration; Thomas of York claims the - jurisdiction of Lindesey; the King orders - the consecration 309-312 - May 6 Remigius dies before the appointed day; the - church remains unconsecrated 312 - - - § 5. _The Conquest and Colonization of Carlisle. 1092._ - - William’s conquest of Carlisle; popular - mistakes as to Cumberland and Westmoreland 313-314 - 603-685 Early history of Carlisle; it forms part of - the Northumbrian kingdom 314 - Scandinavians in Cumberland; destruction of - Carlisle 315 - 1092 Dolfin lord of Carlisle; he is driven out; the - city restored and the castle built 315 - The Saxon colony at Carlisle 316 - The earldom of Carlisle; later history of the - city; the castle and the bishopric 317-318 - 1093 Fortunes of Henry; the men of Domfront - choose him as their lord; description of - Domfront 319-320 - Henry’s wars with Robert; he wins back his - county 320-321 - The castle of Saint James is granted to Earl - Hugh 321-323 - - - CHAPTER IV. - - THE PRIMACY OF ANSELM AND THE ACQUISITION - OF NORMANDY. 1093-1097. - - 1087-1092 Character of the early years of William Rufus; - chronological sequence of the history 325-326 - 1093-1098 Character of the next period; distinct lines - of story 326-328 - Ecclesiastical affairs; working of the new - ideas; new position of the King 328 - 1089-1093 Vacancy of the see of Canterbury; influence of - Randolf Flambard 328-329 - - - § 1. _The Administration of Randolf Flambard._ - - 1089-1099 Early history of Flambard; question as to his - settlement in England T. R. E. 329 - His service with the Bishop of London 329-330 - Flambard a priest, and said to have been Dean - of Twinham 330 - Character of Flambard; his parents; his - surname; his financial skill 330-331 - His probable share in Domesday; his alleged - new Domesday 331-332 - His rise under Rufus; he holds the - justiciarship; growth of the office under - him 332-333 - His loss of land for the New Forest 333 - His systematic charges and exactions; the King - to be every man’s heir 333-335 - The feudal tenure; wardship; marriage; - dealings with bishoprics and abbeys 335-336 - Agency of Flambard; systematizing of the - feudal tenures 336-337 - Flambard’s theory of land-holding; relief and - redemption; dealings with wills 337-339 - Wardship; its oppressive working; wardship and - marriage special to England and Normandy 339-340 - The two sides of feudalism; England in what - sense feudal 340-341 - Flambard’s oppression falls most directly on - the greatest estates; no special oppression - of the English as such 341-342 - Dealings of the tenants-in-chief with their - under-tenants 342 - Submission of the nobles; position of the - king’s clerks 342-343 - Position of Rufus favourable for his schemes; - effect on national unity 343-344 - Abuse of the old laws 344 - Dealings with church property; appointment and - investiture of bishops and abbots 345 - Grant of the temporalities by the king; church - lands become fiefs; analogy between lay and - spiritual fiefs; Flambard’s inferences 346-347 - Vacant prelacies held by the King; power of - prolonging the vacancy 347 - Sale of bishoprics and abbeys; simony not - systematic before Rufus 347-348 - Treatment of vacant churches; Flambard the - chief agent 349 - Novelty of the practice; tenure in - _frankalmoign_ 350 - 1092-1100 Resignation and restoration of Abbot Odo of - Chertsey 350 - Distinction between bishoprics and abbeys; the - vacancies longer in the case of the abbeys 350-352 - English abbots; story of the appointment to an - Sees vacant in 1092 353 - 1091-1123 Ralph Luffa Bishop of Chichester; his - appointment and episcopate 353-354 - 1091 Death of Bishop William of Thetford; history - of Herbert Losinga; he buys the bishopric 354 - 1088-1091 Three years’ vacancy of New Minster 355 - 1091-1093 Herbert buys the abbey for his father Robert 355 - 1093 Herbert repents; receives his bishopric again - from the Pope; novelty of the act 355-356 - 1092-1094 Vacancy of the see of Lincoln 356 - 1089-1093 Vacancy of Canterbury 356 - - - § 2. _The Vacancy of the Primacy and the Appointment - of Anselm. 1089-1093._ - - Effects of the vacancy of the see of Canterbury 357 - Special position of the metropolitan see; - place of the Archbishop as the leader of the - nation 358-359 - Appointment to the archbishopric; the see not - granted to the King’s clerks 359 - The King’s purpose to keep the see vacant; his - motives 359-361 - No fear of a bad appointment 361-362 - No thought of election either by the monks or - by the Witan; silent endurance of the nation 362-363 - Results of the vacancy; corruption of the - clergy; lack of ecclesiastical discipline 363-365 - Anselm; debt of England to foreigners; the - Burgundian saints, Anselm and Hugh 365 - 1080 Birth and parentage of Anselm; Aosta 366-368 - Comparison of Lanfranc and Anselm; various - sides of Anselm’s character; he is not - preferred in England by the Conqueror 368-369 - Anselm and Eadmer; references to Eadmer in - other writers 369-370 - Childhood of Anselm; his youthful licence 370-371 - 1057-1060 He leaves Aosta; his sojourn at Avranches 371 - 1060 He becomes a monk at Bec 371 - 1063 He is elected Prior; stories of him as Prior 372 - 1078 He is elected Abbot; Bec under his government; - his widespread fame 373 - His correspondence 374 - Relations between Bec and England 374-376 - 1090 Foundation of the priory of Clare 376 - Frequency of lawsuits; Anselm’s desire to do - justice 376-377 - 1078 His first visit to England; his friendship with - the monks of Christ Church; his first - acquaintance with Eadmer 377-378 - His general popularity in England; his love - for England; his preaching and alleged - miracles 378-380 - His friendship with the Conqueror and with - Earl Hugh 380-381 - Feeling as to the vacancy of the archbishopric; - Anselm looked to as the coming archbishop 381-382 - Earl Hugh changes the canons of Saint - Werburh’s at Chester for monks; he asks help - from Anselm 382 - Anselm refuses to go; repeated messages and - refusals; he at last goes at the bidding of - his own monks 382-385 - September 8, Anselm at Canterbury 385 - 1092 - His first interview with Rufus; his rebukes of - the King; settlement of the affairs of Bec 385-387 - Anselm at Chester 387 - February, The King refuses him leave to go back; William’s - 1093 feeling towards Anselm 388 - Christmas, The Christmas assembly; the vacancy discussed by - 1092-1093 the Witan; petition of the assembly to the - King 387-389 - Prayers for the appointment of an archbishop - drawn up by Anselm 389-390 - Character of the year 1093 390 - Discourse about Anselm before the King; the - King’s mockery 390-391 - He falls sick at Alveston and is removed to - Gloucester 391 - Repentance of Rufus; advice of the prelates - and nobles; Anselm sent for; Rufus promises - amendment 392-393 - His proclamation of reform; general - satisfaction 393-394 - Beginnings of reform; prisoners set free; the - bishopric of Lincoln granted to Robert Bloet 394-395 - March 6, Rufus names Anselm to the archbishopric; - 1093 unwillingness of Anselm 396 - Arguments of the bishops, of the King, and his - own monks 397-399 - He is invested and installed by force 398-401 - Anselm’s renewed protest; his parable of the - two oxen; the King orders the restitution of - the temporalities of the see 401-403 - The royal right of investiture not questioned; - no scruples on the part of Anselm; later - change in his views 403-404 - No ecclesiastical election; sole action of the - King; Gundulf’s letter to the monks of Bec 404-405 - Anselm tarries with Gundulf; consent of the - Duke, the Archbishop of Rouen, and the monks - of Bec 406 - April 17, The King’s recovery; the Easter Gemót 407 - 1093 - The King falls back into evil ways; he recalls - his acts of mercy 407-408 - He keeps his purpose as to Anselm 408-409 - March-Dec. Affairs of England and Wales; dealings between - 1093 William and Malcolm; designs of William on - Normandy 409-410 - Action of William of Eu; he suggests an attack - on Normandy 410-411 - Dealings of Rufus with the Counts of Flanders 411-412 - Oct. 4 or Death of Robert the Frisian; accession of - 13, 1093 Robert of Jerusalem 411-412 - Interview between Anselm and the King at - Rochester; his three conditions 412-414 - Anselm requires to be allowed to acknowledge - Pope Urban; question of the acknowledgement - of Popes; English feeling on the subject 414-416 - The King’s answer; his special counsellors; - Count Robert of Meulan and Bishop William of - Durham 417 - The King prays Anselm to take the archbishopric; - he asks for the confirmation of grants made - by him during the vacancy 418 - Anselm refuses; statement of the case on both - sides; the King’s _advocatio_ of the - archbishopric 418-421 - State of public feeling; special Gemót at - Winchester; Anselm receives the archbishopric - and does homage 421-422 - The King’s writ; the Archbishop’s thegns; - clauses in favour of the monks 422-423 - Relations of the Archbishop to the city of - Canterbury and the abbey of Saint Alban’s 423-424 - 1093 Death of Abbot Paul of Saint Alban’s; - four years’ vacancy of the abbey 423-424 - The question as to the Pope left unsettled; - no reference to the Pope in English episcopal - appointments 424-425 - Order of episcopal appointments then and now; - theory of the two systems 425-427 - Sept. 25, Enthronement of Anselm; Flambard brings a suit - 1093 against him on the day of his enthronement 427-428 - December 4 Consecration of Anselm at Canterbury; list of - the officiating bishops 429-430 - Successful objection of Thomas of York to the - phrase “Metropolitan of Britain” 430-432 - Anselm’s general profession to the Roman - church 432-433 - Thomas claims jurisdiction over Lincoln; - Robert Bloet’s consecration delayed 433 - Christmas, Assembly at Gloucester; Anselm received by - 1093-1094 the King 434 - - - § 3. _The Assembly at Hastings and the second Norman - Campaign. 1094._ - - Events of the year 1094; affairs of Normandy; - their connection with Anselm 434-435 - Christmas, Robert’s challenge of William; war decreed 435-436 - 1093-1094 - Contributions collected for the war; Anselm - unwilling to contribute; he at last gives - five hundred pounds 437-438 - William first accepts the money and then - refuses it 438-440 - Dispute with Bishop Maurice of London; - judgement of Wulfstan 440-441 - February 2, Assembly at Hastings; fleet delayed by the - 1094 wind 441-442 - February 11 Consecration of the church at Battle; William - and Anselm at Battle 442-445 - February 3, Death of Bishop Geoffrey of Coutances; his - 1093 successor Ralph at Hastings and Battle 444 - February 12 Consecration of Robert Bloet to Lincoln; his - gift to the King; plot against Anselm; - compromise with York 445-446 - 1104-1123 Character and episcopate of Robert Bloet 447-448 - Return of Bishop Herbert of Thetford; he is - deprived by the King 448 - 1094 His restoration; he removes his see to Norwich 448 - February 17 The ceremonies of Ash-Wednesday; Anselm rebukes - the minions 449-450 - Anselm’s interview with the King; his silence - about the war 450-451 - Anselm asks for help in his reforms; he asks - leave to hold a synod; his appeal against - the fashionable vices 451-453 - Grievances of the Church; wrongs of the church - tenants 454 - He prays the King to fill the vacant abbeys; - their relation to the King; hostile answer - of Rufus 454-456 - Comparison of Lanfranc and Anselm; estimate of - Anselm’s conduct 456-457 - Anselm tries to recover the King’s favour; the - bishops advise him to give more money; his - grounds for refusing 457-460 - The King more hostile than ever; Anselm - leaves Hastings 460 - March 19, William crosses to Normandy 461 - 1094 - Vain attempts to settle the dispute between - William and Robert; verdict of the - guarantors against William 461 - Castles held by William; taking of Bures 462-463 - Robert calls in Philip; siege and surrender of - Argentan; ransom of the prisoners 463-464 - Robert takes La Houlme 465 - Difficulties of Rufus; further taxation; levy - of English soldiers; Flambard takes away - the soldiers’ money 465-466 - Rufus buys off Philip 466-467 - Contemporary notices of the campaign; - differences between England and Normandy; - private wars go on in Normandy 467-468 - Relations between Rufus and Henry; war at - Saint Cenery; the castle taken by Robert of - Bellême 468-469 - Henry and Earl Hugh summoned to Eu 469 - October 31 They go to Southampton and keep Christmas in - London 470 - December 28 The King comes to England; William and Henry - reconciled 470 - February, Henry goes to Normandy; his warfare with - 1095 Robert 470-471 - Norman supporters of William 471-474 - Wretchedness of England; causes for the - King’s return; affairs of Scotland and Wales; - plots at home 474-475 - - - § 4. _The Council of Rockingham. - December, 1094-March, 1095._ - - Notes of the year 1095; councils of the year 476 - Jan., Feb., - 1095 Movements of William; alleged Welsh campaign 476-477 - April, 1094- Last days and sickness of Wulfstan; his - Jan., 1095 friendshipwith Bishop Robert of Hereford 477-479 - January 18, Death of Wulfstan; his appearance to Bishop - 1095 Robert 480 - January 22 His burial 480 - Anselm and Urban; need of the pallium; elder - usage as to it 481-484 - Anselm asks leave to go to Urban for the - pallium; William refuses to acknowledge any - pope 484-485 - Anselm asks for an assembly to discuss the - question; he will leave the realm if he may - not acknowledge Urban 485-486 - Frequency of assemblies under Rufus; a special - meeting summoned 487 - Sunday, Assembly at Rockingham 487 - March 11 - Estimate of the question; the King technically - right; no real objection to Urban on his - part 487-489 - History and description of Rockingham 490-491 - Place of meeting; the King’s inner council 491 - Anselm’s opening speech 492 - The real point avoided on the King’s side; - Anselm treated as an accused person 493 - Conduct of the bishops; the meeting adjourned - till Monday 493-494 - Monday, The bishops counsel submission; Anselm’s - March 12 second speech; he asserts no exclusive - claims; his two duties 494-496 - Position of England towards the popes; Anselm - and William of Saint-Calais 496-497 - Anselm not the first to appeal to Rome 497 - Answer of the bishops; the King’s messages; the - bishops advise him to submit to the King in - all things 497-499 - Anselm sleeps during the debate 498 - The bishops’ definition of freedom; Anselm - will not forsake Urban 499-500 - Schemes of William of Saint-Calais against - Anselm; he aspires to the archbishopric 500-501 - Objects of the King; promises of William of - Saint-Calais; his speech to Anselm 502-503 - William’s imperial claims; his relations at - the time to the vassal kingdoms 503-505 - The real question hitherto evaded; Anselm’s - challenge; he states the real case 505-506 - New position of the bishops 506 - Anselm insulted; popular feeling on his side; - story of Anselm and the knight 506-508 - Perplexity of the King; failure of William of - Saint-Calais; the assembly adjourned 508-509 - Tuesday, Debates in the inner council; William of - March 13 Saint-Calais recommends force; the lay nobles - refuse; speeches of the King and Robert of - Meulan 510-511 - The King bids the bishops renounce Anselm; he - withdraws his protection; Anselm’s answer 511-513 - The King turns to the lay lords; they support - Anselm 513-514 - Shame of the bishops; the King further - examines them; his rewards and punishments 514-516 - Anselm wishes to leave England; another - adjournment 516-517 - Wednesday Anselm summoned to the King’s presence; - March 14 the lay lords propose a truce; adjournment - to May 20 517-519 - Importance of the meeting at Rockingham 519 - William keeps faith to Anselm personally, - but oppresses his friends 519-521 - - - § 5. _The Mission of Cardinal Walter. 1095._ - - March-May Events of the time of truce; assemblies of - 1095 the year 521 - Position of Urban 521 - March 1-7, Council of Piacenza; its decrees; no mention - 1095 of English affairs 522-523 - William’s schemes to turn the Pope against - Anselm; mission of Gerard and William of - Warelwast 523-524 - April 10 Urban at Cremona; dealings of William’s - messengers with Urban 525 - The Sicilian monarchy; relations between - England and Sicily 525-526 - Gerard and William bring Walter of Albano as - Legate; he brings a pallium 526-527 - Secrecy of his errand; his interview with the - King; William acknowledges Urban 527-528 - Walter refuses to depose Anselm 528-529 - William and his counsellors outwitted by the - Legate; he is driven to a reconciliation - with Anselm 529 - May 13 Whitsun Assembly; the King’s message to Anselm 530 - Anselm will not pay for the pallium; Anselm and - William reconciled; their friendly discourse 531-532 - Anselm refuses to take the pallium from the - King 532 - Popular aspect of the assembly 533 - Anselm absolves two bishops, Osmund of Salisbury - and Robert of Hereford; he restores Wulfrith - of Saint David’s 533-534 - June 10 Anselm receives the pallium at Canterbury 534-535 - June 26 Death of Bishop Robert of Hereford; the Legate - stays in England; his dealings with Anselm 535-537 - The King’s northern march; Anselm entrusted - with the defence of Canterbury 537-538 - Letters between Anselm and the Legate; the - bishops object to Anselm’s position; his - answer 538-540 - Question about the monks at Christ Church; - Anselm and his tenants 540-541 - Christmas, Assembly at Windsor and Salisbury 541-542 - 1095-1096 - January 6 Anselm attends William of Saint-Calais on his - death-bed 541-542 - June 6 Consecration of bishops; Samson of Worcester - and Gerard of Hereford 542-544 - Anselm consecrates Irish bishops 544 - - - § 6. _The Crusade and the Mortgage of Normandy. - November 1095-March 1097._ - - March 7, Council of Piacenza; appeal of the Emperor - 1095 Alexios 545 - Nov. 18 Council of Clermont; the first crusade 545-547 - Bearing of the crusade on our story; no king - engaged in the first crusade; share of - Normandy and Flanders 546-547 - The crusades a Latin movement; name of - _Franks_ 546 - Decrees of the Council; lay investitures - forbidden; sentence against Clement and the - Emperor; against Philip and Bertrada 548-549 - Urban preaches the crusade; his geography 549-550 - French, Norman, and other crusaders 550-552 - Marriage of Robert of Meulan 551 - Duke Robert takes the cross; he applies to - William for money; position of William - towards the crusade 552-553 - Mission of Abbot Jeronto; he rebukes William 553-554 - Easter, The Pope sends his nephew; peace between - April 13 William and Robert 554-555 - Normandy pledged to William 555 - June 2 Whitsun Assembly; taxation to raise the - pledge-money; protest of the prelates 556-557 - Oppression of the tenants; plunder of the - churches 557-558 - Contribution of Anselm; he mortgages Peckham - to his monks 558-559 - September, Conferences between William and Robert; - 1096 Robert goes on the crusade; his companions 559-560 - Conduct of Robert; his treatment at Rome; his - reception by Robert of Apulia 560-561 - 1096-1097 The crusaders winter in Apulia; siege of - Amalfi; Bohemond takes the cross 562 - Feb. 1097 Odo of Bayeux dies at Palermo 563 - Duke Robert crosses to Dyrrhachion; he does - homage to Alexios 563-564 - Robert at Laodikeia; Hugh of Jaugy joins the - crusaders; the rope-dancers of Antioch 564-565 - Robert refuses the crown of Jerusalem and - goes back 566 - William takes possession of Normandy; - character of his rule there 566-567 - The Côtentin restored to Henry 567 - 1096 Synod of Rouen; the Truce of God confirmed; - other decrees; small results of the synod 568-569 - William’s appointments to Norman prelacies 570 - 1090-1101 Tancard Abbot of Jumièges 570 - 1096-1107 Etard Abbot of Saint Peter on Dives 570 - 1098-1105 Turold Bishop of Bayeux 571 - - - § 7. _The Last Dispute between William and Anselm. 1097._ - - Events of the year 1096-1097 571 - State of Wales at the end of 1096 571 - April, 1097 Assembly at Windsor; Welsh war and seeming - conquest 572 - William complains of Anselm’s contingent; - position of the Archbishop’s knights; - Anselm summoned to the King’s court 572-574 - Change in Anselm’s feelings; his yearnings - towards Rome; aspect of his conduct 574-578 - Causes of his loss of general support 578 - His continued demands of reform; he determines - not to answer the summons but to make a - last effort 579-580 - May 24, Whitsun assembly; Anselm favourably received; - 1097 his last appeal 581 - He determines to ask leave to go to Rome; the - King refuses 581-583 - June-Aug., The charge against Anselm withdrawn; affairs - 1097 of Wales; another assembly; Anselm’s request - again refused 583 - Wednesday, Assembly at Winchester; Anselm renews his - October 14 request; he is again impleaded 584-585 - Thursday, Anselm and the bishops and lords; speech of - October 15 Walkelin; the bishops’ portrait of - themselves; Anselm’s answer 586-588 - Part of the lay lords; Anselm’s promise to - obey the customs; he is charged with breach - of promise; alternatives given him 588-589 - Anselm and the King; Anselm’s discourse; - answer of Count Robert; the barons against - Anselm 589-592 - Anselm allowed to go, but the archbishopric - to be seized 592-593 - Anselm’s last interview with Rufus; he blesses - him 593-594 - Anselm at Canterbury; he takes the pilgrim’s - staff 594 - His treatment at Dover; he crosses to Whitsand 595 - The King seizes the archbishopric; Anselm’s - acts declared null; the monks keep Peckham 595-596 - Rebuilding of the choir of Christ Church; - works of Prior Ernulf 596-597 - Comparison of the trials of William of - Saint-Calais, Anselm, and Thomas 597-605 - Anselm does not strictly appeal to the Pope 598 - He asserts no clerical privilege 599 - Question of observing the customs 600 - Comparison of the proceedings in each case 600-601 - Architectural arrangements 601-602 - Constitution of the assemblies; they become - less popular; lessened freedom of speech 602-603 - The inner and outer council; foreshadowing of - Lords and Commons 603-604 - The Witan and the Theningmannagemót 604 - Behaviour of Rufus, of Henry the First, of - Henry the Second 605 - Effect on Anselm of his foreign sojourn 606 - His journey; dealings of Odo of Burgundy; he - reaches Rome 607 - Councils of Lateran and Bari; story of the - cope of Beneventum 607-610 - Position of Rufus; he is never excommunicated; - probable effect of excommunication 611-612 - Anselm at Lyons; his letters to the Pope 612 - His letters to the King from Rome; William’s - treatment of the letters 613 - Mission of William of Warelwast 614-620 - Nov., 1097- William on the Continent 614 - April, 1099 - Anselm at Schiavia; he writes “Cur Deus Homo” 615 - Anselm and Urban before Capua; Anselm and the - Saracens 615-617 - Anselm wishes to resign the archbishopric; - Urban forbids him 617-618 - October 1, Council of Bari 618 - 1098 - Anselm at Rome; dealings between the Pope and - William of Warelwast; the excommunication - threatened and respited 618-620 - Urban’s treatment of Anselm 620-621 - April 12, Council of Lateran; protest of Reingard of - 1099 Lucca; Anselm goes to Lyons 621-622 - July 29 Death of Urban; William’s words on his death 622-623 - - Aug. 13, 1099-Paschal the Second Pope; William’s words on - Jan. 21, 1108 his election 623 - - - - - CHRONOLOGY OF THE YEARS 1087-1102. - - - 1087 September 8 William Rufus leaves his father’s death-bed and - hastens to England. - He imprisons Morkere and Wulfnoth. - He is accepted by Lanfranc. - In Normandy Robert of Bellême and others drive out - the Duke’s garrisons. - September 26 William is crowned at Westminster. - He makes gifts for his father’s soul. - December 25- The Christmas assembly. Odo restored to his - 1088 January 6 earldom. - Death of Abbot Scotland. - Abbot Guy appointed at Saint Augustine’s. - March Conspiracy against the King. Rebellious movements - in Kent and Sussex. - Bishop William secures London, Dover, and Hastings - for the King. - March-May The Bishop forsakes the King; his temporalities - seized. He is summoned to the King’s court, and - his lands laid waste. - April 16 The Easter assembly; the rebel nobles fail to appear. - April-June Ravaging of Gloucestershire and Somerset. - Deliverance of Worcester. - Attempted invasion of Robert. Sieges of - Tunbridge, Pevensey, and Rochester. - June Return of Rhys; Gruffydd and the wikings harry - Rhuddlan. - Bishop William at the King’s court. - Henry, now Count of the Côtentin, comes to - England for his mother’s lands. - July 3 Death of Robert of Rhuddlan. - July John of Tours consecrated to the bishopric of - Somerset void by the death of Gisa. - August-September Henry and Robert of Bellême go back to Normandy - and are imprisoned. - Duke Robert received at Le Mans; sieges of Ballon - and Saint Cenery. - Henry is released and restored to his county in - the course of the autumn. - September 6 Agreement between Bishop William and the Counts. - September 25 Death of Bishop Geoffrey of Chichester. - November 2 Bishop William before the assembly at Salisbury. - November 14 Durham castle surrendered to the King. - after 26 Bishop William crosses to Normandy. - November ? Grant of the abbey of Bath to Bishop John; the - bishopric of Somerset removed thither. - The priory of Blyth founded in the course of the - year by Roger of Bully. - 1089 May 24 Death of Lanfranc. - 1090 April 21 Easter assembly at Winchester; war declared - against Normandy. - A large part of eastern Normandy won by William - without crossing the sea. - Maine revolts from Robert; reign of Azo of Este; - Howel imprisoned by Helias and visits England. - June 28 Howel returns to Le Mans. - Intrigues of Conan at Rouen. - November 3 Rouen secured to Duke Robert; death of Conan. - War of Evreux and Conches; peace between them. - Anselm visits England for the first time as abbot - in the course of the year. - December 25- Christmas assembly at Winchester. - 1091 January 6 - January Siege of Courcy. - February Helias buys the county of Maine from Hugh. - The King crosses to Normandy. - Treaty of Caen. - February William and Robert besiege Henry at Saint Michael’s - Mount. - May Malcolm invades Northumberland and is driven back. - August William, Robert, and Henry go back to England. - March towards Scotland. - September 3 Bishop William restored to his bishopric. - September 29 Loss of ships. - Treaty with Malcolm. - October 15 Fall of the tower at Winchcombe. - October 17 Great wind in London. - Death of Cedivor; victory of Rhys son of Tewdwr - over Gruffydd son of Meredydd in the course of - the year. - In the course of the year come the death of - William Bishop of Thetford, the consecration of - his successor Herbert Losinga, who also buys - the abbey of New Minster for his father, and - the consecration of Ralph Luffa Bishop of - Chichester. - 1092 Fire in London. - March 28 Consecration of the church of Salisbury. - April 10 The tower blown down. - May 6 Death of Bishop Remigius; the church of Lincoln - remains unconsecrated. - William’s conquest and colonization of Carlisle. - Marriage of Philip and Bertrada. - September 8 Anselm comes to England; his reception at - Canterbury; his first interview with the King. - Anselm helps Earl Hugh in his changes at Chester. - December 25- Christmas assembly; discussion of the vacancy of - 1093 January 6 the archbishopric. - February William refuses leave to Anselm to go back to - Normandy. - February 3 Death of Bishop Geoffrey of Coutances; Ralph - succeeds. - Lent, Sickness of the King; his repentance and - March 2 proclamation; he grants the see of Lincoln to - Robert Bloet. - March 6 The King names Anselm to the archbishopric; his - first installation. - April 17 Easter assembly at Winchester; the King recalls - his reforms. - Scottish embassy at Winchester; Malcolm summoned - to appear in the King’s court. - April 17-24 Defeat and death of Rhys at Brecknock. - April 30 Cadwgan harries Dyfed. - July 1 The Normans enter Ceredigion and Dyfed. - Advance of the Earls in North Wales; seeming - conquest of all Wales. - August 11 Malcolm lays a foundation-stone at Durham. - August 24 Malcolm at Gloucester; William refuses to see him. - Questions between the King and Anselm; his - investiture. - Intrigues of William of Eu; dealings of William - with the Counts of Flanders. - September 25 Enthronement of Anselm. - October 4-13 Death of Robert the Frisian. - October 17 Translation of Saint Julian at Le Mans. - November 13 Death of Malcolm at Alnwick. - November 17 Death of Margaret. - Donald King of Scots; driving out of Margaret’s - children. - December 4 Consecration of Anselm. - Death of Abbot Paul of Saint Alban’s. - Henry received at Domfront and wins back the - Côtentin. - December 25- Christmas assembly at Gloucester. - 1094 January 6 Challenge received from Robert; Duncan claims the - Scottish crown and receives it from William. - Contributions for the Norman war; Anselm’s gift - refused. - February 2 Assembly at Hastings. - February 11 Consecration of the church of Battle. - February 12 Robert Bloet consecrated Bishop of Lincoln. - Bishop Herbert of Thetford deprived of his - bishopric. - February 22 Anselm’s Lenten sermon; he rebukes the King. - March 19 William crosses to Normandy. - Campaign of Argentan, Bures, &c.; the French king - bought off. - May The foreigners driven out of Scotland. - October 31 Henry and Earl Hugh summoned to Eu; they sail to - Southampton. - November Duncan killed; Donald’s second reign in Scotland. - December 28 The King goes back to England. - Deaths of Roger of Beaumont, Roger of Montgomery, - and Hugh of Grantmesnil, in the course of the - year. - In the course of the year the Welsh revolt under - Cadwgan and recover the greater part of the - country; Pembroke castle holds out. - 1095 January 18 Death of Wulfstan. - February 9 Henry goes to Normandy. - February Interview of William and Anselm at Gillingham. - March 1-7 Council of Piacenza. - March 11-14 Assembly at Rockingham. - Gerard and William of Warelwast sent to Pope - Urban. - March 25 Assembly at Winchester; Earl Robert of Mowbray - summoned, but does not appear. - April 10 Urban at Cremona; Cardinal Walter sent to England. - May 13 Assembly at Windsor; Anselm and William reconciled; - Earl Robert fails to appear. - June 10 Anselm receives the pallium at Canterbury. - June 26 Death of Bishop Robert of Hereford. - April 30 Translation of Saint Eadmund. - The King’s northern march; Anselm’s command in - Kent. - July-Sept. Taking of Newcastle and Tynemouth; siege of - Bamburgh. - Michaelmas Montgomery taken by the Welsh; the King marches - against them. - November 1 The King reaches Snowdon; ill-success of the - campaign. - November 18 Council of Clermont. - Pope Urban at Le Mans. - Robert of Mowbray taken at Tynemouth; surrender - of Bamburgh. - December 25- Christmas assembly at Windsor. - 1096 January 6 - January 1 Death of Bishop William. - January 13 The assembly adjourned to Salisbury; sentences of - William of Eu, William of Alderi, and others. - Imprisonment of Robert of Mowbray. - Synod of Rouen; confirmation of the Truce of God. - Mission of Abbot Geronto. - Easter, April 13 He is suspended by the Pope’s nephew. - Normandy pledged to William. - June 8 Consecration of Bishop Gerard of Hereford and - Samson of Worcester. - August William takes possession of Normandy. - Helias takes the cross; mutual defiance between - him and William. - September Duke Robert, Bishop Odo, and others go to the - crusade. - The King spends the winter in Normandy. - In the course of the year the Welsh take - Rhyd-y-gors; Gwent and Brecknock revolt; Pembroke - is besieged, but holds out; Gisors is fortified - by Pagan Theobald. - 1097 February Odo dies at Palermo. - April 4 William comes back to England. - Assembly at Windsor. - The King’s campaign in Wales; seeming conquest of - the country. - The King complains of Anselm’s knights. - May 14 Whitsun assembly; the charge against Anselm - dropped; he asks leave to go to Rome, but is - refused. - Revolt of Cadwgan in Wales. - June―August The King’s last campaign in Wales; its ill-success. - July 24 Death of Howel; Hildebert Bishop of Le Mans. - August Assembly; an expedition against Donald decreed; - Anselm’s request again refused. - September The two Eadgars march to Scotland; exploits of - Robert son of Godwine; Donald defeated and - blinded; the younger Eadgar King of Scots. - October 14 Assembly at Winchester; Anselm allowed to go, but - his temporalities to be seized; his parting - with the King. - Anselm leaves England. - William demands the French Vexin. - November He crosses to Normandy for the war with France - and Maine. Flambard and Walkelin joint regents. - Nov. 1097― French war; Lewis and William; fortification - Sept. 1098. of Gisors by Robert of Bellême. - December 19 Death of Abbot Baldwin of Saint Eadmund’s. - December 25 The King demands money of Walkelin. - 1098 January 3 Death of Walkelin. - January Beginning of the war of Maine; castles occupied - by Robert of Bellême. - Victories of Helias. - April 28 Helias taken prisoner. - May 5 Fulk Rechin at Le Mans. - June The King invades Maine; he retreats from Le Mans. - July 20 William at Ballon. - August Convention between Helias and Fulk. - William enters Le Mans. - Helias set free; he strengthens himself in his - southern castles. - September 27 William’s march against France. - Attacks on Pontoise, Chaumont, and other castles. - Coming of William of Aquitaine; attacks on the - Montfort castles; failure of the two Williams. - October 1 Council of Bari; Anselm pleads for William. - In the course of the year the Welsh withdraw to - Anglesey. - The Earls Hugh in Anglesey. - Expedition of Magnus of Norway; death of Earl - Hugh of Shrewsbury at Aberlleiniog. - Establishment of Robert of Bellême in England; - he buys his brother’s earldom. - His works at Bridgenorth. - He receives the estates of Roger of Bully. - Christmas The King spends the winter in Normandy; truce with - France. - 1099 Mission of William of Warelwast to Rome; he wins - over Urban. - April 10 The King in England; Easter assembly. - April 12 Council of Lateran; William’s excommunication - delayed. - Anselm leaves Rome for Lyons. - April Movements of Helias in southern Maine. - May 19 Whitsun assembly in the new hall at Westminster; - the bishopric of Durham granted to Randolf - Flambard. - June 3 Consecration of Flambard. - June-July Helios recovers Le Mans; the King’s garrisons - hold out in the castles; burning of the city. - The news brought to William; his ride and voyage. - Helias leaves Le Mans and strengthens himself at - Château-du-Loir. - William passes through Le Mans to southern Maine. - His failure before Mayet. - He enters Le Mans. - July 5 Taking of Jerusalem; exploits of Duke Robert. - July 12 Duke Robert refuses the crown of Jerusalem; - Geoffrey chosen King. - July 19 Death of Pope Urban the Second. - August 12 Battle of Ascalon. - August 13 Paschal the Second elected Pope. - September The King returns to England. - November 3 The great tide in the Thames. - December 3 Death of Bishop Osmund of Salisbury. - Dec. 25- Christmas assembly at Gloucester. - Jan. 6, 1100 - In the course of the year Gruffydd and Cadwgan - return, and Anglesey and Ceredigion are - recovered by the Welsh. Eadgar goes on the - crusade. Affairs of Robert son of Godwine in - Scotland. - 1100 April 1 Easter assembly at Winchester. - May 20 Whitsun assembly at Westminster. - Great schemes of William Rufus. - May Death of Richard son of Duke Robert in the New - Forest. - June-July Preparations for war. - July 13 Consecration of Gloucester abbey. - August 1 Abbot Fulchered’s sermon at Gloucester. - August 2 Death of William Rufus. - August 3 Burial of William Rufus; Henry elected King; he - grants the bishopric of Winchester to William - Giffard. - August 5 Coronation of Henry; his charter; he fills the - vacant abbeys. - He imprisons Flambard, and asks Anselm to come - back. - Helias recovers Le Mans; the castle holds out. - September Duke Robert comes back to Normandy. - War between Henry and Robert. - September 23 Anselm comes back to England. - Meeting of Anselm and Henry; question of homage - and investiture; truce till Easter; mission to - the Pope. - November Helias recovers the castle. - November 11 Marriage of Henry and Matilda. - November 18 Death of Archbishop Thomas of York. - Empty legation of Guy of Vienne. - Plots in England on behalf of Robert. - December 25- Christmas assembly at Westminster. - 1101 January 6 - Escape of Flambard to Normandy; he stirs up - Robert to action. - April 21 Easter assembly at Winchester; the question with - Anselm again adjourned. - Growth of the conspiracy. - June 9 Whitsun assembly; mediation of Anselm; renewed - promise of good laws. - July Robert’s fleet at Tréport; the English fleet sent - against him; some of the crews join him. - Henry’s preparations at Pevensey. - July 20 Robert lands at Portchester; he declines to attack - Winchester. - The armies meet at Alton; conference of Henry and - Robert; the treaty of 1101. - Michaelmas Robert goes back to Normandy. - Henry’s rewards and punishments; banishment of - Ivo of Grantmesnil and others. - Robert of Meulan Earl of Leicester. - December 25- Christmas assembly at Westminster. - 1102 January 6 - April 6 Easter assembly at Winchester; Robert of Bellême - summoned, but does not appear. - War against Robert of Bellême in England and - Normandy. - Failure of Duke Robert’s troops at Vignats. - Surrender of Arundel to Henry. - Surrender of Tickhill. - Autumn Henry’s Shropshire campaign. Siege of Bridgenorth. - The King wins over Jorwerth and the Welsh. - Dealings of Robert of Bellême with Murtagh and - Magnus. - Surrender of Bridgenorth. - The King’s march to Shrewsbury. - Surrender of Shrewsbury and banishment of Robert - of Bellême and his brothers. - 1103 Death of Magnus. - Jorwerth tried at Shrewsbury and imprisoned. - 1104 Banishment of William of Mortain. - 1106 Battle of Tinchebrai. - 1107 Compromise with Anselm. - - - - - ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. - - - VOL. I. - -p. 33, l. 17, dele “the father of one of the men who had crossed the -sea to trouble England.” Robert of Bellême had not come yet; see p. -56. - -p. 37, note 3. The comparison of Bristol and Brindisi is a good deal -exaggerated; but a certain measure of likeness may be seen. - -p. 94, l. 18, dele “of the same kind.” See the distinction drawn in p. -604. - -p. 96, note 2, for “abjuvare” read “abjurare.” - -p. 133, note. See vol. ii. p. 330. - -p. 180, note. I do not know how “Esparlon”――Épernon――comes to be -reckoned among the possessions of Robert of Bellême. We shall find it -in vol. ii. p. 251 in the hands of the French house of Montfort. - -p. 183, l. 4 from bottom, for “Rotrou” read “Geoffrey.” - -p. 184, note 1. See vol. ii. p. 396. - -p. 214, side-note, for “William of Geroy” read “William son of Geroy.” - -p. 217, l. 13, for “uncle” read “brother.” - -p. 238, note 3, for “Aunde” read “Aumale.” - -p. 243, note 2. I really ought to have mentioned the wonderful forms -of torture which the man of Belial inflicted on his lord and his other -prisoners (Ord. Vit. 705 A, B); “Per tres menses in castro Brehervallo -eos in carcere strinxit, et multotiens, dum nimia hiems sæviret, in -solis camisiis aqua largiter humectatis in fenestra sublimis aulæ -Boreæ vel Circio exposuit, donec tota vestis circa corpus vinctorum in -uno gelu diriguit.” - -p. 247, l. 3. I suppose that Walter of Rouen, son of Ansgar, who -appears high in the King’s confidence in vol. ii. pp. 241, 370, is a -brother of this William. This is worth noting, as showing how Rufus -picked out men likely to serve his purpose from all quarters. - -p. 251, l. 5. See below, p. 461, note 3. It would be worth enquiring -whether this name _Champ de Mars_ is old or new. There is a _Campus -Martius_ at Autun, whose name is certainly at least mediæval; but, as -it is within the Roman walls, it can hardly date from the first days -of Augustodunum. It divides the upper and lower city, quite another -position from that at Rouen. - -p. 298, l. 6. Orderic is hardly fair to Edgar when he says (778 B), -“Hic corpore speciosus, lingua disertus, liberalis et generosus, -utpote Edwardi regis Hunorum filius [see 701 D and N. C. vol. ii. p. -672], sed dextera segnis erat, ducemque sibi coævum et quasi -collectaneum fratrem diligebat.” - -p. 302, note 1, for “Witan” read “Gemót.” - -p. 307, l. 6. Something of the kind was actually done somewhat later; -see below, p. 435. But that was a challenge through ambassadors. - -p. 326, note. In strictness Anselm did not appeal to the Pope at all. -See below, p. 598. - -p. 335, l. 15, for “unrighteousness” read “unrighteousnesses.” - -p. 353, l. 6 from bottom. I ought not to have forgotten the character -of Ralph Luffa given by William of Malmesbury (Gest. Pont. 205); -“Radulfus proceritate corporis insignis, sed et animi efficacia -famosus, qui contuitu sacerdotalis officii Willelmo juniori in faciem -pro Anselmo archiepiscopo, quem immerito exagitabat, restiterit. -Cumque ille, conscientia potestatis elatus, minas ingeminaret, nihil -alter reveritus baculum protendit, annulum exuit, ut, si vellet, -acciperet. Nec vero vel tunc vel postea austeritatem inflecteret si -assertorem haberet. Sed quia discessu suo spem ejus et ceterorum, si -qui boni essent, Anselmus enervavit, et tunc causa decidit et -postmodum damno succubuit.” This seems at first sight to stand in -contradiction to Eadmer’s picture of all the bishops, except possibly -Gundulf (see below, pp. 497, 513, 516), forsaking and renouncing -Anselm. We can understand that Eadmer would be inclined to make the -worst of the bishops as a body, while William of Malmesbury would be -inclined to make the best of the particular bishop of whom he was -writing. This is one of the passages in which William of Malmesbury in -his second edition watered down the vigorous language of the first. As -he first wrote it, the King appeared as “leo ferocissimus Willelmus -dico minor.” On second thoughts the comparison with the wild beast was -left out. - -p. 355, l. 15. I have sent Herbert to Rome at this time, in order to -bring him back for the meeting at Hastings in 1094. See below, pp. -429, 448. I find that some difficulty has arisen on account of the -words of Eadmer (see p. 429), which have been taken as implying that -Herbert joined in the consecration of Anselm. Dr. Stubbs puts him on -the list in the Registrum. But surely the words might be used if all -the bishops came who were in England and able to come. - -p. 355, side-note, for “1091-1093” read “1091-1098.” See vol. ii. p. -267. - -p. 375, note 6, for “perversitatam” read “perversitatem.” - -p. 385, l. 2, for “undoubtedly” read “by himself.” - -p. 408, l. 15. There must however have been some exceptions. See the -Additions and Corrections to vol. ii. p. 508. - -p. 450, l. 3 from bottom. Yet the guarantors, even on William’s own -side, held him to be in the wrong. See p. 461. - -p. 469, note 1. The reference is to the passage of Orderic, quoted in -vol. ii. p. 537. But it is hard to understand how Henry can have been -at war with William in 1094. Yet there is the passage from Sigebert -quoted in p. 471, note 3, where the date must be wrong, but which -seems to hang together both with this passage of Orderic and with the -suspicions on the Kings part implied in the narrative in the -Chronicle. - -p. 469, l. 10, and note 3, for “son” read “grandson.” - -p. 485, l. 3, for “of” read “to.” - -p. 492, l. 2, put semicolon after “within.” - -p. 506, note 2. This passage is very singular, especially the words -“nec ipsum advertere posse putaverunt.” On this last point the bishops -seem to have been right, as Anselm himself nowhere puts forward any -such claim to exemption. - -p. 516, note 3. Besides the difficulty about Gundulf, there is the -further difficulty about Ralph of Chichester, who, as we have just -seen, is said by William of Malmesbury to have taken Anselm’s side. He -at least stood in no such special position to the Archbishop as the -Bishop of Rochester did. - -p. 522, side-note, for “May” read “March.” - -p. 546, l. 12. Worthiest certainly when any actual work was to be -done; but the idle sojourn at Laodikeia (see p. 565) makes the general -epithet too strong. - -p. 551, l. 10, for “Rotrou” read “Geoffrey.” - -p. 571, l. 3. I believe there is no authority for this English form, -“Evermouth,” though it is not unlikely that “Ebremou” may, like so -many other names in Normandy, really be a corruption of some such -Teutonic name. The place is in Eastern Normandy, in the present -department of Lower Seine. - -p. 579, note 1. This is that singular use of the words “Christianitas” -and the like which we find in such phrases as “Courts Christian” and -“Deanery of Christianity.” We must not think of such a “subventio -Christianitatis” as the Spanish Bishop sought for at the hands of -Anselm. See vol. ii. p. 582. - -p. 586, l. 25. For “three” read “four,” and add the name of Robert -Bloet. He is the Robert referred to in the next page. - -p. 604, note 1. The _right_ to be tried is confined to the Peers; -other persons of course may be so tried, if they are impeached by the -Commons. - -p. 609, note 1. When I was at Benevento this year (1880), I had hoped -to get a sight of the cope, as the treasury of the metropolitan church -is rich in vestments. But they are all of much later date, and I could -hear nothing of the relic which I sought for. - -p. 614, last line. See more in vol. ii. p. 403. - - - - -THE REIGN OF WILLIAM RUFUS. - - - - -CHAPTER I. - -INTRODUCTION. - - -[Sidenote: Character of the reign of William Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: The Norman Conquest in one sense completed, in another - undone.] - -[Sidenote: Feudal developement under Rufus and Flambard.] - -[Sidenote: Growth of anti-feudal tendencies.] - -The reign of the second Norman king is a period of English history -which may well claim a more special and minute examination than could -be given to it when it took its place merely as one of the later -stages in the history of the Norman Conquest, after the great work of -the Conquest itself was done. There is indeed a point of view in which -the first years of the reign of William the Red may be looked on as -something more than one of the later stages of the Conquest. They may -be looked on, almost at pleasure, either as the last stage of the -Conquest or as the reversal of the Conquest. We may give either name -to a struggle in which a Norman king, the son of the Norman Conqueror, -was established on the English throne by warfare which, simply as -warfare, was a distinct victory won by Englishmen over Normans on -English soil. The truest aspect of that warfare was that the Norman -Conquest of England was completed by English hands. But, in so saying, -we must understand by the Norman Conquest of England all that is -implied in that name to its fullest extent. When Englishmen, by armed -support of a Norman king, accepted the fact of the Norman Conquest, -they in some measure changed its nature. In the act of completing the -Conquest, they in some sort undid it. If we hold that the end of the -Conquest came in the days of Rufus, in the days of Rufus also came the -beginnings of the later effects of the Conquest. The reign of William -the Red, the administration of Randolf Flambard, was, above all -others, the time when the feudal side, so to speak, of the Conquest -put on a systematic shape. The King and his minister put into regular -working, if they did not write down in a regular code, those usages -which under the Conqueror were still merely tendencies irregularly at -work, but which, at the accession of Henry the First, had already -grown into abuses which needed redress. But, on the other hand, it was -equally the time when the anti-feudal tendencies of the Conquest, the -causes and the effects of the great law of Salisbury,[1] showed how -firmly they had taken root. The reign of Rufus laid down the two -principles, that, in the kingdom of England, no man should be stronger -than the king,[2] but that the king should hold his strength only by -making himself the head of the state and of the people. As a stage -then in the history of the Conquest and its results, as a stage in the -general constitutional history of England, the thirteen years of the -reign of Rufus form a period of the highest interest and importance. - -[Sidenote: Extension of the power of England at home.] - -[Sidenote: Wales;] - -[Sidenote: Carlisle.] - -[Sidenote: Beginning of rivalry between England and France.] - -[Sidenote: Wealth of England.] - -[Sidenote: Change in the European position of England.] - -But those years are a time of no less interest and importance, if we -look at them with regard to the general position of England in the -world. Within our own island, the reign of William the Red was marked -by a great practical extension of the power of England on the Welsh -marches. On another side it was marked yet more distinctly by an -enlargement of the kingdom itself, by the settlement of the -north-western frontier, by the winning for England of a new land, and -by the restoration of a fallen city as the bulwark of the new -boundary. What the daughter of Ælfred was at Chester, the son of the -Conqueror was at Carlisle. Beyond the sea, we mark the beginnings of a -state of things which has ceased only within our own memories. The -rivalry between France and Normandy grows, now that England is ruled -by Norman kings, into a rivalry between France and England. In will, -if not in deed, the reign of Rufus forestalls the reigns of Edward the -Third and Henry the Fifth. It sets England before us in a character -which she kept through so many ages, the character of the wealthy land -which could work with gold as well as with steel, the land whence -subsidies might be looked for to flow into the less well-filled -coffers of the princes of the mainland. In the reign of Rufus we see -England holding an European position wholly different from what she -had held in earlier days. She passes in some sort from the world of -the North into the world of the West. That change was the work of the -Conqueror; but it is under his son that we see its full nature and -meaning. The new place which England now holds is seen to be one which -came to her wholly through her connexion with Normandy; it is no less -seen to be one which she has learned to hold in her own name and by -her own strength. - -[Sidenote: Personal character of William Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: His companions and adversaries.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm and Helias.] - -And, if we pass from the domain of political history into the domain -of personal character and personal incident, we shall find few periods -of the same length richer in both. The character of William Rufus -himself, repulsive as from many points it is, is yet a strange and -instructive study of human nature. The mere fact that no prince ever -made a deeper personal impression on the minds of the men of his own -age, the crowd of personal anecdotes and personal sayings which, -whether true or false, bear witness to the depth of that impression, -all invite us to a nearer study of the man of whom those who lived in -his own day found so much to tell, and so much which at first sight -seems strange and contradictory. William Rufus stands before us as the -first representative of a new ideal, a new standard. Our earlier -experiences, English and Norman, have hardly prepared us for the -special place taken by the king who has some claim to rank as the -first distinctly recorded example of the new character of knight and -gentleman. In the company of the Red King we are introduced to a new -line of thought, a new way of looking at things, of which in an -earlier generation we see hardly stronger signs in Normandy than we -see in England. For good and for evil, if William Rufus bears the mark -of his age, he also leaves his mark on his age. His own marked -personality in some sort entitles him to be surrounded, to be -withstood, by men whose personality is also clearly marked. A circle -of well-defined portraits, friends and enemies, ministers and rivals, -gathers around him. Among them two forms stand out before all. The -holy Anselm at home, the valiant Helias beyond the sea, are the men -with whom Rufus has to strive. And the saint of Aosta, the hero of La -Flèche, are men who of themselves are enough to draw our thoughts to -the times and the lands in which they lived. Each, in his own widely -different way, stands forth as the representative of right in the face -of a power of evil which we still feel to be not wholly evil. All -light is not put out, all better feelings are not trampled out of -being, when evil stands in any way abashed before the presence of -good. - -[Sidenote: Rufus and England.] - -[Sidenote: The last warfare of Normans and English.] - -[Sidenote: Results of the struggle.] - -[Sidenote: The Conquest accepted and modified.] - -[Sidenote: The Norman kingship becomes English.] - -[Sidenote: Effects of the French War.] - -Looked at simply as a tale, the tale of Rufus and Anselm, the tale of -Rufus and Helias, is worth the telling. But better worth telling still -is the tale of Rufus and England. The struggle which kept the crown -for Rufus, the last armed struggle between Englishmen and Normans on -English ground, the fight of Pevensey and the siege of Rochester, form -a stirring portion of our annals, a portion whose interest yields only -to that of a few great days like the days of Senlac and of Lewes. But -the really great tale is after all that which is more silent and -hidden. This was above all things the time when the Norman Conquest -took root, as something which at once established the Norman power in -England, and which ruled that the Norman power should step by step -change into an English power. The great fact of Rufus’ day is that -Englishmen won the crown of England for a Norman king in fight against -rebellious Normans. On that day the fact of the Conquest was fully -acknowledged; it became something which, as to its immediate outward -effects, there was no longer any thought of undoing. The house of the -Conqueror was to be the royal house; there were to be no more revolts -on behalf of the heir of Cerdic, no more messages sent to invite the -heir of Cnut. And with the kingship of the Norman all was accepted -which was immediately implied in the kingship of the Norman. But on -that day it was further ruled that the kingship of the Norman was to -change into an English kingship. It became such in some sort even -under Rufus himself, when the King of England went forth to subdue -Normandy, to threaten France, to dream at least, as a link between -Civilis and Buonaparte, of an empire of the Gauls.[3] The success of -the attempt, the accomplishment of the dream, would have been the very -overthrow of English nationality; the mere attempt, the mere dream, -helped, if not to strengthen English nationality, at least to -strengthen the national position of England. But these years helped -too, in a more silent way, if not to change the Norman rule at home -into an English rule, at least to make things ready for the coming of -the king who was really to do the work. It was perhaps in the long run -not the least gain of the reign of William the Red that it left for -Henry the Clerk, not only much to do, but also something directly to -undo. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Scheme of the work.] - -In a former volume we traced the history of the Conqueror in great -detail to his death-bed and his burial. In another volume we followed, -with a more hasty course, the main features of the reign of William -Rufus, looked at specially as bearing on the history of the Conquest -and the mutual relations of English and Normans. We will now again -take up the thread of our detailed story at the bed-side of the dying -Conqueror, and thence trace the history of his successor, from his -first nomination by his father’s dying voice to his unhallowed burial -in the Old Minster of Winchester. And thence, though the tale of Rufus -himself is over, it may be well to carry on the tale of England -through the struggle which ruled for the second time that England -should not be the realm of the Conqueror’s eldest son, and, as such, -an appendage to his Norman duchy. The accession of Henry is -essentially a part of the same tale as the accession of Rufus. The -points of likeness in the two stories are striking indeed, reaching in -some cases almost to a repetition of the same events. But the points -of unlikeness are yet more striking and instructive. And it is from -them that we learn how much the reign of Rufus had done alike towards -completing the Norman Conquest and towards undoing it. - - - - -CHAPTER II. - -THE EARLY DAYS OF WILLIAM RUFUS.[4] - -1087-1090. - - -[Sidenote: Character of the accession of Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: No formal election.] - -[Sidenote: His general acceptance.] - -The way by which the second William became fully established on the -throne of his father has some peculiarities of its own, which -distinguish it from the accessions of most English kings, earlier and -later. The only claim of William Rufus to the crown was a nomination -by his father which we are told that his father hardly ventured to -make. Of election by any assembly, great or small, we see no trace. -Yet the new king is crowned, and he receives the national submission -at his crowning, with the fullest outward national consent, with no -visible opposition from any quarter, and, as events proved, with the -hearty good will of the native English part of his subjects. Yet the -King is hardly established in his kingdom before he has to fight for -his crown. William Rufus had, like his father, to win the kingdom of -England by war after he was already its crowned king. But, as regards -those against whom he fought and those at whose head he fought, his -position was the exact reverse of that of his father. Nominated by his -father, elected, one might say, by Lanfranc, crowned with no man -gainsaying him, William Rufus was at last really established in the -royal power by the act of the conquered English. It was they who won -the crown for the son of their Conqueror in fight against his father’s -nearest kinsmen and most cherished comrades. - - -§ 1. _The Coronation and Acknowledgement of William Rufus. September, -1087._ - -One prominent aspect of the reign of William Rufus sets him before us -as the enemy, almost the persecutor, of the Church in his realm, as -the special adversary of the ecclesiastical power when the -ecclesiastical power was represented by one of the truest of saints. -And yet there have been few kings whose accession to the throne was in -so special a way the act of the ecclesiastical power. William Rufus -was made king by Lanfranc in a somewhat fuller sense than that in -which every king of those times might be said to be made king by the -prelate who poured the consecrating oil upon his head. Nomination by -the last king, in the form of recommendation to the electors, had -always been taken into account when the people of England came -together to set a new king over them. The nomination of Eadward had -formed a part, though the smallest part, of the right of Harold to -become the chief of his own people.[5] An alleged nomination by -Eadward formed the only plausible part of the claim by which William -asserted his right to thrust himself upon a people of strangers. And -now a nomination by William himself was the only right by which his -second surviving son claimed to succeed to the crown which he had won. -Modern notions of hereditary right would have handed over England as -well as Normandy to the eldest son of the last king. English feeling -at the time would doubtless, if a formal choice had to be made among -the sons of the Conqueror of England, have spoken for his youngest -son. Of all the three Henry alone was a true Ætheling; he alone had -any right to the name of Englishman; he alone was the son of a crowned -king and a man born in the land.[6] But the last wish of William the -Great was that his island crown should pass to William the Red. He had -not, as our fullest narrative tells us, dared to make any formal -nomination to a kingdom which he had in his last days found out to be -his only by wrong. He had not dared to name William as his successor; -he left the kingdom in the hands of God; he only hoped that the will -of God might be that William should reign, and should reign well and -happily.[7] And as the best means of finding out whether the will of -God were so, he left the actual decision to the highest and wisest of -God’s ministers in his kingdom. He gave no orders for the coronation -of Rufus; he simply prayed Lanfranc to crown him, if the Primate -deemed such an act a rightful one.[8] As far as the will of the dying -king went, one alone of the Witan of England, the first certainly -among them alike in rank and in renown, was bidden to make the choice -of the next sovereign on behalf of the whole kingdom. - -[Sidenote: Wulf and Duncan set free by Robert.] - -The special agency of Lanfranc in the promotion of William Rufus is -noticed by all the writers who give any detailed account of his -accession.[9] Nor was it likely that, when the Archbishop was to be -the one elector, the claims of the candidate should be refused. It -would seem indeed as if Lanfranc doubted for a moment whether he ought -to take upon himself the responsibility of the choice.[10] But -everything must have helped to make him ready to carry out the wishes -of his late master. That they were the Conqueror’s last wishes was no -small matter, and Lanfranc had every personal reason to incline him -the same way. To make William Rufus king was to promote the man who -stood in a special relation to himself, who had been in some sort his -pupil, and whom he had himself girded with the belt of knighthood.[11] -And it really seems as if there was no other elector besides Lanfranc -himself. For once in our history we read of a king succeeding without -any formal election, without any meeting of the Witan before the -coronation. Within three weeks of the death of the first William, the -second William was full king over the land. As soon as he had heard -the last wishes of his father, as soon as the dying king had dictated -the all-important letter which was to express those wishes to the -Primate, William Rufus left the bedside of his father while the breath -was still in him. He started for the haven of Touques, a spot of which -we shall get a vivid picture later in our story. With him set forth -the bearer of the letter, one of the great King’s chaplains, and, as -some say, his Chancellor. This was Robert Bloet, he who was presently -to succeed Remigius of Fécamp in his newly-placed throne on the hill -of Lincoln.[12] Before they had left Norman ground, the news came that -all was over, that England had no longer a king.[13] William crossed -with all speed, seemingly to Southampton, and found in England no -rival, English or Norman. He indeed brought with him two men, either -of whom, if Englishmen had still heart enough to dream of a king of -their own blood, might have been his rival. Among the captives whom -the Conqueror set free on his death-bed were two men who represented -the mightiest of the fallen houses of conquered England. These were -Morkere the son of Ælfgar, once the chosen Earl of the Northumbrians, -and Wulfnoth, the youngest son of Godwine and brother[14] of Harold. -Two other captives of royal blood, Duncan the son of Malcolm and -Ingebiorg, so long a hostage for his father’s doubtful faith to his -over-lord,[15] and Wulf the son of Harold and Ealdgyth, the babe who -had been taken when Chester fell,[16] were set free at the same time. -Duncan and Wulf were in the power of Robert. They in no way threatened -his possession of Normandy, and Robert, with all his faults, did not -lack generous feeling. They were knighted and set free.[17] Of Wulf we -hear no more; Duncan lived to sit for a moment on the throne of his -father. The fate of their fellow-sufferers was harsher. Morkere and -Wulfnoth had come, by what means we know not, into the power of -William. As Morkere had once crossed the sea with the father,[18] he -now came back with the son. But their day of freedom was short. The -son of Godwine and the grandson of Leofric might either of them be -dangerous to the son of William. They therefore tasted the air of -freedom only for a few days. William, acting as already king, went to -his capital at Winchester, and there thrust the delivered captives -once more into the house of bondage.[19] Of Morkere we hear no more; -we must suppose that the rest of his days, few or many, were spent in -this renewed imprisonment. Wulfnoth seems to have been released at -some later time, to enter religion, and to be made the subject of the -praises of a Norman poet.[20] - -[Sidenote: Rufus is crowned at Westminster, September 26, 1087.] - -Such was the first act of authority done by the new ruler. Having thus -disposed of the men whom he seems to have dreaded, William found no -opposition made to his succession. But it was important for him to -take possession without delay. The time, September, was not one of the -usual seasons for a general assembly of the kingdom, and William could -not afford to wait for the next great festival of Christmas. No native -English competitor was likely to appear; but he must at least make -himself safe against any possible attempts on the part of his brothers -beyond the sea. From Winchester he hastened to the presence of -Lanfranc――seemingly at Canterbury; as the story is told us, it seems -to be taken for granted that it rested with the Primate to give or to -refuse the crown.[21] Whether the younger William himself brought the -news of the death of the elder is not quite clear; but we are not -surprised to hear from an eye-witness that the first feeling of -Lanfranc was one of overwhelming grief at the loss of the king who was -dead, a king who, if he had been to him a master, had also been in so -many things a friend and a fellow-worker.[22] The formal consecration -of his successor was not long delayed; the new king was solemnly -crowned and anointed by the hands of Lanfranc in the minster of Saint -Peter, on Sunday the feast of the saints Cosmas and Damian. So the day -is marked by a scholar who had specially explored the antiquities of -Rome; Englishmen, who knew less of saints whose holy place was by the -Roman forum, were content to mark it by its relation to the great -festival three days later, or even by the mere day of the month.[23] -On that day, before the altar of King Eadward’s rearing, the second -Norman lord of England took the oaths which bound an English king to -the English people. And, besides the prescribed oaths to do justice -and mercy and to defend the rights of the Church, Lanfranc is said to -have bound the new king by a special engagement to follow his own -counsel in all things.[24] William Rufus was thus king, and, if -anything had been lacking in the way of regular election before his -crowning, it was fully made up by the universal and seemingly zealous -acceptance of him at his crowning. “All the men on England to him -bowed and to him oaths swore.”[25] The crown which had passed to -Eadward from a long line of kingly forefathers, the crown which Harold -had worn by the free gift of the English people, the crown which the -first William had won by his sword and had kept by his wisdom, now -passed to the second of his name and house. And it passed, to all -appearance, with the perfect good will of all the dwellers in the -land, conquerors and conquered alike. William the Second, William the -Younger, William the Red, took his place on the seat of the great -Conqueror without a blow being struck or a dog moving his tongue -against him. - -[Sidenote: Wealth of the treasury at Winchester.] - -[Sidenote: Gifts to churches.] - -[Sidenote: Gifts to Battle Abbey.] - -[Sidenote: Gifts to the poor.] - -The first act of the uncrowned candidate for the kingly office had -been one of harshness――harshness which was perhaps politic in the son, -but which trod under foot the last wishes of a repentant father. The -first act of the crowned King was one which might give good hopes for -the reign which was beginning, and which certainly carried out his -father’s wishes to the letter. From Westminster William Rufus went -again to Winchester, this time not to make fast the bars of his -father’s prison-house, but to throw open the stores of his father’s -treasury. Our native Chronicler waxes eloquent on the boundless wealth -of all kinds, far beyond the powers of any man to tell of, which had -been gathered together in the Conqueror’s hoard during his one and -twenty years of kingship. The Chronicler had, as we must remember, -himself lived in William’s court, and we may believe that his own eyes -had looked on the store of gold and silver, of vessels and robes and -gems and other costly things, which it was beyond the skill of man to -set forth.[26] These were the spoils of England, and from them were -made the gifts which, in the belief of those days, were to win repose -in the other world for the soul of her despoiler. Every minster in -England received, some six marks of gold, some ten, besides gifts of -every kind of ecclesiastical ornament and utensil, rich with precious -metals and precious stones, among which books for the use of divine -service was not forgotten.[27] And, above all, the special foundation -of his father, the Abbey of the Battle, received choicer gifts than -any, the royal mantle of the departed King among them.[28] Every -upland church, every one at all events on the royal lordships, -received sixty pennies.[29] Moreover a hundred pounds in money was -sent into each shire to be given away in alms to the poor for -William’s soul.[30] Such a gift might be bountiful in a small shire -like Bedford, where many Englishmen still kept their own; but it would -go but a little way, even after eighteen years, to undo the work of -the great harrying of Yorkshire. Meanwhile Robert, already received as -Duke of the Normans, was doing the same pious work among the poor and -the churches of his duchy.[31] The dutiful son and the rebel were both -doing their best for the welfare of their father in the other world. - -[Sidenote: The Christmas Assembly. 1087-1088.] - -[Sidenote: Odo restored to his earldom.] - -From Winchester the new King went back to Westminster, and there he -held the Christmas feast and assembly. It was attended by the two -archbishops and by several other bishops, among whom the saint of -Worcester is specially mentioned. At this meeting too appeared Odo of -Bayeux, who received again from his nephew his earldom of Kent.[32] -Released from his bonds by the pardon which had been so hardly wrung -from the dying Conqueror,[33] he already filled the first place in the -councils of the new Duke of the Normans,[34] and he hoped to win the -like power over the mind of his other nephew in England. But before -long events came about which showed how true had been the foresight of -William the Great, when he had said that mighty evils would follow if -his brother should be set free from his prison. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Unusual character of William’s accession.] - -[Sidenote: William the only available king at the moment.] - -[Sidenote: Comparison between William and Robert.] - -[Sidenote: Political bearing of William’s accession.] - -It is certainly something unusual in those times for a king thus to -make his way to his crown by virtue, as it were, of an agreement -between a dead king and a living bishop, without either the nobles or -the nation at large either actively supporting or actively opposing -his claim. It is clear that men of both races had very decided views -about the matter; but they gave no open expression to them at the -time. The discussion of the succession came after the coronation, -among men who had already acknowledged the new King. It may be that -all parties were taken by surprise. The accession of William Rufus had -not indeed followed the death of his father with anything like the -same speed with which the accession of Harold had followed the death -of his brother-in-law. But then the death of Eadward had long been -looked for; the succession of Harold had long been practically agreed -on; above all, the Witan were actually in session when the vacancy -took place. Everything therefore could be done at a moment’s notice -with perfect formal regularity. Now everything, if much less sudden, -was much more unlooked for. The kingdom found itself called on to -acknowledge a king whom no party had chosen, but whom no party had at -the moment the means, perhaps not the will, to oppose. The Normans, we -may believe, would, if they had been formally asked, have preferred -Robert. The English, we may be sure, would, if they had been formally -asked, have, at least among Norman candidates, preferred Henry. And -practically the choice lay among Norman candidates only, and among -them Henry was the one who was practically shut out. All hopes, we may -be sure, had passed away of seeking for a king either in the house of -Cerdic, in the house of Godwine, or in the house which, if not the -house of Cnut, was, at least by female succession, the house of his -father Swegen. Of the sons of the Conqueror, Henry, the one who was at -once Norman and Englishman, was young and beyond the sea. William was -in England, with at least his father’s recommendation to support him. -The practical question lay between William and Robert. Was William to -be withstood on behalf of Robert? Between William and Robert there -could at the moment be little doubt in the minds of Englishmen. Their -father’s policy had kept both back from any great opportunity of doing -either good or evil to the conquered kingdom. But, as far as their -personal characters went, Robert had as yet shown his worst side and -William his best. There could be little room for doubt between the man -who had fought against his father and the man who had risked his life -to save his father. And, besides this, the accession of William would -separate England and Normandy. England would again have, if not a king -of her own blood, yet at least a king of her own. The island world -would again be the island world, no longer dependent on, or mixed up -with, the affairs of the world beyond the sea. The harshness which had -again thrust back Morkere and Wulfnoth into prison might be passed by, -as an act of necessary precaution. Morkere too might by this time be -well nigh forgotten, and Wulfnoth had never been known. If a native -king was not to be had, William Rufus was at the moment by no means -the most unpromising among possible foreign kings. - -[Sidenote: No real choice.] - -[Sidenote: Employment of the treasure.] - -But in truth neither Normans nor Englishmen were in this case called -on to make any real choice. Both were called on, somewhat after the -manner of the sham _plebiscita_ of modern France, to acknowledge a -sovereign who was already in possession. Whatever might have been the -abstract preference of the Normans for Robert or of the English for -Henry, neither party felt at the moment that degree of zeal which -would lead them to brave the dangers of opposition. At any rate, -William Rufus was a new king, and a new king is commonly welcome. Men -of both races might reasonably expect that the rule of one who had -come peacefully to his crown would be less harsh than that of one who -had made his entry by the sword. It is further hinted that William -partly owed his recognition to his early possession of his father’s -hoard, perhaps to his careful discharge of his father’s will, perhaps, -even thus early in his reign, to some other discreet application of -his father’s treasures.[35] Certain it is that, from whatever cause, -all men accepted Rufus with all outward cheerfulness, though perhaps -without any very fervent loyalty towards him on any side. It needed -the events of the next few months, it needed strong influences and -strong opposing influences, to turn the Normans in England into the -fierce opponents of the new King, and the native English into his -zealous supporters. It needed the further course of his own actions to -teach both sides how much they had lost when they passed from the rule -of William the Great to that of William the Red. - - -§ 2. _The Rebellion against William Rufus. March-November, 1088._ - -[Sidenote: Beginning of the rebellion.] - -[Sidenote: Discontent of Odo.] - -[Sidenote: Influence of William of Saint-Calais.] - -The winter of the year which beheld the Conqueror’s death passed -without any disturbance in the realm of his son.[36] But in the spring -of the next year it became plain that the general acceptance which -Rufus had met with in England was sincere on the part of his English -subjects only. As the native Chronicler puts it, “the land was -mightily stirred and was filled with mickle treason, for all the -richest Frenchmen that were in this land would betray their lord the -King, and would have his brother to King, Robert that was Earl in -Normandy.”[37] The leaders in this revolt were the bishops whom the -Conqueror had clothed with temporal power. And foremost among them was -his brother, the new King’s uncle, Odo Bishop of Bayeux, now again -Earl of Kent; and, according to one account, already Justiciar and -chief ruler in England.[38] But whatever might be his formal position, -Odo soon began to be dissatisfied with the amount of authority which -he practically enjoyed. He seems to have hoped to be able to rule both -his nephews and all their dominions, and, in England at least, to keep -the whole administration in his own hands at least as fully as he had -held it before his imprisonment. In this hope he was disappointed. The -Earl of Kent was not so great a man under the younger William as he -had been under the elder. The chief place in the confidence of the new -King was held by another man of his own order. This was William of -Saint Carilef or Saint Calais, once Prior of the house from which he -took his name, and afterwards Abbot of Saint Vincent’s without the -walls of Le Mans.[39] He had succeeded the murdered Walcher in the see -of Durham, and he had reformed his church according to the fashion of -the time, by putting in monks instead of secular canons.[40] His place -in the King’s counsel was now high indeed. “So well did the King to -the Bishop that all England went after his rede and so as he -would.”[41] Besides this newly born jealousy of the Kings newly chosen -counsellor, Odo had a long standing hatred against the other prelate -who had so long watched over the King, and whose advice the King was -bound by oath to follow.[42] He bore the bitterest grudge against the -Primate Lanfranc, as the inventor of that subtle distinction between -the Bishop of Bayeux and the Earl of Kent which had cost the Earl five -years of imprisonment.[43] - -[Sidenote: Action of Odo.] - -[Sidenote: March 1, 1088.] - -[Sidenote: Gatherings of the rebels.] - -[Sidenote: Arguments on behalf of Robert.] - -Of the two personages who might thus be joined or separated at -pleasure, it is the temporal chief with whom we have now to deal. Lent -was now come. Of the spiritual exercises of the Bishop of Bayeux -during the holy season we have no record; the Earl of Kent spent the -time plotting with the chief Normans in England how the King might be -killed or handed over alive to his brother.[44] We have more than one -vigorous report of the oratory used in these seditious gatherings. -According to some accounts, they went on on both sides of the sea, and -we are admitted to hear the arguments which were used both in Normandy -and in England.[45] Both agree in maintaining the claims of Robert, as -at once the true successor, and the prince best fitted for their -purpose. But it is on Norman ground that the necessity for an union -between Normandy and England is set forth most clearly. The main -object is to hinder a separation between the two kingdoms, as they are -somewhat daringly called.[46] It is clear that to men who held lands -in both countries it would be a gain to have only one lord instead of -two; but, if we rightly understand the arguments which are put into -the mouths of the speakers, it was held that, if England had again a -king of her own, though it were a king of the Conqueror’s house, the -work of the Conquest would be undone. The men who had won England with -their blood would be brought down from their dominion in the conquered -island.[47] If they have two lords, there will be no hope of pleasing -both; faithfulness to the one will only lead to vengeance on the part -of the other.[48] William was young and insolent, and they owed him no -duty. Robert was the eldest son; his ways were more tractable, and -they had sworn to him during the life-time of his father. Let them -then make a firm agreement to stand by one another, to kill or -dethrone William, and to make Robert ruler of both lands.[49] Robert, -we are told, approved of the scheme, and promised that he would give -them vigorous help to carry it out.[50] - -[Sidenote: Speech of Odo.] - -[Sidenote: Reasons for preferring Robert to William.] - -[Sidenote: Comparison of the elder and younger William.] - -These arguments of Norman speakers are given us without the names of -any ringleaders. We may suspect that the real speaker, in the idea of -the reporter, was no other than the Bishop of Bayeux.[51] We hear of -him more distinctly on English ground, haranguing his accomplices -somewhat to the same effect; only the union of the two states is not -so distinctly spoken of. It may be that such a way of putting the case -would not sound well in the ears of men who, if not Englishmen, were -at least the chief men of England, and who might not be specially -attracted by the prospect of another conquest of England, now that -England was theirs. The chief business of the Bishop’s speech is to -compare the characters of the two brothers between whom they had to -choose, and further to compare the new King with the King who was -gone. The speaker seems to start from the assumption that, in the -interests of those to whom he spoke, it was to be wished that the -ruler whom they were formally to acknowledge should be practically no -ruler at all. William the Great had not been a prince to their minds; -William the Red was not likely to be a prince to their minds either. -Robert was just the man for their purpose. Under Robert, mild and -careless, they would be able to do as they pleased; under the stern -and active William they would soon find that they had a master. The -argument that follows is really the noblest tribute that could be paid -to the memory of the Conqueror. It sets him before us, in a portrait -drawn by one who, if a brother, was also an enemy, as a king who did -justice and made peace, and who did his work without shedding of -blood. It is taken for granted that the death of the great king, at -whose death we are told that peaceable men wept and that robbers and -fiends rejoiced,[52] was something from which Odo and men like Odo -might expect to gain. But nothing would be gained, if the rod of the -elder William were to pass into the hands of the younger. The little -finger of the son would be found to be thicker than the loins of the -father. Their release from the rule of the King who was gone would -profit them nothing, if they remained subjects of one who was likely -to slay where his father had merely put in bonds.[53] In this last -contrast, though we may doubt whether there could have been any ground -for drawing it so early in the reign of Rufus, we see that the men of -the time were struck by the difference between the King whose laws -forbade the judicial taking of human life and the King under whom the -hangman began his work again. To pleadings like these we are told that -the great mass of the Norman nobility in England hearkened; a small -number only remained faithful to the King to whom they had so lately -sworn their oaths. Thus, as the national Chronicler puts it, “the -unrede was read.”[54] - -[Sidenote: Bishop Geoffrey of Coutances joins the rebels.] - -[Sidenote: Treason of the Bishop of Durham.] - -[Sidenote: Different statements of his conduct.] - -As the chief devisers of the unrede we have the names of two bishops -besides Odo. One name we do not wonder to find along with his. -Geoffrey Bishop of Coutances was a prelate of Odo’s own stamp, one of -whose doings as a wielder of the temporal sword we have heard in -northern, in western, and in eastern England.[55] But we should not -have expected to find as partner of their doings the very man whose -high promotion had filled the heart of Odo with envy. It was indeed -the most unkindest cut of all when the Bishop of Durham, the man in -whose counsel the King most trusted, turned against the benefactor who -had raised him so that all England went at his rede. What higher -greatness he could have hoped to gain by treason it is hard to see. -And it is only fair to add that in the records of his own bishopric he -appears as a persecuted victim,[56] while all the writers of southern -England join in special reprobation of his faithlessness. The one who -speaks in our own tongue scruples not to make use of the most emphatic -of all comparisons. “He would do by him”――that is, Bishop William -would do by King William――“as Judas Iscariot did by our Lord.”[57] We -should certainly not learn from these writers that, after all, it was -the King, and not the Bishop, who struck, or tried to strike, the -first blow. - -[Sidenote: His alleged services to the King. Lent, 1088.] - -[Sidenote: His action towards London.] - -[Sidenote: Early movements in Kent and Sussex. March, 1088.] - -It is certainly far from easy to reconcile the different accounts of -this affair. At a time a little later the southern account sets Bishop -William before us as one who “did all harm that he might all over the -North.”[58] But at Durham it was believed that at all events a good -deal of harm had been already done by the King to the Bishop; and the -Bishop claims to have at an earlier time done the best of good service -to the King.[59] That service must have been rendered while the Lenten -conspiracy was still going on; for at no later time does the Bishop of -Durham seem to have been anywhere in the south of England. Then, -according to his own story, the Bishop secured to the King the -possession of Hastings, of Dover, and of London itself. We have only -William of Saint-Calais’ own statement for this display of loyal -vigour on his part; but, as it is a statement made in the hearing of -the King and of the barons and prelates of England, though -exaggeration is likely enough, the whole story can hardly be sheer -invention. Bishop William claims to have kept the two southern havens -in their allegiance when the King had almost lost them. He claims -further to have quieted disturbances in London, after the city had -actually revolted, by taking twelve of the chief citizens to the -King’s presence.[60] Our notes of time show that the events of which -the Bishop thus speaks must have happened at the latest in the very -first days of March. It follows that there must have been at the least -seditious movements in south-eastern England, before the time of the -open revolt in the west. In short, the rebellion in Kent and Sussex -must have begun very early indeed in the penitential season. - -[Sidenote: Bishop William’s advice to the King.] - -[Sidenote: He forsakes the King.] - -[Sidenote: His temporalities seized. March, 1088.] - -[Sidenote: He writes to the King.] - -[Sidenote: He is summoned to the King’s Court.] - -[Sidenote: Action of Ralph Paganel.] - -[Sidenote: The lands of the bishopric laid waste. March-May, 1088.] - -We gather from the Durham narrative that, even at this early stage, -both Bishop Odo and Earl Roger were already known to the King as -traitors. We gather further that it was by the advice of the Bishop of -Durham that the King was making ready for military operations against -them, and that, when the Bishop was himself summoned to the array, he -made answer that he would at once join with the seven knights whom he -had with him――seven chief barons of the bishopric, as it would -seem――and would send to Durham for more. But, instead of so doing, he -left the King’s court without his leave; he took with him some of the -King’s men, and so forsook the King in his need.[61] Such was -afterwards the statement on the King’s side. Certain it is that, -whatever the Bishop’s fault was, the royal vengeance followed speedily -on it. Early in March, whether with or without the advice of any -assembly,[62] Rufus ordered the temporalities of the bishopric to be -seized, and the Bishop himself to be arrested. The Bishop escaped to -his castle at Durham, whence it would not be easy to dislodge him -without a siege. Meanwhile the King’s men in Yorkshire and -Lincolnshire, though they failed to seize the Bishop’s own person, -took possession in the King’s name of his lands, his money, and his -men. From Durham the Bishop wrote to the King, setting forth his -wrongs, protesting his innocence, and demanding restitution of all -that had been taken from him. He goes on to use words which remind us -in a strange way at once of Godwine negotiating with his royal -son-in-law and of Odo in the grasp of his royal brother. He offers the -services of himself and his men. He offers to make answer to any -charge in the King’s court. But, like Godwine, he asks for a -safe-conduct before he will come;[63] like Odo, he declares that it is -not for every one to judge a bishop, and that he will make answer only -according to his order.[64] On the receipt of this letter, the King at -once, in the sight of the Bishop’s messenger, made grants of the -episcopal lands to certain of his barons;[65] those lands were -therefore looked on as property which had undergone at least a -temporary forfeiture. He however sent an answer to the Bishop, bidding -him come to his presence, and adding the condition that, if he would -not stay with the King as the King wished, he should be allowed to go -back safe to Durham. It must however be supposed that this promise was -not accompanied by any formal safe-conduct; otherwise, though it is -not uncommon to find the officers of a king or other lord acting far -more harshly than the lord himself, it is hard to understand the -treatment which Bishop William met with at the hands of the zealous -Sheriff of Yorkshire. That office was now held by Ralph Paganel, a man -who appears in Domesday as holder of lands in various parts, from -Devonshire to the lands of his present sheriffdom,[66] and who next -year became the founder of the priory of the Holy Trinity at York.[67] -The Bishop, on receiving the King’s answer, sent to York to ask for -peace of the Sheriff. But all peace was refused to the Bishop, to his -messengers, and to all his men. A monk who was coming back from the -King’s presence to the Bishop was stopped; his horse was killed, -though he was allowed to go on on foot. Lastly, the Sheriff ordered -all men in the King’s name to do all the harm that they could to the -Bishop everywhere and in every way. The Bishop was thus cut off from -telling his grievances; and for seven weeks, we are told, the lands of -the bishopric were laid waste.[68] This date brings us into the month -of May, by which time important events had happened in other parts of -England. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: General rebellion.] - -[Sidenote: The Easter Gemót. April 16, 1088.] - -[Sidenote: The rebels refuse to come.] - -We have seen that, in south-eastern England at least, the unrede of -this year’s Lent must have gone beyond mere words, and must have -already taken the form of action. But it seems not to have been till -after Easter that the general revolt of the disaffected nobles broke -forth throughout the whole land. By this time they had all thoroughly -made up their minds to act. And we may add that it is quite possible -that the King’s treatment of the Bishop of Durham may have had some -share in helping them to make up their minds. They may have been led -to think that open rebellion was the safest course. The first general -sign was given at the Easter Gemót of the year, which, according to -rule, would be held at Winchester. The rebel nobles, instead of -appearing to do their duty when the King wore his crown, kept aloof -from his court. They gat them each man to his castle, and made them -ready for war.[69] Soon after the festival the flame burst forth. The -great body of the Norman lords of England were in open revolt against -the son of the man who had made England theirs. - -[Sidenote: The rebel nobles.] - -[Sidenote: Robert of Mortain] - -[Sidenote: and William of Eu.] - -[Sidenote: Earl Roger and the border lords.] - -[Sidenote: Osbern.] - -[Sidenote: Loyalty of Earl Hugh.] - -[Sidenote: Rebellion of Robert of Rhuddlan;] - -[Sidenote: of Roger the Bigod;] - -[Sidenote: of Bishop Geoffrey of Coutances;] - -[Sidenote: of Robert of Mowbray.] - -The list of the rebel nobles reads like a roll of the Norman leaders -at Senlac or a choice of the names which fill the foremost places in -Domesday. With a few marked exceptions, all the great men of the land -are there. Along with Odo, Bishop and Earl, the other brother of the -Conqueror, Robert of Mortain and of Cornwall, the lord of Pevensey and -of Montacute, joined in the revolt against his nephew.[70] So did -another kinsman, a member of the ducal house of Normandy and gorged -with the spoils of England, William son of Robert Count of Eu, -grandson of the elder William and his famous wife Lescelina.[71] Of -greater personal fame, and of higher formal rank on English soil, was -the father of one of the men who had crossed the sea to trouble -England, Roger of Montgomery, whose earldom of Shrewsbury swells, in -the statelier language of one of our authorities, into an earldom of -the Mercians.[72] He brought with him a great following from his own -border-land. Among these was Roger of Lacy, great in the shires from -Berkshire to Shropshire;[73] and with him came the old enemy Osbern of -Richard’s Castle, whose name carries us back to times that now seem -far away.[74] With Osbern came his son-in-law Bernard of Neufmarché or -Newmarch, sister’s son to the noble Gulbert of Hugleville, the man who -was soon to stamp his memory on the mountain land of Brecheiniog.[75] -From the same border too came the lord of Wigmore, Ralph of -Mortemer.[76] But the treason of the great Earl of the central march -was not followed by his northern neighbour. Hugh of Chester clave to -the King, while the mightiest of his tenants joined the rebels. For -the old Hugh of Grantmesnil raised the standard of revolt in -Northhamptonshire, and in Leicestershire, the land of his -sheriffdom.[77] And his rebellion seems to have carried with it that -of his nephew the Marquess Robert of Rhuddlan, the terror of the -northern Cymry.[78] Robert thus found himself in arms, not only -against his king, but against his immediate and powerful neighbour and -lord Earl Hugh. But the tie which bound a man to his mother’s brother -was perhaps felt to be stronger than duty towards either king or earl. -Along with the lords of the British marches stood the guardian of the -eastern coast of England against the Dane, Roger the Bigod, father of -earls, whose name, fated to be so renowned in later times, appears in -the records of these days with a special brand of evil.[79] And with -Odo and William of Durham a third prelate joined in the unrede, a -prelate the worthy compeer of Odo, the warrior Geoffrey of Coutances, -the bishop who knew better how to marshal mailed knights for the -battle than to teach surpliced clerks to chant their psalms in the -choir.[80] He brought with him the last of the elder succession of -Northumbrian earls, his nephew Robert of Mowbray, tall of stature, -swarthy of countenance, fierce, bold, and proud, who looked down on -his peers and scorned to obey his betters, who loved better to think -than to speak, and who, when he opened his lips, seldom let a smile -soften his stern words.[81] With these leaders were joined a crowd of -others, “mickle folk, all Frenchmen,” as the Chronicler significantly -marks.[82] The sons of the soil, we are to believe, had no part in the -counsels of that traitorous Lent, in the deeds of that wasting Easter. - -[Sidenote: Ravages of the rebels.] - -[Sidenote: Evidence against the Bishop of Durham.] - -[Sidenote: Ravages of Roger Bigod;] - -[Sidenote: of Hugh of Grantmesnil.] - -The war now began, a war in which, after the example of the chief -combatants, fathers fought against sons, brothers against brothers, -friends against their former friends.[83] The rebel leaders, each from -the point where his main strength lay, began to lay waste the land, -specially the lordships of the King and the Archbishop. And among -these evil-doers the loyal monk of Peterborough distinctly sets down -William of Saint-Calais, meek victim as he seems in the records of his -own house. The Bishop may have argued that he was only returning what -the King had done to him; but the witness is such as cannot be got -over; “The Bishop of Durham did to harm all that he might over all the -north.” Some others of the confederates and their doings are sketched -in a few words by the same sarcastic pen; “Roger hight one of them -that leapt into the castle at Norwich, and did yet the worst of all -over all the land.”[84] So does the English writer speak of the first -Bigod who held the fortress which had arisen on the mound of the -East-Anglian kings.[85] Roger had succeeded to the place, though not -to the rank, of Ralph of Wader, and, as Ralph had made Norwich a -centre of rebellion against the father, so Roger now made it a centre -of rebellion against the son. Then we read how “Hugo eke did nothing -better neither within Leicestershire nor within Northampton.”[86] This -was the way in which the lord of Grantmesnil, so honoured at Saint -Evroul, was looked on in the _scriptorium_ of the house which had once -been the Golden Borough. In some other parts of the country we get -fuller accounts than these of the doers and of what was done. Three -districts in the west and in the south-east of England became the -scene of events which are set down by the writers of the age in -considerable detail. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Bristol and its castle.] - -[Sidenote: Bristol in the eleventh century.] - -[Sidenote: The chief churches not yet built.] - -[Sidenote: Peninsular site of the borough.] - -[Sidenote: The two rivers.] - -[Sidenote: Changes in later times.] - -[Sidenote: The castle.] - -[Sidenote: Works of Earl Robert.] - -[Sidenote: Growth of the town.] - -Of Bristol, the great merchant-haven on the West-Saxon and Mercian -border, we last heard when the sons of Harold failed to make their way -within its walls,[87] and when its greedy slave-traders cast aside, -for a while at least, their darling sin at the preaching of Saint -Wulfstan.[88] The borough was now beginning to put on a new character, -one which, in the disturbances half a century later, won for it the -name of the stepmother of all England.[89] A fortress, the forerunner -of the great work of Robert Earl of Gloucester,[90] had now arisen, -and its presence made Bristol one of the chief military centres of -England down to the warfare of the seventeenth century. The Bristol of -those days had not yet occupied the ground which is now covered by its -two chief ecclesiastical ornaments. The abbey of Saint Augustine, the -creation of Robert Fitz-Harding, had not yet arisen on the lowest -slope of the hills to the west, nor the priory of Saint James, the -creation of Earl Robert, on the ground to the north of the borough. -These foundations arose in the next age on the Mercian ground without -the walls. And any forerunner which may then have been of the church -of Saint Mary on the Red cliff, for ages past the stateliest among the -parish churches of England, stood beyond the walls, beyond the river, -on undisputed West-Saxon ground. The older Bristol lay wholly on the -Mercian side of the Avon, at the point where the Frome of -Gloucestershire still poured its waters into the greater stream in the -sight of the sun.[91] But nowhere, unless at Palermo, have the -relations of land and water been more strangely turned about than they -have been at Bristol. The course of the greater river, though not -actually turned aside, is disguised by cuts and artificial harbours -which puzzle the visitor till the key is found. The lesser stream of -the Frome has had its course changed and shortened, and the remnant -is, like the Fleet of London, condemned by art to the fate which -nature has laid on so many of the rivers of Greece and Dalmatia;[92] -it runs, as in a _katabothra_, under modern streets and houses. The -marshy ground lying at the meeting of the streams has been reclaimed -and covered with the modern buildings of the city. In the twelfth -century, still more therefore in the eleventh, this space was covered -at every high tide, when the waters rushing up the channels of both -rivers made Bristol seem to float on their bosom like Venice or -Ravenna.[93] Of the castle again the more part of its site is covered -by modern buildings; a great part of its moat is filled up; the donjon -has vanished; the green is no longer a green; it is only by searching -that we can find out some parts of the outer walls of the fortress, -and some still smaller parts of the buildings which they fenced -in.[94] But, when the key is once found, it is not hard to follow the -line both of the borough and of the fortress. Bristol belongs to the -same general class of peninsular towns as Châlons, Shrewsbury, Bern, -and Besançon; but, as at Châlons, the height above the rivers is not -great; and it is at Bristol made quite insignificant by comparison -with the hills to the west and north. Yet on the narrow neck of the -isthmus itself, the actual slope towards the streams on either side is -not to be despised. To the west of that isthmus, within the peninsula, -stood the original town, girded to the north by the original course of -the Frome, to the south-west by the marshy ground at the junction of -the rivers.[95] To the west of the isthmus, outside the peninsula, -stood the castle. Standing on the exposed side, open to an attack from -the east, it was fenced in on three sides by a moat joining the two -rivers at either end. A writer of the next age gives us a picture of -Bristol Castle as it then stood, strengthened by all the more advanced -art of that time.[96] But the great keep of Earl Robert, slighted in -the days of the Commonwealth, was not yet. We can only guess at the -state of borough and fortress, as they had stood when the sons of -Harold were driven back from the walls of Bristol, or as they stood -now at the opening of the civil war which we have now reached. But -there are few towns whose general look must have been more thoroughly -unlike what it is now. The central and busy streets which occupy the -area of the older Bristol must, allowing for the difference between -the eleventh century and the nineteenth, still keep the general -character of the old merchant-borough. But few changes can be greater -than those which have affected Bristol both in earlier and in later -times. One period of change first surrounded the elder town with a -fringe of ecclesiastical buildings, and then took them within a more -extended line of wall. Another in later days has swept away well nigh -every trace of the fortress which was so famous both in the twelfth -century and in the seventeenth, and has covered the whole range of the -neighbouring hills with a new and airy city of modern days. - - [Illustration: - Map illustrating the SOMERSET AND GLOUCESTERSHIRE CAMPAIGN. 1088. - _For the Delegates of the Clarendon Press._ Edwᵈ. Weller] - -[Sidenote: Bristol occupied by Bishop Geoffrey.] - -[Sidenote: His relation to the town.] - -[Sidenote: His works.] - -[Sidenote: Ravages of William of Eu and Robert of Mowbray.] - -[Sidenote: Robert burns Bath.] - -[Sidenote: He marches through Wiltshire to Ilchester.] - -[Sidenote: Position of Ilchester.] - -[Sidenote: The siege.] - -[Sidenote: Robert of Mowbray driven back from Ilchester.] - -The castle of Bristol then, though not perched, like so many of its -fellows, on any lofty height, was placed on a strong and important -site. That site, commanding the lower course of the Avon and the great -borough upon it, and guarding the meeting-place, still of two shires, -as once of two kingdoms, supplied an admirable centre for the work of -those whose object was, not to guard those shires, but to lay them -waste.[97] To that end Bristol was occupied and garrisoned by the -warrior Bishop of Coutances, Geoffrey of Mowbray. It is not unlikely -that he was already in command of the castle. He was not only a -land-owner in the two neighbouring shires, a very great land-owner in -that of Somerset;[98] but the meagre notice of Bristol in the Great -Survey also shows that he stood in some special relation to the -borough as the receiver of the King’s dues within it.[99] He doubtless -added anything that the castle needed in the way of further defences, -and conjecture has attributed to him one of the several lines which -the city walls have taken, that which brought the line of defence most -closely to the banks of the Frome.[100] But whatever were his works, -we have no record of them; we know only that the fierce prelate, at -the head of his partisans, turned Bristol Castle into a den of -robbers. His chief confederates were William of Eu, of whom we have -already spoken[101], and his own nephew Robert of Mowbray. Among them -they harried the land, and brought in the fruits of their harrying to -the castle.[102] The central position of Bristol made a division of -labour easy. Of Bishop Geoffrey’s two younger confederates, Robert -undertook the work in Somerset and William in Gloucestershire. Robert -marched up the valley of the Avon to the Roman town of Bath, -emphatically the “old borough.”[103] At the foot of the hills on -either side, lying, as wicked wits put it, amid sulphureous vapours, -at the gates of hell,[104] the square, small indeed, of the Roman -walls sheltered the abbey of Offa’s rearing, now widowed by the death -of its English abbot Ælfsige.[105] The city had been overthrown by the -arms of Ceawlin; it had lain waste like the City of the Legions;[106] -it had risen again as an English town to share with the City of the -Legions in the two chief glories of the days of the peaceful Eadgar. -If Chester saw his triumph,[107] Bath had seen his crowning. And now -the hand of the Norman, not the Norman Conqueror but the Norman rebel, -fell as heavily on the English borough as the hand of the West-Saxon -invader had fallen five hundred years before. Bath was a king’s town; -as such it drew on itself the special wrath of the rebels; the whole -town was destroyed by fire, to rise again presently in another -character.[108] From Bath, the greatest town of Somerset, but which, -as placed in a corner of the land, has never claimed to be one of its -administrative centres, the destroyer passed on to another town of -Roman origin, which once did aspire to be the head of the Sumorsætan, -but from which all traces of greatness have passed away. From Bath -Robert first marched into Wiltshire, most likely following the line of -the Avon; he there wrought much slaughter and took great spoil. He -then turned to the south-west along the high ground of Wiltshire; he -made his way into the mid parts of Somerset, and laid siege to the -King’s town of Givelceaster, Ivelchester, Ilchester, the Ischalis of a -by-gone day.[109] The town lay at the foot of the most central range -of the hills of Somerset, on the edge of one of the inlets of the -great marshland of Sedgemoor. The site was marked by the junction of -the great line of the Fossway with a number of roads in all -directions. The spot was defended by the river, the Ivel, which gives -the town its English name. Here, at the foot of the high ground, the -stream widens to surround an island, a convenient outpost in the -defences of the town which arose on its southern bank. Ilchester, like -Bath, drew on itself the special enmity of the rebels as being a -king’s town, an enmity likely to be the sharper because Ilchester -stands within sight of Count Robert’s castle of Montacute, and is -divided only by the river from lands which were held by his -fellow-rebel William of Eu.[110] The Ilchester of our day seems a -strange place for a siege; but in the days of the Red King the town -was still surrounded by strong walls, and those walls were defended by -valiant burghers. The walls and gates have perished; the ditches have -been filled up; yet the lasting impress of the four-sided shape of the -Roman _chester_ may still be traced in the direction of the roads and -buildings of the modern town.[111] The importance of Ilchester had -passed away even in the sixteenth century, when of its five or six -churches all but one were in ruins; but, in the times with which we -are dealing, its hundred and seven burgesses, with their market held -in the old forum at the meeting-place of the roads, held no -inconsiderable place among the smaller boroughs of Western England.[112] -What the men of Ilchester had they knew how to defend; the attack and -the defence were vigorously carried on on either side. Our one -historian of the leaguer――he becomes almost its minstrel――tells us how -the besiegers fought for greed of booty and love of victory, while the -besieged fought with a good heart for their own safety and that of -their friends and kinsfolk. The stronger and worthier motive had the -better luck. The dark and gloomy Robert of Mowbray, darker and -gloomier than ever, turned away, a defeated man, from the unconquered -walls of Ilchester.[113] - -[Sidenote: William of Eu plunders in Gloucestershire.] - -[Sidenote: He harries Berkeley.] - -[Sidenote: Position of Berkeley.] - -[Sidenote: The castle.] - -This utter failure of a man who stands forth in a marked way as one of -the skilful captains of the age was a good omen for success at points -which were still more important in the struggle. Meanwhile the work of -destruction was going steadily on in the lands on the other side of -Bristol, among the flock of the holy Wulfstan. Gloucestershire was -assigned as the province of William of Eu, and he did his work with a -will along the rich valley of the Severn, still the land of pasture, -then also the land of vines.[114] The district called Berkeley Harness -was laid waste with fire and sword, and the town of Berkeley itself -was plundered.[115] Berkeley, once the abode of Earl Godwine and the -scene of the pious scruples of Gytha,[116] is now simply marked as a -king’s town;[117] the abbey had vanished in a past generation; the -famous castle belongs to a later generation; but the place was not -defenceless. Berkeley is indeed one of those places which have become -strongholds almost by accident. It looks up at a crowd of points on -the bold outlying promontories of the Cotswolds, points some of them -marked by the earthworks of unrecorded times, which in Normandy or -Maine could hardly fail to have been seized on for the site of -fortresses far sooner than itself. Nor is it near enough to the wide -estuary of the Severn to have been of any military importance in the -way of commanding the stream. It is rather one of those places where -the English lord fixed his dwelling on a spot which was chosen more as -a convenient centre for his lands than with any regard to purposes of -warfare. The mound, the church, the town, rose side by side on ground -but slightly higher than the rich meadows around them. But the mound -on which the great Earl of the West-Saxons had once dwelled had been, -as usual, turned to Norman military uses. Earl William of Hereford, -whose watchful care stretched on both sides of the river, had crowned -it with what Domesday marks as “a little castle.”[118] One would be -well pleased to know in what such a defence was an advance on the -palisades or other defences which may have surrounded the hall of -Godwine. In after days the “little castle” was to grow into the -historic home of that historic house in whom, whether they themselves -acknowledge it or not, history must see the lineal offspring, not of a -Danish king, but of an English staller.[119] At present however the -savage William of Eu had not to assault the stronghold of Robert, son -of Harding and grandson of Eadnoth, but merely to overcome whatever -resistance could be offered by the _castellulum_ of William -Fitz-Osbern. Its defences were most likely much less strong than the -Roman walls of Ilchester. Berkeley and the coasts thereof were -thoroughly ravaged. On the whole, notwithstanding the defeat of Robert -of Mowbray, the Bishop of Coutances and his lieutenants had done their -work to their own good liking. No small spoil from each of the three -nearest shires had been brought in to the robbers’ hold at Bristol. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Rebel centre at Hereford.] - -[Sidenote: Action of Earl Roger.] - -Meanwhile the same work was going on busily to the north and -north-west of Bishop Geoffrey’s field of action. Of the movements in -Herefordshire and Worcestershire we have fuller accounts, accounts -which, before we have done, land us from the region of military -history into that of hagiography. The centre of mischief in this -region was at Hereford. The city which Harold had called back into -being, and where William Fitz-Osbern had ruled so sternly, had now no -longer an earl; the rebel Roger was paying the penalty of his treason -at some point far away alike from Hereford, from Flanders, and from -Breteuil.[120] The city had now the King for its immediate lord. It -was presently seized by Roger of Lacy,[121] and was turned into a -meeting-place for the disaffected. The host that came together is -marked as made up of “the men that eldest were of Hereford, and the -whole shire forthwith, and the men of Shropshire with mickle folk of -Bretland.”[122] Some of their names, besides that of Roger of Lacy, we -have heard already.[123] And we are significantly told that the men of -Earl Roger――the men of Shropshire――were with them, a formula which -seems specially meant to shut out the presence of the Earl -himself.[124] And though the leaders were “all Frenchmen,”[125] yet -among their followers were men of all the races of the land. Not only -Normans and Britons, but Englishmen also, were seen in the rebel -ranks. So it seemed, if not in the general prospect as it was looked -at from distant Peterborough, yet at least in the clearer view which -men took from the watch-towers of more nearly threatened -Worcester.[126] - -[Sidenote: The rebels march on Worcester.] - -[Sidenote: 1055.] - -[Sidenote: 1041.] - -[Sidenote: Deliverance of Worcester.] - -[Sidenote: Action of Wulfstan.] - -[Sidenote: Position of Worcester.] - -[Sidenote: Wulfstan called to the command.] - -[Sidenote: Wulfstan enters the castle.] - -[Sidenote: Advance of the rebels.] - -[Sidenote: Sally of the royal forces.] - -[Sidenote: Wulfstan curses the rebels.] - -[Sidenote: Victory of the king’s men.] - -For it was the “faithful city” of after days on which the full storm -of the Western revolt was meant to burst. The Norman lords of the -border, with their British allies, now marched on Worcester, as, -thirty-three years before, an English earl of the border, with his -British allies, had marched on Hereford.[127] They came of their own -will to deal by Worcester, shire and city, as, forty-seven years -before, English earls had been driven against their will to deal with -them at the bidding of a Danish king.[128] “They harried and burned on -Worcestershire forth, and they came to the port itself, and would then -the port burn and the minster reave, and the King’s castle win to -their hands.”[129] But Worcester was not doomed to see in the days of -the second William such a day as Hereford had seen in the days of -Eadward, as Worcester itself had seen in the days of Harthacnut. The -port was not burned, the minster was not reaved, nor was the King’s -castle won into the hands of his enemies. And the deliverance of -Worcester is, with one accord, assigned by the writers of the time to -the presence within its walls of its bishop, the one remaining bishop -of English blood, whose unshaken loyalty had most likely brought the -special wrath of the rebels upon his city and flock. The holy Wulfstan -was grieved at heart for the woes which seemed coming upon his people; -but he bade them be of good courage and trust in the Lord who saveth -not by sword or spear.[130] The man who had won the heart of -Northumberland for Harold,[131] who had saved his own city for the -first William,[132] was now to save it again for the second. At -Worcester, castle, minster, and episcopal palace rose side by side -immediately above the Severn. But Worcester is no hill city like -Durham or Le Mans. The height above the stream is slight; the -subordinate buildings of the monastery went down almost to its banks. -The mound, traditionally connected with the name of Eadgar the -Giver-of-peace, has now utterly vanished; it then stood to the south -of the monastery, and had become, as elsewhere, the kernel of the -Norman castle. It will be remembered that it was the sacrilegious -extension of its precincts at the hands of Urse of Abetot which had -brought down on him the curse of Ealdred.[133] But by this time the -new minster of Wulfstan’s own building, whose site, we may suppose, -was further from the castle, that is, more to the north, than that of -the church of Oswald,[134] was, if not yet finished, at least in -making. It may be that at this moment the two minsters――the elder one -which has wholly passed away, the newer, where Wulfstan’s crypt and -some other portions of his work still remain among the recastings of -later times,――both stood between the mound of Eadgar and its Norman -surroundings, and the bishop’s dwelling, whatever may have been its -form in Wulfstan’s day. Still along the line of the river, lay the -buildings of the city further to the north, with the bridge leading to -the meadows and low hills beyond the stream, backed by the varied -outline of the heights of Malvern, the home of the newly-founded -brotherhood of Ealdwine.[135] At the moment when the rebels drew near -to Worcester, all the inhabitants of the city, of whatever race or -order, were of one heart and of one soul under the inspiration of -their holy Bishop. Like the prophets and judges of old, Wulfstan -suddenly stands forth as first, if not in military action, at least in -military command. We know not whether the fierce Sheriff or some -captain of a milder spirit formally bore rule in the castle. But we -read that the Norman garrison, by whom the mild virtues of the English -bishop were known and loved, practically put him at their head. They -prayed him to leave his episcopal home beyond the church, and to take -up his abode with them in the fortress. If danger should be pressing, -they would feel themselves all the safer, if such an one as he were -among them.[136] Wulfstan agreed to their proposal, and set out on the -short journey which he was asked to make, a journey which the -encroachments of the Sheriff had made shorter than it should have -been.[137] On his way he was surrounded by the inhabitants of -Worcester of all classes, all alike ready for battle. He himself had, -after the new fashion of Norman prelates, a military following,[138] -and the soldiers of the King and of the Bishop, with all the citizens -of Worcester, now came together in arms. From the height of the castle -mound, Wulfstan and his people looked forth beyond the river. The foes -were now advancing; they could be seen marching towards the city, and -burning and laying waste the lands of the bishopric.[139] Soldiers and -citizens now craved the Bishop’s leave to cross the river and meet the -enemy. Wulfstan gave them leave, encouraging them by his blessing, and -by the assurance that God would allow no harm to befall those who went -forth to fight for their King and for the deliverance of their city -and people.[140] Grieved further by the sight of the harrying of the -church-lands, and pressed by the urgent prayer of all around him, -Wulfstan pronounced a solemn anathema against the rebellious and -sacrilegious invaders.[141] The loyal troops, strengthened by the -exhortations and promises of their Bishop, set forth. The bridge was -made firm; the defenders of Worcester marched across it;[142] and the -working of Wulfstan’s curse, so the tradition of Worcester ran, smote -down their enemies before them with a more than human power. The -invaders, scattered over the fields for plunder, were at once -overtaken and overthrown. Their limbs became weak and their eyes dim; -they could hardly lift their weapons or know friend from foe.[143] The -footmen were slaughtered; the horsemen, Norman, English, and Welsh, -were taken prisoners; of the whole host only a few escaped by flight. -The men of the King and of the Bishop marched back to Worcester――so -Worcester dutifully believed――without the loss of a single man from -their ranks. They came back rejoicing in the great salvation which had -been wrought by their hands, and giving all thanks to God and his -servant Wulfstan.[144] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Movements of Odo in Kent.] - -[Sidenote: Tunbridge and Pevensey.] - -Among the sorrows which rent the breast of the holy Bishop of -Worcester, one may have been to see a man of his own order, one whom -he had, somewhat strangely perhaps, honoured with his friendship, -acting as a temporal leader in the rebellion against which he had to -wield his spiritual arms. It was, it may be remembered, Geoffrey of -Mowbray, the lord of the robbers’ hold at Bristol, who had rebuked the -lamb-like simplicity of Wulfstan’s garb.[145] The lamb of Severnside -had now overthrown alike the wolves of Normandy and the wild cats of -the British hills. But, if Wulfstan mourned over the evil deeds of the -warlike Bishop of Coutances, he had no such personal cause for grief -over either the sins or the sorrows of another bishop who was -meanwhile, like himself, besieged in an episcopal city. That bishop -however was not, like Wulfstan, defending his own flock with either -spiritual or temporal arms; he was doing all the wrong in his power to -the flock of another. The source and leader of the whole -mischief,[146] Odo, Bishop and Earl, chose his own earldom of Kent for -the scene of his ravages. Our notes of time are very imperfect, and we -have seen that there were movements in Kent, movements in which Odo -seems to have had a share, much earlier in the year.[147] But it would -seem that the great outbreak of rebellion in south-eastern England -happened about the same time as the great outbreaks more to the west -and north. As the Bishop of Coutances had fixed his head-quarters in -the castle of Bristol, so the Bishop of Bayeux now fixed his -head-quarters in the castle of Rochester, and thence ravaged the lands -of the King and the Archbishop.[148] Another great Kentish fortress, -that of Tunbridge, was also in rebellion. So in Sussex was Pevensey, -the very firstfruits of the Conquest, where Odo’s brother Count Robert -also held out against the King. These three fortresses now become the -busy scene of our immediate story; but the centre of all is the post -occupied by the Bishop of Bayeux and Earl of Kent. This part of the -war is emphatically the war of Rochester. - - [Illustration: - Map illustrating the KENT AND SUSSEX CAMPAIGN. A.D. 1088. - _For the Delegates of the Clarendon Press._ Edwᵈ. Weller] - -[Sidenote: Early history of Rochester.] - -[Sidenote: Importance of its position.] - -[Sidenote: The later castle.] - -[Sidenote: The cathedral church.] - -[Sidenote: The castle site fortified by the Conqueror.] - -[Sidenote: The city.] - -[Sidenote: Nature of the site.] - -[Sidenote: The castle occupied by Odo.] - -[Sidenote: Odo asks Robert to come.] - -The city by the Medway had been a fortress from the earliest times. We -have seen that it had already played a part both in foreign and in -civil wars. In the days of Æthelred it still kept the Roman walls -parts of which still remain, walls which were then able to withstand -two sieges, one at the hands of the King himself, and one at those of -the Danish invaders.[149] In truth the position of Rochester, lying on -the road from London to Canterbury, near to the sea on a navigable -river, made it at all times a great military post.[150] The chief -ornament of the city did not yet exist in the days of Odo. The noble -tower raised in the next age by Archbishop Walter of Corbeuil, the -tower which in one struggle held out against John[151] and in the next -held out for his son,[152] and still remains one of the glories of -Norman military architecture, had perhaps not even a forerunner of its -own class.[153] And the minster of Saint Andrew, which the -enlargements of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries have still left -one of the least among the episcopal churches of England, had then -only the lowly forerunner which had risen, which perhaps was still -only rising, under the hands of Gundulf.[154] But the steep scarped -cliff rising above the broad tidal stream was a stronghold in the -Conqueror’s days, as it had doubtless been in days long before his. -Whether a stone castle had yet been built is uncertain; the fact that -such an one was built for William Rufus by Gundulf later in his reign -might almost lead us to think that as yet the site, strong in itself, -was defended only by earthworks and defences of timber.[155] Below the -castle to the south-east lay the city, doubtless fenced by the Roman -wall; and a large part of its space had now begun to form the monastic -precinct of Saint Andrew. The town is said to have been parted from -the castle by a ditch which, as at Le Mans and at Lincoln, was -overleaped by the enlarged church of the twelfth century;[156] in any -case the castle, in all its stages, formed a sheltering citadel to the -town at its feet. Neither town nor castle by itself occupies a -peninsular site; but a great bend of the river to the south makes the -whole ground on which they stand peninsular, with an extent of marshy -ground between the town and the river to the north and east. The -stronghold of Rochester, no lofty natural peak, no mound of ancient -English kings, perhaps as yet gathering round no square keep of the -new Norman fashion, but in any case a well-defended circuit with its -scarped sides strengthened by all the art of the time, was the chief -fortress of the ancient kingdom over which the Bishop of Bayeux now -ruled as Earl. It now became, under him, the great centre of the -rebellion. Gundulf, renowned as he was for his skill in military -architecture, must have been sore let and hindered in the peaceful -work of building his church and settling the discipline of his -monks,[157] when his brother bishop filled the castle with his men of -war, five hundred of his own knights among them.[158] But Odo was not -satisfied with his garrison. He sent beyond sea to Duke Robert for -further help. The prince in whose name Rochester was now held was -earnestly prayed to come at once at the head of the full power of his -duchy, to take possession of the crown and kingdom which were waiting -for his coming.[159] - - [Illustration: - ROCHESTER - _For the Delegates of the Clarendon Press._ E. Weller] - -[Sidenote: The news brought to Robert.] - -[Sidenote: He sends over Eustace of Boulogne and Robert of Bellême.] - -[Sidenote: Three sons of Earl Roger at Rochester.] - -[Sidenote: Hugh of Montgomery.] - -[Sidenote: Roger of Poitou.] - -[Sidenote: Action of Earl Roger.] - -[Sidenote: He stays at Arundel.] - -[Sidenote: Position of Arundel.] - -[Sidenote: A castle at Arundel T. R. E.] - -[Sidenote: Description of the castle.] - -[Sidenote: William of Warren at Lewes.] - -[Sidenote: His earldom of Surrey.] - -[Sidenote: His loyalty.] - -According to the narrative which we are now following, it would seem -that Robert now heard for the first time of the movement which was -going on in his behalf in England. His heart is lifted up at the -unlooked for news; he tells the tidings to his friends; certain of -victory, he sends some of them over to share in the spoil; he promises -to come himself with all speed, as soon as he should have gathered a -greater force.[160] At the head of the party which was actually sent -were two men whose names are familiar to us.[161] One of them, Count -Eustace of Boulogne, united the characters of a land-owner in England -and of a sovereign prince in Gaul. This was the younger Eustace, the -son of the old enemy of England, the brother of the hero who was -within a few years to win back the Holy City for Christendom.[162] -With him came Robert of Bellême; his share in the rebellion is his -first act on English ground that we have to record. Himself the eldest -son of Earl Roger of Shrewsbury, he had either brought with him two of -his brothers, or else they had already embraced the cause of Odo in -England. Three sons of Roger and Mabel were now within the walls of -Rochester.[163] The second was Hugh, who was for a moment to represent -the line of Montgomery while Robert represented the line of Bellême, -and who was to be as fierce a scourge to the Britons of the Northern -border as Robert was to be to the valiant defenders of the land of -Maine.[164] And with them was the third brother, Roger of Poitou, the -lord of the debateable land between Mersey and Ribble,[165] carrying -as it were to the furthest point of the earldom of Leofric the claim -of his father to the proud title which the elder Roger bears at this -stage of our story. It is as Earl of the Mercians that one teller of -our tale bids us look for a moment on the lord of Montgomery and -Shrewsbury.[166] But the Earl of the Mercians was not with his sons at -Rochester any more than he had been with his men before Worcester. He -was in another seat of his scattered power. His presence was less -needed at Shrewsbury, less needed at the continental or the insular -Montgomery, than it was in the South-Saxon land where the lord of -Arundel and Chichester held so high a place. While his men were -overthrown before Worcester, while his sons were strengthening -themselves at Rochester, Earl Roger himself was watching events in his -castle of Arundel.[167] The spot was well fitted for the purpose. -Arundel lies in the same general region of England as the three great -rebel strongholds of Rochester, Tunbridge, and Pevensey; it lies in -the same shire and near the same coast as the last named of the three. -But it lies apart from the immediate field of action of a campaign -which should gather round those three centres. A gap in the Sussex -downs, where the Arun makes its way to the sea through the flat land -at its base, had been marked out, most likely from the earliest times, -as a fitting spot for a stronghold. The last slope of this part of the -downs towards the east was strengthened in days before King William -came with a mound and a ditch, and Arundel is marked in the Great -Survey as one of the castles few and far between which England -contained before his coming.[168] The shell-keep which crowns the -mound, and the gateway which flanks it, have been recast at various -later times from the twelfth century onward, but it would be rash to -assert that the mere wall of the keep may not contain portions either -of the days of King William or of the days of King Eadward. The traces -of a vast hall, more immediately overlooking the river, reared as -usual on a vaulted substructure, almost constrain us to see in them -the work of no age earlier or later than that of Roger or his -successor of his own house.[169] The site is a natural watchtower, -whence the eye ranges far away to various points of the compass, over -the flat land and over the more distant hills, and over the many -windings of the tidal river which then made Arundel a place of trade -as well as of defence.[170] Less threatening than his vulture’s nest -at _Tre Baldwin_,[171] less tempting to an enemy than his fortresses -on the peninsula of Shrewsbury and within the walls of Chichester,[172] -the stronghold of Arundel seems exactly the place for an experienced -observer of men and things like Earl Roger to look out from and bide -his time. He had to watch the course of things in the three rebel -fortresses; he had further to watch what might come from a nearer -spot, another break in the hill ground, where, between his doubtful -Arundel and rebellious Pevensey, the twin mounds of loyal Lewes,[173] -the home of William and Gundrada, looked up to what was one day to be -the battle-ground of English freedom. Its lord, long familiar to us as -William of Warren, stood firm in his allegiance, and it was now, -according to some accounts, that he received his earldom of Surrey, an -earldom to be borne in after times along with that which took its name -from Roger’s own Arundel.[174] William became the King’s chief -counsellor, and his position at Lewes must have thrown difficulties in -the way of any communication between Arundel and Pevensey. And in -truth, when Earl Roger found it safest to watch and be prudent, we are -not surprised to find events presently shaping themselves in such a -way as to make it his wisest course to play the part of the Curio of -the tale.[175] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Action of the King.] - -[Sidenote: He wins over Earl Roger.] - -[Sidenote: Count Robert at Pevensey.] - -But meanwhile where was King William? Where was the king who had taken -his place on his father’s seat with so much ease, but whose place upon -it had been so soon and so rudely shaken? We have been called on more -than once in earlier studies to mark how the two characters of fox and -lion were mingled in the tempers of the Conqueror and his countrymen, -and assuredly the Conqueror’s second surviving son was fully able to -don either garb when need called for it.[176] At this moment we are -told in a marked way that William Rufus showed himself in the -character of that which is conventionally looked on as the nobler -beast. He had no mind to seek for murky holes, like the timid fox, -but, like the bold and fearless lion, he gave himself mightily to put -down the devices of his enemies.[177] Yet the first time when we -distinctly get a personal sight of him, the Red King is seen playing -the part of the fox with no small effect. Earl Roger was assuredly no -mean master of Norman craft; but King William, in his first essay, -showed himself fully his equal. By a personal appeal he won the Earl -over from at least taking any further personal share in the rebellion. -At some place not mentioned, perhaps at Arundel itself, the Earl, -disguising, we are told, his treason, was riding in the King’s -company.[178] The King took him aside, and argued the case with him. -He would, he said, give up the kingdom, if such was really the wish of -the old companions of his father. He knew not wherefore they were so -bitter against him; he was ready, if they wished it, to make them -further grants of lands or money. Only let them remember one thing; -his cause and theirs were really the same; it was safer not to dispute -the will of the man who had made both him and them what they were. -“You may,” wound up Rufus, “despise and overthrow me; but take care -lest such an example should prove dangerous to yourselves. My father -has made me a king, and it was he alone who made you an earl.”[179] -Roger felt or affected conviction, and followed the King, in his -bodily presence at least, during the rest of the campaign.[180] But -Robert, Count of Mortain and lord of Cornwall, still made Pevensey one -of the strongholds of the revolt. Of the third great neighbour of -these two lords, Count Robert of Eu, father of the ravager of -Berkeley, we hear nothing on this side of the water. - -[Sidenote: Loyal Normans.] - -[Sidenote: Earl Hugh.] - -[Sidenote: William of Warren.] - -[Sidenote: Robert Fitz-hamon.] - -[Sidenote: Forces on the side of Rufus,] - -[Sidenote: the Church, and the people.] - -[Sidenote: Loyalty of the Bishops.] - -[Sidenote: The King appeals to the English.] - -[Sidenote: His proclamation.] - -[Sidenote: His promises.] - -[Sidenote: The English take up the King’s cause.] - -[Sidenote: Motives for supporting William.] - -But, amid the general falling away, the throne of William Rufus was -still defended by some men of Norman birth on whom he could better -rely than on the doubtful loyalty of the Earl of Shrewsbury. Earl Hugh -of Chester remained faithful; so, as we have seen, did Earl Roger’s -neighbour, now or afterwards Earl William.[181] And to these already -famous names we must add one which was now only beginning to be heard -of, but which was presently to equal, if not to surpass, the renown of -either. This was Robert Fitz-hamon, the son or grandson of Hamon -_Dentatus_, the rebel of Val-ès-dunes.[182] But it was not on the -swords of the Norman followers of his father that the son of the -Conqueror rested his hopes of keeping the crown which the Conqueror -had left him. William Rufus had at his side two forces, either of -which, when it could put forth its full power, was stronger by far -than the Norman nobles. All that in any way represented the higher -feelings and instincts of man was along with him. All that in any -shape was an embodiment of law or right was arrayed against the men -whose one avowed principle was the desire to shake off the restraints -of law in any shape. Against the openly proclaimed reign of -lawlessness the King could rely on the strength of the Church and the -strength of the people. With the single exception of him of Durham, -the marauding bishops of Bayeux and Coutances found no followers among -the men of their order in England. Lanfranc stood firmly by the King -to whom he had given the crown; and the other bishops, of whatever -origin, sought, we are told, with all faithfulness of purpose, the -things which were for peace.[183] Either by their advice or by his own -discernment, the King saw that his only course was to throw himself on -the true folk of the land, to declare himself King of the English in -fact as well as in name. A written proclamation went forth in the name -of King William, addressed, doubtless in their own ancient tongue, to -the sons of the soil, the men of English kin. The King of the English -called on the people of the English, on the valiant men who were left -of the old stock; he set forth his need to them and craved for their -loyal help.[184] At such a moment he was lavish of promises. All the -wrongs of the days of William the Elder were to be put an end to in -the days of William the Younger. The English folk should have again -the best laws that ever before were in this land. King William would -reign over his people like Eadward or Cnut or Ælfred. The two great -grievances of his father’s days were to cease; the King’s coffers were -no longer to be filled by money wrung from his people; the King’s -hunting-grounds were no longer to be fenced in by the savage code -which had guarded the Conqueror’s pleasures. All unrighteous geld he -forbade, and he granted to them their woods and right of hunting.[185] -At the sound of such promises men’s hearts were stirred. At such -moments, men commonly listen to their hopes rather than to their -reason; the prospects and promises of a new reign are always made the -best of; and there was no special reason as yet why the word of -William the Red should be distrusted. He had not conquered England; he -had not as yet had the means of oppressing England; he had shown at -least one virtue in dutiful attachment to his father; his counsellor -was the venerated Primate; chief in loyalty to him was one yet more -venerated, the one native chief left to the English Church, the holy -Bishop of Worcester. If the English dealt with William as an English -king, he might deal with them as an English king should deal with his -people. In fighting for William against the men who had risen up -against him, they would be fighting for one who had not himself -wronged them against the men who had done them the bitterest of -wrongs. If the Bishop of Bayeux and the Bishop of Coutances, if Robert -of Mortain and Robert of Mowbray, if Eustace of Boulogne and the -fierce lord of Bellême, could all be smitten down by English axes or -driven into banishment from the English shores, if their estates on -English soil could be again parted out as the reward of English -valour, the work of the Norman Conquest would indeed seem to be -undone. And it would be undone none the less, although the king whose -crown was made sure by English hands was himself the son of the -Conqueror of England. - -[Sidenote: Loyalty of the English.] - -[Sidenote: They meet in London.] - -[Sidenote: William’s English army.] - -[Sidenote: Their zeal in his cause.] - -[Sidenote: William accepted as the English king.] - -With such feelings as these the sons of the soil gathered with glee -around the standard of King William. Not a name is handed down to us. -We know not from what shires they came or under what leaders they -marched. We see only that, as was natural when the stress of the war -lay in Kent and Sussex, the trysting-place was London.[186] How did -that great city stand at this moment with regard to the rebellion? It -will be remembered by what vigorous means Bishop William of Durham -claimed to have secured the allegiance of the citizens some time -earlier.[187] At all events, whether by the help of William of -Saint-Calais or not, London was now in the King’s hands. There the -royal host met, a motley host, a host of horse and foot, of Normans -and English, but a host in which the English element was by far the -greatest, and in which English feeling gave its character to the whole -movement. Thirty thousand of the true natives of the land came -together of their own free will to the defence of their lord the -King.[188] The figures are of much the same value as other figures; it -is enough if we take them as marking a general and zealous movement. -The men who were thus brought together promised the King their most -zealous service; they exhorted him to press on valiantly, to smite the -rebels, and to win for himself the Empire of the whole island.[189] -This last phrase is worth noting, even if it be a mere flourish of the -historian. It marks that the change of dynasty was fully accepted, -that the son of the Conqueror was fully acknowledged as the heir of -all the rights of Æthelstan the Glorious and of Eadmund the -Doer-of-great-deeds. A daughter of their race still sat on the -Scottish throne; but for Malcolm, the savage devastator of Northern -England, Englishmen could not be expected to feel any love. William -was now their king, their king crowned and anointed, the lord to whom -their duty was owing as his men.[190] Him they would make fast on the -throne of England; for him they were ready to win the Empire of all -Britain. The English followers of Rufus loudly proclaimed their hatred -of rebellion. They even, we are told, called on their leader to study -the history of past times, where he would see how faithful Englishmen -had ever been to their kings.[191] - -[Sidenote: William’s march.] - -[Sidenote: English hatred of Odo.] - -At the head of this great and zealous host William the Red set forth -from London. He set forth at the head of an English host, to fight -against Norman enemies in the Kentish and South-Saxon lands. And in -that host there may well have been men who had marched forth from -London on the like errand only two-and-twenty years before. Great as -were the changes which had swept over the land, men must have been -still living, still able to bear arms, who had dealt their blows in -the _Malfosse_ of Senlac amidst the last glimmerings of light on the -day of Saint Calixtus. The enemy was nationally and even personally -the same. The work before all others at the present moment was to -seize the man whose spiritual exhortations had stirred up Norman -valour on that unforgotten day, and whose temporal arm had wielded, if -not the sword, at least the war-club, in the first rank of the -invaders. Odo, the invader of old, the oppressor of later days, the -head and front of the evil rede of the present moment, was the -foremost object of the loyal and patriotic hatred of every Englishman -in the Red King’s army. Could he be seized, it would be easier to -seize his accomplices.[192] The great object of the campaign was -therefore to recover the castle of Rochester, the stronghold where the -rebel Bishop, with his allies from Boulogne and from Bellême, bade -their defiance to the King and people of England. - -[Sidenote: Tunbridge castle.] - -[Sidenote: Attack on the castle.] - -[Sidenote: Position of Tunbridge.] - -[Sidenote: The castle stormed.] - -It was not however deemed good to march at once upon the immediate -centre of the rebellion. A glance at the map will show that it was -better policy not to make the attack on Rochester while both the other -rebel strongholds, Tunbridge and Pevensey, remained unsubdued. The -former of these, a border-post of Kent and Sussex, guarding the upper -course of the stream that flows by Rochester, would, if won for the -King, put a strong barrier between Rochester and Pevensey. The march -on Rochester therefore took a roundabout course, and this part of the -war opened by an attack on Tunbridge which was the first exploit of -the Red King’s English army. At a point on the Medway about four miles -within the Kentish border, at the foot of the high ground reaching -northward from the actual frontier of the two ancient kingdoms, the -winding river receives the waters of several smaller streams, and -forms a group of low islands and peninsulas. On the slightly rising -ground to the north, commanding the stream and its bridge, a mound had -risen, fenced by a ditch on the exposed side to the north. This -ancient fortress had grown into the castle of Gilbert the son of -Richard, called of Clare and of Tunbridge, the son of the famous Count -Gilbert of the early days of the Conqueror.[193] As Tunbridge now -stands, the outer defences of the castle stand between the mound and -the river, and the mound, bearing the shell-keep, is yoked together in -a striking way with one of the noblest gateways of the later form of -mediæval military art.[194] The general arrangements of the latter -days of the eleventh century cannot have been widely different. The -mound, doubtless a work of English hands turned to the uses of the -stranger, was the main stronghold to be won. It was held by a body of -Bishop Odo’s knights, under the command of its own lord Gilbert; to -win it for the King and his people was an object only second to that -of seizing the traitor prelate himself. The rebel band bade defiance -to the King and his army. The castle held out for two days; but the -zeal of the English was not to be withstood; no work could be more to -their liking than that of attacking a Norman castle on their own soil, -even with a Norman King as their leader. The castle was stormed; the -native Chronicler, specially recording the act of his countrymen, -speaks of it, like the castles of York in the days of Waltheof, as -“tobroken.”[195] Most likely the buildings on the mound were thus -“tobroken;” but some part of the castle enclosure must have been left -habitable and defensible. For the garrison, with their chief Gilbert, -were admitted to terms; and Gilbert, who had been wounded in the -struggle, was left there under the care of a loyal guard. - -[Sidenote: They march towards Rochester.] - -[Sidenote: Odo at Pevensey.] - -[Sidenote: Odo exhorts Robert of Mortain to hold out.] - -The first blow had thus gone well to the mark. Such an exploit as -this, the capture by English valour of one of the hated strongholds of -the stranger, was enough to raise the spirit of William’s English -followers to the highest pitch. And presently they were summoned to a -work which would call forth a yet fiercer glow of national feeling. -After Tunbridge had fallen, they set forth on their march towards -Rochester, believing that the arch-enemy Odo was there. Their course -would be to the north-east, keeping some way from the left side of the -Medway; Bishop Gundulf’s tower at Malling,[196] if it was already -built, would be the most marked point on the road. But they were not -to reach Rochester by so easy a path. While they were on their way, -news came to the King that his uncle was no longer at Rochester. While -the King was before Tunbridge, the Bishop with a few followers had -struck to the south-east, and had reached his brother’s castle of -Pevensey.[197] The Count of Mortain and lord of Cornwall was perhaps -wavering, like his neighbour at Arundel. The Bishop exhorted him to -hold out. While the King besieged Rochester, they would be safe at -Pevensey, and meanwhile Duke Robert and his host would cross the sea. -The Duke would then win the crown, and would reward all their -services.[198] - -[Sidenote: Interest of Duke Robert in the rebellion.] - -[Sidenote: His coming looked for.] - -[Sidenote: He fails to help the rebels.] - -[Sidenote: His childish boasting.] - -[Sidenote: His promises.] - -It is well to be reminded by words like these what the professed -object of the insurgents was. It would be easy to forget that all the -plundering that had been done from Rochester to Ilchester had been -done in the name of the lawful rights of Duke Robert. The men who -harried Berkeley and who were overthrown at Worcester were but the -forerunners of the Duke of the Normans, who was to come, as spring -went on, with the full force of his duchy.[199] It was not for nothing -that King William had gathered his English army, when a new Norman -Conquest was looked for. But as yet the blow was put off; Duke Robert -came not; he seemed to think that the crown of England could be won -with ease at any moment. When the first news of William’s accession -came, when those around him urged him to active measures to support -his rights, he had spoken of the matter with childish scorn. Were he -at the ends of the earth――the city of Alexandria is taken as the -standard of distance――the English would not dare to make William king, -William would not dare to accept the crown at their hands, without -waiting for the coming of his elder brother.[200] Both the impossible -things had happened, and Robert and his partisans had now before them -the harder task of driving William from a throne which was already -his, instead of merely hindering him from mounting it. Up to this time -Robert had done nothing; but now, in answer to the urgent prayers of -his uncles, he did get together a force for their help, and promised -that he would himself follow it before long.[201] - -[Sidenote: William marches on Pevensey.] - -[Sidenote: The English besiege Odo in Pevensey.] - -[Sidenote: The castle of Pevensey.] - -The news of Odo’s presence at Pevensey at once changed the course of -William’s march. Wherever the Bishop of Bayeux was, there was the -point to be aimed at.[202] Instead of going on to Rochester, the King -turned and marched straight upon Pevensey. The exact line of his march -is not told us, but it could not fail to cross, perhaps it might for a -while even coincide with, the line of march by which Harold had -pressed to the South-Saxon coast on the eve of the great battle. -Things might seem to have strangely turned about, when an English -army, led by a son of the Conqueror, marched to lay siege to the two -brothers and chief fellow-workers of the Conqueror within the -stronghold which was the very firstfruits of the Conquest. The Roman -walls of Anderida were still there; but their whole circuit was no -longer desolate, as it had been when the Conqueror landed, and as we -see it now again. One part of the ancient city had again become a -dwelling-place of man. As Pevensey now stands, the south-eastern -corner of the Roman enclosure, now again as forsaken as the rest, is -fenced in by the moat, the walls, the towers, of a castle of the later -type, the type of the Edwards, but whose towers are built in evident -imitation of the solid Roman bastions. Then, or at some earlier time, -the Roman wall itself received a new line of parapet, and one at least -of its bastions was raised to form a tower in the restored line of -defence. When the house of Mortain passed away in the second -generation, the honour of Pevensey became the possession of the house -of Laigle, and from them, perhaps in popular speech, certainly in the -dialect of local antiquaries, Anderida became the Honour of the -Eagle.[203] Within the circuit of the later castle, close on the -ancient wall, rises, covered with shapeless ruins, a small mound which -doubtless marks the site of the elder keep of Count Robert. Within -that keep the two sons of Herleva, Bishop and Count, looked down on -the shore close at their feet where they had landed with their -mightier brother two-and-twenty years before. Within that stern -memorial of their victory, they had now to defend themselves against -the sons and brothers of men who had fallen by their hands, and whose -lands they had parted out among them for a prey. - -[Sidenote: The siege of Pevensey.] - -[Sidenote: Duke Robert at last sends help.] - -[Sidenote: Robert stays behind.] - -[Sidenote: The English hinder the Normans from landing.] - -[Sidenote: Utter failure of the invasion.] - -The siege of Pevensey proved a far harder work than the siege of -Tunbridge. The Roman wall with its new Norman defences was less easy -to storm than the ancient English mound. William the Red had to wait -longer before Pevensey than William the Great had had to wait before -Exeter. The fortress was strong; the spirit of its defenders was high; -for Odo was among them. The King beset the castle with a great host; -he brought the artillery of the time to bear upon its defences; but -for six weeks his rebellious uncles bore up against the attacks of -William and his Englishmen.[204] And, while the siege went on, another -of the chances of war seemed yet more thoroughly to reverse what had -happened on the same spot not a generation back. Again a Norman host -landed, or strove to land, within the haven of Pevensey. But they came -under other guidance than that which had led the men who came before -them on the like errand. When William crossed the sea, his own Mora -sailed foremost and swiftest in the whole fleet, and William himself -was the first man in his army to set foot on English ground. William -in short led his fleet; his son only sent his. Robert still tarried in -Normandy; he was coming, but not yet; his men were to make their way -into England how they could without him. They came, and they found the -South-Saxon coast better guarded than it had been when Harold had to -strive against two invaders at once. When Robert’s ships drew nigh, -they found the ships of King William watching the coast; they found -the soldiers of King William lining the shore.[205] On such a spot, in -such a cause, no Englishman’s heart or hand was likely to fail him. -The attempt at a new Norman landing at Pevensey was driven back. Those -who escaped the English sailors drew near to the shore, but only to -fall into the hands of the English land-force. It must not be -forgotten that, as the coast-line then stood, when the sea covered -what is now the low ground between the castle and the beach, the -struggle for the landing must have gone on close under the walls of -the ancient city and of the new-built castle. The English who beat -back the Normans of Duke Robert’s fleet as they strove to land must -have been themselves exposed to the arrows of the Normans who guarded -Count Robert’s donjon. But the work was done. Some of the invaders -lived to be taken prisoners; but the more part, a greater number than -any man could tell, were smitten down by the English axes or thrust -back to meet their doom in the waves of the Channel. Some who deemed -that they had still the means of escape tried to hoist the sails of -their ships and get them back to their own land. But the elements -fought against them. The winds which had so long refused to bring the -fleet of William from Normandy to England now refused no less to take -back the fleet of Robert from England to Normandy. And there were no -means now, as there had been by the Dive and at Saint Valery, for -waiting patiently by a friendly coast, or for winning the good will of -the South-Saxon saints by prayers or offerings.[206] Even Saint Martin -of the Place of Battle had no call to help the eldest son of his -founder against his founder’s namesake and chosen heir. The ships -could not be moved; the English were upon them; the Normans, a -laughing-stock to their enemies, rather than fall into their enemies’ -hands, leaped from their benches into the less hostile waters. The -attempt of the Conqueror’s eldest son to do by deputy what his father -had done in person had utterly come to nought. The new invaders of -England had been overthrown by English hands on the spot where the -work of the former invaders had begun. - -[Sidenote: Alleged death of William of Warren.] - -[Sidenote: The castle surrenders.] - -[Sidenote: Terms granted to Odo.] - -[Sidenote: Rochester to be surrendered.] - -[Sidenote: The garrison refuse to surrender; Odo taken prisoner by his -own friends.] - -After the defeat of this attempt to bring help to the besieged at -Pevensey, nothing more was heard of Duke Robert’s coming in person. If -we may believe a single confused and doubtful narrative, the defenders -of the castle had at least the satisfaction of slaying one of the -chief men in the royal army. We are told that Earl William of Warren -was mortally wounded in the leg by an arrow from the walls of -Pevensey, and was carried to Lewes only to die there.[207] However -this may be, the failure of the Norman expedition carried with it the -failure of the hopes of the besieged. Food now began to fail them, and -Odo and Robert found that there was nothing left for them but to -surrender to their nephew on the best terms that they could get. Of -the terms which were granted to the Count of Mortain and lord of -Cornwall we hear nothing. The Bishop of Bayeux and Earl of Kent was a -more important person, and we have full details of everything that -concerned him. The terms granted to the chief stirrer up of the whole -rebellion were certainly favourable. He was called on to swear that he -would leave England, and would never come back, unless the King sent -for him, and that, before he went, he would cause the castle of -Rochester to be surrendered.[208] For the better carrying out of the -last of his engagements, the Bishop was sent on towards Rochester in -the keeping of a small body of the King’s troops, while the King -himself slowly followed.[209] No further treachery was feared; it was -taken for granted that those who held the castle for Odo would give it -up at once when Odo came in person to bid them do so. These hopes were -vain; the young nobles who were left in the castle, Count Eustace, -Robert of Bellême, and the rest, were not scrupulous as to the faith -of treaties, and they had no mind to give up their stronghold till -they were made to do so by force of arms. Odo was brought before the -walls of Rochester. The leaders of the party that brought him called -on the defenders of the castle to surrender; such was the bidding -alike of the King who was absent and of the Bishop who was there in -person. But Odo’s friends could see from the wall that the voices of -the King’s messengers told one story, while the looks of the Bishop -told another. They threw open the gates; they rushed forth on the -King’s men, who were in no case to resist them, and carried both them -and the Bishop prisoners into the castle.[210] Odo was doubtless a -willing captive; once within the walls of Rochester, he again became -the life and soul of the defence. - -[Sidenote: William’s _Niðing_ Proclamation.] - -[Sidenote: The second English muster.] - -[Sidenote: The siege of Rochester.] - -[Sidenote: Straits of the besieged.] - -[Sidenote: Plague of flies.] - -[Sidenote: They agree to surrender.] - -It perhaps did not tend to the moral improvement of William Rufus to -find himself thus shamefully deceived by one so near of kin to -himself, so high in ecclesiastical rank. At the moment the treachery -of Odo stirred him up to greater efforts. Rochester should be won, -though it might need the whole strength of the kingdom to win it. But -the King saw that it was only by English hands that it could be won. -He gathered around him his English followers, and by their advice put -out a proclamation in ancient form bidding all men, French and -English, from port and from upland, to come with all speed to the -royal muster, if they would not be branded with the shameful name of -_Nithing_. That name, the name which had been fixed, as the lowest -badge of infamy, on the murderer Swegen,[211] was a name under which -no Englishman could live; and it seems to have been held that -strangers settled on English ground would have put on enough of -English feeling to be stirred in the like sort by the fear of having -such a mark set upon them. What the Frenchmen did we are not told; but -the _fyrd_ of England answered loyally to the call of a King who thus -knew how to appeal to the most deep-set feelings and traditions of -Englishmen.[212] Men came in crowds to King William’s muster, and, in -the course of May, a vast host beset the fortress of Rochester. -According to a practice of which we have often heard already, two -temporary forts, no doubt of wood, were raised, so as to hem in the -besieged and to cut off their communications from without.[213] The -site of one at least of these may be looked for on the high ground to -the south of the castle, said to be itself partly artificial, and -known as Boley Hill.[214] The besieged soon found that all resistance -was useless. They were absolutely alone. Pevensey and Tunbridge were -now in the King’s hands; since the overthrow of Duke Robert’s fleet, -they could look for no help from Normandy; they could look for none -from yet more distant Bristol or Durham. Till the siege began, they -had lived at the cost of the loyal inhabitants of Kent and London. For -not only the Archbishop, but most of the chief land-owners of Kent -were on the King’s side.[215] This is a point to be noticed amid the -general falling away of the Normans. For the land-owners of Kent, a -land where no Englishman was a tenant-in-chief, were a class -preeminently Norman. But we can well believe that the rule of Odo, who -spared neither French nor English who stood in his way,[216] may have -been little more to the liking of his own countrymen than it was to -that of the men of the land. But all chance of plunder was now cut -off; a crowd of men and horses were packed closely together within the -circuit of the fortress, with little heed to health or cleanliness. -Sickness was rife among them, and a plague of flies, a plague which is -likened to the ancient plague of Egypt, added to their distress.[217] -There was no hope within their own defences, and beyond them a host -lay spread which there was no chance of overcoming. At last the heart -of Odo himself failed him. He and his fiercest comrades, Eustace of -Boulogne, even Robert of Bellême, at last brought themselves to crave -for peace at the hands of the offended and victorious King. - -[Sidenote: Lesson of the war: the King stronger than any one noble.] - -[Sidenote: Odo and Roger of Montgomery.] - -[Sidenote: The unity of England.] - -It was a great and a hard lesson which Odo and his accomplices learned -at Pevensey and Rochester. It was the great lesson of English history, -the great result of the teaching of William the Great on the day of -Salisbury, that no one noble, however great his power, however strong -the force which he could gather round him, could strive with any hope -of success against the King of the whole land. In the royal army -itself Odo might see one who had risen as high as himself among the -conquerors of England, the father of the fiercest of the warriors who -stood beside him, following indeed the King’s bidding, but following -it against his will. Roger of Montgomery was in the host before -Rochester, an unwilling partner in a siege which was waged against his -own sons. Both he and other Normans in the King’s army are charged -with giving more of real help to the besieged than they gave to the -King whom they no longer dared to withstand openly.[218] But it was in -vain that even so great a lord as Earl Roger sought to strive or to -plot against England and her King. The policy of the Conqueror, -crowning the work of earlier kings, had made England a land in which -no Earl of Kent or of Shrewsbury could gather a host able to withstand -the King of the English at the head of the English people.[219] When -the days came that kings were to be brought low, it was not by the -might of this or that overgrown noble, but by the people of the land, -with the barons of the land acting only as the first rank of the -people. Those days were yet far away; but an earlier stage in the -chain of progress had been reached. The Norman nobles had taken one -step towards becoming the first rank of the English people, when they -learned that King and people together were stronger than they. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Rufus refuses terms to the besieged.] - -[Sidenote: The King’s threats.] - -[Sidenote: Pleadings for the besieged.] - -[Sidenote: Answer of the King.] - -[Sidenote: Pleadings for Odo.] - -[Sidenote: Pleadings for Eustace and Robert of Bellême.] - -The defenders of Rochester had brought themselves to ask for peace; -but they still thought that they could make terms with their -sovereign. Let the King secure to them the lands and honours which -they held in his kingdom, and they would give up the castle of -Rochester to his will; they would hold all that they had as of his -grant, and would serve him faithfully as their natural lord.[220] The -wrath of the Red King burst forth, as well it might. Odo at least was -asking at Rochester for more favourable terms than those to which he -had already sworn at Pevensey. William answered that he would grant no -terms; he had strength enough to take the castle, whether they chose -to surrender it or not. And the story runs that he added――not -altogether in the spirit of his father――that all the traitors within -the walls should be hanged on gibbets, or put to such other forms of -death as might please him.[221] But those of his followers who had -friends or kinsfolk within the castle came to the King to crave mercy -for them. A dialogue follows in our most detailed account, in which -the scriptural reference to the history of Saul and David may be set -down as the garnish of the monk of Saint Evroul, but which contains -arguments that are likely enough to have been used on the two sides of -the question. An appeal is made to William’s own greatness and -victory, to his position as the successor of his father. God, who -helps those who trust in him, gives to good fathers a worthy offspring -to come after them. The men in the castle, the proud youths and the -old men blinded by greediness, had learned that the power of kings had -not died out in the island realm. Those who had come from -Normandy――here we seem to hear an argument from English mouths――sweeping -down upon the land like kites, they who had deemed that the kingly -stock had died out in England, had learned that the younger William -was in no way weaker than the elder.[222] Mercy was the noblest -attribute of a conqueror; something too was due to the men who had -helped him to his victory, and who now pleaded for those who had -undergone enough of punishment for their error. Rufus is made to -answer that he is thankful both to God and to his faithful followers. -But he fears that he should be lacking in that justice which is a -king’s first duty, if he were to spare the men who had risen up -against him without cause, and who had sought the life of a king who, -as he truly said, had done them no harm.[223] The Red King is made to -employ the argument which we have so often come across on behalf of -that severe discharge of princely duty which made the names of his -father and his younger brother live in men’s grateful remembrance. He -fears lest their prayers should lead him away from the strait path of -justice. He who spares robbers and traitors and perjured persons takes -away the peace and safety of the innocent, and only sows loss and -slaughter for the good and for the unarmed people.[224] This course is -one which the Red King was very far from following in after years; but -it is quite possible that he may have made such professions at any -stage of his life, and he may have even made them honestly at this -stage. But on behalf of the chiefest of all culprits, the counsellors -of mercy had special arguments. Odo is the King’s uncle, the companion -of his father in the Conquest of England. He is moreover a bishop, a -priest of the Lord, a sharer in the privileges to which, in one side -of his twofold character, he had once appealed in vain. The King is -implored not to lay hands on one of Odo’s holy calling, not to shed -blood which was at once kindred and sacred. Let the Bishop of Bayeux -at least be spared, and allowed to go back to his proper place in his -Norman diocese.[225] Count Eustace too was the son of his father’s old -ally and follower――the invasion which Eustace’s father had once -wrought in that very shire seems to be conveniently forgotten.[226] -Robert of Bellême had been loved and promoted by his father; he held -no small part of Normandy; lord of many strong castles, he stood out -foremost among the nobles of the duchy.[227] It was no more than the -bidding of prudence to win over such men by favours, and to have their -friendship instead of their enmity.[228] As for the rest, they were -valiant knights, whose proffered services the King would do well not -to despise.[229] The King had shown how far he surpassed his enemies -in power, riches, and valour; let him now show how far he surpassed -them in mercy and greatness of soul.[230] - -[Sidenote: The King yields.] - -[Sidenote: He grants terms.] - -[Sidenote: Odo asks for the honours of war.] - -[Sidenote: Humiliation of Odo.] - -[Sidenote: Wrath of the English against him.] - -[Sidenote: He leaves England for ever.] - -To this appeal Rufus yielded. It was not indeed an appeal to his -knightly faith, which was in no way pledged to the defenders of -Rochester. But it was an appeal to any gentler feelings that might be -in him, and still more so to that vein of self-esteem and -self-exaltation which was the leading feature in his character. If -Rufus had an opportunity of showing himself greater than other men, as -neither justice nor mercy stood in the way of his making the most of -it, so neither did any mere feeling of wrath or revenge. As his -advisers told him, he was so successful that he could afford to be -merciful, and merciful he accordingly was. To have hanged or blinded -his enemies would not have so distinctly exalted himself, as he must -have felt himself exalted, when those who had defied him, those who -had tried to make terms with him, were driven to accept such terms as -he chose to give them. The Red King then plighted his faith――and his -faith when once so plighted was never broken――that the lives and limbs -of the garrison should be safe, that they should come forth from the -castle with their arms and horses. But they must leave the realm; they -must give up all hope of keeping their lands and honours in England, -as long at least as King William lived.[231] To these terms they had -to yield; but Odo, even in his extremity, craved for one favour. He -had to bear utter discomfiture, the failure of his hopes, the loss of -his lands and honours; but he prayed to be at least spared the public -scorn of the victors. His proud soul was not ready to bear the looks, -the gestures, the triumphant shouts and songs, of the people whom he -had trodden to the earth, and who had now risen up to be his -conquerors. He asked, it would seem, to be allowed to march out with -what in modern phrase are called the honours of war. His particular -prayer was that the trumpets might not sound when he and his followers -came forth from the castle. This, we are told, was the usual ceremony -after the overthrow of an enemy and the taking of a fortress.[232] The -King was again wrathful at the request, and said that not for a -thousand marks of gold would he grant it.[233] Odo had therefore to -submit, and to drink the cup of his humiliation to the dregs. With sad -and downcast looks he and his companions came forth from the -stronghold which could shelter them no longer. The trumpets sounded -merrily to greet them.[234] But other sounds more fearful than the -voice of the trumpet sounded in the ears of Odo as he came forth. Men -saw passing before them, a second time hurled down from his high -estate――and this time not by the bidding of a Norman king but by the -arms of the English people――the man who stood forth in English eyes as -the imbodiment of all that was blackest and basest in the foreign -dominion. Odo might keep his eyes fixed on the ground, but the eyes of -the nation which he had wronged were full upon him. The English -followers of Rufus pressed close upon him, crying out with shouts -which all could hear, “Halters, bring halters; hang up the traitor -Bishop and his accomplices on the gibbet.” They turned to the King -whose throne they had made fast for him, and hailed him as a national -ruler. “Mighty King of the English, let not the stirrer up of all evil -go away unharmed. The perjured murderer, whose craft and cruelty have -taken away the lives of thousands of men, ought not to live any -longer.”[235] Cries like these, mingled with every form of cursing and -reviling, with every threat which could rise to the lips of an -oppressed people in their day of vengeance, sounded in the ears of Odo -and his comrades.[236] But the King’s word had been passed, and the -thirst for vengeance of the wrathful English had to be baulked. Odo -and those who had shared with him in the defence of Rochester went -away unhurt; but they had to leave England, and to lose all their -English lands and honours, at least for a season. But Odo left England -and all that he had in England for ever.[237] The career of the Earl -of Kent was over; of the later career of the Bishop of Bayeux we shall -hear again. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: End of the rebellion.] - -[Sidenote: Order of events.] - -[Sidenote: The Whitsun Assembly. June 4, 1088.] - -[Sidenote: Confiscations and grants.] - -[Sidenote: Amnesty of the chief rebels.] - -The rebellion was now at an end in southern England. Revolt had been -crushed at Worcester, at Pevensey, and at Rochester, and we hear -nothing more of those movements of which Bishop Geoffrey had made -Bristol the centre, and which had met with such a reverse at the hands -of the gallant defenders of Ilchester. The chronology of the whole -time is very puzzling. We have no exact date for the surrender of -Rochester; we are told only that it happened in the beginning of -summer.[238] But, as the siege of Pevensey lasted six weeks,[239] it -is impossible to crowd all the events which had happened since Easter -into the time between Easter and Whitsuntide. Otherwise the -pentecostal Gemót would have been the most natural season for some -acts of authority which took place at some time during the year. The -King was now in a position to reward and to punish; and some -confiscations, some grants, were made by him soon after the rebellion -came to an end. “Many Frenchmen forlet their land and went over sea, -and the King gave their land to the men that were faithful to -him.”[240] Of these confiscations and grants we should be glad to have -some details. Did any dispossessed Englishmen win back their ancient -heritage? And, if so, did they keep their recovered heritage, -notwithstanding the amnesty which at a somewhat later time restored -many of the rebels? One thing is clear, that the Frenchmen who are now -spoken of were not the men of highest rank and greatest estates among -the rebellious Normans. For them there was an amnesty at once. Them, -we are told, the King spared, for the love of his father to whom they -had been faithful followers, and out of reverence for their age which -opened a speedy prospect of their deaths. He was rewarded, it is -added, by their repentant loyalty and thankfulness, which made them -eager to please him by gifts and service of all kinds.[241] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Versions of the story of the Bishop of Durham.] - -[Sidenote: The King again summons the Bishop.] - -[Sidenote: The Bishop’s complaints.] - -[Sidenote: Doings of Counts Alan and Odo.] - -[Sidenote: The Bishop comes with a safe-conduct.] - -The speed with which some of the greatest among the rebel leaders were -restored to their old rank and their old places in the King’s favour -is shown by the way in which, within a very few months, we find them -acting on the King’s side against one who at the worst was their own -accomplice, and who himself professed to have had no part or lot in -their doings. We must now take up again the puzzling story of Bishop -William of Durham. We left him, according to his own version, hindered -from coming to the King by the violence of the Sheriff of Yorkshire, -and suffering a seven weeks’ harrying of his lands which carries us -into the month of May.[242] This is exactly the time when the national -Chronicler sets the Bishop himself before us as carrying on a general -harrying of the North country.[243] It is likely enough that both -stories are true; in a civil war above all it is easy, without the -assertion of any direct falsehood, to draw two exactly opposite -pictures by simply leaving out the doings of each side in turn. Anyhow -the King had summoned the Bishop to his presence, and the Bishop had -not come. The King now sends a more special and urgent summons, -demanding the Bishop’s presence in his court, that is, in all -likelihood, at the Whitsun Gemót, or at whatever assembly took its -place for that year.[244] The message was sent by a prelate of high -rank, that Abbot Guy who had just before been forced by Lanfranc upon -the unwilling monks of Saint Augustine’s.[245] The Bishop was to -accompany the Abbot to the King’s presence. But, instead of going with -Guy, Bishop William, fearing the King’s wrath and the snares of his -enemies, sent another letter, the bearer of which went under the -Abbot’s protection.[246] The letter curiously illustrates some of the -features of the case. We learn more details of the Sheriff’s doings. -He had divided certain of the Bishop’s lands between two very great -personages, Count Alan of the Breton and of the Yorkshire Richmond, -and Count Odo, husband of the King’s aunt, and seemingly already lord -of Holderness.[247] The Sheriff had not only refused the King’s peace -to the Bishop; he had formally defied him on the part of the -King.[248] Some of the Bishop’s men he had allowed to redeem -themselves; but others he had actually sold. Were they the Bishop’s -slaves, dealt with as forfeited chattels, or did the Sheriff take on -himself to degrade freemen into slavery?[249] The Bishop protests that -he is ready to come with a safe-conduct, and to prove before all the -barons of the realm that he is wholly innocent of any crime against -the King. He adds that he would willingly come at once with the Abbot. -He had full faith in the King and his barons; but he feared his -personal enemies and the unlearned multitude.[250] Who were these -last? Are we again driven to think of the old popular character of the -Assembly, and did the Bishop fear that the solemn proceedings of the -King’s court would be disturbed by a loyal crowd, ready to deal out -summary justice against any one who should be even suspected of -treason? The King sent the safe-conduct that was asked for, and the -Bishop came to the King’s court.[251] - -[Sidenote: The Bishop’s ecclesiastical claims.] - -[Sidenote: He goes back to Durham.] - -The two Williams, King and Bishop, now met face to face. William of -Saint-Calais pleaded his rights as a bishop as zealously, and far more -fully, than they had been pleaded by the bishop who was also an earl. -The Bishop of Durham, as Bishop of Durham, held great temporal rights; -but William of Saint-Calais was not, like his predecessor Walcher, -personally earl of any earldom. Bishop William’s assertion of the new -ecclesiastical claims reminds us of two more famous assemblies, in the -earlier of which William of Saint-Calais will appear on the other -side. In forming our estimate of the whole story, we must never forget -that the man who surprised the Red King with claims greater than those -of Anselm is the same man who a few years later became the counsellor -of the Red King against Anselm. In this first Assembly the Bishop -refuses to plead otherwise than according to the privileges of his -order. The demand is refused. He craves for the counsel of his -Metropolitan Thomas of York and of the other bishops. This also is -refused. He offers to make his personal purgation on any charge of -treason or perjury. This is refused. The King insists that he shall be -tried before the Court after the manner of a layman. This the Bishop -refuses;[252] but the King keeps his personal faith, and the Bishop is -allowed to go back safely to Durham. We hear much of the ravages done -on the Bishop’s lands, both while he was away from Durham and after he -had gone back thither.[253] Of ravages done by the Bishop we hear -nothing in this version. In this version William of Saint-Calais, -blackest of traitors in the Peterborough Chronicle, is still the -meekest of confessors. - -[Sidenote: June-September, 1088.] - -[Sidenote: Agreement between the Bishop] - -[Sidenote: and the Counts. September 8.] - -We get no further details of the Bishop of Durham’s story till the -beginning of September. But in the meanwhile the Bishop wrote another -letter to the King, again asking leave to make his purgation. The only -answer, we are told, on the King’s part was to imprison the Bishop’s -messenger and to lay waste his lands more thoroughly than ever. But, -from the beginning of September, the story is told with great detail. -By that time southern England at least was at peace, and by that time -too men who had taken a leading part in the rebellion were acting as -loyal subjects to the King. On the day of the Nativity of our Lady an -agreement was come to between the Bishop and three of the barons of -the North. Two of these were the Counts Alan and Odo, who had received -grants of the Bishop’s lands. They, it seems clear, had had no share -in the rebellion; but with them was joined a leading rebel, Roger of -Poitou, son of the Earl of Shrewsbury, whom we last heard of as one of -Odo’s accomplices at Pevensey. These three, acting in the King’s name, -pledged their faith for the Bishop’s personal safety to and from the -King’s court. The three barons seem to make themselves in some sort -arbiters between the King and the Bishop. His personal safety is -guaranteed in any case. But the place to which he is to be safely -taken is to differ according to the result of the trial. The terms -seem to imply that, if the three barons deem justice to be on the side -of the Bishop, he is to be taken back safely to Durham, while, if they -deem justice to be on the side of the King, he is to be allowed freely -to cross the sea at any haven that he may choose, from Sandwich to -Exeter.[254] In case of the Bishop’s return to Durham, if he should -find that during his absence any new fortifications have been added to -the castle, those fortifications are to be destroyed.[255] If, on the -other hand, the Bishop crosses the sea, the castle is to be -surrendered to the King. No agreement contrary to this present one was -to be extorted from the Bishop on any pretext. The terms were agreed -to by the Bishop, and were sworn to, as far as the surrender of the -castle was concerned, by seven of the Bishop’s men, seemingly the same -seven of whom we have heard before and of whom we shall hear again. -All matters were to be settled in the King’s court one way or the -other by the coming feast of Saint Michael; but, as this term was -plainly too short, the time of meeting was put off by the consent of -both sides to an early day in November. - -[Sidenote: The Meeting at Salisbury. November 2, 1088.] - -[Sidenote: Urse of Abetot.] - -[Sidenote: Conduct of the Bishop.] - -[Sidenote: Lanfranc’s view of vestments.] - -[Sidenote: Case of Thomas at Northampton. 1164.] - -On the appointed day Bishop William of Durham appeared in the King’s -court at Salisbury. We have not now, as we had two years before, to -deal with a gathering of all the land-owners of England in the great -plain. The castle which had been reared within the ditches that fence -in the waterless hill became the scene of a meeting of the King and -the great men of the realm which may take its place alongside of later -meetings of the same kind in the castle by the wood at Rockingham and -in the castle by the busy streets of Northampton. We have――from the -Bishop’s side only, it must be remembered――a minute and lifelike -account of a two days’ debate in the Assembly, a debate in which not a -few men with whose names we have been long familiar in our story, in -which others whose names and possessions are written in the Great -Survey, meet us face to face as living men and utter characteristic -speeches in our ears. We are met at the threshold by a well-known -form, that of the terrible Sheriff of Worcestershire, Urse of Abetot. -Notwithstanding the curse of Ealdred, he flourished and enjoyed court -favour, and we now find him the first among the courtiers to meet -Bishop William, and to bid him enter the royal presence.[256] That -presence the Bishop entered four times in the course of the day, -having had three times to withdraw while the Court came to a judgement -on points of law touching his case. At every stage the Bishop raises -some point, renews some protest, interposes some delay or other. And -during the whole earlier part of the debate, it is Lanfranc who takes -the chief part in answering him; the King says little till a late -stage of the controversy. Before Bishop William comes in to the King’s -presence, he prays again, but prays in vain, to have the counsel of -his brother bishops. None of them, not even his own Metropolitan -Thomas, would give him the kiss of peace or even a word of greeting. -When he does come in, he first raises the question whether he ought -not to be judged, and the other bishops to judge him, in full -episcopal dress. To the practical mind of Lanfranc questions about -vestments did not seem of first-rate importance. “We can judge very -well,” he said, “clothed as we are; for garments do not hinder -truth.”[257] This point, it will be remembered, again came up at -Northampton, seventy-six years later. The entrance of Thomas into the -King’s hall clad in the full garb of the Primate of all England was -one of the most striking features of that memorable day.[258] - -[Sidenote: Hostile dealings of the Bishop’s own men.] - -[Sidenote: The Bishop called on to “do right.”] - -[Sidenote: He denies the authority of the Court.] - -[Sidenote: Growth of the new doctrines.] - -[Sidenote: Position of Lanfranc and Bishop William.] - -A long legal discussion followed, in which Bishop William and Lanfranc -were the chief speakers. Some points were merely verbal. Much turned -on the construction of the word _bishopric_. The Bishop of Durham -asked to be restored to his bishopric. Lanfranc answered that he had -not been disseized of it.[259] In the course of this dispute one or -two facts of interest come out. It appears from the Bishop’s complaint -that some of the chief men of the patrimony of Saint Cuthberht had -made their way to the meeting at Salisbury, and that not as their -bishop’s friends. They, his own liegemen, had abjured him; they held -the lands of the bishopric in fief of the King; they had made war upon -him by the King’s orders, and were now sitting as his judges.[260] But -the main point was that the Bishop should, before matters went any -further, do right to the King, that is, acknowledge the jurisdiction -of the Court.[261] This demand the Bishop tried to evade by every -means; but it was firmly pressed both by Lanfranc and by the lay -members of the Court. These last seem to act in close concert with the -Primate, and the ecclesiastical writer brings out in a lively way the -energy of their way of speaking.[262] In answer to them the Bishop -spake words which amounted to a casting aside of all the earlier -jurisprudence of England, but which were only a natural inference from -that act of the Conqueror which had severed the jurisdictions which -ancient English custom had joined together. He told the barons of the -realm and the other laymen who were present that with them he had -nothing to do, that he altogether refused their jurisdiction; he -demanded, that, if the King and the Bishops allowed them to be -present, they should at least not speak against him.[263] The doctrine -of ecclesiastical privilege had indeed grown, since, six and thirty -years before, the people of England, gathered beneath the walls of -London, had declared a traitorous archbishop to be deprived and -outlawed, and had by their own act set another in his place. Yet the -position of William of Saint-Calais was more consistent than the -position of Lanfranc. William of Saint-Calais wholly denied the right -of laymen to judge a bishop; Lanfranc, the assertor of that right, had -been placed in his see on the very ground that the deposition of -Robert and the election of Stigand were both invalid, as being merely -acts of the secular power. Still, however logical might be the -Bishop’s argument, his claims were practically new, either in English -or in Norman ears. If they had ever been heard of before, it had been -only for a moment from the lips of Odo. And we may mark again that, -though the words of William of Saint-Calais would have won him favour -with Hildebrand, they won him no favour with Lanfranc. Lanfranc -represented the traditions of the Conqueror, and in the days of the -Conqueror, all things, divine and human, had depended on the -Conqueror’s nod.[264] - -[Sidenote: The King speaks.] - -[Sidenote: Roger Bigod demands that the charge be read.] - -[Sidenote: The charge formally brought.] - -[Sidenote: Its probable truth.] - -[Sidenote: Points not dwelled on.] - -At this stage the King speaks for the first time, and, in this first -speech the words of William the Red are mild enough. He had hoped, he -said, that the Bishop would have first made answer to the charges -which had been brought against him, and he wondered that he had taken -any other course. But the charge had not yet been formally made. Amid -the Bishop’s protests about the rights of his order, this somewhat -important point was pressed by one of his fellow-rebels. This was -Roger the Bigod, he who from the castle of Norwich had done such harm -in the eastern lands, but who now appears as an adviser of the king -against whom he had been fighting a few months before. Let the charge, -he said, be brought in due form, and let the Bishop be tried according -to it.[265] After more protests from the Bishop, the charge was made -by Hugh of Beaumont.[266] It contained a full statement of the -Bishop’s treason and desertion, as already described,[267] and the -time is said to have been when the King’s enemies came against him, -and when his own men, Bishop Odo, Earl Roger, and many others, strove -to take away his crown and kingdom.[268] It is demanded that, on this -charge and on any other charges that the King may afterwards bring, -the Bishop shall abide by the sentence of the King’s court. We have -this statement only in the version of Bishop William himself or of a -local partisan. Yet there is no reason to doubt that it is a fair -representation of the formal charge which was brought in the King’s -court. That charge brings out quite enough of overt acts of treason to -justify even the strong words of the Peterborough Chronicler.[269] -With the secret counsels of the rebels during Lent it does not deal; -what share Bishop William had had in them might be hard to make out by -legal proof, and the charge is quite enough for the King’s purpose -without them. But it brings out this special aggravation of the -Bishop’s guilt, that, after the rebellion had broken out, after -military operations had begun, the Bishop was still at the King’s -side, counselling action while he was himself plotting desertion. The -flight of Bishop William, as we have already told it, really reads not -unlike the flight of Cornbury and Churchill just six centuries later; -and it would be pressing the judgement of charity a long way to plead -in his behalf the doctrine that in revolutions men live fast.[270] We -may notice also that nothing is said about the Bishop’s harryings in -Northern England. They might, according to the custom of the time, be -almost taken as implied in the fact of his rebellion; or they might be -among the other charges which the King had ready to bring forward if -he thought good. - -[Sidenote: The Bishop’s answer.] - -[Sidenote: Wrath of the lay members.] - -[Sidenote: Speech of Bishop Geoffrey on behalf of William.] - -[Sidenote: Answer of Lanfranc.] - -[Sidenote: The Bishop goes out.] - -[Sidenote: Defiance of Hugh of Beaumont.] - -The formal charge was thus laid before the Court, and it was for the -Bishop to make his answer. It was the same as before. Hugh of Beaumont -might say what he chose;[271] only according to his own ideas of -canonical rule would he answer. By this time the wrath of the lay -members of the Assembly was waxing hot; they assailed the Bishop, -some, we are told, with arguments, some with revilings.[272] At this -stage Bishop William found a friend where we should hardly have looked -for one. The brigand Bishop of Coutances, already changed from a rebel -into a loyal subject, was there among the great men of the realm. -England knew him, not as a prelate of the Church, but as one of the -greatest of her land-owners; but now, like Odo, he speaks as a bishop. -He appeals to the Archbishops at least to give a hearing to Bishop -William’s objection. They, the bishops and abbots, ought no longer to -sit there; they ought to withdraw, taking with them some lay -assessors, to discuss the point raised by the Bishop of Durham, -whether he ought not to be restored to his bishopric before he is -called on to plead.[273] Again the great ecclesiastical statesman is -inclined to scorn, almost to mock, the scruples of lesser men. -Canonical subtleties might disturb the conscience of a bishop who had -a few months before headed a band of robbers; but the lawyer of Pavia, -the teacher of Avranches, the monk of Bec, the Abbot of Saint -Stephen’s, the Patriarch of all the nations beyond the sea, had -learned, in his long experience, that, as changes of vestments did not -greatly matter, so changes of place and procedure did not greatly -matter either. As Lanfranc had told Bishop William that they could -judge perfectly well in the clothes which they then had on, so now he -tells Bishop Geoffrey that they can judge perfectly well in the place -and company in which they were now sitting. There was no need to rise; -let the Bishop of Durham and his men go out, and the rest of the -Court, clergy and laity alike, would judge what was right to be -done.[274] The Bishop warned the Court to act according to the canons, -and to let no one judge who might not canonically judge a bishop. -Lanfranc calmly, but vaguely, assured him that justice would be -done.[275] Hugh of Beaumont told him more plainly, “If I may not -to-day judge you and your order, you and your order shall never -afterwards judge me.”[276] With one more protest, one more declaration -that he would disown any judgement which was not strictly -canonical,[277] Bishop William and his followers left the hall of -meeting. - -[Sidenote: Debate in the Bishop’s absence.] - -[Sidenote: Constitution of the Court.] - -[Sidenote: The Bishop comes back.] - -[Sidenote: Debate on the word _fief_.] - -[Sidenote: The Bishop’s seven men.] - -[Sidenote: He goes out the second time.] - -Our only narrative of these debates, the narrative of Bishop William -himself or of some one writing under his inspiration, complains of the -long delay before the Bishop was allowed to come back, and gives a -description, one which reads like satire, of the assembly which stayed -to debate the preliminary point of law. There was the King, with the -bishops and earls, the sheriffs and the lesser reeves, with the King’s -huntsmen and other officials.[278] The great officers of state, -Justiciar, Chancellor, Treasurer, had not yet risen to their full -importance; still it is odd to find them, as they would seem to be, -thrust in, after the manner of an _et cetera_, after, it may be, -Osgeat the reeve and Croc the huntsman.[279] But anyhow, in this -purely official assembly, we may surely see the _Theningmannagemót_ -gradually changing into the _Curia Regis_.[280] The Court, however -constituted, debated in the Bishop’s absence on the point of the law -which he had raised. On his return, his own Metropolitan, Thomas of -York, announced to him the decision of the Assembly. Till he -acknowledged the jurisdiction of the Court, the King was not bound to -restore anything that had been taken from him. We seem to hear the -voice of Flambard, when, in announcing this decision, Thomas makes use -of the word _fief_, which had not hitherto been heard in the -discussion.[281] Bishop William catches in vain at the novelty; -Archbishop Thomas declines all verbal discussion; whether it is called -bishopric or fief, nothing is to be restored till the jurisdiction of -the court is acknowledged.[282] Thus baffled, Bishop William has only -to fall back on his old protests, his old demand for the counsel of -his brother bishops. Lanfranc meets him as a lawyer; the bishops are -his judges, and therefore cannot be his counsel.[283] The King now -steps in; the Bishop may take counsel with his own men, but he shall -have no counsel from any man of his.[284] The Bishop answers that, in -the seven men whom he has with him――clearly the same seven of whom we -have twice heard already――he will find but little help against the -power and learning of the whole realm which he sees arrayed against -him.[285] But he gets no further help; he withdraws the second time -for consultation, but it is only with the seven men of his own -following. - -[Sidenote: He comes back and appeals to Rome.] - -The result of their secret debate suggests that Bishop William in -truth took counsel with no one but himself. Surely no seven men of -English or Norman birth could have been found to suggest the course -which William of Saint-Calais now took. For he came back to utter -words which must have sounded strange indeed either in English or in -Norman ears. “The judgement which has here been given I reject, -because it is made against the canons and against our law; nor was I -canonically summoned; but I stand here compelled by the force of the -King’s army, and despoiled of my bishopric, beyond the bounds of my -province, in the absence of all my comprovincial bishops. I am -compelled to plead my cause in a lay assembly; and my enemies, who -refuse me their counsel and speech and the kiss of peace, laying aside -the things which I have said, judge me of things which I have not -said; and they are at once accusers and judges; and I find it -forbidden in our law to admit such a judgement as I in my folly was -willing to admit.[286] The Archbishop of Canterbury and my own Primate -ought, out of regard for God and our order, to save me of their good -will from this encroachment. Because then, through the King’s enmity, -I see you all against me, I appeal to the Apostolic See of Rome, to -the Holy Church, and to the Blessed Peter and his Vicar, that he may -take order for a just sentence in my affair; for to his disposition -the ancient authority of the Apostles and their successors and of the -canons reserves the greater ecclesiastical causes and the judgement of -bishops.”[287] - -[Sidenote: Character of the appeal.] - -[Sidenote: Arguments of Lanfranc.] - -[Sidenote: William’s comprovincials.] - -[Sidenote: The Bishop goes out the third time.] - -[Sidenote: He comes back, and sentence is pronounced.] - -[Sidenote: He renews his appeal.] - -Such an appeal as this was indeed going to the root of the matter. It -was laying down the rule against which Englishmen had yet to strive -for more than four hundred years. William of Saint-Calais not only -declared that there were causes with which no English tribunal was -competent to deal, but he laid down that among such causes were to be -reckoned all judgements where any bishop――if not every priest――was an -accused party. Bishop William could not even claim that, as one -charged with an ecclesiastical offence, he had a right to appeal to -the highest ecclesiastical judge. Even such a claim as this was a -novelty either in Normandy or in England; but William of Saint-Calais -was not charged with any ecclesiastical offence. Except so far as the -indictment involved the charge of perjury, that debateable ground of -the two jurisdictions, the offence laid to the Bishop’s charge was a -purely temporal one, that of treason against his lord the King. So -arraigned, he refuses the judgement of the King of the English and his -Witan, and appeals from them to the Bishop of Rome. He justifies his -appeal by referring to some law other than the law of England, some -special law of his own order, by which, he alleges, he is forbidden to -submit to any such judgements as that of the national assembly of the -realm of which he is a subject. We again instinctively ask, how would -William the Great have dealt with such an appeal, if any man had been -so hardy as to make it in his hearing? But we again see how the -ecclesiastical system which William the Great had brought in was one -which needed his own mighty hand to guide.[288] He was indeed, in all -causes and over all persons, ecclesiastical and temporal, within his -dominions supreme. But the moment he himself was gone, that great -supremacy seems to have fallen in pieces. Lanfranc himself, steadily -as he maintains the royal authority throughout the dispute, seems to -shrink from boldly grappling with the Bishop’s claim. Some lesser -fallacies we are not surprised to find passed over. The daring -statement that the sole right of the Bishop of Rome to judge other -bishops was established by the Apostles may perhaps have seemed less -strange even to Lanfranc than it does to us. But Lanfranc must have -smiled, and Thomas of York must have smiled yet more, at the Bishop of -Durham’s grotesque complaint that he was deprived of the help of his -comprovincial bishops.[289] It was a vain hope indeed, if he thought -that King Malcolm would allow him the comfort of any brotherly counsel -from Glasgow or Saint Andrews. But the real point is that Lanfranc -seems to avoid giving any direct answer to Bishop William’s claim to -appeal to a court beyond the sea. Instead of stoutly denying the right -of any English subject to appeal to any foreign power from the -judgement of the highest court in England, he falls back into Bishop -William’s own subtleties about “fief” and “bishopric;” and he appeals -to the case of Odo, where it was only the Earl and not the Bishop who -was dealt with.[290] The verbal question goes on, till the Bishop -declares that he has no skill to dispute against the wisdom of -Lanfranc; he has been driven to appeal to the apostolic see, and he -wishes to have the leave of the King and the Archbishop to go to the -see to which he has appealed.[291] A third time does he, at Lanfranc’s -bidding, leave the hall while this question is debated by the King and -his council. On his return the final sentence is pronounced by the -mouth of Hugh of Beaumont. As the Bishop has refused to answer the -charges brought against him by the King, as he invites the King to a -tribunal at Rome, the Bishop’s fief is declared forfeited by the -judgement of the King’s court and the barons. It really says a good -deal for the long-suffering of the prelates and barons, and of the Red -King himself, that Bishop William again ventured to make his appeal in -more offensive terms than before. He is ready, in any place where -justice reigns and not violence, to purge himself of all charges of -crime and perjury. He will prove in the Roman Church that the -judgement which has just been pronounced is false and unjust.[292] -Hugh of Beaumont is driven to a retort; “I and my companions are ready -to confirm our judgement in this court.” The Bishop again declares -that he will enter into no pleadings in that court. Let him speak -never so well, his words are perverted by the King’s partisans. They -have no respect for the apostolic authority, and, even after he has -made his appeal, they load him with an unjust judgement. He will go to -Rome to seek the help of God and of Saint Peter.[293] - -[Sidenote: Speeches of the King.] - -[Sidenote: The Bishop appeals to Counts Odo and Alan.] - -[Sidenote: Cries of the lay members.] - -[Sidenote: Intervention of Count Alan.] - -[Sidenote: The Bishop appeals yet again.] - -[Sidenote: The final sentence.] - -Up to this time the King has taken only a secondary part in the lively -dispute which has been going on in his presence. We have listened -chiefly to the pithy sayings of Lanfranc and to the official -utterances of Hugh of Beaumont. But now Rufus himself steps in as a -chief speaker, and that certainly in a characteristic strain. His -patience had borne a good deal, but it was now beginning to give way. -The King’s short and pointed sentences, uttered, we must remember, -with a fierce look and a stammering tongue, are a marked contrast to -the long-turned periods and legal subtleties of the Bishop. He now -steps into the dispute from a very practical side; “My will is that -you give me up your castle, as you will not abide by the sentence of -my court.”[294] More distinctions, more protests, more appeals to -Rome, only stir up the Red King to the use of his familiar oath; “By -the face of Lucca, you shall never go out of my hands till I have your -castle.”[295] The Bishop was now fairly in the mouth of the lion; yet -he again goes through the whole story of his wrongs and his innocence, -with some particulars which we have not hitherto heard. When his -possessions were seized by the King’s officers, though a hundred of -his own knights looked on, no resistance had been offered to the -King’s will.[296] He had now nothing left but his episcopal city; if -the King wished to take that, he would offer no resistance, save by -the power of God. He would only warn him, on behalf of God and Saint -Peter and his Vicar the Pope, not to take it. He would give hostages -and sureties that, while he went to Rome, his own men should keep the -castle, and that, if the King wished, they should keep it for his -service.[297] The King again spoke; “Be sure, Bishop, that you shall -never go to Durham, nor shall your men hold Durham, nor shall you -escape my hands, unless you freely give up the castle to me.”[298] The -Bishop now for once says not a word about canonical rights; he -appeals, more shortly and more prudently, to the plighted faith of the -two Counts who had promised that he should go back to Durham. But -Lanfranc argues that the Bishop has forfeited his safe-conduct, and -that, if he refuses to give up the castle, the King may rightly arrest -him.[299] At this hint the lay members of the Assembly joined in with -one voice, the foremost among them being that Randolf Peverel of whose -possessions and supposed kindred we have had elsewhere to speak.[300] -“Take him,” was the cry, “take him; for that old gaoler speaks -well.”[301] But at this stage the Bishop finds friends in the Counts -whose faith had been pledged to his safe-conduct. Count Alan formally -states the terms of the agreement, and prays the King――Odo and Roger -joining with him in the prayer――that he may not be forced to belie his -faith, as otherwise the King should have no further service from -him.[302] But in Lanfranc’s view the second of the two cases which -were contemplated in the agreement had taken place. The King was not -bound to let the Bishop go back to Durham; all that he was now bound -to do was to give him ships and a safe-conduct out of the realm.[303] -The dispute goes on in the usual style. The Bishop continues his -appeal to Rome; he again invokes what he calls specially the Christian -law, pointing, it would seem, to a volume in his own hand;[304] while -Lanfranc asserts the authority of the King’s court.[305] The King then -steps in with one of his short speeches; “You may say what you will, -but you shall not escape my hands, unless you first give up the castle -to me.”[306] The Bishop then makes a shorter protest than usual, the -drift of which seems to be that he is ready to suffer any loss rather -than be personally arrested.[307] The sentence of the Court is now -finally passed. A day is fixed by which the Bishop’s men should leave -the city of Durham and the King’s men take possession of it -instead.[308] - -[Sidenote: The Bishop asks for an allowance.] - -[Sidenote: Answer of Lanfranc.] - -[Sidenote: The King’s offers.] - -[Sidenote: The King and Ralph Paganel.] - -The judgement of the Assembly had thus formally gone against the -claims of the Bishop of Durham; but his resources were not at an end. -Defeated on all points of law, he makes an appeal to the King’s -generosity. Will his lord the King, he now prays, leave him something -from his bishopric on which he may at least be able to live? Lanfranc -again answers; “Shall you go to Rome, to the King’s hurt and to the -dishonour of all of us, and shall the King leave lands to you? Stay in -his land, and he will give back to you all your bishopric, except the -city, on the one condition that you do right to him in his court by -the judgement of his barons.”[309] Bishop William, almost parodying -the words of a much earlier appeal to Rome, says that he has appealed -to the Apostolic See, and to the Apostolic See he will go.[310] -Lanfranc retorts; “If you go to Rome without the King’s leave, we will -tell him what he ought to do with your bishopric.” Bishop William -answers in a long speech, renewing his protests of innocence and his -offers of purgation, and setting forth the services which he claimed -to have done for the King at Dover, Hastings, and London. The Bishop -many times makes his prayer, and the King as often refuses. Then -Lanfranc counsels him to throw himself wholly on the King’s mercy; if -he will do so, he himself will plead for him at the King’s feet. But -the Bishop still goes on about the authority of the canons and the -honour of the Church; he will earnestly pray for the King’s mercy, but -he will accept no uncanonical judgement. The King then makes a new -proposal; “Let the Bishop give me sureties that he will do nought to -my hurt on this side the sea, and that neither my brother nor any of -my brother’s men shall keep the ships which I shall provide to my -damage or against the will of their crews.”[311] It certainly was -demanding a good deal to expect Bishop William to go surety for either -the will or the power of Duke Robert to do or to hinder anything. The -Bishop pleads that the Counts pledged their faith that he should not -be obliged to enter into any agreement except the one which had been -made at Durham. And the Sheriff of Yorkshire, Ralph Paganel, the same -who had been the spoiler of the Bishop’s goods, bears witness that his -claim was a just one.[312] By this time the wrath of the Red King was -gradually kindling; he turns on the Sheriff with some sharpness; “Hold -your peace; for no surety will I endure to lose my ships; but if the -Bishop will give this surety which I ask, I will ask for no -other.”[313] The Bishop falls back on his old plea; he will enter into -no agreement save that into which he entered with the Counts. The King -again swears by the face of Lucca that the Bishop shall not cross the -sea that year, unless he gives the required surety for the ships.[314] -The Bishop then protests that, rather than be arrested, he will give -the surety and more than the surety which is demanded; but he calls -all men to witness that he does this unwillingly and through fear of -arrest.[315] He gives the surety, and another stage in the long debate -ends. - -[Sidenote: Question of the safe-conduct.] - -[Sidenote: Charges against the Bishop’s men.] - -[Sidenote: Interposition of Lanfranc on behalf of the Bishop.] - -[Sidenote: The Bishop to leave England.] - -A new point, happily the last, was raised when the Bishop, having -given the required surety, asked for ships and a safe-conduct. The -King says that he shall have them as soon as the castle of Durham is -in the King’s power; till then, he shall have no safe-conduct, but -shall stay at Wilton.[316] He again meekly protests; he will endure -the wrong against which he has no means of striving.[317] Then a man -of Bishop Geoffrey of Coutances steps in with a new count. The men who -held the Bishop of Durham’s castle had――before the Bishop came to -the King’s court; therefore, it might be inferred, with his -knowledge――taken two hundred beasts belonging to the Bishop of -Coutances which were under the King’s safe-conduct. Bishop Geoffrey -had surely seen more than two hundred beasts brought into Bristol as -the spoil of loyal men in Somerset, Gloucestershire, and Wiltshire; -but he is careful to exact the redress of his own loss from his -brother bishop and rebel. The men of the Bishop of Durham had refused -to pay the price of the beasts; they refused even when Walter of -Eyncourt――we have met him in Lincolnshire[318]――bade them do so in the -King’s name; he William, the man of Bishop Geoffrey, demands that the -price be paid to his lord.[319] The King puts it to the barons whether -he can implead the Bishop on this charge also.[320] Lanfranc, for the -first time helping his brother prelate, rules that this cannot be -done. Bishop William cannot be impleaded any further, because he now -holds nothing of the King――the surrender of the castle of Durham is -thus held to be already made――and is entitled to the King’s -safe-conduct.[321] The Assembly now breaks up for the day; the Bishop -is to choose the haven from which he will sail, and to make known his -choice on the morrow. - -[Sidenote: Conditions of the Bishop’s sailing.] - -[Sidenote: November 21, 1088.] - -[Sidenote: November 14.] - -The next day the Court again comes together. The Bishop of Durham asks -Count Alan to find him a haven and ships at Southampton. The King -steps in; “Know well, Bishop, that you shall never cross the channel -till I have your castle”――adding, with a remembrance of the doings of -another prelate at Rochester――“for the Bishop of Bayeux made me smart -with that kind of thing.”[322] If the castle of Durham was in the -King’s hands by the fixed day, the fourteenth day of November, the -Bishop should have the ships and the safe-conduct without further -delay. The King then bids Count Alan and the Sheriff Gilbert[323] to -give the Bishop at Southampton such ships as might be needful for his -voyage seven days after the day fixed for the surrender of the castle. -Meanwhile, on the appointed day, the castle of Durham was received -into the King’s hands by Ivo Taillebois and Erneis of Burun――names -with which we have long been familiar.[324] They disseized the Bishop -of his church and castle and all his land; but they gave to the -Bishop’s men a writ under the King’s seal, promising the most perfect -safety to the Bishop and his men through all England and in their -voyage.[325] And, according to the most obvious meaning of the -narrative, Heppo, the King’s _balistarius_――a man of whom, like Ivo -Taillebois, we have heard in Lincolnshire――was put into their hands as -surety for the observance of the safe-conduct. - -[Sidenote: Action of Ivo Taillebois.] - -[Sidenote: November 21.] - -[Sidenote: The Bishop’s voyage delayed.] - -[Sidenote: November 26.] - -[Sidenote: Charge against the monk Geoffrey.] - -[Sidenote: New summons against the Bishop.] - -[Sidenote: His argument with Osmund.] - -[Sidenote: The Bishop again summoned by Walkelin.] - -[Sidenote: Interposition of the Counts.] - -[Sidenote: He at last crosses to Normandy.] - -It might have seemed that the Bishop’s troubles were now ended, so far -as they could be ended by leaving the land which he professed to look -on as a land of persecution. But a crowd of hindrances were put in the -way of his voyage. Notwithstanding the safe-conduct given to the -Bishop’s men, a number of wrongs were done to them by Ivo Taillebois, -whose conduct may be thought to bear out his character as drawn in the -legendary history of Crowland. The great grievance was that in -defiance――so men thought at Durham――of Lanfranc’s judgement that -Bishop William was not bound to plead in the matter of the beasts -taken from the Bishop of Coutances, two of his knights were forced to -plead on that charge.[326] Meanwhile the day came which had been -appointed for the Bishop’s voyage. He had been waiting at Wilton, -under the care of a certain Robert of Conteville, who had been -assigned, at his own request, to keep him from all harm.[327] The -castle had been duly given up; all seemed ready for his crossing. -Bishop William asked the Sheriff Gilbert and his guardian Robert for -ships, to cross in the company of Robert of Mowbray.[328] Under orders -from the King,[329] they kept him for five days longer, when Robert of -Conteville took him to Southampton. The wind was favourable, and the -Bishop craved for leave to set sail at once. The King’s officers -forbade him to sail that day; the next day, when the wind had become -contrary, they, seemingly in mockery, gave him leave to sail. While he -waited for a favourable wind, a new charge was brought against him, -founded on the alleged doings of one of his monks, Geoffrey by name, -of whom we shall afterwards hear as being in his special confidence. -By the sentence of forfeiture pronounced by the Court, all the -Bishop’s goods had become the property of the Crown. It was therefore -deemed an invasion of the King’s rights when, after the Bishop had -gone to the King’s court, Geoffrey took a large number of beasts from -the Bishop’s demesne. He had also taken away part of the garrison of -the castle, who had killed a man of the King’s. On this charge Bishop -William was summoned to appear in the King’s court at the Christmas -Gemót to be held in London. One of the bearers of the summons was no -less famous a man than Bishop Osmund of Salisbury, a man of a local -reputation almost saintly.[330] Bishop William again appeals to the -old agreement; he protests his innocence of any share in the acts of -Geoffrey, though he adds that he might lawfully have done what he -would with his own up to the moment when he was formally -disseized.[331] These words might seem to imply that the act of -Geoffrey, though done after the Bishop had left Durham, was done -before the sentence was finally pronounced. But he cannot go to the -King’s court; he has nothing left; he has eaten his horses; that is -seemingly their price.[332] He is still repeatedly forbidden to cross, -even alone.[333] In answer to an earnest message that he might be -allowed to go to Rome, the King sent Walkelin Bishop of Winchester -with two companions, one of them Hugh of Port, a well-known Domesday -name, to summon him to send Geoffrey for trial to Durham and to appear -himself in London at the Christmas Gemót to answer for the deeds of -his men.[334] In defiance of all prayers and protests, the King’s -officers kept the Bishop in ward night and day; in his sadness he sent -a message to the Counts who had given him the safe-conduct, praying -them by the faith of their baptism to have him released from his -imprisonment and allowed to cross the sea.[335] They answered his -appeal. At their urgent prayer, the King at last let him cross. He -sailed to Normandy, where he was honourably received by Duke Robert, -and――so the Durham writer believed――entrusted with the care of his -whole duchy.[336] Perhaps it was owing to these new worldly cares -that, though we often hear of him again, we do not hear of him as a -suppliant at the court of Rome. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Importance of the story of William of Saint-Calais.] - -[Sidenote: Illustrations of jurisprudence.] - -[Sidenote: Legal trickery of the Bishop.] - -[Sidenote: Reasons for proceeding against him.] - -[Sidenote: The first appeal to Rome made by William of Saint-Calais.] - -The tale of Bishop William of Durham is long, perhaps in some of its -stages it is wearisome; but it is too important a contribution to our -story to be left out or cut short. It sets before us the earliest of -those debates in the King’s court of which we shall come across other -memorable examples before the reign of Rufus is over. We see the forms -and the spirit of the jurisprudence of England in the days immediately -following the Norman Conquest, a jurisprudence which, both in its -forms and its spirit, has become strongly technical, but which still -has not yet become the exclusive possession of a professional class. -Bishops, earls, sheriffs, are still, as of old, learned in the law, -and are fully able to carry on a legal discussion in their own -persons. And we see that a legal discussion in those days could be -carried out with a good deal of freedom of speech on all sides. As to -the matter of the debate, all that we know of Bishop William, both -afterwards and at this time from other sources, can leave hardly any -doubt that he was simply availing himself of every legal subtlety, of -every pretended ecclesiastical privilege, in order to escape a real -trial in which he knew that he would have no safe ground on the merits -of the case. And, if it be asked why the Bishop of Durham should have -been picked out for legal prosecution, while his accomplices were -forgiven and were actually sitting as his judges, the answer is to be -found in the circumstances of the case. As we read the tale in all -other accounts, as we read of it in the formal charge brought by Hugh -of Beaumont, we see that there was a special treachery in Bishop -William’s rebellion which distinguished his case from that of all -other rebels. Why he should have joined the revolt at all, how he -could expect that any change could make him greater than he already -was, is certainly a difficulty; but the fact seems certain, and, if it -be true, it quite accounts for the special enmity with which he was -now pursued. The idea of the Bishop which the story conveys to us is -that of a subtle man, full of resources, well able to counterfeit -innocence, and to employ the highest ecclesiastical claims as a means -to escape punishment for a civil crime. It was from the mouth of -William of Saint-Calais that, for the first time as far as we can see, -men who were English by birth or settlement heard the doctrine that -the King of the English had a superior on earth, that the decrees of -the Witan of England could be rightly appealed from to a foreign -power. The later career of the Bishop makes him a strange champion of -any such teaching. The largest charity will not allow us to give him -credit for the pure single-mindedness of Anselm, or even for the -conscious self-devotion of Thomas. We feel throughout that he is -simply using every verbal technicality in order to avoid any -discussion of the real facts. A trial and conviction would hardly have -brought with them any harsher punishment than the forfeiture and -banishment which he actually underwent. But it made a fairer show in -men’s eyes to undergo forfeiture and banishment in the character of a -persecuted confessor than to undergo the same amount of loss in the -character of a convicted traitor. - -[Sidenote: Behaviour of Lanfranc;] - -[Sidenote: of the King.] - -[Sidenote: The lesser actors.] - -[Sidenote: Conduct of the laity,] - -[Sidenote: not favourable to the Bishop.] - -The part played by Lanfranc is eminently characteristic. Practically -he maintains the royal supremacy on every point; but he makes no -formal declaration which could commit him to anti-papal theories. As -for William Rufus, one is really inclined for a long while to admire -his patience through a discussion which must have been both wearisome -and provoking, rather than to feel any wonder that, towards the end of -the day, he begins to break out into somewhat stronger language. But -in the latter part of the story, like Henry the Second but unlike -Henry the First, he stoops from his own thoroughly good position. He -shows a purpose to take every advantage however mean, and to crush the -Bishop in any way, fair or foul. So at least it seems in our story; -but one would like to hear the other side, as one is unwilling to -fancy either Bishop Walkelin or Bishop Osmund directly lending himself -to sheer palpable wrong. But, after all, not the least attractive part -of the story is the glimpse which it gives us of the lesser actors, -some of them men of whom we know from other sources the mere names and -nothing more. We feel brought nearer to the real life of the eleventh -century every time that we are admitted to see a Domesday name -becoming something more than a name, to see Ralph Paganel, Hugh of -Port, and Heppo the _Balistarius_ playing their parts in an actual -story. The short sharp speeches put into the mouths of some of the -smaller actors, as well as those which are put into the mouth of the -King, both add to the liveliness of the story and increase our faith -in its trustworthiness. As in some other pictures of the kind, the -laity, both the great men and the general body, stand out on the whole -in favourable colours. It is perfectly plain, from Bishop William’s -own words,[337] that he had not, like Anselm and Thomas, the mass of -the people on his side. It is equally plain that the majority of the -assembly, though they certainly gave him a fair hearing, were neither -inclined to his cause nor convinced by his arguments. And the conduct -of the Counts Alan and Odo and their companion Roger of Poitou is -throughout that of strictly honourable men, anxious to carry out to -the letter every point to which they have pledged their faith. The Red -King, having merely pledged his faith as a king, and not in that more -fantastic character in which he always held his plighted word as -sacred, is less scrupulous on this head. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: No recorded movement in Scotland.] - -[Sidenote: Movements in Wales.] - -[Sidenote: State of Wales.] - -[Sidenote: Rhys restored by a fleet from Ireland.] - -[Sidenote: Gruffydd’s Irish allies.] - -[Sidenote: He attacks Rhuddlan.] - -The affair of Bishop William brings us almost to the last days of the -year of the rebellion. But, much earlier in the year, events of some -importance had been happening in other parts of the island. We are -almost tempted to take for granted that so great a stir in northern -England as that which accompanied the banishment of the Bishop of -Durham must have been accompanied or followed by some action on the -part of King Malcolm of Scotland. None such however is spoken of. But -the stirs on the Western border had been taken advantage of by the -enemies of England on that side. We have seen that British allies -played a part on the side of the rebels in the attack on Worcester. -Further north, independent Britons deemed that the time was come for a -renewal of the old border strife. When Earl Hugh of Chester and the -Marquess Robert of Rhuddlan took opposite sides in a civil war, it was -indeed an inviting moment for any of the neighbouring Welsh princes. -The time seems to have been one of even more confusion than usual -among the Britons. The year after the death of the Conqueror is marked -in their annals as a special time of civil warfare, in which allies -were brought by sea from Scotland and Ireland. Rhys the son of Tewdwr, -of whom we have already heard,[338] was driven from his kingdom by the -sons of Bleddyn, and won it again by the help of a fleet from -Ireland.[339] Men were struck by the vast rewards in money and -captives with which he repaid his naval allies, who are spoken of as -if some of them were still heathens.[340] These movements are not -recorded by any English or Norman writer, nor do the Welsh annals -record the event with which Norman and English feeling was more deeply -concerned. But there was clearly a connexion between the two. Gruffydd -the son of Cynan appears in the British annals as an ally of the -restored Rhys,[341] and we now find a King Gruffydd, not only carrying -slaughter by land into the English territory, but appearing in the -more unusual character of the head of a seafaring expedition. We may -feel pretty sure that it was the presence of the allies from -Ireland――both native Irish, it would seem, and Scandinavian -settlers――which combined with the disturbed state of England to lead -Gruffydd to a frightful inroad on the lands of the most cruel enemy of -the Britons, the Marquess Robert. The Welsh King and his allies -marched as far as the new stronghold of Rhuddlan; they burned much and -slew many men, and carried off many prisoners, doubtless for the Irish -slave-market.[342] It was clearly through this doubtless far more -profitable raid on the English territory that Rhys and Gruffydd found -the means of rewarding their Irish and Scandinavian allies. - -[Sidenote: Robert of Rhuddlan.] - -[Sidenote: His probable change of party.] - -[Sidenote: He returns to North Wales.] - -[Sidenote: The peninsula of Dwyganwy.] - -[Sidenote: The castle of Dwyganwy.] - -[Sidenote: Robert at Dwyganwy.] - -[Sidenote: Approach of Gruffydd. July 3, 1088.] - -[Sidenote: Eagerness of Robert.] - -[Sidenote: Death of Robert.] - -[Sidenote: His burial at Chester.] - -This inroad took place while the civil war in England was going -on,[343] a war in which it must be remembered that other British -warriors had borne their part.[344] While the lands of Rhuddlan were -wasted, the Marquess Robert was busy far away at the siege of -Rochester. This would make us think that, like Earl Roger, he changed -sides early,[345] and that he was now in the royal camp, helping to -besiege Odo and his accomplices. After the surrender of Rochester, the -news of the grievous blow which had been dealt to himself and his -lands brought Robert back to North Wales, wrathful and full of -threats.[346] The enemy must by this time have withdrawn from the -neighbourhood of Rhuddlan; for we now hear of the Marquess in the -north-western corner of the land which he had brought under his rule. -He was now in the peninsula which ends to the north in that vast -headland which, like the other headland which ends the peninsula of -Gower to the west, bears the name of the Orm’s Head.[347] The mountain -itself, thick set with remains which were most likely ancient when -Suetonius passed by to Mona, forms a strong contrast to the flat -ground at its foot which stretches southward towards the tidal mouth -of the Conwy. But that flat ground is broken by several isolated -hills, once doubtless, like the Head itself, islands. Of these the two -most conspicuous, two peaks of no great height but of marked steepness -and ruggedness, rise close together, one almost immediately above the -Conwy shore, the other landwards behind it. They are in fact two peaks -of a single hill, with a dip between the two, as on the Capitoline -hill of Rome. Here was the old British stronghold of Dwyganwy, famous -in early times as the royal seat of Maelgwyn, him who is apostrophized -in the lament of Gildas by the name of the dragon――the _worm_――of the -island.[348] That stronghold had now passed into the hands of the -Marquess Robert, and had been by him strengthened with all the newly -imported skill of Normandy. The castle of Dwyganwy plays a part in -every Welsh war during the next two centuries, and we can hardly fancy -that much of Robert’s work survives in the remains of buildings which -are to be traced on both peaks and in the dip between them. But it is -likely that at all times the habitable part of the castle lay between -the two peaks, while the peaks themselves formed merely military -defences. Here then Robert was keeping his head-quarters in the -opening days of July. At noon on one of the summer days the Marquess -was sleeping――between the peaks, we may fancy, whether in any building -or in the open air. He was roused from his slumber by stirring -tidings. King Gruffydd, at the head of three ships, had entered the -mouth of the Conwy; he had brought his ships to anchor; his pirate -crews had landed and were laying waste the country. The tide ebbed; -the ships stood on the dry land; the followers of Gruffydd spread -themselves far and wide over the flat country, and carried prisoners -and cattle to their ships.[349] The Marquess rose; he climbed the -height immediately above him, a height which looks on the flat land, -the open sea, the estuary now crowned on the other side by Conwy with -its diadem of towers, over the inland hills, and on the Orm’s Head -itself rising in the full view to the northward. He saw beneath him a -sight which might have stirred a more sluggish soul. As King Henry had -looked down on the slaughter of his troops at Varaville,[350] so -Robert, from his fortified post of Dwyganwy, saw his men carried off -in bonds and thrown into the ships along with the sheep.[351] He sent -forth orders for a general gathering, and made ready for an attack on -the plunderers at the head of such men as were with him at the moment. -They were few; they were unarmed; but he called on them to make their -way down the steep hillside and to fall on the plunderers on the shore -before the returning tide enabled them to carry off their booty.[352] -The appeal met with no hearty answer; the followers of the valiant -Marquess pleaded their small numbers and the hard task of making their -way down the steep and rocky height.[353] But Robert was not to be -kept back; he still saw what was doing through the whole of the -peninsular lowlands. He could not bear to let the favourable moment -pass by. Without his cuirass, attended only by a single knight, Osbern -of Orgères, he went down to attack the enemy on the shores of the -estuary.[354] When the Britons saw him alone, with only a single -companion and no defence but his shield, they gathered round him to -overwhelm him with darts and arrows, none daring to attack him with -the sword.[355] He still stood, wounded, with his shield bristling -with missiles, but still defying his enemies. At last his wounds bore -him down. The weight of the encumbered shield was too much for him; he -sank on his knees[356], and commended his soul to God and His Mother. -Then the enemy rushed on him with one accord; they smote off his head -in sight of his followers, and fixed it as a trophy on the mast of one -of the ships.[357] Men saw all this from the hilltop with grief and -rage; but they could give no help. A crowd came together on the shore; -but it was too late; the lord of Rhuddlan was already slain. By this -time the invaders were able to put to sea, and the followers of Robert -were also able to get their ships together and follow them. They -followed in wrath and sorrow, as they saw the head of their chief on -the mast.[358] Gruffydd must have felt himself the weaker. He ordered -the head to be taken down and cast into the sea. On this the pursuers -gave up the chase; they took up the body of the slain Marquess, and, -amidst much grief of Normans and English,[359] buried him in Saint -Werburh’s minster at Chester.[360] - -[Sidenote: Connexion of Robert with Saint Evroul.] - -[Sidenote: His translation to Saint Evroul.] - -[Sidenote: Orderic writes his epitaph.] - -[Sidenote: Its character.] - -We are well pleased to have preserved to us this living piece of -personal anecdote, which reminds us for a moment of the deaths of -Harold and of Hereward. Its preservation we doubtless owe to the -connexion of Robert of Rhuddlan with the house of Saint Evroul. -Otherwise we might have known no more of the conqueror of North Wales -than we can learn from the entries in Domesday which record his -possessions.[361] But Robert, nephew of Hugh of Grantmesnil, had -enriched his uncle’s foundation with estates in England, and in the -city of Chester itself.[362] He was therefore not allowed to sleep for -ever in the foreign soil of Chester. He had a brother Arnold, a monk -of Saint Evroul, zealous in all things for his house, who had begged -endless gifts for it from his kinsfolk in England, Sicily, and -elsewhere. Some years after Robert’s death, Arnold came to England, -and, by the leave of Bishop Robert of Chester or Coventry――Bishop of -the Mercians in the phrase of the monk who was born in his -diocese――translated the body of Robert to the minster of Saint Evroul. -There a skilful painter, Reginald surnamed Bartholomew――most likely a -monk who had taken the apostolic name on entering religion――was -employed to adorn the tomb of Robert and the arch which sheltered it -with all the devices of his art.[363] And the English monk Vital――we -know him better by his English and worldly name――was set to compose -the epitaph of one who had in some sort, like himself, passed from -Mercia to Saint Evroul.[364] In his history Orderic deemed it his duty -to brand Robert’s dealings with the Welsh as breaches of the natural -law which binds man to man.[365] And it may be that something of the -same feeling peeps out in the words of the epitaph itself, which prays -with unusual fervour for the forgiveness of Robert’s sins.[366] Yet in -the verses which record his acts, his campaigns against the Briton -appear as worthy exploits alongside of his zeal for holy things and -his special love for the house of Ouche. It is not easy to track out -all these exploits, even in the narrative of Orderic himself, much -less in the annals of Robert’s British enemies. But all the mightiest -names of the Cymry are set forth in order, as having felt the might of -the daring Marquess. He had built Rhuddlan and had guarded it against -the fierce people of the land. He had ofttimes crossed beyond Conwy -and Snowdon in arms. He had put King Bleddyn to flight and had won -great spoil from him. He had carried off King Howel as a prisoner in -bonds. He had taken King Gruffydd and had overthrown Trahaern. That -Howel, his former captive, should rejoice at his fall is in no way -wonderful; but the epitaph speaks further of the treachery of a -certain Owen, of which there is no mention in the prose narrative.[367] -In any case Robert of Rhuddlan stands out as one of the mightiest -enemies of the Northern Cymry, and the tale of his end is one of the -most picturesque in this reign of picturesque incidents. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: End of the Norman Conquest.] - -[Sidenote: The Conquest confirmed and undone.] - -[Sidenote: How far undone.] - -[Sidenote: Tendencies to union.] - -The rebellion was now over, and the new King was firm upon his throne. -And with the rebellion, the last scene, as we have already said, of -the Norman Conquest was over also. Englishmen and Normans had, for the -last time under those names, met in open fight on English soil. -Whether of the two had won the victory? Such a question might admit of -different answers when the Norman King vanquished the Norman nobility -at the head of the English people. In one sense the Conquest was -confirmed; in another sense it was undone. Men must have felt that the -Conquest was undone, that the _wergeld_ of those who fell -two-and-twenty years back was indeed paid, when the second Norman host -that strove to land on the beach of Pevensey, instead of marching on -to Hastings, to Senlac, to London, and to York, was beaten back from -the English coast by the arms of Englishmen. They must have felt that -it was undone, when the castles on which Englishmen looked as the -darkest badges of bondage were stormed by an English host, gathered -together at the same bidding which had gathered men together to fight -at Sherstone and at Stamfordbridge. He must have been _Nithing_ indeed -who did not feel that the wrongs of many days were paid for, when the -arch-oppressor, the most loathed of all his race, came forth with -downcast looks to meet the jeers and curses of the nation on which he -had trampled. Days like the day of Tunbridge, the day of Pevensey, and -the day of Rochester, are among the days which make the heart of a -nation swell higher for their memory. They were days on which the -Englishman overcame the Norman, days which ruled that he who would -reign over England must reign with the good will of the English -people. The fusion of Normans and English was as yet far from being -brought to perfection; indeed nothing could show more clearly than -those days that the gap between the two nations still yawned in all -its fulness. But nothing did more than the work of those days at once -to fill up the gap and to rule in what way it should be filled up. -Those days showed that the land was still an English land, that the -choice of its ruler rested in the last resort with the true folk of -the land. Those days ruled that Normans and English should become one -people; but they further ruled, if there could be any doubt about the -matter, that they were to become one people by the Normans becoming -Englishmen, not by the English becoming Normans. It is significant -that, in recording the next general rebellion, the Chronicler no -longer marks the traitors as “the richest Frenchmen that were on this -land;” they are simply “the head men here on land who took rede -together against the King.”[368] - -[Sidenote: How far confirmed.] - -[Sidenote: The Norman dynasty accepted.] - -[Sidenote: Acceptance of the Norman nobility in an English character.] - -But, if in this way the Conquest was undone, if it was ruled that -England was still to be England, in another way the Conquest was -confirmed. The English people showed that the English crown was still -theirs to bestow; but at the same time they showed that they had no -longer a thought of bestowing it out of the house of their Conqueror. -When the English people came together at the bidding of the -Conqueror’s son, when they willingly plighted their faith to him and -called on him, as King of the English, to trust himself to English -loyalty, they formally accepted the Conquest, so far as it took the -form of a change of dynasty. Men pressed to fight for King William -against the pretender Robert; not a voice was raised for Eadgar or -Wulf or Olaf of Denmark. The stock of the Bastard of Falaise was -received as the _cynecyn_ of England, instead of the stock of Cerdic -and Woden; for there must have been few indeed who remembered that -William the Red, unlike his father, unlike Harold, unlike Cnut, did -come of the stock of Cerdic and Woden by the spindle-side.[369] And, -in admitting the change of dynasty, all was admitted which the change -of dynasty immediately implied. Men who accepted the son could not ask -for the wiping out of the acts of the father. They could not ask for a -new confiscation and a new Domesday the other way. In accepting the -son of the Conqueror, they also accepted the settlement of the -Conqueror. His earls, his bishops, his knights, his grantees of land -from Wight to Cheviot, were accepted as lawful owners of English lands -and offices. But the very acceptance implied that they could hold -English lands and offices only in the character of Englishmen, and -that that character they must now put on. - -[Sidenote: Rufus’ breach of his promises.] - -[Sidenote: Englishmen not oppressed as such;] - -[Sidenote: but the general oppression touches them most.] - -[Sidenote: Rufus and the English.] - -[Sidenote: The mercenaries.] - -[Sidenote: Their favour helps the fusion of races.] - -In this way the reign of William Rufus marks a stage in the -developement or recovery of English nationality and freedom. And yet -at the time the days of Rufus must have seemed the darkest of all -days. No reign ever began with brighter promises than the real reign -of William the Red; for we can hardly count his reign as really -beginning till the rebellion was put down. No reign ever became -blacker. No king was ever more distinctly placed on his throne by the -good will of his people. No other king was ever hated as William Rufus -lived to be hated. No other king more utterly and shamefully broke the -promises of good government by which he had gained his crown. And yet -we may doubt whether William Rufus can be fairly set down as an -oppressor of Englishmen, in the sense which those words would bear in -the mouths of a certain school of writers. His reign is rather a reign -of general wrong-doing, a reign of oppression which regarded no -distinctions of race, rank, or order, a time when the mercenary -soldier, of whatever race, did what he thought good, and when all -other men had to put up with what he thought good. In such a state of -things the burthen of oppression would undoubtedly fall by far the -most heavily upon the native English; they would be the class most -open to suffering and least able to obtain redress. The broken -promises of the King had been specially made to them, and they would -feel specially aggrieved and disheartened at his breach of them. Still -the good government which Rufus promised, but which he did not give, -was a good government which would have profited all the King’s men, -French and English, and the lack of it pressed, in its measure, on all -the King’s men, French and English. There is at least nothing to show -that, during the reign of Rufus, Englishmen, as Englishmen, were -formally and purposely picked out as victims. We must further remember -that no legal barrier parted the two races, and that the legal -innovations of the reign of Rufus, as mainly affecting the King’s -military tenants, bore most hardly on a class which was more largely -Norman than English. On the other hand, it is certain that native -Englishmen did sometimes, if rarely, rise to high places, both -ecclesiastical and temporal, in the days of Rufus. Of the many stories -current about this king, not above one or two throw any light on his -relations to the native English class of his subjects. The one saying -of his that bears on the subject savours of good-humoured banter -rather than of dislike or even contempt.[370] On the whole, dark as is -the picture given us of the reign of Rufus, we cannot look on it as -having at all turned back or checked the course of national advance. -When mercenary soldiers have the upper hand, they are sure to be -chosen rather from strangers of any race than from natives of the land -of any race. There is indeed no reason to think that either a native -Englishman or a man of Norman descent born in England would, if he -were strong, brave, and faithful, be shut out from the Red King’s -military family. The eye of Rufus must have been keen enough to mark -many an act of good service done on the shore of Pevensey or beneath -the stronghold of Rochester. But all experience shows that the -tendency of such military families is to recruit themselves anywhere -rather than among the sons of the soil. And nothing draws the sons of -the soil more closely together than the presence of strangers on the -soil. In their presence they learn to forget any mutual grievances -against one another. In after times Normans and English drew together -against Brabançons and Poitevins. We may feel sure that they did so -from the beginning, and that the reign of Rufus really had its share -in making ready the way for the fusion of the two races, by making -both races feel themselves fellow-sufferers in a time of common -wrong-doing. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Sale of ecclesiastical offices.] - -[Sidenote: Prolonging of vacancies.] - -[Sidenote: Case of Thurstan of Glastonbury.] - -[Sidenote: Geoffrey Bishop of Chichester;] - -[Sidenote: dies September 25, 1088.] - -[Sidenote: Death of Scotland of Saint Augustine’s and Ælfsige of -Bath.] - -[Sidenote: Death of Bishop Gisa. 1088.] - -[Sidenote: The bishopric of Somerset granted to John of Tours.] - -[Sidenote: He removes the see to Bath.] - -[Sidenote: Grant of the temporal lordship.] - -The rebellion and its suppression, the affairs of the Bishop of -Durham, and the striking episode by the Orm’s Head, fill up the first -stirring year of the Red King. But the year of the rebellion is also -marked by one or two ecclesiastical events, which throw some light on -the state of things in the early days of Rufus, while he still had -Lanfranc to his guide. The great ecclesiastical crimes of the Red King -in his after days were the bestowal of bishoprics and abbeys for -money, and the practice of keeping them vacant for his own profit. Of -these two abuses, the former seems to have been the earlier in date. -The keeping prelacies vacant was one of the devices of Randolf -Flambard, and it could hardly have been brought into play during the -very first year of Rufus. The influence of Lanfranc too would be -powerful to hinder so public an act as the keeping vacant of a -bishopric or abbey; it would be less powerful to hinder a private -transaction on the King’s part which might be done without the -Primate’s knowledge. Add to this, that, while the filling a church or -keeping it vacant was a matter of fact about which there could be no -doubt, the question whether the King had or had not received a bribe -was a matter of surmise and suspicion, even when the surmise and -suspicion happened to be just. It is then not wonderful that we find -Rufus charged with corrupt dealings of this last kind at a very early -stage of his reign. We have seen that Thurstan, the fierce Abbot of -Glastonbury, was, by one of the first acts of Rufus, restored to the -office which he had so unworthily filled, and from which the Conqueror -had so worthily put him aside. And we have seen that it was at least -the general belief that his restoration was brought about by a lavish -gift to the King’s hoard.[371] But three prelacies, two bishoprics and -a great abbey, which either were vacant at the moment of the -Conqueror’s death or which fell vacant very soon after, were filled -without any unreasonable delay. Stigand, Bishop of Chichester, died -about the time of the Conqeror’s death, whether before or after, and -his see was filled by his successor before the end of the year.[372] -Geoffrey’s own tenure was short; he died in the year of the rebellion, -and, as his see did then remain vacant three years, we may set that -down as the beginning of the evil practice.[373] About the same time -died Scotland Abbot of Saint Augustine’s, and the English Ælfsige, who -still kept the abbey of Bath. Not long after died Ælfsige’s diocesan, -the Lotharingian Gisa, who had striven so hard to bring in the -Lotharingian discipline among his canons of Wells.[374] The bishopric -of the Sumorsætan was thus among the first sees which fell to the -disposal of William the Red, and his disposal of it led to one of the -most marked changes in its history. The bishopric was given to John, -called _de Villula_, a physician of Tours, one of the men of eminence -whom the discerning patronage of William the Great had brought from -lands alike beyond his island realm and beyond his continental duchy. -John was a trusty counsellor of the Red King, employed by him in many -affairs, and withal a zealous encourager of learning.[375] But he had -little regard to the traditions and feelings of Englishmen, least of -all to those of the canons of Wells. Like Hermann, Remigius, and other -bishops of his time, he carried out the policy of transferring -episcopal sees to the chief towns of their dioceses. But the way in -which he carried out his scheme, if not exactly like the violent -inroad of Robert of Limesey on the church of Coventry,[376] was at -least like the first designs of Hermann on the church of Malmesbury, -which had been thwarted by the interposition of Earl Harold.[377] The -change was made in a perfectly orderly manner, but by the secular -power only. The abbey of Bath was now vacant by the death of its abbot -Ælfsige. Bishop John procured that the vacant post should be granted -to himself and his successors for the increase of the bishopric of -Somerset. This was done by a royal grant made at Winchester soon after -the suppression of the rebellion, and confirmed somewhat later in a -meeting of the Witan at Dover.[378] John then transferred his -_bishopsettle_ from its older seat at Wells to the church which had -now become his. He next procured a grant of the temporal lordship of -the “old borough,” which was perhaps of less value after its late -burning by Robert of Mowbray.[379] Thus, in the language of the time, -Andrew had to yield to Simon, the younger brother to the elder.[380] -That is, the church of Saint Peter at Bath, with its Benedictine -monks, displaced the church of Saint Andrew at Wells, with its secular -canons freshly instructed in the rule of Chrodegang, as the head -church of the bishopric of Somerset. The line of the independent -abbots of Bath came to an end; their office was merged in the -bishopric, by the new style of Bishop of Bath. Thus the old Roman city -in a corner of the land of the Sumorsætan, which has never claimed the -temporal headship of that land, became for a while the seat of its -chief pastor. - -[Sidenote: The change made wholly by the civil authority.] - -[Sidenote: Power of bishops.] - -[Sidenote: Dislike to the change on the part of the canons of Wells] - -[Sidenote: and the monks of Bath.] - -[Sidenote: Buildings of John of Tours. 1088-1122.] - -[Sidenote: The church of Bath called abbey.] - -That so great an ecclesiastical change should be wrought by the -authority of the King and his Witan――perhaps in the first instance by -the King’s authority only――shows clearly how strong an ecclesiastical -supremacy the new king had inherited from his father and his father’s -English predecessors. By the authority of the Great Council of the -realm, but without any licence from Pope or synod, an ancient -ecclesiastical office was abolished, the constitution of one church -was altered, and another was degraded from its rank as an episcopal -see. The change was made, so says the Red King’s charter, for the good -of the Red King’s soul, and for the profit of his kingdom and people. -It is more certain that it was eminently distasteful to both the -ecclesiastical bodies which were immediately concerned. The treatment -which they met with illustrates the absolute power which the bishops -of the eleventh century exercised over their monks and canons, but -which so largely passed away from them in the course of the twelfth. -To the canons of Wells Bishop John was as stern a master or conqueror -as Bishop Robert was to the monks of Coventry. They were deprived of -their revenues, deprived of the common buildings which had been built -for them by Gisa, and left to live how they might in the little town -which had sprung up at the bishop’s gate.[381] To the English monks of -Offa’s house at Bath the new bishop was hardly gentler; he deemed them -dolts and barbarians, and cut short their revenues and allowances. It -was not till he was surrounded by a more enlightened company of monks -of his own choosing that he began to restore something for the relief -of their poor estate.[382] But in his architectural works he was -magnificent. His long reign of thirty-four years allowed him, not only -to begin, but seemingly to finish, the great church of Saint Peter of -Bath, of which a few traces only remain, and the nave only of which is -represented by the present building.[383] And though, since the days -of Ælfsige, there has never been an Abbot of Bath distinct from the -Bishop, yet _abbey_, and not _minster_ or _cathedral_, is the name by -which the church of Bath is always known to this day.[384] - -[Sidenote: Disturbances on the appointment of Guy at Saint -Augustine’s.] - -[Sidenote: Flight of Guy.] - -[Sidenote: Punishment of the rebellious monks.] - -[Sidenote: Punishment of the citizens.] - -The disturbances at Saint Augustine’s which followed the death of -Abbot Scotland, and the chief features of which have been described -elsewhere, must have taken place earlier in the year. For the -appointment or intrusion of Guy took place while Odo was still acting -as Earl of Kent.[385] But the great outbreak, in which the citizens of -Canterbury took part with the monks against the Abbot, did not happen -till after the death of Lanfranc. Then monks and citizens alike made -an armed attack on Guy, and hard fighting, accompanied by many wounds -and some deaths, was waged between them and the Abbot’s military -following.[386] The Abbot himself escaped only by fleeing to the rival -house of Christ Church. Then came two Bishops, Walkelin of Winchester -and Gundulf of Rochester, accompanied by some lay nobles, with the -King’s orders to punish the offenders. The monks were scourged; but, -by the intercession of the Prior and monks of Christ Church, the -discipline was inflicted privately with no lay eyes to behold.[387] -They were then scattered through different monasteries, and -twenty-four monks of Christ Church, with their sub-prior Anthony as -Prior, were sent to colonize the empty cloister of Saint -Augustine’s.[388] The doom of the citizens was harder; those who were -found guilty of a share in the attack on the Abbot lost their -eyes.[389] The justice of the Red King, stern as it was, thus drew the -distinction for which Thomas of London strove in after days. The lives -and limbs of monastic offenders were sacred. - - -§ 3. _The Character of William Rufus._ - -[Sidenote: Death of Lanfranc. May 24, 1089.] - -[Sidenote: Its effects.] - -[Sidenote: Position of Lanfranc in England and Normandy.] - -[Sidenote: His burial at Christ Church.] - -The one great event recorded in the year after the rebellion was the -death of Archbishop Lanfranc, an event at once important in itself, -and still more important in the effect which it had on the character -of William Rufus, and in its consequent effect on the general march of -events. The removal of a man who had played so great a part in all -affairs since the earliest days of the Conquest, who had been for so -many years, both before and after the Conquest, the right hand man of -the Conqueror, was in itself no small change. For good or for evil, -the Lombard Primate had left his mark for ever on the Church and realm -of England. One of the abetters of the Conquest, the chief instrument -of the Conqueror, he had found the way to the good will of the -conquered people, with whom and with whose land either his feelings or -his policy led him freely to identify himself.[390] It must never be -forgotten that, if Lanfranc was a stranger in England, he was no less -a stranger in Normandy. As such, he was doubtless better able to act -as a kind of mediator between the Norman King and the English people; -he could do somewhat, if not to lighten the yoke, at least to make it -less galling. In the last events of his life we have seen him act as -one of the leaders in a cause which was at once that of the English -people and of the Norman King. We have seen too some specimens of his -worldly wisdom, of his skill in fence and debate. An ecclesiastical -statesman rather than either a saint or strictly a churchman, it seems -rather a narrow view of him when the national Chronicler sends him out -of the world with the hope that he was gone to the heavenly kingdom, -but with the special character of the venerable father and patron of -monks.[391] His primacy of nearly nineteen years ended in the May of -the year following the rebellion.[392] He was buried in the -metropolitan church of his own rebuilding, and, when his shorter choir -gave way to the grander conceptions of the days of his successor, the -sweet savour that came from his tomb made all men sure that the pious -hope of the Chronicler had been fulfilled.[393] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Change for the worse in the King’s character.] - -[Sidenote: Lanfranc’s rebukes of William.] - -Lanfranc was borne to his grave amid general sorrow.[394] But the -sorrow might have been yet deeper, if men had known the effect which -his death would have on the character of the King and his reign. Up to -this time the worst features of the character of William Rufus had not -shown themselves in their fulness. As long as his father lived, as -long as Lanfranc lived, he had in some measure kept them in check. We -need not suppose any sudden or violent change. It is the manifest -exaggeration of a writer who had his own reasons for drawing as -favourable a picture as he could of the Red King, when we are told -that, as long as Lanfranc lived, he showed himself, under that -wholesome influence, the perfect model of a ruler.[395] There can be -no doubt that, while Lanfranc yet lived, William Rufus began to cast -aside his fetters, and to look on his monitor with some degree of ill -will. The Primate had already had to rebuke him for breach of the -solemn promises of his coronation, and it was then that he received -the characteristic and memorable answer that no man could keep all his -promises. But there is no reason to doubt that the death of Lanfranc -set Rufus free from the last traces of moral restraint.[396] His -dutiful submission to his father had been the best feature in his -character; and it is clear that some measure of the same feeling -extended itself to the guardian to whose care his father, both in life -and in death, had entrusted him. But now he was no longer under tutors -and governors; there was no longer any man to whom he could in any -sense look up. He was left to his own devices, or to the counsels of -men whose counsels were not likely to improve him. It was not a -wholesome exchange when the authority of Lanfranc and William the -Great was exchanged for the cunning service of Randolf Flambard and -the military companionship of Robert of Bellême. - -[Sidenote: Picture of William Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: Birth of William Rufus, c. 1060.] - -[Sidenote: His outward appearance.] - -[Sidenote: His surname of _Rufus_.] - -[Sidenote: Rufus in youth.] - -[Sidenote: His filial duty.] - -[Sidenote: His natural gifts.] - -[Sidenote: His conduct during the rebellion.] - -[Sidenote: Case of the Bishop of Durham.] - -As soon then as Lanfranc was dead, William Rufus burst all bounds, and -the man stood forth as he was, or as his unhappy circumstances had -made him. We may now look at him, physically and morally, as he is -drawn in very elaborate pictures by contemporary hands. William, the -third son of the Conqueror, was born before his father came into -England; but I do not know that there is any evidence to fix the exact -year of his birth. He is spoken of as young[397] at the time of his -accession, and from the date of the marriage of the Conqueror and -Matilda, it would seem likely that their third son would then be about -twenty-seven years of age. He would therefore be hardly thirty at the -time of the death of Lanfranc. The description of his personal -appearance is not specially inviting. In his bodily form he seems, -like his brother Robert,[398] a kind of caricature of his father, as -Rufus, though certainly not Robert, was also in some of his moral and -mental qualities. He was a man of no great stature, of a thick square -frame, with a projecting stomach. His bodily strength was great; his -eye was restless; his speech was stammering, especially when he was -stirred to anger. He lacked the power of speech which had belonged to -his father and had even descended to his elder brother; his pent-up -wrath or merriment, or whatever the momentary passion might be, broke -out in short sharp sentences, often showing some readiness of wit, but -no continued flow of speech. He had the yellow hair of his race, and -the ruddiness of his countenance gave him the surname which has stuck -to him so closely. The second William is yet more emphatically the Red -King than his father is either the Bastard or the Conqueror. Unlike -most other names of the kind, his surname is not only used by -contemporary writers, but it is used by them almost as a proper -name.[399] Up to the time of his accession, he had played no part in -public affairs; in truth he had no opportunity of playing any. The -policy of the Conqueror had kept his sons dependent on himself, -without governments or estates.[400] We have a picture of Rufus in his -youthful days, as the young soldier foremost in every strife, who -deemed himself disgraced, if any other took to his arms before -himself, if he was not the first to challenge an enemy or to overthrow -any enemy that challenged his side.[401] Above all things, he had -shown himself a dutiful son, cleaving steadfastly to his father, both -in peace and war. His filial zeal had been increased after the -rebellion of his brother, when the hope of the succession had begun to -be opened to himself.[402] By his father’s side, in defence of his -father, he had himself received a wound at Gerberoi.[403] Such was his -character beyond the sea; but the one fact known of him in England -before his father’s death is that he had, like most men of his time -who had the chance, possessed himself in some illegal way of a small -amount of ecclesiastical land.[404] It is quite possible that both his -father and Lanfranc may have been deceived as to his real character. -In the stormy times which followed his accession, he had shown the -qualities of an able captain and something more. He had shown great -readiness of spirit, great power of adapting himself to circumstances, -great skill in keeping friends and in winning over enemies. No man -could doubt that the new King of the English had in him the power, if -he chose to use it, of becoming a great and a good ruler. And -assuredly he could not be charged with anything like either cruelty or -breach of faith at any stage of the warfare by which his crown was -made fast to him. If he anywhere showed the cloven foot, it was in the -matter of the Bishop of Durham. Even there we can have no doubt that -he spared a traitor; but he may have been hasty in the earliest stage -of the quarrel; he certainly, in its latter stages, showed signs of -that small personal spite, that disposition to take mean personal -advantages of an enemy, which was so common in the kings of those -days. Still, whatever Lanfranc may have found to rebuke, whatever may -have been the beginnings of evil while the Primate yet lived, no -public act of the new king is as yet recorded which would lead us to -pass any severe sentence upon him, if he is judged according to the -measure of his own times. - -[Sidenote: General charges against Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: Little personal cruelty;] - -[Sidenote: comparison with his father and brother.] - -[Sidenote: His profligacy and irreligion.] - -[Sidenote: Redeeming features in his character.] - -It is indeed remarkable that the pictures of evil-doing which mark the -reign of Rufus from the Chronicle onwards are, except when they take -the form of personal anecdote, mainly of a general kind. Those -pictures, those anecdotes, leave no room to doubt that the reign of -Rufus was a reign of fearful oppression; but his oppression seems to -have consisted more in the unrestrained licence which he allowed to -his followers than in any special deeds of personal cruelty done by -his own hands or by his immediate orders. Rufus certainly did not -share his father’s life-long shrinking from taking human life anywhere -but in battle; but his brother Henry, the model ruler of his time, the -king who made peace for man and deer, is really chargeable with uglier -deeds in his own person than any that can be distinctly proved against -the Red King. We are driven back to our old distinction. The excesses -of the followers of Rufus, the reign of unright and unlaw which they -brought with them, did or threatened harm to every man in his -dominions; the occasional cruelties of Henry hurt only a few people, -while the general strictness of his rule profited every one. What -makes William Rufus stand out personally in so specially hateful a -light is not so much deeds of personal cruelty, as indulgence in the -foulest forms of vice, combined with a form of irreligion which -startled not only saints but ordinary sinners. And the point is that, -hateful as these features in his character were, they did not hinder -the presence of other features which were not hateful in the view of -his own age, of some indeed which are not hateful in the view of any -age. - -[Sidenote: His marked personality.] - -[Sidenote: Comparison with his father.] - -[Sidenote: His alleged firmness of purpose.] - -[Sidenote: His caprice.] - -[Sidenote: His unfinished campaigns.] - -The marked personality of William Rufus, the way in which that -personality stamped itself on the memory of his age, is shown by the -elaborate pictures which we have of his character, and by the crowd of -personal anecdotes by which those pictures are illustrated. Allowing -for the sure tendency of such a character to get worse, we may take -our survey of the Red King as he seemed in men’s eyes when the -restraints of his earlier life were taken away. As long as his father -lived, he had little power to do evil; as long as Lanfranc lived, he -was kept within some kind of bounds by respect for the man to whom he -owed so much. When Lanfranc was gone, he either was corrupted by -prosperity, or else, like Tiberius,[405] his natural character was now -for the first time able to show itself in the absence of restraint. -His character then stood out boldly, and men might compare him with -his father. William the Red may pass for William the Great with all -his nobler qualities, intellectual and moral, left out.[406] He could -be, when he chose, either a great captain or a great ruler; but it was -only by fits and starts that he chose to be either. His memory was -strong; he at least never forgot an injury; he had also a kind of -firmness of purpose; that is, he was earnest in whatever he undertook -for good or for evil, and could not easily be turned from his -will.[407] But he lacked that true steadiness of purpose, that power -of waiting for the right time, that unfailing adaptation of means to -ends, which lends somewhat of moral dignity even to the worst deeds of -his father. The elder William, we may be sure, loved power and loved -success; he loved them as the objects and the rewards of a -well-studied and abiding policy. The younger William rather loved the -excitement of winning them, and the ostentatious display of them when -they were won. Hard as it was for others to turn him from his purpose, -no man was more easily turned from it by his own caprice. No man began -so many things and finished so few of them. His military undertakings -are always ably planned and set on foot with great vigour. But his -campaigns come to an end without any visible cause. After elaborate -preparations and energetic beginnings, the Red King turns away to -something else, often without either any marked success to satisfy him -or any marked defeat to discourage him. If he could not carry his -point at the first rush, he seems to have lacked steadiness to go on. -We have seen what he could do when fighting for his crown at the head -of a loyal nation. He does not show in so favourable a light, even as -a captain, much less as a man, when he was fighting to gratify a -restless ambition at the head of hirelings gathered from every land. - -[Sidenote: His “magnanimity.”] - -[Sidenote: His boundless pride.] - -[Sidenote: His private demeanour.] - -[Sidenote: Trick of his chamberlain.] - -The two qualities for which he is chiefly praised by the writer who -strives to make the best of him are his magnanimity and his -liberality. The former word must not be taken in its modern English -use. It is reckoned as a virtue; it therefore does not exactly answer -to the older English use of the word “high-minded;” but it perhaps -comes nearer to it than to anything that would be spoken of as -magnanimity now. It was at all events a virtue which easily -degenerated into a vice; the magnanimity of William Rufus changed, it -is allowed, by degrees into needless harshness.[408] The leading -feature of the Red King’s character was a boundless pride and -self-confidence, tempered by occasional fits of that kind of -generosity which is really the offspring of pride. We see little in -him either of real justice or of real mercy; but he held himself too -high to hurt those whom he deemed it beneath him to hurt. His -overweening notion of his own greatness, personal and official, his -belief in the dignity of kings and specially in the dignity of King -William of England, led him, perhaps not to a belief in his star like -Buonaparte, certainly not to a belief in any favouring power, like -Sulla,[409] but to a kind of conviction that neither human strength -nor the powers of nature could or ought to withstand his will. This -high opinion of himself he asserted after his own fashion. The stern -and dignified aspect of his father degenerated in him into the mere -affectation of a lofty bearing, a fierce and threatening look.[410] -This was for the outside world; in the lighter moments of more -familiar intercourse, the grim pleasantry into which the stately -courtesy of his father sometimes relaxed degenerated in him into a -habit of reckless jesting, which took the specially shameless form of -mocking excuses for his own evil deeds.[411] Indeed his boasted -loftiness of spirit sometimes laid him open to be mocked and cheated -by those around him. One of the endless stories about him, stories -which, true or false, mark the character of the man, told how, when -his chamberlain brought him a pair of new boots, he asked the price. -Hearing that they cost three shillings only――a good price, one would -have thought, in the coinage of those times――he bade his officer take -them away as unworthy of a king and bring him a pair worth a mark of -silver. The cunning chamberlain brought a worse pair, which he -professed to have bought at the higher price, and which Rufus -accordingly pronounced to be worthy of a King’s majesty.[412] Such a -tale could not have been believed or invented except of a man in whose -nature true dignity, true greatness of soul, found no place, but who -was puffed up with a feeling of his own importance, which, if it could -sometimes be shaped into the likeness of something nobler, could also -sometimes sink into vanity of the silliest and most childish kind. - -[Sidenote: His “liberality.”] - -[Sidenote: His wastefulness.] - -[Sidenote: His reward to the loyal troops after the rebellion.] - -[Sidenote: His extortions.] - -[Sidenote: His generally strict government.] - -[Sidenote: His lavishness to his mercenaries.] - -[Sidenote: Chiefly foreigners.] - -[Sidenote: Their wrongdoings.] - -[Sidenote: Statute of Henry against them. 1108.] - -But the quality for which the Red King was most famous in his own day, -a quality which was, we are told, blazed abroad through all lands, -East and West, was what his own age called his boundless liberality. -The wealth of England was a standing subject of wonder in other lands, -and in the days of Rufus men wondered no less at the lavish way in -which it was scattered abroad by the open hand of her King.[413] But -the liberality of Rufus had no claim to that name in its higher -sense.[414] It was not that kind of liberality which spends -ungrudgingly for good purposes out of stores which have been honestly -come by; it was a liberality which gave for purposes of wrong out of -stores which were brought together by wrong. It was a liberality which -consisted in the most reckless personal waste in matters of daily -life, and which in public affairs took the form of lavish bribes paid -to seduce the subjects of other princes from their allegiance, of -lavish payments to troops of mercenary soldiers, hired for the -oppression of his own dominions and the disquieting of the dominions -of others. It was said of him that the merchant could draw from him -any price for his wares, and that the soldier could draw from him any -pay for his services.[415] The sources which supplied William with his -wealth were of a piece with the objects to which his wealth was -applied; under him the two ideas of liberality and oppression can -never be separated. What was called liberality by the foreign -mercenary was called extortion by the plundered Englishman. The hoard -at Winchester, full as the Conqueror had left it, could not stay full -for ever; it is implied that it was greatly drawn upon by gifts to -those who saved William’s crown and kingdom at Pevensey and -Rochester.[416] This was of a truth the best spent money of the Red -King’s reign; for it rewarded true and honest service, and service -done by the hands of Englishmen. But to fill the hoard again, to keep -it filled amid the constant drain, to keep up with the lavishness of -one to whom prodigality had become part of his nature,[417] needed -every kind of unrighteous extortion. The land was bowed down by what, -in the living speech of our forefathers, was called _ungeld_; money, -that is, wrung from the people by unrede, unright, and unlaw.[418] -Like his father, Rufus was, as a rule, strict in preserving the peace -of the land; his hand was heavy on the murderer and the robber. The -law of his father which forbade the punishment of death[419] was -either formally repealed or allowed to fall into disuse. The robber -was now sent to the gallows; but, when he had got thither, he might -still save his neck by a timely payment to the King’s coffers.[420] -And the sternness of the law which smote offenders who had no such -prevailing plea was relaxed also in favour of all who were in the -immediate service of the King.[421] The chief objects of William’s -boasted liberality were his mercenary soldiers, picked men from all -lands. A strong hand and a ready wit, by whomsoever shown and -howsoever proved, were a passport to the Red King’s service and to his -personal favour.[422] And those who thus won his personal favour were -more likely to be altogether strangers than natives of the land, -whether of the conquering or of the conquered race. We may suspect -that the settled inhabitants of England, whether English or Norman, -knew the King’s mercenaries mainly as a body of aliens who had licence -to do any kind of wrong among them without fear of punishment. The -native Englishman and his Norman neighbour had alike to complain of -the chartered brigands who went through the land, wasting the -substance of those who tilled it, and snatching the food out of the -very mouths of the wretched.[423] A more detailed picture sets before -us how, when the King drew near to any place, men fled from their -houses into the woods, or anywhere else where they could hide -themselves. For the King’s followers, when they were quartered in any -house, carried off, sold, or burned, whatever was in it. They took the -householder’s store of drink to wash the feet of their horses, and -everywhere offered the cruellest of insults to men’s wives and -daughters.[424] And for all this no redress was to be had; the law of -the land and the discipline of the camp had alike become a dead letter -in the case of offenders of this class. The oppressions of the King’s -immediate company were often complained of in better times and under -better kings; but they seem to have reached a greater height under -William Rufus than at any time before or after. We hear of no such -doings under the settled rule of the Conqueror; under Henry they were -checked by a statute of fearful severity.[425] As usual, the picture -of the time cannot be so well drawn in any words as those in which the -native Chronicler draws it in our own tongue. King William “was very -strong and stern over his land and his men and his neighbours, and -very much to be feared, and, through evil men’s rede that to him ever -welcome were, and through his own greediness, he harassed his land -with his army and with _ungeld_. For in his days ilk right fell away, -and ilk unright for God and for world uprose.”[426] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Stricter forest laws.] - -[Sidenote: Story of the fifty Englishmen.] - -[Sidenote: Why mentioned as Englishmen.] - -[Sidenote: Their acquittal by ordeal.] - -[Sidenote: The King’s blasphemous comment.] - -Thus were the promises with which William Rufus had bought the help of -the English people in his day of danger utterly trampled under foot. -He had promised them good laws and freedom from unrighteous taxes; he -had promised them that they should have again, as in the days of -Cnut,[427] the right of every man to slay the beasts of the field for -his lawful needs. Instead of all this, the reign of the younger -William became, above all other reigns, a reign of _unlaw_ and of -_ungeld_. The savage pleasures of the father, for the sake of which he -had laid waste the homes and fields of Hampshire, were sought after by -the son with a yet keener zest, and were fenced in by a yet sterner -code. In the days of William the Red the man who slew a hart had, what -he had not in the days of William the Great, to pay for his crime with -his life.[428] The working of this stern law is shown in one of the -many stories of William Rufus, a story of which we should like to hear -the end a little more clearly.[429] Fifty men were charged with having -taken, killed, and eaten the King’s deer. We are so generally left to -guess at the nationality of the lesser actors in our story that our -attention is specially called to the marked way in which we are told -that they were men of Old-English birth, once of high rank in the -land, and who had contrived still to keep some remnants of their -ancient wealth.[430] They belonged doubtless to the class of King’s -thegns; if we were told in what shire the tale was laid, Domesday -might help us to their names. This is one of the very few passages -which might suggest the notion that Englishmen, as Englishmen, were -specially picked out for oppression. And it may well be true that the -forest laws pressed with special harshness on native Englishmen; no -man would have so great temptation to offend against them as a -dispossessed Englishman. What is not shown is that a man of Norman -birth who offended in the same way would have fared any better. The -mention of the accused men as Englishmen comes from the teller of the -story only; and he most likely points out the fact in order to explain -what next follows. On their denying the charge, they were sent to the -ordeal of hot iron. Granting that killing a deer was a crime at all, -this was simply the ancient English way of dealing with the alleged -criminal. We are therefore a little surprised when our informant seems -to speak of the appeal to the ordeal as a piece of special -cruelty.[431] The fiery test was gone through; but God, we are told, -took care to save the innocent, and on the third day, when their hands -were formally examined, they were found to be unhurt. The King in his -wrath uttered words of blasphemy. Men said that God was a just judge; -he would believe it no longer. God was no judge of these matters; he -would for the future take them into his own hands.[432] To understand -the full force of such words, we must remember that the ordeal was, in -its own nature, an appeal to the judgement of God in cases when there -was no evidence on which man could found a judgement.[433] What -happened further we are not told; it can hardly be meant that the men -in whose favour the judgement of God was held to have been given were -sent to the gallows all the same. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Special vices of Rufus.] - -In this last story the most distinctive feature of the character of -William Rufus comes out. In many of his recorded deeds we see the -picture of an evil man and an evil king, but still of a man and a king -whose deeds might find many parallels in other times and places. But -the story in which he mocks at the ordeal leads us to those other -points in him which give him a place of his own, a place which perhaps -none other in the long roll-call of evil kings can dispute with him. -Other kings have been cruel; others have been lustful; others have -broken their faith with their people, and have said in their hearts -that there was no God. But the Red King stands well nigh alone in -bringing back the foulest vices of heathendom into a Christian land, -and at the same time openly proclaiming himself the personal enemy of -his Maker. - -[Sidenote: Contrast between Rufus and his father.] - -[Sidenote: Old and new fashions of dress.] - -[Sidenote: The pointed shoes.] - -[Sidenote: Fashionable vices of the time.] - -[Sidenote: Personal crimes of the King.] - -It is with regard to his daily life and to the beliefs and objects -which his age looked on as sacred that William Rufus stands out in the -most glaring contrast to his father. William the Great, I need hardly -repeat, was austere in his personal morals and a strict observer of -every outward religious duty. His court was decent; the men who stood -before him kept, we are told, to the modesty of the elder days. Their -clothes were fitted to the form of their bodies, leaving them ready to -run or ride or do anything that was to be done.[434] They shaved their -beards――all save penitents, captives, and pilgrims――and cut their hair -close.[435] But with the death of William, of Pope Gregory, and of -other religious princes, the good old times passed away, and their -decorous fashions were forgotten through all the Western lands.[436] -Then vain and foppish forms of attire came in. The gilded youth of -Normandy and of Norman England began to wear long garments like women, -which hindered walking or acting of any kind; they let their hair grow -long like women; they copied the walk and mien of women.[437] Above -all, their feet were shod with shoes with long curved points, like the -horns of rams or the tails of scorpions. These long and puffed shoes -were the device of a courtier of Rufus, Robert henceforth surnamed the -_Cornard_, and they were further improved by Count Fulk of Anjou, when -he wished to hide the swellings on his gouty feet.[438] The long hair -and the long-pointed shoes serve as special subjects for declamation -among the moral writers of the time.[439] But these unseemly fashions -were only the outward signs of the deeper corruption within. The -courtiers, the minions, of Rufus, forerunners of the minions of the -last Henry of Valois, altogether forsook the law of God and the -customs of their fathers. The day they passed in sleep; the night in -revellings, dicing, and vain talk.[440] Vices before unknown, the -vices of the East, the special sin, as Englishmen then deemed, of the -Norman, were rife among them. And deepest of all in guilt was the Red -King himself. Into the details of the private life of Rufus it is well -not to grope too narrowly. In him England might see on her own soil -the habits of the ancient Greek and the modern Turk. His sins were of -a kind from which his brother Henry, no model of moral perfection, was -deemed to be wholly free, and which he was believed to look upon with -loathing.[441] - -[Sidenote: His irreligion.] - -[Sidenote: Coming of the Jews.] - -[Sidenote: Their position in England.] - -[Sidenote: Favour shown to them by Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: Comparison with the Sicilian Saracens.] - -[Sidenote: William’s vein of mockery.] - -Sinners, even of the special type of the Red King, have before now -been zealous supporters of orthodoxy. If William persecuted Anselm, -Constans defended Athanasius. But the foulness of William’s life was -of a piece with his open mockery of everything which other men in his -day held sacred. Whatever else divided Englishman and Norman, they -were at least one in religious doctrine and religious worship. In -matters of dogma Stigand was as orthodox as Lanfranc. But now, among -the endless classes of adventurers whom the Conquest brought to try -their luck in the conquered land, came men of a race whom Normans and -Englishmen alike looked on as cut off from all national and religious -fellowship. In the wake of the Conqueror the Jews of Rouen found their -way to London,[442] and before long we find settlements of the Hebrew -race in the chief cities and boroughs of England, at York, Winchester, -Lincoln, Bristol, Oxford, and even at the gates of the Abbots of Saint -Edmund’s and Saint Alban’s.[443] They came as the King’s special men, -or more truly his special chattels, strangers alike to the Church and -to the commonwealth of England, but strong in the protection of a -master who commonly found it to his interest to defend them against -all others. Hated, feared, and loathed, but far too deeply feared to -be scorned or oppressed, they stalked defiantly among the people of -the land, on whose wants they throve. They lived safe from harm or -insult, save now and then, when popular wrath burst all bounds, and -when their proud mansions and fortified quarters could shelter them no -longer from raging crowds eager to wash out their debts in the blood -of their creditors.[444] The romantic picture of the despised, -trembling, Jew, cringing before every Christian that he meets, is, in -any age of English history, simply a romantic picture. In the days of -Rufus at all events, the Jews of Rouen and London stood erect before -the prince of the land, and they seem to have enjoyed no small share -of his favour and personal familiarity. The presence of the -unbelieving Hebrew supplied the Red King with many opportunities for -mocking at Christianity and its ministers. He is even said to have -shown himself more than once, when it was to his interest so to show -himself, as a kind of missionary of the Hebrew faith. He was not the -only prince of his age who discouraged conversions to Christianity on -the part of distinct races who could be made more useful, if they -remained distinct, and who could in no way be kept so distinct as if -they remained in the position of infidels. Count Roger of Sicily found -that the unbelieving Saracens,[445] and William Rufus found that the -unbelieving Hebrews, were, each in their own way, more profitable to -their several masters than if they had been allowed to lose their -distinct being among their Christian neighbours. But in the whole -dealings of Rufus with the Jews there is a vein of mockery in which, -if Roger shared, it is not recorded. It is true that we do not find -Rufus taking the part of the Jew, except when the Jew made it worth -his while to do so. But when he did take the Jew’s part, he clearly -found a malicious pleasure in taking it. He enjoyed showing favour to -the Jew, because so to do gave annoyance to the Christian. - -[Sidenote: Question of William’s scepticism.] - -[Sidenote: The dispute between Jews and Christians.] - -[Sidenote: Jews turn back again.] - -[Sidenote: Story of the convert Stephen and his father.] - -[Sidenote: Dispute between Stephen and the King.] - -[Sidenote: The King’s compromise with Stephen’s father.] - -Whether Rufus was in any strict sense an intellectual sceptic may be -doubted. That he was such cannot be inferred from his bidding in -bitter mockery the Jewish rabbis and the bishops of England to dispute -before him on the tenets of their several creeds, promising to embrace -the faith of the strangers, if they should have the better in the -discussion. The discussion took place in London, most likely when the -prelates were gathered for some Whitsun Gemót. The Christian cause was -supported by several bishops and clerks――one would like to have their -names――who argued, we are told, in great fear on behalf of the faith -which was thus jeoparded.[446] As is usual in such cases, each side -claimed the victory;[447] but in any case the arguments on the Hebrew -side were not so overwhelming as to make the King become an avowed -votary of Moses. Still he did what he could to hinder the ranks of the -Church from being swelled at the cost of the synagogue. In a story -which must belong to the latter part of his reign, we read how the -Jews of Rouen began to be frightened at the great numbers of their -body who fell away from the law of their fathers. They came to the -King, and, by a large bribe, obtained from him a promise that the -converts should be constrained to go back to the faith which they had -forsaken. They were brought before Rufus, and most of them were by his -terrible threats forced again to apostatize.[448] The tale of the Red -King’s success in this crooked kind of missionary enterprise reached -the ears of a Jew father――where we are not told――whose only and -well-beloved son was lost to him by conversion to the Christian faith. -The young man had been favoured with a vision of the protomartyr -Stephen, who had bidden him ask for baptism and take his own name at -the font.[449] He went to a priest, told his tale, and was admitted to -baptism by the name which was appointed to him. His father, mourning -for his loss, went to King William and made his complaint; praying -that at his command his son might be restored to his old faith.[450] -Rufus held his peace; the argument which alone persuaded him to meddle -in such matters had not yet been urged.[451] A promise of sixty marks -of silver, payable on the second conversion of the youth, brought the -King to another mind,[452] and Stephen was called into the royal -presence. A dialogue took place between the King and the neophyte, in -which Rufus, remembering perhaps the one redeeming feature in his own -life, pressed Stephen’s return to Judaism as a matter of filial duty. -The youth humbly suggests that the King is joking. Rufus waxes wroth, -and takes to words of abuse and to his usual oath. Stephen’s eyes -shall be torn out, if he does not presently obey his bidding.[453] The -youth stands firm, and even rebukes the King. He can be no good -Christian who, instead of trying to win to Christ those who are -estranged from him, strives to drive back those who have already -embraced his faith. Rufus, put to shame by the answer, has nothing to -say, but drives Stephen from his presence with scorn.[454] The Jew -father is waiting without. His son overwhelms him with words of abuse -which even zeal for his new faith would hardly justify. He would no -longer acknowledge a father in one whose own father was the Devil, and -who, not satisfied with his own damnation, sought the damnation of his -son.[455] With this somewhat harsh way of putting matters, the zealous -youth vanishes from the story; the Jew father has yet another turn -with the Red King. He is called in, and Rufus says that he has done -what he had been asked to do, and demands the promised payment for his -pains.[456] The Jew expostulates. His son, he says, is firmer than -ever in his Christian faith and in his hatred towards himself. Yet the -King says that he has done what he had been asked, and demands -payment. “Finish,” he goes on, with a boldness which challenges some -sympathy, “what you have begun, and then we will settle about my -promise; such was our agreement.”[457] It is characteristic of Rufus -not to be angry at a really bold word. Evidently entering into the -grotesque side of the dispute, he rejects the doctrine of payment by -results; he answers that he has done his best, and that, though he had -not succeeded, he cannot go away with nothing for his trouble.[458] At -last, after some further haggling, the parties in this strange dispute -come to a compromise. The Jew pays, and the King receives, half the -sum which had been promised in the beginning. - -[Sidenote: William’s defiance of God.] - -[Sidenote: 1093.] - -[Sidenote: His contempt for the saints.] - -[Sidenote: Frequency of blasphemy.] - -[Sidenote: Contrast of Saint Lewis.] - -[Sidenote: Case of Henry the Second.] - -A king of whom such stories as these could be told, whether every -detail is literally true or not, must have utterly cast aside all the -decencies of his own or of any other age. But Rufus, according to the -tales told of him, went even further than this. He is charged with a -kind of personal defiance of the Almighty, quite distinct alike from -mere carelessness and from speculative unbelief. When he recovered -from the sickness which forms such an epoch in his life, “God,” he -said, “shall never see me a good man; I have suffered too much at his -hands.”[459] He mocked at God’s judgement and doubted his justice――his -disbelief in the ordeal is quoted as an instance. Either God did not -know the deeds of men, or else he weighed them in an unfair -balance.[460] He was wroth if any one ventured to add the usual -reserve of God’s will to anything which he, King William, undertook or -ordered to be undertaken. He had that belief in himself that he would -have everything referred to his own wisdom and power only.[461] Modern -ideas might be less shocked at another alleged sign of his impiety. He -was said to have declared publicly that neither Saint Peter nor any -other saint had any influence with God, and that he would ask none of -them for help.[462] In all this we are again left in doubt whether we -are dealing with a speculative unbeliever, or only with one who was so -puffed up with pride that he liked not to be reminded of any power -greater than his own, least of all of a power which might some day -call him to account for his evil deeds. And though William Rufus -clearly went lengths in his defiance of God to which even bad men were -unaccustomed, we must remember that something of the same kind in a -less degree was not uncommon in his time. Blasphemy strictly so -called, that is, neither simple irreverence nor intellectual unbelief, -but direct reviling and defiance of a power which, by the very terms -of the defiance, is believed in, is a vice of which Englishmen of our -own day have hardly any notion. But, as it has many parallels in -heathen creeds, as it has not yet died out in all parts of -Christendom, so it was by no means unknown in the days with which we -are dealing. Its frequency at a somewhat later time is shown when the -biographer of Saint Lewis sets it down as one of his special virtues, -that he never, under any circumstance, allowed any reviling of God or -the saints.[463] On the other hand, we find Henry the Second, whom -there is no reason whatever to look on as a speculative unbeliever, -indulging, as in lesser forms of irreverence, so also in direct -reviling of God.[464] But the vice, to us so revolting and -unintelligible, seems to have reached its highest point in the King of -whom men said in proverbs that he every morning got up a worse man -than he lay down, and every evening lay down a worse man than he got -up.[465] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Redeeming features in Rufus’ character.] - -[Sidenote: Little personal cruelty.] - -[Sidenote: Respect to his father’s memory.] - -[Sidenote: His foundations.] - -[Sidenote: Le Mans.] - -Thus far we are inclined to see in our second William a character of -unmixed blackness, alike as a man and as a King. There seems no room -left for even pagan virtues in the oppressor, the blasphemer, the man -given up to vices at whose foulness ordinary sinners stood aghast. Yet -nothing is plainer than that there was something in the character of -William Rufus which made him not wholly hateful in the eyes of his own -age. There was a side to him which, if we may not strictly call it -virtuous, has yet in it something akin to virtue, as compared with -other sides of him. There is, as I have already hinted, amidst all the -general oppressions of his reign, amidst all the special outrages -which he at least allowed to go unpunished, no sign in him of that -direct delight in human suffering which marks some of his -contemporaries. I have spoken of his dutiful obedience to his father -while he lived; and the sentiment of filial duty lived on after his -father’s death, and showed itself in some singular forms of respect -for his memory. Elsewhere the enemy and spoiler of the Church, towards -his father’s ecclesiastical foundations Rufus appears as a benefactor. -Saint Stephen’s, the monument of his father’s penance, Battle, the -monument of his father’s victory, were both the objects of his -bounty.[466] But it is singularly characteristic that the means for -bounty towards Saint Stephen at Caen were found in the plunder of the -Holy Cross at Waltham.[467] At York, strangely out of the common range -of his actions, we find him counted as a second founder of the -hospital of Saint Peter; we find him changing its site, enlarging its -buildings and revenues, but specially setting forth that he was -confirming the gifts of his father.[468] We shall see that, in all his -wars, it was his special ambition to keep whatever had been his -father’s; whatever he lost or won, it was a point of honour to hold -the great trophy of his father’s continental victories. In other -warfare the Red King might halt or dally or put up with an imperfect -conquest. But when Le Mans, castle and city, was to be kept or won, -when the royal tower of his father was in jeopardy or in hostile -hands, then the heart of Rufus never waxed weak in counsel, his arm -never faltered in the fight. - -[Sidenote: His chivalrous spirit.] - -[Sidenote: Chivalry a new thing.] - -But one form of words which I have just used opens to us one special -side of the character of the Red King which is apt to be overlooked. I -have spoken of the point of honour. I am not sure that, in the -generation before Rufus, those words could have applied in all their -fulness either to Harold of England or to William of Normandy, either -to Gyrth of East-Anglia or to Roger of Beaumont. But to no man that -ever lived was the whole train of thoughts and feelings suggested by -those words more abidingly present than they were to the Red King. It -might be going too far to say that William Rufus was the first -gentleman, as his claim to that title might be disputed by his -forefather Duke Richard the Good.[469] But he was certainly the first -man in any very prominent place by whom the whole set of words, -thoughts, and feelings, which belong to the titles of knight and -gentleman were habitually and ostentatiously thrust forward. - -[Sidenote: True character of chivalry.] - -[Sidenote: The knight and the monk.] - -[Sidenote: His word when kept and when broken.] - -[Sidenote: His knightly courtesy.] - -[Sidenote: His trust in the knightly word of others.] - -[Sidenote: Contrast with Helias.] - -[Sidenote: Importance of this side of his character.] - -[Sidenote: He marks the beginning of a new æra.] - -We have now in short reached the days of chivalry, the days of that -spirit on which two of the masters of history have spoken in words so -strong that I should hardly venture to follow them.[470] Of that -spirit, the spirit which, instead of striving to obey the whole law of -right, picks out a few of its precepts to be observed under certain -circumstances and towards certain classes of people, William the Red -was one of the foremost models. The knight, like the monk, arbitrarily -picks out certain virtues, to be observed in such an exclusive and -one-sided way as almost to turn them into vices. He has his arbitrary -code of honour to supplant alike the law of God and the law of the -land. That code teaches the duties of good faith, courtesy, -mercy――under certain circumstances and towards certain people. Was -William Rufus a man of his word? His subjects as a body had no reason -to think so; the princes of other lands had no reason to think so. His -promises to his people went for nothing; his treaties with other -princes went for nothing.[471] To observe both of these was the dull -everyday duty of a Christian man whom it had pleased God to call to a -particular state of life, that namely of a king. Holding, as Rufus -did, that no man could keep all his promises,[472] these were the -class of promises that he thought it needless to try to keep. But when -William plighted his word in the character of the _probus miles_, the -_preux chevalier_, in modern phrase, as “an officer and a gentleman,” -no man kept it more strictly. No man cared less for the justice of his -wars; no man cared less for the wrong and suffering which his warfare -caused. But no man ever more scrupulously observed all the mere -courtesies of warfare. He was not like Robert of Bellême. The life and -limb of the prisoner of knightly rank were safe in his hands. Indeed -any man of any rank who appealed to his personal generosity was always -safe. Under the influence of the law of honour, the tyrant, the -blasphemer, the extortioner, the oppressor who neither feared God nor -regarded man, puts on an air of unselfishness, of unworldliness. -Strict in the observance of his own knightly word, he places unbounded -confidence in the knightly word of others. He thrusts indignantly -aside the suggestion of colder spirits that a captive knight may -possibly break his _parole_.[473] We shall see all this as we follow -the tale of his strife with Helias of Maine, one who was as scrupulous -an observer of the law of honour as himself, but one who did not let -the law of honour stand in the place of higher and older laws. And -this is a side of the character of Rufus on which it is important to -dwell, as it is one which the popular conception of him, a conception -perfectly true as far as it goes, is apt to leave out. We have not -grasped the likeness of the real man, unless we remember that the man -whose crimes and vices the popular picture has not exaggerated, -carried with him through life a sentimental standard of filial duty -and reverence, and a knightly conscience, if the phrase may pass, as -quick to speak and as sure to be obeyed as the higher conscience of -Anselm or Helias. Without fully taking this in, we shall not easily -understand the twofold light in which Rufus looked to the men of his -own age, in whose eyes he clearly was not wholly hateful. And without -fully taking it in, we shall fail to give him his place in the general -history of England, Normandy, and mankind in general. In William Rufus -we have not only to study a very varied and remarkable phase of human -nature; we have also to look on a man who marks the beginning of a new -age and a new state of feeling. - -[Sidenote: Chivalry the bad side of some princes;] - -[Sidenote: Its one-sided nature.] - -[Sidenote: Its incidental use.] - -[Sidenote: Instances of obedience to a higher law.] - -[Sidenote: Practical working of chivalry.] - -[Sidenote: Bayard.] - -[Sidenote: The Black Prince.] - -[Sidenote: Francis the First of France.] - -[Sidenote: Twofold character of the Black Prince.] - -The Red King has indeed this advantage, that the other parts of his -character are so bad that the chivalrous side of him stands out as a -relief, as at least comparative light amid surrounding darkness. There -are other princes in whom the chivalrous side is the dark side, -because there are other parts of their character better than chivalry. -The essence of chivalry is that the fantastic and capricious law of -honour displaces all the forms of the law of right. The standard of -the good knight, the rule of good faith, respect, and courtesy, as due -from one knight to another, displaces the higher standard of the man, -the citizen, and the Christian. There are perhaps whole ages, there -certainly are particular men, in which this lower standard has its -use. Any check, any law, is better than no check and no law. He who -cannot rise to the higher rank of an honest man had better be a knight -and gentleman than a mere knave and ruffian. If a man cannot be kept -back from all crimes by the law of right, it is a gain that he should -be kept back from some crimes by the law of honour. It was better that -William Rufus should show mercy and keep his word in some particular -kind of cases than that he should never show mercy or keep his word at -all. But the very fact that such an one as Rufus could feel bound by -the law of honour shows how feeble a check the law of honour is. And -we must remember that the very feeling of courtesy and deference -towards men of a certain rank led only to more reckless and -contemptuous oppression of all who lay without the favoured pale. And, -at least as regards particular men, the beginning of the days of -chivalry was the falling back from a higher standard. We have come -across men in our own story who showed that they obeyed a better law -than that of honour. It was not at the bidding of chivalry or honour, -it was not in the character of knight or gentleman, that Herlwin made -light of his own wrongs by the side of those of his poor -peasants,[474] or that Harold refused to harry the lands of the men -who had chosen him to be their king.[475] But the law of honour and -chivalry was most fully obeyed, the character of knight and gentleman -was shown in its full perfection, when the Knight without Fear and -without Reproach refused to expose himself to toils of war which were -too dangerous for any but the base churl.[476] It was fully carried -out when the mirror of chivalry, the Black Prince himself, gave their -lives to the French knights who fought against him, and murdered the -unarmed men, women, and children, who craved for mercy.[477] It was no -less worthily carried out by the king who ever had the faith of a -gentleman on his lips, who boasted that he had never broken his word -except to women, and who betrayed, not only the women, but the allied -princes and commonwealths who trusted in him. William the Red at least -need not shrink from a comparison with Francis of Valois.[478] But it -must not be forgotten that one of the chivalrous heroes on our list -had a side to him better than his chivalry. William the Great -assuredly, and I believe William the Red also, would have shrunk from -such a deed as the slaughter of Limoges. But he who wrought the -slaughter of Limoges was also the patriotic statesman of the Good -Parliament. The knight, courteous and bloody as became his knighthood, -could turn about and act as something better than a knight. In such a -man we must measure the balance of good and evil as we can, and the -chivalrous side of him is the evil side. In William Rufus the -chivalrous side is the better side; it is the comparatively bright -spot in a picture otherwise of utter blackness. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Grouping of events in the reign of Rufus.] - -The chief events of the reign of William Rufus fall into two classes. -There is the military side; there is the ecclesiastical and -constitutional side. There is the side which shows us the noblest and -the basest type of the warrior in Helias of La Flèche and in Robert of -Bellême. There is the side which shows us the noblest and the basest -type of the priest in Anselm of Canterbury and in Randolf of Durham. -The two sides go on together. The most striking features in both -belong to a somewhat later time than that which we have now reached. -But it is the military side in its earlier stages which most directly -connects itself with the tale which we have gone through in the -present chapter. The first Norman campaign of the Red King comes in -date before the archiepiscopate of Anselm; it comes in idea before the -administration of Randolf Flambard. On the other hand, it is directly -connected with the war of Pevensey and Rochester, with the banishment -of Bishop Odo and Bishop William. We will therefore pass to it as the -chief subject of our next chapter. - - - - -CHAPTER III. - -THE FIRST WARS OF WILLIAM RUFUS. - -1090-1092.[479] - - -[Sidenote: Character of the year 1089.] - -[Sidenote: Natural phænomena.] - -[Sidenote: The great earthquake. Aug. 11, 1089.] - -The rest of the year in which Lanfranc died was unmarked by any -striking public event, political or military. The causes of evil which -had begun to play their part before the Primate’s death, which were -enabled to play it so much more powerfully after his death, were no -doubt already at work; but they had as yet not wrought any open -change, or done anything specially to impress men’s minds. The writers -of the time have nothing to record, except natural phænomena, and it -must be remembered that natural phænomena, and those mostly of a -baleful kind, form a marked feature of the reign of William Rufus. -Even he could hardly be charged with directly causing earthquakes, -storms, and bad harvests; but, in the ideas of his day, it was natural -to look on earthquakes, storms, and bad harvests, either as scourges -sent to punish his evil deeds, or else as signs that some more direct -vengeance was presently coming upon himself. The ever-living belief of -those times in the near connexion between the moral and the physical -world must always be borne in mind in reading their history. And in -the days of William Rufus there was plenty in both worlds to set men’s -minds a-thinking. Lanfranc had not been dead three months before the -land was visited with a mighty earthquake. The strongest -buildings――the massive keeps and minsters lately built or still -building――seemed to spring from the ground and sink back again into -their places.[480] Then came a lack of the fruits of the earth of all -kinds; the harvest was slow in ripening and scanty when it came; men -reaped their corn at Martinmas and yet later.[481] - -[Sidenote: Character of the year 1090.] - -[Sidenote: Beginnings of foreign adventure.] - -[Sidenote: First mention of domestic opposition.] - -The next year we find no entries of this kind. There was a mighty stir -in England and in Normandy; but it was not a mere stirring of the -elements. We now enter on the record of the foreign policy and the -foreign wars of the Red King, and we hear the first wail going up from -the oppressed folk within his kingdom. Throughout his reign the growth -of the prince’s power and the grievances of his people go together. In -the former year there was nothing to chronicle but the earthquake and -the late harvest. This year we hear of the first successes of the King -beyond the sea, and we hear, as their natural consequence, that the -“land was fordone with unlawful gelds.”[482] - -[Sidenote: The years 1090-1091.] - -[Sidenote: Successes in Normandy.] - -[Sidenote: Supremacy over Scotland. 1091.] - -[Sidenote: Annexation of Cumberland. 1092.] - -The two years which followed the death of Lanfranc saw the attempt of -the first year of Rufus reversed. Instead of the lord of Normandy -striving to win England, the lord of England not only strives, but -succeeds, in making himself master of a large part of the Norman -duchy. Having thus become a continental potentate, the King comes back -to his island kingdom, to establish his Imperial supremacy over the -greatest vassal of his crown, and to do what his father had not done, -to enlarge the borders of his immediate realm by a new land and a new -city. - -[Sidenote: Close connexion of English and Norman history.] - -[Sidenote: The same main actors in both.] - -[Sidenote: Normandy the chief seat of warfare.] - -[Sidenote: Contrast between Normandy and England as to private war.] - -Through a large part then of the present chapter the scene of our -story will be removed from England to Normandy. Yet it is only the -scene which is changed, not the actors. One main result of the coming -of the first William into England was that for a while the history of -Normandy and that of England cannot be kept asunder. The chief men on -the one side of the water are the chief men on the other side. And the -fact that they were so is the main key to the politics of the time. We -have in the last chapter seen the working of this fact from one side; -we shall now see its working from the other side. The same men flit -backwards and forwards from Normandy to England and from England to -Normandy. But of warfare, public and private, during the reign of -William Rufus and still more during the reign of Henry the First, -Normandy rather than England is the chosen field. Without warfare of -some kind a Norman noble could hardly live. And for that beloved -employment Normandy gave many more opportunities than England. The -Duke of the Normans, himself after all the man of a higher lord, could -not be――at least no duke but William the Great could be――in his -continental duchy all that the King of the English, Emperor in his own -island, could be within his island realm. Private war was lawful in -Normandy――the Truce of God itself implied its lawfulness; it never was -lawful in England. And wars with France, wars with Anjou, the endless -struggle in and for the borderland of Maine, went much further towards -taxing the strength and disturbing the peace of the Norman duchy, than -the endless strife on the Welsh and Scottish marches could go towards -taxing the strength and disturbing the peace of the English kingdom. -Normandy then will be our fighting-ground far more than England; but -the fighting men will be the same in both lands. - -[Sidenote: The old and the new generation.] - -[Sidenote: Bishop Odo.] - -[Sidenote: Hugh. d. 1101.] - -[Sidenote: Roger. d. 1094.] - -[Sidenote: Robert of Mowbray.] - -[Sidenote: William of Warren.] - -[Sidenote: Walter Giffard, d. 1102.] - -[Sidenote: William of Eu.] - -[Sidenote: Robert of Bellême.] - -[Sidenote: Robert of Meulan.] - -The old companions of the Conqueror were by this time beginning to -make way for a new generation. The rebellion of 1088 saw the last -exploits of some of them. Yet others among them will still be actors -for a while. Bishop Odo, cut off from playing any part in England, -still plays a part in Normandy. The great border earls, Hugh of -Chester and of Avranches, Roger of Shrewsbury and of Montgomery, die -in the course of our tale, but not till we have something more to tell -about both of them, and a good deal to tell about the longer-lived of -the two. Their younger fellow, Robert of Mowbray, after becoming the -chief centre of one part of our story, leaves the world by a living -death. The new Earl of Surrey, if not already dead, passes away -without anything further to record of him; Walter Giffard, old as a -man, but young as an earl, still lives on. But younger men are coming -into sight. William of Eu, the son of the still living Count Robert, -has already come before us as a chief actor in our story, and we shall -see him as the chiefest sufferer. But above all, two men, whom we have -hitherto seen only by fits and starts, now come to the front as chief -actors on both sides of the sea. Before we enter on the details of -Norman affairs, it will be well to try clearly to take in the -character and position of two famous bearers of the same name, great -alike in England, in Normandy, and in France, Robert of Bellême, -afterwards of Shrewsbury, of Bridgenorth, and of both Montgomeries, -and Robert, Count of the French county of Meulan, heir of the great -Norman house of Beaumont, and forefather of the great English house of -Leicester. - -[Sidenote: History and character of Robert of Bellême.] - -[Sidenote: Succeeds his mother Mabel. 1082.] - -[Sidenote: Her inheritance.] - -[Sidenote: Succeeds his father at Montgomery, 1094;] - -[Sidenote: and his brother at Shrewsbury, 1098.] - -[Sidenote: His wife Agnes of Ponthieu.] - -[Sidenote: Guy Count of Ponthieu. 1053-1100.] - -[Sidenote: Greatness of Robert’s possessions.] - -[Sidenote: Great part played by him.] - -The two Rogers, fathers of the two Roberts, are still living; but for -the rest of their days they play a part quite secondary to that played -by their sons. Robert of Bellême, the eldest son of Roger of -Montgomery, has already come before us several times, most prominently -as a sharer in the rebellion raised by the present Duke against his -father in Normandy[483] and in the rebellion raised on his behalf -against his brother. As son of the slain Countess Mabel,[484] he was -heir of the house of Talvas, heir alike of their possessions and of -their reputed wickedness. Lord through his mother of the castle from -which he took his name, lord of a crowd of other castles on the -border-lands of Normandy, Perche, and Maine, Robert of Bellême, Robert -Talvas, stands forth for the present as the son of Mabel rather than -as the son of Roger. In after times counties and lordships flowed in -upon him from various sources and in various quarters. The death of -his father gave him the old Norman possessions of the house of -Montgomery; the death of his brother gave him the new English -possessions of that house, the great earldom of Shrewsbury and all -that went with it. We seem to be carried back to past times when we -find that Robert of Bellême was married to the daughter of Guy of -Ponthieu, the gaoler of Harold, and that, at the accession of William -Rufus, Guy had still as many years to reign as the Red King himself. -Guy’s death at last added Ponthieu to the possessions of the house of -Bellême, nominally in the person of Robert’s son William Talvas, -practically in that of Robert himself. The lord of such lands, master -of four and thirty castles,[485] ranked rather with princes than with -ordinary nobles; and even now, when Robert held only the inheritance -of his mother, the extent and nature of his fiefs gave him a position -almost princely. The man alike of Normandy and of France, he could -make use of the profitable as well as the dangerous side of a divided -allegiance, and it is not without reason that we find the lord of the -border-land spoken of by the fitting title of Marquess.[486] From the -death of the Conqueror onwards, through the reigns of Robert and -William, till the day when Henry sent him to a life-long prison, -Robert of Bellême fills in the history of Normandy and England a place -alongside of their sovereigns. - -[Sidenote: His character.] - -[Sidenote: His surname.] - -[Sidenote: His skill in engineering.] - -[Sidenote: His special and wanton cruelty.] - -[Sidenote: His treatment of his wife] - -[Sidenote: and his godson.] - -With the inheritance of Mabel and William Talvas, their son and -grandson was believed to have succeeded in full measure to the -hereditary wickedness of their house. That house is spoken of as one -at whose deeds dæmons themselves might shudder,[487] and Robert -himself bears in the traditions of his Cenomannian enemies the -frightful surname which has been so unfairly transferred to the father -of the Conqueror. His name lives in proverbs. In the land of Maine his -abiding works are pointed to as the works of Robert the Devil. -Elsewhere the “wonders of Robert of Bellême” became a familiar -saying.[488] That Robert was a man of no small natural gifts is plain; -to the ordinary accomplishments of the Norman warrior he added a -mastery of the more intellectual branches of the art of warfare. As -the Cenomannian legend shows, he stood at the head of his age in the -skill of the military engineer.[489] Firm and daring, ready of wit and -ready of speech, he had in him most of the qualities which might have -made him great in that or in any other age. But, even in that age, he -held a place by himself as a kind of incarnation of evil. Restless -ambition, reckless contempt of the rights of others, were common to -him with many of his neighbours and contemporaries. But he stands -almost alone in his habitual delight in the infliction of human -suffering. The recklessness which lays waste houses and fields, the -cruelty of passion or of policy which slays or mutilates an enemy, -were common in his day. But even then we find only a few men of whom -it was believed that the pangs of other men were to them a direct -source of enjoyment. In Robert sheer love of cruelty displaced even -greediness; he refused ransom for his prisoners that he might have the -pleasure of putting them to lingering deaths.[490] The received forms -of cruelty blinding and mutilation, were not enough for him; he -brought the horrors of the East into Western Europe; men, and women -too, were left at his bidding to writhe on the sharp stake.[491] -Distrustful of all men, artful, flattering, courteous of speech, his -profession of friendship was the sure path to destruction.[492] The -special vices of William Rufus are not laid to his charge; it is at -least to the credit of Latin Christendom in the eleventh century that -it needs the union of its two worst sinners to form the likeness of an -Ottoman Majesty, Excellency, or Highness in the nineteenth. But his -domestic life was hardly happy. His wife Agnes, the heiress of -Ponthieu, the mother of his one child William Talvas, was long kept by -him in bonds in the dungeons of Bellême.[493] And, more piteous than -all, we read how a little boy, his own godchild, drew near to him in -all loving trust. Some say, in the sheer wantonness of cruelty, some -say, to avenge some slight fault of the child’s father, the monster -drew the boy under his cloak and tore out his eyes with his own -hands.[494] - -[Sidenote: His enmity] - -[Sidenote: to the men of Domfront;] - -[Sidenote: to Helias;] - -[Sidenote: to Rotrou of Perche;] - -[Sidenote: to the prelates of Seez.] - -[Sidenote: Abbot Ralph, afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury.] - -[Sidenote: His imprisonment by Henry. 1110.] - -The list of the men, great and small, who were simply wronged and -dispossessed by Robert of Bellême, is long indeed.[495] Some of them, -it is true, were now and then able to revenge their wrongs with their -own arms. He seems, as might have been expected, to have been the -special enemy of all that was specially good in individuals or in -communities. He was the bitter foe of the valiant and faithful men of -Domfront.[496] He was before all things the enemy of Helias of La -Flèche. He was the enemy of his neighbour Count Rotrou of Perche, who -also bears a good character among the princes of his day.[497] As -temporal lord of Seez, he was the enemy of its churches, episcopal and -abbatial; he had not that reverence for the foundation of his father -which is one of the redeeming features in the character of the Red -King. He underwent excommunication from the zeal of Bishop Serlo, and -by the wrongs done by him to Abbot Ralph of Seez, which drove that -prelate to seek shelter in England, he unwittingly gave England a -worthy primate and Anselm a worthy successor.[498] One is inclined to -wonder how such a man gained the special favour of the Conqueror, -whose politic sternness had nothing in common with the fiendish -brutality of Robert.[499] Perhaps, as in William Rufus, the worst -features of his character may for a while have been hidden. It is less -surprising that, in the days of William’s sons, we find him in honour -at the courts of England, Normandy, and France. But at last vengeance -came upon him. When King Henry sent him to spend his days in prison, -it was in a prison so strait and darksome that the outer world knew -not whether he were dead or alive, nor was the time of his death set -down in any record.[500] - -[Sidenote: Robert Count of Meulan and Earl of Leicester.] - -[Sidenote: His father Roger of Beaumont.] - -[Sidenote: He inherits Meulan from his uncle,] - -[Sidenote: and Beaumont from his father.] - -[Sidenote: His earldom of Leicester.] - -[Sidenote: His exploits at Senlac.] - -[Sidenote: His fame for wisdom.] - -[Sidenote: Character of his influence with Rufus and Henry.] - -[Sidenote: His sons.] - -[Sidenote: His last days.] - -[Sidenote: His death. 1118.] - -[Sidenote: Story of his death-bed.] - -The other Robert, the son of the other Roger, was a man of a different -mould, a man who would perhaps seem more in place in some other age -than in that in which he lived. He was the son of the old and worthy -Roger of Beaumont, the faithful counsellor of princes, who, like -Gulbert of Hugleville, refused to share in the spoils of England.[501] -Great, like his namesake, in France, Normandy, and England, Robert -passed through a long life unstained by any remarkable crime, though -it was hinted that, of his vast possessions on both sides of the sea, -some were not fairly come by.[502] He is known in history by the name -of his French county of Meulan, which he inherited from his mother’s -brother, Count Hugh, son of Count Waleran, who withdrew to become a -monk of Bec.[503] From his father, when he too had gone to end -his days in his father’s monastery of Preaux, Robert inherited -the lordship of Beaumont, called, from his father’s name, -Beaumont-le-Roger.[504] He shared in the Conqueror’s distribution of -lands in England, and in after days he received the earldom of -Leicester from King Henry, as his less stirring brother Henry had -already received that of Warwick from the Red King. That he was a -brave and skilful soldier we cannot doubt; his establishment in -England was the reward of good service done at one of the most -critical moments of the most terrible of battles.[505] But the warrior -of Senlac hardly appears again in the character of a warrior; he lives -on for many years as a cold and crafty statesman, the counsellor of -successive kings, whose wisdom, surpassing that of all men between -Huntingdon and Jerusalem, was deemed, like that of Ahithophel, to be -like the oracle of God.[506] His counsels were not always of an -amiable kind. Under Rufus, without, as far as we can see, sharing in -his crimes, he checked those chivalrous instincts which were the -King’s nearest approach to virtue.[507] Under Henry his influence was -used to hinder the promotion of Englishmen in their own land.[508] Yet -on the whole his character stands fair. He discouraged foppery and -extravagance by precept and example; he was the right-hand man of King -Henry in maintaining the peace of the land, and he seems to have -shared the higher tastes of the clerkly monarch.[509] Of Anselm he was -sometimes the enemy, sometimes the friend.[510] His sons were well -taught, and they could win the admiration of Pope and cardinals by -their skill in disputation.[511] The eldest, Waleran, his Norman heir, -plays an unlucky part in the reign of Henry;[512] his English heir -Robert continued the line of the Earls of Leicester.[513] His last -days were clouded by domestic troubles;[514] and he is said to have -formally perilled his own soul in his zeal for the temporal welfare of -his sons. On his death-bed, so the story runs, Archbishop Ralph and -other clergy bade him, for his soul’s health, to restore whatever -lands he had gained unjustly.[515] What then, he asked, should he -leave to his sons? “Your old inheritance,” answered Ralph, “and -whatever you have acquired justly. Give up the rest, or you devote -your soul to hell.” The fond father answered that he would leave all -to them, and would trust to their filial piety to make atonement for -his sins.[516] But we are told that Waleran and Robert were too busy -increasing by wrong what had been won by wrong to do anything for the -soul of their father.[517] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Prominence of the two Roberts.] - -These are the two men who, of secondary importance in the tale of the -Conquest and of the reign of the first William, become the most -prominent laymen of the reign of the second. The churchmen of the time -who stand forth conspicuously for good and for evil will have their -place in another chapter. But the two Roberts will, next to the King -and the Ætheling, hold the first place in the tale which we have -immediately to tell, as they held it still in days of which we shall -not have the telling, long after the Ætheling had changed into the -King. The force of him of Bellême, the wit of him of Meulan, had their -full place in the affairs both of Normandy and of England, and both -were brought to bear against the prince and people of Maine. - - -§ 1. _Normandy under Robert. 1087-1090._ - -[Sidenote: Temptations to the invasion of Normandy.] - -[Sidenote: Interest of those who held land in both countries.] - -[Sidenote: Provocation given by Robert.] - -[Sidenote: State of Normandy.] - -[Sidenote: His invasion likely to be largely welcome.] - -That the thought of an invasion of his elder brother’s duchy should -present itself to the mind of William Rufus was not very wonderful. -The fact that it was his elder brother’s duchy might perhaps be of -itself enough to suggest the thought. The dutiful son of his father, -whom alone his father had called to rule of his own free will, might -feel himself in some sort defrauded, if any part of his father’s -dominions was held by a brother whose only claim was the accident of -his elder birth, and whose personal unfitness for the rule of men his -father had emphatically set forth. Indeed, without seeking for any -special motive at all, mere ambition, mere love of enterprise, might -be motive enough to lead a prince like Rufus to a campaign beyond the -sea, a campaign which might make him master of the native dominion of -his father, the land of his own birth. And such schemes would be -supported on grounds of reasonable policy by a large part of the -Norman possessors of the soil of England. Holding, many of them, lands -on both sides of the sea, it was their interest that the same prince -should reign on both sides of the sea, and that they themselves should -not be left open to the dangers of a divided allegiance. They had -failed to carry out this purpose by putting Robert in possession of -England; they might now carry it out by putting William in possession -of Normandy. And the attempt might even be made with some show of -justice. The help which Robert had given to the rebellion against -Rufus might, in the eyes of Rufus, or of a much more scrupulous prince -than Rufus, have been held to justify reprisals. And to a prince -seeking occasions or excuses for an invasion of Normandy the actual -condition of that duchy might seem directly to invite the coming of an -invader. The invader might almost comfort himself with the belief that -his invasion was a charitable work. Any kind of rule, almost any kind -of tyranny, might seem an improvement on the state of things which was -now rife through the whole length and breadth of the Norman land. -William Rufus might reasonably think that no small part of the -inhabitants of Normandy would welcome invasion from an invader of -their own blood, the son of their greatest ruler. And the event showed -that he was by no means mistaken in so thinking. - -[Sidenote: The Conqueror foretells the character of Robert’s reign.] - -[Sidenote: Utter anarchy of the duchy.] - -[Sidenote: Character of Robert.] - -[Sidenote: His weak good-nature.] - -[Sidenote: Revival of brigandage and private war.] - -[Sidenote: Lack of “justice.”] - -No words of man were ever more truly spoken than the words in which -William the Great, constrained, as he deemed himself, to leave -Normandy in the hands of Robert, was believed to have foretold the -fate of the land which should be under his rule. Robert was, so his -father is made to call him, proud and foolish, doomed to misfortune; -the land would be wretched where he was master.[518] The Conqueror was -a true prophet; when Robert stepped into his father’s place, the work -of the fifty years’ rule of his father was undone in a moment. -Normandy at once fell back into the state of anarchy from which -William had saved it, the state into which it fell when the elder -Robert set forth for Jerusalem.[519] Once more every man did what was -right in his own eyes. And the Duke did nothing to hinder them. Again -we are brought to that standard of the duties of a sovereign of which -we have heard so often, that standard which was reached by the -Conqueror and by his younger son, but which neither Robert in this -generation nor Stephen in the next strove to reach. Robert, it must -always be noticed, is never charged with cruelty or oppression of any -kind in his own person. His fault was exactly of the opposite kind. He -was so mild and good-natured, so ready to listen to every suppliant, -to give to every petitioner, to show mercy to every offender, that he -utterly neglected the discharge of the first duty of his office, that -which the men of his time called doing justice.[520] William the Great -had done justice and made peace. The smaller brood of thieves and -murderers had been brought to feel the avenging arm of the law. -Thieves and murderers on a greater scale, the unruly nobles of the -duchy, had been forced to keep back their hands from that form of -brigandage which they dignified with the name of private war. Under -Robert both classes of offenders found full scope for their energies. -He did nothing to restrain either. He neither made peace nor did -justice. Brave, liberal, ready of speech, ready of wit and keen of -sight in supporting the cause of another, Robert undoubtedly could be. -But stronger qualities were needed, and those qualities Robert had -not. Sunk in sloth and dissipation, no man heeded him; the land was -without a ruler. Forgetful alike of injuries and of benefits, Robert, -from the first moment of his reign, tamely endured the most flagrant -outrages to the ducal authority, without doing anything to hinder or -to avenge.[521] - -[Sidenote: Spread of vice and evil fashions.] - -[Sidenote: Weakness of the spiritual power.] - -In other respects also Normandy suddenly changed from what it had been -under the great King-duke. William the Great, strict to austerity in -his private life, careful in the observance of all religious duties, a -zealous supporter of ecclesiastical discipline, had made his duchy -into a kind of paradise in ecclesiastical eyes. All this was now swept -away. The same flood of foolish and vicious fashions which overspread -England overspread Normandy also. There is nothing to convict Robert -personally of the special vices of Rufus; but the life of the -unmarried Duke was very unlike the life of his father. And vice of the -grossest kind, the vices of Rufus himself, stalked forth into broad -daylight, unabashed and unpunished.[522] The ecclesiastical power, no -longer supported by the secular arm, was too weak to restrain or to -chastise.[523] As every form of violence, so every form of -licentiousness, had its full swing in the Normandy of Robert Curthose. - -[Sidenote: Building of castles.] - -[Sidenote: The Conqueror keeps garrisons in the castles of the -nobles.] - -[Sidenote: Instances at Evreux, and in the Bellême castles.] - -[Sidenote: Robert of Bellême drives out the ducal forces.] - -[Sidenote: The like done by the Count of Evreux and others.] - -[Sidenote: Robert’s lavish grants.] - -[Sidenote: Ivry.] - -[Sidenote: Brionne.] - -But, above all, this time stood out, like all times of anarchy, as a -time of building and strengthening of castles. One of the means by -which the Conqueror had maintained the peace of the land had been by -keeping garrisons of his own in the castles of such of his nobles as -were likely to be dangerous. He had followed this wise policy with the -castle of Evreux, the stronghold of his kinsman Count William. He had -followed it with the crowd of castles which, as the inheritance of his -mother, had passed to Robert of Bellême, the man who is to be the -leading villain of our present drama. But the precautions of the -Conqueror lasted no longer than his life; his successor might be -defied without danger. At the moment of the King’s death, Robert of -Bellême was on his way to the court to “speak with the King,” in the -ordinary phrase,[524] on some affairs of his own. He had reached -Brionne when he heard of the Conqueror’s death. Instead of going on to -offer his homage or support to the new Duke, he turned back, gathered -his own followers, marched on Alençon, and by a sudden attack drove -the ducal garrison out of the fortress by the Sarthe, the southern -bulwark of Normandy. He did the same with better right on his own hill -of Bellême, which was not strictly Norman soil. He did so with all his -other castles, and with as many of the castles of his neighbours as he -could.[525] The lord of Bellême in short established himself as a -prince who might well bear himself as independent of the lord of -Rouen. Count William of Evreux followed his example; the late King’s -garrison was driven out of the fortress which had arisen within the -walls of the Roman Mediolanum. William of Breteuil, Ralph of Toesny or -of Conches, the nobles of Normandy in general wherever they had the -power, all did the like.[526] They drove out the garrisons; they -strengthened the old fortresses; they raised new ones, adulterine -castles in the phrase of the day, built without the Duke’s licence and -placed beyond his control. Those who were strong enough seized on the -castles of weaker neighbours. The land was again filled with these -robbers’ nests, within whose walls and circuit law was powerless, -lairs, as men said, of grievous wolves, who entered in and spared not -the flock.[527] Some nobles indeed had the decency to go through the -form of asking the Duke for gifts which they knew that he would not -have strength of mind to refuse them. One of them was William of -Breteuil, the son of the famous Earl William of Hereford, the brother -of the rebel Roger,[528] and once a sharer in Robert’s rebellion -against his father. He asked and received the famous tower of Ivry, -the tower of Albereda, the now vanished stronghold which once looked -down on the plain where Henry of Navarre was in after ages to smite -down the forces of the League. This gift involved a wrong to the old -Roger of Beaumont, who had held that great fortress by the Conqueror’s -commission. Roger was accordingly recompensed by a grant of Brionne, -the island stronghold in the heart of Normandy, which had played such -a part in the early wars of the Conqueror.[529] Thus places specially -connected with the memory of the great William, places like Alençon -and Brionne, which had cost him no small pains to win or to recover, -passed away from his son without a thought. Robert gave to every man -everything that he asked for, to the impoverishment of himself and to -the strengthening of every other man against him.[530] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: The Ætheling Henry.] - -[Sidenote: He claims his mother’s lands.] - -[Sidenote: Lavish waste of Robert.] - -[Sidenote: He asks a loan of Henry.] - -[Sidenote: Henry buys the Côtentin and Avranchin.] - -[Sidenote: Henry’s firm rule.] - -In one corner only of the duchy was there a better state of things to -be seen. The Ætheling Henry had received from his dying father a -bequest in money, but no share in his territorial dominions.[531] He -claimed however the English lands which had been held by his mother -Matilda, but which the late King had kept in his own hands after her -death.[532] This claim had not as yet been made good, and Henry’s -possessions still consisted only of his five thousand pounds in money. -With part of this he was presently to make a splendid investment. -While Henry had money but no lands, Robert had wide domains, but his -extravagance soon left him without money. The Norman portion of the -Conqueror’s hoard was presently scattered broadcast among his -mercenary soldiers and other followers. Of these he kept a vast -number; men flocked eagerly to a prince who was so ready to give; but -before long he was without the means of giving or paying any more. He -asked Henry for a gift or a loan. The scholar-prince was wary, and -refused to throw his money away into the bottomless pit of Robert’s -extravagance.[533] The Duke then proposed to sell him some part of his -dominions. At this proposal Henry caught gladly, and a bargain was -struck. For a payment of three thousand pounds, Henry became master of -a noble principality in the western part of the Norman duchy. The -conquest of William Longsword,[534] the colony of Harold -Blaatand,[535] the whole land from the fortress of Saint James to the -haven of Cherbourg, the land of Coutances and Avranches, the castle -and abbey of Saint Saviour,[536] and the house that was castle and -abbey in one, the house of Saint Michael in Peril of the Sea――all this -became the dominion of Henry, now known as Count of the Côtentin. With -these territories he received the superiority over a formidable -vassal; he became lord over the Norman possessions of Earl Hugh of -Chester.[537] Thus the English-born son of the Norman Conqueror held -for his first dominion no contemptible portion of his father’s duchy, -as ruler of the Danish land which in earlier days had beaten back an -English invasion.[538] In that land, under the rule of him who was one -day to be called the Lion of Justice, there was a nearer approach to -peace and order than could be found in other parts of Normandy. The -young Count governed his county well and firmly; no such doings went -on in the lands of Coutances and Avranches as went on in the rest of -the duchy under the no-rule of Duke Robert.[539] - -[Sidenote: Henry goes to England. Summer, 1088.] - -[Sidenote: William promises him the lands of Matilda.] - -[Sidenote: He seizes them again.] - -[Sidenote: They are granted to Robert Fitz-hamon.] - -Henry, Ætheling on one side of the sea and now Count on the other -side,[540] next thought of crossing the channel to seek for those -estates in his native land which he claimed in right of his -mother.[541] These lands, in Cornwall, Buckinghamshire, and specially -in Gloucestershire, had mostly formed a part of the forfeited -possessions of Brihtric, the man whose name legend has so strangely -connected with that of Matilda.[542] Henry must have reached England -about the time when the rebellion had been put down, and when the new -King might be expected to be in a mood inclined either to justice or -to generosity. William received his brother graciously, and granted, -promised, or pretended to grant, the restitution of the lands of their -mother.[543] Henry, already a ruler on one side of the sea, a sharer -in his father’s inheritance, went back to his peninsula in a character -which was yet newer to him, that of a sharer in his father’s conquest, -a great land-owner on the other side of the sea. But his luck, which -was to shine forth so brightly in after times, forsook him for the -present. If Henry ever came into actual possession of his English -estates, his tenure of them was short. At some time which is not -distinctly marked, the lands which had been Matilda’s were again -seized by William. They were granted to one of the rising men of the -time, one of the few who had been faithful to the King in the late -times of trouble, to Robert Fitz-hamon, perhaps already the terror of -the southern Cymry. Thus the old possessions of Brihtric passed into -the hands of the lord of the castle of Cardiff, the founder of the -minster of Tewkesbury.[544] In the next generation the policy of Henry -was to win them back, if not for himself, yet for his son.[545] - -[Sidenote: Influence of Odo with Robert.] - -[Sidenote: Autumn, 1088.] - -[Sidenote: Henry brings back Robert of Bellême.] - -[Sidenote: They are seized and imprisoned.] - -[Sidenote: Earl Roger makes war on the Duke.] - -[Sidenote: His fortresses.] - -If the Count of Coutances failed of his objects in England, a worse -fate awaited him for a season on his return to Normandy. He had -enemies at the court of Duke Robert; first of all, it would seem, his -uncle Odo, lately Earl of Kent and still Bishop of Bayeux. He was now -driven from his earldom to his bishopric, like a dragon, we are told, -with fiery wings cast down to the earth.[546] The tyrant of Bayeux, -the worst of prelates――such are the names under which Odo now appears -in the pages of our chief guide[547]――had again become Robert’s chief -counsellor. His counsel seems to have taken the form of stirring up -the Duke’s mind to abiding wrath against his brother of England, and -against all who were, or were held to be, his partisans.[548] When -Henry left England to come back to Normandy, he brought with him a -dangerous companion in the person of Robert of Bellême. That rebel of -a few months back was now thoroughly reconciled to Rufus. Duke Robert -was even made to believe that his namesake of Bellême, so lately his -zealous supporter, was joined with Henry by a mutual oath to support -the interests of the King of the English at the expense of the Duke of -the Normans.[549] The measures of Robert or of Odo were speedily -taken; the coasts were watched; the voyagers were seized before they -could disembark from their ships.[550] They were put in fetters, and -presently consigned to prisons in the keeping of the Bishop. They had -not even the comfort of companionship in bonds. While the Ætheling, -Count of the Côtentin, was kept in Odo’s episcopal city, the place of -imprisonment for the son of the Earl of Shrewsbury was the fortress of -Neuilly, in the most distant part of Odo’s diocese, near the frontier -stream of Vire which parts the Bessin from Henry’s own peninsula. The -less illustrious captive was the first to find a champion. Earl Roger, -by the licence of the King, left England, crossed into Normandy, -entered into open war with the Duke on behalf of his son, and -garrisoned all his own castles and those of his son against him. -Vassal of three lords, the lord of Montgomery and Shrewsbury, the -father of the lord of Bellême, might almost rank as their peer. As a -prince rather than as a mere baron, Earl Roger took to arms. The -border-fortresses on the frontier ground of Normandy, Maine, and -Perche were all put into a state of defence.[551] Alençon, by the -border stream, was again, as in the days when its burghers mocked the -Tanner’s grandson,[552] garrisoned against his son and successor. -Bellême itself, the cradle of the house of Talvas――the Rock of Mabel, -bearing the name of her who had united the houses of Talvas -and Montgomery, and whose blood had been the price of its -possession――Saint-Cenery on its peninsula by the Sarthe, another of -the spoils of Mabel’s bloody policy――all these border strongholds, -together with a crowd of others lying more distinctly within the -Norman dominions, had again become hostile spots where the Duke of the -Normans was defied. - -[Sidenote: Odo’s exhortation to Robert.] - -[Sidenote: Rivalry of Normandy and France.] - -[Sidenote: The line of Talvas to be rooted out.] - -The episcopal gaoler of Bayeux, in his character of chief counsellor -of Duke Robert, is described as keeping his feeble nephew somewhat in -awe. But his counsels, it is added, were sometimes followed, sometimes -despised.[553] Now that all Normandy was in a blaze of civil war, Odo -came to Rouen, and had an audience of the Duke, seemingly in an -assembly of his nobles.[554] If our guide is to be trusted, Robert, -who had no love for hearing sermons even from the lips of his father, -was now condemned to hear a sermon of no small length from the perhaps -even readier lips of his uncle. Odo gave Robert a lecture on the good -government of his duchy, on the duty of defending the oppressed and -putting down their oppressors. A long list of princes are held up as -his examples, the familiar heroes of Persia, Macedonia, Carthage, and -Rome, among whom, one hardly sees why, Septimius Severus takes his -place along with the first Cæsar. On the same list too come the -princes of his own house, the princes whom the warlike French had ever -feared, winding up with the name of his own father, greatest of them -all.[555] In all this we hear the monk of Saint Evroul rather than the -Bishop of Bayeux; but any voice is worth hearing which impresses on us -a clearer understanding of the abiding jealousy between Normandy and -France. But we may surely hear Odo himself in the practical advice -that follows. Now is the time to root out the whole accursed stock of -Talvas from the Norman duchy. They were an evil generation from the -beginning, not one of whom ever died the death of other men.[556] It -is as the son of Mabel, not as the son of Roger, that Robert of -Bellême comes in for this frightful inheritance, and Odo could not -foresee how pious an end the Earl of Shrewsbury was to make in a few -years.[557] He reminded the Duke that a crowd of castles, which had -been ducal possessions as long as his father lived, had been seized on -his father’s death by Robert of Bellême, and their ducal garrisons -driven out.[558] It was the Duke’s duty, as the ruler of the land, as -a faithful son of Holy Church, to put an end to the tyranny of this -usurper, and to give to all his dominions the blessing of lawful -government at the hand of their lawful prince. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Affairs of Maine.] - -[Sidenote: Helias and Hildebert.] - -[Sidenote: History of Maine under the Conqueror.] - -[Sidenote: 1063.] - -[Sidenote: 1073.] - -[Sidenote: 1083.] - -[Sidenote: 1086.] - -[Sidenote: Dissatisfaction in Maine.] - -[Sidenote: Relations with Fulk of Anjou.] - -[Sidenote: Robert’s homage to Fulk.] - -But the overthrow of the house of Talvas was not the only work to -which Odo stirred up his nephew. There was another enterprise to be -undertaken before the great lord of the Cenomannian border could be -safely attacked. These early days of Robert lead us on at once to that -side of the continental wars and continental policy of Rufus which -seems to have drawn to itself the smallest amount of English interest -at the time,[559] but which is that on which we are now led to look -with a deeper interest than any other. Before Robert could safely -attack Bellême, he must make sure of Le Mans and of all Maine. Every -mention of that noble city, of its counts and its bishops, its -renowned church, and its stout-hearted citizens, has a charm which is -shared by no other spot between the Loire and the Channel. And at no -stage of its history did the Cenomannian state stand forth with -greater brilliancy than in the last days of its independent being, -when Le Mans had Helias to its count and Hildebert to its bishop. -Those days are still parted from us by a few years; but the advice -given by Odo to Robert brings us to the beginning of the chain of -events which leads straight to them. The historian of William Rufus -must now begin to look forward to the days when Rufus, like his -father, tried his strength against the valiant men of the Cenomannian -land and city, and tried it at a time when land and city could put -forth their full strength back again under a leader worthy of them. -But as yet the land of Maine has neither to deal with so mighty a foe -nor to rejoice in the guardianship of so worthy a champion. In the -stage of the tale which we have now reached, Rufus plays no part at -all, and Helias plays only a secondary part. The general story of Le -Mans and Maine has been elsewhere carried down to the last mention of -them in the days of the Conqueror.[560] It has been told how the land -passed under William’s power in the days before he crossed the sea to -win England[561]――how the city and land had revolted against the -Norman――how, after trying the rule of a foreign branch of their own -princely house, its people had risen as the first free commonwealth -north of the Loire――how they had been again brought into William’s -hand, and that largely by the help of his English warriors[562]――and -how, after the final submission of the city, isolated spots of the -Cenomannian land had again risen against the Norman power. The last -act of this earlier drama was when a single Cenomannian fortress -successfully withstood the whole strength of Normandy and -England.[563] We have seen how Hubert of Beaumont beheld the Conqueror -baffled before his hill fortress of Sainte-Susanne, the shattered keep -which still stands, sharing with Dol in the Breton land the honour of -being the two spots from which William had to turn away, conqueror no -longer.[564] But, if Hubert had beaten back William from his castle, -he had found it expedient to return to his allegiance; and, at the -death of the Conqueror, Maine seems to have been as thoroughly under -William’s power as Normandy and England. Things changed as soon as the -great King had passed away. The land and city which had striven so -often against the Conqueror himself were not likely to sit down -quietly under the feeble rule of Robert. And, besides the standing -dislike of the people of Maine to Norman rule, there was a neighbour -who was likely to be stirred up by his own ambition to meddle in the -affairs of Maine, and to whom the actual provisions of treaties gave -at least a colourable claim to do so. By the terms of the peace of -Blanchelande, the new Duke of the Normans had become the man of Count -Fulk of Anjou for the county of Maine.[565] It is true that the homage -had been of the most formal kind. There had been no reservation of -authority on the part of the superior lord, nor, as far as we can see, -was any service of any kind imposed on the fief, if fief it is to be -called. The homage might almost seem to have been a purely personal -act, a homage expressing thankfulness for the surrender of all Angevin -rights over Maine, rather than an acknowledgement of Angevin -superiority over the land and city. Still Robert, as Count of Maine, -had, in some way or other, become Count Fulk’s man, and Count Fulk -had, in some way or other, become Robert’s lord. A relation was thus -established between them of which the _Rechin_ was sure to take -advantage, whenever the time came. - -[Sidenote: Robert Count of Maine.] - -[Sidenote: State of things in Maine.] - -[Sidenote: Howel.] - -[Sidenote: Geoffrey of Mayenne.] - -[Sidenote: Helias.] - -[Sidenote: His descent and position.] - -[Sidenote: Story of Bishop Howel’s appointment.] - -[Sidenote: Samson recommends him for the see.] - -[Sidenote: Temporal relations of the bishopric of Le Mans.] - -[Sidenote: Howel consecrated at Rouen. April 21, 1085.] - -Robert, on his father’s death, had taken his title of Prince of the -Cenomannians as well as that of Duke of the Normans,[566] and his -authority seems to have been acknowledged at Le Mans no less than at -Rouen. We may suspect that there was no very deep felt loyalty in the -minds of a people whose rebellious tendencies had deeply impressed the -mind of William the Great. He is said――though we may guess that the -etymology comes rather from the reporter than from the speaker――to -have derived the name of their land and city from their currish -madness.[567] But there was as yet no open resistance. Of the three -chief men in Church and State, Bishop Howel was an active supporter of -the Norman connexion, while Geoffrey of Mayenne and Helias of La -Flèche were at least not ready openly to throw it off. Geoffrey, who -had fought against the Conqueror twenty-five years before,[568] who -had betrayed the young commonwealth of Le Mans fifteen years -before,[569] must have been now advanced in life; but we shall still -hear of him for some years to come. Helias, the chief hero of later -wars, was of a younger generation, and now appears for the first time. -He was, it will be remembered, the son of John of La Flèche and of -Paula the youngest sister of the last Count Herbert.[570] He was -therefore, before any other man in the land, the representative of -Cenomannian independence, as distinguished both from Norman rule and -from Angevin superiority. But his father had, in the Conqueror’s -second Cenomannian war, remained faithful to the Norman, alike against -commonwealth, Lombard, and Angevin.[571] His son for the present -followed the same course. Bishop Howel was in any case a zealous -Norman partisan; according to one story he was a special nominee of -the Conqueror, appointed for the express purpose of helping to keep -the people of Maine in order. According to the local historian, he had -been appointed Dean of Saint Julian’s by his predecessor Arnold, and -was, on Arnold’s death, freely and unanimously chosen to the -bishopric.[572] In Normandy it was believed that King William, on -Arnold’s death, offered the bishopric to one of his own clerks, Samson -of Bayeux, who declined the offer on the ground that a bishop, -according to apostolic rule, ought to be blameless, while he himself -was a grievous sinner in many ways. The King said that Samson must -either take the bishopric himself or find some fit person in his -stead. Samson made his nomination at once. There was in the King’s -chapel a clerk, poor, but of noble birth and of virtuous life, Howel -by name, and, as his name implied, of Breton birth or descent.[573] He -was the man to be bishop of Le Mans. Howel was at once sent for. He -came, not knowing to what end he was called. Young in years, slight -and mean in figure, he had not the stately presence with which Walcher -of Durham had once impressed the mind of Eadgyth, perhaps of William -himself.[574] But Howel was not called upon, like Walcher, to be a -goodly martyr, but only a confessor on a small scale. William was at -first tempted to despise the unconscious candidate for the chair of -Saint Julian. But Samson, who, sinner as he may have been, seems not -to have been a bad preacher or reasoner, warned the King that God -looked not at the outward appearance, but at the heart. William -examined further into Howel’s life and conversation, and presently -gave him the temporal investiture of the bishopric.[575] At the same -time a _congé d’élire_ went to Le Mans, which led to Howel’s “pure and -simple” election by the Chapter.[576] A point both of canon and of -feudal law turned up. The old dispute between the Norman Duke and the -Angevin Count about the advowson of the bishopric had never been -settled; the Peace of Blanchelande was silent on that point. Legally -there can be no doubt that the true temporal superior of the Bishop of -Le Mans was neither Fulk nor William, but their common, if forgotten, -lord King Philip.[577] But, whoever might be his temporal lord, no one -doubted that the Bishop of Le Mans was a suffragan, and the suffragan -highest in rank, of the Archbishop of Tours.[578] Yet, as things -stood, as Tours was in the dominions of Fulk, a subject of William who -went to that metropolis for consecration might have been called on to -enter into some engagement inconsistent with his Norman loyalty. By a -commission therefore from Archbishop Ralph of Tours, Howel received -consecration at Rouen from the Primate of the Normans, William the -Good Soul.[579] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Howel’s Norman loyalty.] - -[Sidenote: Robert before Le Mans.] - -[Sidenote: General submission of the county.] - -[Sidenote: Ballon holds out.] - -This story is worth telling, as it is thoroughly characteristic of the -Conqueror; but there is this difficulty about it, that we can hardly -understand either how the historian of the Bishops of Le Mans could -fail to know the succession of the deans of his own church, or else -how the head of the chapter of Saint Julian’s could be lurking as a -poor clerk in King William’s chapel. Be this as it may, there is -thorough agreement as to the episcopal virtues of Howel, as to his -zeal in continuing the works in the church of Saint Julian,[580] and -as to his unwavering loyalty to the Norman house. And, builder and -adorner of the sanctuary as he was, he did not scruple to rob the -altars of the saints of their gold and silver to feed the poor in the -day of hunger.[581] His loyalty to Robert seems to have carried with -it, for a time at least, the submission of the city. The Duke drew -near at the head of his army. Bishop Odo was again in harness as one -of his nephew’s chief captains. With him came not a few of the lords -who had seized castles in the Duke’s despite, but who were -nevertheless ready to follow his banner. There was the elder Ralph of -Toesny, he who had taken the strange message to King Henry after the -day of Mortemer, and who had refused to bear the banner of Normandy on -the day of Senlac.[582] With him was his nephew, William of Breteuil, -the elder and more lucky of the two sons of William Fitz-Osbern. He -had been one of Robert’s companions in his day of rebellion, along -with the younger Ralph of Toesny and with Robert of Bellême, now their -enemy.[583] The host entered Le Mans without resistance, and was -received, we are told, with joy by clergy and citizens alike.[584] -Messages were sent forth to summon the chief men of the county to come -and do their duty to their new lord. Helias came; so did Geoffrey of -Mayenne. When two such leaders submitted, others naturally followed -their example. All the chief men of Maine, it would seem, became the -liegemen of Duke Robert. One obstinate rebel alone, Pagan or Payne of -Montdoubleau, defended with his followers the castle of Ballon against -the new prince.[585] - -[Sidenote: The castle of Ballon.] - -[Sidenote: Siege of Ballon.] - -[Sidenote: August-September, 1088.] - -[Sidenote: The castle surrenders.] - -The fortress which still held out, one whose name we shall again meet -with more than once in the immediate story of the Red King, was a -stronghold indeed. About twelve miles north of Le Mans a line of high -ground ends to the north in a steep bluff rising above the Cenomannian -Orne, the lesser stream of that name which mingles its waters with the -Sarthe. The river is not the same prominent feature in the landscape -which the Sarthe itself is at Le Mans and at some of the other towns -and castles which it washes; it does not in the same way flow directly -at the foot of the hill. But it comes fully near enough to place -Ballon in the long list of peninsular strongholds. The hill forms a -prominent feature in the surrounding landscape; and the view from the -height itself, over the wooded plains and gentle hills of Maine, is -wide indeed. He who held Ballon against the lord of Normandy, the new -lord of Le Mans, might feel how isolated his hillfort stood in the -midst of his enemies. To the south Le Mans is seen on its promontory; -and, if the mighty pile of Saint Julian’s had not yet reached its -present height, yet the twin towers of Howel, the royal tower by their -side, the abbey of Saint Vincent then rising above all, may well have -caught the eye even more readily than it is caught by the somewhat -shapeless mass of the cathedral church in its present state. To the -north and north-west the eye stretches over lands which in any normal -state of things would have been the lands of enemies, the lands of the -houses of Montgomery and Bellême. But at the moment of Robert’s siege -the defenders of Ballon must have looked to them as friendly spots, -joined in common warfare against the Norman Duke. To the north the eye -can reach beyond the Norman border at now rebellious Alençon, to the -_butte_ of Chaumont, the isolated hill which looks down upon the Rock -of Mabel. To the north-east the horizon skirts the land, at other -times the most dangerous of all, but which might now be deemed the -most helpful, the native home of the fierce house of Talvas. But, even -if Ballon had been begirt on all sides by foes, its defenders might -well venture to hope that they could defy them all. The hill had -clearly been a stronghold even from præhistoric times. The neck of the -promontory is cut off by a vast ditch, which may have fenced in a -Cenomannian fortress in days before Cæsar came. This ditch takes in -the little town of Ballon with its church. A second ditch surrounds -the castle itself, and is carried fully round it on every side. The -castle of Ballon therefore does not, like so many of its fellows, -strictly overhang the stream or the low ground at its foot. At no -point does it, like many other fortresses in the same land, mingle its -masonry with the native rock. Ballon is more like Arques[586] on a -smaller scale than like any of the strictly river fortresses. Within -the ditch, the wall of the castle remains, a gateway, a tower, a house -of delicate detail; but every architectural feature at Ballon is later -than the days of Rufus; the greater part of the present castle belongs -to the latest days of mediæval art. This stronghold, to be fought for -over and over again in the course of our story, now underwent the -earliest of its sieges which concerns us. It held out stoutly for some -time during the months of August and September. The loss on both sides -was great. At last the besieged surrendered, and were admitted to the -Duke’s grace.[587] Robert was for a moment the undisputed lord of all -Maine. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Further schemes of Odo.] - -[Sidenote: Robert attacks Saint Cenery.] - -[Sidenote: Description and history of the fortress.] - -[Sidenote: Monastery of Saint Cenery.] - -[Sidenote: The monks flee to Château-Thierry.] - -[Sidenote: The castle founded by Geoffrey of Mayenne for William of -Geroy.] - -[Sidenote: History of the descendants of Geroy.] - -[Sidenote: Roche-Mabille.] - -[Sidenote: Saint Cenery seized by Mabel.] - -The first part of Bishop Odo’s counsel was thus successfully carried -out. But the submission of Maine was in Odo’s scheme only a means to -the thorough rooting out of the house of Bellême. And Robert found -himself in such sure possession of Le Mans and Maine that he could -call on the warriors of city and county to follow him in carrying out -the second part of the Bishop’s scheme. The first point for attack -among the fortresses held on behalf of Earl Roger or his captive son -was the castle of Saint Cenery. This was a border fortress of Normandy -and Maine, one which could boast of a long and stirring history, and -its small remains still occupy a site worthy of the tale which they -have to tell. Just within the Norman border, some miles west of the -town and castle of Alençon, not far from the junction of the lesser -stream of Sarthon with the boundary river, a long narrow peninsula is -formed by the windings of the Sarthe. It forms an advanced post of -Normandy thrust forward with the Cenomannian land on three sides of -it. The greater part of the peninsula consists of a steep and rocky -hill,[588] which, as it draws near to its point, is washed by the -stream on either side, though nearer to the isthmus the height rises -immediately above alluvial meadows between its base and the river. The -site was a tempting one for the foundation of a castle, in days when, -though there might be hostile ground on three sides, yet no bow-shot -or catapult from any hostile point could reach the highest part of the -hill. Yet, as the name of the place is ecclesiastical, so its earliest -memories are ecclesiastical, and its occupation as a fortress was, in -the days of our story, a thing of yesterday. Cenericus or Cenery, a -saint of the seventh century, gave the place its name. A monastery -arose, where a hundred and forty monks prayed around the tomb of their -patron. His memory is still cherished on his own ground. A church -contemporary with our story, a church of the eleventh century crowned -by a tower of the twelfth, rises boldly above the swift stream which -flows below the three apses of its eastern end. Within, the art of a -later but still early age has adorned its walls with the forms of a -series of holy persons, among whom the sainted hero of the spot holds -a chief place.[589] But if the name of Saint Cenery first suggests the -ecclesiastical history of the place, its surname[590] marks a chief -feature in its secular history. The place is still Saint -Cenery-_le-Gerey_. That is, it keeps the name of the famous house of -Geroy, the name so dear to the heart of the monk of Saint Evroul.[591] -For the monastery of Saint Cenery was but short-lived. When the wiking -Hasting was laying waste the land, the monks of Saint Cenery fled away -with the body of their patron, like that of Saint Cuthberht in our own -land, to the safer resting-place of Château-Thierry in the land of -Soissons.[592] As things now stand, the peninsula of Saint Cenery, -with its church and the site of its castle, might suggest, as a lesser -object suggests, a greater, the grouping of abbey and castle on that -more renowned peninsula where the relics of Saint Cuthberht at last -found shelter. The forsaken monastery was never restored. The holy -place lost its holiness; over the tombs of the ancient monks arose a -den of thieves, a special fortress of crime.[593] In other words, -after a century and a half of desolation, a castle arose on the -tempting site which was supplied by the neck of the peninsula.[594] -Fragments of its masonry may still be seen, and its precinct seems to -have taken in the church and the whole peninsula, though in the -greater part of its circuit no defence was needed beyond the steep and -scarped sides of the rocky hill itself. The castle was the work of a -man whose name has been familiar to us for thirty years, a man who was -still living, and who was actually in the host before the fortress of -his own rearing. Geoffrey of Mayenne was closely connected, as kinsman -and as lord, with William the son of Geroy. When Geoffrey fell into -the hands of William Talvas, the faithful vassal ransomed his lord by -the sacrifice of his own castle of Montacute, which stood just beyond -the Sarthon within the borders of Maine. To repair this loss of his -friend, no doubt also to repay the invasion of Cenomannian soil by a -like invasion of Norman soil, and to put some check in the teeth of -the house of Bellême, Geoffrey built the castle of Saint Cenery on the -left bank of the Sarthe, and gave it as a gift of thankfulness to the -son of Geroy.[595] But the inhabitants of the new stronghold, in their -dangerous border position, never knew peace or good luck, but were -visited with every kind of evil.[596] The sons of the pious and -virtuous Geroy yielded to the influence of the spot; they fell into -crime and rebellion, and were punished by banishments and strange -deaths. The second lord of Saint Cenery, Robert the brother of -William, had rebelled against the Conqueror; he had held his fortress -against him, and he had died in a mysterious way of a poisoned -apple.[597] His son and successor Arnold found how dangerous was the -greed and hate of a powerful and unscrupulous neighbour. Nearly north -from Saint Cenery, at much the same distance as Alençon is to the -east, not far from the foot of the hill of Chaumont which makes so -marked a feature in the whole surrounding landscape, on a peninsula -formed by a bend of the Sarthon, just within the borders of Maine as -Saint Cenery is just within the borders of Normandy, rises the -solitary rock which once had been known as Jaugy. There we still trace -the ruins of the castle which bore the name of the cruel Countess, the -despoiler of the house of Jaugy, the castle of the Rock of Mabel.[598] -To the possessor of the Rock of Mabel the mightier rock of Saint -Cenery, forming part of the same natural line of defence, could not -fail to be an object of covetousness. Arnold died of poison, by the -practice of the ruthless wife of Roger of Montgomery. Saint Cenery -became part of the possessions of the fierce line of Bellême; and, -under its present master, it doubtless deserved the strongest of the -names bestowed on it by the monk of Saint Evroul. - -[Sidenote: Saint Cenery held by Robert Carrel.] - -[Sidenote: The siege.] - -[Sidenote: Surrender of Saint Cenery.] - -[Sidenote: Robert Carrel blinded.] - -[Sidenote: Other mutilations.] - -[Sidenote: Question of the military tribunal.] - -At this moment Saint Cenery was held on behalf of Robert of Bellême by -a specially valiant captain named Robert Carrel.[599] We have no -details of the siege. We are told nothing of the positions occupied by -the besiegers, or how they became masters of the seemingly impregnable -height. We are told that the resistance was long and fierce; but at -last the castle was taken; and, as failure of provisions is spoken of -as the cause, we may guess that the garrison was driven to surrender. -If so, the surrender must have been to the Duke’s mercy, and the mercy -of Duke Robert or of his counsellors was cruel. The Duke, we are told, -in his wrath, ordered the eyes of Robert Carrel to be put out. The -personal act of the Duke in the case of the rebel leader seems to be -contrasted with the sentence of a more regular tribunal of some kind, -by which mutilations of various kinds were dealt out to others of the -garrison.[600] Yet personal cruelty is so inconsistent with the -ordinary character of Robert that we are driven to suppose either that -some strong personal influence was brought to bear on the Duke’s mind, -or else that Robert Carrel had given some unpardonable offence during -the course of the siege. But it is worth while to notice the words -which seem to imply that the punishment of the other defenders of -Saint Cenery was the work of some body which at least claimed to act -in a judicial character. We can hardly look as yet for the subtlety of -a separate military jurisdiction, for what we should now call a -court-martial. That can hardly be thought of, except in the case of a -standing body of soldiers, like Cnut’s housecarls, with a constitution -and rules of their own.[601] But as in free England we have seen the -army――that is, the nation in arms――act on occasion the part of a -national assembly, so in more aristocratic Normandy the same principle -would apply in another shape. The chief men of Normandy were there, -each in command of his own followers. If Robert or his immediate -counsellors wished that the cruel punishments to be dealt out to the -revolted garrison should not be merely their own work, if they wished -the responsibility of them to be shared by a larger body, the means -were easy. There was a court of peers ready at hand, before whom they -might arraign the traitors. - -[Sidenote: Claims of Robert, grandson of Geroy.] - -[Sidenote: The castle granted to him.] - -But if there were those within Saint Cenery who were marked for -punishment, there was one without its walls who claimed restitution. A -son of Geroy’s son Robert, bearing his father’s name, had, like others -of his family, served with credit in the wars of Apulia and Sicily. He -was now in the Duke’s army, seemingly among the warriors of Maine, -ready to play his part in winning back the castle of his father from -the son of the murderess of his uncle. Geoffrey of Mayenne and the -rest of the Cenomannian leaders asked of the Duke that the son of the -former owner of the castle, Geoffrey’s own kinsman and vassal, should -be restored to the inheritance of his father, the inheritance which -his father held in the first instance by Geoffrey’s own gift. The -warfare which was now waging was waged against the son of the woman by -whom one lord of Saint Cenery had been treacherously slain. The -triumph of right would be complete, if the banished man were restored -to his own, at the prayer of the first giver. The Duke consented; -Saint Cenery was granted afresh to the representative of the house of -Geroy; Geoffrey saw the castle of his own rearing once more in -friendly hands. The new lord strengthened the defences of his -fortress, and held it as a post to be guarded with all care against -the common enemy, the son of Mabel.[602] - -[Sidenote: Surrender of Alençon,] - -[Sidenote: of Bellême.] - -[Sidenote: The other castles ready to surrender.] - -[Sidenote: Robert disbands his army.] - -Two fortresses were thus won from the revolters; and the success of -the Duke at both places, his severity at one of them, had their effect -on those who still defended other castles for Robert of Bellême.[603] -Alençon, where the great William had wrought so stern a vengeance for -the mockeries of its citizens, stood ready to receive his son without -resistance. So did Bellême itself, the fortress which gave its name to -the descendants of the line of Talvas, the centre of their power, -where their ancient chapel of Mabel’s day still crowns the elder -castle hill, standing, isolated below the town and fortress of later -date.[604] Its defenders made up their minds to submit to the summons -of the Duke, if only the Duke would come near to summon them. So did -the garrisons of all the other castles which still remained in -rebellion. Frightened at the doom of Robert Carrel and his companions, -they stood ready to surrender as soon as the Duke should come. But it -is not clear whether the Duke ever did draw near to receive the -fortresses which were ready to open their gates to him. Robert had had -enough of success, or of the exertions which were needful for success. -It would almost seem as if the siege of Saint Cenery had been as much -as he could go through, and as if he turned back at once on its -surrender. At all events he stopped just when complete victory was -within his grasp. He longed for the idle repose of his palace. His -army was disbanded; every man who followed the Duke’s banner had the -Duke’s licence to go to his own home.[605] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Robert of Bellême still in prison.] - -[Sidenote: Earl Roger prays for his son’s release.] - -[Sidenote: Robert of Bellême set free.] - -[Sidenote: His career.] - -All this while, it will be remembered, Robert of Bellême himself was -actually in bonds in the keeping of Bishop Odo. The war had been waged -rather against his father Earl Roger than against himself. But it was -wholly on Robert’s account that it had been waged. Whatever we may -think of the right or wrong of his imprisonment at the moment when it -took place, there can be no doubt that it was for the general good of -the Norman duchy that Robert of Bellême should be hindered from doing -mischief. He was the arch-rebel against his sovereign, the -arch-plunderer of his neighbours, the man who, in that fierce age, was -branded by common consent as the cruellest of the cruel. It was to -break his power, to win back the castles which he had seized, that the -hosts of Normandy and Maine had been brought together; it was for the -crime of maintaining his cause that Robert Carrel and his comrades had -undergone their cruel punishment. But the fates of the chief and of -his subaltern were widely different. Duke Robert, weary of warfare, -was even more than ever disposed to mercy, that is more than ever -disposed to gratify the biddings of a weak good-nature. Earl Roger -marked the favourable moment, when the host was disbanded, and when -the Duke had gone back to the idle pleasures of Rouen. He sent -eloquent messengers, charged with many promises in his name――promises -doubtless of good behaviour on the part of his son――and prayed for the -release of the prisoner.[606] With Duke Robert an appeal of this kind -from a man like Earl Roger went for more than all reasonable -forethought for himself and his duchy. The welfare of thousands was -sacrificed to a weak pity for one man. Robert of Bellême was set free. -His promises were of course forgotten; gratitude and loyalty were -forgotten. Till a wiser sovereign sent him in after days to a prison -from which there was no escape, he went on with his career of plunder -and torture, of utter contempt and defiance of the ducal -authority.[607] But, under such a prince as Robert, contempt and -defiance of the ducal authority was no disqualification for appearing -from time to time as a ducal counsellor.[608] - -[Sidenote: Henry set free.] - -[Sidenote: Henry strengthens his castles.] - -[Sidenote: His partisans.] - -[Sidenote: His good government.] - -Robert of Bellême was thus set free, because his father had asked for -his freedom. A prince who sought to keep any kind of consistency in -his acts could hardly have kept his own brother Henry in ward one -moment after the prison doors were opened to his fellow-captive. But -it would seem that the gaol-delivery at Bayeux did not follow at once -on that at Neuilly. Henry was still kept in his prison, till, at the -general request of all the chief lords of Normandy, he was set -free.[609] He went back to his county of the Côtentin with no good -will to either of his brothers.[610] Here he strove to strengthen -himself in every way, by holding the castles of his principality, by -winning friends and hiring mercenaries. He strengthened the castles of -Coutances and Avranches, those of Cherbourg by the northern rocks and -of Gavray in the southern part of the Côtentin. Among his counsellors -and supporters were some men of note, as Richard of Redvers, and the -greater name of the native lord of Avranches, Earl Hugh of -Chester.[611] Indeed all the lords of the Côtentin stood by their -Count, save only the gloomy, and perhaps banished, Robert of Mowbray, -Earl of Northumberland. That we find the lords of two English earldoms -thus close together in a corner of Normandy shows how thoroughly the -history of the kingdom and that of the duchy form at this moment one -tale. While the Count and Ætheling was strengthened by such support, -the land of Coutances and Avranches enjoyed another moment of peace -and order, while the rest of Normandy was torn in pieces by the -quarrels of Robert of Bellême and his like. - - -§ 2. _The first Successes of William Rufus._ 1090. - -[Sidenote: Schemes of William Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: He consults the Assembly at Winchester. Easter, 1090.] - -[Sidenote: His speech.] - -[Sidenote: His constitutional language.] - -While the duchy of Normandy had thus become one scene of anarchy under -the no-government of its nominal prince, the King of the English had -been carefully watching the revolutions of his brother’s dominions. He -now deemed that the time had come to avenge the wrongs which he deemed -that he had suffered at his brother’s hands. He must have seen that he -had not much to fear from a prince who had let slip such advantages as -Robert had held in his hands after the taking of Saint Cenery. He -watched his time; he made his preparations, and was now ready to take -the decisive step of crossing the sea himself or sending others to -cross it. But even William Rufus in all his pride and self-confidence -knew that it did not depend wholly on himself to send either native or -adopted Englishmen on such an errand. He had learned enough of English -constitutional law not to think of venturing on a foreign war without -the constitutional sanction of his kingdom. In a Gemót at Winchester, -seemingly the Easter Gemót of the third year of his reign,[612] he -laid his schemes before the assembled Witan, and obtained their -consent to a war with the Duke of the Normans. If we may trust the one -report which we have of his speech, William the Red had as good -reasons to give for an invasion of Normandy as his father had once had -to give for an invasion of England. He went forth to avenge the wrongs -which his brother had done to him, the rebellion which he had stirred -up in his kingdom. But he went also from the purest motives of piety -and humanity. The prince who had tried to deprive him of his dominions -had shown himself utterly unable to rule his own. A cry had come into -the ears of him, the Red King, to which he could not refuse to -hearken. It was the cry of the holy Church, the cry of the widow and -the orphan. All were alike oppressed by the thieves and murderers whom -the weakness of Robert allowed to do their will throughout the Norman -land. That land looked back with a sigh to the days of William the -Great, who had saved Normandy alike from foreign and from domestic -foes. It became his son, the inheritor of his name and crown, to -follow in his steps, and to do the same work again. He called on all -who had been his father’s men, on all who held fiefs of his granting -in Normandy or in England, to come forward and show their prowess for -the deliverance of the suffering duchy.[613] But it was for them to -take counsel and to decide. Let the Assembly declare its judgement on -his proposal. His purpose was, with their consent, to send over an -army to Normandy, at once to take vengeance for his own wrongs, and to -carry out the charitable work of delivering the Church and the -oppressed, and of chastising evil-doers with the sword of -justice.[614] - -[Sidenote: Its witness to constitutional usage.] - -This constitutional language in the mouth of William Rufus sounds -somewhat strange in our ears; the profession of high and holy purposes -sounds stranger still. There is of course no likelihood that we are -reading a genuine report of an actual speech; still the words of our -historian are not without their value. No one would have been likely -to invent those words, unless they had fairly represented the -relations which still existed between a King of the English and the -Assembly of his kingdom. The piety may all come from the brain of the -monk of Saint Evroul; but the constitutional doctrines which he has -worked into the speech cannot fail to set forth the ordinary -constitutional usage of the time. Even in the darkest hour in which -England had any settled government at all, in the reign of the worst -of all our kings, it was not the will of the King alone, not the will -of any private cabal or cabinet, but the will of the Great Council of -the nation, which, just as in the days of King Eadward,[615] decided -questions of peace and war. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: War voted by the Witan.] - -[Sidenote: The King stays in England.] - -[Sidenote: His policy.] - -[Sidenote: His advantages in a a struggle with Robert.] - -[Sidenote: Interest of the chief Normans.] - -[Sidenote: Position of William and Robert.] - -[Sidenote: Power of William’s wealth.] - -[Sidenote: Hiring of mercenaries.] - -[Sidenote: Bribes.] - -[Sidenote: He conquers without leaving England.] - -The Witan unanimously agreed to the King’s proposal, and applauded, so -we are told, the lofty spirit――the technical name is used――of the King -himself.[616] War was at once voted, and it might have been expected -that a brilliant campaign would at once have followed on the warlike -vote. We might have looked to see the Red King, the mirror of -chivalry, cross the sea, as his father had done on the opposite -errand, at the head of the whole force of his realm. We might have -looked to see a series of gallant feats of arms take place between the -two hostile brothers. The real story is widely different. William -Rufus did not cross the sea till a year after war had been declared, -and remarkably little fighting happened, both while he stayed in -England and after he set forth for Normandy. But we have seen that -William Rufus, as a true Norman, was, with all his chivalry, at least -as much fox as lion.[617] And a ruler of England, above all, a son of -William the Great, had many weapons at his command, one only of which -could the Duke of the Normans hope to withstand with weapons of the -like kind. Robert was in his own person as stout a man-at-arms as -Rufus, and, if the chivalry of Normandy could only be persuaded to -rally round his banner, he might, as the valiant leader of a valiant -host, withstand on equal terms any force that the island monarch could -bring against him. But courage, and, we may add, whenever he chose to -use it, real military skill, were the only weapons which Robert had at -his bidding. The armoury of the Red King contained a choice of many -others, any one of which alone might make courage and military skill -wholly useless. William, headstrong as he often showed himself, could -on occasion bide his time as well as his father, and, well as he loved -fighting, he knew that a land in such a state as Normandy was under -Robert could be won by easier means. Besides daring and generalship -equal to that of Robert, Rufus had statecraft; and he was not minded -to use even his generalship as long as his statecraft could serve his -turn. He knew, or his ready wit divined, that there were men of all -classes in Normandy who would be willing to do his main work for him -without his striking a blow, without his crossing the sea in person, -almost without a blow being struck in his behalf. He had only to -declare himself his brother’s rival, and it was the interest of most -of the chief men in Normandy to support his claims against his -brother. The very same motives which had led the Normans in England to -revolt against William on behalf of Robert would now lead the Normans -in Normandy to revolt against Robert on behalf of William. Norman -nobles and land-owners who held lands on both sides of the sea had -deemed it for their interest that one lord should rule on both sides -of the sea. They had then deemed it for their interest that that lord -should be Robert rather than William. The former doctrine still kept -all its force; on the second point they had learned something by -experience. If England and Normandy were to have one sovereign, that -sovereign must needs be William and not Robert. There was not the -faintest chance of placing Robert on the royal throne of England; -there was a very fair chance of placing William in the ducal chair of -Normandy. Simply as a ruler, as one who commanded the powers of the -state and the army, William had shown that he had it in his power to -reward and to punish. Robert had shown that it was quite beyond his -power to reward or to punish anybody. He who drew on himself the wrath -of the King was likely enough to lose his estates in England; he who -drew on himself the wrath of the Duke had no need to be fearful of -losing his estates in Normandy. And William had the means of making a -yet more direct appeal to the interests of not a few of his brother’s -subjects, in a way in which it was still more certain that his brother -would not appeal to any of his subjects. The hoard at Winchester was -still well filled. If it had been largely drawn upon, it was again -filled to the brim with treasures brought in by every kind of -unrighteous exactions. Already was the land “fordone with unlawful -gelds;”[618] but the King had the profit of them. But there was no -longer any hoard at Rouen out of which Robert could hire the choicest -troops of all lands to defend his duchy, as William could hire them to -attack it. And the wealth at William’s command might do much even -without hiring a single mercenary. The castles of Normandy were -strong; but few of them were so strong that, in the words of King -Philip――Philip of Macedon, not Philip of France――an ass laden with -gold could not find its way into them.[619] Armed at all points, -master alike of gold and steel, able to work himself and to command -the services of others alike with the head and with the hand, William -Rufus could, at least in contending with Robert, conquer when he chose -and how he chose. And for a while he chose, like the Persian king of -old, to win towns and castles without stirring from his hearth.[620] - - [Illustration: - Map illustrating the NORMAN CAMPAIGN. A.D. 1091. - _For the Delegates of the Clarendon Press._ Edwᵈ. Weller] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Submission of Saint Valery.] - -[Sidenote: Beginning of English action on the continent.] - -The first point of the mainland which the Red King won was one which -lay beyond the strict bounds of the Norman duchy; but no spot, either -in Normandy or in England, was more closely connected with the -fortunes of his house. And it was one which had a certain fitness as -the beginning of such a campaign. The first spot of continental ground -which was added to the dominion of one who called himself King of the -English, and who at least was truly King of England, was the spot from -which his father had set forth for the conquest of England. He won it -by the means which were specially his own. “By his cunning or by his -treasures he gat him the castle at Saint Valery and the havens.”[621] -Englishmen had fought for the elder William in Maine and before -Gerberoi;[622] but that was merely to win back the lost possessions of -the Norman Duke. Now the wealth and the arms of England were used to -win castles beyond the sea for a prince whose possessions and whose -titles up to that moment were purely English. In the history of -England as a power――and the history of England as a power had no small -effect on the history of the English as a people――the taking of Saint -Valery is the beginning of a chain of events which leads on, not only -to the fight of Tinchebray and the first loss of Rouen, but to the -fight of Crecy and the fight of Chastillon, to the taking of Boulogne -and the loss of Calais. - -[Sidenote: Submission of Stephen of Aumale.] - -[Sidenote: Aumale strengthened as the King’s headquarters.] - -[Sidenote: Submission of Count Robert of Eu and his son William;] - -Saint Valery had, by the forced commendation of the still reigning -Count Guy, passed under Norman superiority;[623] but it was no part of -the true Norman land. The first fortress within the Norman duchy which -passed into the hands of Rufus was the castle of Aumale, standing just -within the Norman border, on the upper course of the river of Eu. Its -lord, the first of the great Norman nobles to submit to William and to -receive his garrison into his castle, was Stephen, son of Count Odo of -Champagne and of Adelaide, whole sister of the Conqueror, -cousin-german therefore of the two contending princes.[624] Aumale was -won, as Saint Valery had been won, by cunning or by treasure. Stephen -may simply have learned to see that it was better for him to have the -same lord at Aumale and in Holderness, or his eyes may have been yet -further enlightened by the brightness of English gold. But the Red -King had other means at his disposal, and it seems that other means -were needed, if not to win, at least to keep Aumale. The defences of -the castle were greatly strengthened at the King’s cost,[625] and it -became a centre for further operations. “Therein he set his knights, -and they did harms upon the land, in harrying and in burning.”[626] -Other castles were soon added to the Red King’s dominion. Count Robert -of Eu, whom we have heard of alike at Mortemer and in Lindesey,[627] -the father of the man whom we have more lately heard of at Berkeley, -still held the house where William the Great had received Harold as -his guest,[628] hard by the church where he had received Matilda as -his bride.[629] The Count had been enriched with lands in southern -England; he is not recorded as having joined in his son’s rebellion; -and the lord of Eu now transferred the allegiance of his Norman county -to the prince of whom he held his command on the rocks of -Hastings.[630] Aumale and Eu, two of the most important points on the -eastern border of Normandy, are thus the first places which we hear of -as receiving Rufus on the mainland. We shall hear of both names again, -but in quite another kind of tale, before the reign of Rufus is over. - -[Sidenote: of Gerard of Gournay.] - -[Sidenote: The church of Gournay.] - -[Sidenote: Other castles of Gerard.] - -[Sidenote: Submission of Earl Walter Giffard.] - -[Sidenote: His castle of Longueville.] - -The next Norman noble to join the cause of William was another lord of -the same frontier, who held a point of hardly less importance to the -south of Eu and Aumale. This was Gerard of Gournay, son of the warrior -of Mortemer who had gone to end his days as a monk of Bec,[631] -son-in-law of the new Earl of Surrey,[632] husband of perhaps the only -woman on Norman ground who bore the name of English Eadgyth.[633] His -castle of Gournay, from which many men and more than one place[634] in -England have drawn their name, stood on the upper course of the Epte, -close to the French border. The fortress itself has vanished; but the -minster of Saint Hildebert, where the massive work of Gerard’s day has -been partly recast in the lighter style of the next century, still -remains, with its mighty pillars, its varied and fantastic carvings, -to make Gournay a place of artistic pilgrimage. Nor is it hard to -trace the line of the ancient walls of the town, showing how the -border stream of Epte was pressed into the service of the Norman -engineers. The adhesion of the lord of Gournay seems to have been of -the highest importance to the cause of Rufus. The influence of Gerard -reached over a wide district north of his main dwelling. Along with -Gournay, he placed at the King’s disposal his fortress of La Ferté -Saint Samson, crowning a height looking over the vale of Bray, and his -other fortress of Gaillefontaine to the north-east, on another height -by the wood of its own name, overlooking the early course of the -Bethune or Dieppe, the stream which joins the eastern Varenne by the -hill of Arques.[635] Gerard too was not only ready in receiving the -King’s forces into his own castles, but zealous also in bringing over -his neighbours to follow his example.[636] Among these was the lord of -Wigmore, late the rebel of Worcester, Ralph of Mortemer.[637] Old -Walter Giffard too, now Earl of Buckingham in England, had English -interests far too precious to allow him to oppose his island -sovereign. He held the stronghold of Longueville――the north-eastern -Longueville by the Scie, the stream which, small as it is, pours its -waters independently into the Channel between Dieppe and Saint -Valery-in-Caux. There, from a bottom fenced in by hills on every side, -the village, the church where the hand of the modern destroyer has -spared only a few fragments of the days of Norman greatness, the -priory which has been utterly swept away, all looked up to a hill on -the right bank of the stream which art had changed into a stronghold -worthy to rank alongside of Arques and Gisors. Girt about with a deep -ditch, on the more exposed southern side with a double ditch, the hill -was crowned by a shell-keep which still remains, though patched and -shattered, and a donjon which has been wholly swept away. In this -fortress the aged warrior of Arques and Senlac received, like so many -of his neighbours, the troops which William of England had sent to -bring the Norman duchy under his power. - -[Sidenote: Ralph of Toesny and Count William of Evreux.] - -[Sidenote: Enmity of their wives.] - -[Sidenote: Countess Heloise of Evreux.] - -[Sidenote: Isabel of Montfort.] - -[Sidenote: War between Conches and Evreux.] - -[Sidenote: Ralph in vain asks help of the Duke.] - -[Sidenote: He submits to William.] - -[Sidenote: Advance of William’s party.] - -The domains of all these lords lay in the lands on the right bank of -the Seine, the oldest, but, as I have often remarked, not the truest -Normandy. But the Red King also won a valuable ally in quite another -part of the duchy. This was Ralph of Conches or of Toesny, with whom -we are now most concerned as the husband of the warlike Isabel of -Montfort, and, in that character rather than in any other, the enemy -of the Countess Heloise and of her husband Count William of Evreux. -The rival lords were in fact half-brothers. The old Roger of Toesny, -the warlike pilgrim of Spain,[638] was succeeded by Ralph, who has so -often played his part in our story, and whom we last met in Duke -Robert’s army before Le Mans.[639] The widow of Roger, the mother of -Ralph, had married Richard Count of Evreux, and was by him the mother -of the present Count William.[640] But this near kindred by birth had -less strength to bind the brothers together than the fierce rivalry of -their wives had to set them at feud with one another. The jealousy of -these two warlike ladies kept a large part of Normandy in a constant -uproar. Our historian bitterly laments the amount of bloodshed and -havoc which was the result of their rivalry.[641] Heloise was of the -house of the Counts of Nevers, the Burgundian city by the Loire, a -descent which carries us a little out of our usual geographical -range.[642] Tall, handsome, and ready of speech, she ruled her husband -and the whole land of Evreux with an absolute sway. Her will was -everything; the counsels of the barons of the county went for -nothing.[643] Violent and greedy, she quarrelled with many of the -nobles of Normandy, with Count Robert of Meulan among them, and -stirred up her husband to many disputes and wars to gratify her fierce -passions.[644] At this time some slight which she had received from -the lady of Conches had led her to entangle her husband in a bitter -feud with his half-brother. Isabel or Elizabeth――the two names are, as -usual, given to her indifferently――the wife of Ralph of Toesny, was a -daughter of the French house of Montfort,[645] the house of our own -Simon. Like her rival, she must now have been long past her youth; -but, while Heloise was childless,[646] Isabel was the mother of -several children, among them of a son who has already played a part in -Norman history. This was that younger Ralph of Toesny who married the -daughter of Waltheof and who had taken a part in the present Duke’s -rebellion against his father.[647] Handsome, eloquent, self-willed, -and overbearing, like her rival, Isabel had qualities which gained her -somewhat more of personal regard than the Countess of Evreux. She was -liberal and pleasant and merry of speech, and made herself agreeable -to those immediately about her. Moreover, while of Heloise we read -indeed that she stirred up wars, but not that she waged them in her -own person, Isabel, like the ancient Queens of the Amazons, went forth -to the fight, mounted and armed, and attended by a knightly -following.[648] The struggle between the ladies of Evreux and Conches -was at its height at the moment when the castles of eastern Normandy -were falling one by one into the hands of Rufus. Isabel and Ralph were -just now sore pressed. The lord of Conches therefore went to Duke -Robert and craved his help;[649] but from Duke Robert no help was to -be had for any man. Ralph then bethought him of a stronger protector, -in the sovereign of his English possessions. King William gladly -received such a petition, and bade Count Stephen and Gerard of -Gournay, and all who had joined him in Normandy, to give all the help -that they could to the new proselyte.[650] The cause of the Red King -prospered everywhere; well nigh all Normandy to the right of Seine was -in the obedience of Rufus. All its chief men had, in a phrase which -startles us in that generation, “joined the English.”[651] And for -them the King of the English was open-handed. Into the hoard at -Winchester the wealth of England flowed in the shape of every kind of -unlawful exaction. Out of it it flowed as freely to enable the new -subjects of King William to strengthen the defences of their castles -and to hire mercenaries to defend them.[652] - -[Sidenote: Helias of Saint-Saens.] - -[Sidenote: He marries Robert’s daughter.] - -[Sidenote: His descent.] - -[Sidenote: He has Caux as his wife’s dowry.] - -[Sidenote: Position of Saint-Saens.] - -[Sidenote: Importance of his position.] - -[Sidenote: Bures.] - -[Sidenote: Helias holds Arques.] - -[Sidenote: Faithfulness of Helias towards Robert.] - -During all this time Duke Robert himself does not seem to have thought -of striking a blow. But there was one man at least between Seine and -Somme who was ready both to give and to take blows on his behalf. -Robert had given one of his natural children, a daughter born, to him -in his wandering days,[653] in marriage to Helias, lord of -Saint-Saens.[654] Helias, like so many of the Norman nobles, came of a -house which had risen to importance through the loves of Gunnor and -Richard the Fearless.[655] A daughter of one of Gunnor’s sisters -married Richard Viscount of Rouen, and became the mother of Lambert of -Saint-Saens, the father of Helias.[656] Helias and the daughter of -Robert had thus a common, though distant, forefather in the father of -Gunnor. With his wife Helias received a goodly dowry, nothing less, we -are told, than the whole land of Caux.[657] Helias’ own lordship of -Saint-Saens lies on the upper course of the Varenne, in a deep bottom -girt on all sides by wooded hills, one of which, known as the -_Câtelier_, overhanging the town to the north, seems to have been the -site of the castle of Helias. His stronghold has vanished; but the -church on which the height looks down, if no rival to Saint Hildebert -of Gournay, still keeps considerable remains of an age but little -later than that with which we have to do. The possessions of Helias, -both those which he inherited and those which he received with his -wife, made his resistance to the invader of no small help to the cause -of his father-in-law. They barred the nearest way to Rouen, not indeed -from Gournay, but from Eu and Aumale. They came right between these -last fortresses and the domain of Walter Giffard at Longueville. Of -the three streams which meet by Arques, while Helias himself held the -upper Varenne at Saint-Saens, his wife’s fortress of Bures held the -middle course of the Bethune or Dieppe below Gerard’s Gaillefontaine, -and below Drincourt, not yet the New Castle of King Henry.[658] The -massive church, with parts dating from the days of Norman -independence, rises on the left slope of the valley above an island in -the stream. But the site of the castle which formed part of the -marriage portion of Duke Robert’s daughter is hard to trace. But lower -down, nearer the point where the streams meet, the bride of Helias had -brought him a noble gift indeed. Through her he was lord of Arques, -with its donjon and its ditches, the mighty castle whose tale has been -told in recording the history of an earlier generation.[659] A glance -at the map will show how strong a position in eastern Normandy was -held by the man who commanded at once Saint-Saens, Bures, and Arques. -But the son-in-law of Duke Robert deserves our notice for something -better than his birth, his marriage, or his domains. Helias of -Saint-Saens was, in his personal character, a worthy namesake of -Helias of La Flêche. Among the crimes and treasons of that age, we -dwell with delight on the unswerving faithfulness with which, through -many years and amidst all the ups and downs of fortune, he clave to -the reigning Duke and to his son after him.[660] But this his later -history lies beyond the bounds of our immediate tale. What directly -concerns us now is that Helias was the one noble of Normandy whom the -gold of England could not tempt. It would be almost ungenerous to put -on record the fact that, unlike most of his neighbours, he had no -English estates to lose. The later life of Helias puts him above all -suspicion of meaner motives. Saint-Saens, Arques, Bures, and all Caux, -remained faithful to Duke Robert. - -[Sidenote: William’s dealings with France.] - -[Sidenote: Robert asks help of Philip.] - -[Sidenote: Philip comes to help.] - -[Sidenote: Meeting of the Norman and French armies.] - -[Sidenote: They march on Eu.] - -[Sidenote: Philip bribed to go back.] - -With this honourable exception, an exception which greatly lessened -the value of his new conquests, William Rufus had won, without -hand-strokes, without his personal presence, a good half of the -original grant to Rolf, the greater part of the diocese of Rouen. He -was soon to win yet another triumph by his peculiar policy. By those -arms which were specially his own, he was to win over an ally, or at -least to secure the neutrality of an enemy, of far higher rank, though -perhaps of hardly greater practical power, than the Count of Aumale -and the aged lord of Longueville. Robert in his helplessness cried to -his over-lord at Paris. Had not his father done the same to Philip’s -father? Had not King Henry played a part at least equal to that of -Duke William among the lifted lances of Val-ès-dunes?[661] Philip had -had his jest on the bulky frame of the Conqueror, and his jest had -been avenged among the candles of the bloody churching at Mantes.[662] -By this time at least, so some of our authorities imply, Philip had -brought himself to a case in which the same jest might have been made -upon himself with a good deal more of point. At the prayer of his -vassal the bulky King of the French left his table and his dainties, -and set forth, sighing and groaning at the unusual exertion, to come -to the help of the aggrieved Duke.[663] It was a strange beginning of -the direct rivalry between England and France. King Philip came with a -great host into Normandy. And Robert must somewhere or other have -found forces to join those of his royal ally. And now was shown the -value of the position which was held by the faithful Helias in the -land of Caux. It must have been by his help that the combined armies -of Robert and Philip were able to march to the furthest point of the -Red King’s new acquisitions, to the furthest point of the Norman duchy -itself, to the castle of Eu, which was held, we are told, by a vast -host, Norman and English.[664] Let an honest voice from Peterborough -tell what followed. “And the King and the Earl with a huge _fyrd_ -beset the castle about where the King’s men of England in it were. The -King William of England sent to Philip the Franks’ King, and he for -his love or for his mickle treasure forlet so his man the Earl Robert -and his land, and went again to France and let them so be.”[665] A -Latin writer does not think it needful to allow Philip the perhaps -ironical alternative of the English writer. Love between Philip and -William Rufus is not thought of. We are simply told that, while Philip -was promising great things, the money of the King of England met -him――the wealth of Rufus seems to be personified. Before its presence -his courage was broken; he loosed his girdle and went back to his -banquet.[666] - -[Sidenote: The first English subsidy.] - -[Sidenote: First direct dealings between England and France.] - -[Sidenote: Different position of the two Williams.] - -[Sidenote: Relation of England, Normandy, and France.] - -[Sidenote: Results of Rufus’ dealings with Philip.] - -Thus the special weapons of Rufus could overcome even kings at a -distance. But, ludicrous as the tale sounds in the way in which it is -told, this negotiation between Philip and William is really, in an -European, and even in an English point of view, the most important -event in the whole story. We should hardly be wrong in calling this -payment to Philip the first instance of the employment of English -money in the shape of subsidies to foreign princes. For such it in -strictness was. It was not, like a Danegeld, money paid to buy off a -foreign invader. Nor was it like the simple hiring of mercenaries at -home or abroad. It is, like later subsidies, money paid to a foreign -sovereign, on condition of his promoting, or at least not thwarting, -the policy of a sovereign of England. The appetite[667] which was now -first awakened in Philip of Paris soon came to be shared by other -princes, and it lasted in full force for many ages. Again, we have now -for the first time direct political dealings between a purely insular -King of England――we may forestall the territorial style when speaking -of England as a state rather than of Englishmen as a nation――and a -French King at Paris. The embassies which passed between Eadward and -Henry, even when Henry made his appeal on behalf of Godwine,[668] -hardly make an exception. William the Great had dealt with France as a -Norman duke; if, in the latter part of his reign, he had wielded the -strength of England as well as the strength of Normandy, he had -wielded it, as far as France was concerned, wholly for Norman -purposes. But William the Red, though his position arose wholly out of -the new relations between England and Normandy, was still for the -present a purely English king. The first years of Rufus and the first -years of Henry the First are alike breaks in the hundred and forty -years of union between England and Normandy.[669] Had not a Norman -duke conquered England, an English king would not have been seeking to -conquer Normandy; but, as a matter of fact, an English king, who had -no dominions on the mainland, was seeking to conquer Normandy. And he -was seeking to win it with the good will, or at least the neutrality, -of the French King. This was a state of things which could have -happened only during the few years when different sons of the -Conqueror ruled in England and in Normandy. Whenever England and -Normandy were united, whether by conquest or by inheritance, the old -strife between France and Normandy led England into the struggle. But -at the present moment an alliance between England and France against -Normandy was as possible as any other political combination. And the -arts of Rufus secured, if not French alliance, at least French -neutrality. But either alliance or neutrality was in its own nature -destructive of itself. Let either Normandy win England or England win -Normandy, and the old state of things again began. The union of -England and Normandy meant enmity between England and France, an -enmity which survived their separation.[670] Friendly dealings between -William and Philip were a step towards the union of England and -Normandy, and thereby a step towards that open enmity between England -and France which began under Rufus himself and which lasted down to -our fathers’ times. The bribe which Philip took at Eu has its place in -the chain of events which led to Bouvines, to Crécy, and to Waterloo. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: State of Normandy.] - -[Sidenote: Private wars not interrupted by the invasion.] - -[Sidenote: Action of Robert of Bellême.] - -[Sidenote: Robert of Meulan claims the tower of Ivry.] - -[Sidenote: He is imprisoned, but set free at the intercession of his -father.] - -[Sidenote: Robert takes Brionne.] - -But while things were thus, unknown to the actors in them, taking a -turn which was permanently to affect the history of mankind, the -immediate business of the time went on as before in the lands of -Northern Gaul. In Normandy that immediate business was mutual -destruction――civil war is too lofty a name; in Maine it was -deliverance from the Norman yoke. I am not called on to tell in detail -the whole story of every local strife between one Norman baron and -another, not even in those rare cases when the Duke himself stepped in -as a judge or as a party in the strife. Those who loved nothing so -well as slaughter, plunder, and burning, had now to make up for the -many years during which the strong hand of William the Great had kept -them back from those enjoyments. They had no thought of stopping, -though the kings of England and France, or all the kings of the earth, -should appear in arms on Norman soil. Many a brilliant feat of arms, -as it was deemed in those days, must be left to local remembrance; -even at events which closely touched many of the chief names of our -story we can do no more than glance. The revolt of Maine will have to -be spoken of at length in another chapter; among strictly Norman -affairs we naturally find Robert of Bellême playing his usual part -towards his sovereign and his neighbours, and we find the tower of -Ivry and the fortified hall of Brionne ever supplying subjects of -strife to the turbulent nobles. We see Robert of Bellême at war with -his immediate neighbour Geoffrey Count of Perche,[671] and driving -Abbot Ralph of Seez to seek shelter in England.[672] We also find him -beaten back from the walls of Exmes by Gilbert of Laigle and the other -warriors of his house, the house of which we have heard in the -Malfosse of Senlac and beneath the rocks of Sainte-Susanne.[673] -William of Breteuil loses, wins, and loses again, his late grant of -the tower of Ivry, and the second time he is driven to give both the -tower and the hand of his natural daughter as his own ransom from a -specially cruel imprisonment at the hands of a rebellious vassal.[674] -Brionne forms the centre of a tale in which its new lord and his son, -the other Roger and the other Robert of our story, play over again the -part of the Earl of Shrewsbury and his son of Bellême. Robert of -Meulan comes from England to assert his claim among others to the -much-contested tower of Ivry. The Duke reminds him that he had given -Brionne to his father in exchange for Ivry. The Count of Meulan gives -a threatening answer.[675] The Duke, with unusual spirit, puts him in -prison, seizes Brionne, and puts it into a state of defence. Then the -old Roger of Beaumont, old a generation earlier,[676] obtains, by the -recital of his own exploits, the deliverance of his son.[677] He then -prays, not without golden arguments, for the restitution of -Brionne.[678] The officer in command, Robert son of Baldwin, asserts -his own hereditary claim, and, at the head of six knights only, stands -a siege, though not a long one, against the combined forces of the -Duke and of the Count of Meulan and his father.[679] This siege is -remarkable. The summer days were hot; all things were dry; the -besiegers shot red-hot arrows against the roof of the fortified hall, -and set fire to it.[680] So Duke Robert boasted that he had taken in a -day the river-fortress which had held out for three years against his -father.[681] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Advance of Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: The war of Conches and Evreux.] - -[Sidenote: Movement at Rouen.] - -These events concern us only because we know the actors, and because -they helped to keep up that state of confusion in the Norman duchy -which supplied the Red King at once with an excuse for his invasion, -and with the means for carrying out his schemes. It must be remembered -that the two stories are actually contemporary; while Robert was -besieging Brionne, the fortresses of eastern Normandy were already -falling one by one into the hands of Rufus. It is even quite possible -that Robert of Meulan’s voyage from England to Normandy, and the -demands made by him and his father on the Duke, were actually planned -between the cunning Count and the Red King as a means of increasing -the confusion which reigned in the duchy. But there are tales of local -strife which concern us more nearly. The war of the half-brothers, the -war of the Amazons, the strife between Conches and Evreux, between -Isabel and Heloise, is an immediate part of the tale of William Rufus. -The lord of Conches was strengthened in his struggle with his brother -by forces directly sent to his help by the King’s order.[682] The war -went on; and, while it was still going on, a far more important -movement began in the greatest city of Normandy, a movement in which -the King of the English was yet more directly concerned. Up to this -time his plans had been everywhere crowned with success. His campaign, -if campaign we can call it, had begun soon after Easter. Half a year -had passed, and nearly the whole of the oldest, though not the truest, -Normandy had fallen into his hands without his stirring out of his -island realm. It now became doubtful whether Robert could keep even -the capital of his duchy. - -[Sidenote: November, 1090.] - -[Sidenote: State of things in Rouen.] - -[Sidenote: The municipal spirit.] - -[Sidenote: Conan demagogue or tyrant.] - -[Sidenote: Conan’s treaty with William.] - -[Sidenote: The citizens favour William.] - -[Sidenote: A party for Robert.] - -[Sidenote: A day fixed for the surrender to William.] - -[Sidenote: Robert sends for help.] - -The month of November of this year saw stirring scenes alike in the -streets of Rouen and beneath the walls of Conches. But, while Conches -was openly aided by the King’s troops, no force from England or from -the parts of Normandy which William had already won had as yet drawn -near to Rouen. Rufus knew other means to gain over the burghers of a -great city as well as the lords of castles and smaller towns. The -glimpse which we now get of the internal state of the Norman -metropolis tells us, like so many other glimpses which are given us in -the history of these times, just enough to make us wish to be told -more. A state of things is revealed to us which we are not used to in -the history of Normandy. Rouen appears for a moment as something like -an independent commonwealth, though an enemy might call it a -commonwealth which seemed to be singularly bent on its own -destruction. The same municipal spirit which we have seen so strong at -Exeter and at Le Mans[683] shows itself now for a moment at Rouen. We -may be sure that under the rule of William the Great no man had -dreamed of a _commune_ in the capital of Normandy. His arm, we may be -sure, had protected the men of Rouen, like all his other subjects, in -the enjoyment of all rights and privileges which were not inconsistent -with his own dominion. But in his day Rouen could have seen no -demagogues, no tyrants, no armies in civic pay, no dealings of its -citizens with any prince other than their own sovereign. But the rule -of William the Great was over; in Robert’s days it may well have -seemed that the citizens of so great a city were better able to rule -themselves, or at all events that they were entitled to choose their -own ruler. When the arts of Rufus, his gifts and his promises, began -to work at Rouen in the same way in which they had worked on the -castles of the eastern border, his agents had to deal, not with a -prince or a lord, but with a body of citizens under the leadership of -one of whom one doubts whether he should be called a demagogue or a -tyrant. We seem to be carried over two hundred and forty years to the -dealings of Edward the Third with the mighty brewer of Ghent. The -Artevelde of Rouen was Conan――the name suggests a Breton origin――the -son of Gilbert surnamed Pilatus. He was the richest man in the city; -his craft is not told us; but we must always remember that a citizen -was not necessarily a trader.[684] His wealth was such that it enabled -him to feed troops of mercenaries and to take armed knights into his -pay.[685] Another leading citizen, next in wealth to Conan, was -William the son of Ansgar,[686] whose name seems to imply the purest -Norman blood. Conan had entered into a treaty with William, the object -of which, we are told, was to betray the metropolis of Normandy and -the Duke of the Normans――the sleepy Duke, as our guide calls him――into -the power of the island King.[687] Nor was this merely the scheme of -Conan and William; public feeling in the city went heartily with them. -A party still clave to the Duke; but the mass of the men of Rouen -threw in their lot with Conan, and were, like him, ready to receive -William as their sovereign instead of Robert.[688] They may well have -thought that, in the present state of things, any change would be for -the better; the utter lawlessness of the time, which might have its -charms for turbulent nobles, would have no charms for the burghers of -a great city. Or the men of Rouen may have argued then, much as the -men of Bourdeaux argued ages later, that they were likely to enjoy a -greater measure of municipal freedom, under a King of the English, -dwelling apart from them in his own island, than they would ever win -from a Duke of the Normans, holding his court and castle in Rouen -itself. Yet the friends of Robert might have their arguments too. The -party of mere conservatism, the party of order, would naturally cleave -to him. But other motives might well come in. True friends of the -_commune_ might doubt whether William the Red was likely to be a very -safe protector of civic freedom. They might argue that, if they must -needs have a master, their liberties were less likely to be meddled -with under such a master as Robert. But the party of the Duke’s -friends, on whatever grounds it stood by him, was the weaker party. A -majority of the citizens was zealous for William. A day was fixed by -Conan with the general consent, on which the city was to be given -up,[689] and the King’s forces were invited to come from Gournay and -other points in his obedience. Robert seems to have stayed in the -capital which was passing from him; but he felt that, if he was to -have supporters, he must seek for them beyond its walls. He sent to -tell his plight to those of the nobles of Normandy in whom he still -put any trust.[690] And he also hastened to seek help in a -reconciliation with some neighbours and subjects with whom he was at -variance. - -[Sidenote: Henry and Robert of Bellême come to the Duke’s help.] - -[Sidenote: Danger of the example of Rouen.] - -[Sidenote: Others who help Robert.] - -[Sidenote: November 3, 1090.] - -[Sidenote: Henry at Rouen.] - -It is certainly a little startling, after the history of the past -year, to find at the head of the list of Duke Robert’s new allies the -names of the Ætheling Henry and of Robert of Bellême. We may well -fancy that they took up arms, not so much to support the rights of the -Duke against the King as to check the dangerous example of a great -city taking upon itself to choose among the claims of kings, dukes, -and counts. Robert of Bellême may indeed have simply hastened to any -quarter from which the scent of coming slaughter greeted him. But -Henry the Clerk could always have given a reason for anything that he -did. Popular movements at Rouen might supply dangerous precedents at -Coutances. The Count of Coutances too might have better hopes of -becoming Duke of Rouen, if Rouen were still held for a while by such a -prince as Robert, than he could have if the city became either the -seat of a powerful commonwealth or the stronghold of a powerful king. -But, from whatever motive, Henry came, and he was the first to -come.[691] Others to whom the Duke’s messengers set forth his desolate -state[692] came also. Robert of Bellême, so lately his prisoner, Count -William of Evreux and his nephew William of Breteuil, all hastened, if -not to the deliverance of Duke Robert, at least to the overthrow of -Conan. And with them came Reginald of Warren, the younger son of -William and Gundrada,[693] and Gilbert of Laigle, fresh from his -victory over his mightiest comrade.[694] At the beginning of November -Duke Robert was still in the castle of Rouen; but his brother Henry -was now with him within its walls, and the captains who had come to -his help were thundering at the gates of the rebellious city. - - [Illustration: - ROUEN - _For the Delegates of the Clarendon Press._ E. Weller.] - -[Sidenote: Rouen in the eleventh century.] - -[Sidenote: Position of the city.] - -[Sidenote: The ducal castles.] - -[Sidenote: The eastern side of the city.] - -[Sidenote: The archbishopric.] - -[Sidenote: Abbey of Saint Ouen.] - -[Sidenote: Priory of Saint Gervase.] - -[Sidenote: Castle of Bouvreil.] - -[Sidenote: Walls of Saint Lewis.] - -The Rouen of those days, like the Le Mans, the York, and the Lincoln, -of those days, was still the Roman city, the old Rothomagus. As in -those and in countless other cases, large and populous suburbs had -spread themselves over the neighbouring country; at Rouen, as at York, -those suburbs had passed the river; but the city itself, the walled -space to be attacked and defended in wartime, was still of the same -extent as it had been in the days before Rolf and before Chlodwig. The -rectangular space marking the Roman camp stretched on its southern -side nearly to the Seine, whose stream, not yet fenced in by quays, -reached further inland on that side than it now does. Rouen is -essentially a river city, not a hill city. The metropolitan church -does indeed stand on sensibly higher ground than the buildings close -to the river; but to one fresh from Le Mans or Chartres the rise which -has to be mastered seems trifling indeed. For a hill city the obvious -site would have been on the natural akropolis supplied by the height -of Saint Katharine to the south-east. Yet Rouen is a city of the -mainland; the islands which divide the waters of the Seine must have -been tempting points for Rolf in his Wiking days; but even the largest -of them, the Isle of the Cross, was hardly large enough for a town to -grow upon it. Of the walls of Rothomagus not a fragment is left; yet -the impress of a Roman _chester_ is hard to wipe out; it is still easy -to trace its lines among the streets and buildings of the greatly -enlarged mediæval and modern city. Frightful as has been the havoc -which the metropolis of Normandy has undergone in our own time, -mercilessly as the besom of destruction has swept over its ancient -streets, churches, and houses, the dæmon of modern improvement has -spared enough to enable us, if not to tell the towers, yet in idea to -mark well the bulwarks, of the city where the Conqueror reigned. Near -the south-west corner of the parallelogram, not far from the -river-side, had stood the earlier castle of the Dukes. Its site in -after times became the friary of the Cordeliers, a small fragment of -whose church, as well as another desecrated church within the castle -precinct, does in some faint way preserve the memory of the -dwelling-place of Rolf.[695] But by the days of Robert, the dukes had -moved their dwelling to the south-eastern corner, also near the river, -where the site of the castle is marked by the vast _halles_, and by -the graceful Renaissance porch, where the chapter of our Lady of Rouen -yearly, on the feast of the Ascension, exercised the prerogative of -mercy by saving one prisoner condemned to die. Here the memory of the -castle, though only its memory, lives in the names of the _Haute_ and -the _Basse Vieille Tour_, one of which is soon to be famous in our -story. On the eastern side the wall was washed by a small tributary of -the Seine, the Rebecq, a stream whose course has withdrawn from sight -almost as thoroughly as the Fleet of London or the Frome of -Bristol.[696] On this side of the city lay a large swampy tract, whose -name of _Mala palus_ still lives in a _Rue Malpalu_[697], though a -more distant part of it has taken the more ambitious name of the Field -of Mars. Within the wall lay the metropolitan church of our Lady and -the palace of the Primate of Normandy. If this last reached to -anything like its present extent to the east, the Archbishops of -Rouen, like the Counts of Maine,[698] must have been reckoned among -the men who sat on the wall. Outside the city, but close under the -wall, near its north-eastern corner, stood the great abbey of Saint -Ouen, the arch-monastery,[699] still ruled by its Abbot Nicolas, -though his long reign was now drawing to an end.[700] At the opposite -north-western angle, but much further from the walls, where the higher -ground begins to rise above the city, stood the priory of Saint -Gervase, the scene of the Conqueror’s death.[701] Saint Gervase indeed -stood, not only far beyond the Roman walls, but beyond those -fortifications of later times which took Saint Ouen’s within the city. -For Rouen grew as Le Mans grew. On the higher ground like Saint -Gervase, but more to the east, rose the castle of Bouvreil, which -Philip of Paris, after the loss of Norman independence, reared to hold -down the conquered city. Between his grandfather’s castle and the -ancient wall Saint Lewis traced out the newer line of fortification -which is marked by the modern _boulevards_. His walls are gone, as -well as the walls of Rothomagus; but of the house of bondage of Philip -Augustus one tower still stands, while of the dwelling-place of her -own princes even mediæval Rouen had preserved nothing. - -[Sidenote: The gates.] - -[Sidenote: Suburbs beyond the Seine.] - -The four sides of the Roman enclosure were of course pierced by the -four chief gates of the city, of three of which we hear in our story. -Of these the western, the gate of Caux, is in some sort represented by -the Renaissance gate of the Great Clock[702] with its adjoining tower. -The northern gate bore the name of Saint Apollonius. The river was -spanned by at least one bridge, which crossed it by way of the island -of the Cross, near the second ducal castle. Beyond the stream lay the -suburb of Hermentrudeville, now Saint Sever, where Anselm had waited -during the sickness of the Conqueror.[703] There too the Duchess -Matilda, soon to be Queen, had begun the monastery of the meadow, the -monastery of our Lady of Good News, the house of _Pratum_ or _Pré_, -whose church still stood unfinished, awaiting the perfecting hand of -her youngest son.[704] - -[Sidenote: Fright of Duke Robert.] - -[Sidenote: Approach of Gilbert and Reginald.] - -[Sidenote: Efforts of Conan.] - -[Sidenote: Division among the citizens.] - -[Sidenote: Utter confusion.] - -Meanwhile the elder and best-beloved son of Matilda was trembling -within the city on the right bank of the broad river. Luckily he had -the presence of his youngest brother, the English Ætheling, the Count -of the Côtentin, to strengthen him. Personal courage Duke Robert never -lacked at any time; but something more than personal courage was now -needed. Robert was perhaps not frightened, but he was puzzled; at such -a moment he seemed to the calm judgement of Henry to be simply in the -way; it was for wiser heads to take counsel without him. But -deliverance was at hand. Both sides of the Seine sent their helpers. -Gilbert of Laigle crossed the bridge by the island close under the -ducal tower, and turned to the left to the attack of the southern -gate. Reginald of Warren at the head of three hundred knights drew -near to the gate of Caux.[705] Against this twofold attack Conan -strove hard to keep up the hearts of his partisans. He made speeches -exhorting to a valiant defence. Many obeyed; but the city was already -divided; while one party hastened to the southern gate to withstand -the assault of Gilbert, another party sped to open the western gate -and to let in the forces of Reginald. Soldiers of the King of the -English, the advanced guard doubtless of a greater host to come, were -already in the city, stirring up the party of Conan to swifter and -fiercer action.[706] Soldiers and citizens were huddled together in -wild confusion; shouts passed to and fro for King and Duke; men at -either gate smote down neighbours and kinsmen to the sound of either -war-cry.[707] The strength of the city was turned against itself. The -hopes of the commonwealth of Rouen, either as a free city or as a -favoured ally of the island King, were quenched in the blood of its -citizens. Le Mans and Exeter had fallen; but they had fallen more -worthily than this. - -[Sidenote: Henry sends Duke Robert away.] - -[Sidenote: No attacks from the east.] - -Meanwhile Henry and those who were with him in the castle deemed that -the time had come for the defenders of the ducal stronghold to join -their friends within and without the city. But there was one -inhabitant of the castle whose presence was deemed an encumbrance at -such a moment. Men were shouting for the Duke of the Normans; but the -wiser heads of his friends deemed that the Duke of the Normans was -just then best out of the way. Robert came down from the tower, eager -to join in the fray and to give help to the citizens of his own -party.[708] But all was wild tumult; it needed a cooler head than -Robert’s to distinguish friend from foe. He might easily rush on -destruction in some ignoble form, and bring dishonour on the Norman -name itself.[709] He was persuaded by his friends to forego his -warlike purposes, and to suffer himself to be led out of harm’s way. -While every other man in the metropolis of Normandy was giving and -taking blows, the lord of Normandy, in mere personal prowess one of -the foremost soldiers in his duchy, was smuggled out of his capital as -one who could not be trusted to let his blows fall in the right place. -With a few comrades he passed through the eastern gate into the suburb -of the Evil Swamp, just below the castle walls. It is to be noticed -that no fighting on this side of the city is mentioned. The King’s -troops were specially looked for to approach from Gournay, and the -east gate was the natural path by which an army from Gournay would -seek to enter Rouen. One would have expected that one at least of the -relieving parties would have hastened to make sure of this most -important point. Yet one division takes its post by the southern gate, -another by the western, none by the eastern. Were operations on that -side made needless, either by the neighbourhood of the castle, by any -difficulties of the marshy ground, or by the disposition of the -inhabitants of the suburb? Certain it is that Duke Robert’s nearest -neighbours outside his capital were loyal to him. The men of the Evil -Swamp received the Duke gladly as their special lord.[710] He allowed -himself to be put into a boat, and ferried across to the suburb on the -left bank. There he was received by one of his special counsellors, -William of Arques, a monk of Molesme, and was kept safely in his -mother’s monastery till all danger was over.[711] - -[Sidenote: Gilbert enters Rouen.] - -[Sidenote: Slaughter of the citizens.] - -[Sidenote: Conan taken prisoner.] - -[Sidenote: Fate of Conan.] - -[Sidenote: Henry and Conan in the tower.] - -[Sidenote: Death of Conan.] - -It was clearly not wholly for the sake of such a prince as this that -so many Norman leaders, Henry of Coutances among them, had made up -their minds that the republican movement at Rouen was to be put down. -The moment for putting it down had come. Gilbert of Laigle had by this -time, by the strength of his own forces and by the help of the -citizens of his party, entered Rouen through the southern gate. His -forces now joined the company of Henry; they thus became far more than -a match for the citizens of Conan’s party, even strengthened as they -were by those of the King’s men who were in the city. A great -slaughter of the citizens followed; the soldiers of Rufus contrived to -flee out of the city, and to find shelter in the neighbouring -woods;[712] the city was full of death, flight, and weeping; innocent -and guilty fell together; Conan and others of the ringleaders were -taken prisoners. Conan himself was led into the castle, and there -Henry took him for his own share of the spoil, not indeed for ransom, -but to be dealt with in a strange and dreadful fashion. It is one of -the contrasts of human nature that Henry, the great and wise ruler, -the king who made peace for man and deer, the good man of whom there -was mickle awe and in whose day none durst hurt other, should have -been more than once guilty in his own person of acts of calm and -deliberate cruelty which have no parallel in the acts of his father, -nor in those of either of his brothers. So now Conan was doomed to a -fate which was made the sterner by the bitter personal mockery which -he had to endure from Henry’s own mouth. The Ætheling led his victim -up through the several stages of the loftiest tower of the castle, -till a wide view was opened to his eyes through the uppermost -windows.[713] Henry bade Conan look out on the fair prospect which lay -before him. He bade him think how goodly a land it was which he had -striven to bring under his dominion.[714] These words well express the -light in which Conan’s schemes would look in princely eyes; the -question was not whether Robert or William should reign in Rouen; it -was whether Conan should reign there as demagogue or tyrant in the -teeth of all princely rights. Henry went on to point out the beauties -of the landscape in detail; the eyes of the scholar-prince could -perhaps better enjoy them than the eyes of Rufus or of Robert of -Bellême. Beyond the river lay the pleasant park, the woody land rich -in beasts of chase. There was the Seine washing the walls of the city, -the river rich in fish, bearing on its waters the ships which enriched -Rouen with the wares of many lands.[715] On the other side he bade him -look on the city itself thronged with people, its noble churches, its -goodly houses. The modern reader stops for a moment to think that, of -the buildings which then met the eye of Conan, churches, castles, -halls of wealthy burghers like himself, clustering within and without -the ancient walls, all doubtless goodly works according to the sterner -standard of that day, hardly a stone is left to meet his own eye as he -looks down from hill or tower on the great buildings of modern Rouen. -It was another Saint Romanus, another Saint Ouen, of far different -outline and style from those on which we now gaze, which Henry called -on Conan to admire at that awful moment. He bade him mark the -splendour of the city; he bade him think of its dignity as the spot -which had been from of old the head of Normandy.[716] The trembling -wretch felt the mockery; all that was left to him was to groan and cry -for mercy. He confessed his guilt; he simply craved for grace in the -name of their common Maker. He would give to his lord all the gold and -silver of his hoard and the hoards of his kinsfolk; he would wipe out -the stain of his past disloyalty by faithful service for the rest of -his days.[717] The Conqueror would have granted such a prayer in sheer -greatness of soul; the Red King might well have deemed it beneath him -to harm so lowly a suppliant. But the stern purpose of Henry was -fixed, and his wrath, when it was once kindled, was as fierce as that -of his father or his brother. “By the soul of my mother”――that seems -to have been the most sacred of oaths with Matilda’s defrauded heir, -as he looked out towards the church of her building――“there shall be -no ransom for the traitor, but rather a hastening of the death which -he deserves.”[718] Conan no longer pleaded for life; he thought only -of the welfare of his soul. “For the love of God, at least grant me a -confessor.”[719] Had the Lion of Justice reached that height of malice -which seeks to kill the soul as well as the body? At Conan’s last -prayer his wrath reached its height;[720] Conan should have no time -for shrift any more than for ransom. If the clergy of Saint Romanus -already enjoyed their privilege of mercy, they were to have no chance -of exercising it on behalf of this arch-criminal. With all the -strength of both his hands, Henry thrust Conan, like Eadric,[721] -through the window of the tower. He fell from the giddy height, and -died, so it was said, before he reached the ground. His body was tied -to the tail of a pack-horse and dragged through the streets of Rouen -to strike terror into his followers. The spot from which he was hurled -took the name of the Leap of Conan.[722] The tower, as I have said, -has perished; the site of the Leap of Conan must be sought for in -imagination, at some point, perhaps the south-eastern corner, of the -vast _halles_ of ancient Rouen. - -[Sidenote: Policy of Henry.] - -[Sidenote: Robert brought back.] - -[Sidenote: Treatment of the citizens.] - -[Sidenote: Imprisonment and ransom of William son of Ansgar.] - -The rule of Robert was now restored in Rouen, so far as Robert could -be said to rule at any time in Rouen or elsewhere. It is remarkable -that after the death of Conan we lose sight of Henry; that is, as far -as Rouen is concerned, for we shall before long hear of him again in -quite different relations towards his two brothers. He may well have -thought that one fearful example was needed, but that one fearful -example was enough. He would secure the punishment of the ringleader, -even by doing the hangman’s duty with his own hands; but mere havoc -and massacre had no charms for him at any time. His policy might well -have forestalled the later English rule, “Smite the leaders and spare -the commons.” If Robert or anybody else was to reign in Rouen, nothing -would be gained by killing, driving out, or recklessly spoiling, the -people over whom he was to reign. But there were men at his side to -whom the utmost licence of warfare was the most cherished of -enjoyments. The Duke, never personally cruel,[723] was in a merciful -mood. When all danger was over, he was brought across the river from -his monastery to the castle. He saw how much the city had already -suffered; his heart was touched, and he was not minded to inflict any -further punishment. But he had to yield to the sterner counsels of -those about him, and to allow a heavy vengeance to be meted out.[724] -He seems however to have prevailed so far as to hinder the shedding of -blood. At least we hear nothing of any general slaughter. The fierce -men who had brought him back seem to have contented themselves with -plunder and leading into captivity. The citizens of Rouen were dealt -with by their countrymen as men deal with barbarian robbers. They were -spoiled of all their goods and led away into bondage. Robert of -Bellême and William of Breteuil, if they spared life, spared it only -to deal out on their captives all the horrors of the prison-house.[725] -The richest man in Rouen after the dead Conan, William the son of -Ansgar, became the spoil of William of Breteuil. After a long and -painful imprisonment, he regained his liberty on paying a mighty -ransom of three thousand pounds.[726] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Count William marches against Conches. November, 1090.] - -Before his captive was set free, the lord of Breteuil himself learned -what it was to endure imprisonment, this time doubtless of a milder -kind than that which he inflicted on William the son of Ansgar or that -which himself endured at the hands of Ascelin.[727] The Count of -Evreux and his nephew of Breteuil must have marched almost at once -from their successful enterprise at Rouen to a less successful -enterprise at Conches. For it was still November when Count William or -his Countess resolved on a great attack on the stronghold of their -rival.[728] Evreux was doubtless the starting-point for an undertaking -which followed naturally on the work which had been done at Rouen. The -Count of Evreux might keep on the garb of Norman patriotism which he -had worn in the assault on the rebellious capital, and his Countess -might add to the other crimes with which she charged Ralph and Isabel -a share in the crime of Conan, that of traitorous dealing with the -invading enemy. The forces of Evreux and Breteuil were therefore -arrayed to march together against the stronghold of the common kinsman -and enemy at Conches. - -[Sidenote: Position of Evreux and Conches.] - -[Sidenote: Position of Mediolanum or Evreux.] - -[Sidenote: History of Evreux.] - -[Sidenote: The Roman walls.] - -[Sidenote: Small traces of the eleventh century at Evreux.] - -[Sidenote: The _Câtelier_.] - -No contrast could well be greater than the contrast between the spot -from which Count William set forth and the spot which he led his -troops to attack. Near as Conches and Evreux are, they are more -thoroughly cut off from one another than many spots which are far more -distant on the map. The forest of Evreux parts the hills of Conches -from the capital of Count William’s county. The small stream of the -Iton flows by the homes of both the rival heroines. But at Conches it -flows below the hill crowned by castle, church, and abbey; at Evreux -its swift stream had ages before been taught to act as a fosse to the -four walls of a Roman _chester_. Low down in the valley, like our own -Bath, with the hills standing round about his city, the Count of -Evreux lived among the memorials of elder days. The walls of -Mediolanum, which can still be traced through a large part of their -circuit, fenced in to the south the minster of Our Lady and the palace -of the Bishop, then still tenanted by the eloquent Gilbert.[729] His -home, like that of his metropolitan at Rouen,[730] might seem to stand -upon the Roman wall itself. At the north-west corner, the wall fenced -in the castle from which Count William had driven out the Conqueror’s -garrison, and where he, either then or at some later time, overthrew -the Conqueror’s donjon.[731] The wall of Mediolanum, like the wall of -the Athenian akropolis, had fragments of ornamental work, shattered -columns, capitals, cornices, built in among its materials. It would -thus seem to belong to a late stage of Roman rule, when the Frank was -dreaded as a dangerous neighbour, perhaps when he had already once -laid Mediolanum waste. To the north, much as at Le Mans and at Rouen, -the city in later times enlarged its borders, as, in later times -still, it has enlarged them far to the south. The “Little City”――a -name still borne by a street within the Roman circuit――is a poor -representative of the Old Rome on the Cenomannian height;[732] but -both alike bear witness to the small size of the original Roman -encampments, and to the gradual process by which they were enlarged -into the cities of modern times. But in the days of William and -Heloise the circuit of Roman Mediolanum was still the circuit of -Norman Evreux. And, as in so many other places, the oldest monuments -have outlived many that were newer. Neither church, castle, nor -episcopal palace, keeps any fragments of the days of the warlike -Countess; it is only in the minster of Saint Taurinus without the -walls that some small witnesses of those times are to be found. Even -the Romanesque portions of the church of Our Lady must be later than -Count William’s day, and the greater part of the building of the -twelfth century has given way to some of the most graceful conceptions -of the architects of the fourteenth. The home of the Bishop has taken -the shape of a stately dwelling in the latest style of mediæval art; -the home of the Count has vanished like the donjon which Count William -overthrew. But the old defences within which bishops and counts had -fixed themselves in successive ages still live on, to no small extent -in their actual masonry, and in the greater part of their circuit in -their still easily marked lines. And, high upon the hills, the eye -rests on the stronghold of yet earlier days, bearing the local name of -the _Câtelier_, the earth-works which rise above Evreux as the -earth-works of Sinodun rise above the northern Dorchester. Here we may -perhaps see the point where the Gaul still held out on the hill, when -the Roman had already entrenched himself by the river-side. At Evreux -the works of the earliest times, the works of the latest times, the -works of several intermediate times, are there in their fulness. But -there is nothing whatever left in the city directly to remind us of -the times with which we are now dealing. A man might pass through -Evreux, he might make a diligent search into the monuments of Evreux, -and, unless he had learned the fact from other sources, he might fail -to find out that Evreux had ever had counts or temporal lords of any -kind. - - [Illustration: - EVREUX - _For the Delegates of the Clarendon Press._ E. Weller.] - -[Sidenote: Position of Conches.] - -[Sidenote: Foundation of the monastery.] - -[Sidenote: The castle.] - -[Sidenote: The abbey.] - -It is otherwise with the fortress of the warlike lady of the hills, -against which the warlike lady of the river-city now bade the forces -of her husband’s county to march. The home of Isabel has no more of -her actual work or date to show than the home of Heloise; but the -impress of the state of things which she represents is stamped for -ever on the stronghold of the house of Toesny. At Evreux the Count and -his followers lived in the midst of works which, even in their day, -were ancient; at Conches, on the other hand, all was in that day new. -Conches had already its minster, its castle, most likely its growing -town; but all were the works of its present lord or of his father. The -hill of Conches is another of those peninsular hills which, as the -chosen sites of castles, play so large a part in our story. But the -castle of Conches does not itself crown a promontory, like the castle -of Ballon. The cause doubtless was that at Conches the abode of peace -came first, and the abode of warfare came only second. Either Ralph -himself, the first of his house who bears the surname of Conches as -well as that of Toesny, or else his fierce father in some milder -moment, had planted on the hill a colony of monks, the house of Saint -Peter of Conches or Castellion.[733] The monastery arose on that point -of the high ground which is most nearly peninsular, that stretching -towards the north. To the south of the abbey presently grew up the -town with its church, a town which, in after times at least, was -girded by a wall, and which was sheltered or threatened by the castle -of its lords at the end furthest from the monastery. To the east, the -height on which town and castle stand side by side rises sheer from a -low and swampy plain, girt in by hills on every side, lying like the -arena of a natural amphitheatre. On the hill-side art has helped -nature by escarpments; the mound of the castle, girt by its deep and -winding ditch, rises as it rose in the days of Ralph and Isabel; but -the round donjon on the mound and the other remaining buildings of the -fortress cannot claim an earlier date than the thirteenth century. The -donjon and the apse of the parish church, a gem of the latest days of -French art, now stand nobly side by side; in Isabel’s day they had -other and ruder forerunners. But of the abbey, which must have -balanced the castle itself in the general view, small traces only now -remain; it has become quite secondary in the general aspect of the -place, which gathers wholly round the parish church and the donjon. -The western side of the hill, towards the forest which takes its name -from Conches, shows nearly the same features as the eastern side on a -smaller scale. It looks down on another plain girt in by hills; but on -this side the slope of the hill of Conches itself is gentler, and the -town is here defended by a wall. Altogether it was a formidable -undertaking when the lord of the ancient city in the vale carried his -arms against the fortress, the work of his brother, which had arisen -within his own memory on the height overlooking his own river. - -[Sidenote: Siege of Conches.] - -[Sidenote: Near kindred of the combatants.] - -[Sidenote: Death of Richard of Montfort.] - -[Sidenote: William of Breteuil taken prisoner.] - -[Sidenote: Settlement of the county of Evreux on young Roger of -Conches.] - -Count William thus began his winter siege of Conches; but, as usual, -we get no intelligible account of the siege as a military operation. -We are told nothing of the Count’s line of march, or by what means he -sought to bring the castle to submission. But, as usual too, we have -no lack of personal anecdotes, anecdotes some of which remind us how -near were the family ties between the fierce nobles who tore one -another in pieces. We have already mentioned one nephew of the Count -of Evreux who came with him to the attack of Conches. But William of -Breteuil was nephew alike of both the contending brothers. His mother -Adeliza, daughter of Roger of Toesny, wife of Earl William of Hereford -before he went to seek a loftier bride in Flanders,[734] was the whole -sister of Ralph of Conches and the half-sister of Count William of -Evreux.[735] Another nephew and follower of Count William, Richard of -Montfort, son of his whole sister, was moreover a brother of the -Penthesileia of Conches.[736] The fate of these two kinsmen was -different. Richard, in warring against his sister’s castle, with some -chance of meeting his sister personally in the field, did not respect -the sanctity of the neighbouring abbey of her husband’s foundation. He -heeded not the tears of the monks who prayed him to spare the holy -place. A chance shot of which he presently died was looked on as the -reward of his sacrilege. Both sides mourned for one so nearly allied -to both leaders.[737] William of Breteuil, the ally of his uncle of -Evreux, became the captive of his uncle of Conches. That wary captain, -when the host of Evreux came a-plundering, was at the head of a large -force of his own followers and of the King of England’s soldiers.[738] -But he bade his men keep back till the foe was laden with booty; they -were then to set upon them in their retreat. His orders were -successfully carried out. Many of the party became the prisoners of -the lord of Conches, among them the lord of Breteuil, the gaoler of -William the son of Ansgar.[739] Of this incident came a peace which -ended the three years’ warfare of the half-brothers.[740] The captive -William of Breteuil procured his freedom by a ransom of three thousand -pounds paid to his uncle of Conches, which was presently made good to -him by the ransom of his own victim from Rouen. Moreover, as he had no -lawful issue,[741] he settled his estates on his young cousin Roger, -the younger son of Ralph and Isabel. The same youthful heir was also -chosen by his childless uncle of Evreux to succeed him in his -county.[742] Perhaps Duke Robert confirmed all these arrangements as a -matter of course; perhaps the consent of such an over-lord was not -deemed worth the asking. - -[Sidenote: Character of Roger.] - -[Sidenote: The three dreams.] - -[Sidenote: Baldwin of Boulogne.] - -[Sidenote: Roger’s dream.] - -The young Roger of Toesny thus seemed to have a brilliant destiny -opened to him, but he was not doomed to be lord either of Evreux or of -Breteuil. He was, it is implied, too good for this world, at all -events for such a world as that of Normandy in the reign of Robert. -Pious, gentle, kind to men of all classes, despising the pomp of -apparel which was the fashion of his day,[743] the young Roger -attracts us as one of a class of whom there may have been more among -the chivalry of Normandy than we are apt to think at first sight. An -order could not be wholly corrupt which numbered among its members -such men as Herlwin of Bec, as Gulbert of Hugleville,[744] and the -younger son of Ralph of Conches. A tale is told of him, a tale -touching in itself and one which gives us our only glimpse of the -inner and milder life of the castle of Conches under the rule of its -Amazonian mistress. A number of knights sat idle in the hall, sporting -and amusing themselves with talk in the presence of the lady -Isabel.[745] At last they told their dreams. One whose name is not -given, said that he had seen the form of the Saviour on the cross, -writhing in agony and looking on him with a terrible countenance. All -who heard the dream said that some fearful judgement was hanging over -the head of the dreamer. Then spoke Baldwin the son of Count Eustace -of Boulogne, one of the mightier sons of an ignoble father.[746] He -too had seen his Lord hanging on the cross; but the divine form was -bright and glorious; the divine face smiled kindly on the dreamer; the -divine hand blessed him and traced the sign of the cross over his -head.[747] All said that rich gifts of divine favour were in store for -him. Then the young Roger crept near to his mother, and told her that -he too knew one not far off who had beheld his vision also. Isabel -asked of her son of whom he spoke and what the seer had beheld. The -youth blushed and hesitated, but, pressed by his mother and his -comrades, he told how there was one who had lately seen his vision of -the Lord, how the Saviour had placed his hand on his head, and had -bidden him, as his beloved, to come quickly that he might receive the -joys of life. And he added that he knew that he who was thus called of -his Lord would not long abide in this world. - -[Sidenote: Fulfilment of the dreams.] - -[Sidenote: Death of young Roger.] - -Such talk as this in the hall of Conches, in the presence of its -warlike lady, whether we deem it the record of real dreams or a mere -pious imagining after the fact, seems like a fresh oasis in the dreary -wilderness of unnatural war. Each vision was of course fulfilled. The -nameless knight, wounded ere long in one of the combats of the time, -died without the sacraments. Baldwin of Boulogne, afterwards -son-in-law of Ralph and Isabel,[748] was indeed called to bear the -cross, but in a way which men perhaps had not thought of six years -before Pope Urban preached at Clermont. Count of Edessa, King of -Jerusalem, the name of Baldwin lives in the annals of crusading -Europe; to Englishmen it perhaps comes home most nearly as the name of -a comrade of our own Robert son of Godwine.[749] But a brighter crown -than that of Baldwin’s kingdom was, long before Baldwin reigned, the -reward of the young Roger. A few months after the date of the tale, he -died peacefully in his bed, full of faith and hope, and, amid the -grief of many, his body was laid in the minster of Saint Peter of his -father’s rearing.[750] - -[Sidenote: Later treaty between the two brothers.] - -[Sidenote: 1100.] - -[Sidenote: Banishment and death of Count William. April 18, 1108.] - -There was thus peace between Conches and Evreux, a peace which does -not seem to have been again broken. Ten years later, in a time of -renewed licence, we find the two brothers joining in a private war -against Count Robert of Meulan.[751] Eight years later again, when -Count William and his Countess were busy building a monastery at -Noyon, they fell under the displeasure of King Henry, and died in -banishment in the land of Anjou.[752] Ralph of Toesny was succeeded by -his son the younger Ralph, and Isabel, after a long widowhood, -withdrew as a penitent to atone for the errors of her youth, one would -think of her later days also, in a life of religion.[753] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Orderic’s picture of Normandy.] - -[Sidenote: His English feelings.] - -It is after recording the war of Conches and the sack of Rouen that -the monk of Saint Evroul takes up his parable to set forth the general -wretchedness of Normandy in the blackest colours with which the -pictures of Hebrew prophets and Latin poets could furnish him. And it -is Orderic the Englishman[754] that speaks. In his Norman cell he -never forgot that he first drew breath by the banks of the Severn. In -his eyes the woes of Normandy were the righteous punishment for the -wrongs of England. The proud people who had gloried in their conquest, -who had slain or driven out the native sons of the land, who had taken -to themselves their possessions and commands, were now themselves -bowed down with sorrows. The wealth which they had stolen from others -served now not to their delight but to their torment.[755] Normandy, -like Babylon, had now to drink of the same cup of tribulation, of -which she had given others to drink even to drunkenness. A Fury -without a curb raged through the land, and smote down its inhabitants. -The clergy, the monks, the unarmed people, everywhere wept and -groaned. None were glad save thieves and robbers, and they were not -long to be glad.[756] And so he follows out the same strain through a -crowd of prophetic images, the locust, the mildew, and every other -instrument of divine wrath. We admit the aptness of his parallel when -he tells us that in those days there was no king nor duke in the -Norman Jerusalem; we are less able to follow the analogy when he adds -that the rebellious folk sacrificed at Dan and Bethel to the golden -calves of Jeroboam.[757] At last, when his stock of metaphors is worn -out, he goes back to his story to tell the same tale of crime and -sorrow in other parts of the Norman duchy.[758] - - -§ 3. _Personal Coming of William Rufus._ - -1091. - -[Sidenote: Christmas Gemót at Westminster. 1090.] - -[Sidenote: The King crosses to Normandy. February, 1091.] - -[Sidenote: Duke Robert helps Robert of Bellême.] - -[Sidenote: Hugh of Grantmesnil and Richard of Courcy.] - -In a general view of the state of affairs, William Rufus had lost much -more by the check of his plans at Rouen than he could gain by any -successes of his Norman allies at Conches. The attempt of the Count of -Evreux on the castle of his new vassal had been baffled; but his own -far greater scheme, the scheme by which he had hoped to win the -capital of Normandy, had been baffled also. It may have been this -failure which led the King to see that his own presence was needed -beyond the sea. The Christmas Gemót of the year was held, not, as -usual, at Gloucester, but at Westminster. At Candlemas the King -crossed to Normandy with a great fleet.[759] The two things are -mentioned together, as if to imply that a further sanction of the -assembled Witan was given to this new stage of the war. War indeed -between William and Robert there was none. It does not seem that a -single blow was struck to withstand the invader. But blows were given -and taken in Normandy throughout the winter with as much zeal as ever. -And this time Duke Robert himself was helping to give and take them. -Stranger than all, he was giving and taking them in the character of -an ally of Robert of Bellême against men who seem to have done -nothing but defend themselves against the attacks of the last-named -common enemy of mankind. Old Hugh of Grantmesnil, once the -Conqueror’s lieutenant at Winchester and afterwards his Sheriff of -Leicestershire,[760] was connected by family ties with Richard of -Courcy,[761] and the spots from which they took their names, in the -diocese of Seez, between the Dive and the Oudon, lay at no great -distance from one another. They thus lay between Earl Roger’s own -Montgomery[762] and a series of new fortresses on the Orne and the -neighbouring streams, by which Earl Roger’s son hoped to extend his -power over the whole land of Hiesmes.[763] Hugh and Richard -strengthened themselves against the tyrant――such is the name which -Robert bears――gathering their allies and putting their castles in a -state of defence. Their united forces were too much for the lord of -Bellême. He sought help from his sovereign, and the Duke, who was not -allowed to strike a blow for his own Rouen, appeared as the besieger -of Courcy, no less than of Brionne. He who had fought to turn the -tyrant out of Ballon and Saint Cenery now fought to put Courcy into -the tyrant’s power. - -[Sidenote: Siege of Courcy. January, 1091.] - -[Sidenote: News of William’s coming. February.] - -[Sidenote: The siege raised.] - -[Sidenote: Men flock to William from all parts.] - -[Sidenote: Treaty of Caen. 1091.] - -The siege of Courcy began in January.[764] At the end of the month or -the beginning of the next, a piece of news came which caused the Duke -and the other besiegers to cease from their work. Robert himself could -see that there was something else to be done besides making war on -Hugh of Grantmesnil on behalf of Robert of Bellême, when the King of -the English was in his own person on Norman ground. The host before -Courcy broke up; some doubtless went to their own homes;[765] but we -may suspect that some found their way to Eu. For there it was that -King William had fixed his quarters; there the great men of Normandy -were gathering around him. They did not come empty-handed. They -welcomed the King with royal gifts; but it was to receive far greater -gifts in return. Thither too men were flocking to him, not only from -Normandy, but from France, Flanders, Britanny, and all the -neighbouring lands. And all who came went away saying that the King of -the English was a far richer and more bountiful lord than any of their -own princes.[766] In such a state of things it was useless for Robert -to think of meeting his brother in arms. His only hope was to save -some part of his dominions by negotiation before the whole Norman land -had passed into the hands of the island king. A treaty of peace was -concluded, by which Robert kept his capital and the greater part of -his duchy, but by which William was established as a powerful and -dangerous continental neighbour, hemming in what was left of Normandy -on every side. - -[Sidenote: Cession of Norman territory to William.] - -[Sidenote: Their geographical aspect.] - -[Sidenote: Cession of Fécamp and Cherbourg.] - -The treaty was agreed to, seemingly under the mediation of the King of -the French, in a meeting of the rival brothers at Caen.[767] The -territorial cession made by Robert mainly took the form of recognizing -the commendations which so many Norman nobles had made to the Red -King. They had sought him to lord, and their lord he was to be. The -fiefs held by the lords of Eu, Aumale, Gournay, and Conches, and all -others who had submitted to William, passed away from Robert. They -were to be held of the King of the English, under what title, if any, -does not appear. To hold a fief of William Rufus meant something quite -different from holding a fief of Robert. The over-lordship of Robert -meant nothing at all; it did not hinder his vassal from making war at -pleasure either on his lord or on any fellow-vassal. But the -over-lordship of William Rufus, like that of his father, meant real -sovereignty; the lords who submitted to him had given themselves a -master. If any of them had a mind to live in peace, their chance -certainly became greater; in any case the dread of William’s power, -combined with the attractions of the rich hoard which was so freely -opened, might account for the sacrifice of a wild independence. The -territory thus ceded to the east, the lands of Eu, Aumale, and -Gournay, involved a complete surrender of the eastern frontier of the -duchy. The addition of the lands of Conches formed an outpost to the -south. Rouen was thus hemmed in on two sides. But this was not enough, -in the ideas of the Red King, to secure a scientific frontier. The -lord of the island realm must hold some points to strengthen his -approach to the mainland, something better than the single port of Eu -in one corner of the duchy. Robert had therefore to surrender two -points of coast which had not, as far as we have heard, been occupied -by William or by his Norman allies. Rouen was to be further hemmed in -to the north-west, by the cession of Fécamp, abbey and palace. The -occupation of this point had the further advantage for William that it -put a check on the districts which had been kept for Robert by Helias -of Saint-Saen. These were now threatened by Fécamp on one side and by -Eu and Aumale on the other. And William’s demands on the Duke of the -Normans contained one clause which could be carried out only at the -cost of the Count of the Côtentin. Henry’s fortress of Cherbourg, not -so long before strengthened by him,[768] was also to pass to William. -So early was the art known by which a more powerful prince, with no -ground to show except his own will, claims the right to shut out a -weaker prince or people from the seaboard which nature has designed -for them. - -[Sidenote: William demands Saint Michael’s Mount.] - -[Sidenote: Money paid to Robert.] - -[Sidenote: The lost dominions of the Conqueror to be restored to -Robert.] - -[Sidenote: Projected recovery of Maine.] - -Besides Cherbourg, the Red King demanded the island fortress of Saint -Michael’s Mount, the abbey in peril of the sea. Otherwise he seems to -have claimed nothing in the west of Normandy. Robert might reign, if -he could, over the lands which his father had brought into submission -on the day of Val-ès-Dunes. Nor were the great cessions which Robert -made to be wholly without recompence. It might be taken for granted -that the Duke whose territories were thus cut off was to have some -compensation in another shape out of the wealth of England. So it was; -vast gifts were given by the lord of the hoard at Winchester to the -pauper prince at Rouen.[769] But he was not to be left without -territorial compensation also. William not only undertook to bring -under Robert’s obedience all those who were in arms against him -throughout Normandy; he further undertook to win back for him all the -dominions which their father had ever held, except those lands which, -by the terms of the treaty, were to fall to William himself. This -involved a very considerable enlargement of Robert’s dominions, -besides turning his nominal rule into a reality in the lands where he -was already sovereign in name. It was aimed at lands both within and -without the bounds of the Norman duchy. Maine, city and county, was -again in revolt against its Norman lords.[770] By this clause of the -treaty William bound himself to recover Maine for Robert. This -obligation he certainly never even attempted to fulfil. He did not -meddle with Maine till the Norman lord and the English King were again -one. Then the recovery of Maine, or at least of its capital, became -one of the chief objects of his policy. - -[Sidenote: Henry to be despoiled of the Côtentin.] - -[Sidenote: Character of the agreement.] - -[Sidenote: Henry attacked at once.] - -But this clause had also a more remarkable application. Its terms were -to be brought to bear on one nearer by blood and neighbourhood to both -the contending princes than either Cenomannian counts or Cenomannian -citizens. The terms of the treaty amounted to a partition of the -dominions of the Count of the Côtentin between his two brothers. -Cherbourg and Saint Michael’s Mount were, as we have seen, formally -assigned to William, and the remainder of Henry’s principality -certainly came under the head of lands which had been held by William -the Great and which the treaty did not assign to William the Red. As -such they were to be won back for Robert by the help of William. That -is to say, William and Robert agreed to divide between themselves the -territory which Henry had fairly bought with money from Robert. No -agreement could be more unprincipled. As between prince and prince, no -title could be better than Henry’s title to his county; while, if the -welfare of the people of Coutances and Avranches was to be thought of, -the proposed change meant their transfer from a prince who knew the -art of ruling to a prince whose nominal rule was everywhere simple -anarchy. Neither Robert nor William was likely to be troubled with -moral scruples; neither was likely to think much of the terms of a -bargain and sale; but one might have expected that Robert would have -felt some thankfulness to his youngest brother for his ready help in -putting down the rebellious movement at Rouen.[771] William might -indeed on that same account look on Henry as an enemy; but such enmity -could hardly be decently professed in a treaty of alliance between -Robert and William. We may perhaps believe that the chief feeling -which the affair of Rouen had awakened in Robert’s mind was rather -mortification than gratitude. A brother who had acted so vigorously -when he himself was not allowed to act at all was dangerous as a -neighbour or as a vassal. The memory of his services was humiliating; -it was not well to have a brother so near at hand, and in command of -so powerful a force, a brother who, if he had at one moment hastened -to his elder brother’s defence, might at some other moment come with -equal speed on an opposite errand. But whatever were their motives, -King and Duke agreed to rob their youngest brother of his dominions. -And the importance which was attached to this part of the treaty is -shown by the speed and energy with which it was carried out. While the -recovery of Maine was delayed or forgotten, the recovery of the -Côtentin was the first act of the contracting princes after the -conclusion of the treaty. - -[Sidenote: Probable objects of William.] - -[Sidenote: Settlement of the English and Norman succession.] - -[Sidenote: William and Robert to succeed one another.] - -[Sidenote: Constitutional aspect of the agreement.] - -[Sidenote: Growth of the hereditary principle,] - -[Sidenote: and of the doctrine of legitimacy.] - -[Sidenote: The two Æthelings] - -[Sidenote: Henry;] - -[Sidenote: Eadgar.] - -[Sidenote: Eadgar banished from Normandy.] - -[Sidenote: William’s policy towards] - -[Sidenote: Henry and Eadgar.] - -[Sidenote: Eadgar goes to Scotland.] - -But, when we look to some other terms of the treaty, it is possible -that, in the mind of William at least, the spoliation of Henry had a -deeper object. One purpose of the treaty was to settle the succession -both to the kingdom of England and to the duchy of Normandy. Neither -the imperial crown nor the ducal coronet had at this moment any direct -and undoubted heir, according to any doctrine of succession. Both -William and Robert were at this time unmarried; Robert had more than -one illegitimate child; no children of William Rufus are recorded at -any time. The treaty provided that, if either King or Duke died -without lawful issue during the lifetime of his brother, the survivor -should succeed to his dominions. I have spoken elsewhere of the -constitutional aspect of this agreement.[772] It was an attempt to -barter away beforehand the right of the Witan of England to bestow the -crown of a deceased king on whatever successor they thought good. And, -like all such attempts, before and after, till the great act of -settlement which put an end to the nineteen years’ anarchy,[773] it -came to nothing. But that such an agreement should have been made -shows what fresh strength had been given by the Norman Conquest to the -whole class of ideas of which the doctrine of hereditary succession to -kingdoms forms a part.[774] But, putting this view of the matter -aside, the objects of the provision, as a family compact, were -obvious. It was William’s manifest interest to shut out Robert’s sons -from any share in the inheritance of their father. This was easily -done. The stricter doctrine of legitimacy of birth was fast -growing.[775] It was but unwillingly that Normandy had, sixty years -earlier, acknowledged the bastard of an earlier Robert; it was most -unlikely that Normandy would submit to a bastard of the present -Robert, while there yet lived lawful sons of him who had made the name -of Bastard glorious. Robert, on the other hand, might not be unwilling -to give up so faint a chance on the part of his own children, in order -to be himself declared presumptive heir to the crown of England. But -there were others to be shut out, one of whom at least was far more -dangerous than the natural sons of Robert. There were then in Normandy -two men who bore the English title of Ætheling, one of the old race, -one of the new; one whom Englishmen had once chosen as the last of the -old race, another to whom Englishmen looked as the first of the new -race who had any claim to the privileges of kingly birth. We must -always remember that, in English eyes, Henry, the son of a crowned -King of the English, born of his crowned Lady on English ground, had a -claim which was not shared by his brothers, foreign born sons of a -mere Norman Duke and Duchess.[776] The kingly and native birth of -Henry might put his claims at least on a level with those of Eadgar, -who, male heir of Ecgberht and Cerdic as he was, was born of uncrowned -parents in a foreign land.[777] Indeed it might seem that by this time -all thoughts of a restoration of the West-Saxon house had passed out -of the range of practical politics, and that the claims of Eadgar were -no longer entitled to a thought. The Red King however seems to have -deemed otherwise. He was clearly determined to secure himself against -the remotest chances of danger. Henry was to be despoiled; Eadgar was -to be banished. Eadgar had come back from Apulia;[778] he was now -living in Normandy on terms of the closest friendship with the Duke, -who had enriched him with grants of land, and, as we have seen, -admitted him to his inmost counsels.[779] We know not whether Eadgar -had given the Red King any personal offence, or whether William was -simply jealous of him as a possible rival for the crown. At any rate, -whether by a formal clause of the treaty or not, he called on Robert -to confiscate Eadgar’s Norman estates and to make him leave his -dominions.[780] Neither towards Henry nor towards Eadgar would the -policy of William Rufus seem to have been wise; but sound policy, in -any high sense, was not one of the attributes of William Rufus. -Whatever may be said of Henry’s relations towards Normandy, he was -more likely to plot against his brother of England if he became a -landless wanderer than if he remained Count of Coutances and -Avranches. As for Eadgar, it might possibly have been a gain if he -could have been sent back to Apulia or provided for in his native -Hungary. As it was, he straightway betook himself to a land where he -was likely to be far more dangerous than he could ever be in Normandy. -As in the days of William the Great,[781] he went at once to the court -of his brother-in-law of Scotland.[782] It may be that William -presently saw that he had taken a false step in the treatment of both -the Æthelings. At a later time we shall see both Henry and Eadgar -enjoying his full favour and confidence. - -[Sidenote: The followers of each side to be restored.] - -[Sidenote: The rebels of 1088 to be restored.] - -The man before whose eyes the crown of England had twice been dangled -in mockery, and the man who was hereafter to grasp that crown with a -grasp like that of the Conqueror himself, were thus both doomed to be -for the moment despoiled of lands and honours. To men of less exalted -degree the treaty was more favourable. King and Duke alike, so far to -the credit of both of them, stipulated for the safety and restoration -of their several partisans in the dominions of the other. All -supporters of William in any of those parts of Normandy which were not -to be ceded to him were to suffer no harm at the hands of Robert. And, -what was much more important, all those who had lost their lands in -England three years before on account of their share in the rebellion -on behalf of Robert were to have their lands back again. An exception, -formal or practical, must have been made in the case of Bishop Odo. He -certainly was not restored to his earldom of Kent. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: The treaty sworn to.] - -[Sidenote: It stands but a little while.] - -[Sidenote: William and Robert march against Henry. Lent, 1091.] - -[Sidenote: Henry’s position.] - -[Sidenote: Earl Hugh of Chester and others betray their castles to -William.] - -[Sidenote: Henry takes up his quarters at Saint Michael’s Mount.] - -[Sidenote: The buildings on the Mount.] - -[Sidenote: Abbot Roger. 1085.] - -[Sidenote: The monks welcome Henry.] - -The treaty was sworn to by twelve chief men on each side.[783] The -English Chronicler remarks, with perfect truth, that it stood but a -little while.[784] But one part at least was carried out at once and -with great vigour. Within less than a month after William had landed -in Normandy to dispossess Robert, he and Robert marched together to -dispossess Henry. They spent their Lent in besieging him in his last -stronghold. When the Count of Coutances heard of the coalition against -him, he made ready for a vigorous resistance. He put his two cities of -Coutances and Avranches and his other fortresses into a state of -defence, and gathered a force, Norman and Breton, to garrison -them.[785] Britanny indeed was the only quarter from which he received -any help in his struggle.[786] Those who seemed to be his firmest -friends turned against him. Even Earl Hugh of Chester, the foremost -man in the land from which his father had taken his name,[787] had no -mind to jeopard his great English palatinate for the sake of keeping -his paternal Avranches in the obedience of the Ætheling. Henry’s other -supporters, Richard of Redvers, it is to be supposed, among them, were -of the same mind. They saw no hope that Henry could withstand the -might, above all the wealth, of Rufus; they accordingly surrendered -their fortresses into the King’s hands.[788] One stronghold only was -now left to Henry, one of the two which had been specially marked out -to be taken from him, the monastic fortress of Saint Michael. The -sacred mount was then famous and venerable through all Normandy, and -far beyond the bounds of Normandy. Of that vast and wondrous pile of -buildings, halls, cloister, church, buildings which elsewhere stand -side by side, but which here are heaped one upon another, little could -then have been standing. The minster itself, which crowns all, had -begun to be rebuilt seventy years before by the Abbot Hildebert,[789] -and it may be that some parts of his work have lived through the -natural accidents of the next age[790] and the destruction and -disfigurement of later times. But the series of pillared halls, -knightly and monastic, which give its special character to the abbey -of the Mount, are all of far later date than the war of the three -brothers. Yet the house of the warrior archangel was already at once -knightly and monastic. The reigning abbot Roger was, in strict -ecclesiastical eyes, a prelate of doubtful title. He had come in――as -countless other bishops and abbots of Normandy and England had come -in――less by free election of the monks than by the will of the great -Duke and King.[791] What personal share Roger took in the struggle is -not recorded; but some at least of his monks, like the monks of Ely in -the days of Hereward,[792] welcomed the small body of followers who -still clave to Henry, and at whose head he now took up his last -position of defence in the island sanctuary.[793] - -[Sidenote: Siege of the Mount.] - -[Sidenote: Lent, 1091.] - -[Sidenote: Its position.] - -[Sidenote: The inner bay.] - -[Sidenote: Later sieges. 1417-1424.] - -[Sidenote: No mention of ships.] - -[Sidenote: Positions of the besiegers.] - -[Sidenote: Character of the siege.] - -[Sidenote: Combats] - -Here Henry was besieged by his two brothers, Duke and King. Yet we -hear of nothing which can in strictness be called a siege. The Mount -stands in the mouth of a bay within a bay. At high water it is -strictly an island; at low water it is surrounded by a vast wilderness -of sand――those treacherous sands from which thirty years before Harold -had rescued the soldiers of the elder William[794], and which stretch -back as far as the rocks of Cancale on the Breton shore. In this sense -the bay of Saint Michael may be counted to stretch from Cancale to the -opposite point on the Norman coast, where the land begins to bend -inwards to form the narrower bay. This last may be counted to stretch -from the mouth of the border stream of Coesnon below Pontorson to -Genetz lying on the coast nearly due west from Avranches. The Mount -itself and its satellite the smaller rock of Tombelaine lie nearly in -a straight line between these two points. Alternately inaccessible by -land and by water, accessible by land at any time only by certain -known routes at different points, the Mount would seem to be incapable -of direct attack by any weapons known in the eleventh century. On the -other hand, it would be easy to cut it off from all communication with -the outer world by the occupation of the needful points on the shore -and by the help of a blockading fleet. And in the great siege three -hundred and thirty years later――when Normandy had again a kingly duke -of the blood of Rolf and Henry, but when the Mount clave to the King -of Paris or of Bourges――we hear both of the blockading fleet of -England and of the series of posts with which the shore was lined. -Without a fleet the Mount could hardly be said to be besieged; but, on -the other hand, its insular position would be of no use to its -defenders, unless they had either ships at command or friends beyond -sea. In the present case we hear nothing of ships on either side, nor -of any help coming to the besieged. Nor do we hear of any systematic -occupation of the whole coast. We hear only that the besiegers -occupied two points which commanded the two sides of the inner bay, On -the north the Duke took up his quarters at Genetz; to the south the -besiegers occupied Arderon, not far from the mouth of the Coesnon, -while King William of England established himself in the central -position of Avranches.[795] The siege thus became an affair of endless -small attacks and skirmishes. We hear of the plundering expeditions -which Henry was able to make into the lands of Avranches and even of -Coutances, lands which had once been his own, but which had now become -hostile ground.[796] We hear too how, before each of the extreme -points occupied by the besiegers, before Genetz and before Arderon, -the knights on both sides met every day in various feats of arms, -feats, it would seem, savouring rather of the bravado of the tourney -than of any rational military purpose.[797] - - [Illustration: - Map to illustrate the SIEGE OF Sᵀ MICHAEL’S MOUNT. A.D. 1091. - _For the Delegates of the Clarendon Press._ Edwᵈ. Weller] - -[Sidenote: Personal anecdotes.] - -[Sidenote: William compared to Alexander.] - -[Sidenote: Knight-errantry of William.] - -[Sidenote: The King upset.] - -[Sidenote: His treatment of the knight who unhorsed him.] - -We now get, in the shape of those personal anecdotes in which this -reign is so rich, pictures of more than one side of the strangely -mixed character of the Red King. At the other end of Normandy William -had won lands and castles without dealing a single blow with his own -sword, and with a singularly small outlay of blows from the swords of -others. At Eu, at Aumale, and at Gournay, the work had been done with -gold far more than with steel. Beneath Saint Michael’s Mount steel was -to have its turn; and, when steel was the metal to be used, William -Rufus was sure to be in his own person the foremost among those who -used it. The change of scene seemed to have turned the wary trafficker -into the most reckless of knights errant. Amidst such scenes he -became, in the eyes of his own age, the peer of the most renowned of -those Nine Worthies the tale of whom was made up only in his own day. -We shall see at a later stage how the question was raised whether the -soul of the Dictator Cæsar had not passed into the body of the Red -King; by the sands of Saint Michael’s bay he was held to have placed -himself on a level with the Macedonian Alexander. The likeness could -hardly be carried on through the general military character of the two -princes; for Alexander, when he began an enterprise, commonly carried -it on to the end. And it may be doubted whether Alexander ever -jeoparded his own life in the senseless way in which Rufus in the tale -is made to jeopard his. We must picture to ourselves the royal -head-quarters between the height of Avranches and the sands of Saint -Michael’s bay. The King goes forth from his tent, and mounts the horse -which he had that morning bought for fifteen marks of silver.[798] He -sees the enemy at a distance riding proudly towards him. Alone, -waiting for no comrade, borne on both by eagerness for the fray and by -the belief that no one would dare to withstand a king face to face, he -gallops forward and charges the advancing party.[799] The newly bought -horse is killed; the King falls under him; he is ignominiously dragged -along by the foot, but the strength of his chain-armour saves him from -any actual wound.[800] By this time the knight who had unhorsed him -has his hand on the hilt of his sword, ready to deal a deadly blow. -William, frightened by the extremity of his danger, cries out, “Hold, -rascal, I am the King of England.”[801] The words had that kind of -magic effect which is so often wrought by the personal presence of -royalty. From any rational view of the business in hand, to slay, or -better still to capture, the hostile king should have been the first -object of every man in Henry’s garrison. To no case better applied the -wise order of the Syrian monarch, “Fight neither with small nor great, -save only with the King of Israel.”[802] But as soon as a voice which -some at least of them knew proclaimed that it was a king who lay -helpless among them, every arm was stayed. The soldiers of Henry -tremble at the thought of what they were so near doing; with all -worship they raise the King from the ground and bring him another -horse.[803] William springs unaided on his back; he casts a keen -glance on the band around him,[804] and asks, “Who unhorsed me?” As -they were muttering one to another, the daring man who had done the -deed came forward and said, “I, who took you, not for a king but for a -knight.” A bold answer was never displeasing to Rufus; he looked -approval, and said, “By the face of Lucca,[805] you shall be mine; -your name shall be written in my book,[806] and you shall receive the -reward of good service.” Here the story ends; we are to suppose that -William, instead of being carried a prisoner to the Mount, rode back -free to Avranches, having lessened the small force of Henry by a stout -knight and two horses. - -[Sidenote: Character of the story.] - -[Sidenote: Comparison with Richard the First.] - -The tale is told as an example of the magnanimity of the Red King. And -there is something which moves a kind of admiration in the picture of -a man, helpless among a crowd of enemies, yet bearing himself as if -they were his prisoners, instead of his being theirs. The point of the -story is that Rufus did no harm, that he felt no ill will, towards the -man who had unhorsed, and all but killed him; that he honoured his -bold deed and bold bearing, and promised him favour and promotion. But -had the soldiers of Henry done their duty, William would have had no -opportunity, at least no immediate opportunity, of doing either good -or harm to his antagonist. William assumes that the enemy will not -dare to withstand him, and his assumption is so far justified that he -is withstood only by one who knows not who he is, and whose words -imply that, if he had known, he would not have ventured to withstand -him. Trusting to this kind of superstitious dread, William is able to -speak and act as he might have spoken if the man who unhorsed him had -been brought before him in his own tent. Richard of the Lion-heart, -when the archer who had given him his death-wound was brought before -him, first designed him for a death of torture, and then, on hearing a -bold answer, granted him life and freedom.[807] In this, as in some -other cases, the Red King, the earliest model of chivalry, certainly -does not lose by comparison with the successor who is more commonly -looked on as its ideal.[808] - -[Sidenote: Contrast between William and Robert.] - -[Sidenote: Lack of water on the Mount.] - -[Sidenote: Henry asks to be allowed to take water.] - -[Sidenote: Answer of Robert and William.] - -Another and perhaps better known story which is told of this siege -puts the character of William Rufus in another light, while it brings -out the character of Robert in a lively form. The Duke, heedless of -the consequences of his acts but not cruel in his own person, was, -above all men, open to those passing bursts of generosity which are -quite consistent with utter weakness and want of principle. William -Rufus was always open to an appeal to his knightly generosity, to that -higher form of self-assertion which forbade him to harm one who was -beneath him, and which taught him to admire a bold deed or word even -when directed against himself. But the ties of kindred, still more the -ties of common humanity, sat very lightly on him. The gentler soul of -Robert was by no means dead to them. He did not shrink from waging an -unjust war against his brother and deliverer; he did not shrink from -despoiling that brother and deliverer of dominions which he had sold -to him by his own act for a fair price; but he did shrink from the -thought of letting the brother against whom he warred suffer actual -bodily hardships when he could hinder them. The defenders of the Mount -had, according to one account, plenty of meat; but all our narratives -agree as to the difficulty of providing fresh water for the fortress -which twice in the day was surrounded by the waves.[809] Henry sent a -message to the Duke, praying that he might be allowed access to fresh -water; his brothers might, if they thought good, make war on him by -the valour of their soldiers; they should not press the powers of -nature into their service, or deprive him of those gifts of Providence -which were open to all human beings.[810] Robert was moved; he gave -orders to the sentinels at Genetz not to hinder the besieged from -coming to the mainland for water.[811] One version even adds that he -added the further gift of a tun of the best wine.[812] This kind of -generosity, where no appeal was made to his own personal pride, was by -no means to the taste of Rufus; as a commander carrying on war, he was -ready to press the rights of warfare to the uttermost. When he heard -what Robert had done, he mocked at his brother’s weakness; it was a -fine way of making war to give the enemy meat and drink.[813] Robert -answered, in words which do him honour, but which would have done him -more honour if they had been spoken at the beginning as a reason for -forbearing an unjust attack on his brother――“Shall we let our brother -die of thirst? Where shall we find another, if we lose him?”[814] - -[Sidenote: Henry surrenders.] - -[Sidenote: William at Eu.] - -[Sidenote: He goes back to England. August, 1091.] - -Such are these two famous stories of the war waged beneath the mount -of the Archangel. Both are eminently characteristic; there is no -reason why both may not be true. But we must withhold our belief when -one of our tale-tellers adds that William turned away from the siege -in contempt for Robert’s weakness.[815] A more sober guide tells us -that when, for fifteen days, Henry and his followers had held up -against lack of water and threatening lack of food,[816] the wary -youth saw the hopelessness of further resistance, and offered to -surrender the Mount on honourable terms. He demanded a free passage -for himself and his garrison. William, already tired of a siege in -which he had made little progress and which had cost him many men and -horses,[817] gladly accepted the terms. Henry, still Ætheling, though -no longer Count, marched forth from his island stronghold with all the -honours of war.[818] We are to suppose that, according to the terms of -the treaty, the King took possession of the Mount itself, and the Duke -of the rest of Henry’s former county. William stayed on the mainland, -in the parts of Normandy which had been ceded to him, for full six -months, having his head-quarters at Eu.[819] In August the affairs of -his island kingdom called him back again; and, strange to say, both -his brothers went with him as his guests and allies.[820] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Fortunes of Henry.] - -[Sidenote: His presence in England in 1091.] - -[Sidenote: Story of Henry’s adventures.] - -[Sidenote: His alleged wanderings.] - -[Sidenote: Robert and Henry accompany William to England.] - -At this moment the past and the future alike lead us to look with more -interest on the fates of the dispossessed Ætheling than on those of -any other of the actors in our story. But there is at first sight some -little difficulty in finding out what those fates were. From our -English authorities we could only gather that Henry was in England -before the end of the year in which the siege took place, and that -three years later he was again beyond sea, in favour with William and -at enmity with Robert. From other writers we get a version, which -takes no notice of any visit to England, but which gives us a moving -tale of Henry’s experiences in Normandy and the neighbouring lands. It -is one of those cases where a writer, telling his own part of the -story, altogether forgets, perhaps without formally contradicting, -other parts. In such a case he is likely to stumble in some of his -dates and details; but this need not lead us altogether to cast aside -the main features of his story. It is plain that, for some time after -the surrender of the Mount, Henry was, to say the least, landless. In -the pictures of his actual distress and adversity there may well be -somewhat of exaggeration; but they draw from one who is not a -flatterer the important remark that, having known adversity himself, -he learned to be gracious in after years to the sufferings of -others.[821] We are perhaps startled by such a saying when we think of -some particular acts of Henry; but this witness does not stand alone; -and, among the contradictions of human nature, there is nothing -impossible in the belief that such a spirit may have existed alongside -of many particular acts of cruelty.[822] But it is certain that -Henry’s season of adversity must have been shorter than it appears in -the picture of it which is given to us. We are told that, soon after -he left the Mount, he found himself very nearly a solitary wanderer. -He first went into Britanny, the only land from which he had received -any help, and thanked his friends there for their services. Thence he -betook himself to France, and spent, we are told, nearly two years in -the borderland of the Vexin, the land which had been the scene of his -father’s last and fatal warfare, and which was again to be the scene -of warfare before his brother’s reign was ended. There, with a train -cut down to one knight, one clerk, and three esquires, Henry wandered -to and fro, seeking shelter where he could.[823] Whatever truth there -may be in these details, the time of Henry’s probation could not have -been spread over anything like a period of two years. He may have been -a wanderer during the few months which immediately followed the -surrender of the Mount; but, if so, he was reconciled to both his -brothers long before the end of the year. Or he may, from some -unexplained reason, have again become a wanderer during some months of -the following year. There is nothing in any way impossible or unlikely -in either story. What is certain is that, before the end of the next -year, Henry had again an establishment on Gaulish ground, and one -gained in the most honourable way. And it is equally certain that when -King William went back to England in the month of August in the -present year he took both of his brothers with him.[824] - - -§ 4. _The Scottish Expedition of William Rufus._ - -_August-October, 1091._ - -[Sidenote: Affairs of Scotland.] - -[Sidenote: Malcolm’s invasion of Northumberland. May, 1091.] - -[Sidenote: He is driven back.] - -[Sidenote: The “good men.”] - -The business which called William back to his kingdom was a serious -one; it was no other than to drive back or to avenge a Scottish -invasion. King Malcolm, who seems to have stayed quiet during the -rebellion three years before, now took up arms. We cannot help -connecting this step with the visit of his brother-in-law, and the -words of the Chronicler seem directly to imply that Malcolm’s invasion -was the consequence of Eadgar’s coming.[825] From one version we might -almost think that Malcolm had been called on to do homage and had -refused.[826] This is perfectly possible in itself; but the time of -William’s special occupation with Norman affairs seems oddly chosen -for such a summons. An earlier time, some point in the blank period -between the rebellion and the Norman campaign, would have seemed more -natural for such a purpose. However this may be, now, in the month of -May, Malcolm took advantage of William’s absence in Normandy to invade -Northumberland for the fourth time. He designed, we are told, to go -much further and do much more, words which might almost suggest a -purpose of asserting the claims of Eadgar to the English crown. -Whatever were his objects, they were not carried out, save one which -was doubtless not the least among them, that of carrying off great -spoil from Northumberland.[827] The furthest point that Malcolm -reached was Chester-le-Street, a point unpleasantly near to the -bishopless monks of Durham.[828] There the men in local command went -against him and drove him back. In the national Chronicle they appear -as “the good men who guarded this land.”[829] In this way of speaking, -as in many other phrases in our own and other tongues, the word “good” -means rank and office rather than moral goodness. Yet the latter idea -is not wholly absent; the name would hardly be given to men who were -engaged in a cause which the writer wholly condemned. The “good men” -here spoken of must have been mainly Normans, with Earl Robert of -Mowbray at their head. Earl Robert was not likely to have won much -love from the English people. Yet he passed for a “good man,” when he -did his duty for England, when he guarded the land and drove back the -Scottish invader. Of any wish to put Malcolm in the place of either -the elder or the younger William we see no trace at any stage of our -story. Beyond this emphatic sentence, we get no details. As in so many -other cases, if conquest was the object of Malcolm’s expedition, -plunder was the only result. - -[Sidenote: William and Robert in England. August, 1091.] - -[Sidenote: Relations between Robert and Malcolm.] - -[Sidenote: Stronger side of Robert and Eadgar.] - -The news of this harrying of the northern part of his kingdom brought -King William back from Normandy in the course of August. With him, as -we have said, came Robert and Henry. Why was the Duke’s presence -needed? One account hints that his coming had some reference to the -actors in the late rebellion, some of whom at least were now restored -to their estates.[830] Another version speaks of an old friendship -between Robert and Malcolm;[831] and there was a tie of spiritual -affinity between them arising out of Robert’s relation as godfather to -a child of Malcolm.[832] It was perhaps in this character that Robert -came to act, if need should be, as a welcome negotiator with his -Scottish gossip. One strange thing is that, on more than one occasion -in our story, both Robert and Eadgar, two men who seem so incapable of -vigorous or rational action on behalf of themselves, play a distinctly -creditable part when acting on behalf of others. But this is really no -uncommon inconsistency of human nature; men are often found who are -good advisers in the affairs of others, while they are by no means -wise managers of their own. Robert in truth appears to most advantage -anywhere out of his own duchy. Neither the warrior of the crusade nor -the negotiator with the Scot seems to be the same man as the Duke who -could not be trusted to defend his own palace. - -[Sidenote: William sets forth.] - -[Sidenote: Durham in the absence of Bishop William.] - -[Sidenote: The King’s favourable treatment of the monks.] - -[Sidenote: Works at Durham.] - -[Sidenote: Reconciliation of Bishop William with the King.] - -[Sidenote: He is restored to his bishopric. September 3, 1091.] - -[Sidenote: His renewed influence with the King.] - -In the present case there was more of negotiation than of warfare. Of -actual fighting there seems to have been none. William got together, -as his father had done in the like case,[833] a great force by land -and sea for the invasion of Scotland. With the land force the King and -the Duke set forth; but seemingly with no haste, as time was found for -a great ecclesiastical ceremony on the way. For three years the church -of Durham had been without a shepherd, and the castle of Durham had -been in the hands of the King. The monks of Saint Cuthberht’s abbey -had feared that this irregular time would be an evil time for them. -But they put their trust in God and their patron saint, and went to -the King to ask his favour. Rufus was specially gracious and merciful; -he rose up to greet Prior Turgot, the head of the embassy, and he gave -orders that the monks of Durham should be in no way disturbed, but -should keep full possession of their rights and property, exactly as -if the Bishop had remained in occupation of his see.[834] We may even -venture to guess that they had a somewhat fuller possession of them -during the Bishop’s absence. We are expressly told by the local -historian that the Red King did not deal with Durham as he dealt with -other churches; he took nothing from the monks, and even gave them -something of his own.[835] The new society――for it must be remembered -that the monks of Durham were a body of Bishop William’s own bringing -in[836]――flourished so greatly during this irregular state of things -that it was now that they built their refectory.[837] But a time of -more settled order was now to come. Bishop William of Saint-Calais, -whatever had been his crimes three years back, was among those whom -King William had engaged by his treaty with his brother to restore to -their lands and honours. Besides this general claim, it was believed, -at Durham at least, that the banished prelate had earned his -restoration by a signal service done to the King. In the third year of -his banishment an unnamed Norman fortress was holding out for the -King; but its garrison was sore pressed, and its capture by the enemy -seemed imminent. The Bishop, by what means of persuasion we are not -told, but it does not seem to have been by force, caused the besiegers -to raise the siege.[838] This service won the King’s thorough good -will, and William, on his march to Scotland, personally put the Bishop -once more in possession of his see and of all its rights and -belongings, temporal and spiritual.[839] Bishop William did not come -back empty-handed; he brought with him costly gifts for his church, -ornaments, gold and silver vessels, and, above all, many books.[840] -And, at some time before the year was out, we find him confirming with -great solemnity, with the witness of the great men of the realm, -certain grants of the Conqueror to the monks of his church.[841] The -return of the Bishop was an event not only of local but of national -importance. He was restored by the King, not only to his formal -favour, but to a high place in his innermost counsels. Bishop William -was not one of those who come back from banishment having learned -nothing and forgotten nothing. He had, in his sojourn beyond the sea, -learned an altogether new doctrine as to the relations between bishops -and kings. - -[Sidenote: Loss of the ships. Michaelmas, 1091.] - -[Sidenote: William and Malcolm by the _Scots’ Water_.] - -[Sidenote: Mediation of Robert and Eadgar.] - -[Sidenote: Conference of Robert and Malcolm.] - -[Sidenote: Malcolm’s homage to Robert.] - -[Sidenote: He submits to William.] - -The march which had been interrupted by the ceremony at Durham was -clearly a slow one. William was at Durham in the first days of -September; much later in the month a heavy blow fell on one part of -the expedition. The greater part of the ships were lost a few days -before the feast of Michaelmas, and we are told that this happened -before the King could reach Scotland. The King was therefore several -weeks in journeying from Durham to the border of the true Scotland, -the Firth of Forth; and we are told that many of the land force also -perished of cold and hunger.[842] The army however which remained was -strong enough to make Malcolm feel less eager for deeds of arms than -he had most likely felt in May. At last, near the shore of the _Scots’ -Water_, the estuary which parted English Lothian from Scottish Fife, -the two kings met face to face, seemingly in battle array, but without -coming to any exchange of blows. It is marked in a pointed way that -Malcolm had crossed from his kingdom to his earldom. He “went out of -Scotland into Lothian in England, and there abode,”[843] There a -negotiation took place. The ambassadors or mediators were Duke Robert -and the Ætheling Eadgar.[844] According to the most picturesque -version, Malcolm, who is conceived as still keeping on the northern -side of the firth, sends a message to William to the effect that he -owes no homage to him, but that, if he can have an interview with -Robert, he will do to him whatever is right. By the advice of his Wise -Men,[845] William sends his brother, who is courteously received by -the Scottish King for three days. Somewhat like the Moabite king of -old, though with quite another purpose, Malcolm takes his visitor to -the tops of various hills, and shows him the hosts of Scotland -encamped in the plains and dales below. With so mighty a force he is -ready to withstand any one who should try to cross the firth; he would -be well pleased if any enemy would make the attempt. He then suddenly -turns to the question of homage. He had received the earldom of -Lothian from King Eadward, when his great-niece Margaret was betrothed -to him. The late King William had confirmed the gifts of his -predecessor, and, at his bidding, he, Malcolm, had become the man of -his eldest son, his present visitor Duke Robert. To him he would -discharge his duty; to the present King William he owed no duty at -all. He appealed to the Gospel for the doctrine that no man could -serve two lords, the doctrine which had been so practically pressed on -Robert’s behalf three years before.[846] Robert admitted the truth of -Malcolm’s statement; but he argued that times were changed, and that -the decrees of his father had lost their old force. It would be wise -to accept the reigning King as his lord, a lord nearer, richer, and -more powerful, than he could pretend to be himself. Malcolm might be -sure of a gracious reception from William, if he came on such an -errand. Malcolm was convinced; he went to the King of the English; he -was favourably received, and a peace was agreed on. It is added that -the two kings then disbanded their armies, and went together into -England.[847] - -[Sidenote: Question as to the betrothal of Margaret.] - -[Sidenote: Question of Lothian.] - -This last statement throws some doubt upon the whole of this version; -for Malcolm’s alleged journey to England at this moment is clearly a -confusion with events which happened two years later. The references -too to the earldom of Lothian and to an earlier betrothal of Margaret -are a little startling; yet it is perhaps not quite hopeless to -reconcile them with better ascertained facts. As I have elsewhere -suggested, this earlier betrothal of Margaret to Malcolm is not -necessarily inconsistent with his later marriage with her after the -intermediate stage of Ingebiorg.[848] Malcolm may at one time have -been in no hurry to carry out a marriage dictated by political -reasons; yet he may have afterwards become eager for the same marriage -after he had seen her whose hand was designed for him. As for the -Lothian earldom, we here see the beginning of the later Scottish -argument, that homage was due from the Scottish to the English king -only for lands held within the kingdom of England. At this stage -Lothian was the land held within the kingdom of England; it was what -Northumberland, Huntingdon, or any other confessedly English land held -by the Scottish king, was in later times. When Malcolm was restored to -his crown by the arms of Siward,[849] no doubt Lothian was granted to -him among other things. Only Malcolm takes up the line, or our -historian thinks it in character to make him take up the line, of -implying, though not directly asserting, that Lothian was the only -possession for which homage was due. And, on the strictest view of -English claims, Malcolm would be right in at least drawing a marked -distinction between Scotland and Lothian. He owed both kingdom and -earldom to the intervention of Eadward and Siward; but Lothian was a -grant from Eadward in a sense in which Scotland was not. Over Scotland -neither Eadward nor William could claim more than an external -superiority. Lothian was still English ground, as much as the land -which is now beginning to be distinguished as Northumberland. - -[Sidenote: Treaty between William and Malcolm.] - -[Sidenote: Malcolm does homage.] - -The version of Malcolm’s submission which I have just gone through is -certainly worth examining, and I do not see that it contradicts the -simpler and more certain version. According to this account, the -negotiation was carried on between Robert and Eadgar. The agreement to -which the mediators came was that Malcolm should renew to the younger -William the homage which he had paid to the elder.[850] On the other -hand, he was to receive all lands and everything else that he had -before held in England, specially, it would seem, twelve _vills_ or -mansions for his reception on his way to the English court.[851] On -these terms Malcolm became the man of William; Eadgar also was -reconciled to William. The two kings parted on good terms, but the -Chronicler notices, in a phrase of which he is rather fond, that it -“little while stood.”[852] - -[Sidenote: Return of William.] - -[Sidenote: Evidence of the Durham charters.] - -[Sidenote: Duncan.] - -[Sidenote: Eadgar.] - -[Sidenote: Henry.] - -[Sidenote: Siward Barn.] - -William, Robert, and Eadgar now took their journey back again, as it -is specially marked, from Northumberland into Wessex.[853] The realm -of Ælfred is still looked on as the special dwelling-place of his -successors from beyond the sea. But it would seem that, at some stage -of their southward journey, at some time before the year was out, they -joined with other men of royal and princely descent in setting their -crosses to a document, in itself of merely local importance, but which -is clothed with a higher interest by the names of those who sign it. A -grant of certain churches to the convent of Durham becomes a piece of -national history when, besides the signatures for which we might -naturally look, it bears the names of King William the Second, of -Robert his brother, of Henry his brother, of Duncan son of King -Malcolm, of Eadgar the Ætheling, and of Siward Barn.[854] This is the -only time when all these persons could have met. There is no sign of -any later visit of Robert to England during the reign of William. But -the signatures of Henry and Duncan teach us more. Duncan, it will be -remembered, had been given as a hostage at Abernethy;[855] he had been -set free by the Conqueror on his death-bed; he had been knighted by -Robert, and allowed to go whither he would.[856] Had he already made -his way back to his own land, or did he come in the train of his -latest benefactor? In the former case, had he been again given as a -hostage? Or had William found out that the son of Ingebiorg might -possibly be useful to him? It is certain that, two years later, Duncan -was at William’s court and in William’s favour; and it looks very much -as if he had, in whatever character, gone back to England with the -King. The signature of Eadgar shows that the document must be later -than the treaty with Malcolm by which he was reconciled to William, -that is, that it was signed on the journey southward, not on the -journey northward. The signature of Henry is our only hint that he had -any share at all in the Scottish business, and it throws a perfectly -new light on this part of his history. He was plainly in England, -seemingly in favour with both his brothers, and things look as if he -too, though he is nowhere mentioned, must have gone on the march to -Scotland. Siward Barn, like Duncan, was one of those who were set free -by William the Great on his death-bed. We now learn that he shared the -good luck of Duncan and Wulf, not the bad luck of Morkere and -Wulfnoth. He signs as one of the great men of the north, with Arnold -of Percy, with the Sheriff Morel, and with Earl Robert himself. - -[Sidenote: Fresh dispute between William and Robert.] - -[Sidenote: Robert and Eadgar leave England. December 23, 1091.] - -One thing is plain, namely, that this document was not signed in the -regular Christmas Assembly of the year. By that time Robert and Eadgar -were no longer in England. By that time Robert and William had again -quarrelled. We may guess that some of Robert’s old partisans had been -less lucky than the Bishop of Durham. At all events, some points in -the treaty of Caen remained unfulfilled. Then, as in later times, a -diplomatic engagement was not found strong enough to carry itself out -by its own force, like a physical law of nature. We are not told what -was the special point complained of; but something which the Red King -should have done for Robert or for his partisans was left undone.[857] -It was simply as a man and a king that Rufus had entered into any -engagements with his brother. His knightly honour was not pledged; the -treaty therefore came under the head of those promises which no man -can fulfil.[858] We are told in a pointed way that Robert stayed with -his brother till nearly the time of Christmas. The matter in dispute, -whatever it was, might have been fittingly discussed in the Christmas -Assembly; only it might have been hard to find the formula by which -the Duke of the Normans was to appeal the King of the English of bad -faith before his own Witan. Two days before the feast Robert took ship -in Wight, and sailed to Normandy, taking the Ætheling Eadgar with -him.[859] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Natural phænomena. Fall of the tower at Winchcombe. October -15, 1091.] - -[Sidenote: Great wind in London. October 17, 1091.] - -[Sidenote: Fire in London. March 28, 1092.] - -[Sidenote: Consecration of the church of Salisbury. April 5, 1092.] - -[Sidenote: The tower roof thrown down. April 10.] - -Either the reign of Rufus was really richer than other times in -striking natural phænomena, or else they were specially noticed as -signs of the times. About the time of the King’s Scottish expedition, -the tower of the minster at Winchcombe was smitten by a mighty -thunderbolt, and fell in ruins on the body of the church, crushing the -most hallowed images in its fall. The Chthonian Zeus had no place in -the mythology of the times; but this destruction, which left behind it -a thick smoke and an evil smell, was deemed to be the work of the evil -one, the signs of whose presence were got rid of only by the most -solemn chants and processions.[860] Two days later, London was visited -by a fearful wind, which blew down seven churches and houses to the -number of six hundred. Above all, the wooden roof of the church of -Saint Mary-le-bow was carried off, and its beams were hurled to the -ground with such force that they were driven into the hard earth, and -had to be sawn off as they stood.[861] Two men who were in the church -were crushed. The citizens could have hardly repaired their houses -before another blow came upon them. Early in the next year the greater -part of London was destroyed by fire.[862] By Eastertide the cathedral -churches of two of the dioceses whose seats had been moved in the late -reign stood ready for consecration. On the waterless hill which then -was Salisbury, within the everlasting ditches of the elder time, -looking down on the field of battle which had decreed that Britain -should be English[863] and on the field of council which had decreed -that England should be one,[864] Norman Osmund, the doctor of the -ritual lore of England, had finished the work which Lotharingian -Hermann had began. The new mother church of the lands of Berkshire, -Wiltshire, and Dorset, the elder minster of Saint Mary, whose stones -were borne away to build the soaring steeple of its successor but -whose foundations may still be traced on the turf of the forsaken -city, now awaited its hallowing. There was then no archbishop in -southern England; the rite was done by Osmund himself with the help of -his two nearest episcopal neighbours, Walkelin of Winchester and John -of Bath.[865] The ceremony had thus a specially West-Saxon character. -The three bishops who came together at Salisbury represented the -three――once four――churches, among which the old West-Saxon diocese, -the diocese of Winchester, had been parted asunder.[866] But at -Salisbury too, the elements, if somewhat less hostile than at -Winchcombe and London, were by no means friendly. Five days only after -the hallowing, the lightning fell, as at Winchcombe; the peaked roof -or low spire which sheltered the tower――doubtless of wood covered with -lead――was thrown down, and its fall did much damage to the walls of -the new minster.[867] - -[Sidenote: Remigius of Lincoln.] - -[Sidenote: Completion of the minster.] - -[Sidenote: Thomas of York claims the jurisdiction of Lindesey.] - -[Sidenote: Remigius wins over the King.] - -[Sidenote: Gathering for the consecration at Lincoln. May 9, 1092.] - -[Sidenote: Death of Remigius. May 6, 1092.] - -A day later by a month had been fixed for another ceremony of the same -kind, the crowning of the work of a prelate who seems to have wished -for a more stately ceremony and a greater gathering than the almost -domestic rite which had satisfied Bishop Osmund. Remigius, Almoner of -Fécamp, Bishop of Dorchester, Bishop of Lincoln, was drawing near the -end of his famous episcopate. He had reformed the constitution of his -chapter and diocese; and we hear that he was no less zealous in -reforming the manners of his flock.[868] The darling sin of -Bristol――most likely the darling sin of every great trading-town――was -rife at Lincoln also; and Remigius, like Wulfstan, preached against -the wicked custom by which men sold their country-folk, sometimes -their kinsfolk, to a life of shame or of bondage in foreign -lands.[869] But beyond all this, he had finished his great work on the -hill of Lincoln; the elder church of Saint Mary had grown into the -great minster of which later rebuildings and enlargements have still -left us some small remnants.[870] The eastern limb had as yet no need -to overleap the Roman wall of Lindum; but Remigius had reared, and -sought to consecrate, no fragment, but a perfect church. His doorways -are there in the western front to show that the building has received -no enlargement on that side from Remigius’ day to our own. The work -was done, and its founder felt his last end coming. He was eager to -see the house which he had builded dedicated to its holy use before he -himself passed away. But an unlooked-for hindrance came. The only -archbishop in the land, Thomas of York, claimed the district in which -Remigius had built his church as belonging to his own diocese.[871] -This does not seem to have been by virtue of the claim that the whole -diocese of Dorchester came within his metropolitan jurisdiction.[872] -The argument was that Lindesey, won for the Christian faith by -Paullinus, won for the Northumbrian realm by Ecgfrith, was part of the -diocesan jurisdiction of the Bishop of York. And, whatever the truth -of the case might be, the warmest of all admirers of Remigius goes -some way to strengthen the doctrine of Thomas, when he speaks of -Lindesey almost as a conquered land won by the prowess of Remigius -from the Northumbrian enemy.[873] The time was not one for doubtful -disputations. Remigius, saint as he is pictured to us, knew how to use -those baser arguments which were convincing above all others in the -days of the Red King. His original appointment in the days of the -Conqueror had not been altogether beyond suspicion;[874] and it was -now whispered that it was by the help of a bribe that he won the -zealous adhesion of William Rufus to his cause. Rufus was at least -impartial; he was clearly ready to give a fair day’s work for a fair -day’s wages, and what he would do for a Jew he would also do for a -bishop. All the bishops of England were bidden by royal order to come -together at the appointed day for the dedication of the church of -Lincoln.[875] A vast crowd of men of all ranks came to Lincoln; the -course of the story suggests that the King himself was there; all the -bishops came, save one only. Robert of Hereford, the friend of -Wulfstan, the Lotharingian skilled in the lore of the stars, knew by -his science that the rite would not take place in the lifetime of -Remigius. He therefore deemed it needless to travel to Lincoln for -nothing.[876] His skill was not deceived; three days before the -appointed time Remigius died.[877] The dedication of the church was -delayed; it was done in the days of his successor, some years -later.[878] Meanwhile Remigius himself won the honours of a saint in -local esteem, and wonders of healing were wrought at his tomb for the -benefit of not a few of divers tongues and even of divers creeds.[879] - - -§ 5. _The Conquest and Colonization of Carlisle._ - -1092. - -[Sidenote: William’s conquest of Carlisle.] - -[Sidenote: Mistakes as to the position of Cumberland and -Westmoreland.] - -It was seemingly from this fruitless gathering at Lincoln that William -the Red went forth to what was in truth the greatest exploit of his -reign. He went on a strange errand, to enlarge the bounds of England -by overthrowing the last shadow of independent English rule. Hitherto -the northern border of England had shown a tendency to fall back -rather than to advance, and a generation later the same tendency -showed itself again. But Rufus did what neither his father nor his -brother did; he enlarged the actual kingdom of England by the addition -of a new shire, a new earldom――in process of time a new bishopric――and -he raised as its capital a renewed city whose calling it was to be the -foremost bulwark of England in her northern wars. Whatever any other -spot on either side of the sea may be bound to do, Carlisle, city and -earldom, is bound to pay to the Red King the honours of a founder. And -the Saxon branch of the English people must see in him one who planted -a strong colony of their blood on the lands of men of other races, -kindred and alien. There is a certain amusement in seeing the endless -discussions in which men have entangled themselves in order to explain -the simple fact that Cumberland and Westmoreland are not entered in -Domesday, forgetful that it was just as reasonable to look for them -there as it would have been to look there for Caithness or the -Côtentin. Cumberland and Westmoreland, by those names, formed no part -of the English kingdom when the Conqueror drew up his Survey. Parts of -the lands so called, those parts which till recent changes formed -part, first of the diocese of York, afterwards of that of Chester, are -entered in Domesday in their natural place, as parts of Yorkshire.[880] -The other parts are not entered, for the simple reason that they were -then no part of the kingdom of England. It was now, in the third or -fourth year of William Rufus, that they became so. - -[Sidenote: History of Carlisle.] - -[Sidenote: 603-685.] - -[Sidenote: Scandinavians in Cumberland.] - -[Sidenote: Carlisle destroyed by Scandinavians.] - -Lugubalia or _Caerluel_ was reckoned among the Roman cities of -Britain. It was reckoned too among the cities of the Northumbrian -realm, in the great days of that realm, from the victory of Æthelfrith -at Dægsanstan to the fall of Ecgfrith at Nectansmere.[881] Then the -Northumbrian power fell back from the whole land between Clyde and -Solway, and all trace of Lugubalia is lost in the confused history of -the land of the Northern Britons. Its site, to say the least, must -have formed part of that northern British land whose king and people -sought Eadward the Unconquered to father and lord.[882] It must have -formed part of that well nigh first of territorial fiefs which Eadmund -the Doer-of-great-deeds granted to his Scottish fellow-worker.[883] It -must have formed part of the under-kingdom which so long served as an -appanage for the heirs of Scottish kingship. But, amidst all these -changes, though the land passed under the over-lordship of the -Basileus of Britain, yet it never, from Ecgfrith to Rufus, passed -under the immediate dominion of any English king. And, as far as the -city itself was concerned, for the last two centuries before Rufus the -site was all that was left to pass to any one. The history of -Scandinavian influence in Cumberland is one of the great puzzles of -our early history. The Northman is there to speak for himself; but it -is not easy to say how and when he came there.[884] But one result of -Scandinavian occupation or Scandinavian inroad was the overthrow of -Lugubalia. We gather that it fell, as Anderida fell before Ælle and -Cissa, as Aquæ Solis fell before Ceawlin, as the City of the Legions -fell before Æthelfrith.[885] But now the son of the Conqueror was to -be to Lugubalia what the daughter of Ælfred had been to the City of -the Legions. The king who made the land of Carlisle English bade the -walls of Carlisle again rise, to fence in a city of men, a colony of -the Saxon land. - -[Sidenote: Dolfin lord of Carlisle.] - -At this moment the land of Carlisle, defined, as we can hardly doubt, -by the limits of the ancient diocese, was the only spot of Britain -where any man of English race ruled. Its prince, lord, earl――no -definite title is given him――was Dolfin the son of Gospatric, a scion -of the old Northumbrian princely house and sprung by female descent -from the Imperial stock of Wessex.[886] When or how Dolfin had got -possession of his lordship we know not; but it can hardly fail to have -been a grant from Malcolm, and it must have been held by him in the -character of a man of the Scottish king. - -[Sidenote: Dolfin driven out, the city restored and the castle built. -1092.] - -[Sidenote: The Saxon colony.] - -[Sidenote: Supposed connexion with the making of the New Forest.] - -We are not told whether either Dolfin or Malcolm had given any new -offence to William, or whether there was any other motive for the -King’s action at this moment. We can record only the event. Rufus went -northward with a great force to Carlisle. He drove out Dolfin; he -restored the forsaken city; he built the castle; he left a garrison in -it, and went southward again.[887] But this was not all. Not only was -the restored city to be a bulwark of England, but the conquered land -was to become a colony of Englishmen. Many churlish folk were sent -thither with wives and cattle, to dwell in the land and to till -it.[888] We thus see, what seems always to be forgotten in discussions -of Cumbrian ethnology, that, at least in the immediate district of -Carlisle, the last element in its mixed population was distinctly -Saxon.[889] Ingenious writers have guessed that the men who were now -settled at Carlisle were the very men who had been deprived of their -homes and lands at the making of the New Forest. There is no evidence -for this guess, and every likelihood is against it. Though I hold that -the dispossessed land-owners and occupiers of Hampshire are not an -imaginary class,[890] yet I cannot think that they can have formed so -large a class as to have gone any way towards colonizing even so small -a district as the old diocese of Carlisle. But it is plain that the -land needed inhabitants, and that the new inhabitants were sought for -in the south of England. In the Carlisle district then the order of -settlement among the races of Britain is different from what it is -anywhere else. Elsewhere it is Briton, Angle or Saxon, Dane or -Northman. Here, as far as one can see, the order must be Briton, -Angle, Pict, Northman, Saxon. - -[Sidenote: The land and earldom of Carlisle.] - -[Sidenote: History and character of the city.] - -[Sidenote: Its analogy with Edinburgh and Stirling.] - -[Sidenote: The wall and the castle.] - -[Sidenote: Work of Rufus and Henry at Carlisle.] - -The land now added to England is strictly the land of Carlisle. We do -not hear the names of Cumberland or Westmoreland till after the times -with which we are dealing. The restored city gave its name to the -land, to its earls, when it had earls, to its bishops when it had -bishops.[891] And truly of all the cities of England none is more -memorable in its own special way than that which now for the first -time became a city of united England. The local history of Carlisle -stands out beyond that of almost any other English city on the surface -of English history. It has not, as local history so often has; to be -dug out of special records by special research. Called into fresh -being to be the bulwark of England against Scotland, Carlisle remained -the bulwark of England against Scotland as long as England needed any -bulwark on that side. In every Scottish war, from Stephen to George -the Second, Carlisle plays its part. Nor is it perhaps unfit that a -city whose special work was to act as a check upon the Scot should -itself have in its general look somewhat of a Scottish character. The -site of the city and castle instinctively reminds us of the sites of -Edinburgh and Stirling. It is a likeness in miniature; but it is a -likeness none the less. The hill which is crowned by Carlisle castle -is lower than the hills which are crowned by the two famous Scottish -fortresses; but in all three cases the original city climbs the hill -whose highest point is crowned by the castle. At Carlisle the castle -stands at the northern end of the city, and its look-out over the -Eden, towards the Scottish march, is emphatically the look-out of a -sentinel. It looks out towards the land which so long was hostile; but -it looks out also on one spot which suggests the memories of times -when Scots, Picts, and Britons may have been there, but when they -found no English or Danish adversaries to meet them. The Roman wall -avoids Lugubalia itself, though the inner line of foss, which runs -some way south of the wall itself, is said to be traced along the line -which divides the castle from the city. But among the most prominent -points of view from the castle is Stanwix, the site of the nearest -Roman station, which seems to bear about it the memory of the stones -of the ancient builders. Here, on the brow of the hill, cut off by a -ditch like so many headlands of the same kind, on a site which had -doubtless been a place of strength for ages before the Roman came, the -Red King reared the new bulwark of his realm. Of the works of his age -there are still large remains; how much is the work of Rufus himself, -how much of his successor, it might be hard to say. The square keep is -there, though sadly disfigured by the unhappy use of the castle as a -barrack; a large part of the wall, both of city and castle, is still, -after many patchings and rebuildings, of Norman date; it is still in -many places plainly built out of Roman stones. Here and there one is -even tempted to think that some of those stones in the lower part of -the wall may have stood there since Carlisle was Lugubalia. Castle and -city bear about them the memories of many later times and many -stirring scenes in history. But on that spot we are most called on to -trace out, in church and city and castle, every scrap that reminds us -of the two founders of Carlisle, the two royal sons of the Conqueror. -The names which before all others live on that site are those of -William who raised up city and fortress from the sleep of ages, and of -Henry who completed the work by adding Carlisle to the tale of English -episcopal sees.[892] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Fortunes of Henry.] - -[Sidenote: Domfront held by Robert of Bellême.] - -[Sidenote: The men of Domfront choose Henry to lord. 1093.] - -In the same year in which King William of England thus advanced and -strengthened the borders of his kingdom by strength of arms, his -youngest brother again became a ruler of men by a nobler title. -Whatever was the date or the length of Henry’s day of distress, it -came to an end about the time of the restoration of Carlisle. No call -could be more honourable than that which again set him in a place of -power. Among the many victims of Robert of Bellême were the people of -Domfront, the old conquest of William the Great. The castle had passed -into the hands of the tyrant, and grievous was the oppression which -Domfront and the coasts thereof suffered at his hands. The -inhabitants, under the lead of a chief man of the place, Harecher or -Archard by name, rose in revolt, and chose the banished Count of the -Côtentin as their lord and defender against the common enemy of -mankind. In company with this local patriot, Henry came to Domfront; -he accepted the offered lordship, and entered into the closest -relations with those who had chosen him. He bound himself to respect -all their local customs, and never to give them over to any other -master. Henry kept his word; amidst all changes, he clave to Domfront -for the rest of his days as a specially cherished possession.[893] - -[Sidenote: Position of Domfront.] - -It was indeed, both in its position and in its associations, a noble -starting-point for one who had to carve out a dominion for himself by -his wits or by his sword. It was a place of happy omen for a son of -William the Conqueror, as the place where his father first began to -deserve that title, his first possession beyond the elder bounds of -his own duchy.[894] Henry was now lord of the rocky peninsula, which, -impregnable as it had once been deemed, had yielded to the terror of -his father’s name, and where the donjon of his father’s rearing opened -its doors to receive his greatest son as a prince and a deliverer. On -one side, the Varenne flowed far beneath the rock, parting it from the -wilder rocks beyond the stream. On the other side, on the same level -as the castle, but with a slight dip between the two, just like the -dip which parts town and castle at Nottingham,[895] was the walled -town, in after days itself a mighty fortress, girded with double walls -and towers in thick array, and entered by a grim and frowning gateway -with two massive flanking towers grounded on the solid rock. But, of -all spots in the world, Domfront is one whose lord could never bear to -be lord of Domfront only. From few spots not fixed on actual Alps or -Pyrenees can the eye range over a wider prospect than it ranges over -from the castle steep of Henry’s new lordship. To the north the view -is by comparison shut in; but on this side lies the way into the true -heart of Normandy, to Caen and Bayeux and all that lies between. To -the west the eye catches the hills of the Avranchin; to the south the -land of Maine stretches far away, the land of his father’s victories -at Ambrières and at Mayenne, the land whose sight suggests that the -land of Anjou lies yet beyond it. To the south Henry might look on -lands which were to be the inheritance of his children; to the north -he looked on lands which were one day to be his own; but to the -south-west, towards Mortain and Avranches and the Archangel’s Mount, -his eye might light on a region some of the most famous spots of which -he was presently to win with his own right hand. - -[Sidenote: Change in Henry’s affairs.] - -[Sidenote: His old friends join him.] - -[Sidenote: Earl Hugh.] - -[Sidenote: Henry restored to William’s favour.] - -[Sidenote: Henry at war with Robert.] - -[Sidenote: He gets back his county.] - -For the tide in Henry’s affairs turned fast, as soon as the wanderer -of the Vexin became the chosen lord of Domfront. His old friends in -his former principality began to flock around him once more. Earl Hugh -was again on his side, with Richard of Redvers and the rest.[896] And -he had now a mightier friend than all. King William of England soon -found out that he had not played a wise part for his own interests, or -at least for his own plans, in strengthening his elder brother at the -expense of the younger. He was now again scheming against Robert; he -therefore favoured the growth of the new power on the Cenomannian -border. It was with the Red King’s full sanction that Domfront became -the head-quarters of a warfare which Henry waged against both Roberts, -the Duke and the tyrant of Bellême.[897] He made many expeditions, -which were largely rewarded with plunder and captives, and in the -course of which some picturesque incidents happened which may call for -some notice later in our story.[898] For the present we are concerned -rather with the re-establishment of Henry’s power, of which his -possession of Domfront was at once the earnest and the beginning. -Favoured by William, helped by his former friends, Henry was soon -again a powerful prince, lord of the greater part of his old county of -Coutances and Avranches. And this dominion was secured on his southern -border by the occupation of another fortress almost as important as -Domfront itself, and no less closely connected with the memory of -Henry’s father. - -[Sidenote: Castle of Saint James occupied by Henry.] - -[Sidenote: Its position.] - -[Sidenote: Slight remains of the castle.] - -This was the castle of Saint James, the stronghold which the Conqueror -reared to guard the Breton march,[899] which stands close on that -dangerous frontier, in the southernmost part of the land of Avranches. -That hilly and wooded land puts on at this point a somewhat bolder -character. A peninsular hill with steep sides, and with a rushing -beck, the Beuvron, between itself and the opposite heights, was a -point which the eye of William the Great had marked out as a fitting -site for a border-castle. Yet the castle did not occupy the exact spot -where one would have looked for it. We should have thought to find it -at the very head of the promontory, commanding the valley on all -sides. It is so at Ballon; it is not so at Saint Cenery or at Conches. -But in a more marked way than either of these, the castle of Saint -James stood on one side of the hill, the south side certainly, the -side looking towards the dangerous land, but still not occupying the -most commanding position of all. In this choice of a site we may -perhaps see a mark of the Conqueror’s respect for religion. The -ecclesiastical name of the place shows that, in William’s day, the -church of Saint James already occupied the lofty site which its -successor still keeps. Castle-builders less scrupulous than the great -William might perhaps have ventured, like Geoffrey of Mayenne at Saint -Cenery,[900] to build their fortress on the holy ground. The Conqueror -had been content with the less favourable part of the hill, and at -Saint James, as at Conches, church and castle stood side by side. The -natural beauty of the site cannot pass away; the look-out over the -valley on either side is fairer and more peaceful now than it was in -William’s day; but every care has been taken to destroy or to mutilate -all that could directly remind us of the days when Saint James was a -stronghold of dukes and kings. The elder church has given way to a -structure strangely made up of modern buildings and ancient fragments. -The tower of the Conqueror still gives its name to the Place of the -Fort; but there are no such remains as we see in the shattered keep of -Domfront, hardly such remains as may be traced out at Saint Cenery and -on the Rock of Mabel. A line of wall to the south, strengthening the -scarped hill-side like the oldest walls of Rome, is all that is left -to speak to us of the castle which was William’s most famous work on -that border of his dominions. Nothing beyond these small scraps is -left of the fortress whose building led to that memorable march -against the Breton in which William and Harold fought as -fellow-soldiers.[901] - -[Sidenote: The castle granted to Earl Hugh.] - -We are not told what were Henry’s relations with Britanny at the time -when this great border fortress passed into his hands. Bretons had -been his only friends at the time of the siege of the Mount; but their -friendship for the Count of the Côtentin was perhaps felt for him, not -so much in that character as in that of the enemy of the Norman Duke -and the English King. It may possibly mark a feeling that the Celtic -peninsula might again become a dangerous land, when the guardianship -of the chief bulwark against the _Bretwealas_ of the mainland was -given to one who had full experience of warfare with the _Bretwealas_ -of the great island. The Earl of Chester had a hereditary call to be -the keeper of the castle of Saint James. The fortress had, on its -first building, been entrusted by the Conqueror to the guardianship of -Earl Hugh’s father, the Viscount Richard of Avranches. Hugh’s treason -when King and Duke came against him was now forgotten; his earlier and -later services were remembered; and the restored prince, now once more -Count as well as Ætheling, granted the border castle, not as a mere -castellanship, but as his own proper fief, to the lord of the distant -City of the Legions.[902] - - * * * * * - -We have thus seen the power of William the Red firmly established on -both sides of the sea. He had received the homage of Scotland; he had -enlarged the bounds of England; he had won for himself a Norman -dominion hemming in the dominions which are left to the nominal -sovereign of the Norman land. And it is wonderful with how little -fighting all this had been done. It was only before the island rock of -Saint Michael that the chivalrous King had any opportunity of winning -renown by feats of chivalry. A year follows, crowded with events, but -all of them events which happened within the four seas of our own -island. Our next chapter will therefore deal mainly with English -affairs, and with some aspects of English affairs which yield in -importance to none in the whole history of England. One of the chief -personages of our story now comes before us in the form of the holy -Anselm. Few more striking personal contrasts are to be found in the -whole range of history than those parts of our tale where Anselm and -William meet face to face. But more memorable still, in a general -aspect of English history, is the work which has been silently going -on ever since William Rufus was made fast on his throne, the work -which stands broadly forth as a finished thing when the controversy -between King and Primate begins. Assuredly no “feudal system” was ever -introduced into England by any law of William the Great; but it is -only a slight stretch of language to say that something which, if any -one chooses, may be called a “feudal system” was, during these years, -devised in and for England by the craft and subtlety of Randolf -Flambard. - - - - -CHAPTER IV. - -THE PRIMACY OF ANSELM AND THE ACQUISITION OF NORMANDY.[903] - -1093-1097. - - -[Sidenote: Character of the early years of William Rufus. 1087-1092.] - -[Sidenote: Chronological sequence of the history.] - -[Sidenote: More complicated character of the next period. 1093-1098.] - -[Sidenote: Three distinct sets of contemporary events.] - -[Sidenote: Aspects of Rufus with regard to each.] - -[Sidenote: Primacy of Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: Affairs of Scotland and Wales.] - -[Sidenote: Continental schemes.] - -[Sidenote: Revolt of Robert of Mowbray. 1095.] - -The story of the first five years of the Red King’s reign may be -written with little, if any, forsaking of strict chronological order. -The accession, the rebellion, the affairs of Normandy, the affairs of -Scotland, follow one another in successive or nearly successive years, -as the main subjects which challenge our attention. One set of events -leads to another. The rebellion followed naturally on the accession; -the interference of Rufus in Normandy followed naturally on the -rebellion; the Scottish invasion seems to have been the immediate -occasion of the banishment of Eadgar from Normandy. But during the -whole of the five years there is no great interlacing of different -parts of the main story; at no stage are two distinct sets of events -of equal moment going on at the same time; the historian is hardly -called on to forsake the arrangement of the annalist. While the events -recorded by the annalist were in doing, some of the greatest changes -in English history were silently going on; but they were not changes -of a kind which could be set down in the shape of annals. From the end -of the year which saw the restoration of Carlisle the nature of the -story changes. Different scenes of the drama of equal importance are -now acting at once. For the next five years we have three several -lines of contemporary story, which are now and then intertwined, but -which on the whole did not seriously affect one another. Each is best -told by itself, with as little reference to either of the others as -may be. And each begins in the year of which we have now reached the -threshold. The sixth year of William Rufus saw the beginning of the -primacy of Anselm, the beginning of the main dealings of the reign -with Wales and Scotland, the beginning of renewed interference in the -Norman duchy. It will be well to keep these three lines of narrative -as distinct as may be. They show the Red King in three different -characters. In the first story he appears as the representative of the -new form which the kingship of England has taken with reference both -to temporal and to spiritual matters within the kingdom. In the second -story we see him asserting the powers of the English crown beyond the -kingdom of England, but within the island of Britain. And here, -alongside of the affairs of Scotland, perhaps not very closely -connected with them by any chain of cause and effect, but forming one -general subject with them as distinguished alike from purely domestic -and from continental affairs, will come the relations between England -and Wales during the reign of William Rufus. In the third story we see -the beginning of the events which led to those wider schemes of -continental policy which almost wholly occupy the last three years of -the reign. One event only of much moment stands apart from the general -thread of any of the three stories. It stands by itself, as one of -those events which might easily have led to great changes, but which, -as a matter of fact, passed away without much result. This is the -conspiracy and revolt of Robert of Mowbray and William of Eu, which -may, dramatically at least, be connected with either the Scottish or -the Norman story, but which, as a matter of actual English history, -stands apart from all. - -[Sidenote: Relations between Rufus and Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: Working of the new ideas.] - -[Sidenote: New position of the King.] - -[Sidenote: Ecclesiastical position of the Conqueror.] - -[Sidenote: William and Lanfranc.] - -[Sidenote: Opposite conduct of Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: Vacancy of the see of Canterbury. 1089-1093.] - -[Sidenote: Its policy.] - -[Sidenote: Influence of Randolf Flambard.] - -Of these three the first on the list must claim the precedence. The -relations between Rufus and Anselm involve the whole civil and -ecclesiastical policy of the reign. The dispute between King and -Primate was the outcome of all that had been working in silence while -the Red King was winning castles in Normandy, receiving the homage of -Scotland, and enlarging the bounds of England. During those years one -side of the results of the Norman Conquest was put into formal shape. -Between the fall of Rochester and the restoration of Carlisle, new -ideas, new claims, had come to their full growth. Those ideas, those -claims, had made the kingship of William the Red something marked by -not a few points of difference from the kingship either of the -Confessor or of the Conqueror. Nowhere does the difference between the -elder and the younger William stand forth more clearly than in their -dealings with the spiritual power. No king, as I have often shown, was -more truly Supreme Governor of the Church within his realm than was -the Conqueror of England, her defender against the claims of Rome. But -William the Great sought and found his fellow-worker in all things in -an archbishop likeminded with himself. We can hardly conceive the -reign of the Conqueror without the primacy of Lanfranc. But the great -object of William the Red was to avoid the restraints which could not -fail to be placed upon his self-will, if he had one standing at his -side whose place it was to be at once the chief shepherd of the -English Church and the tribune of the English people. For three years -and more from the death of Lanfranc the see of Canterbury remained -vacant. Such a vacancy was without precedent; but it was designed -itself to become a precedent. It was by no accident, from no momentary -cause, that William delayed the appointment of any successor to his -old guardian and counsellor. It was part of a deliberate policy -affecting the whole ecclesiastical and civil institutions of the -realm. And that policy, there can be little doubt, was the device of a -single subtle and malignant genius by whom the whole internal -administration of the Red King’s reign was guided. - - -§ 1. _The Administration of Randolf Flambard._ - -1089-1099. - -[Sidenote: Early history of Flambard.] - -[Sidenote: Said to have been settled in England T. R. E.] - -[Sidenote: Said to have been in the service of Bishop Maurice [Bishop -of London 1086-1107].] - -[Sidenote: Said to have held the deanery of Twinham.] - -[Sidenote: Preferments held by the clerks of kings and bishops.] - -[Sidenote: Flambard a priest.] - -[Sidenote: Character of Flambard.] - -The chief minister, if we may so call him, of William Rufus, during -these years, and indeed to the end of his reign, was that Randolf -Flambard or Passeflambard of whom we have already heard.[904] His -early history is not easy to trace, beyond the general fact that he -rose to power by the same path by which so many others rose in his -day, by service in the King’s chapel and chancery.[905] It has been -generally thought that he was settled in England as early as the days -of Eadward; but it may be doubted whether the evidence bears out this -belief. And the course of his life is certainly easier to understand, -if we do not bring him into England so soon, or attribute to him so -great a length of life, as we must do if we look on him as having been -already a land-owner in England before the Conquest.[906] On the other -hand, if we accept the story which makes him pass to the King’s -service from the service of Maurice Bishop of London, he must have -been the King’s clerk for so short a time before the death of the -Conqueror as hardly to give room for the usual stages of official -promotion. Another version places him in the King’s service from his -earliest years.[907] Perhaps we may guess that the name of the Bishop -of London is wrongly given, and that Flambard had really been in the -service of one of Maurice’s predecessors, of Hugh of Orival or of the -more famous William. His reason for leaving his episcopal patron is -said to have been that a deanery which he held was taken from him, a -story which oddly connects itself with another, according to which he -was at one time dean or other head of the canons of Twinham――better -known as Christchurch――in Hampshire.[908] The story, true or false, -like the earlier life of Thomas of London, illustrates the way in -which the highest ecclesiastical preferments short of bishoprics and -abbeys were held by these clerical servants of kings and bishops. -Clerical they often were only in the widest sense; they were sometimes -merely tonsured, and they seldom took priest’s orders till they were -themselves promoted to bishoprics.[909] Randolf Flambard however was a -priest;[910] he could therefore discharge the duties of his deanery in -person, if he ever troubled himself to go near it. Otherwise there was -very little of the churchman, or indeed of the Christian, about the -future Bishop of Durham and builder of Saint Cuthberht’s nave. At all -events it was wholly by his personal qualities, such as they were, -that Randolf Flambard made his way to the highest places in Church and -State. In his day the Church supplied the readiest opening for the -service of the State, and service to the State was again rewarded by -all but the highest honours of the Church. - -[Sidenote: His parents.] - -[Sidenote: The name _Flambard_.] - -[Sidenote: His financial skill.] - -[Sidenote: Mention of him in the Conqueror’s reign.] - -[Sidenote: His share in Domesday.] - -[Sidenote: His rise under Rufus.] - -The man who was practically to rule England had at least little -advantage on the score of birth. He is set before us as the son of a -low-born priest in the diocese of Bayeux and of a mother who bore the -character of a witch, and who was reported to have lost an eye through -the agency of the powers with which she was too familiar.[911] -Handsome in person, ready of wit, free of speech and of hand, -unlearned, loose of life, clever and unscrupulous in business of every -kind, he made friends and he made enemies; but he rose. The surname -which cleaves to him in various shapes and spellings is said to have -been given to him in the court of the Conqueror by the _dispenser_ -Robert, because he pushed himself on at the expense of his betters, -like a burning flame.[912] But his genius lay most of all in the -direction of finance, in days when finance meant to transfer, by -whatever means, the greatest amount of the subject’s money into the -coffers of the King. One story describes him as sent on such an errand -by the Conqueror into the lands of his future bishopric, and as -smitten for his crime by the wonder-working hand of Saint Cuthberht -himself.[913] There is every reason to believe that he had a hand in -drawing up the Great Survey.[914] But, while William the Great lived, -he seems not to have risen to any high place. Towards the end of his -reign the Conqueror did begin to give away bishoprics to his own -clerks,[915] but still hardly to such clerks as Randolf Flambard. Nor -did the Conqueror need a minister, in the sense of needing one who -should in some sort fill his place and exercise his powers. The elder -William could rule his kingdom himself, or at most with the advice of -the special counsellor whom ancient custom gave him in the person of -Lanfranc. But the younger William, sultan-like in his mood, needed, -like other sultans, the help of a vizier. And he found the fittest of -all viziers for his purpose in the supple clerk from the Bessin. - -[Sidenote: His alleged new Domesday.] - -[Sidenote: His official position.] - -[Sidenote: He holds the Justiciarship.] - -[Sidenote: Growth of the office under him.] - -[Sidenote: His “driving” of the Gemóts.] - -[Sidenote: He loses his land for the New Forest.] - -[Sidenote: His zeal for the King’s interests.] - -The reign of Flambard seems to have begun as soon as Lanfranc was -gone. He thoroughly suited the Red King’s views. He was ready to -gather in wealth for his master from every quarter; he knew how to -squeeze the most out of rich and poor; when a tax of a certain amount -was decreed, he knew how to make it bring in double its nominal -value.[916] He alone thoroughly knew his art; no one else, said the -laughing King, cared so little whose hatred he brought on himself, so -that he only pleased his master.[917] He stands charged in one account -of his deeds with declaring the Great Survey to be drawn up on -principles not favourable enough to the royal hoard, and with causing -it to be supplanted by a new inquisition which made the Red King -richer than his father.[918] This story is very doubtful; but it is -thoroughly in character. In any case Flambard rose to the highest -measure both of power and of official dignity that was open to him. -His office and its duties are described in various ways; in that age -official titles and functions were less accurately distinguished than -they were a little later.[919] But there seems no doubt that Flambard, -the lawyer whom none could withstand,[920] held the formal office of -Justiciar. Till his time that post had not, as a distinct office, -reached the full measure of its greatness. It was Flambard himself who -raised it to the height of power and dignity which accompanied it when -it was held by Roger of Salisbury and Randolf of Glanville. He was to -the post of Justiciar what Thomas of London two generations later was -to the post of Chancellor; he was the man who knew how to magnify his -office.[921] In that office “he drave all the King’s gemóts over all -England.”[922] The King’s thegns who had come to the local assembly on -the King’s errand in the days of Æthelred and Cnut[923] had now grown -into a mighty and terrible power. How Flambard drave the gemóts we -learn elsewhere. He was fierce alike to the suppliant and to the -rebel.[924] Suppliant and rebel alike were in his eyes useful only as -means for further filling the mighty chest at Winchester. Strangely -enough, he himself, clerk and Norman as he was, had found neither -birth nor order protect him when the Conqueror had needed a part of -his land for the creation of the New Forest.[925] On the principle -that man is ever most ready to inflict on others the wrongs which he -has borne himself, Flambard, who himself in some sort ranked among the -disinherited, was of all ministers of the royal will the most eager to -draw the heritage of every man, without respect to birth or order, -into the hands of the master whom he served too faithfully. - -[Sidenote: His changes and exactions systematic.] - -[Sidenote: His alleged spoliation of the rich.] - -[Sidenote: His dealings with the Ætheling Henry.] - -[Sidenote: Witness of the Chronicle.] - -[Sidenote: The King to be every man’s heir.] - -[Sidenote: Flambard’s lasting burthens and exactions.] - -But we shall altogether misunderstand both Flambard and his master, if -we take either of them for vulgar spoilers, living as it were from -hand to mouth, and casually grasping any sources of gain which chanced -to be thrown in their way. Whatever Flambard did he did according to -rule and system; nay more, he did it according to the severest rules -of logic. Amidst the vague declamations which set him before us as the -general robber of all men, we light on particular facts and phrases -which give us the clue to the real nature of his doings. It is worth -notice that, in more than one picture, the rich are enlarged on as the -special victims of his extortions; in one the Ætheling Henry himself -is spoken of as having suffered deeply at his hands.[926] We may guess -that this has some special reference to the way in which Henry was -defrauded of the lands of his mother, a business in which Flambard is -likely enough to have had a share.[927] These references to the wrongs -done to the rich have their significance; they point to a cunningly -devised system of Flambard’s, by which, the greater a man’s estate -was, the more surely was he marked for extortion. The legislation of -Flambard, if we can call that legislation which seems never to have -been set down in any formal statute,[928] was not at all of the kind -which catches the small flies and lets the large ones get through. As -we have seen in some other cases,[929] a seemingly casual expression -of our native Chronicler is the best record of a matter of no small -constitutional importance. The Red King “would be ilk man’s heir, -ordered and lewd.”[930] In those words lay the whole root of the -matter. The great work of the administration of Flambard, the great -work of the reign of Rufus, was to put in order a system of rules by -which the King might be the heir of every man. Those few words, which -might seem to have dropped from the Chronicler in a moment of -embittered sarcasm, do indeed set forth the formal beginning of a -series of burthens and exactions under which Englishmen, and -preeminently the rich and noble among Englishmen, groaned for not much -less than six hundred years after Flambard’s days. - -[Sidenote: The Feudal Tenures.] - -[Sidenote: Abolished 1660.] - -[Sidenote: Tenure in chivalry.] - -[Sidenote: Wardship.] - -[Sidenote: Marriage.] - -[Sidenote: Dealings with bishoprics and abbeys.] - -[Sidenote: Agency of Flambard in systematizing the feudal tenures.] - -[Sidenote: The evidence.] - -[Sidenote: Henry’s charters.] - -[Sidenote: Importance of seemingly casual phrases.] - -In short the “unrighteousness” ordained by William Rufus and Randolf -Flambard[931] are no other than those feudal tenures and feudal -burthens which even the Parliament which elected Charles the Second, -in the midst of its self-abasement and betrayal of its own ancient -rights, declared to have been “much more burthensome, grievous, and -prejudicial to the kingdom than they have been beneficial to the -king.”[932] Assuredly they were as burthensome, grievous, and -prejudicial to the kingdom in the eleventh century as they were in the -seventeenth; but assuredly they were found in the eleventh century to -be highly beneficial to the King, or they would not have been ordained -by Rufus and Flambard. We have reached the age of chivalry; and tenure -in chivalry, with all its mean and pettifogging incidents, was put -into a systematic form for the special benefit of the coffers of the -king who was before all things the good knight, the _preux chevalier_, -the _probus miles_. The King “would be the heir of ilk man, ordered -and lewd.” To that end the estate of the minor heir was to be made a -prey; he was himself to be begged and granted and sold like an ox or -an ass;[933] the heiress, maid or widow, was in the like sort to be -begged and granted, sold into unwilling wedlock, or else forced to pay -the price which a chivalrous tenure demanded for the right either to -remain unmarried or to marry according to her own will. The bishopric -or the abbey was to be left without a pastor, and its lands were to be -let to farm for the King’s profit, because the King would be the heir -of the priest as well as of the layman. That all this, in its fully -developed and systematic form, was the work of Randolf Flambard, I -hope I may now assume. I have argued the point at some length -elsewhere,[934] and I need not now do more than pass lightly over some -of the main points. Certain tendencies, certain customs, of which, -under the Conqueror and even before the Conqueror, we see the germs, -but only the germs, appear at the accession of Henry the First as -firmly established rules, which Henry does not promise wholly to -abolish, while he does promise to redress their abuses. It follows -that they had put on their systematic shape in the intermediate time, -that is, during the reign of Rufus. One of these abuses, that which -for obvious reasons was most largely dwelled on by our authorities, -namely the new way of dealing with ecclesiastical property, is -distinctly spoken of as a novelty, and a novelty of Flambard’s -devising. The obvious inference is that the whole system, a system -which logically hangs together in the most perfect way, was the device -of the same subtle and malignant brain. And having got thus far, we -are now enabled to see the full force of those seemingly casual -expressions in the writers of the time of which I have already spoken. -It was the royal claims of relief, of wardship, and marriage, -systematically and mercilessly enforced, no less than the royal claim -to enjoy the fruits of vacant ecclesiastical benefices, which are -branded in Latin as the _injustitiæ_ of Rufus and Flambard, and which -in our own tongue take the shape of the King’s claim to be the heir of -every man. - -[Sidenote: Flambard’s theory of land-holding.] - -[Sidenote: Relief and redemption.] - -[Sidenote: Dealings with men’s wills.] - -[Sidenote: Older theory of wills.] - -This last pithy phrase takes in all the new claims which were now set -up over all lands, whether held by spiritual or temporal owners, and, -in some cases at least, over personal property also. All the -“unrighteousnesses,” all “the evil customs,” which the charter of -Henry promises to reform[935] come under this one head. In Flambard’s -system of tenure there could be no such thing as an ancient _eðel_ or -_allod_, held of no lord, and burthened only with such payments or -duties as the law might lay upon its owner. With him all land was in -the strictest sense _loanland_.[936] The owner had at most a -life-interest in it; at his death it fell back to the king, for the -king was to be the heir of every man. The king might grant it to the -son of the last owner; but, if so, it was by a fresh grant,[937] for -which the new grantee had to pay. And the terms of Henry’s charter -imply that the payment was arbitrary and extortionate. Henry promises -that the heir of a tenant-in-chief shall not be constrained to -_redeem_――to buy back――his father’s lands as had been done in his -brother’s time; he shall _relieve_ them by a just and lawful -relief.[938] Under Rufus then it was held that the land had, by the -former holder’s death, actually passed to the king, as the common heir -of all men, and that, if the son or other representative of the former -holder wished to possess it, he must, in the strictest sense, buy it -back from the king. Henry acknowledges the rights of the heir, while -still maintaining the theory of the fresh grant. The heir is not to -_redeem_――to buy back――his father’s land; he is merely to _relieve_ -it――to take it up again, and he is to pay only the sum prescribed by -legal custom, the equivalent of the ancient heriot or the modern -succession-duty. So it is with personal property. The Red King, it is -plain, claimed to be the heir of men’s money, as well as of their -land. For one of Henry’s promised reforms is that the wills of his -barons and others his men shall stand good, that their money shall go -to the purposes to which they may have bequeathed it, and that, if -they die without wills, their wives, children, kinsfolk, or lawful -men, shall dispose of it as they may think best for the dead man’s -soul.[939] Such a reform could not have been needed unless William -Rufus had been in the habit of interfering with men’s free right of -bequest. And it might have been plausibly argued that the right of -bequest was no natural right of man, that the most ancient legal -doctrine both of Rome and of England was that a will was an -exceptional act, which needed the confirmation of the sovereign power. -If such a doctrine had anyhow come to the knowledge of Flambard, it -would assuredly seem to him a natural inference that no such -confirmation should be granted save at such a price as the king might -see fit to demand. - -[Sidenote: Wardship.] - -[Sidenote: Its logical character.] - -[Sidenote: Its oppressive working.] - -But of all the devices of Flambard, there was one which, it would -seem, was specially his own, one which was at once the most oppressive -of all and that which followed most logically from the nature of -feudal tenure. This was the lord’s right of wardship. This claim -starts from the undoubted doctrine that the fief is after all only a -conditional possession of its holder, that he holds it only on the -terms of discharging the military service which is due from it. -Nothing was easier than to argue that, when the fief passed to an heir -who was from his youth incapable of discharging that service, the fief -should go back into the lord’s hands till the heir had reached the -time of life when he could discharge it. The abuses and oppressions -which such a right led to need hardly be dwelled on; they are written -in every page of our legal history from the days of Rufus to the days -of Charles the First. Nothing now enriches an estate like a long -minority; in those times the heir, when at last he came into -possession, found his estate impoverished in every way by the -temporary occupation of the king or of the king’s favourite to whom -the wardship had been granted or sold. Yet it cannot be denied that -the argument by which the right of wardship was established was, as a -piece of legal argument, quite unanswerable. And of all the feudal -exactions certainly none was more profitable. The tenant-in-chief who -died, perhaps fighting in the king’s cause, and who left an infant son -behind him, had the comfort of thinking that his estate would, perhaps -for the next twenty years, go to enrich the coffers of his sovereign. -On this head Henry speaks less clearly than he speaks on some other -points; but his words certainly seem to imply that the wardship of the -tenant-in-chief was to go, not to the king, but to the mother or to -some kinsman.[940] If so, either Henry himself or his successors -thought better of the matter. The right of wardship, as a privilege of -the king or other lord, appears in full force in the law-book of -Randolf of Glanville.[941] - -[Sidenote: Extent of Flambard’s changes.] - -[Sidenote: Wardship and marriage special to England and Normandy.] - -[Sidenote: The two sides of feudalism.] - -[Sidenote: England in what sense feudal.] - -[Sidenote: Flambard the lawgiver of English feudalism.] - -When we attribute all these exactions and “unrighteousnesses” to the -device of Flambard, it is of course not meant that they were -altogether unheard of either before his day or beyond the lands over -which his influence reached. Traces of these claims, or of some of -them, are to be found wherever and whenever feudal notions about the -tenure of land had crept in. All that is meant is that claims which -were vaguely growing up were put by Flambard into a distinct and -systematic shape. What William the Great did on occasion, for reasons -of state, William the Red did as a matter of course, as an ordinary -means of making money.[942] And it is significant that two of the most -oppressive of these claims, that of wardship and the kindred claim of -marriage, were, in their fully developed shape, peculiar or nearly so -to the lands where Rufus reigned and Flambard governed, to the English -kingdom and the Norman duchy.[943] I have said elsewhere that, of the -two sides of feudalism, our Norman kings carefully shut out the side -which tended to weaken the royal power, and carefully fostered the -side which tended to strengthen it.[944] Both sides of this process -were busily at work during the reign of Rufus. The great law of the -Conqueror, the law of Salisbury, which decreed that duty to the king -should come before all other duties, was practically tried and -practically confirmed in the struggle which showed that no man in -England was strong enough to stand against the king.[945] England was -not to become feudal in the sense in which Germany and France became -feudal. But in all those points where the doctrines of feudal tenure -could be turned to the king’s enrichment, England became of all lands -the most feudal. Enactor of no statute, author of no code or law-book, -Randolf Flambard was in effect the lawgiver of feudalism, so far as -that misleading word has any meaning at all on English soil. - -[Sidenote: Flambard’s oppression falls most directly on the greatest -estates.] - -[Sidenote: No special oppression of the native English.] - -[Sidenote: Indirect oppression of other classes.] - -[Sidenote: Dealings of the tenants-in-chief with their under-tenants.] - -[Sidenote: Strange submission of the nobles.] - -[Sidenote: Position of the king’s clerks.] - -[Sidenote: The reign of unlaw.] - -[Sidenote: General submission.] - -All this exactly falls in with those phrases in our authorities which -speak of Flambard as the spoiler of the rich, the plunderer of the -inheritances of other men. It also bears out what I have said -already,[946] that there is no evidence to show that Rufus was a -direct oppressor of the native English as such. The subtle devices of -tyranny of which we have just spoken directly concerned those only who -were the King’s tenants-in-chief. That is to say, they touched a class -of estates which were far more largely in Norman than in English -hands. Most likely, even in that reign, a numerical majority of the -King’s tenants-in-chief would have been found to be of English blood. -But such a majority would have been chiefly made up of the very -smallest members of the class; the greater landowners, those whose -wrongs, under such a system, would be, if not heavier, at least more -conspicuous, were mainly the conquerors of Senlac or their sons. It -was a form of oppression which would strike men as specially falling -upon the rich. A special meaning is thus given to phrases which might -otherwise be thought to be merely those common formulæ which, in -speaking of any evil which affects all classes, join rich and poor -together. The devices of Flambard were specially aimed at the rich. -The great mass of the English people, and that large class of Normans -who held their lands, not straight of the king but of some -intermediate lord, were touched by them only when the lords who -suffered by Flambard’s exactions tried to make good their own losses -by exactions of the same kind on their own tenants. That they did so -is shown by the reforming charter of Henry. When he promises to deal -fairly and lawfully by his barons and his other men in the matters of -relief and marriage, he demands that his barons shall deal fairly and -lawfully by their men in the like cases.[947] But in the first -instance it was mainly the rich, mainly the Normans, whom the feudal -devices of Flambard touched. And it is not the least strange thing in -these times to see a race of warlike and high-spirited nobles, -conquerors or sons of conquerors, submit to so galling a yoke, a yoke -which must have been all the more galling when we think of the origin -and position of the man by whom it was devised. We cannot think that -the king’s clerks were ever a popular body with any class, high or -low, native or foreign. Their position appealed to no sentiment of any -kind, military, religious, or national; their rule rather implied the -treading under foot of all such sentiments. The military tenants must -have looked on them with the dislike which men of the sword, specially -in such an age, are apt to look on the rule of men of the pen. In the -eyes of strict churchmen they must have passed for ungodly scorners of -the decencies of their order. To the mass of the people they must have -seemed foreign extortioners, and nothing more. They represented the -power of the king, and nothing else. In some states of things the -power of the king, even of a despotic king, may be welcomed as the -representative of law against force. But under Rufus the power of the -king was before all things the representative of unlaw. Yet though all -murmured, all submitted. The son of the poor priest of the Bessin, -clothed with a power purely official, lorded it over all classes and -orders. Earls, prelates, and people, were alike held down by the guide -and minister of the royal will. - -[Sidenote: Position of Rufus favourable for his schemes.] - -[Sidenote: Effect on national unity.] - -One cause of this general submission is doubtless to be found in the -immediate circumstances of the time. The alliance of the King and the -English people had for the moment broken the power of the Norman -nobles. The ecclesiastical estate was left without a head by the death -of Lanfranc. The popular estate was left without a head, as soon as -the King turned away from the people who had given him his crown, and -broke all the promises that he had made to them. There was no power of -combination; the great days when nobles, clergy, and commons, could -join together against the king, as three orders in one nation, were -yet far distant. Each class had to bear its own grievances as it -could; no class could get any help from any other class; and the -King’s picked mercenaries, kept at the expense of all classes, were -stronger than any one class by itself. Yet we cannot doubt that even -the rule of Rufus and Flambard did something towards the great work of -founding national unity. All the inhabitants of the land, if they had -nothing else in common, had common grievances and a common oppressor. -For a moment we can believe that the English people would feel a -certain pleasure in seeing the men who had once conquered them and -whom they had more lately conquered, brought under the yoke, and under -such a yoke as that of Flambard. But such a feeling would be -short-lived compared with the far deeper feeling of common grievances -and common enmities. - -[Sidenote: Other forms of exaction.] - -[Sidenote: Working of the old laws.] - -[Sidenote: “Driving” of the Gemóts.] - -[Sidenote: Witness of Henry’s charter.] - -For the yoke of Flambard was one which, in different ways, pressed on -all classes. If the native English, and the less wealthy men -generally, were less directly touched by his feudal legislation than -those who ranked above them, Flambard had no mind to let poor men, or -native Englishmen, or any other class of men, go scot free. If his new -devices pressed mainly on the great, he knew how to use the old forms -of law so as to press on great and small alike. No one was too high, -no one was too low, for the ministers of the King’s Exchequer to keep -their eyes on him. No source of profit was deemed too small or too -mean, if the coffers of a chivalrous king could be filled by it. If -Flambard sought to seize upon every man’s heritage, he also _drave_ -all the King’s gemóts over all England. We have no details; but it is -easy to see how the ancient assemblies, and the judicial and -administrative business which was done in them, might be turned into -instruments of extortion. We have seen that the worst criminals could -win their pardon by a bribe,[948] and means might easily be found, by -false charges and by various tricks of the law, for wringing money out -of the innocent as well as the guilty. We may again turn to Henry’s -charter. It is a very speaking clause which forgives all “pleas” and -debts due to his brother, except certain classes of them which were -held to be due of lawful right.[949] In the days of Rufus and Flambard -the presumption was that a demand made on behalf of the crown was -unlawful. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Dealings with church property.] - -[Sidenote: Appointment and investiture of bishops and abbots.] - -[Sidenote: Grant of the temporalities by the king.] - -[Sidenote: Church lands become fiefs.] - -[Sidenote: Flambard’s inferences.] - -[Sidenote: Analogy between lay and ecclesiastical fiefs.] - -[Sidenote: Vacant prelacies held by the King.] - -[Sidenote: Power of prolonging the vacancy.] - -[Sidenote: Sale of bishoprics and abbeys.] - -[Sidenote: Innovations of Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: Earlier cases of simony.] - -[Sidenote: Not systematic before Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: Treatment of vacant churches.] - -[Sidenote: Flambard the chief agent.] - -But there is one form of the exactions of the Red King which, for -obvious reasons, stands forth before all others in the pages of the -writers of the time. When the King would be the heir of every man, he -was fully minded to be the heir of the clerk or the monk as well as of -the layman. And Flambard, priest and chaplain as he was, had no mind -to sacrifice the interests of his master to the interests of his -order. By his suggestion William began early in his reign, as soon as -the influence of Lanfranc was withdrawn, to make himself in a special -way the heir of deceased bishops and abbots. These great spiritual -lords were among the chief land-owners of the kingdom. The kings -therefore naturally claimed to have a voice in their appointment. They -invested the new prelate with his ring and staff; and this right, so -fiercely denied to the successor of Augustus, was exercised without -dispute by the successor of Cerdic and Rolf.[950] The new prelate -received, by the king’s writ, as a grant from the king, the temporal -possessions which were attached to the spiritual office.[951] We have -seen that this action on the part of the king by no means wholly shut -out action either on the part of the local ecclesiastical body or on -the part of the great council of the kingdom.[952] But it was from the -king personally that the newly chosen or newly nominated prelate -received the actual investiture of his office and its temporalities. -The temporalities with which he was invested might have their special -rights and privileges; but at least they were not exempt from the -three burthens which no land could escape, among which was the duty of -providing men for military service in case of need.[953] As feudal -ideas grew, the inference was easy that lands granted by the king and -charged with military service were a fief held of the king by a -military tenure. We have seen signs of change in that direction in the -days of the Conqueror;[954] in the days of Rufus the doctrine was -fully established, and it was pushed to its logical results by the -lawyer-like ingenuity of Flambard. If the lands held by a bishop or -abbot were a fief held by military tenure, they must be liable to the -same accidents as other fiefs of the same kind. When a bishop or abbot -died, or otherwise vacated his office, the result was the same as when -the lay holder of a fief died without leaving an heir of full age. -There was the fief; but there was no one ready to perform the duties -with which it was charged. The fief must therefore fall back to the -lord till it should be granted afresh to some one who could discharge -those duties. The king thus, in the words of the Chronicler, became -the heir of the deceased bishop or abbot, even more thoroughly than he -became the heir of the deceased baron or other lay tenant-in-chief. -For in the latter case, except when the late holder’s family became -extinct by his death, there was always some one person who had by all -law and custom a right above all other men to succeed him. The son or -other natural successor might be constrained to buy back the lands of -the _ancestor_,[955] or, if a minor, he might be kept out of them till -his time of wardship was over. Still even Flambard would have allowed -that such a natural successor had, if he could pay the price demanded, -a claim upon the land which was not shared by any one else. But on the -lands of a deceased bishop or abbot no man, even of his own order, had -any better claim than another till such a claim was created by -election or nomination. The king was the only heir; the lands and all -the other property of the vacant office passed into his hands; and, as -no election or nomination could hold good without his consent, it was -in his power to prolong his possession as heir as long as he thought -good. That is to say, by the new device of Flambard, when a bishop or -abbot died, the king at once entered on his lands, and kept them as -long as the see or abbey remained vacant. And, as it rested with the -king when the see or abbey should be filled, he could prolong the -vacancy for any time that he thought good. And William Rufus commonly -thought good to prolong the vacancy till some one offered him such a -price in ready money as made it worth his while to put an end to -it.[956] The result was that, in the words of the Chronicler, “God’s -Church was brought low.”[957] The great ecclesiastical offices, as -they fell vacant, were either kept vacant for the King’s profit, or -else were sold for his profit to men who, by the very act of buying -them, were shown to be unworthy to hold them.[958] We are distinctly -told that this practice was an innovation of the days of Rufus, and -that it was an innovation of which Flambard was the author.[959] The -charge of simony, like all other charges of bribery and corruption, is -often much easier to bring than to disprove; but it is not likely to -be spoken of as a systematic practice, unless it undoubtedly happened -in a good many cases. We have come across cases in our earlier history -where it was at least suspected that ecclesiastical offices had been -sold, or, what proves even more, that they were looked on as likely to -be sold.[960] And that the practice was common among continental -princes there can be little doubt. But there is nothing to make us -believe that it was at all systematic in England at any earlier time, -and the Conqueror at all events was clear from all scandal of the -kind. But the chain of reasoning devised by Flambard would make it as -fair a source of profit for the king to take money on the grant of a -bishopric as to take it on the grant of a lay fief. And there is no -reason to doubt that Rufus systematically acted on this principle, and -that, save at the moment of his temporary repentance, he seldom or -never gave away a bishopric or abbey for nothing. The other point of -the charge, that bishoprics and abbeys were kept vacant while the king -received the profits, was not a matter of surmise or suspicion, but a -matter of fact open to all men. When a prelate died, one of the king’s -clerks was sent to take down in writing a full account of all his -possessions. All was taken into the king’s hands. Sometimes the king -granted out the lands for money or on military tenure, in which case -the new prelate, when one was appointed, might have some difficulty in -getting them back.[961] In other cases the king kept the property in -his own hands, letting it out at the highest rent that he could get, -and, as his father did with the royal demesnes, at once making void -his bargains if a higher price was offered.[962] In the case of the -abbeys and of those churches of secular canons where the episcopal and -capitular estates were not yet separated, the king took the whole -property of the church, and allowed the monks or canons only a -wretched pittance.[963] We have seen that, in one case where local -gratitude has recorded that he did otherwise, it is marked as an -exception to his usual practice.[964] And, in all these doings, -Flambard, as he was the deviser of the system, was its chief -administrator. The vacant prelacies were put under his management; he -extorted, for his own profit and for the king’s, such sums both from -the monks or clergy and from the tenants of the church lands that they -all said that it was better to die than to live.[965] - -[Sidenote: The practice a new one.] - -[Sidenote: The olden practice.] - -[Sidenote: Tenure in _frank-almoign_.] - -[Sidenote: Odo Abbot of Chertsey resigns, 1092.] - -[Sidenote: Restored by Henry, 1100.] - -These doings on the part of Rufus are by the writers of the time put -in marked contrast with the practice of earlier kings, and especially -with the practice of his own father. As the old and inborn kings had -done nothing of the kind, so neither had the Conqueror from beyond -sea. In their days, when an abbot or bishop died, his spiritual -superior, the bishop of the diocese or the archbishop of the province, -administered the estates of his church during the vacancy, bestowing -the income to pious and charitable uses, and handing the estates over -to the new prelate on his appointment.[966] In later legal language, -the guardian of the spiritualties was also the guardian of the -temporalities. Bishoprics and abbeys were dealt with as smaller -preferments have always been dealt with, as holdings in _frank-almoign_. -The novelty lay, not in receiving the bishopric or abbey from the -king, but in receiving it on the terms of a lay fief. One prelate, Odo -Abbot of Chertsey, the Norman successor of the English Wulfwold,[967] -resigned his post rather than hold it on such terms.[968] For the rest -of the reign of Rufus the estates of the abbey were left in the hands -of Flambard. One of the earliest among the reforms of Henry and Anselm -was the restoration of Odo.[969] - -[Sidenote: Vacancies longer in abbeys than in bishoprics.] - -[Sidenote: Walkelin dies. Jan. 3, 1098.] - -[Sidenote: Osmund dies. Dec. 3, 1099.] - -[Sidenote: Differences between bishoprics and abbeys.] - -[Sidenote: Case of Peterborough. 1098.] - -[Sidenote: English abbots.] - -[Sidenote: Story of the appointment to an unnamed abbey.] - -If we look more minutely into the chronology of this reign, it will -appear that these long vacancies were more usual in the case of the -abbeys than in that of the bishoprics. At the time of William’s death -he had in his hands, besides the archbishopric of the absent Anselm, -the two bishoprics of Winchester and Salisbury and eleven abbeys.[970] -Of these Winchester had been vacant rather more than two years and a -half, Salisbury had been vacant only eight months. And the bishoprics -which were filled in his reign had mostly been vacant one, two, or at -most three years, shorter times than bishoprics were often kept vacant -in much later times.[971] The reason for the difference seems clear. -The bishoprics, when they were filled, commonly went to the king’s -clerks, to Flambard himself and his fellows. The great temporal -position of a bishopric was acceptable to men of this class, and they -found in the king’s service the means of making up a purse such as -would tempt the king to end the vacancy in their favour[972]. A -bishopric was therefore likely to be filled, unworthily filled -doubtless, but still filled, before any very long time had passed. The -abbeys, on the other hand, would have small attractions for the king’s -servants, who in fact, as secular clerks, could not hold them. And the -men for whom such a post would have attractions, the monks of the -vacant abbey or the abbots or priors of lesser houses, would not have -the same means as the king’s servants of making up a purse. The abbeys -therefore were likely to remain vacant longer than the bishoprics. -When they were filled, it was not without simony, or at least not -without a payment of some kind to the King. For it is rather harsh to -apply the word simony to the payment by which the monks of -Peterborough bought of the King the right to choose an abbot freely――a -free _congé d’élire_ in short, without any letter missive.[973] -Another thing may be noticed. The bishops appointed at this time all -bear Norman names; Normans were the most likely men to find their way -into the King’s chapel and chancery. But the abbots are still not -uncommonly English.[974] Rufus, who welcomed brave mercenaries from -any quarter, also welcomed bribes from any quarter, with little of -narrow prejudice for or against particular nations. An English monk -was as likely as his Norman fellow to have, by some means quite -inconsistent with his rule, scraped together money enough to purchase -preferment. And when a body of monks bought the right of free -election, they were likely to choose an Englishman rather than a -stranger. At all times the kings interfered less with the elections to -abbeys than they did with the elections to bishoprics.[975] And, if -there is any truth, even as a legendary illustration, in a tale which -is told both of Rufus and of other kings, there were moments when the -Red King could prefer a practical joke to a bribe. An abbey――the name -is not given――is vacant; two of its monks come to the King, trying to -outbid one another in offers of money for the vacant office. A third -brother has come with them, and the King asks what he will give. He -answers that he will not give anything; he has simply come to receive -the new abbot, whoever he may be, and to take him home with all -honour. Rufus at once bestows the abbey on him, as the only one of the -party worthy of it.[976] The tale is not impossible; had it been -placed in Normandy and not in England, we might have even said that it -was not unlikely. For we shall see, as we go on, that, from whatever -cause, Rufus dealt with ecclesiastical matters in Normandy in a -different spirit from that in which he dealt with them in England. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Sees vacant in 1092.] - -[Sidenote: Ralph Luffa Bishop of Chichester. 1091-1123.] - -[Sidenote: Death of William Bishop of Thetford. 1091.] - -[Sidenote: Herbert Losinga.] - -[Sidenote: Prior of Fécamp.] - -[Sidenote: Abbot of Ramsey. 1087.] - -[Sidenote: He buys the see of Thetford.] - -[Sidenote: Three years’ vacancy of New Minster. 1088-1091.] - -[Sidenote: Robert Losinga Abbot. 1091-1093.] - -[Sidenote: Herbert repents and receives his bishopric again from the -Pope, c. 1093.] - -[Sidenote: Novelty of Herbert’s act.] - -At the point which we have reached in our general story, the time of -the restoration of Carlisle, two English sees only were vacant. Two -had been filled during the year of the Norman campaign, and both of -them by prelates of some personal mark. Ralph Luffa, Bishop of -Chichester, holds a high place in the history of his own church, as -the founder alike of the existing fabric and of the existing -constitution of its chapter.[977] He bears altogether so good a -character that he is not likely to have come to a bishopric in the way -which was usual in the days of Rufus. Did the King give him his staff -in some passing better moment, like that in which he gave the staff to -the worthy abbot at the nameless monastery? But the other episcopal -appointment of the same year was one of the usual kind, as far as the -motive of the appointment went, though the person to whom the -bishopric was given or sold was not one of the class who in this reign -commonly profited by such transactions. Bishop William of Thetford, -the successor of the unlearned Herfast,[978] died in the year of -negotiations, the year of the peace with Robert and the peace with -Malcolm.[979] His bishopric was not long kept vacant; before the end -of the year the church of Thetford had a new pastor, and one who plays -no small part in local history. This was the famous Herbert -Losinga,[980] who, if we may trust such accounts of him as we have, -made so bad a beginning and so good an ending. Norman by birth, an -immediate countryman of the Conqueror, as sprung from the land of -Hiesmes, a man of learning and evident energy, he became a monk of -Fécamp and prior of that great house.[981] Early in the reign of Rufus -or in the last days of the Conqueror, he was raised to the abbey of -Ramsey, when the long and varied life of Æthelsige came to an -end.[982] He now, on Bishop William’s death, at once bought for -himself the see of Thetford for one thousand pounds.[983] Before the -end of the year he was consecrated by Archbishop Thomas of York, -making his profession to a future Archbishop of Canterbury.[984] At -the same time he also bought preferment for his father Robert, who, it -must be supposed, had embraced the monastic life. The New Minster of -Winchester had now been for three years, since the death of its last -Abbot Ralph, in the hands of Flambard.[985] Herbert now bought the -abbacy for his father.[986] This twofold simony naturally gave great -offence, and formed a fertile subject for the eloquence of the time, -both in prose and verse.[987] The reign of the father was short; two -years later Flambard again held the wardship of New Minster.[988] The -career of the son in his East-Anglian bishopric was longer and more -varied, and we shall come across him again in the course of our story. -At present it is only needful to say that Herbert very soon repented -of the shameful way by which he had climbed into the sheepfold, that -he went to Rome, that he gave up his ill-gotten bishopric into the -hands of Pope Urban, and received his staff from him again in what was -deemed to be a more regular way.[989] Herbert’s repentance was to his -credit; and, as things stood at the moment, there was perhaps no -better way of making amends. But the course which he took was not only -one which was sure to bring on him the displeasure of the Red King; it -was in the teeth of all the customs of William the Great and of the -kings before him. A journey to Rome, without the royal licence, and -seemingly taken by stealth,[990] the submission to a Pope whom the -King had not acknowledged,[991] the surrender to any Pope of the staff -which he had received from the King of the English, were all of them -offences, and the last act was distinctly a novelty. Ulf, Ealdred, -Thomas, Remigius, had all been deprived of their staves and had -received them again;[992] but no English prelate of those times had of -his own act made the Pope his judge in such a matter. When the holy -Wulfstan was threatened with deposition, he had, even in the legend, -given back his staff, not to the Pope who ruled at Rome, but to the -King who slept at Westminster.[993] No wonder then that the Red King -was moved to anger by a slight to his authority which his father could -not have overlooked, and which might have stirred the Confessor -himself to one of his passing fits of wrath. The return of Herbert -from Rome forms part of a striking group of events to which we shall -presently come. - -[Sidenote: Vacancy of Lincoln. 1092-1094.] - -[Sidenote: Vacancy of Canterbury. 1089-1093.] - -The two bishoprics of Chichester and Thetford were thus filled soon -after they became vacant. In the year after the consecration of Ralph -and Herbert, a third see, as we have seen, fell vacant by the death of -Remigius of Lincoln.[994] That see was not filled so speedily as -Chichester and Thetford had been; still it did not remain vacant so -long as some of the abbeys. But a longer vacancy befell, a lasting -vacancy seemed designed to befall, the mother church of all of them. -All this while the metropolitan throne of Canterbury remained empty. -No successor to Lanfranc was chosen or nominated; it was the fixed -purpose of the Red King to make no nomination himself, to allow no -choice on the part of the ecclesiastical electors. Here at least the -doctrines of Randolf Flambard were to be carried out in their fulness. -It is the state of ecclesiastical matters during this memorable -vacancy, and the memorable nomination which at last ended it, which -call for our main attention at this stage of our story. - - -§ 2. _The Vacancy of the Primacy and the Appointment of Anselm. -1089-1093._ - -[Sidenote: Effects of the vacancy of the see of Canterbury.] - -[Sidenote: Special position of the metropolitan see.] - -[Sidenote: Its antiquity and dignity.] - -[Sidenote: Place of the Archbishop in the assembly.] - -[Sidenote: His leadership of the nation.] - -[Sidenote: Appointments to the archbishopric.] - -[Sidenote: Thomas of London. 1162.] - -[Sidenote: The King’s fixed purpose to keep the see vacant.] - -It needs some little effort of the imagination fully to take in all -that is implied in a four years’ vacancy of the see of Canterbury in -the eleventh century. For the King to keep any bishopric vacant in -order to fill his coffers with its revenues was a new and an -unrighteous thing, against which men cried out as at once new and -unrighteous. But to deal in this way with the see of Canterbury was -something which differed in kind from the like treatment of any other -see. That the bishopric of Lincoln was vacant, that the Bishop of -Durham was in banishment, was mainly a local grievance. The churches -of Lincoln and Durham suffered; they were condemned to what, in the -language of the times, was called a state of widowhood. The tenants of -those churches suffered all that was implied in being handed over from -a milder lord to a harsher one. The dioceses were defrauded of -whatever advantages might have flowed from the episcopal -superintendence of Robert Bloet or of William of Saint-Calais. But the -general affairs of the Church and realm might go on much the same; -there was one councillor less in the gemót or the synod, and that was -all. It was another thing when the patriarchal throne was left vacant, -when Church and realm were deprived of him who in a certain sense -might be called the head of both. An Archbishop of Canterbury was -something more than merely the first of English bishops. Setting aside -his loftier ecclesiastical claims as the second Pontiff of a second -world, he held within the realm of England itself a position which was -wholly his own.[995] He held an office older and more venerable than -the crown itself. There were indeed kings in England before there were -bishops; but there were Archbishops of Canterbury before there were -Kings of the English. The successor of Augustine, the “head of -Angle-kin,”[996] had been the embodiment of united English national -life, in days when the land was still torn in pieces by the rivalry of -the kings of this or that corner of it.[997] This lofty position -survived the union of the kingdoms; it survived the transfer of the -united kingdom to a foreign Conqueror. Lanfranc stood by the side of -William, as Dunstan had stood by the side of Eadgar. In every -gathering of the Church and of the people, in every synod, in every -gemót, the Archbishop of Canterbury held a place which had no equal or -second, a place which was shared by no other bishop or earl or -ætheling. If we reckon the King as the head of the assembly, the -Archbishop is its first member. If we reckon the King as a power -outside the assembly, the Archbishop is himself its head. He is the -personal counsellor of the King, the personal leader of the nation, in -a way in which no other man in the realm could be said to be. As of -old, under the Empire of Rome, each town had its _defensor civitatis_, -so now, under the kingship of England, the successor of Augustine -might be said to hold the place of _defensor regni_. The position -which Lanfranc had held, and in which during these dreary years he had -no successor, was a position wholly unlike that of the class of -bishops to which we are now getting accustomed, royal officials who -received bishoprics as the payment of their temporal services. It was -equally unlike that of the statesman-bishops of later times, who might -or might not forget the bishop in the statesman, but whose two -characters, ecclesiastical and temporal, were quite distinct and in no -way implied one another. An archbishop of those times was a statesman -by virtue of his spiritual office; he was the moral guardian and moral -mouth-piece of the nation. The ideal archbishop was at once saint, -scholar, and statesman; of the long series from Augustine to Lanfranc, -some had really united all those characters; none perhaps had been -altogether lacking in all three. Hence the special care with which men -were chosen for so great a place both before and for some time after -the time with which we are dealing. The king’s clerks, his chancellor, -his treasurer, even his larderer,[998] might beg or buy some bishopric -of less account; but, seventy years after this time, the world was -amazed when King Henry bethought him of placing Chancellor Thomas, not -in the seat of Randolf of Durham or Roger of Salisbury, but in the -seat of Ælfheah, Anselm, and Theobald.[999] The surprise which was -then called forth by what was looked on as a new-fangled and wrongful -nomination to the archbishopric of Canterbury may help us to judge of -the surprise and horror and despair which came over the minds of men, -as it became plain that the wish, perhaps the fixed purpose, of the -Red King was to get rid of archbishops of Canterbury altogether. - -[Sidenote: The King’s motives.] - -[Sidenote: The estates of the see.] - -[Sidenote: Further motives.] - -The motives of the King are plain. He sought something more than -merely to get possession of the rich revenues of the archbishopric, -though that was doubtless not a small matter in the policy of either -Rufus or Flambard. The estates of the see of Canterbury furnished a -very perceptible addition to the royal income, and they gave the King -a convenient means of rewarding some of his favourites, to whom he -granted archiepiscopal lands on military tenure.[1000] Lanfranc -himself had already done something like this;[1001] but the usual -tendency of lands so granted to pass away from the Church would be -greatly strengthened when it was not the Archbishop, but the King, at -whose hands they had been received, and to whom the first homage had -been paid. But all this was doubtless very secondary. In the case of -other sees it was a mere reckoning of profit; Rufus had no objection -to fill them at once, if any one would make it worth his while to do -so. But it is plain that he had a fixed determination to keep the -archbishopric vacant, if possible, for ever, at all events as long as -the patience of his kingdom would endure such a state of things. To -Rufus, whether as man or as king, the appointment of an archbishop was -the thing of all others which was least to be wished. To fill the see -of Canterbury would be at once to set up a disagreeable monitor by his -side, and to put some check on the reign of unright and unlaw, public -and private. William doubtless remembered how, as long as Lanfranc -lived, he had had to play an unwilling part, and to put a bridle on -his worst and most cherished instincts. An archbishop of his own -naming could not indeed have the personal authority of his ancient -guardian; but any archbishop would have a charge to speak in the name -of the Church and the nation in a way which could hardly be pleasing -in his ears. The metropolitan see therefore remained unfilled till the -day when William Rufus became for a short season another man. - -[Sidenote: No fear of a bad appointment.] - -[Sidenote: Primates between Anselm and Thomas.] - -It is worth remarking that what might have seemed a very obvious way -out of the difficulty clearly did not come into the head of the King -or of any one else. The long vacancy of the archbishopric made men -uneasy; they were grieved and amazed as to what might happen in so -unusual a case; but they felt sure that the present distress must end -some time, and they seem to have taken for granted that, when it did -end, it would end by the appointment of some one worthy of the place. -Men were troubled at the King’s failure to appoint any archbishop; -they do not seem to have been at all troubled by fear that he might -appoint a bad archbishop.[1002] Rufus himself seems never to have -thought of granting or selling the metropolitan see to any of his own -creatures, to Flambard for instance or to Robert Bloet. He might so -deal with Lincoln or Durham; something within or without him kept him -from so dealing with Canterbury. It is throughout taken for granted -that the choice lay between a good archbishop or none at all. A good -archbishop was the yoke-fellow of a good king, the reprover of an evil -king. William Rufus wanted neither of those. But even William Rufus -had not gone so far, his subjects did not suspect him of going so far, -as to think of appointing an evil archbishop in order to be the tool -of an evil king. The precedent of making the patriarchal throne of -Britain the reward of merely temporal services[1003] did not come till -it had been filled by four more primates, all taken from the regular -orders, numbering among them at least one saint and one statesman, but -no mere royal official. The first degradation of the archbishopric led -to its greatest exaltation, in the person of Thomas of London. But -Thomas of London, even in his most worldly days, was a very different -person from Randolf Flambard. - -[Sidenote: Seemingly no thought of election.] - -[Sidenote: No action of the monks.] - -[Sidenote: No action of the Witan.] - -[Sidenote: Silent endurance of the action.] - -Another point to be remarked is how utterly the notion either of -ecclesiastical election or of election in the Great Council of the -realm seems to have passed away. There is nothing like an attempt at -the choice of an archbishop, either by the monks of Christ Church, the -usual electors, or by the suffragan bishops, who afterwards claimed -the right. It might have been too daring a step if the monks had done -as they once had done in the days of King Eadward,[1004] if they had -chosen an archbishop freely, and then asked for the King’s approval of -their choice. Eadward had rejected the prelate so chosen; William -Rufus might have done something more than reject him. But we do not -hear of their even venturing to petition for leave to elect; they do -not, like the monks of Peterborough,[1005] make such a petition, and -enforce it by the strongest of arguments. Nor do bishops, earls, -thegns, the nation at large, venture to act, any more than the monks. -They murmur, and that is all. No action on the subject is recorded to -have been taken in any of the gemóts till the vacancy had lasted -nearly four years; and we shall see that the action which was at last -taken showed more strongly than anything else that, as far as this -world was concerned, it rested wholly with the King whether England -should ever again have another primate or not. Through the whole time, -the nation suffers, but it suffers in silence. We have already had to -deal with a king on whose nod all things human and divine were held to -hang;[1006] we are now dealing with a king who would have no petition -made, no act ascribed, within his realm, to any God or man except -himself.[1007] - -[Sidenote: Results, of the vacancy.] - -[Sidenote: Corruption of the clergy.] - -[Sidenote: Fiscal spirit of the time.] - -[Sidenote: Effects of the lack of ecclesiastical discipline.] - -The state of things during the time when William Rufus held firm to -his purpose that no man should be archbishop but himself,[1008] and -when the revenues of the archbishopric were paid into the hands of -Randolf Flambard,[1009] was one of general corruption. It is -immediately after recording the King’s way of dealing with bishoprics -and abbeys that one of our chief guides breaks forth into his most -vehement protest against the vices of the time, and specially against -the corruption and degradation of the clergy.[1010] That they took to -secular callings, that they became pleaders of causes and farmers of -revenues, was not wonderful. Under the rule of Flambard there -were endless openings for employments of this kind, employments for -which, as in the case of Flambard himself, the clerk was commonly -better fitted than the layman. And the general fiscal spirit of the -time, the endless seeking after gold and silver of which the King set -the example, naturally spread through all classes; every rich man, we -are told, turned money-changer.[1011] The constant demands for actual -coin, the large outlay of actual coin in the payment of the King’s -mercenaries, must have led to an increased activity in the circulation -of the precious metals. The newly-come Jews, strong in royal favour, -doubtless found their account in this turn of things; but some classes -of Christians seem to have found their account in it also. But, -besides all this, the writers of the time seem clearly to connect the -frightful profligacy of the time, specially rife among the King’s -immediate following, with the vacancy of the archbishopric. It is true -that things were not much better in Normandy, where the good soul of -Archbishop William must have been daily grieved at the unlawful deeds -of almost every one around him. But an Archbishop of Rouen had never -been held to have the same authority over either prince or people as -an Archbishop of Canterbury. Whatever power, moral or formal, was at -any time wielded by the ecclesiastical state for the reformation of -manners was altogether in abeyance, now that there was no Primate -either to call together a synod of the national Church or to speak -with that personal authority which belonged to none of the chiefs of -the national Church but himself. Even darker times were in store, when -there was a Primate in the land, but when his authority was defied and -his person insulted. But as yet the darkest times that men had known -were the four years during which the sons of the English Church were -left as sheep without a shepherd. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: Debt of England to foreigners.] - -[Sidenote: The Burgundian saints.] - -[Sidenote: Hugh of Avalon.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm of Aosta.] - -[Sidenote: His parentage.] - -[Sidenote: Associations of his youth.] - -The shepherd was at last to come, like his immediate predecessor, in -one sense from a distant land, in another sense from a land which was -only too near. The house of Bec, the house of Herlwin, was for the -second time to give a patriarch to the isle of Britain. It had given -us Lanfranc the statesman; it was now to give us Anselm the saint. We -may reckon it, not as the shame, but as the glory of our nation that -we have so often won strangers, and even conquerors, to become our -national leaders, and to take their place among the noblest worthies -of the soil. Alongside of the lawgiver from Denmark, of the deliverer -from France, we rank, as holding the same place among bishops which -they hold among kings and earls, the holy man from the Prætorian -Augusta.[1012] The annals of the eleventh and twelfth centuries are -thick set with the names of foreign prelates holding English sees; and -among them both Normandy and Lorraine, to say nothing of Pavia, had -sent us some whom we might well be glad to welcome. But the two whose -names shine out above them all, the two from whose names all thought -of their foreign birth passes away, the two whom we hail as our own by -adoption and love, came from a more distant realm, and a realm which -is well nigh forgotten. Hugh of Avalon and of Lincoln came from the -more favoured and famous district where the Imperial Burgundy rises to -the Alps and sinks again to the Rhone.[1013] Anselm of Aosta and of -Canterbury came from that deep valley which, after all changes, is -still Cisalpine Gaul. He came from that small outlying fragment of the -Middle Kingdom which has not risen to the destiny of Unterwalden and -Bern, of Lausanne and Geneva, but which has escaped the destiny of -Bresse and Bugey, of Chablais and Nizza, of royal Arles and princely -Orange, and of Hugh’s own home by the city of Gratian.[1014] The vale -of Aosta, still Burgundian in its speech and buildings, the last -remnant of the great Burgundian dominion of its lords, still gives a -title to princes of the house of its earliest and of its latest -Humbert. The father of Anselm, no less than the father of Lanfranc, -was of Lombard birth. But Gundulf had been fully adopted at Aosta, and -his son, born on Burgundian soil, son of a Burgundian mother of lofty, -perhaps of princely stock,[1015] must be reckoned as belonging to the -Burgundy in which he was born and bred rather than to the Italy which -in after days he visited as a stranger.[1016] There, in the last home -of old Gaulish freedom, in an Augusta named after the first -Augustus――an Augusta which we doubt whether to call Prætorian from the -conquerors or Salassian from the conquered――in the long valley fenced -in by the giant Alps on either side――at the foot of the pass where -local belief holds that Hannibal had crossed of old and where -Buonaparte was to cross in days to come――there where the square walls -of the Roman town rise almost untouched above the rushing Dora――where -the street still bearing the name of Anselm leads from the Roman gate -to the Roman arch of triumph, where the towers of Saint Gratus and -Saint Urse, fellows of kindred towers at Verona and at Lincoln, at -Schaffhausen and at Cambridge, rose fresh in all their squareness and -sternness when Anselm lay as a babe beneath their shadow――there, among -the sublimest works of nature and among some of the most striking -works of man, was born the teacher of Normandy, the shepherd of -England, the man who dived deeper than any man before him into the -most awful mysteries of the faith, but whom we have rather to deal -with as one who ranks by adoption among the truest worthies of -England, the man who stood forth as the champion of right against both -political and moral wrong in the days when both political and moral -wrong were at their darkest. - -[Sidenote: Comparison of Lanfranc and Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm not preferred in England by the Conqueror.] - -[Sidenote: Various sides of Anselm’s character.] - -I have already pointed out the contrast between the characters of -Lanfranc and Anselm, in recording one memorable discourse between -them, in which Anselm won Lanfranc over to a better mind in the matter -of our English Ælfheah.[1017] The calling and the work of the two men -were different; and the work of Anselm implied the earlier work of -Lanfranc. Lanfranc was, after all, in some sort a conqueror of the -English Church, and the character of a conqueror was one in which -Anselm could never have shown himself. Lanfranc was a statesman, one -whose policy could spread itself far beyond the bounds of this or that -kingdom or nation, but whose very policy compelled him not to let the -distinctions of kingdoms and nations slip out of his sight. To Anselm -we could almost fancy that such distinctions were of small account. He -was the servant of God and the friend of all God’s creatures; he -perhaps hardly stopped to think whether those whose souls and bodies -he was ever ready to help were Burgundian, Norman, or English. With -such a spirit as this, he could not have done Lanfranc’s work; and it -is worthy of remark that the Conqueror, who so greatly valued him, -seems never to have thought of him for any preferment in England. -Lanfranc had to carry out a policy, in some measure harsh and worldly, -but which, granting his own position and that of his master, could not -be avoided. Anselm fittingly came after him, at a time when national -distinctions and national wrongs were almost forgotten in the -universal reign of evil, to protest in the name of universal right, -and in so doing to protest against particular and national wrongs. He -would have been out of place in the first days of the Conquest; as a -stranger, though only as a stranger, he would have been out of place -in the days of our earlier freedom. When he did come, he was -thoroughly in place, as one who was before all things a preacher of -righteousness, but who could, when need called for it, put on the -mantle of the statesman and even that of the warrior. Like our own -Wulfstan, in many things his fellow, we find him the friend and -counsellor of men of a character most opposite to his own. And, as we -have seen Wulfstan, if not commanding, at least directing, -armies,[1018] so we shall see Anselm, if not waging war in his own -person, at least hallowing more than one camp by his presence. And we -can hardly blame him if, at some later stages of his career, he -allowed himself to be swayed by scruples which he had never thought of -at its beginning, if, in his zeal for eternal right, he allowed -himself to sin against the ancient laws and customs of England. When -England, Normandy, France, and the Empire, were as they all were in -his day, we can forgive him for looking on the Roman Bishop as the one -surviving embodiment of law and right, and for deeming that, when he -spake, it was as when a man listened to the oracles of God. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Anselm and Eadmer.] - -[Sidenote: References to Eadmer in other writers.] - -[Sidenote: Church’s Life of Anselm.] - -The tale of the early life of Anselm has been handed down to us by a -loving companion, a man of our own nation, who was won in his youth by -the kind words of the foreign saint when he came to England as a -momentary visitor, and who in after times became the most faithful of -disciples through all the changes of his fortunes. It is one of the -marked features of the story that we know so little of Anselm, except -from his own writings and from the narrative of Eadmer. Our own -historians of the time speak of Anselm with the deepest reverence; but -they say little of him beside the broad facts which lie on the surface -of English history. Some of them directly refer to his special -biographer for fuller accounts.[1019] In telling his story I find -myself in the like case. I am tempted to refer once for all for the -acts of Anselm to his Life as written in our own day by a master both -of description and of comment.[1020] I could be well pleased to send -my readers elsewhere to study Anselm the monk and abbot, and to -concern myself only with his career as archbishop in our own land. But -the earlier and the later career of Anselm hang together, and he has -already made his appearance at more than one earlier stage of our own -story. I must therefore attempt some general notice, though at less -length than if the ground had not been thus forestalled, of the -primate who came to us from Aosta, as his predecessor did from Pavia, -and who, like his predecessor, made Bec a halting-place on the way to -Canterbury. - -[Sidenote: Childhood of Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: His youthful licence.] - -[Sidenote: He leaves Aosta. 1057.] - -[Sidenote: His sojourn at Avranches.] - -[Sidenote: He becomes a monk at Bec. 1060.] - -[Sidenote: Elected prior. 1063.] - -In the life of Anselm a childhood and a manhood of eminent holiness -are parted by a short time of youthful licence. The little child in -his dream climbed his native mountains to seek for the palace of God -on a Christian Olympos. He reported the idleness of the handmaids of -his Lord; he sat at the feet of his Lord; he was refreshed by the -steward of the divine household with a meal of the purest bread.[1021] -The scholarly boy was so eager for the monastic life that he prayed -for some sickness that might drive him into the cloister.[1022] But -the youth for a while cast aside his piety; he cast aside his -learning; he gave himself to the thoughts and sports of the world; he -even yielded to those temptations of the flesh which Wulfstan had -withstood in the midst of his military exercises,[1023] and which -Thomas withstood in the midst of his worldly business.[1024] But the -love of his tender and pious mother kept him from wholly falling away. -The yearning for a monastic life came upon him again, though his -wishes were greatly opposed by his father. At last, in his -twenty-fourth year, Anselm left his own land. After three years’ -sojourn in Burgundy and France, he reached Normandy, and, in the steps -of Lanfranc, first took up his abode at Avranches.[1025] But Lanfranc -was now at Bec. Thither Anselm, fully bent on the monastic calling, -followed the great scholar. He had doubted for a while between Bec and -Clugny. We shall hardly think the worse of him for his frank -confession of human feelings. He doubted, because at Clugny his human -learning would be of no use, while at Bec it would be overshadowed by -that of Lanfranc.[1026] In the end, by the advice of Lanfranc himself -and of Archbishop Maurilius, he became a monk of Bec, and, when -Lanfranc became Abbot of Saint Stephen’s, Anselm succeeded him in the -office of prior.[1027] - -[Sidenote: Stories of him as prior.] - -[Sidenote: Elected Abbot. 1078.] - -This first preferment Anselm seems to have taken willingly. A crowd of -beautiful stories, setting forth his faith towards God and his -kindliness towards all men, belong to this part of his career, the -time when he was specially employed in writing his theological works. -We admire the mixture of wisdom and kindness with which he reproved -the abbot of another house who complained that the boys who were -entrusted to his teaching got more and more unruly, even though they -were whipped day and night.[1028] We are tempted to feel a slight -grudge when he counsels a knight who seems to have been leading a good -and devout life in the world to embrace the monastic calling.[1029] -Much as that age needed men like Anselm, it still more needed men like -Gulbert of Hugleville and Helias of La Flèche. But we note with some -interest the comment of Eadmer, so curiously illustrating the common -rivalry between one monastery and another. In such cases Anselm did -not counsel profession at Bec rather than in any other house, and this -particular convert took the cowl at Marmoutiers. At last, on the death -of Herlwin, the unanimous choice of the convent called him to the -place of abbot. His deep reluctance to accept so great a charge was -overcome only by the express command of Archbishop Maurilius, who, on -his election to the priorship, had bidden him by virtue of holy -obedience to accept both that and any higher preferment which might -come in his way.[1030] The election of Anselm to the abbacy marks a -stage in our story. It was in his character of abbot that he was first -brought into relations with England; in that character he paid his -first visit to the land which was presently to make him her own. - -[Sidenote: Bec under Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: His widespread fame.] - -[Sidenote: His correspondence.] - -[Sidenote: Intercourse between Bec and England.] - -The fame of the new Abbot of Bec and of his house, great already, now -grew still greater. Learning had shone at Bec ever since Lanfranc came -thither; but hitherto it had shone only in the second rank. It now -took the chief seat in the person of Abbot Anselm. He was sought by -men from all parts as a friend, a teacher, a spiritual adviser. Of the -open-handed hospitality of Bec it was not, we are told, for Norman -neighbours to speak; those might speak who had found their way thither -from the distant lands of Burgundy and Spain.[1031] The whole Latin -world drank in with eagerness the teaching of Anselm.[1032] Scholars -of all lands came to sit at his feet. Noble ladies in their widowhood -sought his neighbourhood and spiritual direction, and received the -honourable title of mothers of the house.[1033] Like all the saints -and scholars of his day, he had a crowd of correspondents of all -classes; amongst them we see Countess Ida of Boulogne and the -Conqueror’s renowned daughter Adela.[1034] And throughout his life and -letters we see constant signs of the daily intercourse which, as -naturally followed on the circumstances of the time, was ever going on -between Normandy and England. The endless going to and fro between the -two countries strikes us at every step.[1035] There was an interchange -of men; if many Normans found their way to England, some Englishmen -found their way to Normandy. Bec had already begun to give bishops to -England. Lanfranc had placed two monks of his old house in the -episcopal chair of Rochester.[1036] The second of them, the famous -Gundulf, had been, when at Bec, the familiar friend of Anselm, who -spoke little himself, but who listened to the great teacher, and wept -at his touching words.[1037] On the other hand, in the house of Bec -itself there were monks who were English of the Old-English stock, -monks whom Lanfranc thought fit to call back to their own land and to -the monastery of which he was the spiritual father.[1038] - -[Sidenote: Lands of Bec in England.] - -[Sidenote: The dependent priory of Clare. 1090.] - -Anselm had thus many ties of friendship and kindly association with -England, even before he had any official connexion with the land or -its inhabitants. And a strictly official connexion began long before -he became archbishop. The Abbot of Bec had both temporal possessions -and spiritual duties within our island. He was the lord of English -estates and the spiritual father of brethren settled on English soil. -The house of Bec appears in four places in Domesday as holder of lands -in England; but one manor only was held in chief of the king. The -church of Saint Mary of Bec held the lordship of Deverel in Wiltshire, -once the possession of Brihtric, whether the son of Ælfgar or any less -famous bearer of the name. This had been the gift of Queen Matilda, -and it is worth noting that the value of the land had lessened in the -few years between her death and the taking of the Survey.[1039] A -smaller estate at Swinecombe in Oxfordshire, held of Miles Crispin, -was more lucky; it had grown in value by one third.[1040] In Surrey -the house held lands at Tooting and Streatham, the gift of Richard of -Clare or of Tunbridge, him of whom we have so often heard. The -possessions of Bec at Tooting, which had sunk to one fifth of their -ancient value at the time of their grant to the abbey, had risen again -to the value at which they were rated in the days of King -Eadward.[1041] The business arising out of these lands, all seemingly -held in demesne, with a mill, churls, slaves, and other dependents, -must have called for some care on the part of the abbot or of those -whom he employed for the purpose. And it would seem that, on the -whole, the monastic body had been a careful husband of its English -estates. In after times also Bec became the head of several alien -priories in England; but one only of these can be carried back with -certainty to Anselm’s day. This was the priory of Clare in Suffolk, -afterwards moved to Stoke, which was founded as a cell to Bec while -Anselm was abbot.[1042] It was the gift of Gilbert of Clare, brother -of Richard the other benefactor of the house, a house which seems to -have had special attractions for the whole family of Count Gilbert. - -[Sidenote: Law-suits.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s desire to do justice.] - -[Sidenote: His first visit to England. 1078.] - -[Sidenote: His friendship with the monks of Christ Church.] - -[Sidenote: Eadmer.] - -Anselm was thus a land-owner on both sides of the sea, and, little as -he loved temporal business, he could not wholly escape it. No man, no -society of men, in either the Normandy or the England of those days, -could hope to keep clear of law-suits. The house of Herlwin, new as it -was and holy as it was, seems to have been entangled in not a few. -Anselm’s chief wish was that in these disputes justice should be done -to all concerned. There were among the monks of Bec, as among the -monks of other houses, men who knew the law and who were skilful in -legal pleadings. The Abbot had sometimes to charge them to make no -unfair use of their skill, and not to strive to win any advantage for -the house but such as was strictly just.[1043] Otherwise, as far as he -could, he entrusted mere worldly affairs――the serving of tables――to -others.[1044] Yet he could not avoid journeys beyond sea on behalf of -the house. He was thus more than once compelled to visit England. He -crossed the sea in the first year of his appointment as abbot. He came -to Canterbury; he was received with mickle worship by Lanfranc and the -monks of Christ Church.[1045] The first touch of English soil seems to -have changed the Burgundian saint, the Norman abbot, into an -Englishman and an English patriot. It was now that he made the -memorable discourse in which he showed that English Ælfheah was a true -martyr.[1046] The Abbot of Bec did not scorn to be admitted into the -brotherhood of the monks of Christ Church, and to dwell with them as -one of themselves.[1047] It was the time when Lanfranc was doing his -work of reform among them,[1048] a work which was doubtless helped by -the sojourn and counsel of Anselm. With the more learned among them he -lived familiarly, putting and answering questions, both in profane and -sacred lore.[1049] And among them he made one friend, English by blood -and name, whose memory is for ever entwined with his own. It was now -that Eadmer, then a young monk of the house, won his deep regard, and -attached himself for ever to the master whose acts he was in after -times to record.[1050] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s general popularity in England.] - -[Sidenote: His preaching.] - -[Sidenote: His love for England.] - -[Sidenote: His alleged miracles.] - -[Sidenote: His friendship with the Conqueror;] - -[Sidenote: with Earl Hugh.] - -[Sidenote: Hugh’s changes at Chester.] - -But it was not only in the church which was one day to be his own, or -among men of his own order only, that Anselm made friends in England. -He made a kind of progress through the land, being welcomed -everywhere, as well in the courts of nobles as in the houses of monks, -nuns, and canons.[1051] Everywhere he scattered the good seed of his -teaching, speaking to all according to their several callings, to men -and women, married and unmarried, monks, clerks, laymen, making -himself, as far as was lawful, all things to all men.[1052] Scholar -and theologian as Anselm was, his teaching was specially popular; he -did not affect the grand style, but dealt largely in parables and -instances which were easy to be understood.[1053] The laity therefore -flocked eagerly to hear him, and every man rejoiced who could win the -privilege of personal speech with the new apostle.[1054] The men of -that age, stained as many of them were with great crimes――perhaps all -the more because their crimes were of a kind which they could not help -feeling to be crimes――commonly kept enough of conscience and good -feeling to admire in others the virtues which they failed to practise -themselves. William Rufus himself had moments when goodness awed him. -It was only a few exceptional monsters like the fiend of Bellême whom -no such feelings ever touched. Anselm became the idol of all the -inhabitants of England, without distinction of age or sex, of rank or -race. The land became to him yet another home, a home which he loved -to visit, and where he was ever welcome.[1055] Men sought to him for -the cure of bodily as well as spiritual diseases; and we read of not a -few cases of healing in which he was deemed to be the agent, cases in -which modern times will most likely see the strong exercise of that -power which, from one point of view, is called imagination, and from -another faith.[1056] The highest in estate and power were the most -eager of all to humble themselves before him. We have seen how the -elder William, ever mild to good men, was specially mild to Anselm, -how he craved his presence on his death-bed, and how Anselm, unable to -help his master in life, was among those who did the last honours to -him in death.[1057] We are told that there was not an earl or countess -or great person of any kind in England, who did not seek the -friendship of Anselm, who did not deem that his or her spiritual state -was the worse if any opportunity had been lost of doing honour or -service to the Abbot of Bec.[1058] Like some other saints of his own -and of other times, he drew to himself the special regard of some -whose characters were most unlike his own. Earl Hugh of Chester, -debauched, greedy, reckless, and cruel, beyond the average of the -time, is recorded as being a special friend of the holy man.[1059] He -who rebuked kings doubtless rebuked earls also; but it would have been -a better sign of reformation, if Hugh, under the teaching of Anselm, -had learned to spare the eyes either of brother nobles or of British -captives, than if he was merely led to place monks instead of canons -at Saint Werburh’s, and in the end to take the cowl among them -himself. - -[Sidenote: Feeling as to the vacancy of the archbishopric. 1092.] - -[Sidenote: Vacancy of Lincoln.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm looked to as the coming archbishop.] - -But the planting of monks at Saint Werburh’s had no small effect on -the destiny of Anselm and of England. In the course of the year which -saw the annexation of Cumberland men began to be thoroughly wearied of -the long vacancy of the archbishopric. It may be that the great -gathering at Lincoln had brought home to every mind the great wrong -under which the Church was suffering. The bishops of the land had come -together to a great ecclesiastical rite; but they had come together as -a body without a head. And they had parted under circumstances which -made the state of things even worse than it had been when they met. -The death of Remigius had handed over another bishopric to the -wardship of Flambard. The land from the Thames to the Humber, the -great diocese which took in nine shires, was to be left without a -shepherd as long as Rufus and Flambard should think good. That is, it -was to be left till some one among the King’s servants should be ready -to do by Lincoln as Herbert Losinga had done by Thetford. Men began to -say among themselves that such unlaw as this could not go on for ever; -the land could not abide without a chief pastor; an archbishop must -soon come somehow, whether the King and Flambard willed it or not. The -feeling was universal; and with it another feeling was almost equally -universal; when the archbishop should come, he could come only in the -shape of the man who was of all men most worthy of the office, the man -whom all England knew and loved as if his whole life had been spent -within her seas, the holy Abbot of Bec.[1060] That such was the -general feeling in England soon became known out of England; it became -known at Bec as at other places; it was not hidden from the Abbot of -Bec himself. - -[Sidenote: Earl Hugh seeks help from Anselm in his reforms. 1092.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm refuses to go.] - -[Sidenote: His motives.] - -[Sidenote: Hugh’s sickness and second message.] - -[Sidenote: The third message.] - -At the time which we have now reached Earl Hugh was planning his -supposed reforms at Saint Werburh’s. Designing to fill the minster -with monks, he would have his monks from the place where the monastic -life was most perfectly practised; the men who were to kindle a new -light at Chester must come from Bec.[1061] It was in the end from Bec -that the first abbot Richard and his brethren came to wage that strife -which we are told was so specially hard-fought in that region.[1062] -But the founder further wished the work to be done under the eye of -the Abbot of Bec himself; so, trusting in his old friendship, Earl -Hugh prayed Anselm to come to him. His prayer was backed by that of -other nobles of England;[1063] the monks of Bec too deemed that either -the affairs of Saint Werburh’s or some other business of the monastery -called for their abbot’s presence in England.[1064] But Anselm at -first steadily refused to go; the general rumour had reached his own -ears; he had been told that, if he went to England, he would certainly -become Archbishop of Canterbury. He shrank from the acceptance of such -an office; he shrank yet more from doing anything which might even -have the look of seeking for such an office. It might be a question of -casuistry whether the command of Maurilius to accept any preferment -that might be offered could have any force beyond the life and the -province of Maurilius; yet that command may have made Anselm yet more -determined to keep out of the way of all danger of having the see of -Canterbury offered to him. He refused to go to England, when it was -possible that his object in going might be cruelly misconstrued.[1065] -Another message came, announcing that Earl Hugh was smitten with -grievous sickness, and needed the spiritual help of his friend. -Moreover Anselm need not be afraid; there was nothing in the rumours -which he had heard; he stood in no danger of the archbishopric.[1066] -In this Hugh most likely spoke the truth. Others had brought -themselves to believe that there must soon be an archbishop, and that -that archbishop must be Anselm. But they had no ground for thinking -that anything of the kind would happen, except that it was the best -thing that could happen. The Earl of Chester was as likely as any man -except Flambard to know the King’s real mind; and what followed makes -it plain that as yet Rufus had no thought of filling the archbishopric -at all. Still Anselm would not go till a third message from the Earl -appealed to another motive. It would not be for the soul’s health of -Anselm himself if he stayed away when his friend so deeply needed his -help.[1067] To this argument Anselm yielded; for the sake of -friendship and of his friend’s spiritual welfare, he would go, let men -say what they would about his motives for going.[1068] - -[Sidenote: He is bidden to go by his monks.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm goes to England.] - -But the invitation of Earl Hugh was not Anselm’s only motive for his -journey. Another cause was added which a little startles us. The -business of the abbey in England, business to be done with the King, -still called for the abbot’s presence there. The monks sought to have -the royal exactions on their English lands made less heavy.[1069] At -this moment Anselm was not at Bec; he was spending some days at -Boulogne with his friend and correspondent Countess Ida.[1070] While -there, he received a message from Bec, bidding him, by virtue of the -law of obedience, not to come back to the abbey till he had gone into -England and looked after the matters about which he was needed -there.[1071] Such a message as this from monks to their abbot sounds -to us like a reversal of all monastic order; but it seems to have been -held that, while each monk undoubtedly owed obedience to the abbot, -the abbot himself owed obedience to the general vote of the convent. -To these two influences, the law of obedience and care for Earl Hugh’s -soul, Anselm at last yielded. He set sail from Boulogne or Whitsand, -and landed at Dover. He was now within what was presently to be his -own province, his own diocese; and that province he was not again to -leave till he sought shelter on the mainland in the character of -archbishop and confessor. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Anselm at Canterbury. September 8, 1092.] - -[Sidenote: His first interview with Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s rebuke of the King.] - -[Sidenote: Settlement of the affairs of Bec.] - -The immediate business of Anselm led him to Chester, and to the place, -wherever it was, where the King was to be found. We are told that he -made the best of his way to his sick friend,[1072] who was so eager -for Anselm’s coming that he despised all other spiritual help.[1073] -But it is plain that he tarried on the road to see the King. From -Dover his first stage was Canterbury. There he was alarmed by the -welcome given him by a crowd of monks and laymen who hailed him as -their future archbishop. It was a high festival, the Nativity of our -Lady; but Anselm, wishing to give no encouragement to such greetings -as he had just received, declined to officiate at the celebration of -the feast. He tarried but one night in the city, and left it early the -next morning.[1074] He then went to the King. The reception which he -met with showed that Rufus must have been for the moment in one of his -better moods. Anselm indeed was a chosen friend of his father, and he -had given him no personal offence. As soon as the approach of the -Abbot of Bec was announced, the King arose, met him at the door, -exchanged the kiss of peace, and led him by the hand to his -seat.[1075] A friendly discourse followed. Perhaps the very -friendliness of William’s greeting brought it more fully home to -Anselm’s mind that it would be a failure of duty on his own part if he -spoke only of the worldly affairs of his abbey. He must seize the -moment to give a word of warning to a sinner whose evil deeds were so -black, and who disgraced at the same time so lofty an office and such -high natural gifts. Anselm asked that all others might withdraw; he -wished for a private interview with the King. The affairs of the house -of Bec were, for the moment at least, passed by; the welfare of the -kingdom of England, and the soul’s health of its king, were objects -which came first. Anselm told Rufus in plain words that the men of his -kingdom, both secretly and openly, daily said things of him which in -no way became his kingly office.[1076] From later appeals of Anselm to -the conscience of Rufus, we may conceive that this general description -took in at once the special wrongs done to the Church, the general -abuses of William’s government, and the personal excesses of William’s -own life. Anselm was not the man to hold his peace on any one of those -three subjects; but we have no details of Anselm’s discourse from his -own biographer, nor does he give us any notice of the way in which -William received his rebuke.[1077] Yet it would seem that the milder -mood of the Red King had not wholly passed away. If Anselm had been -thrust aside with any violent or sarcastic answer, it would surely -have passed into one of the stock anecdotes of the reign. Our only -other description of the scene paints Rufus as held back from any -disrespectful treatment of Anselm by a lingering reverence for the -friend of his parents. He turned the matter off with a laugh. He could -not hinder what men chose to say of him; but so holy a man as Anselm -ought not to believe such stories.[1078] It is not even clear whether -Anselm brought himself to speak at all on the particular business -which had brought him to the King’s presence. King and Abbot parted; -it would seem that nothing was done about the affairs of Bec for the -present; but we may gather that, at some later time, the lands of the -monastery were relieved from the burthens of which they complained.[1079] - -[Sidenote: Anselm at Chester.] - -[Sidenote: The King refuses him leave to go back. February, 1093.] - -Anselm now went on to Chester, where he found his friend Earl Hugh -restored to health. But the change in the foundation at Saint -Werburh’s still needed his presence, and the special affairs of his -own house had also to be looked to. Between these two sets of affairs, -Anselm was kept in England for five months. He then wished to go back -to Normandy; but the King’s leave, it seems, was needed, and the -King’s leave was refused.[1080] - -[Sidenote: William’s feeling towards Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: Christmas Assembly, 1092-1093.] - -[Sidenote: The vacancy discussed by the Witan.] - -[Sidenote: Petition of the Assembly to the King.] - -[Sidenote: Prayers for the appointment of an archbishop.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm draws up a form of prayer.] - -This refusal is worth notice. It does not seem to have been done in -enmity; at least it was not followed by any kind of further -wrong-doing on the King’s part towards Anselm. It really looks as if -William had, not indeed any fixed purpose of appointing Anselm to the -archbishopric, but a kind of feeling that he might be driven to -appoint him, a feeling that things might come to a stage in which he -could not help naming some archbishop, and that, if it came to that -stage, he could not help naming Anselm. It is plain from what follows -that the thought of Anselm as a possible archbishop was in the King’s -mind as well as in the minds of others. But certainly no offer or hint -was at this stage made by William, nor was anything said to Anselm -about the matter by any one else.[1081] Men no doubt knew Anselm’s -feelings, and avoided the subject. But at one point during these five -months the vacancy of the archbishopric was brought very strongly -before Anselm’s mind, though not in a way which suggested his own -appointment rather than that of anybody else. When the Midwinter Gemót -of this year was held, the long vacancy, and the evils which flowed -from it, became a matter of discussion among the assembled Witan. But -they did not venture to attempt any election, or even to make any -suggestion of their own; they did not even make any direct petition to -the King to put an end to the vacancy. A resolution was passed――our -contemporary guide doubted whether future ages would believe the -fact――that the King should be humbly petitioned to allow prayers to be -put up throughout the churches of England craving that God would by -his inspiration move the King’s heart to put an end to the wrongs of -his head church and of all his other churches by the appointment of a -worthy chief pastor.[1082] We thus see that the power of ending or -prolonging the vacancy is acknowledged to rest only with the King; it -is not for the Witan to constrain, but only for God to guide, the -royal will. But we further see that the right of ordaining religious -ceremonies is held to rest with the King and his Witan, just as it had -rested in the days of Cnut.[1083] The unanimous petition of the -Assembly was laid before the King. He was somewhat angry, but he took -no violent step. He agreed to the matter of the address, but in a -scornful shape. “Pray as you will; I shall do as I think good; no -man’s prayers will do anything to shake my will.”[1084] To draw up a -proper form of prayer was the natural business of the bishops; and -they had among them one specially skilled in such matters in the -person of Osmund of Salisbury. But they all agreed to consult the -Abbot of Bec, and to ask him to draw up a prayer fitted for the -purpose. Anselm, after much pressing, agreed; he drew up the prayer; -it was laid before the Assembly, and his work was approved by -all.[1085] The Gemót broke up, and prayers were offered throughout -England, according to Anselm’s model, for the appointment of an -archbishop, a prayer which on most lips doubtless meant the -appointment of Anselm himself.[1086] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: The year 1093.] - -[Sidenote: William’s sickness at Alvestone.] - -[Sidenote: Discourse about Anselm before the King.] - -[Sidenote: The King’s mockery.] - -[Sidenote: He falls sick and is moved to Gloucester.] - -[Sidenote: Ash Wednesday, March 2, 1093.] - -Before the Assembly broke up, a memorable year had begun. It is a year -crowded with events, with the deaths of memorable men, with one death -above all which led to most important results on the relations between -the two great parts of the isle of Britain. With these events I shall -deal in another chapter; we have now mainly to trace the -ecclesiastical character of the year as the greatest of all stages in -the career of Anselm. The Assembly had doubtless been held at -Gloucester, and, after the session was over, the King tarried in the -neighbourhood, at the royal house of Alvestone, once a lordship of -Earl Harold.[1087] There he was smitten with a heavy sickness. The -tale has a legendary sound; yet there is nothing really incredible in -the story that he fell sick directly after he had been guilty of a -mocking speech about Anselm. Some nobles were with the King at -Alvestone, and one of them spoke of the virtues of the Abbot of Bec. -He was a man who loved God only, and sought for none of the things of -this world. The King says in mockery, “Not for the archbishopric of -Canterbury?” The remark at least shows that Anselm and the -archbishopric went together in the King’s thoughts as well as in the -thoughts of other men.[1088] The lord who had spoken answered that, in -his belief and in that of many others, the archbishopric was the very -thing which Anselm least wished for.[1089] The King laughed again, and -said that, if Anselm had any hope of the archbishopric, he would clap -his hands and stamp with his feet, and run into the King’s arms. But -he added, “By the face of Lucca, he and every other man who seeks the -archbishopric may this time give way to me; for I will be archbishop -myself.”[1090] He repeated the jest several times. Presently sickness -came upon him, and, in a few hours, he took to his bed. He was carried -in haste from Alvestone to the neighbouring city, where he could -doubtless find better quarters and attendance.[1091] He lay sick -during the whole of Lent; but, unless his sickness began somewhat -earlier, the whole of the events with which we have to deal must have -been crowded into the first few days of the penitential season. At all -events, during the first week of Lent, William Rufus was lying at -Gloucester, sick of a sickness which both himself and others deemed to -be unto death.[1092] - -[Sidenote: Repentance of Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: Advice of the prelates and nobles.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm sent for.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm and Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: Rufus promises amendment.] - -[Sidenote: His proclamation.] - -[Sidenote: General satisfaction.] - -The heart of the Red King was not yet wholly hardened; with sickness -came repentance. Believing himself to be at the gates of the next -world, his conscience awoke, and he saw in their true light the deeds -which he had been so long doing in this world. He no longer jested at -his own crimes and vices; he bemoaned them and began to think of -amendment. The great men of the realm, bishops, abbots, and lay -nobles, pressed around his sick bed, looking for his speedy death, and -urging him to make what atonement he could for his misdeeds, while he -yet lived. Let him throw open his prisons; let him set free his -captives; let him loose those who were in chains; let him forgive his -debtors――it is again assumed that a debt to the Crown must be a -wrongful debt――let him provide pastors for the churches which he holds -in his hands; above all, let him set free the head church of all, the -church of Canterbury, whose bondage was the most crying wrong of his -kingdom.[1093] All this they pressed, each to the best of his power, -on the no longer unwilling mind of the King. It bethought them -moreover that there was one not far off, who was more skilled than any -of them in healing the diseases of the soul, and whose words would -strike deeper into the heart of the penitent than the words of any -other. The Abbot of Bec was still in England; he was even, knowing -nothing of what was going on, tarrying at no great distance from -Gloucester.[1094] A messenger was sent, bidding him come with all -speed; the King was dying, and needed his spiritual help before all -was over. Anselm came at once; he asked what had passed between the -sick man and his directors, and he fully approved of all the counsel -that they had given to the repentant sinner.[1095] The duties of -confession, of amendment, of reparation, the full and speedy carrying -out of all that his advisers had pressed upon him, was the only means, -the only hope. By the general voice of all, Anselm was bidden to -undertake the duty of making yet another exhortation to the royal -penitent. Anselm spoke, and William hearkened. He more than hearkened; -he answered, and for the moment he acted. He accepted all that Anselm -told him; he promised to amend his ways, to rule his kingdom in -mildness and righteousness. To this he pledged his faith; he made the -bishops his sureties, and bade them renew the promise in his name to -God before the altar.[1096] More practical still, a proclamation was -put forth under the royal seal, promising to the people, in the old -form, good laws, strict heed to right, strict examination into wrong. -The vacant churches should be filled, and their revenues should be -restored to them. The King would no longer sell them or set them to -farm. All prisoners should be set free; all debts to the crown should -be forgiven; all offences against the King should be pardoned, and all -suits begun in the King’s name stopped.[1097] Great was the joy -through the land; a burst of loyal thankfulness was in every heart and -on every mouth. The rule of King William was henceforth to be as the -rule of the best of the kings who had gone before him. Thanksgivings -went up to God through the whole land, and earnest prayers for the -welfare of so great and so good a king.[1098] - -[Sidenote: Beginnings of reform.] - -[Sidenote: He grants the bishopric of Lincoln to Robert Bloet.] - -This was the second time that the people of England had greedily -swallowed the promises of the Red King. He had already deceived them -once; but kings are easily trusted, and the awful circumstances under -which reform was now promised might well lead men to believe that the -promise was sincere. Sincere for the moment it doubtless was; nor did -the proclamation remain altogether a dead letter. The reforms were -actually begun; some at least of the prisoners were set free. William -also now made grants to some monasteries,[1099] and, what was more -important than all, he filled the vacant bishoprics. The fame of one -of the two appointments so fills the pages of our guides that we might -easily forget that it was now that the staff of Remigius was given to -Robert Bloet.[1100] We have heard of him already as an old servant of -William the Great, and as trusted by him with the weighty letter which -ruled the succession of the crown on behalf of William the Red.[1101] -He was now the King’s Chancellor. He bears a doubtful character; he -was not a scholar, but he was a man skilful in all worldly business; -he was not a saint, but he was perhaps not the extreme sinner which -some have painted him.[1102] His consecration was put off for nearly a -year; and we shall meet him again in the midst of a striking and busy -scene when the next year has begun. For the present we need only -remember that two bishops, and not one only, were invested, according -to the ancient use of England, by the royal hand at the bedside of -William Rufus. - -[Sidenote: March 6, 1093.] - -[Sidenote: Rufus names Anselm to the archbishopric.] - -[Sidenote: General delight.] - -[Sidenote: Unwillingness of Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: Arguments of the bishops.] - -We may take for granted that it took no such struggle to change the -King’s Chancellor into the Bishop-elect of Lincoln as it took -to change the man on whom all eyes were now fixed into an -Archbishop-elect of Canterbury. It was now a Sunday, the first Sunday -in Lent; a gathering of bishops and other chief men stood around the -King who was believed to be dying. He had solemnly repented; he must -now make restitution. The best men among those who stood around him -pressed yet more strongly on his mind the duty of at once filling the -metropolitan see. The sick man answered that such was his purpose. -They asked whom he deemed worthy of such a post; none dared suggest -any name; the choice rested wholly with the royal will.[1103] The King -made an effort; he sat up in his bed; he pointed out the Abbot of Bec -among those who filled the room, and spake the words; “I choose this -holy man Anselm.”[1104] The feeling which now bids men to listen in -silence to the official utterances of royal lips was then unheard of; -even the fear of danger to the sick man yielded to the universal joy; -a loud shout of applause rang through the chamber which was soon, as -men deemed, to be the chamber of death. One man alone joined not in -the shout; one man grew pale and trembled in every limb. The moment so -long dreaded had at last come; the burthen from which he shrank was at -last to be forced on the shoulders of the struggling abbot. For in the -case of Anselm the struggle was no metaphor. He was dragged to the -King’s bedside to receive the investiture[1105]――no thought of the -elective rights of the monks of distant Christ Church seems to have -come into the head of any man. Pouring out reasons against his own -appointment, Anselm withstood by main force all efforts to drag him -nearer to the King. The bishops at last succeeded in drawing him apart -from the crowd, and began to argue with him more quietly.[1106] They -warned him not to withstand the will of God, or to refuse the work to -which he was called. He saw that Christianity had almost died out in -England; everything had fallen into confusion; every abomination was -rife. One bolder voice――was it the voice of English Wulfstan or of -Norman Gundulf?――added words such as are not often uttered in the -chamber of a king, and which even then perhaps were not meant to reach -kingly ears. “By the tyranny of that man”[1107]――pointing to the sick -king on his bed――“we and the churches which we ought to rule have -fallen into danger of eternal death; wilt thou, when thou canst help -us, scorn our petition?” The appeal went on; Anselm was told how the -church of Canterbury, in whose oppression all were oppressed, called -to him to raise up her and them; could he, casting aside all thought -for her freedom, all thought for the help of his brethren, refuse to -share their work, and seek only his own ease? Anselm pleaded at -length; he was old; he was unused to worldly affairs. He prayed to be -allowed to abide in the peaceful calling which he loved. The bishops -all the more called on him to take the rule over them which was -offered to him; let him guide them in the way of God; let him pray to -God for them, and they would manage all worldly affairs for him.[1108] -He then pleaded that he was the subject of another realm;[1109] he -owed obedience to his own prince, to his own archbishop; he could not -cast off his duty to them without their leave; nay, he could not, -without the consent of his own monks, cast off the duties which he -owed to them. The bishops told him that the consent of all concerned -would be easily gained. He protested that all that they did, all that -they purposed, was nought.[1110] - -[Sidenote: Anselm dragged to the King’s bedside.] - -[Sidenote: Pleadings of the King.] - -[Sidenote: Further pleadings of the bishops] - -[Sidenote: and of his own monks.] - -[Sidenote: He is invested by main force.] - -[Sidenote: He is installed in the church.] - -The bishops had certainly the better in the argument; they had also -the better in the physical struggle; for they now dragged Anselm close -to the King’s bedside. They set forth to Rufus what they called the -obstinacy of the Abbot;[1111] it was for the King to try what his -personal authority could do. The sick man, lately so proud and -scornful, was stirred even to tears; he made a speech far longer than -his wont, but which seems to carry with it the stamp of genuineness. -He had raised himself to speak his formal choice with a voice of -authority; he now spoke, in plaintive and beseeching words, in the ear -of the holy man beside him. In the mind of Rufus at that moment it was -his own personal salvation that was at stake. “O Anselm,” he -whispered, “why do you condemn me to eternal torments? Remember, I -pray you, the faithful friendship which my father and my mother had to -you and which you had to them; by that friendship I adjure you not to -let their son perish both in body and soul. For I am sure that I shall -perish if I die while I still have the archbishopric in my -hands.[1112] Help me then, help me, lord and father; take the -bishopric for the holding of which I am already greatly confounded, -and fear that I shall be confounded for ever.” Still Anselm drew back -and excused himself. Then the bishops again took up their parable in a -stronger tone. What madness had possessed him? He was harassing the -King, almost killing him; his last moments were embittered by Anselm’s -obstinacy.[1113] They gave him to know that whatever disturbances, -oppressions, and crimes, might hereafter disturb England would all lie -at his door, if he did not stop them that day by taking on him the -pastoral care. Still――so he himself witnessed afterwards――wishing -rather, if it were God’s will, to die than to take on him the -archbishopric, he turned to two of his own monks who had come with -him, Eustace and Baldwin of Tournay, and asked them to help him.[1114] -Baldwin answered, “If it be the will of God that it shall be so, who -are we that we should withstand the will of God?” His words were -followed by a flood of tears, his tears by a gush of blood from his -nostrils. Anselm, surely half-smiling, said, “Alas, how soon is your -staff broken.” The King then, seeing that nothing was gained, bade the -bishops fall at Anselm’s feet and implore him to take the see. A like -scene had been gone through at Bec when it was first sought to raise -Anselm to the abbacy.[1115] The bishops fell at his feet, and -implored; Anselm fell at their feet, and implored back again. There -was nothing to be done save the last shift of, so to speak, investing -him with the bishopric by physical force. A cry was raised for a -pastoral staff; the staff was brought, and was placed in the sick -king’s hand.[1116] The bishops seized the right arm of Anselm; some -pushed; some pulled; he was forced close up to the Kings bed. The King -held out the staff; the Abbot, though his arm was stretched out -against his will, held his hand firmly clenched. The bishops strove to -force open his fingers, till he shrieked with the pain. After much -striving, they managed to raise his forefinger, to place the staff -between that one finger and his still closed hand, and to keep it -there with their own hands.[1117] This piece of sheer violence was -held to be a lawful investiture. The assembled crowd――we are still in -the sick king’s room――began to shout “Long live the Bishop.” The -bishops and clergy began to sing _Te Deum_ with a loud voice.[1118] -Then the bishops, abbots, and nobles, seized Anselm, and carried -rather than led him into a neighbouring church――was it the great -minster of Ealdred or its successor growing up under the hands of -Serlo?[1119]――while he still refused and struggled and protested that -all that they did went for nothing.[1120] A looker-on, Anselm himself -says, might have doubted whether a crowd in their right mind were -dragging a single madman, or whether a crowd of madmen were dragging a -single man who kept his right mind.[1121] Anyhow they reached the -church and there went through the ceremonies which were usual on such -occasions.[1122] Anselm was now deemed to have become, however much -against his own will, Archbishop-elect of Canterbury. - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s renewed protest.] - -[Sidenote: His parable to the prelates and nobles.] - -[Sidenote: Its special fitness in England.] - -[Sidenote: The King orders the restitution of the lands of the see.] - -From the church Anselm went back to the King’s chamber. He there -renewed his protest against the appointment, but he renewed it in the -form of a prophecy. “My lord the King, I tell you that you will not -die of this sickness; I would therefore have you know how easily you -can undo what has been this day done with regard to me, as I never -agreed, nor do I agree, that it shall be held valid.”[1123] He then -left the sick room, and spoke to the bishops and nobles in some other -place, perhaps the hall of the castle. Whether formally summoned as -such or not, they were practically a Gemót of the realm.[1124] Anselm -spoke to them in a parable, founded on the apostolic figure which -speaks of the Church as God’s husbandry.[1125] In England the plough -of the Church ought to be drawn by two chief oxen of equal strength, -each pulling with the same good will. These were the King and the -Archbishop of Canterbury, one ruling by worldly justice and dominion, -the other by divine doctrine and teaching. So, he implies, it had -been in the days of William the Great and of Lanfranc his -yoke-fellow.[1126] The figure is one which will bear much study. It is -perhaps in England alone that it could have been used. In the highest -rank of all, used to the loftier metaphors of the two great lights of -heaven and the two swords on earth, figures drawn from ploughs and -oxen might have seemed unworthy of the supreme majesty of the Roman -Emperor and the Roman Pontiff. In other lands the metaphor would have -failed from another side. The Primate of Rheims or of Rouen could -hardly be spoken of as in the same sort the yoke-fellow of the French -King or the Norman Duke. In England the parable had more truth. It set -forth at once the supreme ecclesiastical authority of the King, and -the check which ancient custom put on that authority in the shape of -an archiepiscopal tribune of the people. But the happy partnership of -the two powers had come to an end. The strong ox Lanfranc was dead. -His surviving yoke-fellow was a young and untameable wild bull.[1127] -With him they wished to yoke an old and feeble sheep, who might -perhaps furnish them with the wool and milk of the Lord’s word, and -with lambs for His service,[1128] but who was utterly unequal to the -task of pulling in fellowship with such a comrade. His weakness and -the King’s fierceness could never work together. If they would only -think over the matter, they would give up the attempt which they had -begun. The joy with which they had hailed his nomination would be -turned into sorrow. They talked of his raising up the Church from -widowhood; if they insisted on forcing him into the see, the Church -would be thrust down into a yet deeper widowhood, widowhood during the -life of her pastor. He himself would be the first victim; none of them -would dare to give him help, and then the King would trample them too -under his feet at pleasure. He then burst into tears; he parted from -the assembly, and went to his own quarters, whether in the city of -Gloucester or at the unnamed place where he had before been -staying.[1129] The King, foreseeing no further difficulties, gave -orders that steps should be taken for investing him without delay with -the temporal possessions of the see.[1130] But a whole train of -unlooked-for hindrances appeared before Anselm could be put into -possession of either the temporal or the spiritual powers of Lanfranc. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: The royal right of investiture not questioned.] - -[Sidenote: No scruples on the part of Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: No ecclesiastical election.] - -[Sidenote: Later change in Anselm’s views.] - -[Sidenote: Gundulf’s letter to the monks of Bec.] - -[Sidenote: Sole action of the King.] - -At this first stage of the story, as at every other, as long as the -scene is laid in England, we are struck in the strongest way by the -fact that every one concerned takes the ancient customs of England for -granted. If those customs have changed from what they may have been -under Cnut or Eadward, they have at least not changed to the advantage -of the Roman see, or indeed of the ecclesiastical power in any shape. -Hildebrand has no followers either in England or in Normandy. No one -has called in question the right either of the King of the English or -of the Duke of the Normans to invest the prelates of his dominions -with the pastoral staff. There is not one word in the whole story -implying that any one had any scruple on the subject. Anselm clearly -had none. He had received the staff of Bec from the Duke; if he was -not ready to receive the staff of Canterbury from the King, it was not -because of any scruple as to the mode of appointment, but because he -refused to accept the appointment itself, however made. Not a single -English bishop has a word to say on the matter. We could not look for -such scruples in Wulfstan who had received his staff from the holy -Eadward; but neither do they trouble William of Saint-Calais, so -lately the zealous champion of the rights of Rome. If anything, the -bishops seem to attribute a kind of mystic and almost sacramental -efficacy to the investiture by the King’s hand. Nor is there a word -said as to the rights of any ecclesiastical electors, the monks of -Christ Church or any other. It is taken for granted that the whole -matter rests with the King. Anselm protests against the validity of -the act, but not on any ground which assumed any other elector than -the King. The nomination was invalid, because he did not consent to it -himself, because the Duke of the Normans, the Archbishop of Rouen, and -the monks of Bec, had not consented to it. Anselm is very careful as -to the rights of all these three; he has not a word to say about the -rights of the monks of Christ Church. Had he been a subject of the -crown of England, a bishop or presbyter of the province of Canterbury, -and himself willing to accept the archbishopric, there would clearly -have been in his eyes nothing irregular in his accepting it in the -form in which it was forced upon him, by the sole choice and sole -investiture of the King. He afterwards learned to think otherwise; but -it was neither at Canterbury nor at Bec nor at Aosta that he learned -such scruples. He had to go beyond English, Norman, and Burgundian -ground to look for them. At present he does at every stage, as an -ordinary matter of course, something which his later lights would have -led him to condemn. But it certainly does seem strange when Bishop -Gundulf of Rochester, in a letter to his old companions the monks of -Bec, tells them that the King had given the government of the church -of Canterbury to their abbot Anselm, by the advice and request of his -great men and by the petition and election of the clergy and -people.[1131] We have often come across such phrases;[1132] and this -case, where we know every detail, may help us to estimate their -meaning in some other cases. That Anselm’s appointment had been the -general wish of all classes before it was made, that it received the -general approval of all classes after it was made, there is no manner -of doubt. But there is no sign of any formal advice, petition, or -election, by any class of men at any stage. It may be that the -ceremony in the church at Gloucester was held to pass for an election -by the clergy and people. But that was after the King had, by the -delivery of the staff, given to Anselm the government of the church of -Canterbury. Even in Gundulf’s formula, the advice, petition, and -election are mere helps to guide the King’s choice; it is the King who -actually bestows the see. And here again, of the rights of the monks -of the metropolitan church there is not a word. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Anselm tarries with Gundulf.] - -[Sidenote: Consent of the Duke, the Archbishop of Rouen, and the monks -of Bec.] - -Several months passed after this amazing scene at Gloucester before -Anselm was fully admitted to the full possession of the archbishopric. -He had not yet given any consent himself, and the consents of the -Norman Duke, the Norman Archbishop, and the Norman monks, on all of -which Anselm laid such stress, were still to be sought for. The King -sent messengers to all of them, and meanwhile Anselm was, by the -King’s order, lodged on some of the archiepiscopal manors under the -care of his old friend Bishop Gundulf.[1133] One may suspect that it -was the influence of this prelate, a good man plainly, but not very -stout-hearted, and more ready than Anselm to adapt himself to the -ruling powers, which brought Anselm to the belief that he ought to -give way to what he himself calls the choice of all England, and which -he now allows to be the will of God. At any rate Anselm brought -himself to write letters to the monks of Bec, asking their consent to -his resignation of the abbey and acceptance of the archbishopric.[1134] -For it was with the monks of Bec that the difficulty lay; Duke Robert -and Archbishop William seem to have made no objection.[1135] It was, -after much hesitation, and by a narrow majority only that the convent -agreed to part with the abbot who had brought such honour upon their -house.[1136] In the end all the needful consents were given. Anselm -was free from all obligations beyond the sea. But he still had not -given his own formal consent to the acceptance of the archbishopric. A -long series of acts, temporal and spiritual, were needed to change the -simple monk and presbyter, as he was now once more, into an Archbishop -of Canterbury, clothed with the full powers and possessions of the -Patriarch of all the nations beyond the sea. Those acts needed the -consent, some of them needed the personal action, of the King. And -King William the Red was now again quite another man from what he had -been when he lay on his sick bed at Gloucester. - -[Sidenote: The King’s recovery.] - -[Sidenote: The Easter Gemót. 1093.] - -[Sidenote: William falls back into evil ways.] - -[Sidenote: His renewed blasphemy.] - -[Sidenote: He recalls his acts of mercy.] - -[Sidenote: He keeps his purpose as to Anselm.] - -The King’s sickness is said to have lasted during the whole of Lent; -but he seems to have been restored to health early enough to hold the -Easter Gemót at Winchester.[1137] Anselm was there, in company with -his guardian Bishop Gundulf and his friend Baldwin the monk of Bec; -but there is no mention of any business being done between him and the -King. Doubtless the needful letters had not yet come from Normandy, -even if Anselm had so soon brought himself to write those which were -needful on his own part. By this time William was again in full -health, and, with his former state of body, his former state of mind -had also come back. He had repented of his repentance; he had fallen -back into all his old evil courses with more eagerness than ever. All -the wrong that he had done before he fell sick was deemed to be a -small matter compared with the wrong which he did after he was -restored to health.[1138] It is to this stage of his life that one of -the most hideous of his blasphemous sayings is assigned. Instead of -thankfulness for his renewed health, he looked on his sickness as a -wrong done to him by his Maker, for which he would in some way have -his revenge. It was now that he told Bishop Gundulf, whom we can fancy -faintly exhorting him to keep in the good frame of mind which he had -put on while he lay on his sick bed――“God shall never see me a good -man; I have suffered too much at his hands.”[1139] And his practice -was such as became the fool who said that there was no God, or rather -the deeper fool who said that there was a God, and yet defied him. He -even went on to undo, as far as lay in his power, the good works which -he had done during his momentary repentance. Some of the prisoners to -whom he had promised deliverance were already set free, and some of -those who were set free had taken themselves beyond his reach. But -those who were still in safe-keeping were kept in yet harsher bondage -than before; and of those who had been set free as many as could be -laid hold of were sent back to their prisons. The pardons, the -remissions of debts, which had been put forth were recalled. Every man -who had been held liable before the King’s sickness was held liable -again. His gifts to monasteries were also recalled.[1140] But one -thing which William had promised to do he remained as fully minded to -do as before. At no stage did he show the slightest purpose of -recalling his grant of the archbishopric to Anselm. This distinction -is quite in harmony with the general character of William Rufus. The -reforms which he had promised, and which he had partly carried out, -were part of the ordinary duty of a man in that state of life to which -William had been called, the state of a king. As such, they were -reckoned by him among those promises which it was beyond his power to -fulfil. But his engagement to Anselm was of another kind. To say -nothing of Anselm being the old friend of his father, his engagement -to him was strictly personal. If it was not exactly done in the -character of a good knight, it was done as the act of a man to a man. -It was like a safe-conduct; it touched, not so much William’s kingly -duty as his personal honour. William’s honour did not keep him back -from annoying and insulting Anselm, or from haggling with him about -money in a manner worthy of the chivalrous Richard himself. But it did -keep him back from any attempt to undo his own personal act and -promise. He had prayed Anselm to take the archbishopric; he had forced -the staff, as far as might be, into Anselm’s unwilling hand. From that -act he would not draw back, though he was quite ready to get any -advantage for himself that might be had in the way of carrying it out. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Events of March-December, 1093.] - -[Sidenote: Affairs of England and Wales.] - -[Sidenote: Dealings between William and Malcolm.] - -[Sidenote: Designs of Rufus on Normandy.] - -[Sidenote: Action of William of Eu.] - -[Sidenote: His divided allegiance.] - -[Sidenote: He suggests an attack on Normandy.] - -[Sidenote: William and Robert Count of Flanders.] - -[Sidenote: Death of Count Robert. October 4 or 13, 1093.] - -[Sidenote: Robert of Jerusalem.] - -[Sidenote: Relation between William and the Flemish Counts.] - -But we must not fancy that the affairs of Anselm and of the see to -which he had been so strangely called were the only matters which -occupied the mind of England during this memorable year. The months -which passed between the first nomination of Anselm and his -consecration to the archbishopric, that is, the months from March to -December, were a busy time in affairs of quite another kind than the -appointment of pastors of the Church. The events of those months -chiefly concerned the relations of England to the other parts of the -island, Welsh and Scottish, and I shall speak of them at length in -another chapter. Here it is enough to say that the very week of the -Easter Gemót was marked by striking events in Wales,[1141] and that -during the whole time from March to August, negotiations were going on -between William and Malcolm of Scotland. In August Malcolm came -personally to Gloucester, but William refused to see him. Malcolm then -went home in wrath, and took his revenge in a fifth and last invasion -of England, in the course of which he was killed near Alnwick in the -month of November. By that time Anselm was already enthroned, but not -yet consecrated. The main telling of the two stories must be kept -apart; but it is well always to keep the joint chronology of the two -in mind. In reading the Lives of Anselm, where secular affairs are -mentioned only casually, we might sometimes forget how stirring a time -the year of Anselm’s appointment was in other ways; while the general -writers of the time, as I have already noticed,[1142] tell us less -about Anselm than we should have looked for. The affairs of Scotland -and the affairs of Anselm were going on at the same time; and along -with them a third chain of affairs must have begun of which we shall -hear much in the next year. Rufus was by this time already planning a -second attack on his brother in Normandy. Except during the short -season of his penitence, he was doubtless ready for such an enterprise -at any moment. And this same year, seemingly in the course of its -summer, a special tempter came over from beyond sea. This was William -of Eu, of whom we have already heard as the King’s enemy and of whom -we shall hear again in the same character, but who just now appears as -the King’s counsellor. As the owner of vast English estates, he had -played a leading part in the first rebellion against William, with the -object of uniting England and Normandy under a single prince.[1143] -That object he still sought; but he now sought to gain it by other -means. He had learned which of the brothers was the more useful master -to serve. He was now, by the death of his father, Count of Eu, and Eu -was among the parts of Normandy which Robert had yielded to -William.[1144] For Eu then Count William was the man of King William; -but he was still the man of Duke Robert for some other parts of his -possessions. He thought it his interest to serve one lord only; he -accordingly threw off his allegiance to Robert, and came over to -England to stir up William to take possession of the whole -duchy.[1145] And it must surely have been in connexion with these -affairs that, at some time between March and September, William had an -interview with Count Robert of Flanders at Dover. By this description -we are doubtless to understand the elder Count Robert, the famous -Frisian, of whom we have already heard as an enemy to the elder -William,[1146] but who must now have been at least on terms of peace -with his son. He was drawing near the end of his life, a memorable -life, nearly the last act of which had been honourable indeed. He had, -several years before the preaching of the crusade, sent a body of the -choicest warriors of Flanders to defend Eastern Christendom against -the Turk.[1147] Robert died in October of this year, and was succeeded -by his son Robert of Jerusalem,[1148] a name which the father had an -equal right to bear. The younger Robert had been associated by his -father in the government of the county; but one may suppose that, when -our guide speaks of Robert Count of Flanders, it is the elder Robert -who is meant. He was the enemy of the elder William rather in his -Norman than in his English character, and his enmity may have passed -to his successor in the duchy and not to his successor in the kingdom. -One can hardly help thinking that this meeting of William of England -and Robert of Flanders had some reference to joint operations designed -against Robert of Normandy. But, if so, the alliance was put an end to -by the death of Robert the Frisian, and, when the time for his Norman -enterprise came, William had to carry it on without Flemish help. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Interview between Anselm and the King at Rochester.] - -By this time Anselm had received the letters from Normandy which were -to make him free to accept the archbishopric; but the letters to the -King from the same parties had not yet come. At this stage then Anselm -wished for an interview with the King, the first――unless they met at -Easter at Winchester――since they had parted in the sick room at -Gloucester. William was on his way back from his meeting with the -Count of Flanders at Dover; he came to Rochester, where Anselm was -then staying with Bishop Gundulf. There Anselm took the King aside, -and laid the case before him as it then stood. - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s position.] - -Anselm was at this moment, in his own view, a private man. He was no -longer Abbot of Bec. His monks had released him from that office, and -he had formally resigned it by sending back to them the pastoral -staff.[1149] He was not yet Archbishop of Canterbury; he was not yet, -in his own view, even Archbishop-elect; all that had been done at -Gloucester he counted for null and void. But he was now free to accept -the archbishopric, and, though he still did not wish for the post, he -had got over the scruples which had before led him to refuse it. In -such a case he deemed it his duty to be perfectly frank with the King, -and to tell him on what terms only he would accept the primacy, if the -King still persisted in offering it to him. - -[Sidenote: His conditions with the King.] - -[Sidenote: Restoration of the estates of the see.] - -[Sidenote: He demands to be the King’s spiritual guide.] - -The conditions which Anselm now laid before William Rufus were three. -The first of them had to do with the temporal estates of the -archbishopric. I have elsewhere spoken of the light in which we ought -to look at demands of this kind.[1150] We may be sure that Anselm -would gladly have purchased the peace of the land, the friendship of -the King, or anything that would profit the souls or bodies of other -men, at the cost of any temporal possessions which were strictly his -own to give up. But, if he became Archbishop of Canterbury, he would -become a steward of the church of Canterbury, a trustee for his -successors, the guardian of gifts which had been given to God, His -saints, and His Church. In any of these characters, it would be a sin -against his own soul and the souls of others, if he willingly allowed -anything which had ever been given to his church to be taken from her -or detained from her. If the King chose to keep the see vacant and to -turn its revenues to his own use, that would be his sin and not -Anselm’s; but Anselm would be a sharer in the sin, if he accepted the -see without requiring full restitution of everything to which the see -had a lawful claim. In the private conference at Rochester, he -therefore demanded, as a condition of his accepting the see, that he -should receive all that Lanfranc had held, without delay or dispute or -process in any court. As for lands to which his church had an ancient -claim, but which Lanfranc had been unable to win back, for those he -demanded that the King should do him justice in his court.[1151] The -second demand touched the ancient relations between the crown and the -archbishopric. The sheep, about to be yoked with the wild bull, sought -to make terms with his fierce comrade. Anselm demanded that, in all -matters which touched God and Christianity, the King should take him -as his counsellor before all other men; as he acknowledged in the King -his earthly lord, so let the King acknowledge in him his ghostly -father and the special guardian of his soul.[1152] - -[Sidenote: Acknowledgement of Popes.] - -[Sidenote: Schism in the papacy. Victor the Third. 1086-1087. Urban -the Second. 1088-1099. Urban and Clement.] - -[Sidenote: English feeling on the subject.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm requires to be allowed to acknowledge Urban.] - -To these two requests Anselm added a third, one which touched a point -on which the Red King seems to have been specially sensitive. It had -been the rule of his father’s reign that no Pope should be -acknowledged in England without his consent.[1153] William Rufus seems -to have construed this rule in the same way in which he construed some -others. From his right to nominate to bishoprics and abbeys he had -inferred a right not to nominate to them; so, from his right to judge -between contending popes, he inferred the right to do without -acknowledging any pope at all. And, if the King acted in this way for -his own ends, the country at large seems to have shown a remarkable -indifference to the whole controversy. To Englishmen and to men -settled in England it was clearly a much greater grievance to be kept -without an Archbishop of Canterbury than it was to be left uncertain -who was the lawful pope. At this moment the Western Church was divided -between the claims of Wibert or Clement, the Imperial anti-pope of the -days of Hildebrand, and those of Urban, formerly Odo of Ostia, who, -after the short reign of Victor, stepped into Hildebrand’s place. In -the eyes of strict churchmen Urban was the true Vicar of Christ, and -Wibert was a wicked intruder and schismatic. Yet it will be remembered -that Lanfranc himself had, when the dispute lay between Wibert and -Hildebrand, spoken with singular calmness and caution of a question -which to more zealous minds seemed a matter of spiritual life and -death.[1154] Our own Chronicler seems to have measured popes, as well -as kings and bishops, by the standard of possession; he found it hard -to conceive a pope that “nothing had of the settle at Rome.”[1155] -Even Anselm’s own biographer speaks very quietly on the point. Two -rival candidates claimed the popedom; but which was the one rightly -chosen no one in England, we are told, knew――or seemingly cared.[1156] -Another of our guides describes Urban and Clement as alike men of -personal merit, and looks on the controversy as one in which there was -much to be said on both sides. The chief argument for Urban was that -his supporters seemed to increase in number; otherwise no one really -knew on which side the divine right was. In England opinion was -divided; but fear of the King――so we are told――made it lean on the -whole to Clement.[1157] Earlier in the reign we have heard Bishop -William of Durham talk a great deal about going to the Pope; but he -had taken care not to say to which pope he meant to go, and in the end -he had not gone to either.[1158] With Anselm the matter was more -serious. Urban was his pope. All the churches of Gaul had acknowledged -him; Bec and the other churches of Normandy had acknowledged him along -with the rest.[1159] From the obedience which he had thus plighted he -could not fall back. He told the King that, though he, King William, -had not acknowledged Urban, yet he, Anselm, must continue to -acknowledge him and to yield him such obedience as was his due.[1160] -To be allowed freely to do so must be one of the conditions of his -accepting the archbishopric. - -[Sidenote: The King’s counsellors; Count Robert and Bishop William.] - -[Sidenote: The Bishop’s new policy.] - -[Sidenote: The King’s answer.] - -The King’s answer was unsatisfactory, but not openly hostile. He was -however beginning to be on his guard; he called to his side the two -subtlest advisers that the Church and realm of England could supply. -The one was Count Robert of Meulan, at home alike in England, -Normandy, and France. The other was William Bishop of Durham, once the -strong assertor of ecclesiastical claims, who had appealed to the Pope -against the judgement of the King and his Witan. He had indeed both -learned and forgotten something in his exile. He had come back to be -the special counsellor of Rufus, the special enemy of Anselm, the -special assertor of the doctrine that it was for the King alone to -judge as to the acknowledgement of Popes. The King, having listened to -Anselm, sent for these two chosen advisers. He bade Anselm say over -again in their hearing what he had before said privately. He then, by -their advice, answered that he would restore to the see everything -that had been held by Lanfranc; on other points he would not as yet -make any positive engagement.[1161] - -[Sidenote: The letters come from Normandy.] - -[Sidenote: The King prays Anselm to take the archbishopric.] - -[Sidenote: He asks for the confirmation of grants made by him during -the vacancy.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm refuses.] - -Up to this time the King had not yet received his expected letters -from Normandy. They presently came, and Rufus evidently thought that -some step on his part ought to follow. He had asked the Duke, the -Archbishop, and the monks of Bec, to set Anselm free to accept the -archbishopric. They had done so at his request. Unless then he wished -to make fools of himself and of everybody else, he could not help -again offering the see to the man whom he had himself chosen, and who -was now free to take it. He sent for Anselm to Windsor, where he now -was; he prayed him no longer to refuse the choice of the whole -realm;[1162] but in so doing, he fell back somewhat from the one -distinct promise which he had made at Rochester. When the estates of -the see came into his hands on the death of Lanfranc, he had granted -out parts of them on tenure of knight-service. These grants he asked -Anselm, as a matter of friendship to himself, to allow.[1163] Was -William merely seeking an excuse for backing altogether out of his -offer of the archbishopric, or did he feel himself bound in honour to -the men to whom he had made the grants? If so, his scruple of honour -was met by Anselm’s scruple of conscience. Anselm would not be a party -to any alienation of the goods of the Church; above all, he would not -make any agreement about such matters before he was invested with any -part of them.[1164] The point clearly is that so to do would be more -than wasting the estates of the Church; it would be obtaining the -archbishopric by a corrupt bargain. To agree to give up the estates of -the see to the King’s grantees would be the same thing as obtaining -the see by a bribe to the King. Anselm therefore refused to consent to -the grants which the King had made during the vacancy. The whole -matter thus came to a standstill. Rufus refused the investiture unless -his grants were to stand good. Anselm went away rejoicing. - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s statement of the case.] - -[Sidenote: Nature of the King’s grants.] - -[Sidenote: The King’s case.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s argument.] - -[Sidenote: The King’s _advocatio_ of the archbishopric.] - -The whole case was set forth at length by Anselm in a letter to his -friend Hugh Archbishop of Lyons, the head prelate of his native -Burgundy.[1165] The alienation to which Anselm was asked to consent -was called by the King a “voluntary justice,” a phrase which has a -technical sound, but the meaning of which is not very clear.[1166] The -King’s argument was that, before the Normans invaded England, the -lands in question had been held of the archbishopric by English -thegns, that those thegns had died without heirs, and that it was open -to the King to give them what heirs he would.[1167] It was certainly -strange, if, on the one hand, not one of these thegns had been -constrained to make way for a Norman successor, and if, on the other -hand, not one of them had left a son to succeed him. But we must take -the fact as it is stated. Rufus seems to mean that, during Lanfranc’s -incumbency, the lands which these thegns had held of the see had -fallen back to the lord for lack of heirs, and had become demesne -lands of the archbishopric. The King asserts his right, during the -vacancy of the see, to grant out such lands by knight-service, service -to be paid of course to the King as long as the vacancy lasted, but -seemingly to the Archbishop, as soon as there should be an archbishop -in possession. If this was the argument, an argument which savours of -the subtlety of Flambard, there is, from Flambard’s point of view, a -good deal that is plausible about it. The King, as temporary lord, -claims to deal with the land as any other lord might do, and, when his -temporary lordship comes to an end, he calls on the incoming lord to -respect his acts. The legal question would seem to be whether the new -doctrine which gave the King the temporary profits of the -archbishopric gave him any right to turn its demesne lands into fiefs. -Anselm’s argument seems to be that anyhow the possessions of the -archbishopric were practically lessened, as they undoubtedly were. -Experience showed that such a lordship as the see would keep over the -lands so granted out would be both hard to enforce and of little value -if enforced.[1168] Practically the grants were an alienation of the -lands of the see. And to this Anselm could not consent. Open robbery -from some quarter which owed no special duty to the archbishopric he -might bear, and in such a case there would be more hope of gaining -back what was lost by the help of the law.[1169] But for the King, the -advocate of the see, and for himself, its guardian, to come to an -agreement whereby the see would be damaged, was a thing to which -Anselm would never consent.[1170] In this argument we hear the word -_advocate_, the equivalent of the modern _patron_, in its elder sense. -The _advocatio_, the _advowson_, of an ecclesiastical benefice carries -with it, not only the right to name the incumbent of that benefice, -but also the duty of acting as its protector.[1171] For the King, the -advocate of the see of Canterbury, to do anything against its rights -was a greater crime than if another man did the same. For the -Archbishop to betray the rights of his church and his successors was a -greater crime still. And if King and Archbishop agreed to any such -spoliation, all other men would naturally hold that the act could not -be questioned. On these grounds Anselm refused to consent to the -King’s grants. He left the royal presence trusting that he was now -free from the burthen of ecclesiastical rule in any shape. He had been -set free from the abbatial rule of Bec; he had escaped being loaded -with the primatial rule of Canterbury. He was, as he wished to be, a -private man.[1172] - -[Sidenote: Public feeling since the nomination at Gloucester.] - -[Sidenote: Gemót at Winchester.] - -[Sidenote: The King renews his promises.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm receives the archbishopric, and does homage.] - -But a private man Anselm was not to remain. After the scene in the -sick room at Gloucester, neither William nor Anselm could act exactly -as if that scene had never taken place. The momentary repentance of -the King, and the acts done during the time of that repentance, had -given a strength to public opinion which even William Rufus could not -despise. The old abuses, the old oppressions, began again; but men -were now less disposed to put up with them than they had been before. -They would no longer go on without an archbishop, after an archbishop, -and Anselm as that archbishop, had been more than promised, after he -had been given to them. The general murmur became so loud that the -King had to give way.[1173] He could no longer help giving the -archbishopric to Anselm, and that on Anselm’s own terms. And what he -did, he did in the most solemn and, as far as outward appearances -went, the most thorough manner. An extraordinary Gemót of the -kingdom――for the season was neither Christmas, Easter, nor -Pentecost――was summoned to Winchester. In the presence of the -assembled Witan, William Rufus, in full health, renewed the promises -which he had made in his sickness. The wrongs done in his kingdom, -above all, the wrongs done to the Church, were a second time to come -to an end.[1174] Anselm was exhorted, and at last persuaded, to accept -the archbishopric. He received it, seemingly without scruple, -according to the ancient use of England; he became the man of the -King.[1175] Anselm kneeling before Rufus, with his pure hands between -the polluted hands of the King, pledging himself as the King’s man for -all earthly worship, makes a scene which it is strange to think -of.[1176] The deed was now done, and it could not be recalled. Bishop -in the spiritual sense Anselm was not as yet; but he was the legal -possessor of all the temporal estates and temporal jurisdiction of the -see of Canterbury. - -[Sidenote: The King’s writ.] - -[Sidenote: The Archbishop’s thegns.] - -[Sidenote: Clauses in favour of the monks.] - -[Sidenote: The city of Canterbury and abbey of Saint Alban’s.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm and Saint Alban’s.] - -[Sidenote: Death of Abbot Paul. 1093.] - -[Sidenote: Vacancy of the abbey.] - -The act which had just been done had now to be announced to the whole -nation in the ancient form. The writ of King William went forth, -announcing to all the King’s faithful men, French and English, that he -had granted to Anselm the archbishopric of Canterbury, with all the -rights, powers, and possessions――rights, powers, and possessions, -recited in the English tongue――which belonged to the see, with all -liberties over all his men, within boroughs and without. And words -were added which seemed meant expressly to enforce Anselm’s view of -the point last in dispute. The new archbishop was to have all these -liberties over as many thegns as King Eadward the King’s kinsman had -granted to the see of Christ Church. This can hardly mean anything -except the annulling of the grants which the King had made during the -vacancy.[1177] Anselm was to have all such temporal rights as had been -lawfully held by Lanfranc, as had been before him unlawfully held by -Stigand. The writ further contains provisions on behalf of the -metropolitan monastery. The estates of the convent were distinct from -those of the see; still, in such a time of unlaw, it is likely that -some excuse had been found to do them some wrong also. To the monks of -Christ Church therefore the King confirms all their rights and -possessions, with all the tolls and dues from the haven of Sandwich; -no man, French or English, should meddle with them or their -servants.[1178] Our Canterbury guide speaks also of a renewed grant, -on more favourable terms than before, of the city of Canterbury and of -the abbey of Saint Alban’s.[1179] These possessions were at least not -granted by the writ which announces the grant of the archbishopric. Of -one of them the local patriotism of Saint Alban’s naturally knew -nothing, though we hear of the friendship which Anselm showed to the -house and to its abbot Paul. This friendship could hardly have been -shown in the character of archbishop, as Paul died during the year of -Anselm’s appointment.[1180] And it is not wonderful that Anselm’s -friendship for the abbey did not avail to save it from the usual fate. -For four years after the death of Paul, the church of Saint Alban -remained without an abbot, while the King held the lands of the abbey, -cut down its woods, and found many ingenious excuses, such as Flambard -knew how to devise, for wringing money out of its tenants.[1181] - -[Sidenote: The question as to the Pope left unsettled.] - -[Sidenote: No reference to the Pope in English episcopal -appointments.] - -It would seem that, of the three points which had been insisted on by -Anselm at Rochester, two were left out of sight in the public assembly -at Winchester no less than in the private conference at Windsor. The -question about the grants of the archiepiscopal lands was settled, at -least in name and for the time, in favour of Anselm; but nothing was -said either about William’s obligation to take Anselm as his spiritual -guide or about the acknowledgement of Urban as Pope. The former of -these two was in truth a matter for the King’s private conscience; it -was hardly a matter to be discussed and legislated about in an -assembly of the kingdom. And even the matter of the Pope did not touch -Anselm’s conscience in exactly the same way as the question of the -grants. If Anselm had allowed the grants, it would have been, in his -view, an alienation of the rights of his see, and therefore a personal -crime. But he might, without in any way giving up his position, -receive the investiture without saying anything about the papal -question at all. It was not yet held that the Bishop of Rome was -entitled to any voice as to the election, investiture, or -consecration, of any English bishop. In the case of a diocesan bishop, -there was no need for any reference to the Pope at any stage; in the -case of a metropolitan, the pallium had to be asked for; but it was -not asked for till after consecration. Anselm had given fair warning -to the King that he meant to acknowledge Urban. But at no stage of the -business which had yet been reached was there any need for any formal -acknowledgement of any Pope. Anselm might therefore fairly hold that -his first warning was enough, and that he was not called upon to raise -the question again, till the time came when it would be his duty to -seek for the pallium from one Pope or the other. When that time came, -he would be ready to do or suffer as the circumstances of that yet -future day might dictate. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Order of episcopal appointments.] - -[Sidenote: Opposite present practice.] - -[Sidenote: Theories of the two systems.] - -[Sidenote: Present process.] - -Before the time for any dealings with Rome should come, there were -still two more ceremonies to be done in England. The process of making -a bishop was, then as now, a long one; but the order of the several -stages was different then from what it now is. Anselm had done homage -and had received restitution of the temporalities; but he was not yet -enthroned, still less consecrated. The order then was, homage, -enthronement, consecration. The present order is the exact opposite. -The bishop-elect is consecrated; then he takes corporal possession of -the see by enthronement; last of all, he does homage to the King and -receives restitution of the temporalities. In the elder state of -things the spiritual office was bestowed on one who was already full -bishop for all temporal purposes. By the later rule the temporal -rights are bestowed on one who is already full bishop for all -spiritual purposes. The difference in order seems to arise from the -different theory of the episcopate which has prevailed since the -restoration of ecclesiastical elections was fully established by the -Great Charter. In the irregular practice of the eleventh century, the -notion of investiture of a benefice by the king had come to the front. -The king had in his hands a great fief, which he granted to whom he -would; that fief was chargeable with certain spiritual duties. It was -therefore for the Church, by her spiritual rite of consecration, to -make the king’s nominee, already invested with his temporal rights, -capable of discharging his spiritual duties. Such was clearly the -established view of the days of Rufus, and the order of the process is -in harmony with it. The office is treated as an appendage to the -benefice. In the theory which is both earlier and later the benefice -is treated as an appendage to the office. The order of the process is -therefore reversed. The spiritual office is first filled by the three -ecclesiastical processes of election, confirmation, consecration――the -last of course being needless when the person chosen is already a -bishop. The bishop then takes personal possession of his church by -installation or enthronement. The spiritual functions over, the -bishop, now in full possession of his office, lastly receives the -attached benefice by homage to the king and restitution of the -temporalities at his hands. That elections were hardly ever really -free at any time, that the royal leave was needed for the election, -that kings recommended, that popes “provided,” that the later law -requires the electors to choose only the king’s nominee and requires -the metropolitan to confirm the person so chosen, makes no difference -to the theory. The royal power is kept in the background; it is the -ecclesiastical power which formally acts. The king’s hand pulls the -wires of the ecclesiastical puppets; but the ecclesiastical puppets -play their formal part. The whole is done according to a theory which -naturally places the formal act of the temporal power last. In the -days of Rufus the whole was done according to another theory which, as -naturally, placed the formal act of the temporal power first of all. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Enthronement of Anselm. September 25, 1093.] - -[Sidenote: Flambard brings a suit against Anselm on the day of -enthronement.] - -The next stage then was for Anselm, still only a presbyter, but -already invested with all the temporal powers and possessions of the -archbishopric, to take personal possession of his see in the -metropolitan church. It was the only time that such a rite was -performed in the short eastern limb of the new church of Lanfranc. -Anselm’s own later days were to see the removal of the patriarchal -throne of Britain to be the centre of the more stately apse of Conrad, -as later days saw it again removed to be the centre of the yet more -stately apse of the two Williams. On that throne, Anselm, chosen to be -Pope of the island Empire, was placed on one of the later days of -September in the presence of a rejoicing crowd of monks, clergy, and -lay folk. Well might they rejoice; the Church had again a shepherd; -the nation had again a defender. But even that day of joy did not pass -without signs that the favour of the temporal lord of the island -Empire was already turned away from its new pontiff. The King’s sense -of personal honour required him to carry out the promise made at -Gloucester, to allow, even to compel, Anselm to become archbishop. But -he had no sense of Christian or kingly duty to keep him from insulting -and harassing the man whom he had promoted, or to constrain him to -keep the promises contained in his own proclamation. Those things had -not been done in the character of _probus miles_, of knight and -gentleman. It was quite consistent with chivalrous honour to send -Flambard to disturb the joyful day of enthronement by the announcement -of a hostile suit against the new archbishop. We are not told what was -its exact nature, only that it was something which, in the eyes of -strict churchmen at least, wholly concerned the affairs of the Church, -and with which the King’s court had nothing to do.[1182] In the older -days of England such a distinction could hardly have been drawn; after -the separation of the jurisdictions under the Conqueror, it may have -been fair enough. Whatever the actual matter in dispute was, we can -understand the general indignation at the choice of such a moment for -the serving of the notice, at the malice which would not let even the -first day of the Primate’s new dignity pass unmolested. We can also -easily picture to ourselves the fierce swagger of Flambard, -graphically as it is set before us.[1183] And we can listen also to -the mild grief of Anselm, inferring from such treatment on the first -day of his primacy what the troubles of his future life were likely to -be.[1184] - -[Sidenote: Other events of the year.] - -[Sidenote: Consecration of Anselm at Canterbury. December 4, 1093.] - -[Sidenote: Thomas of York.] - -[Sidenote: Other bishops present.] - -[Sidenote: Absence of Herbert,] - -[Sidenote: Wulfstan,] - -[Sidenote: and Osbern.] - -After the enthronement more than two months still passed before the -final rite of consecration admitted Anselm to the fulness of his -spiritual office. They were months of no small moment in the history -of Britain. They beheld the last invasion of Malcolm, his death,[1185] -the death of his saintly wife, the uprising of Scottish nationality -against the foreign innovations or reforms which Malcolm and Margaret -represented in the eyes of their native subjects. The affairs of -Scotland, of Wales, of Normandy, were all on the Red King’s mind at -the same moment, as well as the affairs of Anselm. But it is these -last that we have to follow for the present. Early in December, on the -second Sunday in Advent, the more part of the bishops of England came -together at Canterbury for the consecration of the new metropolitan. -At their head was the Archbishop of York, Thomas of Bayeux. It was the -privilege of his see――so the loyal historian of the church of York -takes care that we should know――when Canterbury was without an -archbishop, to consecrate bishops and to put the crown on the king’s -head within the vacant province.[1186] Whether the one available -suffragan of the northern province came along with Thomas, in the form -of William of Durham, we are not distinctly told. But of the bishops -of the province of Canterbury eight must have been there. Robert Bloet -was the elect of Lincoln; but he, like Anselm, was himself awaiting -consecration. Of the rest three were absent, and among those three -were the only two who were English either by birth or by adoption, the -two whom we could have most wished to have a share in the work. -Herbert of Thetford must now have been on his penitential journey to -Rome or on his way back.[1187] The holy Wulfstan, the one Englishman -by descent as well as by birth who was left among the bishops of -England, the only one who had been a bishop in the old days of King -Eadward, was still in the land, but was kept away by age or sickness. -So was Osbern of Exeter, the only one of the foreign stock who had -thoroughly made himself an Englishman by adoption. These two sent -letters of consent instead of their personal presence.[1188] The -others gathered round the high altar of Lanfranc’s rearing at Christ -Church. Most of them are men with whose names we are familiar; Maurice -of London, Walkelin of Winchester, Gundulf of Rochester, Osmund of -Salisbury, Robert of Hereford, John who had moved from Wells to Bath, -Robert of Lichfield or of Chester, who had moved in a fiercer sort to -Earl Leofric’s Coventry. All of them, whatever they were in other -ways, were mighty builders. If William of Durham, whose church had -just begun to rise on the height above the Wear,[1189] was really in -their company, there was indeed the master-builder of all, whose heart -might already swell to think how the work which he had begun would -surpass the work of Lanfranc under whose roof they were met. These -eight came together in the new metropolitan church to perform the rite -which should make Anselm at once their brother and their father. - -[Sidenote: Position of Thomas.] - -[Sidenote: Thomas objects to the description of Anselm as -“Metropolitan of Britain.”] - -[Sidenote: His objection admitted.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s consecration.] - -But, before the rite could be gone through, an old question was -stirred again, by no means for the last time. The leader of the -episcopal band was fully minded that the rank to which they were about -to admit the prelate elect should be clearly defined. Thomas of York -had doubtless not forgotten the day when he had himself gone away -unconsecrated from the spot where they were now met, because he could -not bring himself to make such a submission to the higher dignity of -Canterbury as Anselm’s predecessor had required of him.[1190] He now -had his opportunity of raising his voice with greater success on -behalf of the dignity of his own church. Before the consecrating -prelates went on to the examination of the bishop-elect, it was the -business of the Bishop of London to read the formal document declaring -the cause why they had come together.[1191] Bishop Maurice handed over -this duty to the Bishop of Winchester. Walkelin began to read how the -church of Canterbury, the metropolitan church of all Britain, was -widowed of its pastor. The Archbishop of York stopped him; -“Metropolitan church of all Britain? Then the church of York, which -all men know to be a metropolitan church, is not metropolitan. We all -know that the church of Canterbury is the primatial church of all -Britain; metropolitan church of all Britain it is not.”[1192] This was -not a distinction without a difference. To allow the claim of -Canterbury to be the metropolitan church of all Britain would have -been to admit that the church of York was a mere suffragan see of -Canterbury. The other form simply asserted the precedency of -Canterbury as the higher in rank of the two metropolitan sees of -Britain. So Anselm’s correspondent at Lyons was Primate of all the -Gauls, without endangering the metropolitan rank of Rheims and Rouen. -But William the Good Soul would have been stirred to wrath had it been -hinted that Lyons was the metropolitan church of all Gaul, and Rouen -simply its suffragan. A zealot for the rights of Canterbury admits -that the objection of Thomas was a good one.[1193] The wording of the -document was at once changed;[1194] the rite went on, and Anselm was -consecrated as Archbishop of Canterbury and Primate of all Britain. If -the more northern suffragans of York had any objections to make, they -were just then less likely than ever to be at Canterbury to make them. - -[Sidenote: Question of acknowledging the Pope.] - -[Sidenote: Thomas claims jurisdiction over Lincoln.] - -[Sidenote: Robert Bloet’s consecration delayed.] - -The position of the newly-consecrated Primate within his own island -was thus settled to the satisfaction of the man who thought that he -had a special interest in the matter. It was perhaps more difficult to -settle his relation to the ecclesiastical powers beyond his own -island. Anselm had warned the King that, if he became archbishop, he -must yield obedience to Urban. But, as the King had not acknowledged -Urban, it would have been deemed unlawful to speak of Urban as Pope in -any public act. The difficulty seems to have been got over by Anselm -making a profession of obedience to the Roman Church, without -mentioning the name of any particular pontiff.[1195] Thus passed the -day of the consecration; but, on the morrow, Thomas of York, -successful thus far, found yet another point to assert on behalf of -the alleged rights of his church. He had, it will be remembered, -striven to hinder Remigius from transferring the see of Dorchester to -a spot which he deemed to be in his own province and diocese.[1196] -Since that time, notwithstanding his remonstrances, the minster of -Lincoln had arisen; but it remained unconsecrated, and its builder was -dead. To the mind of Thomas these facts perhaps seemed to be signs as -clear in their meaning as any which the Bishop of Hereford would find -out from the lore of the stars.[1197] Thus emboldened, on the day -after he had consecrated Anselm to the see of Canterbury, Thomas -warned the new Primate against proceeding, as he had purposed, to -consecrate Robert Bloet to the see of Lincoln. He might consecrate -him, if he would, to the ancient see of Dorchester; but not to Lincoln -or to any other place in that land of Lindesey which belonged to the -jurisdiction of York.[1198] Anselm seems to have yielded; at least the -matter remained unsettled, and the elect of Lincoln remained -unconsecrated for two months longer. - -[Sidenote: Christmas Gemót at Gloucester. 1093-1094.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm received by the King.] - -Anselm now, after so many difficulties, was at last fully Archbishop. -He remained in his metropolis for eight days only after his -consecration. He then set forth for the Christmas Assembly of the -realm, to be held at Gloucester.[1199] The prayer which he had drawn -up at the assembly held there twelve months before had indeed been -answered. The King’s heart had been stirred; the Archbishop had been -appointed. Unhappily also the King’s heart had been stirred back -again. William was again the king who had mockingly bidden his bishops -to pray as they thought good, not the king who had passionately called -on Anselm to step in between him and eternal death. The breach between -King and Primate had begun before Anselm was fully Primate, when -Flambard had insolently summoned him in his own church on the day of -his enthronement. Whatever the matter of the summons was, Anselm was -now ready in the King’s court to answer it. But of that dispute we -hear no more. The Archbishop came to Gloucester, and was courteously -and cheerfully received, not only by the assembled nobles, but by the -King himself.[1200] But the Witan were not to depart from the place of -meeting till new grounds of quarrel had arisen between the two unequal -yokefellows who were at last fully coupled together. - - -§ 3. _The Assembly at Hastings and the Second Norman Campaign._ 1094. - -[Sidenote: Events of the year 1094.] - -[Sidenote: Affairs of Normandy; their connexion with Anselm.] - -The events of the year on which we have now entered consist partly of -warlike movements in Normandy and Scotland, partly of matters directly -touching ecclesiastical questions, above all touching Anselm. Of -these, the affairs of Scotland and the affairs of Anselm have hardly -any bearing on one another. But the affairs of Normandy and the -affairs of Anselm have a close connexion. They were discussed in the -same assemblies; and one ground of quarrel between King and Primate -arose directly out of the discussion of Norman affairs. Some of the -details of the two stories are so mixed up with one another that it -would be hard to keep them apart. Again, the Scottish warfare of this -year is part of a continuous series of Scottish events spread over -several years. But the Norman warfare is a kind of episode. It is -connected by the laws of cause and effect with things which went -before and with things which came after; but, as a story, it stands by -itself or is mixed up with the story of Anselm. It cannot be dealt -with, like the King’s first Norman war, as a distinct chapter of our -history. It will therefore be better, during the year which follows -the consecration of Anselm, to keep Scottish affairs apart from the -history of the ecclesiastical dispute, but to treat the Norman -campaign as something filling up part of the time between two great -stages in Anselm’s history. - -[Sidenote: Robert’s challenge of William. 1093-1094.] - -[Sidenote: Form of the message.] - -[Sidenote: War decreed.] - -The chief business of the assembly which now met at Gloucester was the -reception of a hostile message from the Duke of the Normans. This fact -makes us wish to know more in detail what Count William of Eu had -suggested, and what King William of England had done. It is certain -that King William needed no pressing to make him inclined for another -attempt on his brother’s dominions; but it is clear that the coming of -Count William had led to some special action which had given Duke -Robert special ground of complaint. The Norman embassy came, and -challenged one brother in the name of the other, almost as an earlier -Norman embassy had challenged Harold in the name of the father of both -of them.[1201] The diplomacy of those days was clear and outspoken. -The _bodes_ of Duke Robert seem to have spoken to King William in the -midst of his Witan, much as the bodes of the Athenian commonwealth -spoke, with a greater amount of personal deference, to King Philip on -his throne. They told the King of the English that their master -renounced all peace and treaty with him, unless he would do all that -was set down in the treaty; they declared him forsworn and truthless, -unless he would hold to the treaty, or would go and clear himself at -the place where the treaty had been made and sworn to.[1202] Such a -message as this was hardly wise in Robert, whatever it might have been -in a prince who had the resources of his dominions more thoroughly at -his command. It was in some sort an appeal to arbitration; but it was -put in a shape which was sure to bring on war. William had no doubt -made up his mind for a Norman enterprise in any case; the message of -Robert would really help him by turning a certain amount of public -feeling to his side. An expedition was decreed; Normandy was to be a -second time invaded by the Red King. - -[Sidenote: Contributions collected for the war.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm unwilling to contribute.] - -[Sidenote: He gives five hundred pounds.] - -And now came the question how ways and means were to be found for the -new war. That some of the ways and means which were employed were -unworthy of all kingly dignity[1203] is not wonderful in this reign. -But the only one of which we distinctly hear seems in itself less -unworthy than some others, though the particular form which it took is -eminently characteristic of Rufus. The great men who had come together -to the assembly made presents to the King, forerunners of the -benevolences of later times. The great men of Normandy had, -twenty-eight years before, made contributions of ships for the -invasion of England.[1204] Now the great men of England, some of them -the same persons, made contributions of money for the invasion of -Normandy. This was at least less unworthy of the kingly dignity than -some of the tricks by which Flambard wrung money out of more helpless -victims. But the Red King’s way of dealing with such gifts shows the -mixture of greed and pride which stands out in all his doings. If the -sum offered was less than he thought it ought to be, he cast it aside -with scorn; nor would he ever again admit the offerer to his -friendship, unless he made amends by a second offer of such a sum as -the King might think becoming.[1205] To this custom Anselm now -conformed, with the other nobles and prelates; but it was with some -pains that his friends persuaded him to conform to it.[1206] With his -usual fear of being misconstrued, he dreaded that if, so soon after -his consecration, he gave the King any sum which the King would think -worth taking, it might have the air of a simoniacal bargain.[1207] He -might also hold that the goods of the Church ought not to be applied -to worldly, least of all to warlike, uses; he might even feel some -scruple in helping towards a war against a prince who had so lately -been his own worldly lord. But he was won over by the argument that a -gift in season might win the King’s favour for ever, and that he might -be allowed to give his mind with less disturbance to the spiritual -duties of his office.[1208] He brought himself therefore to offer the -King five hundred pounds of silver. William was satisfied with the -amount, and received the gift with courteous thanks.[1209] - -[Sidenote: William persuaded to refuse the money.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm prays Rufus to take the money.] - -[Sidenote: Rufus refuses it.] - -What followed showed that William Rufus had counsellors about him who -were worse than himself, or who at any rate were not ashamed to play -upon the worst parts of his character to obtain their own ends. In -this case they are nameless. Are we to fill up the blank with the -names of the Bishop of Durham and the Count of Meulan? Or is it safer -to lay any evil deed the doer of which is not recorded on the broad -back of Randolf Flambard? At any rate, some malignant persons, whoever -they were, came about the King, and persuaded him that the gift of the -Archbishop was a contemptible sum which he ought to reject. One whom -he had exalted and enriched above the other great men of England -ought, in such need as that in which the King found himself, to have -given him two thousand pounds, or one thousand at the very least. To -offer so little as five hundred was mere mockery. Let the King wait a -little, let him change his face towards the Archbishop, and Anselm -would presently come, delighted to win back the King’s favour with the -gift of five hundred pounds more.[1210] Thus the Primate’s enemies, -whoever they were, sought to frighten him, and to get more money out -of him for the King’s use. But their schemes were disappointed.[1211] -Anselm was presently surprised by a message to say that the King -refused his gift――the gift which he had already cheerfully -accepted.[1212] He then sought an audience, and asked the King whether -such a message was really of his sending. Some tyrants might have seen -in this question an escape from a difficulty. It would have been easy -for Rufus to have denied his own act; but his pride was up, and direct -lying was never in his vein. He avowed his message. Then Anselm prayed -him not to refuse his gift; it was the first that he had offered; it -should not be the last. It would be better for the King to receive a -smaller sum from him as a friend, than to wring a larger sum from him -as a slave.[1213] Of the alternative of increasing the amount of the -gift he said not a word. One motive was that he could not raise a -greater sum without doing wrong to his tenants――the wrong which he had -declared Ælfheah to be a true martyr for refusing to do.[1214] The -King was now in the mood for short and wrathful speeches. “Keep your -money and your jaw to yourself; I have enough of my own. Get you -gone.”[1215] Anselm obeyed, remembering that at his enthronement the -Gospel had been read which said that no man could serve two masters. -He rejoiced that no one now could deem that he had been guilty of any -corrupt bargain with the King. Yet he tried once more through -messengers to persuade the King to take his gift, but, as he steadily -refused to double it, it was still thrust aside with scorn. The -assembly broke up; the Archbishop, still in the King’s disfavour, went -away, and the money which the King had despised was given to the poor. - -[Sidenote: Dispute with the Bishop of London.] - -[Sidenote: Judgement of Wulfstan.] - -This business over, Anselm had now a few weeks, but a few weeks only, -to give to his immediate pastoral work. Even those weeks were -disturbed by a dispute with one of his suffragans. The point at issue -was the right of the Archbishop to consecrate churches and do other -episcopal acts in such of his manors as were locally in other -dioceses. This right was denied by Bishop Maurice of London, who sent -two of his canons to forbid the Archbishop to consecrate the newly -built church of Harrow.[1216] The matter was settled by an appeal to -one who knew the ancient laws of England better than either Maurice or -Anselm. Wulfstan of Worcester, now “one and alone of the ancient -fathers of the English,” wrote back his judgement in favour of the -Primate’s right.[1217] The question was thus decided; Maurice did not -dare to set up his judgement on such a matter against that of the -venerable saint, the relic of a state of things which had passed -away.[1218] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Assembly at Hastings. February 2, 1094.] - -[Sidenote: The fleet delayed by the wind.] - -Those of the great men of England who had come to the Gemót at -Gloucester from the more distant parts of the kingdom could hardly -have reached their homes when they were again summoned to give the -King the benefit of their counsels. William Rufus was so strong upon -his throne that in his days assemblies were sure to be frequent. He -was moreover planning a campaign beyond the sea, so that it was very -doubtful whether he would be able this year to wear his crown in -England at the usual times of Easter and Pentecost. The Easter Gemót -was therefore in some sort forestalled. As the starting-point for his -second invasion of Normandy the King had chosen the spot which had -been his father’s head-quarters in the great invasion of England. At -Pevensey he had once beaten back the invasion of his Norman brother; -at Hastings he now gathered the force which was for the second time to -avenge that wrong. The chief men of England were again brought -together. We may perhaps see in this assembly a case of the military -Gemót. Anselm and several other bishops were there; but it is said -that their presence was required to give their blessing to the King -and his army before they crossed the sea.[1219] But that final -blessing could not be given till many weeks after the army or assembly -first came together. When the younger William sought to invade -Normandy, he was kept lingering at Hastings, as the elder William had -been kept lingering at Saint Valery when he sought to invade England. -For six weeks the north wind refused to blow. While thus kept back -from warfare, the King seems to have amused himself with -ecclesiastical business and ecclesiastical ceremonies, and he further -brought on himself the sharpest of ecclesiastical rebukes.[1220] - -[Sidenote: The Abbey of Battle.] - -[Sidenote: Completion of the building.] - -[Sidenote: Consecration of the church. February 11, 1094.] - -[Sidenote: Bishops present; Ralph of Coutances.] - -[Sidenote: Death of Geoffrey Bishop of Coutances. February 3, 1093.] - -[Sidenote: William and Anselm at Battle.] - -But one of the ceremonies which filled up the time of enforced leisure -must have been something more than a matter of amusement to William -the Red. Whatever traces of good feeling lingered in his heart -gathered round the memory of his parents. And he was now called on to -join in a rite which was the crowning homage to his father’s name, the -most speaking memorial of his father’s victory and his father’s -bounty. Again was a William encamped at Hastings called on to make his -way to the hill of Senlac. But this time he could make his way thither -in peaceful guise. The place was no longer a wilderness or a camp, no -longer the hill of the hoar apple-tree, no longer bristling with the -thickset lines of battle, no longer heaped with the corpses of the -conquerors and the conquered. The height which had once been fenced in -by the palisade of the English host was now fenced in by the precinct -wall of a vast monastery; its buildings, overhanging the hill side, -covered the spot where Gyrth had fallen by the hand of William;[1221] -its church, fresh from the hands of the craftsman, covered the ground -which had beheld the last act of the day of slaughter; its high altar, -blazing doubtless with all the skill of Otto and Theodoric,[1222] -marked the spot where Harold, struck by the bolt from heaven, had -fallen between the Dragon and the Standard. After so many years had -passed since the Conqueror had bidden that the memorial of the -Conquest should rise on that spot and on no other, the minster of -Saint Martin of the Place of Battle stood ready for consecration. -Moved by the prayer of Abbot Gausbert, prompted too by his own -reverence for the memory and the bidding of his father, William the -younger bade that his father’s church should at once be hallowed in -his own presence.[1223] On a Saturday then in the month of February, -in the twenty-eighth year since the awful Saturday of Saint Calixtus, -the two who were so unequally yoked together to draw the plough of the -Church of England made their way to the place of Battle. A crowd of -nobles and commons came together to the sight; and with them, besides -the Primate, were seven bishops of three different provinces. There -was Ralph of Chichester, bishop of the diocese, whose jurisdiction -within the favoured abbey was so zealously denied by every monk of -Battle.[1224] There were Walkelin of Winchester, Osmund of Salisbury, -John of Bath, and Gundulf of Rochester. There was the Primate’s great -northern enemy, William of Durham. And there too was a suffragan of -Rouen, the immediate successor of one of the fierce prelates who had -blessed the Conqueror’s host on the morning of the great battle.[1225] -Geoffrey of Mowbray, Bishop and once Earl, had died a year before, and -the episcopal chair of Coutances was now filled by his successor -Ralph.[1226] How, it may be asked, came a Norman bishop in the court, -almost in the army, of a king who was about to invade Normandy? The -answer is easy. The Côtentin was now again in the hands of -Henry,[1227] and the presence of its bishop at the court of William -was a sign of the good understanding which now reigned between the two -younger sons of the Conqueror. But on such a day as this all interest -gathers round the two main figures in the assembly, the two of highest -rank in their several orders. William the Red, strange assistant in -any religious rite, seems less out of place than usual as assistant in -the rite which was to dedicate the work of his father. And if prayers -and offerings were to go up on that spot for those who had fallen -there on the defeated as well as on the victorious side, there was no -mouth in which we should more gladly put them than in the mouth of him -who was the chief celebrant on that day. Anselm, standing at the head -of his foreign suffragans――English Wulfstan stood not by him――before -the altar of Saint Martin of the Place of Battle, seemed like a -representative of universal Christendom, of universal peace and love. -The holy man from Aosta sang his mass in honour of the holy man of -Tours. And he sang it on the spot where Harold of England had stood by -his standard in the morning, where William of Normandy had held the -feast of victory in the evening, the morning and evening of the most -memorable day in the history of our island since England became one -kingdom. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: The King at Hastings.] - -[Sidenote: William of Saint-Calais.] - -[Sidenote: Consecration of Robert Bloet to Lincoln. February 12, -1094.] - -[Sidenote: Robert’s gift to the King.] - -[Sidenote: Plot against Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: Compromise with York.] - -[Sidenote: Character of Robert Bloet.] - -[Sidenote: His offices.] - -[Sidenote: His death. 1123.] - -[Sidenote: Local legends about him.] - -From the hill of Battle William went back to the hill of Hastings, now -crowned by the castle into which the hasty fortress of his father had -grown.[1228] Six years earlier the Bishop of Durham, charged with -treason, had in answer, pleaded that he had kept Hastings and its -castle in the King’s obedience.[1229] Notwithstanding that answer, he -had been banished; he had been recalled, and he now stood, with all -his former authority, chief counsellor of the King, chief enemy of the -Archbishop. On the morrow of the dedication of Saint Martin’s, William -of Saint-Calais joined with Anselm in the long-delayed consecration of -the elect of Lincoln. The rite was done in the church of Our Lady -within the castle of Hastings, by the hands of the same prelates who -had the day before dedicated the church of Battle. It was to the see -of Lincoln, not to the see of Dorchester, that Robert Bloet was -consecrated. Thomas of Bayeux was not there to repeat his protest. He -would have been there in vain. The bishop-elect had, in the course of -his chancellorship, got together the means of settling such questions. -His bishopric, granted at the time of the King’s repentance, had cost -him nothing. It was now a matter of regret with Rufus that it had cost -him nothing; Robert had therefore to pay all the more for the -establishment of the rights of his see. One who had the means of -knowing says that he gave the King the great sum of five thousand -pounds to decide the cause in favour of Lincoln.[1230] This was done, -the York writer complains, without the consent of the Archbishop of -York and without the knowledge of his chapter.[1231] The case must -have been settled either at Gloucester or now at Hastings. It was most -likely at Hastings, as we can hardly fancy Thomas keeping away from -the great Christmas gathering. Our Canterbury guide tells us a not -very intelligible story which may show us how the claim of Thomas was -spoken of in the southern metropolis. The cause of York had found at -least professing friends among the great men at Hastings, though it -met with no favour from the King himself. Not knowing perhaps with -what weighty arguments the elect of Lincoln had proved his case, -certain unnamed bishops and lords deemed that they would please the -King by anything which could annoy or discredit Anselm. They therefore -insidiously tried to persuade the Archbishop to consecrate Robert -without his making due profession to the church of Canterbury.[1232] -Anselm stood firm. The King, when he heard of the plot, took to his -magnanimous vein. His personal quarrel with Anselm should never lead -him to do anything against the dignity of the Church of Canterbury his -mother.[1233] The King and Flambard perhaps enjoyed the joke together. -But Robert Bloet made the needful profession, and was consecrated as -Bishop of Lincoln by Anselm and the assembled prelates. The -controversy with York was at last formally settled, by a compromise -which was announced in a royal charter. By this the Archbishop of York -accepted the patronage of the new abbey of Selby in his own diocese, -and that of the church of Saint Oswald at Worcester――the city and -diocese so long connected with York――in exchange for his claims over -Lindesey.[1234] The isle and city of Lindum has ever since remained an -undisputed member of the southern province. The new Bishop of Lincoln, -the first prelate consecrated to that see, has left a doubtful -character behind him. He held his bishopric for thirty years, living -on far into the reign of Henry, and keeping the royal favour till just -before his death. Chancellor under both Williams, he, as usual, -resigned that post on his consecration; but under Henry he ruled with -great power in the higher office of Justiciar.[1235] Bountiful in his -gifts to his see and to his church, the number of whose prebends he -doubled, splendid and liberal in his manner of life, bountiful to the -poor, winning the hearts of all around him, not himself a scholar, but -a promoter of scholars, skilful in worldly business of every kind, he -does not show us the best, but neither does he show us the worst type -of the prelates of his day. He was charged with looseness of life; but -his chief accuser found it wise to strike out the charge, and his son -Simon, Dean of his own church, was born while he was Chancellor to the -Conqueror, quite possibly in lawful wedlock. His last days form a -striking incident in the next reign; here he chiefly concerns us as -being in some sort, however strangely, bracketted with Anselm, as the -other bishop whom the Red King named during his short time of -repentance.[1236] Anyhow it was hard on him to tell in after days how -his ghost hindered anybody from praying or giving alms near his tomb -in the minster, and that only because he removed the monks of Stow to -Eynsham, because he subjected his see to the gift of a precious mantle -to the King, or because he agreed to the wise measure which lessened -the extent of his vast diocese. - -[Sidenote: Return of Herbert of Thetford.] - -[Sidenote: He is deprived by the King.] - -Another bishop appeared at this gathering, whose coming was, for the -time, less lucky for himself than that of Robert Bloet. Herbert of -Thetford, struck with penitence for his simoniacal bargain, had, as it -will be remembered, gone beyond sea on an errand which of all others -was most offensive to the King. He had gone to receive again from the -Pope――doubtless from Urban――the bishopric which he had already bought -of the King.[1237] For this offence William now took away his staff; -that is, he deprived him of his bishopric. With whose advice or -consent this was done, and what line Anselm took with regard to such a -step, we are not told. At all events the King now deprived a bishop of -his office on the ground of what he deemed to be treason done without -the realm. This was the converse of the act by which, forty-two years -before, the nation had deprived another bishop on the ground of what -they deemed to be treason within the realm.[1238] William however did -not set up any doubtful Stigand of his own in the church of Thetford. -About a year later Herbert was again in possession of his see.[1239] -How he was restored to the King’s favour we are not told. He may have -deemed it no sin to win it by means which he had learned to look upon -as sin when applied to the obtaining of a spiritual office. Next year -he removed the seat of the East-Anglian bishopric once more. Herfast -had moved it from Elmham to Thetford. With the good will and help of -Roger Bigod Herbert now translated it to its final seat at Norwich. He -there began the foundation of that vast church and monastery, the -creation of which caused his name to be ever since held in at least -local honour. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Lent, 1094.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm rebukes the minions.] - -Meanwhile the north wind still refused to blow, and the King with his -prelates, lords, and courtiers, still tarried at Hastings. Lent began -before the fleet had a chance of sailing. The penitential season began -with the usual ceremonies. The Archbishop said his mass and preached -his sermon in the ears of the multitude who came together on the day -of ashes, to receive, according to custom, the ashes of penitence from -the hands of the Primate. Among them came the minions and young -gallants of the court of Rufus, with their long combed and twined -hair, their mincing gait, defying alike the commands of the Apostle -and the dictates of common decency and manliness. The voice of Anselm -rebuked them, as well he might, when the outward garb was but the sign -of the deeper foulness within. Not a few were moved to repentance; -they submitted to the loss of their flowing locks, and put on again -the form of men.[1240] Others were stubborn; they received neither -ashes nor absolution. In this battle with a foolish custom which was -in truth far more than a foolish custom, Anselm had not a few -forerunners or followers. Saint Wulfstan, Gundulf, Serlo of Seez, all -preached and acted vigorously against the long hair which was the -symbol of the crying vice of the time.[1241] Anselm deemed that the -evil called for something more than a single act of discipline. The -man of God felt called on to strike at the root of the mischief; he -was moved to make a warning appeal to the conscience, if any -conscience was left, of the chief sinner of them all, and he made it, -after his wont, at once gently and vigorously. - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s interview with the King.] - -[Sidenote: His silence about the war.] - -[Sidenote: He asks for help in his reforms.] - -We may guess that the King had not been present at the ceremonies of -Ash-Wednesday; had he been there, his presence would surely have been -dwelled upon. It seems that Anselm, though openly out of the King’s -favour, still visited him from time to time. One day therefore he went -and sat down beside him, and spoke what was in his heart.[1242] The -King was setting forth to conquer Normandy. It is to be noticed that -Anselm does not say a word as to the right or wrong of the war. -Perhaps, after the challenge of Robert, the cause of Rufus may have -seemed, even to him, to be technically just. Perhaps he knew that -anything that could be said on that subject would be fruitless. He may -even have deemed, a view which had much to be said for it, that a -conquest of Normandy by the Red King would be a good exchange for the -rule of its present sovereign. And we must remember that wars of all -kinds were in those days so constantly going on that they would seem -like a necessary evil, a dark side of the economy of things, but one -which could not be hindered. Even men like Anselm would come to look -with less horror than one might expect on wars which were waged only -by those whose whole business might seem to be warfare. Anyhow Anselm -said nothing directly against the war, even though it was to be waged -against the prince to whom he had lately owed allegiance and against -the land which had been to him a second birth-place. But he asked the -King whether he had any right to look for success in that or any other -enterprise, unless he did something to check the evils which had well -nigh uprooted the religion of Christ in his realm. He called on -William to give him the help of the royal authority in his own schemes -of reform. The King asked what form his help was to take,[1243] and -Anselm then put forth his views at length. - -[Sidenote: He asks leave to hold a synod.] - -[Sidenote: Advantages of the synod.] - -[Sidenote: No synod held under Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s appeal against the fashionable vices.] - -First and foremost, the King was to help in the work of reform by -allowing Anselm to hold a synod of the realm. It will be remembered -that, by the laws of the Conqueror, no synod could be held without the -King’s licence, and the acts of the synod were of no force without the -King’s confirmation.[1244] But under the Conqueror Lanfranc had, on -the conditions thus laid down, held his synods without hindrance. That -is to say, the elder William, in all causes and over all persons -within his dominions supreme, used that supremacy as the chief ruler -of the Church from within, while the younger William turned that same -supremacy into a weapon wherewith to assault the Church as an enemy -from without. It is plain from the earnestness of Anselm one way――one -might almost say, from the earnestness of Rufus the other way――that -the synod was a real instrument for the reformation of manners. It is -plain that the assembled bishops, when they came together in a body, -could do more both for ecclesiastical discipline and for moral -improvement than they could do, each one in his own diocese. One cause -may have been that, in a synod, the assembled prelates might seem to -be really speaking as fathers in God, while the exercise of their -local jurisdiction was too much mixed up with the petty and not always -creditable details of their courts, with those tricks and extortions -of archdeacons and other officials of which we have often heard. -Anyhow, as the Roman Senate had good enough left in it to call forth -the hatred of Nero, so an ecclesiastical synod had good enough left in -it to call forth the hatred of William Rufus. Not one synod had he -allowed to be held during the whole time of his reign, now in its -seventh year.[1245] Anselm earnestly prayed to be allowed to hold one -for the restoration of discipline and the reformation of manners. The -King answered; “I will see to this matter when I think good; I will -act, not after your pleasure but after my own. And, pray,” added he -mockingly, “when you have got your synod, what will you talk about in -it?” The man of God did not shrink from going straight to the crying -evil of the time. What weighed most on Anselm’s mind was not any mere -breach of ecclesiastical rule――such breaches he had to speak of, but -he would not speak of them first;[1246] the burthen on his soul was -the hideous moral corruption, a new thing on English ground, which had -become rife throughout the land. Unless King and Primate, each in his -own sphere, each with his own weapons, worked together to root out -this plague, the kingdom of England might share the fate of the cities -which it had come to resemble. A strict law was needed, the very -hearing of which would make the guilty tremble.[1247] The words of -Anselm were general; there was no personal charge against William; the -Archbishop simply appealed to him as King to stop the sins of others. -But all this makes us feel more strongly the wonderful character of -such a scene, where two such men could be sitting side by side and -exchanging their thoughts freely. But the heart of Rufus was hardened; -he answered only by a sneer. “And what may come of this matter for -you?” “For me nothing,” said Anselm; “for you and for God I hope -much.”[1248] - -[Sidenote: Ecclesiastical grievances.] - -[Sidenote: Wrongs of the church tenants.] - -[Sidenote: He prays the King to fill the vacant abbeys.] - -[Sidenote: The abbeys in what sense the King’s.] - -[Sidenote: Hostile answer of Rufus.] - -There is so much of simple moral grandeur in this appeal of the -righteous man against moral evil that we might almost have wished that -Anselm’s discourse had ended at this point, and that he had not gone -on to speak of matters which to us seem to have less of a moral and -more of a technical nature. Yet Anselm would doubtless have thought -himself faithless to his duty, if he had left the King’s presence -without making a special appeal about the special grievances of -ecclesiastical bodies. Moreover the wrongs of the bishoprics and -abbeys were distinctly moral wrongs; the King’s doings involved breach -of law, breach of trust; they were grievances on which the head of the -ecclesiastical order was, as such, specially bound to enlarge. But -they were also grievances which did not touch the ecclesiastical order -only; the wrongs done to the tenants of the vacant churches are -constantly dwelled on as one of the worst features of the system -brought in by Rufus and Flambard. Anselm therefore deemed it his duty, -before he parted from the King, to say a word on this matter also, a -matter in which there could be no doubt that the King himself was the -chief sinner. No bishopric was now vacant; but several abbeys, Saint -Alban’s among them, were in the hands of Flambard. Such a state of -things called for his own care as Primate; he appealed to William to -give him his help as King. In the monasteries which were left without -rulers discipline became lax; the monks fell into evil courses; they -died without confession. He prayed the King to allow the appointment -of abbots to the vacant churches, lest he should draw on himself the -judgement which must follow on the evils to which their vacancies gave -cause.[1249] The King seems to have been less able to endure this -rebuke than the other. The disorders of his courtiers and of his own -private life he could not defend on any showing; but the demand that -the abbeys should be filled touched what he looked on as one of his -royal rights. Rufus burst forth in wrath. “Are not the abbeys mine? -Tush, you do as you choose with your manors; shall not I do as I -choose with my abbeys?”[1250] The answer of Anselm drew a distinction -which was a very practical one in those days, and which affects our -legal language still. To this day the King, the Bishop, the Chapter, -all speak of any episcopal see as “our cathedral church,” and all -speak, from their several points of view, with equal truth. Such a -church is the king’s church by virtue of the fundatorial rights which -he claims, in some cases by real historic succession, in all cases by -a legal theory. By virtue of those fundatorial rights, he claims to be -informed of every vacancy, and to give his consent to a new election. -In this sense Anselm did not deny that the abbeys were the King’s -abbeys; he did deny that they were the King’s in the further sense in -which Rufus claimed them. “The abbeys are yours,” he said, “to defend -and guard as an advocate; they are not yours to spoil and lay waste. -They are God’s; they are given that his servants may live of them, not -that you may make campaigns and battles at their cost.[1251] You have -manors and revenues of many kinds, out of which you may carry on all -that belongs to you. Leave, may it please you, the churches to have -their own.” “Truly,” says the King, “you know that what you say is -most unpleasing to me. Your predecessor would never have dared to -speak so to my father. I will do nothing on your account.” When Anselm -then saw that he was casting his words to the winds,[1252] he rose and -went his way. - -[Sidenote: Lanfranc and Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: No need to rebuke the Conqueror on these points.] - -[Sidenote: Estimate of Anselm’s conduct.] - -[Sidenote: The Archbishop’s claim to the regency.] - -It may be that William Rufus spoke truly, and that Lanfranc would not, -in any case, have dared to speak to the Conqueror as Anselm dared to -speak to him. Lanfranc, with much that was great and good in him, was -not a prophet of righteousness like Anselm. But it is far more certain -that Lanfranc was never put to the test. The Conqueror never gave him -any need to speak to him as Anselm had now need to speak to his son. -What we blame in William the Great, what men like Wimund of Saint -Leutfred dared to blame in him, Lanfranc could not blame. The position -of Lanfranc in England involved the position of William. And, once -granting that position, there was comparatively little to blame in the -elder William. The beheading of Waltheof, the making of the New -Forest, stand almost alone; and the beheading of Waltheof was at least -no private murder; it was the judgement of what was in form a -competent court. The harshness and greediness with which the Conqueror -is justly charged was, after all, a small matter compared with the -utter unlaw of his son’s reign. And on the two subjects of Anselm’s -present discourse, the elder William needed no rebuke at any time. His -private life was at all times absolutely blameless, and, neither as -Duke nor as King, did he ever turn his ecclesiastical supremacy into a -source of gain. On both those points Lanfranc had as good a right to -speak as Anselm; but on those points he was never called on to speak -to his own master. Whether, in Anselm’s place, he would have dared to -speak as Anselm did, we cannot tell. But surely the holy boldness of -Anselm cannot be looked on as in any way blameworthy, as either -insolent or untimed. To him at least the time doubtless seemed most -fitting. He called on the King, before he exposed himself to the -dangers of a campaign beyond the sea, to do something to win God’s -favour by correcting the two grossest of the evils which were rife in -his kingdom. The Assembly was clearly not dissolved when Anselm spoke; -William could at once have filled the abbeys, he could at once have -put forth a law against the other class of offenders, in the most -regular form, by the advice of his Wise Men. Anselm might even have -held his synod while the wind was waiting. The synod in Lanfranc’s day -followed on the Gemót, and it took up only three days.[1253] Most of -the bishops were present at Hastings; those who were absent had -doubtless been summoned and, by the rule of the Great Charter and of -common sense, they would be bound by the acts of those who obeyed the -summons. Moreover, according to the precedents of the late reign, -Anselm would be the sole or chief representative of the King during -his absence. He might fairly ask to be clothed with every power, -temporal and spiritual, which was needed for the fit discharge of -kingly as well as pastoral duties. - -[Sidenote: Anselm attempts to recover the King’s favour.] - -[Sidenote: Advice of the bishops to give more money.] - -Anselm was deeply grieved at the ill success of his personal appeal to -the King. He was now wholly out of the King’s favour, and he felt -that, without some measure of support from the King, he could not -carry out the reforms, ecclesiastical and moral, for which he -longed.[1254] He was ready to do anything that could be done with a -good conscience in order to win back the King’s good will. He sent the -bishops to William, to crave that he might, of the King’s free grace, -be again admitted to his friendship. If the King would not grant him -his favour, let him at least say why he would not grant it; if Anselm -had wronged him in any way, he was ready to make the wrong good.[1255] -The bishops laid the prayer of their metropolitan before the King. The -answer was characteristic. “I have no fault to find with the -Archbishop; yet I will not grant him my favour, because I hear no -reason given why I should.”[1256] What those words meant in the mouth -of Rufus the bishops knew very well. They went back to tell the -Primate that the mystery was clear.[1257] The King’s favour was to be -won only by money, and by money in no small store. Their counsel was -that Anselm should at once give the King the five hundred pounds which -he had before offered, and that he should promise him another gift of -the same amount as soon as he could get it out of his men.[1258] On -those terms they fully believed that the King would grant him his -peace and friendship. They saw no other way for him; they were in the -same strait themselves, and knew no other way out of it.[1259] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s grounds for refusing.] - -[Sidenote: He will not oppress his tenants.] - -[Sidenote: His answer to the bishops.] - -[Sidenote: The King more hostile than ever.] - -In the counsel thus given to Anselm by his suffragans we hear the -words, not of utterly worldly and unscrupulous men, but of the -ordinary prelates of the time, good men, many of them, in all that -concerned their own personal lives and the ordinary administration of -their churches, but not men disposed to risk or dare much, men -disposed to go on as they best might in very bad times, without doing -anything which might make things still worse. In the eyes of Anselm, -on the other hand, things hardly could be made worse; if they could, -it would be by consenting to them. By an unflinching assertion of -principle things might be made better; in the worst case the assertor -of principle would have delivered his own soul. In Anselm’s eyes the -course which his suffragans suggested was sinful on every ground; -moreover――an argument which some of them might better understand――it -was utterly inexpedient. He refused to make his way out of his -difficulties by the path which they proposed. The King allowed that he -had no ground of complaint; he was simply angry because he could not -get five hundred pounds out of him as the price of his favour. If now, -while his appointment was still fresh, he should win the King’s favour -at such a price, the King would get angry with him at any other time -that might suit him, in order to have his wrath bought off in the same -way. This last argument seems to show that Anselm was after all not so -lacking in worldly wisdom as some have thought. But his main argument -was that he would not commit the crime of wringing any more money out -of his tenants. They had been frightfully oppressed and robbed during -the vacancy; he had not as yet been able to do anything to relieve -them; he would not lay fresh burthens upon them; he would not flay -alive those who were already stripped to their skins.[1260] Again, he -would not deal with his lord the King as if his friendship was a thing -to be bought and sold. He owed the King faith and honour, and it would -be doing him dishonour to treat his favour like a horse or an ass to -be paid for in vile money. He utterly refused to put such an insult -upon his sovereign. He told his suffragans that they should rather do -their best to persuade the King to deal of his free grace as it was -fit for him to deal with his archbishop and spiritual father. Then he, -on his part, would strive to do all that he could and might do for his -service and pleasure. This ideal view of the relation of King and -Primate was doubtless above the heads of John of Bath, of Robert of -Lincoln, of Robert of Chester, and of William of Durham in his present -mood. It was surely one of them, rather than Osmund or Robert of -Hereford, who answered; “But at least you will not refuse him the five -hundred pounds which you once offered.” Anselm answered that he could -not give that either; when the King refused it, he had promised it to -the poor, and the more part of it had been given to them already. The -bishops went back to the King on their unpromising errand. William -bade them tell the Archbishop that he hated him much yesterday, that -he hated him much to-day, and that he would hate him more and more -to-morrow and every other day. He would never hold Anselm for father -or archbishop; he cursed and eschewed his blessings and prayers. Let -him go where he would; he need not stay any longer there at Hastings, -if it was to bless him on his setting sail that he was waiting.[1261] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Anselm leaves Hastings.] - -[Sidenote: William crosses to Normandy. March 19, 1094.] - -[Sidenote: Vain attempts to settle the dispute.] - -[Sidenote: Verdict of the guarantors against William.] - -The Red King had thus cast aside another offer of grace. Our guide -tells us; “We departed from the court with speed, and left him to his -will.” The pronoun is emphatic. From that time, if not from an earlier -time, English Eadmer was the inseparable companion of Anselm. Anselm -and Eadmer then turned away, at what exact date we are not told. But -the north wind seems not to have blown till more than half the month -of March had passed. Then at last King William of England set sail -from Hastings for the conquest of Normandy. He went without Anselm’s -blessing; yet some of the ceremonies which had been gone through -during his sojourn at Hastings must surely have dwelled in his mind. -Fresh from the rite which in some sort marked the completion of his -father’s work in England, the younger William set out so far to undo -his father’s work as to bring Normandy into political subjection to -England. At what Norman haven he landed we are not told; it was -seemingly in some part of the lands of his earlier conquest, the lands -on the right bank of the Seine. Before swords were drawn, an attempt -was made to settle the dispute between the brothers. King and Duke met -in person; what was their place of meeting we are not told; but no -agreement could be come to.[1262] A second meeting took place, in -which the guarantors of the former treaty were appealed to, much as -Cnut had appealed to the witnesses of the treaty between him and -Eadmund.[1263] The guarantors, the twenty-four barons, twelve on each -side, who had sworn to the treaty, agreed in a verdict which laid the -whole blame upon the King. The words of our account――it is the English -Chronicler who speaks――clearly imply that the guarantors on William’s -side agreed in this verdict no less than those who swore on behalf of -Robert.[1264] And he adds from himself that Rufus would neither allow -that he was in fault nor abide by his former engagement.[1265] This -meeting therefore was yet more fruitless than the former; the brothers -parted in greater anger than ever.[1266] The Duke went back to Rouen; -the King again took up his head-quarters at Eu.[1267] - -[Sidenote: Castles held by the King.] - -[Sidenote: La Houlme.] - -[Sidenote: Argentan.] - -[Sidenote: Taking of Bures.] - -Again on Norman soil, William began to practise the arts which had -stood him in such stead in his former enterprise on the duchy. He -hired mercenaries; he gave or promised money or lands to such of the -chief men of Normandy as were willing to forsake the allegiance of -Robert; he quartered his knights both in the castles which he had -hitherto held, and in those which he won to himself by these -means.[1268] Some of these last were very far from Eu. It shows how -successful were the arts of Rufus, how wide was the disaffection -against Robert, when we find castles, far away from one another, far -away from the seat of William’s power in eastern Normandy, but hemming -in the lands in the Duke’s obedience on two dangerous frontiers, -garrisoned by the King’s troops. We are reminded of the revival of -Henry’s power in the Côtentin when we read that the castle of La -Houlme, at the junction of the two rivers Douve and Merderet, lying -south-east from Valognes and nearly east from Saint Saviour, was now -held for William.[1269] So was another stronghold in quite another -quarter, not far from the Cenomannian border, the castle of Argentan -on the upper course of the Orne, to the south of the great forest of -Gouffers. Two famous captains held these threatening posts. Argentan -was commanded by Earl Roger’s son, Roger the Poitevin.[1270] La Houlme -was held by William Peverel, the lord of Nottingham and the -Peakland.[1271] But the first military exploit of the campaign was -wrought in a land nearer to Eu. Bures――whether still held or not by -the faithful Helias we are not told――was taken, and the garrison were -made prisoners; some of them were kept in Normandy, others were sent -by Rufus for better safe-keeping in his own kingdom.[1272] - -[Sidenote: Robert calls in King Philip.] - -[Sidenote: Siege of Argentan.] - -[Sidenote: Surrender of Argentan.] - -[Sidenote: Ransom of prisoners.] - -[Sidenote: Robert takes La Houlme] - -Rufus thus pressed the war vigorously against his brother, with the -full purpose of wholly depriving him of the duchy. Robert, in his -distress, again called on his over-lord, and this time with more -effect than before.[1273] The French intervention was at least able to -turn the balance for a while against Rufus. No object was more -important for Robert than the recovery of the two strongholds which -threatened him, one in the dangerous land on the upper Orne, the other -in the no less dangerous Constantine peninsula. A joint expedition of -the new allies was agreed on, and King and Duke appeared side by side -before Argentan. The castle stood on a height of no great elevation -above the river, with the town, as usual, spreading down to its banks. -The existing fragments show that the fortress and its precinct covered -a vast space, but no architectural feature remains as a witness of the -siege of Argentan by Philip and Robert. The town contains several -attractive buildings of later date, ecclesiastical, civil, and -military. There are churches, town-walls with their towers, the later -_château_ within the fortress; but of the stronghold which Roger of -Poitou had to guard against the powers of Rouen and Paris but little -can be traced. There are some massive and irregular pieces of wall, -and part of a polygonal donjon, the latter at least far later than -Roger’s day. But of the size and strength of the castle there can be -no doubt. It is therefore with some little wonder that we read that -the besiegers found its capture so easy a matter as they did, -especially when its defender was one of the house of Montgomery and -Bellême. On the very first day of the siege the castle surrendered -without bloodshed. Roger of Poitou, with seven hundred knights and as -many esquires――a name which we are now beginning to come across――and -his whole garrison were made prisoners and were kept in ward till they -were ransomed.[1274] Here we see the hand of Philip; we see, as in -some other cases which we have come across already, the beginning of -one of the institutions of chivalry. We shall presently see the custom -of the ransom become a marked feature of the wars between France and -England――so we shall soon find ourselves obliged to call them――in the -eleventh century no less than in the fourteenth. But the bulky King of -the French was for the present contented with this one exploit and -with so valuable a stock of captives. Philip went back into France, -and left his Norman vassal to go on with the campaign alone.[1275] -Robert now drew some spirit from success. He marched westward, and -attacked La Houlme. The castle surrendered; the lord of the Peak, with -eight hundred men, became the prize of the Duke’s unusual display of -vigour.[1276] - -[Sidenote: Difficulties of Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: Further taxation.] - -[Sidenote: Levy of English soldiers.] - -[Sidenote: Flambard takes away the soldiers’ money.] - -The war went on; each side burned the towns and took the men of the -other side.[1277] But the tide had for the moment decidedly turned -against the Red King. The loss of Argentan and La Houlme, with their -commanders and their large garrisons, was a serious military blow. The -payment of their ransoms might be a still more serious financial blow. -And the payment of a ransom, by which he only got back again what he -had had before, would be less satisfactory to the mind of Rufus than -the payment of bribes and wages by which he had a hope of gaining -something fresh. The hoard at Winchester seems at last to have been -running low; but when William Rufus was king and when he had Randolf -Flambard to his minister, there could be no lack of ways and means to -fill it again. Specially heavy were the gelds laid on England both in -this year and in the following.[1278] And money was gained by one -device which surely would have come into the head of no king and no -minister save those by whom it actually was devised. A great levy was -ordered; King William sent over his bidding that twenty thousand -Englishmen should come over to help the King in Normandy.[1279] -Englishmen had by this time got used to service beyond sea. Nothing is -said of any difficulty in getting this great force together. The -troops were gathered at Hastings, ready to set sail. Each man had -brought with him ten shillings, the contribution of his shire for his -maintenance in the King’s service. For the men who answered to Rufus’ -bidding were no mercenaries, not even housecarls; they were the _fyrd_ -of England, summoned, by a perhaps unjustifiable but not very -wonderful stretch of authority, to serve their king beyond the sea. -But, when they were ready to sail, Flambard came, and by the King’s -orders took away each man’s money, and bade them all go home -again.[1280] One would like to know something of the feelings of the -men who were thus strangely cheated; we should surely have heard if -there had been any open resistance. Anyhow, by this amazing trick, the -Red King had exchanged the arms of twenty thousand Englishmen for a -sum of ten thousand pounds of English money. After all, the money -might be of greater use than the men in a war with Philip of Paris. - -[Sidenote: Rufus buys off Philip.] - -If William thus reckoned, he was not deceived. He was still at Eu. -Philip was again in arms; his forces joined those of Robert; again -King and Duke marched side by side, this time with the purpose of -besieging the King of the English in his Norman stronghold. The ten -thousand pounds now served William’s turn quite as well as the twenty -thousand men could have served it. The combined French and Norman host -had reached Longueville on the Scie, with streams and forests between -them and Eu.[1281] Longueville was the last stage of their march. -Thither Rufus sent those who knew how to bring his special arguments -to bear on the mind of Philip. The King again went back to France, and -the confederate army was broken up.[1282] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Contemporary notices of the campaign.] - -[Sidenote: Difference between England and Normandy.] - -[Sidenote: Private wars go on in Normandy.] - -There is something very singular in the way in which this second -Norman war of William Rufus is dealt with by those who wrote at or -near the time. Some make no mention of it at all; others speak of it -only casually; our own Chronicler, who gives the fullest account of -all, does not carry it on to any intelligible issue of success or of -failure. In his pages, and in those of some others, the war drops out -of notice, without coming to any real end of any kind.[1283] The monk -of Saint Evroul, so lavish in local Norman details, seems to have had -his head too full of the local strifes among the Norman nobles to tell -us anything of a warfare which in our eyes comes so much nearer to the -likeness of a national struggle. It must always be remembered that the -local wars which tore every district of Normandy in pieces did not -stop in the least because two hostile kings were encamped on Norman -soil. There cannot be a more speaking comment, at once on the -difference between Robert and either of his brothers and on the -essential difference between the ordinary state of Normandy and of -England. With us private war was never lawful; we needed not the -preaching of the Truce of God.[1284] William the Great, when his -authority was fully established, kept England in peace; and in his -later years the peace of Normandy itself, as distinguished from the -border lands, was broken only by the rebellion of his own son. So in -England there still were rebellions alike against Rufus and against -Henry; but, when the rebellion was crushed, the land was at rest. In -Normandy, as soon as the hand of the great ruler was taken away, -things fell back into the state in which they had been during his own -minority. And they remained in that state till William the Red in his -later years again established order in the duchy. One can well -understand that the endless ups and downs in the local struggles which -went on close to every man’s door really drew to themselves far more -of men’s thoughts than the strife of King William, King Philip, and -Duke Robert himself. The two kings were but two more disputants added -to the crowd, and they were disputants who really did much less harm -to the land in general than was done by its own native chiefs. It is -not very wonderful then that we hear so little of this war from the -Norman side. It is not wonderful that, on the English side, when -stirring events began again before long to happen in England, the -Norman war dropped out of sight. And presently events in the world’s -history were to come which made even the warfare of England and France -seem trifles amid the general stir of “the world’s debate.” - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Relations of Rufus and Henry.] - -[Sidenote: Saint Cenery taken by Robert of Bellême.] - -[Sidenote: Henry and Hugh summoned to Eu.] - -[Sidenote: They go to Southampton. October 31, 1094.] - -[Sidenote: They keep Christmas in London.] - -[Sidenote: The King comes to England. December 28, 1094.] - -[Sidenote: William and Henry reconciled.] - -[Sidenote: Henry goes to Normandy, c. Feb. 9, 1095.] - -[Sidenote: His warfare with Robert.] - -[Sidenote: General results of the campaign.] - -[Sidenote: Progress of Henry.] - -For the last events of Rufus’ second Norman war we have to go wholly -to our one witness in our own tongue. It is plain that the King, even -after his gold had turned Philip back, did not feel at all at ease in -his Norman quarters. He seems to have distrusted two important -personages at the other end of the duchy, his other brother and one of -the mightiest of his own subjects. Henry, Ætheling and again Count, -was safe in his castle of Domfront, among the people who had chosen -him as their protector. At one period of this year, he is described as -at war with both his brothers at once.[1285] We find him taking the -part of the lord of Saint Cenery, Robert son of Geroy,[1286] against -the common enemy, Robert of Bellême. His help however did not hinder -the cherished fortress from falling into the hands of the -tyrant.[1287] We hear of him before the end of the war in a way which -implies at least some suspicious feeling between himself and the King -his brother. Besides Henry, Hugh of Chester――rather Hugh of Avranches -or Hugh of Saint-James――was also in his own continental possessions. -The King summoned both of them to come to him at Eu, and, as the state -of the duchy did not allow them to come across Normandy by land, he -sent ships to bring them.[1288] But Henry and Hugh, from whatever -causes, did not choose to meet the King face to face. Instead of -sailing to Eu or its port, they made for Southampton, where they -landed and seemingly stayed――with what objects we are not told――for -some weeks.[1289] Thence they went to London, and kept Christmas -there. King William was not this year wearing his crown either at -Westminster or at Gloucester. But it is clear that the movements of -his youngest brother had an effect upon his own. For the first three -days of the holy twelve he stayed at Whitsand. On the fourth day, the -feast of the Innocents, the anniversary of the dedication of the West -Minster, he crossed the sea and landed at Dover.[1290] Thence he -seemingly came to London, where Henry was. Whatever quarrels or -suspicions had sprung up between the King and the Ætheling were now -made up. Henry was received into his brother’s fullest confidence. He -stayed in England till Lent began, when he went to spend the -penitential season in Normandy. But it was not to be an idle season; -in the month between Epiphany and Lent, the Red King had made his -preparations for a campaign in which Henry was to take his place. The -Count of Coutances then went again beyond sea with great treasures to -be used on the King’s behalf against his brother――Earl Robert, as -English lips called him. “And ofttimes upon the Earl he won, and to -him mickle harm either on land and on men did.”[1291] Here ends our -story. We get no further details till William became master of all -Normandy by quite another process. But though we get no details of the -war from Norman sources, we do get a general picture of its results. -The no-rule of Robert is once more set before us in speaking words. -The soft Duke, who feared his subjects more than they feared him, was -benumbed with softness and idleness.[1292] He is contrasted with both -his brothers. Henry held his stronghold at Domfront, together with a -large but undefined part of the duchy, including without doubt the -more part of his old peninsular county. Some places he had won by -arms; others, like Domfront itself, had sought his rule of their own -free will.[1293] Within these bounds he yielded to his brother the -Duke just so much service as he thought good,[1294] which at this -particular moment would be little indeed. And the other brother who -wore the diadem of England held more than twenty castles on Norman -ground. He, unlike Robert, was a ruler whom men feared; and his gifts, -and the fear of him together, kept many of the great men of the land, -not only in his allegiance, but in his zealous service.[1295] If -Normandy was not conquered, it was at least effectually dismembered. - -[Sidenote: Norman supporters of William.] - -[Sidenote: William of Eu.] - -[Sidenote: Stephen of Aumale.] - -[Sidenote: Robert of Meulan.] - -[Sidenote: Walter Giffard.] - -[Sidenote: Death of Roger of Beaumont. 1094.] - -[Sidenote: Henry Earl of Warwick.] - -[Sidenote: Death of Roger of Montgomery. 1094.] - -[Sidenote: Robert of Bellême succeeds his father in Normandy, and Hugh -in England.] - -[Sidenote: Death of Hugh of Grantmesnil.] - -[Sidenote: His burial at Saint Evroul.] - -[Sidenote: Death of Walter Giffard. 1102.] - -[Sidenote: Eadmer’s judgement of the campaign.] - -The list of the Norman nobles who joined the King from beyond sea -takes in most of the names with which we are most at home. There is -Ralph of Conches, Gerard of Gournay, Richard of Courcy. We hear now -too of Philip of Braose, a name to become famous in more than one part -of our island. And we find the names of men yet higher in power, and -nearer to the ducal house. There is the first author of the late -troubles, Count William of Eu, for the present still an adherent of -Rufus, before long to be heard of in quite another character. With him -stands Count Stephen of Aumale, also before long to play a part in our -story wholly different from that which we find him playing now. And it -is needless to say that Count Robert of Meulan was the Red King’s -servant in his Norman, as well as in his English character.[1296] Nor -do we wonder to find in the same list――for he was Earl of Buckingham -as well as lord of Longueville――the name of Walter Giffard, him who -appeared as an aged man forty years before.[1297] He still lived, -while, during this very year, more than one of the elder generation of -the famous men of Normandy passed away. The father of the Count of -Meulan, the old Roger of Beaumont, renowned so many years before alike -in arms and in council,[1298] died on the Norman soil which he had -guarded so well, and which he seems never to have left. He had for -some years left the world, to become a monk in the monastery of Preaux -of his father’s rearing.[1299] His estates had passed to his son at -Meulan, the mighty vassal of three lords. His younger son Henry had -his lot cast in England, where, perhaps before this time, the Red King -bestowed on him the earldom of Warwick. And, in the same year as the -lord of Beaumont, died, far away in England, another Roger, like him a -monk, but four days before a mighty earl, Roger of Montgomery, of -Arundel, and of Shrewsbury, the youngest brother of the house beyond -the Severn bridge of which he at least claimed to be the -founder.[1300] His vast possessions were divided at his death. Robert -of Bellême, already heir of his mother in the border-land, now became -heir of his father in Normandy. The earldom of Shrewsbury and Roger’s -other English estates passed to his second son Hugh, who bears the -character of being the only one of the sons of Mabel who was mild and -gentle[1301]――mild and gentle, we must understand, to Normans, perhaps -even to Englishmen, but certainly not to captive Britons. Of Hugh, as -well as of Robert of Bellême and Roger of Poitou, as well as of Arnulf -of Montgomery, a fourth son of the same fierce stock, we shall hear -much as our tale goes on. In England too, perhaps within his -sheriffdom of Leicester, died Hugh of Grantmesnil, of whom we have -lately heard in the civil wars both of Normandy and of England, and -whom his own shire and his neighbours of Northamptonshire had no -reason to bless. His body, we need hardly say, found its way across -the sea, to lie among his loyal bedesmen at Saint Evroul.[1302] These -men all left the world in the year with which we are now dealing, and -left the hoary Earl of Buckingham to be for eight years longer the -representative of an earlier day.[1303] The hands which eight and -twenty years before had been too feeble to bear the banner of the -Apostle[1304] were still, it would seem, ready to do whatever was -still found for them to do in the service of the Red King. But the -warfare of the King and his partisans is set down simply as one among -the many ways in which Normandy was torn in pieces by her own -children.[1305] An English writer meanwhile, on whose main subject the -Norman campaigns of Rufus had but a very indirect bearing, speaks -casually of this expedition as an undertaking on which a vast deal of -money was spent, but by which very little was gained.[1306] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Wretchedness of England.] - -[Sidenote: Causes for the King’s return.] - -[Sidenote: Affairs of Scotland] - -[Sidenote: and Wales.] - -[Sidenote: Plots at home.] - -It is indeed to be borne in mind, as supplying at least a partial -explanation of the way in which the second Norman expedition comes to -an end without any end, that things in England were, just as they had -been three years and a half before, in a state which urgently called -for the presence of the King within his kingdom. We know not whether -it at all moved him that the heavy taxation which had been laid on his -kingdom for the cost of his warfare had brought the land to the lowest -pitch of wretchedness. Men, we are told, had ceased to till the -ground; hunger followed; there were hardly left any who could tend the -dying or bury the dead.[1307] These things might not have greatly -stirred the heart of the Red King; but he may, like other tyrants, -have felt that there was a bound beyond which oppression could not be -safely carried. And there were political and military reasons which -called him back. He could not afford to jeopard his undisputed -possession of England for the sake of a few more castles in Normandy. -He could hardly afford to jeopard for their sake the imperial -supremacy of his crown over the whole isle of Britain, a supremacy -which he was at that moment specially called on to assert. The year of -the second Norman campaign was a year of special importance in the -history both of Scotland and of Wales. While the Red King was warring -and bribing in Normandy, Scotland had, as in the days of Siward, -received a king from England, and, what had not happened in the days -of Siward, her people had slain the foreign nominee, and had again -chosen a king of their own. The first reign of Donald, the momentary -reign of Duncan, the beginning of the second reign of Donald, all of -them events which were not mere changes of sovereign, but real -revolutions in the state of the nation, had happened between the death -of Malcolm and the return of William from Normandy thirteen months -later. Wales too had risen in a movement which had more than was usual -of the character of real national insurrection, and the movement had -called for all the energies of the new Earl of Shrewsbury and of the -King himself on his return. And a plot yet nearer home, a plot to -deprive the King of his crown and life, a plot devised by men who had -been just now the foremost in supporting his cause, broke out soon -after his return. It broke out so soon after it that one is tempted to -think that it was already hatching, and that it was one of the causes -which brought him back. The seeming break-down of the Red King’s -second Norman campaign thus becomes more intelligible than some of the -other cases where he began an undertaking and failed to finish it. -William had plenty to do in Britain, both in camp and in council. As -soon as he was assured of the adhesion of his brother Henry, he could -afford, indeed he was driven, to leave him to do the work which had to -be done in Normandy. - - -§ 4. _The Council of Rockingham. December, 1094-March, 1095._ - -[Sidenote: Notices of the year 1095.] - -[Sidenote: Councils of the year.] - -The year to which the last Christmas feast introduces us brings -strongly home to us the singular way in which our general chroniclers -follow one line of events, while the special biographer of the -Archbishop follows another. There is no contradiction; but the gaps -which have to be filled up in each narrative are remarkable. It is not -perhaps wonderful that the biographer of Anselm should, even in a work -which bears a general title, pass by events which in no way affected -the history of Anselm. It is more remarkable that one of the most -striking scenes in Anselm’s history should not have been thought -worthy of notice by the more general annalists of our land. But so it -is. The year 1095 is a year of very stirring events, and it is -preeminently a year of councils. But, with a single exception, our two -authorities do not record the same events and the same councils. Both -tell us of the pallium being brought to Anselm; but, while one tells -us nothing of the most striking of the assemblies in which Anselm bore -a part, the other tells us nothing of the conspiracy, the revolt, the -war, which specially mark this year in the general story of England. - -[Sidenote: Alleged Welsh campaign. January 9, 1095?] - -[Sidenote: Movements of William. January-February, 1095.] - -If our story is rightly told, the Christmas meeting of William and -Henry, followed before long by a Norman campaign on the part of Henry, -was followed yet more immediately by a Welsh campaign on the part of -William. The King took the affairs of his own island into his own -hands, and, for the present, he left those of the mainland to the -Count of Coutances. A winter campaign in Wales does not sound very -promising, and we are not surprised to hear that it did not add much -to the glory of the Red King’s arms.[1308] At all events it must have -been short, for, in the course of January and February we find him at -points at a considerable distance from the Welsh border. In January he -was at Cricklade in Wiltshire; in February he was at Gillingham in -Dorset, near to Ælfred’s monastery of Shaftesbury, and itself the -scene of the election of the Confessor.[1309] In both cases we hear of -the King’s movements through incidental notices in our ecclesiastical -story. The second is part of the story of Anselm; the first does not -concern Anselm himself; it forms part of the tale of the holiest of -his suffragans. - -[Sidenote: Death of Wulfstan.] - -[Sidenote: Sickness of Wulfstan.] - -[Sidenote: Easter, 1094.] - -[Sidenote: He dines with “good men.”] - -[Sidenote: General respect for Wulfstan.] - -[Sidenote: His correspondence.] - -[Sidenote: His increased sickness. Whitsuntide, 1094.] - -[Sidenote: Wulfstan and Robert of Hereford.] - -[Sidenote: Death of Wulfstan. January 18, 1095.] - -[Sidenote: His appearance to Bishop Robert.] - -[Sidenote: His burial. Jan. 22.] - -In this month of January the soul of the last surviving English -bishop, the sainted Wulfstan of Worcester, passed away. In the eyes of -one annalist his death was the great event of the year, and was -announced by signs and wonders in the heavens. “There was a stir among -the stars, and Wulfstan Bishop of Worcester died!”[1310] The health of -the good old man had been for some time ailing; we have seen that he -had latterly been unable to show himself in assemblies and ceremonies. -At the Easter of the year before his death, while the King was in -Normandy, he told his steward that on the day of the feast he meant to -dine in state with “good men.” The steward, mistaking the meaning of a -phrase which is ambiguous in several languages and which was specially -so in the English of his day,[1311] got together many of the rich men -of the neighbourhood――we are not told whether the Sheriff Urse was -among them. The day came; the Bishop entered the hall with a large -company of the poor, and ordered seats to be set for them among the -other guests. The steward was displeased;[1312] but Wulfstan explained -that those whom he brought with him were the men who had the true -riches; he had rather sit down with such a company than sit down, as -he had often done, with the King of the English.[1313] For Rufus, we -are told, always received Wulfstan with honour; we may doubt whether -either knew enough of the other’s language for rebukes to be met by -repartees. The great men of the realm did the like. Foreign princes, -prelates, and potentates honoured him with gifts and asked for his -prayers.[1314] Among his correspondents were the Pope――doubtless -Urban――Malcolm and Margaret of Scotland, and the kings of Ireland. To -this list are added the Archbishop of Bari and the Patriarch of -Jerusalem, which last name suggests correspondence on the common needs -of Christendom. At Pentecost Wulfstan was very sick; he sent for his -special friend Bishop Robert of Hereford, him whose skill had foretold -that Remigius would never dedicate his minster.[1315] Robert came; the -humble Wulfstan made his confession and submitted to the -discipline.[1316] But he lived on during the rest of that year. -Shortly after the beginning of the new year, he had another visit from -Bishop Robert and two abbots of his diocese, Serlo of Gloucester and -Gerald, abbot of the still unfinished house which Robert Fitz-hamon -was raising at Tewkesbury.[1317] Wulfstan again confessed; he foretold -his own death; he comforted his friends; he gave himself to religious -exercises, causing his seat in his chamber to be so placed that he -could see the altar in his chapel.[1318] At last, not many days after -Robert’s visit, the one remaining bishop of the old stock passed away -from his church and from the world. Men believed that he appeared _in -transitu_ to his friend Bishop Robert, who, as one who reconciled his -episcopal virtues with skill in the affairs of the world, was now with -the King at Cricklade.[1319] The vision bade Robert come to his -friend’s burial; he came, and the ceremony took place four days after -Wulfstan’s death, among a mighty gathering of those who had honoured -him in life. A generation later it was made a subject of complaint, a -subject of rebuke to an age which, we are told, was loath to believe -in signs and wonders, that so holy a man was not formally enrolled on -the list of saints.[1320] Aftertimes made up for this neglect. -Wulfstan became the chief object of local devotion, and no small -object of devotion throughout the land. The saint whom Rufus had -honoured in life became after death the special object of the devotion -of King John, who hoped to be safer in the next world if his body lay -in Wulfstan’s church under the shadow of Wulfstan’s shrine. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Anselm and Urban.] - -[Sidenote: Need of the pallium.] - -[Sidenote: Elder usage as to the pallium.] - -[Sidenote: The pallium not needful for the validity of archiepiscopal -acts.] - -[Sidenote: Character of William’s refusal.] - -Another link with the past was thus snapped, and, what the King at -least thought more of, another bishopric passed into the hands of -Flambard. About a month after the shade of Wulfstan had appeared to -Bishop Robert in the King’s court at Cricklade, the living Anselm -showed himself to the King in person in his court at Gillingham.[1321] -Notwithstanding the hatred which William had expressed towards him at -Hastings, the Archbishop had reasons which urged him to seek another -interview. The errand on which he came was one at which he had hinted -before he had been invested with the archbishopric. He had then fairly -warned the King that, if he became archbishop, he must acknowledge -Urban as Pope.[1322] He had as yet done nothing towards acknowledging -him; he had taken no step which involved the acknowledgement of Urban -or of any other pope. With Anselm moral questions came first. The -points on which he had first striven to awaken the conscience of the -King had been the moral corruption of his court and kingdom, and the -synod which, in Anselm’s eyes at least, was the best means for its -reformation. But William had so utterly refused his consent to the -holding of a synod, he had so utterly refused to give Anselm any help -in his schemes of moral reform, that Anselm perhaps thought it useless -to press those subjects again upon him. The point which he still -thought it his duty to press was one which to us seems of infinitely -less importance than either, but with regard to which we must look at -matters with the eyes of Anselm’s day and not with the eyes of our -own. Anselm was full archbishop in all points spiritual and temporal, -as far as the spiritual and temporal powers of England could make him -so. But he still lacked one badge of metropolitan authority, without -which his position would certainly be deemed imperfect anywhere out of -England. He had not received the archiepiscopal _pallium_ from Rome. -He naturally wished for this final stage of his promotion, this sign -of recognition, as he would deem it, on the part of the Universal -Church and her chief pastor. Now this supposed need of the pallium was -not, like some of the claims of the Roman see, anything new. English -archbishops had gone to receive the pallium at Rome, or they had had -the pallium sent to them from Rome, in the days of the elder William, -in the days of Eadward, in the days of kings long before then.[1323] -Lanfranc had gone to Rome for his pallium with the full good will of -the Conqueror,[1324] and one of the chief ecclesiastical difficulties -of the time immediately before the Conqueror’s coming was the belief -that Stigand had received his pallium in an irregular way.[1325] The -amount of dependence on the Roman see which was implied in the receipt -of this badge of honour may perhaps be questioned. It would be -differently understood at Rome and at Canterbury. It would be -differently understood at Canterbury, according to the temper of -different archbishops, or according to their English or foreign birth. -But it is at least plain that the possession of the pallium was not at -this time looked on as at all needful for the validity of any -archiepiscopal act. Anselm, as yet unclothed with it, had consecrated -a bishop and had proposed to hold a synod. Still for the new -archbishop to go to Rome to receive that badge of his office which was -still lacking was a simple matter of course. Doubtless the journey -needed the formal leave of the king; but no king but William Rufus -would have thought of refusing his leave for the purpose. William had -indeed not acknowledged Urban; but Anselm had warned William that, if -he became archbishop, he must continue to acknowledge Urban, and -William had allowed him to become archbishop on those terms. The -earlier conduct of William in such matters could not have led Anselm -to think that he attached much real importance to the matter. William -of Saint-Calais had put forth the loftiest views of papal authority in -the hearing of William and Lanfranc, and they had been objected to on -quite other grounds. King and Primate had rightly objected when the -Bishop of Durham appealed from the King and his Witan to the Pope of -Rome; they had not quarrelled with the Bishop of Durham simply because -he had implied that there was a Pope of Rome. The refusal to allow -Anselm to go for the pallium could have come only from a king who was -determined to raise every point which could annoy the archbishop, -above all to raise every point which could by any chance drive him to -a resignation of the archbishopric. Or better still than all in the -Red King’s eyes would it be to find some point which could anyhow lead -to Anselm’s being deprived of the archbishopric. If such an end could -be gained, it would matter not by what power or by what process it was -done; it would matter not if it involved the forsaking on William’s -own part of every position which he had taken up. - -[Sidenote: Anselm asks leave to go to Urban for the pallium.] - -[Sidenote: William will acknowledge no pope.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s argument.] - -[Sidenote: William’s answer.] - -[Sidenote: Position of Anselm towards Urban.] - -Anselm then came to Gillingham, and asked the King’s leave to go to -the Pope to ask for his pallium. William at once asked to which Pope -he meant to go.[1326] Anselm of course answered, To Urban. The King -said that he had not yet acknowledged Urban as Pope, that it was -neither his custom nor that of his father to allow any one in his -kingdom so much as to call any one Pope without his leave. So precious -was this right to him that to seek to take it from him was the same -thing as to seek to take away his crown.[1327] Anselm then set forth -the case of the two contending Popes, and his own personal case in the -matter. He reminded the King of what he had told him at Rochester -before he took the archbishopric, that, as Abbot of Bec, he had -acknowledged Urban, and that he could not withdraw from the obedience -which he had pledged to him. The King, in great wrath, said that -Anselm could not at once keep his faith towards himself and the -obedience which without his leave he had promised to Urban.[1328] Now, -when Anselm pledged his obedience to Urban, he was not an English -subject, and he needed no leave from the King of England for anything. -He acknowledged Urban, as all the rest of Normandy acknowledged him. -The obedience which he had thus pledged Anselm looked on as still -personally binding on him, though his temporal allegiance was -transferred to a kingdom where Urban was not acknowledged. William, -not unnaturally, took no heed of Anselm’s personal obligations. -Whatever the Abbot of Bec might have done, neither the Archbishop of -Canterbury nor any other English subject could acknowledge any Pope -without the King’s leave. After all, Anselm’s acknowledgement of Urban -had not yet gone further than speaking of him as Pope. He had had no -dealings with him of any kind. He indeed proposed to do an act which -would have been the fullest acknowledgement of Urban’s claims. But he -had proposed to do it only with the King’s leave. What he should do in -case the King refused to give him leave to go, he had not said, very -likely he had not settled in his own mind. He would do nothing -contrary to his obedience to Urban; but as yet his obedience to Urban -was wholly in theory. The King’s words now made it a practical -question; any kind of adhesion to Urban was declared by the King’s own -mouth to be inconsistent with the duties of one who was the man of the -King of England. - -[Sidenote: Twofold duty of the Archbishop.] - -[Sidenote: He asks for an assembly to discuss the question.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s purposes.] - -[Sidenote: He will leave the realm if he may not acknowledge Urban.] - -Anselm, it is plain, was most anxious to do his duty alike as -churchman and as subject. He saw no kind of inconsistency between the -two. No such questions had been raised in the days of Lanfranc, and he -had not done, or proposed to do, anything but what Lanfranc had done -before him. Reasonably enough, he was not prepared to admit the King’s -interpretation of the law which declared that he could not be the -friend at once of Urban and of William. And, in a thoroughly -constitutional spirit, he demanded that the question should be -referred to a lawful assembly of the kingdom. Let the bishops, abbots, -and lay nobles come together, and let them decide whether the two -duties were so inconsistent with each other as the King said they -were.[1329] By their judgement on the point of law he would abide. If -they ruled that it was as the King said, that obedience to Urban was -inconsistent with allegiance to William, then he would shape his own -course accordingly. If such should be their verdict, he could not -abide in the land without either openly throwing off the obedience of -Urban or else openly breaking his duty as subject and liegeman to -William. He would do neither. In such a case he would leave the realm -till such time as the King should acknowledge Urban.[1330] By that -means he would avoid all breach of either duty. The case might well -have been argued on another ground, whether it was not being righteous -overmuch to bring back again, for the sake of a technical scruple of -any kind, all the evils which would at once follow if the land were -again left without an archbishop. Anselm’s answer would doubtless have -been that he could not do evil that good might come. And it would be -much clearer to the mind of Anselm than it would have been to the mind -of any native Englishman that a withdrawal of obedience from Urban was -the doing of evil. The feelings of Aosta, even the feelings of Bec, -were not quite at home in the air of Gillingham. But the bringing in -of foreign ideas, feelings, and scruples, was one of the necessary -consequences of foreign conquest. Anselm obeyed his own conscience, -and his conscience taught him as a conscience schooled at Aosta and -Bec could not fail to teach him. - -[Sidenote: Frequency of assemblies under Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: Easter Gemót. March 25, 1095.] - -[Sidenote: A special meeting summoned.] - -[Sidenote: Assembly of Rockingham. March 11, 1095.] - -To Anselm’s proposal for referring the matter to the Witan of the -kingdom William made no objection. The Red King seems never to have -had any objection to meeting either his great men or the general mass -of his subjects. He was in truth so strong that every gathering of the -kind became little more than a display of his power. But it is not -easy to see why the question could not have been kept open till the -ordinary Easter Gemót. That Gemót was held this year at Winchester, -and, as we shall see in another chapter, matters of no small moment -had to be treated in it. The King’s authority was beginning to be -defied in northern England, and at this Easter it had to be asserted. -But, for whatever reason, it was determined that a special assembly -should be summoned a fortnight before the regular meeting at -Winchester, for the discussion of the particular point which had been -raised between the King and the Archbishop. It illustrates the way in -which the kings and great men of that time were always moving from -place to place that a spot was chosen for the special meeting, far -away from the spot where William and Anselm then were, far away from -the place where the regular assembly was to be held so soon after. -Gillingham and Winchester were comparatively near to each other; but -the assembly which was to give a legal judgement as to Anselm’s -conflicting duties was summoned to meet on the second Sunday before -Easter at the royal castle of Rockingham on the borders of -Northamptonshire and Leicestershire, a place which had at least the -merit of being one of the most central in England. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: The King technically right.] - -[Sidenote: Moral estimate of his conduct.] - -[Sidenote: Position of the rival Popes.] - -[Sidenote: William’s treatment of the question.] - -[Sidenote: No real objection to Urban on his part.] - -In the question which was now to be argued, there can be little doubt -that the King was technically in the right, as the law was understood -in his father’s time. By the custom of the Conqueror’s reign, no Pope -could be acknowledged without the King’s leave; and, though Anselm had -not taken any active or public step in acknowledgement of Urban, he -had acknowledged him in words spoken to the King himself, and he had -declared that he would not on any account withdraw his obedience from -Urban. At the same time one can hardly conceive a more pettifogging -way of interpreting the law, or a meaner way of abusing a legal power. -There was no reasonable ground for refusing to acknowledge Urban, -except on the theory that the deposition of Gregory and the election -of Clement were valid. Urban represented the claims of Gregory; -Clement still lived to assert his own claims. But though Lanfranc had -used cautious language about the dispute,[1331] England and her King -had never thought of acknowledging Clement or of withdrawing their -allegiance from Gregory. Gregory had been the Conqueror’s Pope, as -long as the two great ones both lived. And, if Clement’s election was -void from the beginning, Gregory’s death could not make his right any -better. Victor had succeeded Gregory, and Urban had succeeded Victor. -There could be no excuse for objecting to Urban, except on a ground -which William Rufus might have been glad to take up, but which he -could not take up with any decency. He might, not unreasonably from -his own point of view, have thrown himself into the Imperial cause, as -the common cause of princes. But he could not do this without throwing -blame on the conduct of his father. Or again, if he had tried, in any -legal or regular way, either to limit the papal power like Henry the -Second, or to cast it off altogether like Henry the Eighth, we at -least, as we read the story, could not have blamed him. But it was not -in the nature of William Rufus to do anything in a legal or regular -way. It was not in him to take up any really intelligible counter -position, either by getting rid of Popes altogether or by -acknowledging the Imperial Pope. It is true that he might have found -it hard to carry with him even his servile prelates, still harder to -carry his lay nobles, in either of those courses. But then it was just -as little in him honestly to take the third course which was open to -him, by frankly acknowledging Urban. It pleased him better to play -tricks with his claim to acknowledge popes, just as he played tricks -with his claim to appoint bishops and abbots. To keep the question -open, to give no reason on either side, but practically to hinder the -acknowledgement of any pope, was a more marked exercise of his own -arbitrary will than if he had ruled the disputed question either way. -But, just as he was ready to fill up a bishopric as soon as he thought -it worth his while in point of money, so he was quite ready to -acknowledge a pope as soon as it seemed worth his while to do so, in -point either of policy or of spite. All this while he had not the -slightest real objection to acknowledge Urban. Either now or very soon -after, he was actually intriguing with Urban, in hopes of carrying his -point against Anselm by his means. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Position of Rockingham.] - -[Sidenote: History of the place.] - -[Sidenote: The castle.] - -[Sidenote: Description of the site.] - -And now the Assembly came together which was to declare the law of -England as to the point in dispute between Anselm and the King. It was -not gathered in any of the great cities, or under the shadow of any of -the great minsters, of the realm. Nor yet was it gathered, as some -councils were gathered before and after, in one of those spots which -were simply the seats of the King’s silvan pleasures. Rockingham, -placed on the edge of the forest which bears its name, the wooded -ground between the sluggish streams of Nen and Welland, was -preeminently a hunting-seat; but it was not merely a hunting-seat; it -was also a fortress. As in so many cases, the Norman, in this case the -Conqueror himself, had seized and adapted to his own use the home and -the works of the Englishman. On a height just within the borders of -Northamptonshire, looking forth across the valley of the Welland over -the Danish land to the north, the Englishman Bofig had in King -Eadward’s days held _sac_ and _soc_ in his lordship of Rockingham. His -dwelling-place, like those of other English thegns, crowned a mound on -a site strong by nature, and which the skill of Norman engineers was -to change into a site strong by art. In the havoc which fell upon -Northampton, borough and shire, when William went forth to subdue the -Mercian land,[1332] the home of Bofig had become waste; and on that -waste spot the King ordered a castle to be built.[1333] At Rockingham, -as almost everywhere else, we find works earlier and later than the -time of our story, but nothing that we can positively assign to the -days of either William. There is no keep, as at Bridgenorth and at -Oxford, which we can assign to any of the known actors in our tale. -The mound of Bofig is yoked on to a series of buildings of various -dates, from the thirteenth century to the sixteenth. But we can still -trace the line of the walls and ditches which the Conqueror or his -successors added as new defences to the primitive mound and its -primitive ditch. Art and nature together have made the site almost -peninsular; but a considerable space, occupied by the parish church -and by the town which has sunk to a village, lies between the castle -and the stream that flows beneath the height. The site is a lordly -one, and is almost the more striking because it commands no other -great object such as those which are commanded by those castles which -were raised to protect or to keep down a city. When the forest was -still a forest in every sense of the word, the aspect of the castle of -Rockingham, one of the wilder retreats of English kingship, must have -been at once lonelier and busier than it is now. - -[Sidenote: Meeting of the Assembly. March 11, 1095.] - -[Sidenote: Place of meeting; the castle-chapel.] - -[Sidenote: The King’s inner council.] - -[Sidenote: Early hours of the assembly.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s opening speech.] - -[Sidenote: He states his case.] - -At Rockingham then the Assembly met, a fortnight before Easter. The -immediate place of meeting was the church within the castle.[1334] The -church has perished, but its probable site may be traced among the -buildings to the north of the mound. But it is hard to understand how -the narrow space of a castle-chapel could hold the great gathering -which came together at Rockingham. The King and his immediate -counsellors sat apart in a separate chamber, while outside were a -numerous body, among whom we hear of the bishops and nobles, but which -is also spoken of as a vast crowd of monks, clerks, and laymen.[1335] -It may be that, according to an arrangement which is sometimes found -elsewhere, but of which there is no present trace at Rockingham, the -great hall opened into the chapel, so that, while the church was -formally the place of meeting, the greater space of the hall would be -open to receive the overflowing crowd.[1336] The time of meeting was -the early morning; a midnight sitting of the Wise Men was an unknown -thing in those days. The King sat within in the outer space, whatever -was its nature, Anselm addressed the assembly, calling forth the -bishops and lords from the presence-chamber to hear him. We must -remember that, in the absence of the King, he was the first man in the -Assembly and its natural leader. He laid his case before his hearers. -He had asked leave of the King to go to Pope Urban for his pallium. -The King had told him that to acknowledge Urban or any one else as -Pope without his leave was the same thing as trying to take his crown -from him. The King had added that faith to him and obedience to Urban -were two things which could not go together; Anselm could not practise -both at once. It was this point which the Assembly had come together -to decide; it was on this point that their counsel was needed. He bade -his hearers remember that he had not sought the archbishopric, that in -truth he would gladly have been burned alive rather than take -it.[1337] They had themselves forced him into the office――the bishops -certainly had in a literal and even physical sense. It was for them -now to help him with their counsel, to lessen thereby the burthen -which they themselves had laid on his shoulder.[1338] He appealed to -all, he specially appealed to his brother bishops, to weigh the matter -carefully, and to decide. Could he at once keep his plighted faith to -the King and his plighted obedience to the Pope? It was a grave matter -to sin against either duty. Could not both duties be observed without -any breach of either? - -[Sidenote: The real point avoided on the King’s side.] - -[Sidenote: Assumption of the King’s party against Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: He is treated as an accused person.] - -[Sidenote: Conduct of the bishops.] - -This was indeed the question which the Assembly was brought together -to consider and to decide. The meeting had been called, at Anselm’s -own request, to inform him on the point of law, whether he could -acknowledge Urban without disloyalty to William. But during a long -debate of two days, that real issue is never touched, till Anselm -himself calls back men’s minds to the real object of their coming -together. It is assumed throughout by the King and the King’s party -that the point of law is already settled in the sense unfavourable to -Anselm, that Anselm has done something contrary to his allegiance to -the King, that he is there as an accused man for trial, almost as a -convicted man for sentence. That he is a member of the Assembly, the -highest subject in the Assembly, that the whole object of the meeting -is to decide a question in which the King and his highest subject -understand the law in different ways, seems not to come into the head -of any of the King’s immediate counsellors. Least of all does it come -into the heads of the bishops, the class of men who play the most -prominent and the least creditable part in the story. - -[Sidenote: Answer of the bishops.] - -[Sidenote: The meeting adjourned till Monday.] - -[Sidenote: Meeting of Monday, March 12.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm and the bishops.] - -[Sidenote: They counsel unreserved submission.] - -[Sidenote: Position of the bishops.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm makes no exclusive claims.] - -[Sidenote: His second speech.] - -[Sidenote: His two duties.] - -To Anselm’s question then the bishops were the first to make answer. -They are spoken of throughout as acting in a body; but they must have -had some spokesman. That spokesman could not have been the Bishop of -Durham, who must surely have been sitting with the King in his inner -council. William of Saint-Calais comes on the scene afterwards, but no -bishop is mentioned by name at this stage. The answer of the episcopal -body was not cheering. The Archbishop had no need of their counsel. He -was a man prudent in God and a lover of goodness, and could settle -such points better than they could. If he would throw himself wholly -on the King’s will, then they would give him their advice;[1339] or -they would, if he wished, go in and report his words to the King. They -did so; and Rufus, with a scruple which one would rather have looked -for from Anselm, ordered that, as the day was Sunday, the discussion -should be adjourned to the morrow. Anselm was to go to his own -quarters, and to appear again in the morning. One might like to know -where, not only the Archbishop, but the whole host of visitors at -times like this, found quarters. Unless they were all the King’s -guests in the castle, and filled its nooks and corners how they might, -it must have been much harder to find lodgings at Rockingham than it -was at Gloucester. Monday morning came; Anselm, with his faithful -reporter Eadmer, went to the place of meeting. Sitting in the midst of -the whole Assembly,[1340] he told the bishops, as it would seem, that -he was ready to receive the advice which he had asked for yesterday. -They again answered that they had nothing to say but what they had -said yesterday; they had no advice to give him, unless he was ready to -throw himself wholly on the King’s will. If he drew distinctions and -reservations, if he pleaded any call on behalf of God to do anything -against the King’s will, they would give him no help.[1341] So low had -the prelacy of England fallen under the administration of Rufus and -Flambard. Neither as priests of God, nor as Witan of the realm, nor -simply as freemen of the land, was there any strength or counsel in -them. Their answer seems almost to imply that they cast aside the -common decencies, not only of prelates but of Christian men, that they -fully accepted the ruling of their sovereign, that the will of God was -not to be put into comparison with the will of the King. Anselm is not -doing like some before and after him, not even like his chief enemy in -the present gathering. He is not asserting any special privilege for -his order; he is not appealing from a court within the realm to any -foreign jurisdiction. He asks for counsel how he may reconcile his -duty to God with his duty to the King; and the answer he gets is that -he has nothing to do but to submit to the King’s will; the law of God, -and seemingly the law of England with it, are to go for nothing. But -there was at least some shame left in them; when they had given their -answer, they held their peace and hung down their heads, as if waiting -for what Anselm might lay upon them.[1342] Then the Primate spoke, -seemingly not rising from his seat, but with uplifted eyes, with -solemn voice, with a face all alive with feeling.[1343] He looked at -the chiefs of Church and State, prelates and nobles, and told them -that if they, shepherds and princes,[1344] could give no counsel save -according to the will of one man, he must betake him to the Shepherd -and Prince of all. That Shepherd and Prince had given a charge and -authority to Peter first, and after him to the other Apostles, to the -Vicar of Peter first and after him to all other bishops, a charge and -authority which He had not given to any temporal prince, Count, Duke, -King, or Emperor.[1345] He owed a duty to his temporal prince, for the -Lord had bidden him to render to Cæsar the things that were Cæsar’s. -But he was bidden also to render to God the things that were God’s. He -would, to the best of his power, obey both commands. He must give -obedience to the Vicar of Peter in the things of God; in those things -which belonged to the earthly dignity of his lord the King, he would -ever give his lord his faithful counsel and help, according to the -measure of his power. - -[Sidenote: Position of England towards the Popes.] - - -[Sidenote: Anselm and William of Saint-Calais.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm not the first to appeal to Rome.] - -The words are calm and dignified, the words of a man who, forsaken by -all, had no guide left but the light within him. There is indeed a -ring about some of Anselm’s sayings which is not pleasing in English -ears; we may doubt whether Dunstan would have drawn the distinction -which was drawn by Anselm. And yet that distinction comes to no more -than the undoubted truth that we should obey God rather than man. The -only question was whether obedience to Pope Urban was a necessary part -of obedience to God. The foreign clergy doubtless held stronger views -of papal authority than had been known of old in England; but we may -be sure that every man, native or foreign, held that the Bishop of -Rome had some claim on his reverence, if not on his obedience. The -ancient custom that an English archbishop should go to him for the -pallium shows it of itself. The craven bishops themselves would, if -secretly pressed by their consciences or their confessors, have spoken -in all things as Anselm spoke. And there was one hard by, if not -present in that company, yet within the wall of the same castle, who -had gone many steps further Romeward than Anselm went. Closeted with -the King, caballing with him against the man of God, was Bishop -William of Durham, the man who had openly appealed to the Pope from -the sentence of an English court, the man who had openly refused to -Cæsar what was most truly Cæsar’s, who had denied the right of the -King and Witan of England to judge a bishop, even in the most purely -temporal causes.[1346] Anselm had made no such appeal; he had made no -such exclusive claims; it is needless to say that he did not, like -William of Saint-Calais, take to the policy of obstruction, that he -did not waste the time of the assembly by raising petty points of law, -or subtle questions as to the befitting dress of its members.[1347] -Anselm was a poor Papist, one might almost say a poor churchman, -beside that still recent phase of the bishop who had now fully learned -that the will of God was not to be thought of when it clashed with the -will of the King. It was not Anselm, but the man who sought to -supplant Anselm, who had taken the first and greatest step towards the -establishment of foreign and usurped jurisdictions within the realm. - -[Sidenote: Answer of the bishops.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm goes in to the King.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm asleep.] - -[Sidenote: The King’s message.] - -[Sidenote: Advice of the bishops.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm to submit to the King in all things.] - -The bishops heard the answer of their Primate. They rose troubled and -angry; they talked confusedly to one another; they seemed as if they -were pronouncing Anselm to be guilty of death.[1348] They turned to -him in wrath; they told him that they would not carry to the King such -a message as that, and they went out to the room where the King was. -But it was right that the King should know what Anselm’s answer had -been. Anselm had no one whom he could send on such an errand; it was -not in his nature to thrust another into the mouth of the lion when he -could brave the danger himself. He went into the presence-chamber; he -repeated his own words to the King, and at once withdrew. The wrath of -William was kindled; he took counsel with the bishops and the nobles -of his party, to see what answer he could make; but they found none. -As in the hall at Lillebonne, when the Conqueror put forth his plan -for the invasion of England,[1349] men were to be seen talking -together by threes and fours, seeking for something to say which might -at once soften the King’s wrath and at the same time not directly deny -the doctrine set forth by Anselm.[1350] They were long over their -discussion; the subject of their debates meanwhile sat leaning against -the wall of the place of meeting, in a gentle sleep.[1351] He was -awakened by the entrance of the bishops, accompanied by some of the -lay nobles, charged with a message from the King. His lord the King -bade him at once, laying aside all other words――the words, one would -think, of dreamland so cruelly broken in upon――to hear, and to give -his answer with all speed.[1352] They had not as yet to announce any -solemn judgement of the King and his Witan; their words still took the -form of advice; but it was advice which was meant to be final and -decisive.[1353] As for the matters which had been talked about between -him and the King at Gillingham, the matter for whose decision he had -sought the present adjournment, the matter at issue was plain and -easy. The whole realm was complaining of the Archbishop, because he -was striving to take away from the common lord of all of them his -crown, the glory of his Empire. For he who seeks to take away the -King’s dignities and customs seeks to take away his crown; the one -cannot be without the other.[1354] They counselled Anselm at once to -throw aside all obedience and submission to Urban, who could do him no -good, and who, if he only made his peace with the King, could do him -no harm. Let him be free, as an Archbishop of Canterbury should be in -all his doings; as free, let him wait for the will and bidding of the -King in all things.[1355] Let him, like a wise man, confess his fault -and ask for pardon; then should his enemies who now mocked at his -misfortunes, be put to shame as they saw him again lifted up in -honour.[1356] - -[Sidenote: Their definition of freedom.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm will not reject Urban.] - -Such was the advice which the stranger bishops of England, with such -of the stranger nobles as acted with them, gave to the stranger -Primate. Such was their prayer, such was their counsel; such was the -course which they insisted on as needful for Anselm and for all who -held with him. Among those was the true Englishman who wrote down -their words, and who must have smiled over the definition of freedom -which, even in their mouths, has a sound of sarcasm. Anselm said that, -to speak of nothing else, he could not cast aside his obedience to the -Pope. But it was evening; let there be an adjournment till the morrow; -then he would speak as God should bid him.[1357] The bishops deemed -either that he knew not what more to say or else that he was beginning -to yield through fear.[1358] They went back to the King, and urged him -that the adjournment should not be allowed, but that, as the matter -had been discussed enough, if Anselm would not agree to their counsel, -the formal judgement of the Assembly should be at once pronounced -against him.[1359] - -[Sidenote: William of Saint-Calais.] - -[Sidenote: His schemes against Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: He aspires to the archbishopric.] - -[Sidenote: Objects of the King.] - -And now for the first time we come across a distinct mention of an -individual actor, standing out with a marked personality from the -general mass of the assembled Witan. Foremost on the King’s side, the -chosen spokesman of his master, was the very man who had gone so far -beyond Anselm, who had forestalled Thomas himself, in asserting the -jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome within this realm of England. -William of Saint-Calais, who, when it suited his purpose, had appealed -to the Pope, who had been so anxious to go to the Pope, but who, when -he had the means of going, had never gone, stood now fully ready to -carry out the Imperial teaching that what seems good to the prince has -the force of law. This man, so ready of speech――that we have seen long -ago――but, in Eadmer’s eyes at least, not rich in any true wisdom, was -all this time stirring the King up to wrath against Anselm, and doing -all that he could to widen the breach between them.[1360] Men -believed, on Anselm’s side at least, that his object was to bring -about the Archbishop’s deprivation or resignation by any means, in -hopes that he might himself succeed him.[1361] Was this mere surmise, -or had the Bishop of Durham any solid ground for looking forward to a -translation to Canterbury? Had he the needful means? William of -Saint-Calais was not a servant of the King’s to make a fortune in his -service, like Randolf Flambard or Robert Bloet. He had risen, like -Anselm himself, through the ranks of monk, prior, abbot, and bishop. -But so too had Herbert Losinga, who had managed to buy a bishopric for -himself and an abbey for his father. William of Saint-Calais had since -his consecration spent three years in banishment while his bishopric -was in the King’s hands. Still he may, during his two terms of -possession before and after, have screwed enough out of the patrimony -of Saint Cuthberht to pay even the vast price at which the -archbishopric would doubtless be valued. Or he may have fondly dreamed -that, if Anselm could be got rid of by his means, the service would be -deemed so great as to entitle him to Anselm’s place as a free gift. -Anyhow he worked diligently on the King’s behalf. We are told――and the -picture is not out of character――that Rufus wished to get rid of -Anselm as the representative within his realm of another power than -his own. He deemed himself to be no full king as long as there was any -one who put the will of God before the will of the King, or who named -the name of God as a power to which even the King must yield.[1362] In -his hatred to Anselm, he hoped to carry one of two points. Either the -Archbishop would abjure the Pope, and would abide in the land a -dishonoured man who had given up the cause for which he strove. Or -else, if he still clave to the Pope, the King would then have a -reasonable excuse for driving him out of the kingdom. - -[Sidenote: Bishop William’s promises to the King.] - -[Sidenote: His speech to Anselm.] - -To these intrigues of the blaspheming King the Bishop of Durham was -not ashamed to lend himself. He recked nothing of the dishonour under -which it was thought that Anselm would hardly bear to live. He -promised to the King that he would bring about one of two things; -either the Archbishop should renounce the Pope, or else he should -formally resign the archbishopric by restoring the ring and -staff.[1363] Now seemingly was the time to press him, when he was -weary with the day’s work and sought for a respite, when his enemies -were beginning to hope that, either through fear or weariness, he -would be driven to yield. So the bishops again went back from the King -to the Archbishop, with him of Durham as their leader and spokesman. -The time-server made his speech to the man of God. “Hear the King’s -complaint against you. He says that, as far as lies in your power, you -have robbed him of his dignity by making Odo Bishop of Ostia”――William -of Saint-Calais had had other names for him in an earlier -assembly――“Pope in his England[1364] without his bidding. Having so -robbed him, you ask for an adjournment that you may devise arguments -to prove that that robbery is just. Rather, if you please, clothe him -again with the dignify of his Empire,[1365] and then talk about an -adjournment. Otherwise know that he will invoke the wrath of Almighty -God upon himself, and we his liegemen will have to make ourselves -sharers in the curse, if he grants you an adjournment of an hour. -Wherefore at once make answer to the words of our lord, or else expect -presently a judgement which shall chastise your presumption. Do not -think that all this is a mere joke; we are driven on by the pricks of -a heavy grievance.[1366] Nor is it wonderful. For that which your lord -and ours claims as the chief thing in his whole dominion, that in -which it is allowed that he surpasses all other kings,[1367] that you -unjustly take away from him as far as lies in your power, and by -taking it away you throw scorn on the oath which you have sworn to -him, and plunge all his friends into this distress.” - -[Sidenote: William’s Imperial claim.] - -[Sidenote: William and the vassal kingdoms.] - -[Sidenote: His ill-success at this moment.] - -Here are forms of words which may make us stop to study them. In this -speech, and in the one which went before it, we see the ground on -which William founded a claim to which he attached such special -importance. It was not merely the King of the English, it was the -_Basileus_ of Britain, the Cæsar of the island world, whose dignity -was deemed to be touched. To allow or to refuse the acknowledgement of -Popes is here declared by William of Saint-Calais to be no part of the -prerogative of a mere king; it is spoken of as the special attribute -of Empire. He who, alone among Christian princes, knew no superior -either in the elder or the younger Rome, was alone entitled to judge -how far the claims of the Pontiff of one world should be acknowledged -in another. This sole claim to Imperial power on behalf of the Monarch -of all Britain[1368] might have been disputed in the last age in -Bulgaria and in the next age in Castile; at that moment William of -England was without a rival. He might even, if he chose to take up -Anselm’s line of argument, bear himself as more truly Imperial than -the German king whose Roman crown had been placed on his head by a -schismatic pontiff. And yet at no moment since the day when Scot and -Briton and Northman bowed to Eadward the Unconquered had the Emperor -of the Isle of Albion been less of an Emperor than when Anselm met the -Red King at Rockingham. The younger William had indeed fallen away -from the dominion of the father who had received the homage at -Abernethy and had made the pilgrimage to Saint David’s. The Welsh were -in open and triumphant revolt; the Scots had driven out the king that -he had given them. The Welsh had broken down his castles; the Scots -had declared their land to be barred against all William’s subjects, -French and English.[1369] True he was girding himself up for great -efforts against both enemies; but those efforts had not yet been made. -William was just then as far away as a man could be from deserving his -father’s surnames of the Conqueror and the Great. At such a moment, we -may really believe that he would feel special annoyance at anything -which might be construed as casting doubt even in theory on claims -which he found it so hard to assert in practice. In the moment of his -first great success in England, there had been less to bring the wider -and loftier side of his dominion before his mind. He had thought less -of his right to allow or to refuse the acknowledgement of Popes in the -days when the _regale_ was asserted by Lanfranc and the _pontificale_ -by William of Saint-Calais, than he thought now that the _regale_ was -asserted by William of Saint-Calais and the _pontificale_ by Anselm. - -[Sidenote: The real question hitherto evaded.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s challenge.] - -[Sidenote: He states the real case.] - -[Sidenote: New position of the bishops.] - -The shamelessness of the words of William of Saint-Calais in the mouth -of William of Saint-Calais might have stirred even the meek Anselm to -wrath. But he bore all with patience; he only seized, with all the -skill of his scholastic training, on the palpable fallacy of the -Bishop’s argument. The Assembly had come together to discuss and -settle a point of law. Was the duty which Anselm professed towards the -Pope inconsistent or not with the duty which he no less fully -acknowledged towards the King? On that point not only had no judgement -been given, but no arguments either way had been heard. Messages had -gone to and fro; Anselm had been implored, advised, threatened; but -prayers, advice, and threats had all assumed that the point which they -had all come there to discuss had already been ruled in the sense -unfavourable to Anselm. William of Saint-Calais could talk faster than -Anselm; but, as he had not Anselm’s principle, so neither had he -Anselm’s logic. Anselm saw both his intellectual and his moral -advantage. His answer to the Bishop of Durham took the shape of a -challenge. “If there be any man who wishes to prove that, because I -will not give up my obedience towards the venerable chief Pontiff of -the holy Roman Church, I thereby break the faith and oath which I owe -to my earthly King, let him stand forth, and, in the name of the Lord, -he will find me ready to answer him where I ought and as I ought.” The -real issue was thus at last stated; Anselm demanded that the thing -should at last be done which the Assembly had been called for the very -purpose of doing. The bishops were puzzled, as they well might be; -they looked at one another, but no one had anything to say; so they -went back to their lord.[1370] Our guide however puts thoughts into -their hearts which Anselm had certainly not uttered, which his -position in no way implied, and which one is tempted to think that -both Anselm and Eadmer first heard of in later times when they came to -talk with a pope face to face. The bishops, we are told, remembered, -what they had not thought of before, that an Archbishop of Canterbury -could not be judged on any charge by any judge except the Pope.[1371] -This may be so far true as that William of Saint-Calais may have -remembered the day when he had urged those very claims on behalf, not -only of an Archbishop of Canterbury, but of a Bishop of Durham. If the -other bishops had any such sudden enlightenment, they did well to keep -their new light to themselves. The doctrine that no one but a Pope -could judge the Archbishop, combined with the doctrine that there -could be no Pope in England without the King’s leave, amounted, during -the present state of things, to a full licence to the Archbishop to do -anything that he might think good. - -[Sidenote: Anselm insulted.] - -[Sidenote: Popular feeling on his side.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm and the knight.] - -[Sidenote: “Vox populi vox Dei.”] - -[Sidenote: Perplexity of the King.] - -[Sidenote: His speech to the bishops.] - -[Sidenote: William of Saint-Calais breaks down.] - -[Sidenote: The assembly adjourned.] - -Meanwhile things were taking a new turn in the outer place of -assembly. There a state of mind very unlike that of the King’s inner -council began to show itself. There were those, as there will always -be in every gathering of men, whose instinct led them to insult and -trample on one who seemed to be falling. By such men threats, -revilings, slanders of every kind, were hurled at the Archbishop, as -he sat peacefully waking and sleeping, while William of Saint-Calais -marched to and fro at the head of his episcopal troop. But threats and -revilings were not the only voices that Anselm heard. The feeling of -the great mass of the assembly was with him. Well might it be so. -Englishmen still abiding on their own soil, Normans who on English -soil were growing into Englishmen, men who had brought with them the -spirit which had made the Conqueror himself pause on the day of -Lillebonne, were not minded to see the assembly of the nation turned -into a mere tool to carry out a despot’s will. They were not minded -that the man whose cause they had come together to judge according to -law should be judged without law by a time-serving cabal of the King’s -creatures. English thegns, Norman knights, were wrought in another -mould from the simoniacal bishops of William’s court. A spirit began -to stir among them like the spirit of the old times, the spirit of the -day which called back Godwine to his earldom and drove Robert of -Jumièges from his archbishopric. When Anselm spoke and William of -Saint-Calais stood abashed and speechless, the general feeling of the -assembly went with the man who was ready to trust his cause to the -event of a fair debate, against the man who could do nothing but take -for granted over and over again the very question which they had come -there to argue. There went through the hall that deep, low murmur -which shows that the heart of a great assembly is stirring and that it -will before long find some means of clearer utterance. But for a while -no man dared to speak openly for fear――it is Eadmer’s word――of the -tyrant.[1372] At last a spokesman was found. A knight――we should -gladly know his name and race and dwelling-place――stepped forth from -the crowd and knelt at the feet of Anselm,[1373] with the words, -“Father and lord, through me your suppliant children pray you not to -let your heart be troubled at what you have heard; remember how the -blessed Job vanquished the devil on his dunghill, and avenged Adam -whom he had vanquished in paradise.” Anselm received his words with a -pleased and cheerful look; for he now knew that the heart of the -people was with him. And his true companions rejoiced also, and grew -calmer in their minds, knowing the scripture――so our guide tells -us――that the voice of the people is the voice of God.[1374] While a -native English heart was thus carried back to the feelings of bygone -times, the voice of the stranger King, to whom God was as a personal -enemy, was speaking in another tone. His hopes had utterly broken -down; his loyal bishops had made promises to him which they had been -unable to fulfil. When he heard how popular feeling was turning -towards Anselm, he was angered beyond measure, to the very rending -asunder of his soul.[1375] He turned to his bishops in wrath. “What is -this? Did you not promise that you would deal with him altogether -according to my will, that you would judge him, that you would condemn -him?” The boasted wisdom, the very flow of speech, of their leader the -Bishop of Durham now failed him; he spoke as one from whom all sense -and reason had gone away.[1376] All that he could say who had so -lately with curses and threats refused Anselm’s plea for an -adjournment was to propose an adjournment himself. It was night; let -Anselm be bidden to go to his own quarters; they, the bishops, would -spend the night in thinking over what Anselm had said, and in devising -an answer on the King’s behalf.[1377] The assembly was accordingly -prorogued till the next morning, and Anselm went to his own quarters, -uncondemned, with his cause as yet unheard and unanswered, but -comforted doubtless that he had put his enemies to silence, and that -he had learned that the hearts of the people were with him. - -[Sidenote: March 13, 1095.] - -[Sidenote: Debates in the inner council.] - -[Sidenote: William of Saint-Calais recommends force.] - -[Sidenote: The lay nobles refuse.] - -[Sidenote: Speech of the King.] - -[Sidenote: Speech of Robert of Meulan.] - -Tuesday morning came, and Anselm and his companions took their seats -in the accustomed place,[1378] awaiting the King’s bidding. That -bidding was slow in coming. The debates in the King’s closet were -perplexed. The King and his inner counsellors were working hard to -find some excuse for the condemnation of Anselm. The King asked the -Bishop of Durham how he had passed the night;[1379] but the night -thoughts of William of Saint-Calais, sleeping or waking, did not bring -much help to the royal cause. He confessed that he could find no way -to answer Anselm’s argument, all the more because it rested on holy -writ and the authority of Saint Peter. We must always remember that -the texts which Anselm quoted, and the interpretation which he put -upon them, were in no way special to himself. Every one acknowledged -them; William of Saint-Calais had appealed to them when it suited his -purpose to do so. But the bishop who had once laid the lands of -northern England waste could recommend force when reason failed. He -whose dealings towards the King in whose cause he was now working had -been likened to the deed of Judas was now ready to play Judas over -again towards the Patriarch of all the nations beyond the sea. “My -counsel,” he said in plain words, “is that he be put down by -force;[1380] if he will not consent to the King’s will, let the ring -and staff be taken from him, and let him be driven from the kingdom.” -This short way of dealing with the Archbishop, proposed by the man who -had once argued that none but the Pope could judge any bishop, suited -the temper of the King; it did not suit the temper of the lay nobles. -Many of them had great crimes of their own to repent of; but they -could see what was right when others were to practise it. Besides -Anselm was in one way their own chief; if they were great feudatories -of the kingdom, so was he, the highest in rank among them. The -doctrine that the first vassal of the kingdom was to be stripped of -his fief at the King’s pleasure might be dangerous to earls as well as -to bishops. The lay nobles refused their consent to the violent scheme -of the Bishop of Durham. The King turned fiercely on them. “If this -does not please you, what does please you? While I live, I will not -put up with an equal in my kingdom.” Speaking confusedly, it would -seem, to bishops and barons alike, he asked, “If you knew that he had -such strong grounds for his cause, why did you let me begin the suit -against him? Go, consult, for, by God’s face, if you do not condemn -him according to my will, I will condemn you.”[1381] The common -spokesman was found in him whose counsel was held to be as the oracle -of God.[1382] Count Robert of Meulan spoke, and his speech was -certainly a contrast to that of Bishop William, though both alike, -these two special counsellors, confessed that Anselm had been too much -for them. “All day long were we putting together counsels with all our -might, and consulting how our counsels might hang together, and -meanwhile he, thinking no evil back again, sleeps, and, when our -devices are brought out, with one touch of his lips he breaks them -like a spider’s web.”[1383] - -[Sidenote: The King and the bishops.] - -[Sidenote: The king bids the bishops withdraw their obedience from -Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: He withdraws his protection.] - -[Sidenote: The bishops and abbots carry the message.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s answer.] - -When the temporal lords, the subtlest of counsellors among them, thus -failed him, the King again turned to his lords spiritual. “And you, my -bishops, what do you say?” They answered, but their spokesman this -time is not mentioned; Bishop William, it would seem, had tried and -had failed. They were grieved that they could not satisfy the pleasure -of their lord. Anselm was Primate, not only of the kingdom of England, -but of Scotland, Ireland, and the neighbouring islands――lands to which -William’s power most certainly did not reach at that moment. They were -his suffragans;[1384] they could not with any reason judge or condemn -him, even if any crime could be shown against him, and now no crime -could be shown. “What then,” asks William, “can be done?” The question -was answered by a suggestion of his own, one which sounds as if it -really were his own, and not the device of Bishop William or Count -Robert. If the bishops could not judge him, could they not withdraw -from him all obedience and brotherly friendship? This, they said, if -he commanded it, they could do. It is not clear by what right they -could withdraw their obedience from a superior whom they could not -judge; but both king and bishops were satisfied. The bishops were to -go and do the business at once; when Anselm saw that he was left -alone, he would be ashamed, and would groan that he had ever forsaken -his lord to follow Urban.[1385] And, that they might do this the more -safely, the King added that he now withdrew from Anselm all protection -throughout his Empire, that he would not listen to or acknowledge him -in any cause,[1386] that he would no longer hold him for his -archbishop or ghostly father. Though the King’s commandment was -urgent, the bishops still stayed to devise other devices against -Anselm; yet found they none. At last the bishops, now taking with them -the abbots, a class of whom we have not hitherto heard in the story, -went out and announced to Anselm at once their own withdrawal of -obedience and friendship and the King’s withdrawal of protection. The -Archbishop’s answer was a mild one. They did wrong to withdraw their -obedience and friendship where it was due, merely because he would not -withdraw his where it was also due. But he would not deal by them as -they dealt by him. He would still show them the love of a brother and -a father; he would do what he could for them, as brethren and sons of -the church of Canterbury, to bring them back from their error into the -right way. And whereas the King withdrew from him all protection and -would no longer acknowledge him as father and archbishop, he would -still discharge to the King every earthly duty that lay upon him, and, -so far as the King would let him,[1387] he would still do his duty for -the care of the King’s soul. Only he would, for God’s service, still -keep the name, power, and office, of Archbishop of Canterbury, -whatever might be the oppression in outward things that it might bring -upon him. - -[Sidenote: The King turns again to the lay lords.] - -[Sidenote: The lay lords support Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: The King’s difficulties.] - -[Sidenote: Shame of the bishops.] - -[Sidenote: The King further examines the bishops.] - -[Sidenote: His treatment of them.] - -His words were reported to the King.[1388] We are again admitted to -witness the scene in the presence-chamber. The bishops had proved -broken reeds; William would make one more appeal to the lay nobles. -“Everything that he says,” began the King, “is against my pleasure, -and no one shall be my man who chooses to be his.[1389] Wherefore, you -who are the great men of my kingdom, do you, as the bishops have done, -withdraw from him all faith and friendship, that he may know how -little he gains by the faith which he keeps to the Apostolic See in -defiance of my will.” But the lay lords were not like the bishops; one -would like to know by what mouth they made their calm and logical -answer. They drew a clear distinction between spiritual and temporal -allegiance. The King had told them that no one could be his man and -the Archbishop’s at once, and he had bidden them to withdraw their -faith――clearly using the word in the feudal sense――from the -Archbishop. They answered that they were not the Archbishop’s men, -that they could not withdraw from him a fealty which they had never -paid to him. This of course was true of the lay nobles as a body, -whatever questions there might be about Tunbridge castle or any other -particular fief. But they went on to say that, though Anselm was not -their lord, yet he was their archbishop, that it was he who had to -“govern Christianity” in the land; that, as Christian men, they could -not, while in that land, decline his mastership, all the more as there -was no spot of offence in him which should make the King treat him in -any other way.[1390] Such an answer naturally stirred up William’s -wrath; but the earls and great barons of his kingdom were a body with -whom even he could not dare to trifle. He was stronger than any one -among them; he might not be stronger than all of them together, backed -as they now were, as the events of the day before had shown, by -popular feeling. He had once beaten the Norman nobles at the head of -the English people; he might not be able to beat the Norman nobles and -the English people together. He therefore made an effort, and kept -down any open outburst of the wrath that was in him.[1391] But the -bishops were covered with confusion; they felt that all eyes were -turned on them, and that their apostasy was loathed of all.[1392] This -and that bishop was greeted, seemingly by this or that earl or baron, -with the names usual in such cases, Judas, Pilate, and Herod.[1393] -Then the King put the trembling bishops through another examination. -Had they abjured all obedience to Anselm, or only such obedience as he -claimed by the authority of the Roman Pontiff?[1394] The question was -hard to answer. Anselm does not seem to have claimed any obedience by -virtue of the authority of the Pope; he had simply refused to withdraw -his own obedience from the Pope. Some therefore answered one way, some -another. But it was soon plain which way the King wished them to -answer. The real question in William’s mind had nothing to do with the -Pope; any subtlety about acknowledging this or that Pope was a mere -excuse. It was Anselm himself, as the servant of God, the man who -spake of righteousness and temperance and judgement to come, that -Rufus loathed and sought to crush. Those bishops therefore who said -that they had abjured Anselm’s obedience utterly and without condition -were at once bidden to sit down as his friends in seats of -honour.[1395] Those who said that they had abjured only such obedience -as was claimed by the Pope’s authority, were sent, like naughty -children, into a corner of the room, to wait, as traitors and enemies, -for their sentence of condemnation.[1396] But they debated among -themselves in their corner, and soon found the means of winning back -the royal favour. A heavy bribe, paid at once or soon after, wiped out -even the crime of drawing distinctions while withdrawing their -obedience from a metropolitan whom the King hated.[1397] - -[Sidenote: Anselm wishes to leave England.] - -[Sidenote: Perplexity of the King.] - -[Sidenote: Another adjournment.] - -While his suffragans were undergoing this singular experience of the -strength of the secular arm, Anselm sent a message to the King. He now -asked that, as all protection within the kingdom was withdrawn from -him, the King would give him and his companions a safe-conduct to one -of his havens, that he might go out of the realm till such a time as -God might be pleased to put an end to the present distress.[1398] The -King was much troubled and perplexed. He wished of all things for -Anselm to leave the kingdom; but he feared the greater scandal which -would arise if he left the kingdom while still in possession of the -archbishopric, while he saw no way of depriving him of it.[1399] He -again took counsel; but this time he did not trouble the bishops for -their advice. Of them he had had enough; it was their counsel which -had brought him into his present strait.[1400] He once more turned to -the lay lords. They advised yet another adjournment. The Archbishop -should go back to his own quarters in the King’s full peace,[1401] and -should come again in the morning to hear the King’s answer to his -petition. Many of the King’s immediate courtiers were troubled; they -groaned at the thought of Anselm’s leaving the land.[1402] But he -himself went gladly and cheerfully to his lodgings, hoping to cross -the sea and to cast off all his troubles and all the burthens of the -world.[1403] - -[Sidenote: Wednesday, March 14, 1095.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm summoned to the King’s presence.] - -[Sidenote: The lay lords propose a “truce.”] - -[Sidenote: Adjournment till May 20.] - -The fourth day of the meeting came, and the way in which its business -opened marks how the tide was turning in Anselm’s favour. A body of -the nobles came straight from the King, asking the Primate to come to -the royal presence.[1404] Anselm was tossed to and fro between the -hope of leaving the kingdom and the fear of staying in it. Eadmer was -eager to know what would be the end of the whole matter.[1405] They -set forth and reached the castle. They were not however, at first at -least, admitted to the presence-chamber, but sat in their wonted -place. Before long the lay nobles, accompanied by some of the bishops, -came to Anselm. They were grieved, they said, as old friends of his, -that there had been any dispute between him and the King. Their object -was to heal the breach, and they held that the best means towards that -object was to agree to an adjournment――a truce, a peace[1406]――till a -fixed day, during which time both sides should agree to do nothing -which could be counted as a breach of the peace. Anselm agreed, though -he said that he knew what kind of peace it would be.[1407] But it -should not be said of him that he preferred his own judgement to that -of others. To all that his lord the King and they might appoint in the -name of God he would agree,[1408] saving only his obedience to Pope -Urban. The lords approved; the King agreed; he pledged his honour to -the observance of the peace till the appointed day, the octave of -Pentecost. The day seems to have been chosen in order that the other -business of the Whitsun Gemót might be got over before the particular -case of Anselm came on. If matters had not been brought to an -agreement before that time, the case was to begin again exactly at the -stage in which it had left off at Rockingham.[1409] It is not clear -whether, even at this last moment, William and Anselm again met face -to face. But the Archbishop, by the King’s leave, went to Canterbury, -knowing that the truce was but an idle and momentary veiling of hatred -and of oppression that was to come.[1410] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Importance of the meeting at Rockingham.] - -So it soon proved; yet the scene at Rockingham was a victory, not only -for a moment but for ever. No slight step had been taken in the great -march of English freedom, when Anselm, whom the King had sought to -condemn without trial or indictment, went back, with his own immediate -case indeed unsolved, but free, uncondemned, untried, with the voice -of the people loud in his favour, while the barons of the realm -declared him free from every crime. It was no mean day in English -history when a king, a Norman king, the proudest and fiercest of -Norman kings, was taught that there were limits to his will. It is -like a foreshadowing of brighter days to come when the Primate of all -England, backed by the barons and people of England――for on that day -the very strangers and conquerors deserved that name――overcame the Red -King and his time-serving bishops. The day of Rockingham has the -fullest right to be marked with white in the kalendar in which we -enter the day of Runnymede and the day of Lewes. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: William keeps faith to Anselm personally.] - -[Sidenote: He oppresses his friends.] - -The honour of the chivalrous King was pledged to the peace with -Anselm. But the honour of the chivalrous King was construed after a -truly chivalrous fashion. William doubtless thought that he was doing -all that a true knight could be expected to do, if he kept himself -from any personal injury to the man to whom he had personally pledged -his faith. Anselm was unhurt; he was free; he went whither he would; -he discharged the ordinary duties of his office undisturbed; it does -not appear that he was in any way personally molested, or that any of -the property of his see was taken into the King’s hands. But William -knew full well how to wreak his malice upon Anselm without breaking -the letter of the faith which he had pledged. He knew how to grieve -Anselm’s loving heart far more deeply than it could be grieved by any -wrong done to himself. The honour of the good knight was pledged to -Anselm personally; it was not pledged to Anselm’s friends and tenants. -Towards them he might, without breach of honour, play the greedy and -merciless king. A few days after Anselm had reached Canterbury, Rufus -sent to drive out of England the Archbishop’s cherished friend and -counsellor the monk Baldwin of Tournay,[1411] and two of his clerks. -Their only crime was standing by their master in the trial which still -stood adjourned.[1412] The Archbishop’s chamberlain was seized in his -master’s chamber before his master’s eyes; false charges were brought -against his tenants, unjust imposts were laid upon them, and other -wrongs of many kinds done to them.[1413] The church of Canterbury, it -was said, began to doubt whether it had not been better off during the -vacancy than now that the archbishopric was full.[1414] And all this -while, heavy as William professed to deem the crime of so much as -giving Urban the title of Pope, William’s own dealings with Urban were -neither slight nor unfriendly. - - -§ 5. _The Mission of Cardinal Walter._ 1095. - -[Sidenote: Events of the months of truce, March-May, 1095.] - -[Sidenote: Assemblies of the year.] - -The months of truce between the King and the Archbishop were, as our -next chapter will show, busy months in other ways. William Rufus was -all this time engaged in another dispute with a subject of a rank but -little below that of the Primate, a dispute in which, at least in its -early stages, the King appears to much greater advantage than he -commonly does. A conspiracy against William’s throne and life was -plotting; Robert of Mowbray was making ready for revolt, and his -refusal to appear, when summoned, at the Easter and Whitsun assemblies -of this year was the first overt act of his rebellion. We may conceive -that Anselm did not attend either of those gatherings; that of -Whitsuntide we know that he did not. It might be more consistent with -the notion of the truce that he should keep away from the King’s -presence and court till the time which had been fixed for the -controversy formally to begin again. At Easter and for some time -after, Anselm seems to have stayed at Canterbury, and, while he was -there, the metropolitan city received an unexpected visitor, who did -not allow himself to be treated as a guest. - -[Sidenote: Position of Urban.] - -[Sidenote: Council of Piacenza. May 1-7.] - -[Sidenote: Its decrees.] - -[Sidenote: No mention of English affairs.] - -[Sidenote: William’s fresh schemes to turn the Pope against Anselm.] - -The year which we have reached was one of the most memorable in the -history of the papacy. Urban, though not in full possession of Rome, -had kept his Christmas there a year before, and his cause was -decidedly in the ascendant throughout the year of the Red King’s -second Norman campaign.[1415] At the beginning of the next year, after -keeping Christmas in Tuscany, Urban went on into Lombardy, where the -Emperor still was, though his rebel son Conrad, crowned and largely -acknowledged as King of Italy, was far more powerful than his -father.[1416] Almost on the same days as those which in England were -given to the council of Rockingham, Urban held his great council of -Piacenza, a council so great that no building could hold its numbers; -the business of the assembly was therefore done, as we have seen it -done in our own land, in the open fields.[1417] There the Empress -Praxedes told her tale of sorrow and shame; there the cry of Eastern -Christendom, set forth in the letters of the Emperor Alexios, was -heard and heeded; there the heresy of Berengar, already smitten by -Lanfranc,[1418] was again condemned; there a new set of anathemas were -hurled at the married clergy,[1419] and a more righteous curse was -denounced against the adulterous King of the French. But no mention -seems to have been made of English affairs; one is a little surprized -at the small amount of heed which the dispute between the King and the -Archbishop seems to have drawn to itself in foreign lands. Yet, next -to the ups and downs of the Emperor himself, one would have thought -that no change could have so deeply affected the Roman see as the -change from William the Great to William the Red. It is part of the -same general difficulty which attaches to the Red King’s career, the -strange fact that the worst of all crowned sinners, the foulest in -life, the most open in blasphemy, the most utter scorner of the -ecclesiastical power, never felt the weight of any of those -ecclesiastical censures which so often lighted on offenders of a less -deep dye. But if Urban was not thinking about William, William was -certainly thinking about Urban. It was at this stage that we light on -the curious picture which we have before seen, showing us England in a -state of uncertainty, and seemingly of indifference, between the rival -Pontiffs.[1420] But just now it suited William to acknowledge some -Pope, because he thought that his only chance of carrying out his -purposes against Anselm was by the help of a Pope. He had found that -no class of men in his kingdom, except perhaps some of the bishops, -would support him in any attempt to deprive the Primate of his own -arbitrary will. Mere violence of course was open to him; but his Witan -would not agree to any step against Anselm which made any pretence to -legal form, and, with public feeling so strongly on Anselm’s side, -with a dangerous rebellion brewing in the realm, the King might well -shrink from mere violence towards the first of his subjects. His new -device was to acknowledge a Pope, and then to try, by his usual arts, -arts which Rome commonly appreciated, to get the Pope whom he -acknowledged to act against the Archbishop. To see Anselm deprived, or -in any way humbled, by an exercise of ecclesiastical power, would be -to wound Anselm in a much tenderer point, and would therefore be a -much keener satisfaction to his own spite, than anything that he could -himself do with the high hand. - -[Sidenote: Mission of Gerard and William of Warelwast.] - -[Sidenote: Their commission.] - -[Sidenote: They are practically sent to acknowledge Urban.] - -As soon therefore as William found, by the issue of the meeting at -Rockingham, that Anselm could not be bent to his will, and that he -could practically do nothing against Anselm, he sent two trusty clerks -of his chapel and chancery on a secret and delicate errand. They were -men of the usual stamp, both of whom afterwards rose to those high -places of the Church which were just then commonly reserved for men of -their stamp. They were Gerard, afterwards Bishop of Hereford and -Archbishop of York, and William of Warelwast, afterwards Bishop of -Exeter. As we read our account of their commission, it would almost -seem as if they were empowered to go to Rome, to examine into the -state of things, and to acknowledge whichever seemed to be the true -Pope, or rather whichever Pope was most likely to suit their master’s -purpose. But practically they had no choice but to acknowledge Urban. -Local English feeling might indeed set little store by one who simply -“hight Pope, though he nothing had of the settle at Rome;”[1421] but -Urban was plainly the stronger Pope, the Pope acknowledged by all who -were not in the immediate interest of the Emperor. And, what was more, -Urban was the only Pope who could carry out William’s purpose. A -censure from Urban would be a real blow to Anselm and to Anselm’s -partisans; a censure from Clement would in their eyes go for nothing, -or rather it would be reckoned as another witness in their favour. -Practically Gerard and William of Warelwast went to acknowledge Urban, -and to see what they could make of him. They went secretly. Anselm -knew nothing of their going. Most likely nothing was known of their -errand by any man beyond the innermost cabal of the King’s special -counsellors.[1422] - -[Sidenote: Urban at Cremona. April 10, 1095.] - -[Sidenote: Dealings of Gerard and William with Urban.] - -[Sidenote: The Sicilian “Monarchy.”] - -[Sidenote: Relations between England and Sicily.] - -Their mission is said to have been to Rome; but the name Rome must be -taken in a conventional sense for any place where the Pope might be. -It is not likely that they really reached the Eternal City. In the -former part of April Urban was at Cremona, and was received there with -great state by the rebel King Conrad.[1423] The momentary effort of -Henry which followed, his vain attempt on Nogara, only raised the -position of Urban and the Great Countess yet higher.[1424] It was most -likely at Cremona that the ministers from England met Urban. They were -to try, if possible, to win over the Pontiff, by gifts, by promises, -by any means, to send a pallium to England for the King to bestow on -the Archbishop of Canterbury, without mentioning the name of Anselm. -They were, it seems, to try to obtain for the King a legatine -authority like that which, then or later, had been granted to the -Norman princes of Sicily.[1425] A Norman king of England was surely as -worthy of such powers as a Norman Great Count of Sicily; and -throughout these disputes we ever and anon see the vision of the -“Sicilian Monarchy,” as something at which kings of England were -aiming, and which strict churchmen condemned, whether in Sicily or in -England.[1426] It is even possible that Gerard and William of -Warelwast may have discussed the matter with some members of the -Sicilian embassy which about this time brought the daughter of Count -Roger to Pisa as the bride of King Conrad.[1427] Close intercourse -between the Norman princes of the great Oceanic and the great -Mediterranean island is now beginning to be no small element in -European politics. Some commission of this kind from the Pope was what -William’s heart was set upon; he thought he had good right to it; he -thought that his hope of it could not be doomed to disappointment.[1428] -Did the proudest of men look forward, as an addition to royal and -imperial power, to a day when he might fill a throne in the mother -church of England, looking down on the patriarchal chair, as the empty -thrones of later Williams still look down on the lowlier metropolitan -seats of Palermo and Monreale? - -[Sidenote: Gerard and William come back,] - -[Sidenote: and bring Cardinal Walter as Legate.] - -[Sidenote: He brings a pallium.] - -[Sidenote: Secrecy of his errand.] - -[Sidenote: His interview with the King.] - -[Sidenote: William acknowledges Urban.] - -[Sidenote: Walter refuses to depose Anselm.] - -The dates show that the journeys must have been hasty, and that the -business was got through with all speed. The two clerks could not have -left England before the middle of March, and May was not far advanced -before they were in England again, and a papal Legate with them. This -was the Cardinal Walter, Bishop of Albano, whose good life is -witnessed by our own Chronicler.[1429] His Italian subtlety showed -itself quite equal to the work of outwitting the King and his -counsellors whenever he chose; but his Roman greediness could not -always withstand their bribes. He came, bringing with him a pallium, -but the whole affair was, by the King’s orders, shrouded in the -deepest mystery. Not a word was said about the pallium; indeed the -Legate was not allowed to have any private discourse with any man. His -two keepers, Gerard and William, watched him carefully; they passed in -silence through Canterbury, and took care not to meet the -Archbishop.[1430] A few days before Whitsuntide, Cardinal Walter had -an interview with the King. He spoke so that William understood him to -be willing to abet all his purposes. Some special privilege was -granted to William, which amounted at the least to this, that no -legate should be sent into England but one of the King’s own -choosing.[1431] Not a word did Cardinal Walter say on behalf of -Anselm, not a word that could make peace between him and the King, not -a word that could give Anselm any comfort among all the troubles that -he was enduring on behalf of the Christian religion and of the -authority of the Holy See.[1432] Many who had looked for great good -from the Legate’s coming began to murmur, and to say, as Englishmen -had learned to say already and as they had often to say again, that at -Rome gold went for more than righteousness.[1433] To King William -everything seemed to be going as he wished it to go. Fully satisfied, -he put out a proclamation that throughout his Empire――through the -whole patriarchate of Anselm――Urban should be acknowledged as Pope and -that obedience should be yielded to him as the successor of Saint -Peter.[1434] Walter had now gained his point; William fancied that he -had gained his. He at once asked that Anselm might be deprived of his -archbishopric by the authority of the Pope whom he had just -acknowledged. He offered a vast yearly payment to the Roman See, if -the Cardinal would only serve his turn in this matter.[1435] But -Walter stood firm; he had done the work for which he had come; England -was under the obedience of Urban. And, much as gold might count for at -Rome, neither the Pope nor his Legate had sunk to the infamy of taking -money to oppress an innocent man and a faithful adherent. Anselm was -indeed treated by them as Englishmen, whether by race, by birth, or by -adoption, whether Edmund, Thomas, or Anselm, commonly were treated by -Popes. He was made a tool of, and he got no effectual support; but -Urban was not prepared for such active wickedness as the Red King -asked of him. - -[Sidenote: William and his counsellors outwitted by the Legate.] - -[Sidenote: He is driven to a reconciliation with Anselm.] - -William was now thoroughly beaten at his own weapons. The craft and -subtlety of Randolf Flambard, of William of Saint-Calais, of the -Achitophel of Meulan himself, had proved of no strength before the -sharper wit of Walter of Albano. The King complained with good right -that he had gained nothing by acknowledging Urban.[1436] In truth he -had lost a great deal. He had lost every decent excuse for any further -attack upon Anselm. The whole complaint against Anselm was that he had -acknowledged Urban. But the King had now himself acknowledged Urban, -and he could not go on persecuting Anselm for simply forestalling his -own act. In legal technicality doubtless, if it was a crime to -acknowledge Urban when the King had not yet acknowledged him, that -crime was not purged by the King’s later acknowledgement of him. Rufus -himself might have been shameless enough to press so pettifogging a -point; but he had learned at Rockingham that no man in the land, save -perhaps a few servile bishops, would support him in so doing. There -was nothing to be done but for William to make up his quarrel with -Anselm, to make it up, that is, as far as appearances went, to make it -up till another opportunity for a quarrel could be found. But till -such opportunity was found, Anselm must be openly and formally -received into the King’s favour.[1437] The thing had to be done; -only if some money could be squeezed out of Anselm in the process of -doing it, the chivalrous King would be the better pleased. - -[Sidenote: Whitsun Gemót at Windsor. May 13, 1095.] - -[Sidenote: The King’s message to Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: The Legate’s coming revealed to Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm will not pay for the pallium.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm and William reconciled.] - -[Sidenote: Their friendly discourse.] - -The feast of Pentecost came, and with it the second of the assemblies -at which the rebellious Earl of Northumberland refused to show -himself. The King and his Witan were at Windsor; the Archbishop was -keeping the feast at his manor of Mortlake. On the octave he was -himself, according to the truce made at Rockingham, to appear at -Windsor. In the course of the Whitsun-week a message was brought to -him from the King, bidding him go to Hayes, another of his manors -nearer to Windsor, in order that messages might more easily go to and -fro between him and the King.[1438] He went, and Eadmer went with him. -The next day nearly all the bishops came to him; some of them, it will -be remembered, had kept the King’s favour throughout, and the others -who had lost it had bought it again. Their object was to try to -persuade the Archbishop to give money to the King for the restoration -of his favour. Anselm answered stoutly, as before, that he would not -so dishonour his lord as to treat his friendship as something which -could be bought and sold.[1439] He would faithfully discharge every -temporal duty to his lord, on the one condition of being allowed to -keep his obedience to Pope Urban. If that was not allowed, he would -again ask for a safe-conduct to leave the kingdom. They then told -him――the secret must have been still kept, though Urban was -acknowledged――that the Bishop of Albano had brought a pallium from the -Pope; they did not scruple to add that he had, at the King’s request, -brought it for Anselm.[1440] Would not the Archbishop pay something -for so great a benefit?[1441] Would he not at least, now that the -pallium had come to him instead of his going for the pallium, pay the -sum which the journey to Rome would otherwise have cost him?[1442] -Anselm would pay nothing. The King had thus to make the best of a bad -bargain. As Anselm would not pay for either friendship or pallium, -there was nothing to be done but to let him have both friendship and -pallium without paying. The King once more consulted his lay nobles, -and, by their advice,[1443] he restored Anselm to his full favour, he -cancelled all former causes of quarrel, he received him as archbishop -and ghostly father, and gave him the fullest licence to exercise his -office throughout the realm. One condition only seems to have been -made; Anselm was to promise that he would observe the laws and customs -of the realm and would defend them against all men.[1444] The promise -was made, but with the express or implied reservation of duty to -God.[1445] That was indeed the reservation which William most hated; -but in his present frame of mind he may have brought himself to -consent to it. Anselm came to Windsor, and was admitted by the King to -his most familiar converse in the sight of the lords and of the whole -multitude that had come together.[1446] Cardinal Walter came in at the -lucky moment, and was edified by the sight. He quoted the scripture, -“Behold, how good and joyful it is brethren to dwell together in -unity.” He sat down beside the friendly pair; he quoted other -scriptures, and expressed his sorrow that he himself had not had any -hand in the good work of bringing them together. - -[Sidenote: Anselm asked to take the pallium from the King.] - -[Sidenote: He refuses.] - -[Sidenote: Assent of the Assembly.] - -The wild bull and the feeble sheep thus seemed for a moment to pull -together as friendly yokefellows. But a Norman king did not, in his -character of wild bull, any more than in his character of lion, -altogether cast aside his other character of fox. He, or Count Robert -for him, had one shift left. Or it might almost seem that it was not -the King’s own shift, but merely the device of flatterers who wished -to win the royal favour by proposing it. Would not the Archbishop, for -the honour of the King’s majesty, take the pallium from the King’s -hand?[1447] Anselm had made no objection to receiving the staff from -the King’s hand, for such was the ancient custom of England. But with -the pallium the King had nothing to do; it belonged wholly to the -authority of Saint Peter and his successor.[1448] Anselm therefore -refused to take the pallium from the King. The refusal was so clearly -according to all precedent, the proposal the other way was such a -manifest novelty, that nothing more was said about the matter. It was -settled that, on a fixed day, the pallium should be laid on the altar -of Christ in the metropolitan church, and that Anselm should take it -thence, as from the hand of Saint Peter himself.[1449] The expression -used is remarkable, as showing that the popular character of these -assemblies had not utterly died out. “The whole multitude -agreed.”[1450] They agreed most likely by a shout of Yea, Yea, rather -than by any more formal vote; but in any case it was that voice of the -people which Eadmer at least knew to be the voice of God. - -[Sidenote: Anselm absolves two repentant bishops.] - -[Sidenote: Robert and Osmund.] - -[Sidenote: Wilfrith of Saint David’s restored.] - -The Archbishop and his faithful comrade now set out for Canterbury. -But he was called on to do some archiepiscopal acts by the way. They -had hardly left Windsor when two bishops came to express their -repentance for the crime of denying their metropolitan at -Rockingham.[1451] These were the ritualist Osmund of Salisbury, and -Robert of Hereford, the friend of Wulfstan. It was believed that, -besides the visit at the moment of his departure, the saint of -Worcester had again appeared to Bishop Robert. He had warned him of -divers faults in his life and in the administration of his diocese, -giving him however good hopes if he mended his ways.[1452] -Notwithstanding this voice from the dead, Robert had consented to the -counsel and deed of them at Rockingham; he now came with Osmund to ask -pardon. Anselm turned into a little church by the wayside, and gave -them absolution. Then and there too he did another act of -archiepiscopal clemency to a more distant suffragan. Wilfrith Bishop -of Saint David’s had been――we are not told when――suspended for some -fault――we are not told what. Anselm now restored him to his episcopal -office.[1453] - -[Sidenote: Anselm receives the pallium at Canterbury. June 10, 1095.] - -The Archbishop went on to Canterbury, and there awaited the coming of -the Roman Cardinal. On the appointed day, a Sunday in June, Bishop -Walter came. He was met with all worship by the convents of the two -monasteries, Christ Church and Saint Augustine’s, by a great body of -clergy, and by a vast crowd of layfolk of both sexes. The Bishop of -Albano bore the precious gift in a silver casket. As they drew near to -Christ Church, Anselm, with bare feet, but in the full dress of his -office, supported on either side by the suffragans who had come to the -ceremony, met the procession. The pallium was laid on the altar; it -was taken thence by the hand of Anselm, and reverently kissed by those -who were near him.[1454] The Archbishop was then clothed with his new -badge of honour; nothing was now wanting to his position. Already -invested, consecrated, clothed with full temporal and spiritual powers -within his own province by the King and the bishops of England, he now -received the solemn recognition of the rest of the Western Church, in -the person of its chief Pontiff.[1455] Anselm and England were again -in full fellowship with the lawful occupier of the apostolic throne. -Nothing now was wanting. The Archbishop, clad in his pallium, sang the -mass. But, as at his consecration, men found an evil omen in part of -the words of the service. The gospel of the day told of the man who -made a great supper and bade many, but whose unthankful guests began -to make excuse.[1456] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Death of Bishop Robert of Hereford. June 26, 1095.] - -[Sidenote: The Legate stays in England.] - -[Sidenote: Objects of Walter’s mission.] - -[Sidenote: His dealings with Anselm.] - -The reception of the pallium by Anselm was the last great ceremony -done in the metropolitan church during this his first primacy; it was -one of the very few great ceremonies done in the unaltered church of -Lanfranc. And, if we are to understand that all the suffragans of -Canterbury were present, one of them was soon taken away. Not many -days after Anselm first put on the pallium, his late penitent, Bishop -Robert of Hereford, left the world, to join for ever, as the charity -of Worcester believed, the saintly friend whom he had twice -wonderfully seen.[1457] Cardinal Walter meanwhile stayed in England -during the greater part of that year, and according to some accounts -for some months of the year which followed. Notwithstanding the good -life for which the Chronicler gives him credit, he seems, like other -Romans, to have been open to the King’s special means of influence, -and a foreign writer who had good means of knowing seems to speak of -his general conduct in England as having greatly tended to bring his -office into discredit.[1458] His commission from Pope Urban was a -large one. Among other things, he had to look to the better payment of -the Romescot,[1459] which, it will be remembered, had not always -flowed regularly into the papal coffers even in the days of the -Conqueror,[1460] and which of course did not flow at all in the days -when no Pope was acknowledged in England. He had also to enquire -generally into the state of things in England, and to consult with -Anselm as to the means of reform. It is plain however from most -independent testimonies that the Archbishop and the Cardinal were by -no means suited to work together. Two letters from Anselm to Walter -throw a singular light on some points in the story which are not -recorded in any narrative. The personal intercourse of the two -prelates was interfered with by a cause which we should hardly have -looked for, namely, the occupation of Anselm in the duties of a -military command. But it is plain that Anselm did not look for much -good from any special intercourse between himself and the Cardinal. He -writes that private conferences between the two were of no use; they -could do nothing without the King’s consent and help.[1461] But Anselm -seems to have taken a more constitutional view of the way by which the -King’s consent and help was to be got than the Roman Legate was likely -to take. Anselm says that they would meet to no purpose, except when -the King, the bishops, and the nobles, were all near to be referred -to.[1462] This reads very much as if Anselm was aware of some -underhand practices between the King and the Legate, and had no mind -to meet the emissary of Rome except when he himself would have the -constitutional voice of the nation to back him. But as things stood at -the moment, circumstances seem to have hindered the meeting for which -Walter seems to have wished and Anselm not to have wished. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: The King’s northern march.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm entrusted with the defence of Canterbury.] - -[Sidenote: Letters between Anselm and Walter.] - -[Sidenote: Position of the bishops.] - -[Sidenote: The bishops object to Anselm’s position.] - -We are now in the thick of the revolt of Earl Robert of Mowbray, the -tale of which will be told in full in the next chapter. The King was -on his march northward to put down the revolt. King, Archbishop, and -Legate, had parted as if the Legate at least was not to see either of -the other two again in England.[1463] At such a time the desired -conference could not be held; and Anselm himself was bound for the -time within a very narrow local range. While the King marched on -towards Northumberland, the Archbishop was entrusted with the care of -Canterbury, perhaps of Kent generally, against an expected Norman -invasion.[1464] If Anselm’s conscience would have allowed him to take -part in actual warfare, we can hardly fancy that he would have proved -a captain to the liking of the Red King. Yet it does sometimes happen -that a simple sense of duty will carry a man with credit through -business the most opposite to his own temper and habits. It is more -likely however that the duty really laid upon Anselm, as upon Wulfstan -at Worcester, was rather to keep the minds of the King’s forces up to -the mark by stirring exhortations, while the task of personally -fighting and personally commanding was given to others. Still he was, -both by the King’s word of mouth and by his writ and seal, entrusted -with the care of the district,[1465] and he deemed it his duty not to -leave Canterbury, except to go to any point that might be immediately -threatened.[1466] Why Walter could not have come to Canterbury is not -clear. Anyhow personal communication was hindered, and to that -hindrance we owe a letter which gives us a further insight into the -almost incredible shamelessness of the King’s courtly bishops. Walter, -it is plain, had been rebuking them for their conduct towards Anselm. -They were open to ecclesiastical censure for denying their archbishop, -and he blames Anselm himself for too great lenity towards them.[1467] -Anselm pleads that they had returned to him and had promised obedience -for the future.[1468] The others, it would seem, had followed the -example of the Bishops of Hereford and Salisbury. But it comes out in -the letter that some of these undutiful suffragans had taken up the -strangest and most self-condemning line of defence. These men, -cringing slaves of the King, who had carried every mean and insulting -message from the King to the Primate, who had laid down the rule that -neither bishops nor other men had anything to do but to follow the -King’s will in all things, were not ashamed to plead that Anselm was -no lawful archbishop, that he could claim no duty from them, simply -because he had done what they had themselves done in a far greater -degree. These faithful servants of King William were not ashamed to -urge that their master and his kingdom had been in a state of schism, -cut off from the Catholic Church and its lawful head, and that Anselm -had been a partaker in the schism. He had received investiture from a -schismatic King; he had done homage to that schismatic King, and had -received consecration from schismatic bishops. In other words, they -plead that Anselm is no lawful archbishop, because he had been -consecrated by themselves. - -[Sidenote: His answer.] - -[Sidenote: Question about the monks of Christ Church.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm and his tenants.] - -A more shameless plea than this could hardly be thought of, but Anselm -does not seem stirred by its shamelessness. He simply answers the -doubt which was cast on his own appointment and consecration as calmly -as if it had been started by some impartial outsider.[1469] Those who -consecrated him were not schismatics; no judgement had cut them off -from the communion of the Church. They had not cast off their -allegiance to the Roman Pontiff; they all professed obedience to the -Roman See; they had not in any way denied that Urban was the lawful -Pope; they had simply, in the midst of the controversy which was going -on, doubted whether it was their clear duty to receive him as -such.[1470] That his own position was perfectly good was shown by the -conduct of the Pope himself. Urban knew all that had happened between -him and the King, together with all the circumstances of his -consecration. So knowing, he had treated him as lawfully consecrated, -and had sent him the pallium by Walter’s own hands.[1471] If such -objections had any force, why had not Walter spoken of them before he, -Anselm, had received the pallium?[1472] Another passage in this letter -would seem to imply that some complaint had been made as to Anselm’s -dealings with the monks of his own church. The Cardinal asks Anselm to -leave them in free possession of their goods.[1473] Anselm answers -that he earnestly desires the peace and advantage of his monks, and -with God’s help he will do all that lies in his power to settle -everything for their advantage.[1474] Anselm and his monks seem to -have been commonly on the best of terms. Still we seem here to see the -beginnings of those disputes which grew into such terrible storms a -hundred years later. The lands of the monks had, as we have -seen,[1476][**dup anchor] not been spared during the vacancy of the -archbishopric. And it may be that some wrong had been again done to -them when the King was molesting the Archbishop’s men during the time -of truce. We heard not long ago of great complaints going up during -that time; some of them may have taken the formal shape of an appeal -to the Cardinal. Anselm’s reeves may have been no more scrupulous than -the reeves of other men. Indeed we find a curious witness that it was -so. The question was raised why Anselm, a monk and a special lover of -monks, did not always live at Canterbury, among his monks.[1475] -Several answers are given. The most remarkable is that his presence in -his manors was needed to protect his poorer tenants from the -oppression of his reeves.[1476] When such care was needed on behalf of -the tenants, it is quite possible that the reeves might sometimes -meddle wrongfully with the possessions of the monks also. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Gemót of Windsor and Salisbury. Christmas, 1095-1096.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm attends the Bishop of Durham on his death-bed. -January, 1096.] - -[Sidenote: Consecration of bishops.] - -[Sidenote: Samson Bishop of Worcester.] - -[Sidenote: Gerard Bishop of Hereford, Archbishop of York 1100.] - -[Sidenote: Consecration of Gerard and Samson. June 6, 1096.] - -A time of peace for Anselm followed, though hardly a time of peace for -England. Before the year was out the King had put down the revolt in -Northumberland; Earl Robert of Mowbray was his prisoner. An expedition -against the Welsh was less successful, and Scotland still remained -under the king of her own choice. The Christmas Gemót, of which we -shall have presently to speak at length, was a famous, and, what was -not usual in our early assemblies, a bloody gathering. It was held at -Windsor and was then adjourned to Salisbury; at the former place at -least Anselm was present, and he had an opportunity of showing -Christian charity to an enemy. At Windsor Bishop William of Durham -sickened and died. His latter days are so closely connected with the -fall of Earl Robert that they will be better spoken of elsewhere. It -is enough to say here that his last hours were cheered by the ghostly -help of the holy man against whom he had so deeply sinned. Meanwhile -Anselm, comforted by the recall of his friend Baldwin,[1477] was doing -his duty in peace; ruling, writing, exhorting, showing love to every -living creature,[1478] ever and anon called on to discharge the -special duties of his office. In this interval he consecrated two -bishops to sees within the realm. The churches of Worcester and -Hereford were vacant by the deaths of the two friends Wulfstan and -Robert. Both sees were filled in the year after they fell vacant. Were -they filled after the usual fashion of the Red King’s day, or was -Anselm, now, outwardly at least, in William’s full favour, able during -this interval of peace to bring about some relaxation of the crying -evil of this reign? There is no direct statement either way; we can -judge only by what we know of the characters of the two men appointed. -Neither of them, one would think, was altogether to the mind of -Anselm. In the place of the holy Wulfstan, the diocese of Worcester -received as its bishop, and the monks of Worcester received as their -abbot, a canon of Bayeux, Samson by name, a brother of Archbishop -Thomas of York. The influence of the Northern Primate may perhaps be -seen in the appointment of his kinsman to a see so closely connected -with his own. Samson was one of the school of learned men with whom -Odo――it was his one redeeming merit――had filled his church of -Bayeux.[1479] He was as yet only in deacon’s orders, and he was -possibly married, at least he is said to have been the father of the -second archbishop Thomas of York.[1480] He seems to have been one of -those prelates, who, without any claim to special saintship, went -through their course at least decently. He was bountiful to all; to -the monks of Worcester he did no harm――some harm seems to have been -looked for from a secular――beyond suppressing their dependent -monastery of Westbury.[1481] Of the new Bishop of Hereford we know -more. He was that Gerard who had helped to bring Cardinal Walter to -England, one of the King’s clerks, not even in deacon’s orders, and a -thorough time-server.[1482] We cannot help suspecting that his -bishopric was not granted for nothing, whatever may have been the case -with Samson at Worcester. The bishops-elect came to Anselm for -consecration. He was then with his friend Gundulf at Lambeth, then a -manor of the see of Rochester. In the chapel of the manor Anselm -ordained them priests.[1483] The next day he consecrated them in the -cathedral church of London, with the help of four of his suffragans, -three of whom, Thomas of York, Maurice of London, and Gundulf of -Rochester, had in different ways a special interest in the ceremony. -The fourth was Herbert, described as of Thetford or Norwich. It was in -the course of this year that he began his great work in his last-named -see.[1484] - -[Sidenote: Anselm consecrates Irish bishops.] - -This year too Anselm was able to show that his style of Patriarch of -all the nations beyond the sea was not an empty title. It was now that -he consecrated two bishops to sees in Ireland, Samuel of Dublin and -Malchus of Waterford. They were both Irish by birth, but monks of -English monasteries, Samuel of Saint Alban’s, Malchus of Winchester. -They came with letters from the clergy and people of their sees, and -from King Murtagh or Murchard, of whom we shall hear again, and who -takes to himself the sounding title of King of Ireland. Both -were consecrated by Anselm, Samuel at Winchester, Malchus at -Canterbury.[1485] It was no new claim; two predecessors of Samuel had -already been consecrated by Lanfranc. - - -§ 6. _The Crusade and the Mortgage of Normandy. November, 1095-March, -1097._ - -[Sidenote: Council of Piacenza. March 7, 1095.] - -[Sidenote: Appeal of the Emperor Alexios.] - -[Sidenote: Council of Clermont. November 18, 1095.] - -[Sidenote: The first Crusade.] - -[Sidenote: Bearing of the crusade on our story.] - -[Sidenote: No king engaged in the first crusade.] - -[Sidenote: The crusades a Latin movement.] - -[Sidenote: Name of _Franks_.] - -[Sidenote: Share of Normandy and Flanders.] - -[Sidenote: Place chosen for the council.] - -We must now for a while again turn our eyes to Normandy, but to -Normandy mainly as affected by the most stirring scenes in the history -of the world. We have seen Urban at Piacenza; we have heard him there -make his appeal to Western Christendom on behalf of the oppressed -churches and nations of the East. Their cry came up then, as it has -come up in our own ears; and it was answered in those days as one only -among Christian nations has been found to answer it in ours. In those -days the bulwark and queen of the Eastern lands still stood untouched. -The New Rome had not then to be won back for Christendom; it had -simply to be preserved. By the prince who still kept on the unbroken -succession of Constantine and Diocletian and Augustus the appeal was -made which stirred the hearts of nations as the heart of one man. The -letters of Alexios had been read at Piacenza; the great call from the -mouth of the Western Pontiff was made in the ears of a vaster -multitude still in the memorable assembly of Clermont. But the tale of -the first Crusade needs not to be told here. The writers of the time -were naturally called away from what might seem the smaller affairs of -their own lands to tell of the great struggle of two worlds. Some of -the fullest accounts of the gathering and march of the crusaders are -to be found in the writings to which we are in the habit of turning in -every page for the history of England and Normandy.[1486] Our native -Chronicler can spare only a few words, but those are most pithy words, -to set forth the great stirring of the nations.[1487] And in our -present tale the holy war directly comes home to us, chiefly because -so many men whom we have already heard of took a part in it. Above -all, it places two of our chief actors before us in parts eminently -characteristic of the two. We see how Duke Robert of Normandy went -forth to show himself among the foremost and the worthiest in the -struggle, and how King William of England took occasion of his -brother’s zeal to gain his duchy by money wrung from English -households and English churches. I have noticed elsewhere,[1488] as -has been often noticed before, that the work of the first crusade was -strictly the work of the nations, and of princes of the second rank. -Dukes and counts there were many in the crusading army, but no king of -the West joined in its march. The Western Emperor was at open war with -the Pope who preached the crusade. The kings of Spain had their own -crusade to wage. The kings of England and France were of all men in -their kingdoms the least likely to join in the enterprise. The -kingdoms of the North were as yet hardly stirred by the voice of -Urban. It is indeed plain that the whole movement was primarily a -Latin movement. It is with a true instinct that the people of the East -have from those days onward given the name of _Franks_ to all the -Christians of the West. It is a curious speculation, and one at which -I have already hinted elsewhere, what would have been the share of -England in the crusades, if there had been no Norman Conquest.[1489] -As it was, the part of the Teutonic nations in the crusades is -undoubtedly secondary to that of the Latin nations. Germany takes no -leading part till a later stage; Scandinavia takes no leading part at -all; England is brought into the scene as an appendage to Normandy. -The English crusaders served under the banner of the Norman -Duke.[1490] Among the secondary powers Flanders indeed appears among -the foremost; but Flanders, a fief of the crown of Paris, was, as a -power, though not as a people, more Latin than Teutonic. The elder -Count Robert had won the honour of forestalling the crusade by sending -help to the Eastern Emperor on his own account.[1491] It was fittingly -in a Latin city, in a Gaulish city, that Urban, himself by birth a -Frenchman in the stricter sense,[1492] called the nations of the West -to arms. But it was equally fitting that it should not be within the -immediate dominion of a king who had no heart for the enterprise, of a -king whose own moral offences it was one of the duties of the Pontiff -and his council to denounce. Not in the dominions of any king, not in -the dominions of any of the great dukes and counts who were in power -on a level with kings, but in the land of the lowlier counts, not as -yet dauphins, of Auvergne, the assembly met whose acts were to lead to -the winning back of the Holy City for Christendom, but with which we -are more directly concerned as causing William the Red to reign at -Rouen as well as at Winchester. - -[Sidenote: Decrees of the council.] - -[Sidenote: Lay investiture forbidden.] - -[Sidenote: Sentences against Clement and the Emperor; against Philip -and Bertrada.] - -[Sidenote: Urban preaches the crusades; his geography.] - -The preaching of the crusade was not the only business of the great -assembly at Clermont. A crowd of canons of the usual kind were passed -against the usual abuses. Those abuses were not confined to England -and Normandy. We are told that in all the lands on our side of the -Alps――and we may venture to doubt whether things were likely to be -much better on the other side――simony prevailed among all classes of -the clergy, while the laity had taken to put away their wives and to -take to themselves the wives of other men.[1493] The great example of -this last fault was certainly King Philip of France, whose marriage or -pretended marriage with Bertrada of Montfort, the wife of Count Fulk -of Anjou, was one of the subjects of discussion at the council. All -abuses of all these kinds were again denounced, as they had often been -denounced before, and were often to be denounced again. But what -concerns us more immediately is the decree that no bishop, abbot, or -clerk of any rank, should receive any ecclesiastical benefice from the -hand of any prince or other layman.[1494] This struck straight at the -ancient use both of England and of Normandy. It forbad what Gregory -the Seventh had, if not allowed, at least winked at, during his whole -reign, in the case of the common sovereign of those two lands.[1495] -This decree, we cannot doubt, had an important bearing on the future -position of Anselm. Wibert, calling himself Clement, was of course -excommunicated afresh, along with the Emperor as his supporter. So -were the King of the French and his pretended queen, for their -adulterous marriage. So were all who should call them King and Queen -or Lord and Lady, or should so much as speak to either of them for any -other purpose except to rebuke their offences.[1496] The thunders of -the Church could have found only one more fitting object than the -reformation of this great moral scandal. But we see to what a height -ecclesiastical claims had grown, when the council took on itself to -declare the offenders deprived of their royal dignity and their feudal -rights. Then followed the great discourse which called men to the Holy -War. Urban told how, of the three parts of the world, the infidels had -rent away two from Christendom; how Asia and Africa were theirs――a -saying wholly true of Africa, and which, when the Turk held Nikaia, -seemed even more true of Asia than it really was. Europe alone was -left, our little portion. Of that, Spain had been lost――the Almoravids -had come in since our last glimpse of Spanish matters[1497]――while -most of the northern parts of Europe itself were still shrouded in -heathen darkness. It needs some little effort to remember how true to -the letter Urban’s religious geography was. The south-western -peninsula was then, what the south-eastern is now, the land of -Christian nations slowly winning back their own from infidel masters. -And, before Swedish kings had crossed the Baltic, before -Sword-brothers and Teutonic knights had arisen, before Russia had made -her way northward, southward, and eastward, all north-eastern Europe -was still heathen, while Scandinavia, Poland, and Hungary, were still -recent conquests for the faith. Into the central strip of Christian -land which lay between the heathen of the north and the Turks and -Saracens of the south, east, and west, the enemy was now ready to -cross. Urban called on his hearers to go forth and stop the way; and -not a few of the men whose names have been famous, some whose names -have been infamous, in our own story were among the foremost to go -forth on the holy errand to which the voice of the Pontiff called -them. - -[Sidenote: French and other crusaders.] - -[Sidenote: 1096.] - -[Sidenote: Hugh brother of King Philip.] - -[Sidenote: Robert of Meulan marries his daughter.] - -[Sidenote: Robert of Flanders and Stephen of Chartres.] - -[Sidenote: The brothers from Boulogne;] - -[Sidenote: Eustace,] - -[Sidenote: Baldwin,] - -[Sidenote: Godfrey of Lorraine.] - -[Sidenote: Norman crusaders.] - -[Sidenote: Ralph of Wader.] - -Those among the recorded crusaders whose names come more immediately -home to Englishmen did not join the holy war till a later time. But -not a few names which have been long familiar to us are to be found in -the list of those who joined in the first regular expedition which set -forth in the course of the year which followed the assembly at -Clermont. Beyond the bounds of England and Normandy we may mark the -names of Hugh surnamed the Great, the brother of King Philip, Count of -Vermandois, Count of Valois in succession to the holy Simon,[1498] but -who appears in our chief list of crusaders by the lowlier title of the -Count of Crêpy. He went to the work, leaving his fiefs to his sons. -His daughter Isabel or Elizabeth he gave in marriage to Count Robert -of Meulan, by this time no very youthful bridegroom.[1499] Among -princes of greater power, but of less lofty birth, the foreign allies -of the Norman house were represented by the younger Count Robert of -Flanders, nephew of the Conqueror’s queen, and by Stephen Count of -Chartres and Blois, husband of the Conqueror’s noblest child, and -father of a king of England and of a bishop of an English see more -personally eminent than his royal brother. Rotrou of Mortagne and -Walter of Saint Valery went from the border lands so closely connected -with Norman history. In Everard of Puiset we hear the name of a house -which was in the next century to become famous in England on the -throne of Saint Cuthberht, the throne at that moment empty and widowed -by the death of William of Saint-Calais. And from a house most hateful -to England, but which had received no small share of the spoils of -England, went forth three brethren, one of whom was to show himself -the worthiest, and to be placed the highest, in the crusading host. -Eustace of Boulogne, a prince beyond the sea but in England lord -of lands scattered from Mendip to the Kentish and East-Saxon -shores,[1500] marched with his two brothers, both of whom were to -reign as kings in the Holy City. The part of Baldwin in the enterprise -had been already foreshadowed in visions told in the hall of -Conches.[1501] Visions were hardly needed to foretell the greatness of -Godfrey of Lorraine, who had won his duchy as the prize of faithful -service to the Emperor, but who was none the less ready to discharge -the duties of a higher allegiance at the bidding of the Pontiff. From -Normandy itself went, among a crowd of others, some of that younger -generation which is beginning to supply the chief actors in our tale. -Philip, the son of the lately deceased Roger of Montgomery, Ivo and -Alberic the sons of the lately deceased Hugh of Grantmesnil,[1502] all -went forth; so did Gerard of Gournay and his wife Eadgyth, he to die, -she to come back for another marriage.[1503] And with them went -another married pair whose names carry us back to earlier times. The -double traitor, Ralph of Wader, traitor to England, traitor to -William, went forth with his valiant Emma, to do something to wipe out -his old crimes by good service beneath the walls of Nikaia, and to -leave his bones and hers in lands where his memory was not a memory of -shame.[1504] - -[Sidenote: Duke Robert.] - -[Sidenote: His need of money.] - -[Sidenote: He is driven to apply to William.] - -[Sidenote: Position of William.] - -We may be sure that among the crowd of men of every rank who were -stirred by the voice of Urban none took up the cross with a more -single mind than the Duke of the Normans. It was an appeal which spoke -at once to the better side of him, an appeal which took him away from -that land of his birth and dominion which was to him a land of such -utter failure. As a son and a ruler, he had much to repent of; as a -warrior, a worthy object of warfare was for the first time opened to -him. But how was he to go, at least how was he to go as became the -prince of a duchy which under other princes had been so great? His -hoard was empty; half his barons were in practical rebellion; his -brothers held no small part of his duchy. He had no resource but one, -to seek help, at whatever cost, from the brother who could command the -wealth of England, even though the price should be nothing short of -yielding the whole of Normandy to him who already held a part. It is -needless to say that King William of England had no thought of going -on the crusade himself. He was not indeed hindered, as the Emperor and -the King of the French were hindered, by actually lying under the -censures of the Church. But he was as little likely as either of them -to gird on his sword in the great quarrel. The voice which stirred the -heart of Robert to the quick found no kindred chord to strike on in -the mocking soul of Rufus. The enemy of God felt no call to march in -the cause of God. He was not likely to spend his treasures or to -display his chivalry in warfare which could not bring him any direct -increase of wealth or power. It was rather for him to stay at home, -and to reap what he could in the way of either wealth or power at the -cost of those whose madness led them on errands which could bring in -neither. Palestine was far away and hard to win. Normandy, so much as -was left of Normandy, so much as was not already his own, was near and -was easy to win with his own special arms. William Rufus was not at -all likely to turn aside from any offer of the kind which Robert might -make to him. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Mission of Abbot Jeronto.] - -[Sidenote: Jeronto rebukes William.] - -[Sidenote: The Pope sends his nephew. Easter, April 13, 1096.] - -The brothers were however at war, and the services of a mediator were -needed to open negotiations between them. The Pope becomingly -undertook the office, and sent a prelate from the more distant parts -of Gaul, Jeronto, Abbot of Saint Benignus at Dijon, to make peace -between the King and the Duke. We are told that Walter of Albano’s -greediness and subserviency to the King had brought the name of -Legate, and of Rome itself, into discredit. Jeronto was therefore -trusted with a commission to make an appeal to William, such as Walter -had clearly never made, about the evils which were allowed to go on -under his government.[1505] Of the two branches of this commission one -prospered better than the other. At first, we are told, the Abbot’s -righteous boldness and plainness of speech seemed to have made an -effect on the King, while it raised general hopes of reform among the -nation.[1506] But the King or his counsellors knew how to deal, if not -with Abbot Jeronto, at least with those in greater authority. He had, -so the story runs, sent a messenger of his own to the Pope――most -likely during his sojourn in northern Gaul, of which we shall hear -again――carrying with him the weighty argument of ten marks of the -purest gold.[1507] Trusting to this means of gaining his end, the King -kept the Abbot of Dijon with him, till the Easter of the next year. By -that time the King’s messenger came back, bringing with him a -commissioner from the Pope, a layman, the sister’s son of Urban, by -whose word of mouth it would seem the Abbot’s commission was cancelled -and all questions were adjourned till the next Christmas.[1508] When -the next Christmas came, the King was not in England, to attend to -ecclesiastical reform or to anything else. - -[Sidenote: Peace between Robert and William.] - -[Sidenote: Normandy pledged to William. 1096.] - -The other object for which Jeronto came to England was fully carried -out, whether Jeronto himself had any real hand in bringing it about or -not. Peace was made between the Duke of the Normans and the King of -the English. In order that Robert might have money to go to the -crusade, the duchy of Normandy was pledged to his brother for a sum of -ten thousand marks. The transaction was not a cession or a sale; it -was a mere pledge. The duchy was to pass to William merely for a -season, for three years, or for so long a time as Robert should be -away. If the Duke should come back, and should find himself able to -pay the money, the duchy was to be his again.[1509] Still William’s -possession seemed likely to be a lasting one. There seemed but small -chance of Robert’s ever coming back, and smaller still of his coming -back with ten thousand marks to spare out of the spoils of the -infidels. If he ever did come so laden, William Rufus doubtless -trusted that, by some means either of force or of fraud, his brother’s -restoration to his duchy might be either evaded or withstood. - -[Sidenote: The price not large.] - -[Sidenote: Heavy taxation to raise the money.] - -[Sidenote: Whitsun Assembly, 1096.] - -[Sidenote: Extortion of the benevolence.] - -[Sidenote: Oppression of tenants.] - -[Sidenote: Protest of the prelates.] - -[Sidenote: Comparison of the prelates and the lay lords.] - -[Sidenote: Plunder of the churches.] - -The price for which Normandy was thus handed over does not, when -compared with other payments of the time, seem a large one. It was not -very much higher than the sums which Herbert Losinga was said to have -paid for a bishopric for himself and an abbey for his father.[1510] -The price to be paid for at least a three years’ possession of all -Normandy was not much more than three times the sum which courtiers at -least had looked on as a reasonable contribution for an Archbishop of -Canterbury to make towards a single Norman expedition.[1511] Yet the -sum which was now to be paid is spoken of as a drain upon the whole -kingdom. Rufus had no thought of paying the money out of any rightful -revenues of the crown or out of any stores which he had already wrung -from his people. Something was to be wrung from them yet again for the -special object of the moment. The time would seem to have been the -summer of the year which followed the gathering at Clermont, the year -which in England began with the death of Bishop William of Durham and -the frightful punishment of Count William of Eu. The matter may have -been discussed at the Whitsun Assembly of that year, of which we have -no record. At any rate a heavy tax was laid on the whole kingdom; we -may be sure that the Red King took the occasion to wring more out of -the land than the actual sum which he had to pay to his brother. -Otherwise, except on the view that everything had been taken already, -the payment of a sum less than seven thousand pounds could hardly have -weighed on the whole kingdom as this benevolence is said to have -weighed. For a benevolence it was, at least in form; men were invited -to give or to lend; but we gather that some more stringent means was -found for those who failed to give or to lend willingly.[1512] The -English Chronicler sends up his wail for the heavy time that it was by -reason of the manifold gelds, and he tells us how, as so often -happened, hunger followed in the wake of the extortioner.[1513] Other -writers describe the King as demanding loans and gifts from his -prelates, earls, and other great men. The great lay lords, we are -told, raised their share by the plunder of the knights who held fiefs -of them and of the churls who tilled their demesne lands.[1514] It is -the cry of these last that we hear through the voice of the -Chronicler. The bishops and abbots are said to have made a protest, a -thing which almost passes belief on the part of the bishops of the Red -King’s day. When called on for their shares, they are said to have -answered, in the spirit, or at least in the words, of Ælfheah, that -they could not raise the money by any means save the oppression of the -wretched tillers of the earth.[1515] Judged by the conduct of the two -classes at Rockingham, the prelates and the lay barons seem to have -changed places. It is the churchmen now who have the conscientious -scruple. Yet the difference is not wonderful. The barons were used to -general havoc and violence of every kind; what they scrupled at was -the deliberate perversion of formal justice to crush a single man who -claimed their reverence on every ground, official and personal. The -prelates, on the other hand, might be ready for any amount of cringing -and cowardice, and might yet shrink from being made the agents of -direct oppression in their own persons. Anyhow another means of -payment was suggested by the cunning agents of the impious King. It -may have been the future Bishop of Durham who answered, “Have ye not -chests full of the bones of dead men, but wrought about with gold and -silver?”[1516] In this strait the churchmen took the sacrilegious -hint. The most sacred objects were not spared; books of the gospels, -shrines, crucifixes, were spoiled of their precious ornaments, -chalices were melted down, all the gifts of the bounty of the old time -were seized on, not to relieve the poor, but to fill the coffers of -the King with the money that was needed for his ambitious -schemes.[1517] - -[Sidenote: Contribution of Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: He mortgages the manor of Peckham to his monks.] - -In all this we have learned to suspect some exaggeration; extreme -measures taken at some particular places must have been spoken of as -if they had been universal throughout the land. In one case, and that -the case of the highest personal interest, we get the details, and -they are a good deal less frightful than the general picture. Among -the other great men of the land, the Archbishop of Canterbury was -called on for his contribution. His friends advised compliance with -the request, and he himself did not complain of it as unreasonable.[1518] -But Anselm had no great store of money in hand. He consulted the -Bishops of Winchester and Rochester, Walkelin and Gundulf, and by -their advice he borrowed a sum of money from the hoard of his monks, -who seem to have been better provided than himself. The convent, by a -vote of the majority, agreed to help the Archbishop with a present sum -of two hundred pounds, in return for which Anselm made over to them -for seven years his manor of Peckham, which brought in thirty pounds -yearly. The money supplied by the monks, together with what Anselm -could raise himself, made up a sum which seems to have satisfied the -King; at least no complaint or dispute is recorded.[1519] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Conference between William and Robert.] - -[Sidenote: Robert sets forth on the Crusade. September, 1096.] - -[Sidenote: His companions, Robert, Stephen, and Odo.] - -[Sidenote: Conduct of Robert.] - -[Sidenote: Robert at Rome.] - -[Sidenote: His reception by Roger of Apulia.] - -The ten thousand marks were raised and paid. We may well believe that -more than the ten thousand marks were raised; but we may be sure that -not a penny more than his bargain entitled him to found its way into -the hands of Duke Robert. In September the whole business was -finished. King William crossed the sea, and met his brother in a -conference held under the mediation of the King of the French, at some -point of the border-land of the Vexin, at Pontoise or at Chaumont, -places of which we shall have to speak again.[1520] The money was paid -to the Duke; the duchy was handed over to the King, and Robert of -Normandy set forth for the holy war. He went in company with his -cousin the Count of Flanders and his brother-in-law the Count of -Chartres. And with them went a kinsman of an elder generation, whose -long history, though not specially long life, is now drawing to an -end. Bishop Odo of Bayeux could not bear to stay in Normandy again to -become a subject of the nephew to whom he had surrendered himself at -Rochester.[1521] He joined the forces of his elder nephew, and with -him went the eloquent Bishop of Evreux, Gilbert, who had preached the -funeral sermon of the Conqueror.[5122] The Duke on his armed -pilgrimage showed new powers. He could now, often but not always, -overcome his love of idleness and pleasure, and whenever the moment of -real danger came, he was ever foremost, not only in the mere daring of -the soldier, but in the skill and counsel of the commander.[1523] -Another hand has traced his course with all vividness, but with less -sympathy than one could have wished for the general objects of the -holy war.[1524] A few points in Robert’s eastern career are all that -need now be touched on. He and his companions passed by Lucca, and -there received the blessing of the orthodox Pope Urban.[1525] They -went on to what should have been Urban’s see, and found how truly the -English Chronicler spoke when he said that Urban nothing had of the -settle at Rome. When they went to pay their devotions in the basilica -of Saint Peter, they met with much such entertainment from the -followers of the schismatic Clement as the monks of Glastonbury had -met with from their abbot Thurstan.[1526] They reached southern Italy, -now a duchy of the house of Hauteville, and the reigning Duke Roger, -son of the renowned Wiscard, is said to have welcomed his natural lord -in the head of the ducal house of his ancestral land.[1527] - -[Sidenote: Siege of Amalfi.] - -[Sidenote: Bohemond takes the cross.] - -[Sidenote: The crusaders winter in Apulia. 1096-1097.] - -[Sidenote: Odo dies at Palermo. February, 1097.] - -At the time of their coming, Duke Roger, his uncle Count Roger of -Sicily, who had won back a realm for Christendom, and his brother -Bohemond――Mark Bohemond we find him accurately called[1528]――were -warring against the famous merchant town of Amalfi,[1529] rebellious -in their eyes against the Norman Duke, in its own eyes loyal to the -Eastern Emperor. At the coming of the crusaders Bohemond took the -cross, and rent up a goodly cloak into crosses for his followers.[1530] -Count Roger was left almost alone to besiege Amalfi, and he went back -to his own island. Yet, after this outburst of pious zeal, those who -were highest in rank among the warriors of the cross tarried to spend -a merry winter in that pleasant land, while many of the lower sort, -already weary of the work, turned aside and went back to their -homes.[1531] The Norman prelates, from whatever motives, crossed to -the great island of the Mediterranean, a trophy of Norman victory only -second to the yet greater island of the Ocean. There, under the rule -of the Great Count of Sicily, the whilom Earl of Kent might see how -conquerors of his own blood could deal with the men of conquered lands -after another sort from that in which he had dealt with the men of his -English earldom. There, in the happy city of the threefold -speech,[1532] the Bishop of Bayeux might mark, in the great temple of -Palermo, once church, then mosque, and now church once more, those -forms of art of the Greek and the Saracen, which had lost in grace, if -they had gained in strength, in taking the shapes which he had himself -followed in his great work in his own Saxon city. There the Earl and -Bishop at last ended a career of which Kent and Bayeux could tell so -different a tale. Gilbert of Evreux discharged the last corporal work -of mercy for his fiercer brother; and the tomb of Odo of Bayeux arose -within the walls of the great church of Palermo, soon to boast itself -the head of the Sicilian realm.[1533] And, after all the changes of -later days, amid the small remains which the barbarians of the -_Renaissance_ have left us of the church of English Walter, we may, -even beside the tomb of the Wonder of the World, stop for a moment to -remember that the brother of our Conqueror, the scourge of our land, -found his last resting-place so far away alike from Bayeux, from -Senlac, and from Rochester. - -[Sidenote: Duke Robert crosses to Dyrrhachion.] - -[Sidenote: Use of the Bulgarian name.] - -[Sidenote: Robert does homage to Alexios.] - -[Sidenote: Robert at Laodikeia.] - -[Sidenote: Hugh of Jaugy joins the crusades.] - -[Sidenote: The “rope-dancers” at Antioch.] - -[Sidenote: Robert said to have refused the crown of Jerusalem.] - -[Sidenote: His return.] - -The Bishop went no further than Palermo; the Duke went on by the -course which the warfare of the Apulian Normans had lately made -familiar. They entered the Eastern world at Dyrrhachion, where the -valour of Normans and Englishmen had been lately proved.[1534] They -passed, in the geography of our authors, through Bulgaria;[1535] that -is, they passed through those Illyrian and Macedonian lands where the -rule of Byzantium had again displaced the rule of Ochrida, but to -which the name of the people whom Samuel had made terrible still -clave, as in the language of fact, though not of diplomacy, it cleaves -still. They reached Thessalonica, they reached Constantinople, and -wondered at the glories of the New Rome.[1536] There, as in duty -bound, they pledged their faith to the truest heir of the Roman -majesty, whose lost lands they were to win back from the misbelievers. -Before the throne of Alexios Robert the Norman knelt; he placed his -hands between the Imperial hands, and arose the sworn liegeman of -Augustus.[1537] The homage of Harold to Robert’s father was not more -binding than the homage of Robert to Alexios; but an English earl and -a Norman crusader were measured in those days by different standards. -The host passed on; at Nikaia, at Antioch, at Jerusalem, Robert was -ever foremost in fight and in council. Yet the old spirit was not -wholly cast out. When the English Warangians at Laodikeia hailed their -joint leaders in the son of their Conqueror and in the heir of their -ancient kings,[1538] the pleasures of Asia, like the pleasures of -Apulia, were too much for the Duke, and it needed the anathemas of the -Church to call him back from his luxurious holiday to the stern work -that was before him.[1539] Before the walls of Jerusalem he found a -strange ally. Hugh of Jaugy, one of the murderers of Mabel, after his -long sojourn among the infidels, greeted his natural prince, returned -to his allegiance, and by his knowledge of the tongue and ways of -those whom he forsook, did useful, if not honourable, service.[1540] A -worthier comrade was a noble and valiant Turk, who of his own accord -came to seek for baptism and for admission to share the perils of the -pilgrims.[1541] The Norman Duke ever appears as the fellow-soldier of -his kinsman and namesake of Flanders; the two Roberts are always side -by side. It is needless to say that neither of them shared in that -shameful descent from the walls of Antioch which gained for some of -the heroes of Normandy the mocking surname of the _rope-dancers_.[1542] -It is hard to find any absolutely contemporary authority for the -statement which was very soon afloat, that the crown of Jerusalem was -offered to Robert and was refused by him.[1543] Robert could not have -been as Godfrey; but we can believe that his career would have been -more honourable in a Syrian than in a Norman dominion. He was at least -one of the first to stand on the rescued walls of the Holy City;[1544] -and in the fight for the newly-won realm against the Fatimite Caliph, -it was not merely by cutting down the Saracen standard-bearer with his -own hand, but by a display of really skilful tactics, that Robert did -much to win the day for Christendom.[1545] He then turned his face -towards Constantinople and towards Apulia, and we shall meet him again -in his own land. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: William takes possession of Normandy.] - -[Sidenote: Grants to Henry.] - -As soon as Robert had set forth for Jerusalem, William took possession -of the duchy of Normandy――in modern phrase, he took upon him its -administration――without opposition from any side. There was indeed no -side, except the side of mere anarchy, from which opposition could -come. It was perhaps a little humiliating for a great duchy to be -handed over from one prince to another by a personal bargain, like a -house or a field. But there was no practical ground for opposing -William’s entry. All classes, save mere robbers, lordly or vulgar, -must have had enough of Robert. And now Robert was gone, and in going, -he had handed them over to the prince for whom many of them had fought -or intrigued, and who already held some of the most important points -of the country. Whether it was good or bad for England and Normandy to -have the same ruler, it was clearly a gain for all Normandy to have -only one ruler. In one sense indeed this object was not even now -attained. William’s first step was to dismember the duchy which he had -bought. Henry, it will be remembered, had been left in Normandy a year -and a half before, and had been, perhaps ever since, acting in -William’s interests against Robert. He now received the reward of his -services in a noble fief indeed. He became again acknowledged Count of -the whole Côtentin. And to his peninsular dominion he was allowed to -add the whole Bessin, except the city of Bayeux and the castle and -town of Caen.[1546] The spot which contained the foundations of his -parents, the tombs of his parents, William Rufus could not bring -himself to give up, even to reward the faithful service of a brother. - -[Sidenote: Rule of William in Normandy.] - -[Sidenote: Synod of Rouen. 1096.] - -[Sidenote: Truce of God confirmed.] - -[Sidenote: Other decrees.] - -[Sidenote: The days of King William.] - -But for Henry, in full friendship with his brother, to hold a corner -of Normandy as a fief of his brother was a partition of Normandy of -quite another kind from such a partition as had been when William, as -Robert’s enemy, hemmed in Robert in his capital. There can be no doubt -that the exchange from Robert to William was an unspeakable gain to -the duchy. During the remainder of the life of Rufus Normandy had a -stern master; but, after the anarchy of Robert, what the land most -needed was a master of almost any kind. The kind of work which was -needed is shown in the acts of a synod which had been gathered at -Rouen by Archbishop William, while Robert still nominally ruled, -almost immediately after the greater gathering at Clermont. Three -Norman bishops had been at Clermont in person, Odo of Bayeux, Gilbert -of Evreux, and Serlo of Seez. They brought back the decrees of the -council to their brethren, who forthwith assembled to accept and -enforce in their own province all that had been ordered at Clermont -for the Church and the world in general. They confirmed the Truce of -God[1547] with all its enactments on behalf of the more useful and -helpless members of society. They drew up an oath to be taken under -pain of anathema by all men, which bound them to observe the Truce in -their own persons, and to give the help of the temporal arm to the -efforts of the ecclesiastical powers against those who should break -it.[1548] In those days at least peace could be had only through war, -and the Truce of God itself became the occasion of more fighting -against those who scorned its wholesome checks. Other anathemas were -pronounced against robbers, false moneyers, and buyers of stolen -goods, against those who gathered themselves together in castles for -purposes of plunder, and against the lords who sheltered such men in -their castles. Such castles were put under an interdict; no Christian -rite might be done in them.[1549] In going on to pronounce further -anathemas against the invaders of ecclesiastical rights, against the -unlawful occupiers of Church lands, against laymen who claimed to have -a right in tithes and other Church dues,[1550] the synod uses a -formula which shows how keenly Normandy felt the difference between -the great William and his eldest son. What the days of the Confessor -were in England, the days of the Conqueror were in his own duchy. The -synod decreed that all churches should enjoy their goods and customs -as they had been in the time of King William, and that no burthens -should be laid upon them but such as King William had allowed.[1551] - -[Sidenote: Small results of the synod.] - -[Sidenote: William’s rule in Normandy.] - -[Sidenote: His appointments to prelacies.] - -[Sidenote: Tancard Abbot of Jumièges. 1096-1101.] - -[Sidenote: Etard Abbot of Saint Peter’s. 1096-1107.] - -[Sidenote: February, 1098.] - -[Sidenote: Turold Bishop of Bayeux. 1098-1195.] - -It would be too much to think that William the Red at once brought -back the Norman duchy to the state in which it had been in those -golden days of William the Great. And it is still less needful to stop -to prove that even the days of William the Great would not have seemed -golden days as compared with the state of any well-governed land in -our own time. But there can be no doubt that the coming of the new -ruler wrought a real reform. And a reform was grievously needed. We -read that very little came of the well-intentioned decrees of the -synod. The bishops, Odo among them, did what they could――it is Odo’s -last recorded act in the lands with which we have to deal, and it is -something that he leaves us in the shape of a reformer and not in that -of an oppressor. But very little came of the efforts of the prelates. -The Duke did nothing to help them――his mind was perhaps too full of -the crusade――and things were at the moment of William’s coming in -almost greater confusion than ever.[1552] He at least gave the land -the advantage of a strong rule; he kept the luxury of oppression to -himself. The lesser scourges of mankind were thoroughly put down. We -hear no more of that private warfare which had torn the land in pieces -in the days of Robert. William recalled many of the lavish grants of -Robert; what his father had held, he would hold.[1553] Even in -ecclesiastical matters Rufus is not painted in such dark colours in -Normandy as he is in England. He is not charged with keeping -ecclesiastical benefices vacant in order that he might enjoy their -revenues. He found two great abbeys vacant, those of Jumièges and -Saint Peter-on-Dives; and he at once supplied them with abbots. They -were abbots of his own choosing, but it is not said that they bought -their places.[1554] Tancard, the new abbot of Jumièges, may lie under -some suspicion, as a few years after he was deposed on account of a -shameful quarrel with his monks.[1555] Saint Peter’s was vacant, not -by the death, but by the deposition and banishment――unjust we are -told――of its abbot Fulk. William appointed a monk of Jumièges called -Etard or Walter, who ruled well, we are told, for eleven years, till -Fulk came back with letters from the Pope, on which his successor -cheerfully made way for him again.[1556] No Norman bishopric was -vacant at the time of William’s entry, nor did any become vacant for -more than a year. Then in the midst of events which are to be told -hereafter, the news came that the throne of Bayeux was vacant by the -death of Odo far away at Palermo. William at once bestowed the staff -on Turold the brother of Hugh of Evermouth, seemingly the same Hugh -who figures in the legend of Hereward as his son-in-law and -successor.[1557] This prelate sat for seven years, and then, for -reasons of his own, gave up his see, and became a monk at Bec.[1558] - - -§ 7. _The Last Dispute between William and Anselm. 1097._ - - -[Sidenote: Christmas, 1096-1097.] - -[Sidenote: State of Wales at the end of 1096.] - -[Sidenote: Easter, April 5, 1097.] - -[Sidenote: William comes to England.] - -[Sidenote: Assembly of Windsor.] - -[Sidenote: Seeming conquest of Wales.] - -[Sidenote: Good hopes for the future.] - -[Sidenote: William complains of Anselm’s contingent to the Welsh war.] - -[Sidenote: Estimate of the complaint.] - -[Sidenote: Position of the Archbishop’s knights.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm summoned to the King’s court.] - -The year which followed William’s acquisition of Normandy was a busy -year in many ways. The King passed the winter in the duchy; the -greater part of the year he spent in England. He was largely occupied -with the affairs of Wales and Scotland, and in this year came the last -dispute between the King and the Archbishop, and the first departure -of Anselm from England. Since their reconciliation at Windsor two -years before, there had been no open breach between them. The first -difference arose out of the events of the Welsh war. At the end of the -year which saw William master of Normandy, he seemed to have wholly -lost his hold on Wales. Except Glamorgan and the one isolated castle -of Pembroke, the Britons seemed to have won back their whole -land.[1559] The affairs of Wales brought the King back from Normandy, -and he designed to hold the Easter Gemót in its usual place at -Winchester. Stress of weather however hindered him from reaching -England in time for the festival. He landed at Arundel on Easter eve, -and thence went to Windsor, where the Assembly was therefore held, -somewhat later than the usual time.[1560] The meeting was followed by -a great expedition into Wales, and by a submission of the country -which events a few months later proved to be very nominal -indeed.[1561] But there was at last an apparent success. William -seemed to be greater than ever; he had, by whatever means, won -Normandy and recovered Wales. And, more than this, the beginnings of -his Norman government had been good; he had thus far shown himself a -better nursing-father of the Church in his duchy than his brother -Robert had done. A hope therefore arose in many minds that the days of -victory and peace might be days of reformed government in England -also, and that King and Primate might be able to join in some great -measure for the improvement of discipline and manners.[1562] In this -hope they were disappointed, as they were likely to be, especially if -they reckoned on any long time of peace with the Britons. But the -first renewed breach between the King and the Archbishop arose from -quite a new cause. When the King came back from the Welsh war, he sent -a letter to Anselm, angrily complaining of the nature of the -Archbishop’s military contingent to his army. The knights whom Anselm -had sent had been so badly equipped and so useless in war that he owed -him no thanks for them but rather the contrary.[1563] This story is -commonly told as if Anselm had been the colonel of a regiment whose -men were, through his fault, utterly unfit for service. Anselm had -indeed, as we have seen, once held somewhat of a warlike command, but -it had been of a passive kind; he was certainly not expected to go to -the Welsh war himself. In truth the complaint is against knights; -doubtless, if the knights were bad, their followers would be worse; -but it is of knights that the King speaks. If I rightly understand the -relation between the Archbishop and his military tenants, these -knights were men who held lands of the archbishopric by the tenure of -discharging all the military service to which the whole estates of the -archbishopric were bound.[1564] It was doubtless the business of their -lord to see that the service was paid, that the proper number of -knights, each with his proper number of followers, went to the royal -standard. But one can hardly think that it was part of the -Archbishop’s business to look into every military detail, as if he had -been their commanding officer. It was not Anselm’s business to find -their arms and accoutrements; they held their lands by the tenure of -finding such things for themselves. The King was dissatisfied with the -archiepiscopal contingent, and, from his point of view, most likely -not without reason. Anselm’s troops might be expected to be among the -least serviceable parts of the army. Gentlemen and yeomen of Kent――we -may begin to use those familiar names――could have had no great -experience of warfare; there were no private wars to keep their hands -in practice; they could not be so well fitted for war in general or -specially for Welsh war, either as the picked mercenaries of the King -or as the tried followers of the Earl of Chester and the Lord of -Glamorgan. William, as a military commander, might naturally be -annoyed at the poor figure cut by the Archbishop’s knights; but there -is every reason to think that, in point of law, his complaint against -the Archbishop was unjust. It seems to be shown to be so by the fact -that the charge which the King brought against Anselm on this account -was one which in the end he found it better to drop. But he now bade -Anselm to be ready to _do right_ to him, according to the judgement of -his court, whenever he should think fit to summon him for that -end.[1565] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s distress.] - -[Sidenote: His weariness of England.] - -[Sidenote: Change in Anselm’s feelings.] - -[Sidenote: His yearnings towards Rome.] - -[Sidenote: Personal position of Urban.] - -[Sidenote: Ideal aspect of Rome.] - -Anselm seems to have been thoroughly disheartened by this fresh blow. -And yet it was no more than what he had been looking for. Over and -over again he had said that between him and William there could be no -lasting peace, that under such a king as William there could be no -real reform.[1566] And the new grievance was a personal one; whether -the charge was right or wrong, it had nothing to do with the interests -of the Church or with good morals; it simply touched his relations to -the King as his temporal lord. Since the meeting at Windsor two years -before, though William had given Anselm no kind of help in his plans, -he does not seem to have openly thwarted them, except, as seems -implied throughout, by still refusing his leave for the holding of a -synod. At the same time there had been quite enough to make Anselm -thoroughly weary of England and her King and of everything to do with -her. And the visits of the Cardinal of Albano and the Abbot of Saint -Benignus had done Anselm no good. From this time we mark the beginning -of a certain change in him which, without in any way morally blaming -him, we must call a change for the worse. Left to himself, he seems -not to have had the faintest scruple as to the customs which were -established alike in England and in Normandy. He was unwilling to -accept the metropolitan office at all; but he made no objection to the -particular way of receiving it which was the use of England and of -Normandy. He had, without scruple or protest, received the staff of -Canterbury from the son as he had received the staff of Bec from the -father. His wish to go to Rome to receive the pallium was fully -according to precedent, and it was only the petty captiousness of the -King that turned it into a matter of offence. But the mere talking -about Rome and the Pope which the discussion had led to was not -wholesome; and everything that had since happened had tended to put -Rome and the Pope more and more into Anselm’s head. The coming of the -Legate, the rebukes of the Legate, even the base insinuations of his -undutiful suffragans against the validity of his appointment, would -all help to bring about a certain morbid frame of mind, a craving -after Rome and its Bishop as the one centre of shelter and comfort -among his troubles. The very failure of Walter’s mission, the unworthy -greediness and subserviency into which the Legate had fallen, the -utter break-down of the later mission of Abbot Jeronto, would all tend -the same way. Anselm would hold, not that the Pope was corrupt, but -that none but the Pope in his own person could be trusted. He would -have nothing more to do with his unfaithful agents; he would go -himself to the fountain-head which could not fail him. And he to whom -he would go was not simply the Pope, any Pope; it was Urban the -Second, the reformer, the preacher of the crusade. Since Anselm’s work -had begun, the world had been filled with the personal fame of the -Pontiff in whose cause he had striven. In the same council which had -stirred the common heart of Christendom Urban had denounced those -customs of England to which Anselm had conformed in his own -appointment and which he had promised to defend against all men. The -rules laid down at Clermont against the acceptance of ecclesiastical -benefices from lay hands not only condemned his own appointment, made -before those decrees were issued; it condemned also the consecrations -to the sees of Hereford and Worcester which he had himself performed -since they had been issued. Amid the reign of unlaw, amid the constant -breaches of discipline, the frightful sins against moral right, which -he had daily to behold and which he was kept back from duly censuring, -with none to support him outwardly, none but a few chosen ones to -understand his inward thoughts, it is not wonderful if distant Rome -seemed to him a blessed haven of rest from the troubles and sorrows of -England. Let him flee thither at any cost, and have peace. Let him -seek the counsel of the ghostly superior to whom he looked up in -faith, and to whom he had been so faithful; to him he would open his -soul; from him he would receive guidance, perhaps strength, in a -course which was beset with so many difficulties on all sides. Rome, -seen far away, looked pure and holy; its Pontiff seemed the one -embodiment of right and law, the one shadow of God left upon earth, in -a world of force and falsehood and foulness of life, a world where the -civil sword was left in the hands of kings like William and Philip, -and where an Emperor like Henry still wielded it in defiance of -anathemas. At such a distance he would not see that the policy of -Popes had already learned to be even more worldly and crooked than -that of kings and emperors. He had not learned, what Englishmen had -already learned, that gold was as powerful in the counsels of the Holy -See as ever it was in the closet of the Red King. The Pope’s agents -and messengers might take bribes; the Pope himself, the holy College -around him, would never sink to such shame. The majestic and -attractive side of the Roman system was all that would present itself -to his eyes. He would flee to the blessed shelter and be at peace. He -had had enough of the world of kings and courts, the world where men -of God were called on to send men to fight the battles of this life, -and were called in question if swords were not sharp enough or if -horses were not duly trained and caparisoned. Weary and sick at heart, -he would turn away from such a scene and from its thankless duties; he -would, for a while at least, leave the potsherds of the earth to -strive with the potsherds of the earth; he would go where he might -perhaps win leave to throw aside his burthen, or where, failing that, -he might receive renewed strength to bear it. - -[Sidenote: New position taken by Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: Aspect of his conduct.] - -[Sidenote: Causes of his loss of general support.] - -In all this we can thoroughly enter into Anselm’s feelings, nor are we -called upon to pronounce any censure upon either his feelings or his -conduct. But it is plain that he was now taking up a wholly different -position from that which he had taken at Rockingham, a position in -which he could not expect to meet with, and in which he did not meet -with, the same support which he had met with at Rockingham. At -Gillingham and at Rockingham Anselm did nothing which could be fairly -construed as a defiance of the law or an appeal to the Pope against -any lawful authority of the King. All that he did was to ask the -King’s leave to go for the pallium, that is to do what all his -predecessors had done, to obey what might be as fairly called a custom -of the realm as any other. In the discussions which now began, his -conduct would, to say the least, have, in the eyes of any but the most -friendly judges, another look. He was asking leave to go to Rome, not -to discharge an established duty, but, as it might be not unfairly -argued, simply to gratify a caprice of his own. He might rightly ask -for such leave; but it rested with the King’s discretion to grant or -to refuse it, and no formal wrong would be done to him by refusing it. -And to ask leave to go and consult the Pope, not because of any -meddling with his spiritual office, not on account of any religious or -ecclesiastical difficulty, but because the King had threatened him -with a suit, just or unjust, in a purely temporal matter, had very -much the air of appealing from the King’s authority to the Pope. We -must remember throughout that Anselm nowhere makes the claim which Odo -and William of Saint-Calais made before him, which Thomas of London -made after him, to be exempt from temporal jurisdiction on the ground -of his order. As such claims had no foundation in English law, neither -was it at all in the spirit of Anselm to press them. All that he -wanted was to be allowed to seek help in his troubles in the only -quarter where he believed that help might be found. But the petition -for leave to seek it was put in a form and under circumstances which -might well have awakened some distrust, some unwillingness, in minds -far better disposed towards him than that of the Red King. We may not -for a moment doubt the perfect singlemindedness of Anselm, his perfect -righteousness from the point of view of his own conscience. But we -cannot wonder that, in the new controversy, he failed to have the -barons and people of England at his side, as he had had them on the -day of trial at Rockingham and on the day of peace-making at Windsor. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s continued demands of reform.] - -[Sidenote: He determines not to answer the new summons.] - -[Sidenote: Working of the King’s court.] - -[Sidenote: He determines on a last effort.] - -The belief that the supposed season of peace might be a season of -reform had been shared by Anselm himself. He had more than once urged -the King on the subject; but William had always answered that he was -too busy dealing with his many enemies to think about such -matters.[1567] Such an answer was a mere put-off; yet a more -discouraging one might have been given. Anselm had therefore fully -made up his mind to make the most of this special opportunity, and to -make yet one more urgent appeal to the King to help him in his -work.[1568] And now, at the meeting where he trusted to make this -attempt, he was summoned to appear as defendant on a purely temporal -charge. To that charge he determined to make no answer. But surely the -reason which is given is rather the reason of Eadmer afterwards than -of Anselm at the time. Anselm is made to say that in the King’s court -everything depended on the King’s nod, and that his cause would be -examined in that court, without law, without equity, without -reason.[1569] He had not found it so at Rockingham, nor did he find it -so now. But we can quite understand that, with his mind full of so -much greater matters, he might think it better to let his judges -settle matters as they might, for or against him, in questions as to -horses and weapons and military training. The worst that could happen -would be another payment of money.[1570] Anselm believed that the -charge was a mere pretence, devised simply to hinder him from making -the appeal to the King which he designed.[1571] He therefore made up -his mind to make no answer to the summons, and to let the law, if -there was any law in the matter, take its course.[1572] When he looked -around at the spoliation of the Church, at the evils of all kinds -which had crept in through lack of discipline, he feared the judgement -of God on himself, if he did not make one last effort.[1573] His heart -indeed sank when he saw that, of all the evil that was done, the King -either was himself the doer or took pleasure in them that did it. But -he would strive once more; if his last effort failed, he would appeal -to a higher spiritual power than his own; he would see what the -authority and judgement of the Apostolic See could do.[1574] - -[Sidenote: Whitsun Gemót. May 24, 1097.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm favourably received; his last appeal.] - -[Sidenote: Surmises as to the charge against Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: He determines to ask leave] - -[Sidenote: to go to Rome.] - -[Sidenote: He declares his purpose to a chosen body.] - -[Sidenote: Aspect of the demand.] - -[Sidenote: The King’s answer.] - -[Sidenote: The charge against Anselm withdrawn.] - -The Whitsun festival came, and Anselm went to the Assembly. The place -of meeting is not mentioned; according to usage it would be -Westminster. Though the suit was hanging over Anselm, he went, not as -a defendant in a suit, but as a chief member of the Gemót. He seems to -have been graciously received by the King; at least we hear of him at -the royal table, and he had opportunities of private access to the -royal ear. Of these chances he did not fail to take advantage for his -purpose; but all was in vain; nothing at all tending to reform was to -be got out of William Rufus.[1575] In this way the earlier days of -meeting, the days of the actual festival, were spent. Then, as usual, -the various matters of business which had to be dealt with by the King -and his Witan were brought forward.[1576] Among other questions men -were eagerly asking what would become of the charge against the -Archbishop as to the bad equipment of his knights in the late Welsh -campaign. Would he have to pay some huge sum of money, or would he -have to pray for mercy, and be thereby so humbled that he could never -lift up his head again?[1577] Anselm’s thoughts meanwhile were set -upon quite other matters. He had made his last attempt on the King’s -conscience, and he had failed. There was nothing more to be done by -his own unaided powers. He must seek for the counsel and help of one -greater than himself. He called together a body of nobles of his own -choice, those doubtless in whom he could put most trust, and he bade -them carry a message from him to the King, to say that he was driven -by the utmost need to ask his leave to go to Rome.[1578] We ask why he -who had been on such intimate terms with the King during the earlier -days of the meeting, was now forced to send a message instead of -speaking to the King face to face. We may suppose that the arrangement -was the same as at Rockingham, that there was an outer and an inner -chamber, and that, while the suit against the Archbishop was pending, -he was not allowed to take his natural place among the King’s -counsellors. During the days of festival, he had been a guest and a -friend; now that the days of business had come, he had changed into a -defendant. We are not told what the lords of his choice said or -thought of the message which he put into their hands. Unless it was -accompanied by a rather full explanation, it must have been startling. -With the help of Eadmer we can follow the workings of Anselm’s mind; -but to one who heard the request suddenly it must have had a strange -sound. Did the Archbishop wish to complain to the Pope because the -King was displeased with the trim and conduct of his military -contingent? The King at least, when the message was taken to him, was -utterly amazed. But William was not in one of his worst moods; he was -sarcastic, but not wrathful. He refused the licence. There could be no -need for Anselm to go to the Pope. He would never believe that Anselm -had committed any sin so black that none but the Pope could absolve -him. And as for counsel, Anselm was much better fitted to give it to -the Pope than the Pope was to give it to Anselm. Anselm took the -refusal meekly. “Power is in his hands; he says what pleases him. What -he refuses now he may perhaps grant another day. I will multiply my -prayers.”[1579] Anselm had therefore to stay in England. But the -formal charge against him was withdrawn. Perhaps the King had merely -made it in a fit of ill humour, and had long given up any serious -thought of pressing it. And, if he really wished to annoy Anselm, he -had now a way in which he might annoy him far more thoroughly and with -much greater advantage than by any mere temporal suit. - -[Sidenote: Affairs of Wales. June-August, 1097.] - -[Sidenote: Another assembly.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s request again refused.] - -This year was a year of gatherings, alike for counsel and for warfare. -The seeming submission of Wales was soon found to be utterly hollow. -From Midsummer till August William was engaged in another British -expedition, one which brought nothing but immediate toil and trouble, -but of whose more distant results we shall have again to speak. On his -return he summoned, perhaps not a general Gemót, but at any rate a -council of prelates and lords, to discuss grave matters touching the -state of the kingdom.[1580] We would fain hear something of their -debates on other affairs than those of Anselm; but that privilege is -denied us. We only know that, when the council was about to break up, -when all its members were eager to get to their homes, Anselm -earnestly craved that his request to go to Rome might be granted, and -that the King again refused.[1581] - -[Sidenote: Assembly at Winchester. October 14, 1097.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm renews his request.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm again impleaded.] - -[Sidenote: Alternative given to Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: The meeting adjourned.] - -William Rufus seems never to have been happy save when he was himself -moving and keeping everybody else in motion. It must have been in his -days as in the days of Constantius, when the means of getting from -place to place broke down through the multitude of bishops who were -going to and fro for the endless councils.[1582] In the month of -October the bishops and great lords at least, if no one else, were -brought together for the fourth time this year. This time the place of -meeting was Winchester; the day was the day of Saint Calixtus, the -thirty-first anniversary of the great battle. We hear nothing of any -other business, but only of the renewed petition of Anselm. It is -clear that the idea of going to the Pope had seized on Anselm’s mind -to an unhealthy degree. He could not help pressing it in season and -out of season, clearly to the weakening both of his influence and of -his position. He made his request to the King both with his own -lips――this time he was no defendant――and by the lips of others. The -King was now thoroughly tired of the subject; he was now not -sarcastic, but thoroughly annoyed and angry. He was weary of Anselm’s -endlessly pressing a request which he must by this time know would not -be granted. Anselm had wearied him too much; he now directly commanded -that he should cease from his importunity, that he should submit to -the judgement of the court and pay a fine for the annoyance which he -had given to his sovereign.[1583] The King had an undoubted right to -refuse the licence; but it is hard to see why the Archbishop was to be -fined for asking for it. By this turn Anselm was again made a -defendant. Anselm now offers to give good reasons, such as the King -could not gainsay, for the course which he took. The King refuses to -hear any reasons, and, with a mixture of licence, threat, and -defiance, he gives the Archbishop a kind of alternative. Anselm must -understand that, if he goes, the King will seize the archbishopric -into his own hands, and will never again receive him as archbishop.[1584] -There was some free expression of feeling in these assemblies; for -this announcement of the King’s will was met by a storm of shouts on -different sides, some cheering the King and some the Archbishop.[1585] -Some at last, the moderate party perhaps, proposed and carried an -adjournment till the morrow, hoping meanwhile to settle matters in -some other way.[1586] - -[Sidenote: Thursday, October 15, 1097.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm and the bishops and lords.] - -The next morning came; as so often before, Anselm and his friends sat -waiting the royal pleasure. Some bishops and lords came out and asked -Anselm what his purpose now was about the affair of yesterday. He had -not, he answered, agreed to the adjournment because he had any doubt -as to his own purpose, but only lest he should seem to set no store by -the opinion of others. He was in the same mind in which he had been -yesterday; he would again crave the King’s leave to go. Go he must, -for the sake of his own soul’s health, for the sake of the Christian -religion, for the King’s own honour and profit, if he would only -believe it.[1587] The bishops and lords asked if he had anything else -to say; as for leave to go to Rome, it was no use talking; the King -would not grant it. Anselm answers that, if the King will not grant -it, he must follow the scripture and obey God rather than man. We here -see that Anselm had brooded over his griefs till he had reached the -verge of fanaticism. Such language would have been exaggerated, had it -been used when he was forbidden to go for the pallium according to -ancient custom; it was utterly out of place when no clear duty of any -kind, no law of eternal right, no positive law of the Church, bade him -to go to Rome in defiance of the King’s orders. - -[Sidenote: Speech of Bishop Walkelin.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm and the bishops.] - -[Sidenote: The bishops’ portrait of themselves.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s answer.] - -At this stage we again meet a personal spokesman on the other side; -Bishop Walkelin of Winchester speaks where doubtless William of -Saint-Calais would have spoken, had he still lived. Walkelin’s -argument was one hardly suited to the mind of Anselm. The King and his -lords knew the Archbishop’s ways; they knew that he was a man not -easily turned from his purpose; but it was not easy to believe that he -would be firm in his purpose of casting aside the honour and wealth of -the great office which he held, merely for the sake of going to -Rome.[1588] Anselm’s face lighted up, and he fixed his keen eyes on -Walkelin, with the words, “Truly I shall be firm.” This answer was -taken to the King, and was debated for a long while in the inner -council. At last Anselm bethinks him that his suffragans ought rather -to be advising him than advising the King; he sends and bids them to -come to him. Three of them come at the summons, Walkelin, the -ritualist Osmund, the cunning leech John of Bath. They sat down on -each side of their metropolitan. Anselm called on them, as bishops and -prelates in the Church of God. If they were really willing to guard -the right and the justice of God as they were ready to guard the laws -and usages of a mortal man,[1589] they will let him tell them in full -his reason for the course which he is taking, and they will then give -him their counsel in God’s name.[1590] The three bishops chose first -to confer with their brethren; Walkelin and Robert were then sent in -to the King, and the whole body of bishops came once more to Anselm. -We now see the portrait of the prelates of the Red King’s day, as it -is drawn by their own spokesman. Anselm they knew to be a devout and -holy man who had his conversation in heaven. But they were hindered by -the kinsfolk whom they sustained, by the manifold affairs of the world -which they loved; they could not rise to the loftiness of Anselm’s -life or trample on this world as he did.[1591] But if he would come -down to them, and would walk in their way,[1592] then they would -consult for him as they would consult for themselves, and would help -him in his affairs as if they were their own. If he would persist in -standing alone and referring everything to God,[1593] they would not -go beyond the fealty which they owed to the King. This was plain -speaking enough; the doctrine of interest against right has seldom, -even in these later times, been more openly set forth. One would think -that the bishops simply meant to strengthen Anselm’s fixed purpose; -they could not hope to move him with arguments which certainly did not -do justice to their own case. Anselm’s scholastic training always -enabled him to seize an advantage in argument. “You have spoken well,” -he answered; “go to your lord; I will cleave to God.”[1594] They did -as he bade them; they went, and Anselm was left almost alone; the few -friends who clave to him sat apart at his bidding, and prayed to God -to bring the matter to a good ending.[1595] - -[Sidenote: Part of the lay lords.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s promise to obey the customs.] - -[Sidenote: He is charged with breach of promise.] - -[Sidenote: Alternative given to him.] - -In all these debates it is the bishops who play the worst part. They -seem to say in calm earnest the same kind of things which the King -said in wrath or in jest. After a short delay, they come back, -accompanied by some lay barons, and the tone of their discourse is at -once raised. Anselm has no longer the laity on his side, as he had at -Rockingham; nor can we wonder at the change. The speech which is now -made is harsh, perhaps captious; but at all events the stand is now -taken on direct legal grounds, no longer on the base motives confessed -to by the bishops. The King sent word that Anselm had troubled him, -embittered him, tortured him, by his complaints.[1596] The Archbishop -is reminded that, after the suit at Rockingham and the reconciliation -which followed at Windsor――a reconciliation which is now attributed to -the earnest prayers of Anselm’s friends[1597]――he had sworn to obey -the laws and customs of the realm, and to defend them against all -men.[1598] After this promise the King had believed that Anselm would -give him no more trouble.[1599] But he had already broken his -oath――the charge is delicately worded――when he threatened to go to -Rome without the King’s leave.[1600] For any of the great men of the -realm so to do was utterly unheard of; for him most of all. Anselm’s -enemies had now the advantage of him; he certainly had uttered words -which might be not unfairly construed as an intended breach of the -law. They therefore called on him to make oath that he would never -appeal to the Holy See in any shape in any matter which the King might -lay upon him; otherwise he must leave the kingdom with all speed, on -what conditions he already knew. And if he chose to stay and take the -oath, he must submit to be fined at the judgement of the court for -having troubled the King so much about a matter in which he had after -all not stuck firm to his own purpose.[1601] This last condition seems -hard measure; there was surely no treason in making a request to the -King which it rested with the King to grant or to refuse. With regard -to the alleged breach of promise they undoubtedly stood on firmer -ground. - -[Sidenote: Anselm and the King.] - -[Sidenote: Qualifications and distinctions.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s discourse; duty to God always excepted.] - -The King’s messengers did not wait for an answer. Anselm therefore -rose; followed by his companions, he went in to the King, and, -according to custom, sat down beside him.[1602] He asked whether the -message which he had just heard had really come from the King, and he -received for answer that it had. Anselm then said that he had -undoubtedly made the promise to observe the laws, but that he made it -only in God’s name, and so far as the laws were according to right, -and could be obeyed in God’s name.[1603] The King and his lords -answered that in the promise there had been no mention of God or of -right.[1604] We should be well pleased to have the actual words of the -promise; but we need not suppose any direct misstatement of fact on -either side; the forms of oaths and promises are commonly capable of -more than one interpretation. Words which one side looks on as -surplusage another side looks on as the root of the whole matter. But -the form of the answer gave Anselm, if not a logical, at least a -rhetorical, advantage. If there was no mention of God or right, what -was there mention of? No Christian man could be bound to observe laws -which were contrary to God and right. We have here reached the -beginning of those distinctions and qualifications which play so great -a part in the debates of the next century; but with Anselm the appeal -is simply to God and right; there is not a word about the privileges -of his order. His hearers murmured and wagged their heads, but said -nothing openly.[1605] So the Primate went on to lay down at some -length the doctrine that every promise of earthly duty involved in its -own nature a saving of duty to God. Faith was pledged in earthly -matters according to the faith due to God; faith to God was therefore -excepted by the very terms of the promise.[1606] The argument is -doubtless sound, as regards the individual conscience; it leaves out -of sight, and any argument of that age would probably have left out of -sight, the truth that men may differ as to what is duty towards God, -and that no lawgiver or administrator of the law can possibly listen -to every scruple which may be urged on such grounds in favour of -disobedience. To Anselm’s mind the case was clear. A custom which -hindered him from going to consult the Vicar of Saint Peter for his -own soul’s health and for the good of the Church was a custom contrary -to God and right, a custom which ought to be cast aside and disobeyed. -No man who feared God would hinder him from going to the head of -Christendom on God’s service. He ended with a parable. The King would -not think himself well served if any powerful vassal of his should by -terrors and threatenings hinder any other of his subjects from doing -his duty and service to him. - -[Sidenote: Answer of Count Robert.] - -[Sidenote: The barons against Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: He ends his discourse.] - -It was perhaps not wholly in enmity that the Count of Meulan, who at -Rockingham had frankly professed his admiration of Anselm, joined the -King at this stage in trying to turn off the matter with a jest. The -Primate, he said, was preaching them a sermon; but prudent people -could not admit his line of argument.[1607] And certainly Anselm’s -present line of argument, the assertion of individual conscience -against established law, could not be admitted by any legislative or -judicial assembly. A disturbance followed; the barons who had stood by -the Archbishop when he lay under a manifestly unjust charge joined in -the clamour against him when he declared that the law of the land was -something to be despised and disobeyed. But Anselm’s conscience was -not disturbed; he sat quiet and silent, with his face towards the -ground, till the clamour wore itself out.[1608] He then finished his -sermon, as Count Robert called it. No Christian man ought to demand of -him that he would never appeal to the blessed Peter or his Vicar. So -to swear would be to abjure Peter, and to abjure Peter would be to -abjure Christ who had set Peter as the chief over his Church. He then -turned to the King with a kind of gentle defiance; “When I deny -Christ, O King, for your sake, then will I not be slow to pay a fine -at the judgement of your court for my sin in asking your leave.” Half -in anger, half in mockery, Count Robert said, “You will present -yourself to Peter and the Pope; but no Pope shall get the better of -us, to our knowledge.”[1609] “God knows,” answered Anselm, “what may -be in store for you; He will be able, if He thinks good, to guide me -to the threshold of his apostles.” With these words the Archbishop -rose, and went again into the outer chamber. - -[Sidenote: Anselm to be allowed to go, but the archbishopric to be -seized if he went.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm allowed to go, but the archbishopric to be seized.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s last interview with the King.] - -[Sidenote: He blesses Rufus.] - -The King and his counsellors seem to have been moved by the calm -resolution of Anselm, even when the letter of the law was on their own -side. Either Rufus was not in his most savage mood, or his wily -Achitophel contrived to keep him in some restraint. Nothing could be -gained by keeping Anselm in the kingdom. He had already had the choice -set before him. He might go; but, if he went, the archbishopric would -be seized into the King’s hands. He had made his choice, and he should -be allowed to carry it out without hindrance; only he knew on what -conditions. The decision was on the whole not altogether unfair; but -the inherent pettiness of the magnanimous King could not help throwing -in an insult or two by the way. If Anselm chose to go, all that he -had, in Rufus’ version of the law, at once passed to the King. He was -therefore told, in the message which was sent out to him, that he -might go, but that he might take nothing with him which belonged to -the King.[1610] Anselm did not, like William of Saint-Calais, bargain -for the means of crossing in state with dogs, hawks, and -servants.[1611] He seems tacitly to raise a point of law. The lands of -the archbishopric might pass to the King; but that could not take from -him his mere personal goods. “I have,” he said, “horses, clothes, -furniture, which perhaps somebody may say are the King’s. But I will -go naked and on foot, rather than give up my purpose.” When these -words were reported to Rufus, for a moment he felt a slight sense of -shame.[1612] He did not wish the Archbishop to go naked and barefoot. -But within eleven days he must be ready at the haven to cross the sea, -and a messenger from the King would be there to tell him what he and -his companions would be allowed to take with them. The King’s bidding -was announced to the Archbishop, and Anselm’s companions wished, now -the matter seemed to be settled, to go at once to their own quarters. -But Anselm would not leave the man who was his earthly lord, who had -once been, in form at least, his friend, to whom he held himself to -stand in so close an official and personal relation, without one word -face to face. He entered the presence-chamber, and once more the saint -sat down side by side with the foulest of sinners. “My lord,” said -Anselm, “I am going. If I could have gone with your good will, it -would have better become you, and it would have been more pleasing to -every good man. But since things are turned another way, though it -grieves me as regards you, as regards myself I will, according to my -power, bear it with a calm mind. And not even for this will I, by the -Lord’s help, withdraw myself from the love of your soul’s health. Now -therefore, not knowing when I may again see you, I commend you to God, -and, as a ghostly father speaking to a beloved son, as an Archbishop -of Canterbury speaking to a King of England, I would, before I go, -give you my blessing, if you do not refuse it.” For a moment Rufus was -touched; his good angel perhaps spoke to him then for the last time. -“I refuse not your blessing,” was his answer. The man of God arose; -the King bowed his head, and Anselm made the sign of the cross over -it. He then went forth, leaving the King and all that were with him -wondering at the ready cheerfulness with which he spoke and -went.[1613] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Anselm at Canterbury.] - -[Sidenote: He takes the pilgrim’s staff.] - -[Sidenote: William of Warelwast at Dover.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm crosses to Whitsand.] - -Rufus and Anselm never met again. From Winchester the Archbishop went -to his own home at Canterbury.[1614] The day after he came there, he -gathered together his monks, and addressed them in a farewell -discourse.[1615] Then, in the sight of a crowd of monks, clerks, and -lay folk, he took the staff and scrip of a pilgrim before the altar. -He commended all present to Christ, and set forth amidst their tears -and wailings. The same day he and his comrades reached Dover. There he -found that the passing current of better feeling which had touched the -King’s heart as he bowed his head for Anselm’s blessing had been but -for a moment. Rufus had gone back to his old mind, to the spirit of -petty insult and petty gain. The King’s obedient clerk, William of -Warelwast, one day to be the builder of the twin towers of Exeter, was -there already. For fifteen days Anselm and his companions were kept at -Dover, waiting for a favourable wind. Meanwhile William of Warelwast -went in and out with Anselm; he ate at his table, and said not a word -of the purpose which had brought him.[1616] On the fifteenth day the -wind changed, and the sailors urged the Archbishop’s party to cross at -once. When they were on the shore ready to start, William stopped the -Archbishop as if he had been a runaway slave or a criminal escaping -from justice,[1617] and in the King’s name forbade him to cross, till -he had declared everything that he had in his baggage. In hope of -finding money, all Anselm’s bags and trunks were opened and ransacked, -in the sight of a vast crowd that stood by wondering at so unheard of -a deed, and cursing those who did it.[1618] The bags were opened and -ransacked in vain. Nothing was found that the King’s faithful clerk -thought worth his master’s taking. The Archbishop, with Baldwin and -Eadmer, was then allowed to set sail, and they landed safely at -Whitsand. - -[Sidenote: The archbishopric seized by the King.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm’s acts declared null.] - -[Sidenote: The monks keep Peckham.] - -[Sidenote: Rebuilding of the choir of Christ Church.] - -[Sidenote: Ernulf Prior 1096? Abbot of Peterborough, 1107; Bishop of -Rochester, 1115.] - -As soon as the King heard that Anselm was out of the kingdom, he did -as he had said that he would do; he again seized all the estates of -the archbishopric into his own hands. This was only what was to be -looked for; it was fully in accordance with the doctrines of Flambard, -and better kings than William Rufus would have done the like in the -like case. But Rufus or his agents went much further. Our guide -implies that he acted as if Anselm had been an intruder in the -archbishopric. All the acts and orders of Anselm during his four -years’ primacy――that is, we must suppose, all leases, grants, and -legal transactions of every kind――were declared null and void.[1619] -Much loss and wrong must have been thus caused to many persons. A man -who had, in the old phrase, bought land of the archbishopric for a -term or for lives[1620] would lose his land, and, we may be sure, -would not get back his money. A clerk collated by the Archbishop might -be turned out of his living to make room for a nominee of the King. It -is no wonder then that the wrongs which were done now were said to be -greater than the wrongs which had been done when the archiepiscopal -estates had before been seized after the death of Lanfranc.[1621] For -at any rate the acts of Lanfranc were not reversed. One feels a -certain desire to know what became of the Archbishop’s knights whose -array had so displeased the King earlier in the year. But we hear -nothing of them or of any particular class; all is quite general. In -one case indeed it is quite certain that the rule that all Anselm’s -acts should be treated as invalid was not carried out. The monks of -Christ Church clearly kept their temporary possession of the manor of -Peckham. For they spent the whole income of it on great architectural -works which Anselm himself had begun. The metropolitan church, so -lately rebuilt by Lanfranc, had already become small in the eyes of a -younger generation, as indeed it was smaller than many minsters of the -same date. The church of Lanfranc had followed the usual Norman plan; -the short eastern limb, the monks’ choir, was under the tower.[1622] -The arrangements of the minster were now recast after a new pattern -which did not commonly prevail till many years later. The eastern limb -was rebuilt on a far greater scale, itself forming as it were a -cruciform church, with its own transepts, its own towers, one of which -in after days received the name of Anselm. This work, begun by Anselm -before his banishment, was carried on in his absence by the prior of -his appointment, Ernulf――Earnwulf――a monk of his old house of Bec, but -perhaps of English birth, who rose afterwards to be Abbot of -Peterborough and Bishop of Rochester.[1623] In marked contrast to the -speed with which Lanfranc had carried through his work, the choir -begun by Ernulf and carried on by his successor Prior Conrad was not -consecrated till late in the days of Henry.[1624] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Comparison of the trials of William of Saint-Calais, -Anselm, and Thomas.] - -[Sidenote: Comparison of the men.] - -[Sidenote: Position of Thomas;] - -[Sidenote: of William of Saint-Calais.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm does not strictly appeal to the Pope.] - -After reading the accounts of these two great debates or trials, at -Rockingham and at Winchester, it is impossible to avoid looking both -backwards and forwards. The story of these proceedings must be told, -as I have throughout tried to tell it, with an eye to the earlier -proceedings against William of Saint-Calais, to the later proceedings -against Thomas of London. The three stories supply an instructive -contrast. In each case a bishop is arraigned before a civil tribunal; -in each case the bishop appeals to the Pope; but beyond that the three -men have little in common. William and Thomas were both of them, -though in widely different senses, playing a part; it is Anselm alone -who is throughout perfectly simple and unconscious. Through the whole -of Anselm’s life, we feel that he never could have acted otherwise -than as he did act. He never stopped to think what was the right thing -for a saintly archbishop to do; he simply did at all times what his -conscience told him that he ought to do. Thomas, perfectly sincere, -thoroughly bent on doing his duty, was still following a conscious -ideal of duty; he was always thinking what a saintly archbishop ought -to do; above all things, we may be sure, he was thinking what Anselm, -in the like case, would have done. Thus, while Anselm acts quite -singly, Thomas is, consciously though sincerely, playing a part. -William of Saint-Calais is playing a part in a far baser sense; he -appeals to the Pope, he appeals to ecclesiastical privileges in -general, simply to serve his own personal ends. He appealed to those -privileges more loudly than anybody else, when he thought that by that -appeal he might himself escape condemnation. He trampled them under -foot more scornfully than anybody else, when he thought that by so -doing he might bring about the condemnation of Anselm and his own -promotion. But it is curious to see how in some points the sincere -acting of Thomas and the insincere acting of William agree as -distinguished from the pure single-mindedness of Anselm. Both William -and Thomas distinctly appeal to the Pope from the sentence of the -highest court in their own land. We cannot say that Anselm did this; -he does not refuse the sentence of the King’s court; he does not ask -the Pope to set aside the sentence of the King’s court; the utmost -that he does is to say that it is his duty to obey God rather than -man, and that his duty to God obliges him to go to the Pope. To the -Pope therefore he will go, even though the King forbids him; but he is -ready at the same time to bear patiently the spoiling of his goods as -the penalty of going. This is assuredly not an appeal to the Pope in -the same sense as the appeals made by William and Thomas. - -[Sidenote: Anselm does not assert clerical privileges.] - -[Sidenote: Question of observing the customs.] - -Among the marks of difference in the cases is that both William and -Thomas strongly assert the privileges of their order; none but the -Pope may judge a bishop. Anselm never once, during his whole dispute -with William Rufus, makes the slightest claim to any such privilege; -he never breathes a word about the rights of the clerical order. The -doctrine that none but the Pope may judge the Archbishop of -Canterbury――nothing is said about other priests or other bishops――is -heard of only once during the whole story.[1625] And then it is not -put forth by Anselm; it is not openly put forth by anybody; it is -merely mentioned by Eadmer as something which came into the minds of -the undutiful bishops as a kind of after-thought. This most likely -means that it was not really thought of at the time, either by the -bishops or by anybody else, but that Eadmer, writing by fresh lights -learned at Rome and at Bari, could no longer understand a state of -things in which it was not thought of by somebody. The truth doubtless -is that in Anselm’s day the doctrine of clerical exemption from -temporal jurisdiction was a novelty which was creeping in. It was well -known enough for Odo and William of Saint-Calais to catch at it to -serve their own ends; it was not so fully established that it was at -all a matter of conscience with Anselm to assert it. By the time of -Thomas every doctrine of the kind had so grown that its assertion had -become a point of conscience with every strict churchman. But there is -another point in which the case of Anselm and the case of Thomas agree -as distinguished from the case of William of Saint-Calais. In this -last case nothing turned on any promise of the Bishop to obey the -customs of the realm. Much in the case of Anselm, much more in the -case of Thomas, turned on such a promise. In each case the Archbishop -pleads a certain reservation expressed or understood; but there is a -wide difference between the reservation made by Anselm and the -reservation made by Thomas. The favourite formula with Thomas, the -formula which he proposes, the formula which he is at Clarendon with -difficulty persuaded to withdraw and on which he again falls -back,[1626] is “saving my order.” Anselm has nothing to say about his -order; he is not fighting for the privileges of any special body of -men; he is simply a righteous man clothed with a certain office, the -duties of which office he must discharge. It is not his order that he -reserves; he reserves only the higher and more abiding names of God -and right. - -[Sidenote: Nature of our reports of the trials.] - -[Sidenote: Comparison of the proceedings in each case.] - -[Sidenote: William and Thomas summoned to answer a charge.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm seeks advice on a point of law.] - -[Sidenote: Proceedings in the case of William of Saint-Calais.] - -[Sidenote: Architectural arrangements.] - -[Sidenote: Constitution of the several assemblies.] - -[Sidenote: The Witenagemót;] - -[Sidenote: its constitution becomes gradually less popular.] - -[Sidenote: Lessened freedom of speech.] - -As for the cases themselves and the tribunals before which they were -heard, we must always remember that our reports, though very full, are -not official. Their authors therefore use technical or non-technical -language at pleasure. They assume familiarity with the nature of the -court and its mode of procedure; they do not stop to explain many -things which we should be very glad if they had stopped to explain. -But it is clear that the nature of the proceedings was not exactly the -same in the three cases. And it is singular that, in point of mere -procedure, there seems more likeness between the case of Anselm and -the case of Thomas than there is between either and the case of -William of Saint-Calais. William of Saint-Calais and Thomas were both -of them, in the strictest sense, summoned before a court to answer a -charge. The charges were indeed of quite different kinds in the two -cases. William of Saint-Calais was charged with high treason. Thomas, -besides a number of demands about money, was charged only with failing -to appear in the King’s court in answer to an earlier summons. Anselm, -on the other hand, cannot be said to have been really charged with -anything, though the King and his party tried to treat him as though -he had been. The assembly at Rockingham was gathered at Anselm’s own -request, to inform him on a point of law. The King and his bishops -tried to treat Anselm as a criminal; but they found that the general -feeling of the assembly would not allow them to do so. At Winchester -again, Anselm was not summoned to answer any charge, for the charge -about the troops in the Welsh war had been dropped at Windsor. The -charges, such as they are, which are brought against him turn up as it -were casually in the course of the proceedings. Yet the order of -things seems much the same in the case of Anselm and in the case of -Thomas, while in the case of William of Saint-Calais it seems to be -different. In the case of William of Saint-Calais everything is done -in the King’s presence. The Bishop himself has more than once to leave -the place of meeting, while particular points are discussed; but there -is not that endless going to and fro which there is in the other two -cases. In the case of Thomas, as in the case of Anselm, we see plainly -the inner room where the King sits with his immediate counsellors, -while the Archbishop waits in an outer place with the general body of -the assembly. At Northampton we see the architectural arrangement more -clearly than either at Rockingham or at Winchester. Thomas enters the -great hall, and goes no further, while the King’s inner council is -held in the solar.[1627] It is possible, as indeed I have already -hinted,[1628] that there was a difference in the nature of the -assembly in the case of William of Saint-Calais and in the two cases -of Anselm and Thomas. We must remember that in the reign of William -Rufus the judicial and administrative system was still only forming -itself, and that many things were then vague and irregular, both in -fact and in name, which had taken a definite shape in the time of -Henry the Second. Between the case of Anselm and the case of Thomas -came the justiciarship of Roger of Salisbury and the chancellorship of -Thomas himself. I am inclined to think that, at Rockingham, at -Winchester, at Northampton, the assembly was strictly the great -assembly of the nation, the ancient Witenagemót, with such changes in -its working as had taken place between the days of the Confessor and -the days of William Rufus, and again between the days of William Rufus -and the days of Henry the Second. Each of these periods of change -would of course do something towards taking away from the old popular -character of the assembly. At Rockingham that popular character is by -no means lost. We are not told where the line, if any, was drawn; but -a multitude of monks, clerks, and laymen were there.[1629] At -Northampton we hear of no class below the lesser barons; and they, -with the sheriffs, wait in the outer hall, till they are specially -summoned to the King’s presence. At Rockingham too and at Winchester -there seems much greater freedom of speech than there is at -Northampton. The whole assembly shouts and cheers as it pleases, and a -simple knight steps forth to speak and to speak boldly.[1630] At -Northampton, as at Rockingham and at Winchester, the Archbishop is -allowed the company of his personal followers. William Fitz-Stephen -and Herbert of Bosham sit at the feet of Thomas, as Eadmer and Baldwin -sit at the feet of Anselm. But at Northampton the disciples are -roughly checked in speaking to their master, in a way of which there -is no sign in the earlier assemblies. At Rockingham and Winchester -again, though the Archbishop stays for the most part outside in the -hall, yet he more than once goes unbidden into the presence-chamber, -and is even followed thither by his faithful monks. At Northampton -Thomas is never admitted to the King’s presence, and no one seems to -go into the inner room who is not specially summoned. This may be -merely because, as is likely enough, strictness of rule, form, and -etiquette had greatly advanced between William Rufus and Henry the -Second. Or it may have been because Thomas was strictly summoned to -answer a charge, while Anselm was really under no charge at all, but -came as a member of the assembly. - -[Sidenote: The inner and outer council;] - -[Sidenote: foreshadowing of lords and commons.] - -[Sidenote: Thomas tried before the Witan;] - -[Sidenote: William before the _Theningmannagemót_.] - -Another point here arises. I cannot but think that in these great -assemblies, consisting of an inner and an outer body, we must see the -same kind of distinction which we saw on the great day of Salisbury -between the Witan and the landsitting men. That is, I see in the inner -and outer bodies the foreshadowing of Lords and Commons. To this day -there is one chamber in which the King’s throne is set; there is -another chamber whose occupants do not enter the presence of that -throne, except by special summons. I am inclined therefore to see, -both in the case of Anselm and in the case of Thomas, a true gathering -of the Witan of the realm. Thomas comes, like Strafford or Hastings, -to answer a charge before the Court of our Lord the King in -Parliament,[1631] that court, which from an assembly of the whole -nation, gradually shrank up into an assembly of the present peerage. -In the case of Anselm I see the same body acting, not strictly as a -court, but rather as the great inquest of the nation, but at the same -time fluctuating somewhat, as was but natural in that age, between its -judicial and its legislative functions. But in the tribunal which sat -on William of Saint-Calais I am, as I have already said, inclined to -see, not the _Mickle Gemót_ of the whole nation, but rather the King’s -court in a narrower sense, the representative of the ancient -_Theningmannagemót_, the more strictly official body.[1632] Here we -have no division of chambers; the proceedings are strictly those of a -court trying a charge, and the King, as chief judge, is present -throughout. - -[Sidenote: Estimate of the three cases.] - -[Sidenote: Behaviour of Rufus;] - -[Sidenote: of Henry the Second.] - -[Sidenote: Comparison with Henry the First.] - -As for the matter of the three cases, the trial of William of -Saint-Calais was in itself the perfectly fair trial of a rebel who, in -the end, after the custom of the age, came off very lightly for his -rebellion. There really seems nothing to blame William Rufus for in -that matter――William Rufus, that is, still largely guided by -Lanfranc――except some characteristic pettinesses just towards the end -of the story.[1633] Towards Anselm William appears――save under one or -two momentary touches of better feeling――simply as the power of evil -striving, by whatever means, to crush the power of good. He seems none -the less so, even when on particular points his own case is -technically right. Henry the Second, acting honestly for the good of -his kingdom, both technically and morally right in his main quarrel, -stoops to the base and foolish course of trying to crush his adversary -by a crowd of charges in which the King seems to have been both -morally and technically wrong, and which certainly would never have -been brought if the Archbishop had not given offence on other grounds. -William Rufus again, and Henry the Second also, each forsook his own -position by calling in, when it suited their momentary purposes, the -very power which their main position bade them to control and to keep -out of their kingdom. Not so the great king who came between them. The -Lion of Justice knew, and he alone in those days seems to have known, -how to carry on a controversy of principle, without ever forsaking his -own position, without ever losing his temper or lowering his dignity, -without any breach of personal respect and friendship towards the holy -man whom his kingly office made it his duty to withstand. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Effect on Anselm of his foreign sojourn.] - -[Sidenote: Change in him.] - -The three years of Anselm’s first sojourn beyond sea concern us for -the most part only indirectly. Of their most important aspect, as -concerns us, I have spoken elsewhere,[1634] and we shall again see -their fruit before the present work is ended. In his journeyings to -Lyons, to Rome, to Bari, Anselm learned a new doctrine which he had -never found out either at Bec or at Canterbury. It was not for his -good that he, who had, like the Primates who had gone before him, -received his staff from the King’s hands, and placed his own hands in -homage between them, should hear the anathema pronounced against the -prince who should bestow or the clerk who should receive any -ecclesiastical benefice in such sort as no prince had scrupled to give -them, as no clerk had scrupled to receive them, in the days of King -Eadward and in the days of King William.[1635] When Anselm came back -to England, he came, as we shall see, the same Anselm as of old in -every personal quality, in every personal virtue. But in all things -which touched the relations of popes, kings, and bishops, he came back -another man. - -[Sidenote: His journey.] - -[Sidenote: Alleged scheme of Odo Duke of Burgundy [1078-1102] against -Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm at Rome.] - -[Sidenote: Council of Lateran.] - -But in the course of Anselm’s adventures, in his foreign journeys, -there are details here and there which no Englishman can read without -interest. We come across constant signs of the place which England and -her Primate held in the minds of men of other lands. We read how no -less a prince than Odo Duke of Burgundy, already a crusader in Spain -and afterwards a crusader in Palestine, was tempted by the report of -the wealth of the great English see to sink into a common robber, and -to set forth for the purpose of plundering the Primate as he passed -through his land. We read how he was turned from his purpose, when he -saw the white hair, the gentle and venerable look, of the Archbishop, -the look which won all hearts. Instead of harming him, Odo received -his kiss and sought his blessing, and sent him under a safe guard to -the borders of his duchy.[1636] We read how the likeness of that -venerable face had been painted by cunning limners in the interest of -Clement, that the robbers who were sent to seize the faithful follower -of Urban might better know their intended victim. We read with some -national pride how, at his first interview with Urban, when Anselm -bowed himself at the Pontiff’s feet, he was raised, received to his -kiss, and seated by him as one of equal rank, the Pope and Patriarch -of another world. We read how, in the great gathering in the head -church of the city and of the world, when no man knew what was the -fitting place in a Roman council for a guest such as none had ever -seen before, the English Archbishop was placed at the papal bidding in -a seat of special honour. Anselm took his seat in that apse which was -spared when papal barbarism defaced the long arcades of Constantine, -when the patriarchal throne of the world was cast forth as an useless -thing,[1637] but which the more relentless havoc of our own day, -eager, it would seem, to get rid of all that is older than the dogmas -of modern Rome, has ruthlessly swept away. We read how visitors and -pilgrims from England bowed to kiss the feet of Anselm, as they would -have kissed those of Urban himself, and how the humble saint ever -refused such unbecoming worship.[1638] And we are most touched of all -to hear how, among all these honours, Anselm was commonly spoken of in -Rome, not by his name, not by the titles of his office, but simply as -“the holy man.”[1639] At Rome, that name might have a special meaning. -It was well deserved by the one suitor at the Roman throne who -abstained from the use of Rome’s most convincing argument. - -[Sidenote: Council of Bari.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm pleads for Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: The cope of Beneventum.] - -[Sidenote: Dealings between Canterbury and Beneventum.] - -[Sidenote: Emma buys the arm of Saint Bartholomew.] - -[Sidenote: Æthelnoth’s gift of the cope.] - -[Sidenote: Eadmer recognises the cope.] - -But in the record of Anselm’s wanderings there is one tale which comes -home more than any other to the hearts of Englishmen, a tale which -carries us back, if not strictly to the days of English freedom, at -least to the days when we had a conqueror whom we had made our own. -The fathers are gathered at Bari, in the great minster of the Lykian -Nicolas, where the arts of northern and southern Christendom, the -massiveness of the Norman, the finer grace of the Greek, are so -strangely blended in the pile which was then fresh from the -craftsman’s hand. There, in his humility, the pilgrim from Canterbury -takes to himself a modest place amongst the other bishops, with the -faithful Eadmer sitting at his feet.[1640] The Pope calls on his -father and master, Anselm Archbishop of the English, to arise and -speak. There, in the city so lately torn away from Eastern -Christendom, Anselm is bidden to justify the change which Latin -theology had made in that creed of the East which changeth not. The -Pope harangues on the sufferings of the Church in various lands, and, -above all, on the evil deeds of the tyrant of England. The assembled -fathers agree with one voice that the sword of Peter must be drawn, -and that such a sinner must be smitten in the face of the whole world. -Then Anselm kneels at the feet of Urban, and craves that no such blow -may be dealt on the man who had so deeply wronged him.[1641] But, -while these high debates were going on, the curious eye of Eadmer had -lighted on an object which spoke straight to his heart as an -Englishman and a monk of Christ Church. Among the assembled prelates -the Archbishop of Beneventum appeared clad in a cope of surpassing -richness. Eadmer knew at once whence it came; he knew that it had once -been one of the glories of Canterbury, worn by Primates of England -before England had bowed either to the Norman or to the Dane. Eadmer, -brought up from his childhood in the cloister of Christ Church, had -been taught as a boy by aged monks who could remember the days of Cnut -and Emma. Those elders of the house, Eadwig and Blæcman and Farman, -had told him how in those days there had been a mighty famine in the -land of Apulia, how the then Archbishop of Beneventum had travelled -through foreign lands to seek help for his starving flock, how he -brought with him a precious relic, the arm of the apostle Bartholomew, -and how, having passed through Italy and Gaul, he was led to cross the -sea by the fame of the wealth of England and of the piety and bounty -of Emma its Lady. She gave him plenteous gifts for his people, and he -asked whether she would not give yet more as the price of the precious -relic. The genuineness of the treasure was solemnly sworn to;[1642] a -great price was paid for it by the Lady, and, by the special order of -King Cnut, it was added as a precious gift to the treasures of the -metropolitan church. For in those days, says Eadmer, it was the manner -of the English to set the patronage of the saints before all the -wealth of this world. The Archbishop of Beneventum went back, loaded -with the alms of England, and bearing with him, among other gifts from -his brother Primate Æthelnoth, this very cope richly embroidered with -gold with all the skill of English hands. Eadmer, taught by the -tradition of his elders, knew the vestment as he saw it in that far -land on the shoulders of the successor of the prelate who had come to -our island for help in his day of need. He saw it with joy; he pointed -it out to Father Anselm, and, feigning ignorance, he asked the -Beneventan Archbishop the history of the splendid cope which he wore. -He was pleased to find that the tradition of Beneventum was the same -as the tradition of Canterbury.[1643] Now that we have made our way -into other times and other lands, it is pleasing to look back for a -moment, with our faithful Eadmer, to days when England still was -England, even though she had already learned to bow to a foreign King -and a foreign Lady. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Position of Rufus.] - -[Sidenote: Possible effect of excommunication on him.] - -[Sidenote: Papal excommunications not yet despised.] - -[Sidenote: The Emperor Henry.] - -[Sidenote: Philip of France.] - -[Sidenote: Boleslaus of Poland. 1079.] - -[Sidenote: The case of Harold.] - -[Sidenote: Probable effect of an excommunication on the people.] - -More important in a general view than the details of Anselm’s journey -are the negotiations which went on during this time between William, -Urban, and Anselm. The Red King’s day of grace was now over. The last -touch of feeling recorded of him is when he bowed his head to receive -Anselm’s blessing. Henceforth he stands out, in a more marked way than -ever, in the character which distinguishes him from other kings and -from other men. We have had evil kings before and after him; but we -have had none other who openly chose evil to be his good, none other -who declared himself in plain words to be the personal enemy of the -Almighty. Yet, as we have already noticed, the bolts of the Church -never lighted on the head of this worst of royal sinners. We have just -seen how once at least he was spared by the merciful intercession of -his own victim. We are tempted to stop and think how a formal -excommunication would have worked on such an one as William Rufus had -now become. We must remember that the weight of papal excommunications -of princes had not yet been lowered, as it came to be lowered -afterwards, either by their frequency or by their manifest injustice. -The cases which were then fresh in men’s minds were all striking and -weighty. The excommunication of the Emperor was, from the papal point -of view, a natural stage of the great struggle which was still raging. -Philip of France had been excommunicated for a moral offence which -seemed the darker because it involved the mockery of an ecclesiastical -sacrament. And no man could wonder or blame when, in the days of -Hildebrand, Boleslaus of Poland was put out of the communion of the -faithful for slaying with his own hands before the altar the bishop -who had rebuked him for his sins.[1644] The case most akin to the -wanton excommunications of later times had been when Alexander the -Second in form, when Hildebrand in truth, had denounced Harold without -a hearing for no crime but that of accepting the crown which his -people gave him. But men are so apt to judge by results that the fall -of Harold and of England may by this time, even among Englishmen, have -begun to be looked on as a witness to the power of the Church’s -thunders. In the days of Rufus a papal excommunication was still a -real and fearful thing at which men stood aghast. It might not have -turned the heart of Rufus; it might even have hardened his heart yet -further. But among his people, even among his own courtiers, the -effect would doubtless have been such that he must in the end, like -Philip, have formally given way. As it was, the bolt never fell; the -hand of Anselm stopped it once; other causes, as we shall soon see, -stopped it afterwards. And, instead of the formal excommunication of -Rome, there came that more striking excommunication by the voice of -the English people, when, by a common instinct, they declared William -the Red to have no true part in that communion of the faithful from -which he had never been formally cut off. - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Anselm writes to the Pope from Lyons.] - -[Sidenote: His new tone.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm at Rome.] - -[Sidenote: Letters to the King.] - -[Sidenote: His reception of the letters.] - -The negotiations, if we may so call them, which followed the departure -of Anselm may be looked on as beginning with a letter written by -Anselm to the Pope from Lyons.[1645] The Archbishop, once out of -England, seems to take up a new tone. His language with regard to the -King’s doings is still singularly mild;[1646] but he now begins to -speak, not only of God and right, but of the canons of the Church and -the authority of the Pope, as something to which the arbitrary customs -of England must give way.[1647] To those customs he cannot agree -without perilling his own soul and the souls of his successors. He -comes to the Apostolic See for help and counsel.[1648] When he had -reached Rome, he again set forth his case more fully, as it had been -set forth in the letter from Lyons. Letters both from Anselm and from -the Pope were sent to the King by the same messenger, letters which -unluckily are not preserved. The summary of the papal letter seems to -point to a lofty tone on the part of the Pontiff. He moves, he -exhorts, he at last commands, King William, to leave the goods of the -Archbishop free, and to restore everything to him.[1649] Anselm’s own -letter was doubtless in a milder strain. The messenger came back, to -find both Urban and Anselm again at Rome after the synod at Bari. The -letter from Urban had been received, though ungraciously; the letter -from Anselm was sent back. As soon as the King knew that the bearer -was a man of the Archbishop’s, he had sworn by the face of Lucca that, -unless the messenger speedily got him away out of his lands, he would -have his eyes torn out without fail.[1650] - -[Sidenote: Mission of William of Warelwast.] - -[Sidenote: William on the continent. November, 1097-April, 1099.] - -[Sidenote: Affairs of Southern Italy.] - -[Sidenote: Siege of Capua.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm at Schiavia.] - -[Sidenote: He writes “Cur Deus Homo.”] - -[Sidenote: Anselm and Urban before Capua.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm and the Saracens.] - -[Sidenote: Count Roger forbids conversions.] - -The Pope however could hardly be left wholly without some answer, -however scornfully William might deal with the letter of his own -subject. But the answer was not speedy in coming. Its bearer was the -trusty clerk William of Warelwast, of whom we have already heard more -than once. The King’s business did not now call for the same haste as -it had done when the same man was sent to find out who was the true -Pope.[1651] Much happened before he came. Amongst other things, not a -few travellers came from England and Normandy, bringing with them -fresh and fresh reports of the evil doings of the King, some of which -we have already heard of. William was now in Normandy. He crossed at -Martinmas,[1652] and spent the whole of the next year in the wars of -France and Maine. He did not come back to England till the Easter of -the year following that.[1653] It was now that he played at Rouen the -part of a missionary of the creed of Moses.[1654] But he kept his eye -upon England also; for to this time is assigned the story of the fifty -Englishmen who so enraged the blaspheming King by proving their -innocence by the ordeal.[1655] Nor was it merely rumours of William’s -doings at home which found their way into Italy from Normandy and -England. While the King was devising his answer to the Pope, his -emissaries were busy in other parts of the peninsula. The affairs of -the Normans in their two great settlements are always joining in one -stream. While Bohemund and Tancred were on their Eastern march, the -reigning princes of their house, Roger of Apulia and Roger of Sicily, -were carrying on their schemes of advancement west of Hadria. Their -armies now lay before Capua. Meanwhile Anselm had withdrawn with John -Abbot of Telesia to seek quiet in a town of the Abbot’s on the upper -Vulturnus, whose name of Schiavia may suggest some ethnological -questions.[1656] Our guide specially marks that this journey was a -journey into Samnium; he may not have fully taken in how truly Telesia -was the heart of Samnium, alike in the days of the Pontius of the -Caudine Forks and in the days of the Pontius of the Colline -Gate.[1657] Here, in his Samnite retreat, Anselm was moulding the -theology of all later times by his treatise which told why God became -Man.[1658] Meanwhile William of England, at war with righteousness in -all its forms, held Helias in his prison at Bayeux,[1659] and plotted -against Anselm in his hermitage at Schiavia. When Duke Roger’s army -was so near, the master of Normandy deemed that something might be -done for his purpose by Norman arms or Norman craft. He sent -letters――his letters could go speedily when speed was needed――to stir -up Duke Roger to do some mischief to the man whom he hated.[1660] The -plot was in vain. Anselm was invited to the Duke’s camp; he was -received there with all honour during a sojourn of some time, as he -was at every other point of the Duke’s dominions to which he -went.[1661] The Pope and Anselm, patriarchs of two worlds, were Duke -Roger’s guests at the same time. But only the rich dared to present -themselves in the presence of the Pope of the mainland, while the -shepherd of the nations beyond the sea welcomed men of all kinds -lovingly.[1662] The very Saracens whom Count Roger had brought from -Sicily to the help of his nephew pressed to visit the holy man of -another faith, to be received and fed at his cost, to kiss his hands, -and to cover him with prayers and blessings. Not a few of them were -even ready to embrace Anselm’s creed;[1663] but proselytism among his -soldiers formed no part of the policy of the conqueror of Sicily. -Count Roger was ready enough to extend the territorial bounds of -Christendom by his sword; but he found, as his great-grandson found -after him, that in war no followers were to be trusted like the -misbelievers. Once enlisted in his service, they had no motive to -forsake him for any other Christian leader, while they had no hope of -restoring the supremacy of their own faith. With them too neither -Clement nor Urban, nor any votary of Clement or Urban, had any weight. -So useful a class of warriors was not to be lessened in number. -Whatever might be his missionary zeal at Palermo or Syracuse, Count -Roger allowed no conversions in the camp before Capua. The men who -were ready to hearken to Anselm’s teaching had to turn away at the -bidding of their temporal lord, and the father of Christian theology -was forbidden the rare glory of winning willing proselytes to the -Christian faith among the votaries of Islam.[1664] - - * * * * * - -[Sidenote: Anselm wishes to resign the archbishopric.] - -[Sidenote: Urban forbids him.] - -Meanwhile the tales of William’s misdoings in Normandy and England -were brought in day by day. The heart of Anselm was moved ever more -and more; he saw that, come what might, he and such a king could never -agree; the only course for him was to cast aside the grievous burthen -and responsibility of his archbishopric. He earnestly craved the -Pontiff’s leave to resign it into his hands.[1665] Urban was far too -wary for this. He enjoined Anselm, by virtue of holy obedience, to do -no such thing. The King, in his tyranny, might seize his temporalities -and might keep him out of the land; but in the eye of the Church he -remained none the less the Archbishop of the English kingdom, with his -power of binding and loosing as strong as ever.[1666] Anselm was not -only not to give up his office; he was to make a point of always -appearing with the full badges of his office.[1667] Even now Anselm -seems to have been in some difficulties how to reconcile his two -duties to God and to Cæsar, difficulties which he would doubtless have -got rid of altogether by resigning the archbishopric.[1668] But he -submits to the Pontiff’s will, and he is bidden to meet him again at -Bari, where judgement will be given in the matter of the King of the -English and of all others who interfere with the liberties of the -Church.[1669] - -[Sidenote: Council of Bari. October 1, 1098.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm at Rome.] - -[Sidenote: William of Warelwast and Urban.] - -[Sidenote: Urban’s answer.] - -[Sidenote: Excommunication threatened.] - -[Sidenote: April 12, 1099.] - -Then came the meeting at Bari, the disputation against the Greeks, the -excommunication of Rufus stopped by Anselm’s intercession.[1670] That -Anselm was playing an arranged part we cannot believe for a moment; -but we may believe, without breach of charity, that Urban threatened -the excommunication of Rufus in the full belief that Anselm would -intercede for him. Urban and Anselm then went back to Rome; and -thither presently came the messenger from Normandy, who had to tell of -the King’s frightful threats towards himself. Soon after came William -of Warelwast, with a message from the King to the Pope. The diplomacy -of the future bishop of Exeter was at least straightforward. “My lord -the King sends you word that he wonders not a little how it can have -come into your mind to address him for the restitution of the goods of -Anselm.” He added, “If you ask the reason, here it is. When Anselm -wished to depart from his land, the King openly threatened him that, -if he went, he should take the whole archbishopric into his demesne. -Since Anselm then would not, even when thus threatened, give up his -purpose of going, the King deems that his own acts were right, and -that he is now wrongfully blamed.”[1671] The Pope asked whether the -King had any other charge against Anselm. “None,” answered the envoy. -Urban had gained an advantage. He poured forth his wonder at a thing -so unheard of in all time as that a king should spoil the primate of -his kingdom of all his goods merely because he would not refrain from -visiting the Roman Church, the mother of all churches.[1672] William -of Warelwast might go back to his master, and might tell him that the -Pope meant to hold a council at Rome in the Easter-week next to come, -and that, if by that time Anselm was not restored to all that he had -lost, the sentence of excommunication should go forth.[1673] - -[Sidenote: William of Warelwast’s secret dealings with Urban.] - -[Sidenote: The excommunication respited.] - -[Sidenote: April-September, 1099.] - -Brave words were these of Pope Urban, but William the Red knew how to -deal with mere bravery of words, even in the Pope whom he had -acknowledged. Walter of Albano had once outwitted William and his -counsellors; but Walter of Albano had in the end yielded to William’s -most powerful argument. William of Warelwast was not the least likely -to outwit Urban; but he had it in commission from his master to -overcome the Pope by the same logic by which his Legate had been -overcome. We may copy the words of our own Chronicler four-and-twenty -years later; “That overcame Rome that overcometh all the world, that -is gold and silver.”[1674] To Urban’s well conceived speech the answer -of William of Warelwast was pithy and practical; “Before I go away, I -will have some dealings with you more in private.”[1675] He went to -work prudently, as the Red King’s clerks knew how to do; he made -friends here and there; the Pope’s advisers were blinded; the Pope -himself was blinded; a respite from Easter to Michaelmas was granted -to King William of England.[1676] - -[Sidenote: Position of Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: Urban’s treatment of Anselm.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm made to stay for the Council of Lateran, April 12, -1099.] - -[Sidenote: Protest of Reingar of Lucca.] - -This adjournment was a heavy blow for Anselm. He had in no way stirred -up the Pope to any action against the prince whom he still -acknowledged as his sovereign. At Bari, when no answer had as yet been -received from the King, Anselm had pleaded for him; it was indeed only -common justice to give him that one more chance. But, when the answer -had come, and had proved to be of such a kind as we have seen, Anselm -most likely thought that the time for action had come. He might indeed -fairly deem that the excommunication would in truth be an act of -kindness towards William. All other means of reclaiming the sinner had -failed; that final and most awful means might at last succeed. At all -events, Anselm’s soul was grieved to the quick at the thought that the -Pope’s sentence, whatever it might be, could be changed or delayed by -the power of filthy lucre. He had borne every kind of grief, he had -borne insults and banishment and the spoiling of his goods, for the -sake of Rome and the Pope, and he had now found out what Rome and the -Pope were. He had found that the master was no better than his -servants. He had found Rome to be what Rome was ever found to be by -every English bishop, by every Englishman by birth or adoption, who -ever trusted in her. Urban proved the same broken reed to Anselm which -Alexander in after days proved to Thomas. Anselm had gone through much -in order to have the counsel and help of the Pope. But no counsel or -help had he found in him.[1677] He craved leave to depart from Rome, -and again to tarry at Lyons with a friend in whom he could better -trust, the Primate of all the Gauls.[1678] The request was refused. -Urban had still to make use of Anselm for his own purposes. He had to -show his guest and the Church’s confessor――the guest and confessor -whom he had sold for William’s gold――to the whole world in his Lateran -Council. The special honours which were there paid to Anselm must have -been felt by him as little more than a mockery. It may have been a -preconcerted scene, it may have been a burst of honest indignation, -when Reingar, Bishop of Lucca, bore an emphatic witness on Anselm’s -side. Reingar, chosen on account of his lofty stature and sounding -voice to announce the decrees of the Council, broke forth in words of -his own declaring the holiness and the wrongs of the Archbishop of the -English, and thrice smote his staff on the floor with quivering lips -and teeth gnashed together.[1679] The Pope checked him; Reingar -protested, and renewed his protest. Anselm simply wondered; he had -never said a word to the Bishop of Lucca on any such matter, nor did -he believe that any of his faithful followers had done so -either.[1680] - -[Sidenote: End of the Council.] - -[Sidenote: Anselm goes to Lyons.] - -[Sidenote: Death of Urban. July. 29, 1099.] - -[Sidenote: William’s words on his death.] - -[Sidenote: Battle of Ascalon. August 12, 1099.] - -[Sidenote: Paschal the Second, Pope. August 13, 1099-January 21, -1118.] - -[Sidenote: William’s words on Paschal’s election.] - -The council broke up. The great general anathema was pronounced which -would take in William along with the other princes of the earth;[1681] -but nothing was said or done directly for Anselm or his cause.[1682] -Anselm now at last left Rome for Lyons. He there heard of the deaths -both of him who was to issue the excommunication and of him against -whom it was to be issued. Urban did not live to hear how his preaching -at Clermont was crowned by the deliverance of the Holy City. Yet the -work was done while he still lived. Fourteen days after the storm of -Jerusalem, seven days after the election of King Godfrey, Pope Urban -died. The news of his death was brought to William while he was in the -midst of his last warfare for Le Mans. Let God’s hate, he answered, be -upon him who cares whether he be dead or alive.[1683] Fourteen days -after Urban’s death, the hosts of Egypt were smitten at Ascalon; and -the city which had just been won was again made safe. The next day a -fresh Pope was chosen, Paschal, who, in the course of a long reign, -had to strive alike with a Henry of Germany and with a Henry of -England. The news of his election was brought to William, and he asked -what manner of man the new Pope might be. He was told that he was a -man in many things like Archbishop Anselm. “Then by God’s face,” said -the Red King, “if he be such an one, he is no good.” But William felt -that his wished for time was now come. Now at least there should be no -trouble about acknowledging Popes against his will. “Let the Pope be -what he will, he and his popedom shall not this time come over me by -little and little. I have got my freedom again, and I will use -it.”[1684] The time fixed for the excommunication passed unmarked over -the head of the living Rufus. But before a full year had passed from -Paschal’s election, the dead Rufus was excommunicated by the voice of -his own kingdom. - - * * * * * - -We leave Anselm at Lyons; we shall meet him again when he comes back -in all honour to crown and to marry a king and a queen who filled the -English throne by the free call of the English people. Meanwhile we -must take up the thread of our story, and see more fully what has been -happening in the other lands which come within the Red King’s world, -while Anselm was so long and so wearily striving for righteousness. -The tale of Normandy, the tale of Jerusalem, so far as it concerned us -to tell it, could hardly be kept apart from the tale of Anselm. But we -have still to tell the tale of Scotland, of Northumberland, of Wales, -of France, above all the tale of Maine and its noble Count, during the -years through which we have tracked the history of Anselm. We have to -go back to the beginning of the story through which we have just -passed, and to begin afresh while Rufus in his short day of penitence -lies on his sick-bed at Gloucester. - - - - - [1] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 692. - - [2] Will. Malms. iv. 306. - - [3] Tac. Hist. iv. 59. - - [4] There is not much to say about the authorities for this - chapter. The main sources are those with which we have long - been familiar, the Peterborough Chronicle, Orderic, - Florence, William of Malmesbury. The last three of these - increase in value at every step, as they become more and - more strictly contemporary. So Henry of Huntingdon, - beginning his seventh book in the second year of Rufus, - formally puts on the character of a contemporary writer. - Hitherto he had written from his reading or from common - fame; “nunc autem de his quæ vel ipsi vidimus, vel ab his - qui viderant audivimus, pertractandum est.” But he still - wisely kept the Chronicle before him. He is himself largely - followed by Robert of Torigny (or _De Monte_――that is Abbot - of Saint Michael’s Mount) in his chronicle. From Robert we - have also the so-called eighth book of William of Jumièges, - which may pass as a History of Henry the First. He is not - strictly contemporary for any part of our immediate story. - Eadmer, so precious a few years later, gives us as yet only - a few touches and general pictures. The French riming - chroniclers are of some value later in the reign of Rufus; - but we have hardly anything to do with them as yet. A crowd - of accessory, occasional, and local writings have to be - turned to as usual. - - [5] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 583. - - [6] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 228, 795. So Will. Neub. i. 3; - “Filiorum quidem Willelmi Magni ordine nativitatis - novissimus, sed prærogativa primus. Quippe, aliis in ducatu - patris natis, solus ipse ex eodem jam rege est ortus.” This - is noteworthy in a writer in whom (see Appendix A) we see - the first sign of a notion of Robert’s hereditary right. The - author of the Brevis Relatio (9) goes yet further, and seems - to assert that a party at least was for Henry’s immediate - succession; “Sicut postea multi dixerunt, justum fuit ut - ipse rex Angliæ post patrem suum esset qui de patre rege et - matre regina genitus extitisset.” - - [7] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 706, note 3. - - [8] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 706, note 3. - - [9] See Appendix A. - - [10] See Appendix A. - - [11] Will. Malms. iv. 305. “Eum nutrierat et militem - fecerat.” So Matthew Paris, Hist. Ang. i. 35. - - [12] Orderic has two statements as to the port from which - William set sail. In his account of the Conqueror’s death - (659 D), he makes him sail from Witsand. But afterwards (763 - D), when speaking of Robert Bloet, he says, “Senioris - Guillelmi capellanus fuerat, eoque defuncto de portu Tolochæ - cum juniore Guillelmo mare transfretaverat, et epistolam - regis de coronanda prole Lanfranco archiepiscopo detulerat.” - This latter is to be preferred, as the more circumstantial - account. Touques moreover is at once the more likely haven - to be chosen by one setting out from Rouen, and the one less - likely to come into the head of a careless narrator. Robert - of Torigny also (Cont. Will. Gem. viii. 2) makes the place - Touques. - - [13] Ord. Vit. 659 D. “Ibi jam patrem audivit obiisse.” - - [14] Fl. Wig. 1087. “Willelmus … Angliam festinato adiit, - ducens secum Wlnothum et Morkarum.” - - [15] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 517. - - [16] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 315. - - [17] Fl. Wig. 1087. “Robertus … Ulfum, Haroldi quondam regis - Anglorum filium, Dunechaldumque regis Scottorum Malcolmi - filium a custodia laxatos et armis militaribus honoratos, - abire permisit.” - - [18] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 76. - - [19] Flor. Wig. 1087. “Mox ut Wintoniam venit, illos, ut - prius fuerant, custodiæ mancipavit.” - - [20] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 855. The Winchester Annals (1087; - Ann. Mon. ii. 35) give him, like Prior Godfrey, the title of - Earl, and say that he was not released at all. The Conqueror - releases all his prisoners in England and Normandy “exceptis - duobus comitibus Rogero et Wlnodo.” These three captives are - joined together in the signatures to an alleged charter of - Bishop William of Saint-Calais in the Monasticon, i. 237, - and in the Surtees volume, Hist. Dun. Scriptt. Tres, v, of - which I may have to speak again; “Morkaro et Rogerio - [clearly meant for Roger of Hereford] et Siwardo cognomento - Bran et Wlnoto Haraldi regis germano.” They are made to - sign, along with Abbot Æthelwig, who died in 1077, in a - Council in London in 1082. The whole thing is clearly - spurious; but what put the signatures of the captives into - anybody’s head? - - [21] See Appendix A. - - [22] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 13 Selden. “Quantus autem mœror - Lanfrancum ex morte ejus perculerit quis dicere possit, - quando nos qui circa illum nuncia morte illius eramus, - statim eum præ cordis angustia mori timeremus?” This seems - to imply that the news reached Lanfranc when he had his - monks about him, that is at Canterbury. - - [23] William of Malmesbury (iv. 305) marks the coronation as - being done “die sanctorum Cosmæ et Damiani.” In the - Chronicle it is “þreom dagum ǽr Michaeles mæssedæg;” while - Florence simply gives the day of the month. Wace (14482) - says inaccurately “Li jor de feste saint Michiel;” and the - Chronicon de Bello (40) still more inaccurately, “in - nativitate Christi, intrante anno incarnationis ejusdem - Verbi Dei mlxxxviii.” - - [24] See Appendix A. - - [25] Chron. Petrib. 1087. “Ealle þa men on Englalande him to - abugon, and him aðas sworon.” - - [26] Chron. Petrib. 1087. “Ðisum þus gedone, se cyng ferde - to Winceastre, and sceawode þæt madmehus, and þa gersuman þe - his fæder ǽr gegaderode, þa wæron unasecgendlice ænie man hu - mycel þær wæs gegaderod, on golde and on seolfre and on - faton and on pællan and on gimman and on manige oðre - deorwurðe þingon þe earfoðe sindon to ateallene.” Yet Henry - of Huntingdon (p. 211) knew the exact amount of the silver, - sixty thousand pounds, one doubtless for each knight’s fee. - - [27] Florence brings in the books in a list of gifts which - is longer than that of the Chronicler; “Cruces, altaria, - scrinia, _textos_, candelabra, situlas, fistulas, ac - ornamenta varia gemmis, auro, argento, lapidibusque - pretiosis, redimita, per ecclesias digniores ac monasteria - jussit dividi.” - - [28] Chron. de Bello, 40. “Regni diadema suscepit. Quod - adeptus, paterni mandati non immemor, patris pallium regale - et feretrum unde supra meminimus, cum cccᵗⁱˢ philacteriis, - sanctorum pignorum excellentia gloriosis, ecclesiæ beati - Martini quantocius delegavit, quæ simul apud Bellum viii - Kalendas Novembris suscepta sunt.” - - [29] The Chronicler says, “to ælcen cyrcean uppe land lx. - pæǹ.” But Florence limits it; “ecclesiis in civitatibus vel - villis suis per singulas denarios lx. dari.” - - [30] Chron. Petrib. 1087. “Into ælcere scire man seonde - hundred punda feos, to dælanne earme mannan for his saule.” - - [31] Flor. Wig. 1087. “Ejus quoque germanus Rotbertus in - Normanniam reversus, thesauros quos invenerat monasteriis, - ecclesiis, pauperibus, pro anima patris sui largiter - divisit.” - - [32] Chron Petrib. 1087. “Se cyng wæs on þam midewintre on - Lundene.” So Henry of Huntingdon (211); “Rex novus curiam - suam ad Natale tenuit apud Lundoniam.” He adds a list of - bishops who were present. There were the two Archbishops, - Maurice of London, Walkelin of Winchester, Geoffrey [it - should be Osbern] of Exeter, William of Thetford, Robert of - Chester, William of Durham, as also “Wlnod [sic] episcopus - sanctus Wirecestriæ.” On the presence of Odo, see Appendix - B. Robert of Torigny (1087) writes “Vulnof.” I cannot see - much in his editor’s suggestion that the Geoffrey spoken of - is the Bishop of Coutances, because the so-called Bromton, - of all people, has made a blunder about him; X Scriptt. 984. - - [33] N. C. vol. iv. p. 708. - - [34] Ord. Vit. 664 D. “Totum in Normannia pristinum honorem - adeptus est, et consiliarius ducis, videlicet nepotis sui, - factus est.” - - [35] Will. Malms, iv. 305. “Claves thesaurorum nactus est; - quibus fretus totam Angliam animo subjecit suo.” - - [36] Ib. “Reliquo hiemis quiete et favorabiliter vixit.” - - [37] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “On þisum geare wæs þis land swiðe - astirad, and mid mycele swicdome afylled; swa þæt þa riceste - Frencisce men þe weron innan þrisan lande wolden swican - heore hlaforde þam cynge, and woldon habban his broðer to - cynge, Rodbeard, þe wæs eorl on Normandige.” The duty of - faithfulness to the lord, whoever he may be, is always - strongly felt; still William Rufus is only “heora hlaford se - cyng,” not “heora cynehlaford.” But the notion that Robert - had any special right as the eldest son seems not to have - come into any purely English mind of that age. - - [38] He appears in the list given by Henry of Huntingdon - (see above, p. 19) as “justiciarius et princeps totius - Angliæ.” Simeon of Durham (1088) calls him “secundus rex.” - - [39] See Florence, 1081; Sim. Dun. Hist. Eccl. Dun. iv. 1. - - [40] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 674. - - [41] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “Swa wæll dyde se cyng be þam - bisceop þæt eall Englaland færde æfter his ræde and swa swa - he wolde.” So Florence; “Ea tempestate rex prædictus illius, - ut veri consiliarii, fruebatur prudentia; bene enim - sapiebat, ejusque consiliis totius Angliæ tractabatur - respublica.” Cf. Ann. Wint. 1088. “Episcopus Willelmus - Dunelmensis, qui paulo ante quasi cor regis erat.” - - [42] Will. Malms, iv. 306. “Immortale in eum [Lanfrancum] - odium anhelans, quod ejus consilio a fratre se in vincula - conjectum asserebat.” - - [43] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 680. - - [44] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “And þæs unræd wearð gewesen innan - þam Lengtene.” So Florence; “Pars nobiliorum Normannorum - favebat regi Willelmo, sed minima; pars vero altera favebat - Roberto comiti Normannorum, et maxima; cupiens hunc sibi - adsciscere in regnum, fratrem vero aut fratri tradere vivum - aut regno privare peremptum.” Here is the end of a - hexameter. - - [45] See Appendix B. - - [46] Ord. Vit. 665 D. “Optimates utriusque _regni_ - conveniunt, et de duobus _regnis_ nunc divisis, quæ manus - una pridem tenuerat, tractare satagunt.” Cf. the language - used at an earlier time about Normandy, N. C. vol. i. p. - 221. - - [47] Ib. 666 A. “Labor nobis ingens subito crevit, et maxima - diminutio potentiæ nostræ opumque nobis incumbuit…. Violenta - nobis orta est mutatio et nostræ sublimitatis repentina - dejectio.” It is now that he makes the flourish about - “Saxones Angli” (see N. C. vol. i. p. 542); there is also a - good deal about Jeroboam and Polyneikês. - - [48] Ib. “Quomodo duobus dominis tam diversis, et tam longe - ab invicem remotis competenter servire poterimus?” - - [49] Ib. B, C. “Inviolabile fœdus firmiter ineamus, et - Guillelmo rege dejecto vel interfecto, qui junior est et - protervus, et cui nihil debemus, Robertum ducem, qui major - natu est et tractabilior moribus, et cui jamdudum vivente - patre amborum fidelitatem juravimus, principem Angliæ ac - Neustriæ ad servandam unitatem utriusque regni - constituamus.” - - [50] Ib. C. “Decretum suum Roberto duci detexuit. Ille vero, - utpote levis et inconsideratus, valde gavisus est promissis - inutilibus, seseque spopondit eis, si inchoarent, affaturum - in omnibus, et collaturum mox efficax auxilium ad - perpetrandum tam clarum fecimus.” - - [51] See Appendix B. - - [52] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 710. - - [53] Will. Malms. iv. 306. “Multos eodem susurro infecit - [Odo]; Roberto regnum competere, qui sit et remissioris - animi, et juveniles stultitias multis jam laboribus - decoxerit; hunc delicate nutritum, animi ferocia (quam - vultus ipse demonstret), prætumidum, omnia contra fas et jus - ausurum; brevi futurum ut honores jamdudum plurimis - sudoribus partos amittant; _nihil actum morte patris_, si - quos ille vinxerit iste trucidet.” (Again the ending of a - hexameter.) A good deal of this seems to come from later - experience of Rufus. - - [54] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “þæs unræd wærð geræd.” - - [55] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 276, 580, 673. - - [56] See Appendix C. - - [57] “He þohte to donne be him eall swa Iudas Scarioð dide - be ure Drihtene.” - - [58] “Se bisceop of Dunholme dyde to hearme þæt he mihte - ofer eall be norðan.” - - [59] See Appendix C. - - [60] Mon. Angl. i. 248. “Monstrabo quod Dorobernium et - Hastingas, quæ jam pene perdiderat, in sua fidelitate - detinui, Londoniam quoque quæ jam rebellaverat, in ejus - fidelitate sedavi, meliores etiam duodecim ejusdem urbis - cives ad eum mecum duxi, ut per illos melius ceteros - animaret.” - - [61] Mon. Angl. i. 247. “Ipse [rex] te summonuit ut cum eo - equitares; tu vero respondisti ei, te cum septem militibus - quos ibi habebas libenter iturum, et pro pluribus ad - castellum tuum sub festinatione missurum, et postea fugisti - de curia sua sine ejus licentia, et quosdam de familia sua - tecum adduxisti, et ita in necessitate sua sibi defecisti.” - - [62] See Appendix C. - - [63] Mon. Angl. i. 245. “Præsto sum in curia vestra vobis - justitiam facere convenienti termino, securitate veniendi - accepta.” Cf. N. C. vol. ii. pp. 149, 150. - - [64] Mon. Angl. i. 245. “Non est enim omnium hominum - episcopos judicare, et ego vobis secundum ordinem meum omnem - justitiam offero; et si ad præsens vultis habere servitium - meum vel hominum meorum, illud idem secundum placere vestrum - vobis offero.” - - [65] Ib. “Rex acceptis et auditis istis litteris episcopi, - dedit baronibus suis terras episcopi, vidente legato quem - sibi miserat episcopus.” I suppose that these barons are no - other than the Counts Alan and Odo, of whose share in the - matter we shall hear much more as we go on. - - [66] See Ellis, i. 464. It is there remarked that Ralph’s - lands in Devonshire had largely been Merleswegen’s. This is - equally true in Yorkshire. He must have succeeded Hugh the - son of Baldric as sheriff. See N. C. vol. iv. p. 801. - - [67] See the foundation charter in the Monasticon, iv. 682; - though it is hard to understand how Pope Alexander could - have confirmed anything in 1089. According to the charter, - the church had once been held by a body of canons, which had - come to nothing. Ralph now restored it as a Benedictine - monastery, a cell to Marmoutiers. - - [68] “Præcepit omnibus regis fidelibus de parte regis ut - malum facerent episcopo ubicumque et quomodo cumque possent. - Cumque episcopus per se vel per legatos suos regem non - posset requirere, et terras suas destrui et vastari absque - ulla ultione per vii. septimanas et amplius sustineret,” - etc. - - [69] Their absence from the assembly comes from Florence; - “Execrabile hoc factum clam tractaverunt in quadragesima, - quod cito in palam prorumpi posset post pascha; nam a regali - se subtrahentes curia, munierunt castella, ferrum, flammam, - prædas, necem, excitaverunt in patriam.” Cf. Orderic, 666 C; - “Munitiones suas fossis et hominibus, atque alimentis - hominum et equorum, abundanter instruebant.” - - [70] On Count Robert, see N. C. vol. ii. p. 296; iv. pp. 78, - 168, 170. His name does not now occur in the Chronicles, nor - in Orderic, who does not mention the siege of his castle of - Pevensey. But his action comes out strongly in Florence, who - classes him with Odo as a leader, though in his narrative he - appears merely as his tool. The Hyde writer (297) also - dwells fully on his share in the work, but he has no special - facts or legends. - - [71] See N. C. vol. iii. pp. 117, 672; iv. pp. 39, 562, 825. - - [72] In Orderic, 667 B, he appears as “Rogerius Merciorum - comes.” - - [73] Flor. Wig. 1088. “Rogerius de Laceio, qui jam super - regem invaserat Herefordam.” He appears in Domesday in - Berkshire, Gloucestershire, Worcestershire, Shropshire, but - most largely in Herefordshire. See Ellis, i. 442. - - [74] See N. C. vol. ii. pp. 138, 352. - - [75] Ib. vol. iii. p. 132; iv. p. 448. - - [76] Ib. vol. iii. p. 737. - - [77] Ib. vol. iii. p. 233. - - [78] Ord. Vit. 666 D. See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 74, 489. - - [79] See below, p. 36. - - [80] See his picture in Orderic, 703 B. “Præfatus præsul - nobilitate cluebat, magisque peritia militari quam clericali - vigebat. Ideoque loricatos milites ad bellandum quam - revestitos clericos ad psallendum magis erudire noverat.” - - [81] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 672. Orderic gives his portrait - along with that of his uncle; “Robertus Rogerii de Molbraio - filius potentia divitiisque admodum pollebat, audacia et - militari feritate superbus pares despiciebat, et - superbioribus obtemperare, vana ventositate turgidus, - indignum autumabat. Erat erim corpore magnus, fortis, niger - et hispidus, audax et dolosus, vultu tristis et severus. - Plus meditari quam loqui studebat, et vix in confabulatione - ridebat.” - - [82] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “Swiðe mycel folc mid heom, ealle - Frencisce men.” He must mean that all the leaders were - French. We shall see (see below, p. 47) that there were both - Englishmen and Britons in the rebel army. - - [83] Flor. Wig. 1088. - - [84] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “Roger hét an of heom se hleop - into þam castele æt Norðwic, and dyde git eallra wærst ofer - eall þæt land.” He is “Rogerius Bigot” in William of - Malmesbury. We shall find him behaving better later in our - story. - - [85] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 68, 590. - - [86] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “Hugo eac an þe hit ne gebette nan - þing, ne innan Lægreceastrescire ne innan Norðamtune.” He is - “Hugo de Grentemesnil” in William of Malmesbury. See N. C. - vol. iv. pp. 74, 232. - - [87] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 226. - - [88] Ib. p. 382. - - [89] Gesta Stephani, 41. “Totius Angliæ noverca Bristoa.” - - [90] Simeon of Durham (1088) speaks of the “castellum - fortissimum” at this time. - - [91] Gesta Steph. 36. “Est Bristoa civitas … ipso situ loci - omnium civitatum Angliæ munitissima. Sicut enim de Brundusio - legimus, quædam provinciæ Glaornensis pars ad formam linguæ - restricta, et in longum protensa, duobus fluviis gemina ejus - latera proluentibus, inque inferiori parte, ubi ipsa terra - defectum patitur, in unam aquarum abundantiam coeuntibus, - efficit civitatem.” - - [92] One might quote nearer instances in the streams which - flow out of Mendip; only they have their _katabothra_ at the - beginning. - - [93] Gesta Steph. u. s. “Viva quoque et fortis maris - exæstuatio, noctibus et diebus abundanter exundans, ex - ambabus civitatis partibus fluvios ipsos in latum et - profundum pelagus regurgitare in seipsos cogit, portumque - mille carinis habillimum et tutissimum efficiens, ambitum - illius adeo prope et conjuncte constringit ut tota civitas - aquis innatare, tota super ripas considere videatur.” - - [94] In what was the castle green is a very pretty - undercroft of early thirteenth century work, most likely the - support of a chapel. - - [95] The course of the stream and the line of the walls have - been altered more than once; but the description in the - Gesta Stephani of the peninsula, as long and tongue-shaped, - shows that the Frome cannot, when that was written, have - taken the line of the present Baldwin Street. The town was - on the peninsula, but it covered only the north-east part of - it. - - [96] Gesta Steph. “Ex una tamen ejus regione ubi ad - obsidendum opportunior magisque pervia habetur, castellum - plurimo aggere exaltatum, muro et propugnaculis, turribus, - et diversis machinis firmatum, impugnantium coercet - accessus.” This is doubtless equally true in its measure of - the state of things in 1088; but there is not now much sign - of the “plurimus agger.” The old prints of Bristol show Earl - Robert’s keep, a square tower of the best class. - - [97] The description of the later occupation of Bristol - (Gesta Steph. p. 37) will serve equally for this earlier - one. “E diversis siquidem provinciis et regionibus emersi, - tanto illic abundantius et gratulantius affuerunt, quanto - sub divite domino ex munitissimo castello, quicquid - libentium animo occurreret, in uberrima committere Anglia - fuit eis permissum.” - - [98] His estates in Somerset are very large. See Domesday, - 87 _a_ et seqq. In Gloucestershire (165) he appears as - “Episcopus de Sancto Laudo”――the older seat of the bishopric - of Coutances. - - [99] Domesday, 163. Under “Bertune apud Bristou,” now Barton - Regis, we read, “Hoc manerium et Bristou reddit regi c. et - x. markas argenti. Burgenses dicunt quod episcopus G. habet - xxxiii. markas argenti et unam markam auri propter firmam - regis.” This looks like the Earl’s third penny; but Geoffrey - certainly had no formal earldom in Gloucestershire. - - [100] This is Camden’s conjecture; it does not greatly - matter for my purpose. - - [101] See above, p. 33. - - [102] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “Gosfrid bisceop and Rodbeard a - Mundbræg ferdon to Bricgstowe and hergodon, and brohton to - þam castele þa hergunge.” So Florence; “Gosfridus episcopus - Constantiensis, in castello Brycstowa, socium conjurationis - et perfidiæ habebat secum nepotem suum Rotbertum de - Mulbraio, virum gnarum militiæ.” - - [103] In the song in the Chronicles, 973, Eadgar is crowned - “On þaere ealdan byrig, - Acemannes ceastre, - Eac hie egbuend. - Oþre worde - Beornas Baðan nemnað.” - In the prose entries in Worcester and Peterborough this is - done “at Hatabaðum.” - - [104] See Richard of the Devizes, 62. “Bathonia, in imis - vallium, in crasso nimis aere et vapore sulphureo posita, - imo deposita, est ad portas inferi.” - - [105] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 385. - - [106] Mr. Earle has, I think, made it morally certain that - the Old-English poem on a ruined city in the Codex - Exoniensis refers to Bath. It is a pity that his account is - hidden in the Proceedings of the Bath Natural History and - Antiquarian Field Club, vol. ii. no. 3, 1872. - - [107] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 310. - - [108] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “And syððon foron út of þam - castele and hergodon Baðon, and eall þæt land þær abutan.” - Florence adds the burning; “Rotbertus … congregato exercitu - invasit Bathoniam, civitatem regiam, eamque igne succendit.” - - [109] Flor. Wig. 1088. “Illa [Bathonia] deprædata, transivit - in Wiltusciram, villasque depopulans, multorumque hominum - strage facta, tandem adiit Givelceastram, obsedit, et - expugnare disposuit.” - - [110] Geveltone, now Yeovilton, was held by one Ralph under - William of Eu (Domesday, 96 _b_). Givele, now Yeovil, was - held by Count Robert (Domesday, 93). All these names come in - various corruptions from the river Givel or Ivel, also - called Yeo. Only in _Yeovil_ we may trace a bit of false - etymology, which has also set the pattern to Yeovilton. - - [111] I took with me to Ilchester a book by the Rev. W. - Buckler, “Ilchester Almshouse Deeds” (Yeovil, 1866), which - contains the accounts of Ilchester from Leland, Camden, and - Stukeley, together with Stukeley’s map. The last-named - writer may have drawn somewhat on his imagination; but I - could trace the line of the walls, represented in a great - part of their course by modern buildings. Under the - circumstances of the site, the usual _carfax_ is not to be - found at Ilchester, any more than at Godmanchester. - - [112] Domesday, 86 _a_. “In Givelcestre sunt 107 burgenses, - reddentes xx. solidos. Mercatum cum suis appendiciis reddit - xi. libras.” - - [113] Flor. Wig. 1088. “Pugnant exterius spe capti prædæ et - amore victoriæ, repugnant intrinsecus acriter pro se - suorumque salute. Tandem inter utrumque necessitatis vicit - causa; repulsus et tristis recedit Rotbertus privatus - victoria.” The Chronicle and William of Malmesbury do not - speak of Ilchester. William thus sums up the campaign; - “Gaufridus episcopus, cum nepote, Bathoniam et Bercheleiam - partemque pagi Wiltensis depopulans, manubias apud Bristou - collocabat.” - - [114] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 144. - - [115] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “And eall Beorclea hyrnesse hi - awæston.” Florence more fully; “Willelmus de Owe - Glawornensem invadit comitatum, regiam villam deprædatur - Beorchelaum, per totam ferro et flamma grande perpetrat - malum.” - - [116] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 557. - - [117] See Domesday, 164. But it had already given a name to - Roger and Ralph of Berkeley; Domesday, 168. From Roger’s - descendants it passed by marriage to Robert the son of - Harding. See N. C. vol. iv. p. 758. - - [118] Domesday, 163. “In Nesse [Sharpness] sunt v. hidæ - pertinentes ad Berchelai quos W. comes misit extra ad - faciendum unum castellulum.” - - [119] Since I wrote the fourth volume of the Norman - Conquest, there has been much controversy about the origin - of Robert Fitz-Harding. (See Notes and Queries, Jan. 3rd, - 1880.) I am confirmed on the whole in my old belief that he - was the son of Harding the son of Eadnoth. - - [120] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 590, 855. - - [121] See above, p. 33. - - [122] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “Þa men þe yldest wæron of - Hereforde, and eall þeo scír forþmid, and þa men of - Scrobscyre mid mycele folce of Brytlande.” - - [123] See above, p. 33. - - [124] Flor. Wig. 1088. “Cum hominibus comitis Rogerii de - Scrobbesbyria.” Yet the Chronicler says distinctly, “And - Rogere eorl wæs eac æt þam unræde.” That is, he joined in - the conspiracy, but did not take a personal share in the - war. - - [125] See above, p. 35, note 3. - - [126] Flor. Wig. 1088. “Congregato magno Anglorum, - Normannorum, et Walensium exercitu.” - - [127] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 395. - - [128] Ib. vol. i. p. 520. - - [129] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “Þa men … comon and hergodon and - þærndon on Wiðreceastrescire forð, and hi comon to þam porte - sylfan, and woldon þa þæne port bærnen, and þæt mynster - reafian, and þæs cynges castel gewinnan heom to handa.” - Florence adds, “grandem de regis incolis fidelibus sumpturos - vindictam.” On the deliverance of Worcester, see Appendix D. - - [130] Florence brings in his own Bishop with a panegyric; - “Vir magnæ pietatis et columbinæ simplicitatis, Deo - populoque quern regebat in omnibus amabilis, regi, ut - terreno domino, per omnia fidelis, pater reverendus - Wlstanus.” In the Chronicle he is simply “se arwurða bisceop - Wlfstan.” He goes on to make his exhortation after the - manner of Moses. - - [131] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 61. - - [132] Ib. vol. iv. p. 579. - - [133] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 174. - - [134] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 379. - - [135] Ib. - - [136] Flor. Wig. 1088. “Normanni interim, ineuntes - consilium, rogant ipsum episcopum ut ab ecclesia transiret - in castellam, tutiores se affirmantes de ejus præsentia, si - majus incumberet periculum; diligebant enim eum valde. Ipse - enim, ut erat miræ mansuetudinis, et pro regis fidelitate, - _et pro eorum dilectione_, petitioni eorum adquievit.” - - [137] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 174. - - [138] Flor. Wig. u. s. “Interea audenter in arma se parat - episcopalis familia.” On the nature of this “familia,” see - N. C. vol. v. p. 496. - - [139] Ib. “Inter quos [hostes] magna belli jam fervebat - insania; contumaciter enim episcopi contemnentes mandata, in - terram ipsius posuerunt incendia.” On the order of events, - see Appendix D. - - [140] Ib. “Conveniunt castellani et omnis civium turma, - occurrere se affirmant hostibus ex altera parte Sabrinæ - fluminis, si hoc eis pontificis annueret licentia. Parati - igitur et armis instructi, ipsum ad castellum euntem habent - obviam, quam optabant requirunt licentiam; quibus libentur - annuens, ‘Ite,’ inquit, ‘filii, ite in pace, ite securi, cum - Dei et nostra benedictione.’ Confidens ego in Domino, - spondeo vobis, non hodie nocebit vobis gladius, non quicquam - infortunii, non quisquam adversarius. State in regis - fidelitate, viriliter agentes pro populi urbisque salute.” - - [141] Ib. “Episcopus ingenti concutitur dolore, videns - debilitari res ecclesiæ, acceptoque inde consilio, gravi - eos, ab omnibus qui circumaderant coactus, percussit - anathemate.” See Appendix D. - - [142] Ib. “Alacres pontem reparatum transeunt, hostes de - longinquo accelerantes conspiciunt.” - - [143] See Appendix D. - - [144] Flor. Wig. u. s. “Cæduntur pedites, capiuntur milites, - cum Normannis tam Angli quam Walenses, cæteris vero vix - debili elapsis fuga [were the ‘milites’ spared for the sake - of ransom?] regis fideles cum pontificis familia, exultantes - in gaudio, sine ulla diminutione suorum, redeunt ad propria; - gratias Deo referunt de rerum ecclesiæ incolumitate, gratias - episcopo referunt de consilii ejus salubritate.” - - [145] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 386. - - [146] Chron. Petrib, 1088. “Þe wæs ærur heafod to þam - unræde.” - - [147] See above, p. 29. - - [148] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “Ðe bisceop Odo, þe þas cyng of - awocan, ferde into Cent to his earldome and fordyde hit - swyðe, and þæs cynges land and þæs arcebisceopes mid ealle - aweston, and brohte eall þæt gód into his castele on - Hrofeceastre.” This follows at once on the accounts of Roger - the Bigod and Hugh of Grantmesnil. So William of Malmesbury, - who here brings in the story of Lanfranc’s share in Odo’s - imprisonment in 1082, in order to account for Odo’s special - hatred towards the Archbishop. - - [149] See N. C. vol. i. pp. 267, 296. On the early history - of Rochester generally, see Mr. Hartshorne’s paper in the - Archæological Journal, September, 1863. - - [150] This is brought out by Orderic, 667 B; “Oppidum igitur - Rovecestræ sollicita elegerunt provisione, quoniam, si rex - eos non obsedisset in urbe, in medio positi laxis habenis - Lundoniam et Cantuariam devastarent, et per mare, quod - proximum est, insulasque vicinas, pro auxiliis conducendis - nuntios cito dirigerent.” The islands must be Sheppey and - Thanet. - - [151] See the siege of Rochester in 1215 and his defence by - William of Albini in Roger of Wendover, iii. 333. - - [152] For the siege of 1264 see W. Rishanger, Chron. p. 25 - (Camd. Soc.). On Simon’s military engines he remarks that - the Earl “exemplum relinquens Anglicis qualiter circa - castrorum assultationes agendum sit, qui penitus hujusmodi - diebus illis fuerant ignari.” A forerunner of Kanarês, he - had a fire-ship in the river; he also used mines, as the - Conqueror had done at Exeter. - - [153] Mr. Hartshorne showed distinctly that the present - tower of Rochester was not built by Gundulf, but by William - of Corbeuil. See the passages which he quotes from Gervase, - X Scriptt. 1664, and the continuator of Florence, 1126. But - we have seen (see N. C. vol. iv. p. 366) that Gundulf did - build a stone castle at Rochester for William Rufus - (“castrum Hrofense lapidum”), and we should most naturally - look for it on the site of the later one. On the other hand, - there is a tower, seemingly of Gundulf’s building and of a - military rather than an ecclesiastical look, which is now - almost swallowed up between the transepts of the cathedral. - But it would be strange if a tower built for the King stood - in the middle of the monastic precinct. - - [154] The odd position of the cloister at Rochester suggests - the notion that Gundulf’s church occupied only the site of - the present eastern limb, and that the later Norman nave was - an enlargement rather than a rebuilding. - - [155] Domesday, 2 _b_. “Episcopus de Rouecestre pro excambio - terræ in qua castellum sedet, tantum de hac terra tenet quod - xvii.s. et iv.d. valet.” This is said of land at Aylesford; - but the castle spoken of must surely be that of Rochester. - The Domesday phrase “sedet” seems beautifully to describe - either the massive square donjon or the shell-keep on the - mound; yet it may be doubted whether Rochester had either in - the Conqueror’s day. - - [156] This ditch is said to have been traced right across - the middle of the cathedral, with the twelfth-century nave - to the west of it. I can say nothing either way from my own - observation; but such an extension of the church to the west - would exactly answer to the extension of the churches of Le - Mans and Lincoln to the east. In both those cases the Roman - wall had to give way. - - [157] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 367. - - [158] Ord. Vit. 667 A. “Tunc Odo Bajocensis cum quingentis - militibus intra Rofensem urbem se conclusit, ibique Robertum - ducem cum suis auxiliaribus secundum statuta quæ pepigerant - præstolari proposuit.” The last clause of course implies the - supposed earlier agreement with Duke Robert, on which see - above, p. 25, and Appendix B. - - [159] Flor. Wig. 1088. “Rumore autem percussus insolito, - comes exultat, amicis nunciat, quasi jam de victoria securus - triumphat, plures ad prædam incitat; Odoni episcopo, patruo - suo, auxiliarios in Angliam legat, se quantocius, congregato - majori exercitu, secuturum affirmat.” - - [160] Ib. “Prædictus episcopus Baiocensis, munita - Roveceastra, misit Normanniam, exhortans comitem Rotbertum - cito venire in Angliam, nuntians ei rem gestam, affirmans - paratum sibi regnum, et si sibi non desisteret, paratam et - coronam.” - - [161] Ib. “Missi a comite Rotberto venerunt in Angliam, ab - Odone episcopo ad custodiendum receperunt Roveceastram; et - horum ut primates Eustatius junior, comes Bononiæ, et - Rotbertus de Beleasmo gerebant curam.” Here we have (see - Appendix B) the true moment of their coming. From this point - we may accept the account in Orderic (667 B); “Prædictum - oppidum Odo præsul et Eustachius comes atque Robertus - Bellesmensis, cum multis nobilibus viris et mediocribus, - tenebant, auxiliumque Roberti ducis, qui desidia mollitieque - detinebatur, frustra exspectabant.” We meet them again in - 765 B. - - [162] “Eustatius junior,” “Eustatius þe iunga.” See N. C. - vol. iv. p. 745. - - [163] They are mentioned in the Chronicle along with the - incidental mention of Eustace; “Innan þam castele wæron - swiðe gode cnihtas, Eustatius þe iunga, and Rogeres eorles - þreo sunan, and ealle þa betstboren men þe wæron innan þisan - lande oððe on Normandige.” This is followed by William of - Malmesbury (iv. 306); “Erat tunc apud Roveceastram omnis - pene juventutis ex Anglia et Normannia nobilitas; tres filii - Rogerii comitis, et Eustachius Bononiæ junior, _multique - alii quos infra curam nostram existimo_.” - - [164] The three sons of Earl Roger can hardly fail to be his - three eldest sons (see Will. Gem. vii. 16; Ord. Vit. 708 D), - Robert, Hugh, and Roger, all of whom figure in our story. - Arnulf does not appear in English history till later, and - Philip the clerk does not appear at all. Geoffrey Gaimar - (Chron. Ang. Norm. i. 35), after setting forth the - possessions of Robert of Bellême, mentions the other three; - but one does not exactly see why he says, - “Le conte Ernulf ert le quarte frère, - Par cors valeit un emperère.” - Cf. Ord. Vit. 708 D, 808 C. - - [165] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 488. - - [166] See above, p. 33. - - [167] Flor. Wig. 1088. “Rogerus fautor Rotberti erat in - castello suo Arundello, comitis prædicti opperiens - adventum.” - - [168] See N. C. iv. 66, v. 808. - - [169] See Tierney’s History of Arundel, i. 43. - - [170] Domesday, 23 “Modo inter burgum et portum aquæ et - consuetudinem navium reddit xii. libras et tamen valet xiii. - libras. De his habet S Nicolaus xxiiii. solidos.” “Clerici - sancti Nicolai” are mentioned again in the next column. The - church then was secular in 1086; but the clerks must have - soon given way to the priory of Saint Nicolas, founded by - Earl Roger himself as a cell to his abbey at Seez; in 1386 - it gave way to the college of Arundel. - - [171] See N. C. iv. p. 501. - - [172] Domesday, 23. “Modo est ipsa civitas in manu comitis - Rogerii.” Here he had one quarter of a Roman _chester_, - while the Bishop had another; yet there were sixty houses - more than there had been T. R. E. - - [173] See the customs of Lewes and the rights of William of - Warren in Domesday, 26. The toll on selling a man was - threepence. The two mounds of the castle, the smaller known - as Brack Mount, are rare, perhaps unique. The inner gateway - seems to be of Earl William’s building. - - [174] I suspect that the original title of the Earls of - Arundel was Earl of Sussex, and that the name of the castle - came to be used, much as the successors of William of - Warren, strictly Earls of Surrey, are more commonly called - Earls Warren. See more in Tierney’s History of Arundel. - - [175] Lucan, iv. 819. - - [176] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 161. - - [177] Ord. Vit. 666 D. “Rex Guillelmus, ut vidit suos in - terra sua contra se pessima cogitare, et per singula - crebrescentibus malis ad pejora procedere; non meditatus est - ut timida vulpes ad tenebrosas cavernas fugere, sed ut leo - fortis et audax rebellium conatus terribiliter comprimere.” - - [178] Will. Malms. iv. 306. “Nec minori astutia Rogerium de - Monte Gomerico, secum dissimulata perfidia equitantem, - circumvenit.” - - [179] Ib. “Seorsum enim ducto magnam ingessit invidiam; - dicens, Libenter se imperio cessurum, si illi et aliis - videatur quos pater tutores reliquerat. Non se intelligere - quid ita effrænes sint: si velint, pecunias accipiant pro - libito; si augmentum patrimoniorum, eodem modo; prorsus, quæ - velint, habeant. Tantum videant ne judicium genitoris - periclitetur: quod si de se putaverint aspernandum, de se - ipsis caveant exemplum; idem enim se regem, qui illos duces - fecerit. His verbis comes et pollicitationibus incensus, qui - primus factionis post Odonem signifer fuit, primus defecit.” - Roger of Wendover (ii. 33) adds the words “pœnitentia - ductus.” - - [180] Orderic a little later (667 B) says, “Rogerus - Merciorum comes, multique Normannorum, qui cum rege foris - obsidebant, clam adminiculari quantum poterant inclusis - satagebant.” - - [181] Orderic (680 C) puts the creation of this earldom - somewhat later, at the Gemót held just before the invasion - of Normandy in 1090. He adds that the new earl died soon - after (“quem paulo post mors nulli parcens e medio rapuit”), - and records his burial at Lewes, and adds his epitaph. There - is no better authority than that of the Hyde writer (298) - for placing the creation at this time or for placing the - Earl’s death a little later (see below, p. 76). But his - narrative is so minute that one would think that he must - have had some kind of ground for it. His words are; “Rex - Willelmus … videns igitur principes regni nutantes et - exercitum a se dilabi, sapienti usus consilio, Willelmum de - Warennia, virum bellicosum, animo ferum et corpore strenuum - famaque præclarum, _in amicitia Asarum_ [what this may mean - I have no notion, but the editor vouches that such is the - reading of the MS.] comitis honore sublimat, multa impendit - multaque promittit.” - - [182] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 251. - - [183] Ord. Vit. 667 C. “Omnes episcopi Angliæ _cum Anglis_ - sine dolo regem juvabant, et pro serena patriæ pace, quæ - bonis semper amabiles est, laborabant.” - - [184] The appeal to the English is strongly marked in the - Chronicle; “Ða þe cyng undergeat ealle þas þing and hwilcne - swicdom hi dydon toweard his, þa wearð he on his mode swiðe - gedrefed. Sende þa æfter Englisce mannan, and heom fore sæde - his neode and gyrnde heora fultumes.” Simeon of Durham gives - a free translation quite independent of Florence; “Hoc - audito, rex fecit convocare Anglos, et ostendit eis - traditionem Normannorum, et rogavit ut sibi auxilio essent.” - But the appeal comes out no less strongly in Orderic (666 - D); “Lanfrancum archiepiscopum cum suffraganeis præsulibus, - et comites, Anglosque naturales convocavit, et conatus - adversariorum, ac velle suum expugnandi eos indicavit.” The - writ comes from William of Malmesbury, iv. 306; “Ille, - videns Normannos pene omnes in una rabie conspiratos, Anglos - probos et fortes viros, qui adhuc residui erant, - invitatoriis scriptis accersiit.” It is singular that - Florence mentions the English only in an incidental way a - little later; “Congregato quantum ad præsens poterat - Normannorum, sed tamen maxime Anglorum, equestri et - pedestri, licet mediocri, exercitu.” Does the precious - document spoken of by William of Malmesbury still lurk in - any manuscript store? - - [185] Chron. Petrib. “And behet heom þa betsta laga þe æfre - ær wæs on þisan lande, and ælc unriht geold he forbead, and - geatte mannan heora wudas and slǽtinge.” William of - Malmesbury (iv. 306) translates, “Bonas leges et tributorum - levamen, liberasque venationes pollicens.” Florence is less - literal; “Statuens leges, promittens fautoribus omnia bona.” - Simeon gives another version; “Eo tenore, ut si in hac - necessitate sibi fideles existerent, meliorem legem quam - vellent eligere eis concederet, et omnem injustum scottum - interdixit, et concessit omnibus silvas suas et venationem. - Sed quicquid promisit, parvo tempore custodivit. Angli tamen - fideliter eum juvabant.” - - [186] Flor. Wig. 1088. “Jure regio, militari, ut impiger, - fretus audacia, mittit legatos, vocat quos sibi credit - fidos, vadit Lundoniam, belli tractaturus negotia, - expeditionis provisum, necessaria.” - - [187] See above, p. 29. - - [188] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “Ac Englisce men swa þeah fengon - to þam cynge heora hlaforde on fultume.” The numbers come - from Orderic (667A); “Anglorum triginta millia tunc ad - servitium regis sponte sua convenerunt.” - - [189] Ord. Vit. 667 A. “Passim per totum Albionem _impera_, - omnesque rebelles deice regali justitia.” - - [190] Ib. “Viriliter age, ut regis filius et legitime ad - regnum assumptus; securus in hoc regno dominare omnibus.” - - [191] Ord. Vit. 667 A. “Solerter Anglorum rimare historias, - inveniesque semper fidos principibus suis Angligenas.” Fancy - William Rufus sitting down to study the Chronicles, as his - brother Henry may likely enough have done. - - [192] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “Ferdon þa toweard Hrofeceastre - and woldon þone bisceop Odan begytan, þohtan gif hi hæfdon - hine, þe wæs ærur heafod to þam unræde, þæt hi mihton þe bet - begytan ealla þa oðre.” - - [193] It is somewhat singular that, though Richard appears - in Domesday as “Ricardus de Tonebrige” as well as “Ricardus - filius Gisleberti comitis” (14 et al.), and though his - “leva” or “lowy” (see Ellis, i. 212) is often spoken of, yet - Tunbridge castle itself is not entered. See on Richard of - Bienfaite, Clare, or Tunbridge, N. C. vol. ii. p. 196; iv. - 579. A singular story is told in the Continuation of William - of Jumièges (viii. 15), how Tunbridge was granted in - exchange for Brionne, and measured by the rope. See Appendix - S. - - [194] At Tunbridge the mound and the gateway stand side by - side, as indeed they do, though less conspicuously, at - Arundel and Lewes. A wall is built from the gateway to the - keep on the mound, losing itself, as it were, in the side of - the mound. The mound thus stands half within and half - without the enclosure formed by the gateway. - - [195] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “Þa Englisce men ferdon and - tobræcon þone castel, and þa men þe þærinne wæron griðodon - wið þone cyng,” So Simeon of Durham; “Sed viriliter Angli - insilientes in illud, destruxerunt totum castrum, et qui - intus erant in manus regi dederunt.” Florence gives some - further details; “Tunebrycgiam cui præerat Gilebertus filius - Ricardi, contrarium sibi invenit: obsedit, in biduo - expugnavit, vulneratum Gilebertum cum castello ad deditionem - coegit.” Is it possible that, according to Orderic’s second - account of the rebellion (765 A, B), we are still only in - the Easter week? - - [196] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 366. While I am revising my - text, an account of this tower by Mr. Clark has appeared in - the Builder, November 27, 1880. - - [197] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “Se cyng mid his here ferde - toweard Hrofeceastre, and wendon þæt se bisceop wære - þærinne, ac hit wearð þam cynge cuð þæt se bisceop wæs - afaren to þam castele on Pefenesea.” Florence helps us to an - hexameter in the middle of his prose; “Relatum erat ei ibi - esse episcopum Odonem cum omnibus suis et cohortem - ultramarinam…. - Fama volans dicti pervenit Odonis ad aures, - et cum sociis inito consilio, relinquens Roveceastram, cum - paucis adiit castrum fratris sui Roberti Moritanensis - comitis quod Pevenessa dicitur.” Are the “cohors - ultramarina” those who had come with Eustace and Robert of - Bellême? - - [198] Flor. Wig. 1088. “Fratrem reperiens, cum ut se teneat - hortatur, pollicens se securos ibi posse esse, et dum rex ad - expugnandam Roveceastram intenderet, comitem Normanniæ cum - magno exercitu venturum, seque suosque liberaturum et magna - fautoribus suis dando præmia regnum accepturum.” - - [199] Ord. Vit. 666 D. “Statuerat præcursores suos vere - redeunte sequi cum multis legionibus militum.” - - [200] Cont. Will. Gem. viii. 2. “Quum sui fideles eum - exhortarentur ut regnum Angliæ sibi a fratre præreptum - velocius armis sibimet restitueret, simplicitate solita et, - ut ita dicam, imprudentiæ proxima, respondisse fertur, ‘Per - angelos Dei [Gregory’s pun in another form], si essem in - Alexandria, exspectarent me Angli, nec ante adventum meum - Regem sibi facere auderent. Ipse etiam Willelmus frater - meus, quod eum præsumpsisse dicitur, pro capite suo sine mea - permissione minime attentaret.’” - - [201] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “Betwyx þissum se eorl of - Normandige Rodbeard, þes cynges broðer, gaderode swiðe mycel - folc, and þohte to gewinnane Englelande mid þæra manna - fultume þe wæron innan þisan lande ongean þone cyng, and he - sende of his mannan to þisum lande, and wolde cuman himsylf - æfter.” - - [202] Florence seems here to translate what the Chronicler - had said a little before (see above, p. 67); “Inito itaque - salubri consilio, illum eo usque cum exercitu persequitur, - sperans se belli citius finem assequuturum, si ante - triumphare posset de principibus malorum prædictorum.” - - [203] So I find it called in several papers in the Sussex - Archæological Collections. But the local antiquaries seem - hardly to have fully grasped the fact that there is a town - in Normandy called _Laigle_, and that the family with which - we are concerned took its name from it. - - [204] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “And se cyng mid his here ferde - æfter, and besætt þone castel abutan mid swiðe mycele here - fulle six wucan.” The artillery comes from Florence; - “Accelerat, machinas parat, patruum utrumque obsidet; locus - erat munitissimus; ad expugnationem indies laborat.” William - of Malmesbury cuts the siege of Pevensey short, and Orderic - leaves it out altogether. - - [205] See Appendix E. - - [206] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 395. - - [207] Liber de Hyda, 299. “Willelmus de Warennia apud - obsidionem Peveneselli sagitta in crure valde vulneratus, - Leuwias cum omnium mœrore deportatus est.” The writer goes - on to describe Earl William’s last testament and death. It - will be remembered (see above, p. 62) that Orderic makes - William of Warren die quietly at a later time; but, small as - is the authority of the Hyde writer, it is strange if he - altogether invented or dreamed this minute account. - - [208] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “Syððan heom ateorede mete - wiðinnan þam castele, þa gyrndon hi griðas, and agefan hine - þam cynge, and se bisceop swór þæt he wolde út of Englelande - faran, and ná mare cuman on þisan lande butan se cyng him - æfter sende, and þæt he wolde agyfan þone castel on - Hrofeceastre.” So William of Malmesbury (iv. 306); “Captum - ad quod libuit jusjurandum impulit, ut Anglia decederet et - Rovecestram traderet.” - - [209] Chron. u. s. “Ealswa se bisceop ferde and sceolde - agifan þone castel and se cyng sende his men mid him.” So - Will. Malms. “Ad quod implendum eum cum fidelibus suis - præmisit, lento pede præeuntes subsecutus…. Regii cum - episcopo pauci et inermes (quis enim eo præsente insidias - timeret?) circa muros desiliunt, clamantes oppidanis ut - portas aperiant; hoc episcopum præsentem velle, hoc regem - absentem jubere.” - - [210] Will. Malms. u. s. “At illi, de muro conspicati quod - vultus episcopi cum verbis oratorum non conveniret, raptim - apertis portis ruunt, equos involant, omnesque cum episcopo - vinctos abducunt.” This explains the shorter account in the - Chronicle; “þa arisan þa men þe wæron innan þam castele, and - namon þone bisceop and þes cynges men, and dydon hi on - hæftmenge.” It is now that both the Chronicle and William - give the names of the chief nobles who were in the castle. - Henry of Huntingdon (1088, p. 215) strongly marks Odo’s - treachery; “Eustachius consul et cæteri proceres qui urbi - inerant, fallacia ipsius, episcopum regisque ministros - ceperunt et in carcerem retruserunt.” - - [211] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 104. - - [212] Will. Malms, iv. 306. “Ille [rex]…. Anglos suos - appellat; jubet ut compatriotas advocent ad obsidionem - venire, nisi si qui velint sub nomine Niðing, quod nequam - sonat, remanere. Angli, qui nihil miserius putarent quam - hujusce vocabuli dedecore aduri, catervatim ad regem - confluunt, et invincibilem exercitum faciunt.” This leaves - out the fact that the proclamation was addressed both to - French and English. The words of the Chronicle are express; - “Ða se cyng undergeat þat þing, þa ferde he æfter mid þam - here þe he þær hæfde, and sende ofer eall Englalande, and - bead þæt _ælc man þe wære unniðing_ sceolde cuman to him, - _Frencisce and Englisce_, of porte and of uppelande.” We can - hardly doubt that we have here the actual words of the - proclamation. It must not be forgotten that, by the law of - the Conqueror, Frenchmen who had settled in King Eadward’s - day were counted as English. See N. C. vol. iv. p. 620. - - [213] Ord. Vit. 667 B. “Animosus rex … oppidum Maio mense - cum grandi exercitu potenter obsedit, firmatisque duobus - castellis omnem exeundi facultatem hostibus abstulit.” It - must have been late in May, as six weeks had been spent - before Pevensey. Indeed, if the siege did begin in the - Easter week, it must have been June. - - [214] See Mr. Clark in the Archæological Journal, vol. - xxxii. p. 205. - - [215] This appears from the words of Florence; “Hrofenses - Cantwariensibus et Lundoniensibus cædes inferunt et - incendia. Landfrancus enim archiepiscopus et pene omnes - optimates ejusdem provinciæ erant cum rege.” Orderic too (u. - s.) points out the advantageous position of Rochester for - such purposes; “In medio positi laxis habenis Lundoniam et - Cantuariam devastarent.” - - [216] See N. C. vol. v. p. 748. - - [217] Ord. Vit. 667 C. “In oppido Rofensi plaga similis - Ægyptiorum plagæ apparuit, qua Deus, qui semper res humanas - curat et juste disponit, antiqua miracula nostris etiam - temporibus recentia ostendit.” Nobody could eat, unless his - neighbour drove away the flies; so they wielded the flapper - by turns. - - [218] See above, p. 62. - - [219] Will. Malms. iv. 306. “Nec diutius potuere pati - oppidani quin se traderent, experti quamlibet nobilem, - quamlibet consertam manum, nihil adversus regem Angliæ posse - proficere.” - - [220] Ord. Vit. 667 D. “Guillermum regem nuntiis petierunt - ut pacem cum eis faceret, ac oppidum ab eis reciperet, tali - tenore ut terras, fundos, et omnia quæ hactenus habuerant, - ab ipso reciperent, et ipsi eidem ut naturali domino - [cynehlaford] fideliter amodo servirent.” - - [221] Ord. Vit. 667 D. “His auditis rex iratus est, et valde - rigidus intumuit, et in nullo flexus legatorum - postulationibus non acquievit; sed perfidos traditores in - oppido virtute potenti capiendos juravit, et mox patibulis - suspendendos, et aliis mortium diversis generibus de terra - delendos asseruit.” - - [222] Ib. “Ecce turgidi juvenes et cupiditate cæcati senes - jam satis edocti sunt quod regiæ vires in hac insula nondum - defecerunt. Nam qui de Normannia, tamquam milvi ad prædam, - super nos cum impetu advolarunt, et in Anglia regiam stirpem - defecisse arbitrati sunt, jam Guillelmum juvenem Guillelmo - sene non debiliorem, cohibente Deo, experti sunt.” - - [223] Ord. Vit. 668 B. “Quid sceleratis peccavi? quid illis - nocui? quid mortem meam totis nisibus procuraverunt, et - omnes pro posse suo contra me populos cum detrimento - multorum erexerunt?” - - [224] Ib. “Quisquis parcit perjuris et latronibus, - plagiariis et execratis proditoribus, aufert pacem et - quietem innocentibus, innumerasque cædes et damna serit - bonis et inermibus.” We seem to be reading the cover of the - Edinburgh Review. - - [225] Ord. Vit. 668 C. “Baiocensis Odo patruus tuus est et - _pontificali sanctificatione_ præditus est.” “Cum patre tuo - Anglos subjugavit”――a merit which would hardly be pleaded in - the hearing of the King’s army. He is “antistes Domini,” and - so forth. “Omnes precamur ut illi benevolentiam tuam - concedas et illæsum in Normanniam ad diocesim suam abire - permittas.” - - [226] Ib. “Comes Boloniensis patri tuo satis fuit fidelis, - et in rebus arduis strenuus adjutor et contubernalis.” There - must be some confusion between father and son. - - [227] Ib. “Magnam Normanniæ partem possidet, fortissimisque - castellis corroboratus pene omnibus vicinis suis et Neustriæ - proceribus præeminet.” - - [228] Here (ib. D) a hexameter peeps out; - “Idem qui lædit, fors post ut amicus obedit.” - It is the doctrine of Aias in Sophoklês (659); - ἐγὼ δ’ ἐπίσταμαι γὰρ ἀρτίως, ὅτι - ὅ τ’ ἐχθρὸς ἡμῖν ἐς τοσόνδ’ ἐχθαρτέος, - ὡς καὶ φιλήσων αὖθις. - [egô d’ epistamai gar artiôs, hoti - ho t’ echthros hêmin es tosond’ echtharteos, - hôs kai philêsôn authis.] - The balancing clause was not called for. - - [229] They were (ib.) “eximii tirones”――“swiðe gode - cnihtas”――“quorum servitutem, inclite rex, parvi pendere non - debes.” - - [230] Ib. “Igitur, quos jam superasti potestate, divitiis, - et ingenti probitate, subjuga tibi magnificentia et - pietate.” On the sense of “magnificentia,” cf. N. C. vol. i. - p. 261. - - [231] Ord. Vit. 668 D. “Omnem spem habendi hæreditates et - terras in regno ejus, quamdiu ipse regnaret, funditus - abscidit.” - - [232] Ord. Vit. 668 D. “Tunc Odo pontifex a rege Rufo - impetrare temptavit, ne tubicines in eorum egressu tubis - canerent, sicut moris est dum hostes vincuntur et parvum - oppidum capitur.” Why “parvum”? - - [233] Ib. “Nec se concessurum etiam propter mille auri - marcos palam asseruit.” - - [234] Ib. “Oppidanis cum mœrore et verecundia egredientibus, - et regalibus tubis cum gratulatione clangentibus.” - - [235] Ord. Vit. 669 A. “Multitudo Anglorum quæ regi - adhærebat cunctis audientibus, vociferabatur, et dicebat; - Torques, torques afferte, traditorem episcopum cum suis - complicibus patibulis suspendite. Magne rex Anglorum, cur - sospitem pateris abire incentorem malorum? Non debet vivere - perjurus homicida, qui dolis et crudelitatibus peremit - hominum multa milia.” - - [236] Ib. “Hæc et alia probra mœstus antistes cum suis - audivit.” - - [237] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “Se bisceop Odo mid þam mannum þe - innan þam castele wæron ofer sæ ferdon, and se bisceop swa - forlet þone wurðscipe þe he on þis land hæfde.” Orderic (669 - A)――in his character of “Angligena”――moralizes; “Sic - irreligiosus præsul de Anglia expulsus est, et amplissimis - possessionibus spoliatus est. Tunc maximos quæstus, quos cum - facinore obtinuit, justo Dei judicio cum ingenti dedecore - perdidit, et confusus Baiocas rediit, nec in Angliam - postmodum repedavit.” - - [238] Ord. Vit. 669 A. “Anno primo Guillelmi Rufi regis, in - initio æstatis, Rofensis urbs ei redita est, omniumque qui - contra pacem enses acceperant, nequam commotio compressa - est.” We shall see by the story of Robert of Rhuddlan, to - which we shall presently come, that some of the King’s - followers were at home again by the end of June. - - [239] See above, p. 74. - - [240] Chron. Petrib. 1088. “Eac manige Frencisce men - forleton heora land and ferdon ofer sæ, and se cyng geaf - heora land þam mannum þe him holde wæron.” - - [241] Ord. Vit. 669 B. “Quorumdam factiones sævissimis - legibus puniit, aliquorum vero reatus ex industria - dissimulavit. Antiquis baronibus, quos ab ipso aliquantum - desciverat nequitia, versute pepercit, _pro amore patris - sui_ cui diu fideliter inhæserant, et pro senectutis - reverentia, sciens profecto quod non eos diu vigere sinerent - morbi et mors propria. Porro quidam, quanto gravius se - errasse in regiam majestatem noverunt, tanto ferventius omni - tempore postmodum ei famulati sunt, et tam muneribus quam - servitiis ac adulationibus multis modis placere studuerunt.” - - [242] See above, p. 32. - - [243] See above, p. 28. - - [244] See above, p. 88. - - [245] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 409, 825, and below, p. 139. - - [246] Mon. Ang. i. 245. “Tandem misi sibi rex abbatem sancti - Augustini, mandans ei ut, sicut prius mandaverat sibi, ad - curiam suam cum abbate veniret. Episcopus autem, inimicorum - suorum insidias cum regis ira metuens, sine bono conductu se - non posse venire respondet et legatos suos per abbatis - conductum cum subscriptis litteris regi misit.” - - [247] Ib. “Homines meos et terras et pecuniam quam - vicecomites vestri ubicumque poterant, mihi abstulerunt, - scilicet Offedene et Welletune quas diviserunt Odoni et - Alano comitibus, cum cæteris terris in Ewerwickschire.” See - above, p. 31. On Count Alan, see N. C. vol. iv. p. 294, and - on Odo, vol. iv. pp. 301, 805. - - [248] Ib. “Quod breve cum mississem Radulfo Paganello non - solum mihi pacem negavit sed et de parte vestra me - diffidavit.” On _diffidatio_ see Ducange _in voce_. In N. C. - vol. v. p. 270 we have a case of the man _defying_ his lord. - Here the lord _defies_ his man. In either case there is the - withdrawal of one side of the mutual duty of lord and man. - - [249] Ib. “Hominum vero quosdam vendidit, quosdam redimi - permisit.” - - [250] Mon. Ang. i. 245. “Hoc in veritate vobis mando quod - libenter cum hoc abbate venissem, nisi plus inimicos meos et - _indoctam populi multitudinem_ timuissem quod de vestro - brevi et baronum vestrorum fiducia dubitassem.” - - [251] Ib. “Rex visis his litteris misit conductum episcopo - et bene affidavit eum per litteras suas quod per eum vel per - suos homines nullum ei damnum eveniret usque quo de rege - rediens Dunelmum intraret. Perrexit ergo episcopus ad - regem.” - - [252] Mon. Ang. i. 245. “Episcopus … deprecatus est eum ut - rectitudinem sibi consentiret sicut episcopo suo. Rex autem - respondit ei, Quod si laicaliter placitare vellet, et extra - pacem quam rex ei dederat se mitteret, hoc modo rectitudinem - sibi consentiret, et, si hoc modo placitare recusaret, - Dunelmum faceret eum reconduci.” - - [253] Ib. “Dunelmum rediit episcopus, cui rex interim plus - quam septingentos homines cum multa præda abstulerat.” - - [254] They were to have (Mon. Ang. i. 246) the “securitas et - conductus regis” till they had crossed――“donec ultra mare ad - terram siccam cum rebus suis essent.” The catalogue of the - “res suæ” is curious; “Et liceret eos per conductum regis - secum ducere et portare [ἄγειν καὶ φέρειν] [agein kai - pherein] aurum et argentum, equos et pannos et arma et canes - et accipitres, et sua prorsus omnia quæ de terra portari - debent.” The hawks and hounds remind us of Harold setting - sail from Bosham in the Tapestry. See N. C. vol. iii. p. - 222. - - [255] Mon. Ang. i. 246. “Episcopus dedit fidem suam Rogero - Pictavensi, quod si ipse per præscriptam condicionem - castellum reduceretur, et major fortitudo in castello missa - vel facta esset in hominibus vel in munitione vel in - castelli fortitudine quam eadem die ibi erat, episcopus - totum illud destrui faceret, ita quod episcopus inde nullum - proficuum haberet nec rex damnum.” - - [256] Mon. Angl. i. 246. “In quarto nonas Novembris … venit - episcopus Salisbiriam, quem cum Ursus de Habetot unus ex - servientibus regis ad regem intrare moneret.” On Urse of - Abetot, see N. C. vol. iv. pp. 173, 383, 579, 820. - - [257] Ib. “Episcopus reqnisivit ab archiepiscopis utrum - revestitus ingredi deberet, dixitque, ‘Nihil se prorsus - acturum ibi nisi canonice et secundum ordinem suum et sibi - videbatur quod ecclesiastica consuetudo exigebat ut ipse - revestitus ante revestitos causam suam diceret et - causantibus canonice responderet,’ Cui Lanfrancus - archiepiscopus respondens, ‘bene possumus,’ inquit, ‘hoc - modo vestiti de regalibus tuisque negotiis disceptare, - vestes enim non impediunt veritatem,’” - - [258] See William FitzStephen, iii. 56, Robertson. - - [259] Mon. Angl. u. s. “Episcopus surgens precatus est regem - ut episcopatum suum quem jamdiu sine judicio abstulerat sibi - redderet. Lanfrancus vero, rege tacente, dixit, ‘Rex de - episcopatu tuo nihil tibi abstulit vel aliquis per eam neque - breve suum vidisti per quod te de episcopatu tuo dissaisiret - vel dissaisiri præciperet.’” - - [260] The Bishop now tells his grievances at length. After - other wrongs the King “misit comites et barones cum exercitu - suo, et per eos totum episcopatum meum vastavit, terras - quoque et homines et pecuniam Sancti Cuthberti et meam mihi - abstulit. Nostram etiam sedem me ad tempus abjuvare coegit; - ipsi etiam casati ecclesiæ qui mei homines ligii fuerant et - quidquid habebant de casamento ecclesiæ tenebat ex præcepto - regis guerram mihi fecerunt, et terras suas de rege tenentes - pacifice hic eos cum rege video adversum me convenisse.” - - [261] “Rectitudinem facere” is the technical phrase. See - Appendix C. - - [262] “Tunc laici hujusmodi verbis Lanfranci totius Angliæ - primatis animati, adversus episcopum exclamantes dixerunt - ‘injustum esse quod rex episcopo responderet antequam regi - fecisset justitiam.’ Laicis vero hæc et alia multa - declamantibus et iterantibus, facto silentio, dixit - episcopus.” - - [263] “Domini barones et laici, permittite me, quæso, quæ - dicturus sum regi dicere, archiepiscopis et episcopis - respondere, quia nihil vobis habeo dicere, et, sicut huc non - veni judicium vestrum recepturus, ita illud omnino recuso, - et si domino nostri regi et archiepiscopis et episcopis - placuisset vos hic negotio interesse, nec me taliter obloqui - decuisset.” - - [264] See the complaints from the ecclesiastical side in N. - C. vol. iv. p. 436. - - [265] Mon. Angl. i. 247. “Tunc Rogerus Bygotus dixit regi, - ‘Vos debetis episcopo dicere unde eum appellare vultis, et - postea, si ipse nobis voluerit respondere de responsione sua - facite eum judicari; sin autem, facite inde quod barones - vestri vobis consulerent.’” - - [266] I cannot identify this Hugh. “Hugo cognomento pauper” - (Ord. Vit. 806 A), son of Count Robert of Meulan, and - afterwards Earl of Bedford (Gest. Steph. 61), was not yet - born. - - [267] See above, p. 30. - - [268] Mon. Angl. u. s. “Rex te appellat quod, cum ipse - audivit quod inimici sui super eum veniebant, et homines - sui, episcopus scilicet Baiocensis et Rogerus comes et alii - plures regnum suum pariter sibi et coronam auferre volebant, - et ipse per consilium tuum contra illos equitabat.” There is - something odd in this calm mention of Earl Roger as an open - rebel. - - [269] See above, p. 28. - - [270] Macaulay, ii. 496-499, 510, 511. - - [271] Mon. Angl. u. s. “Episcopus autem Hugoni respondit, - ‘Hugo, dicas quidquid volueris, non tibi tamen hodie - respondebo.’” - - [272] Mon. Angl. u. s. “Tum multum tumultuantes laici, - quidam rationibus, quidam vero contumeliis, adversus - episcopum deiterarent.” - - [273] Ib. “Domini archiepiscopi, nos non oporteret diutius - hæc ita considerare, sed deceret nos surgere et episcopos et - abbates convocare, quosdam etiam baronum et comitum istorum - nobiscum habere, et cum eis juste decernere si episcopus - debeat prius investiri vel ante investituram de querelis - regis intrare in placitum.” The text has “S. Constantiensis - episcopus,” but Bishop Geoffrey must be meant. - - [274] Mon. Angl. u. s. “Ad hæc Lanfrancus archiepiscopus, - ‘Non est necesse,’ inquit, ‘nos surgere, sed episcopus et - homines sui egrediantur, et nos remanentes, tam clerici quam - laici, consideremus equaliter quid inde juste facere - debeamus.’” - - [275] Ib. “Vade, nos enim juste faciemus quidquid - fecerimus.” - - [276] Ib. “Si ego hodie te et tuum ordinem judicare non - potero, tu vel tuus ordo nunquam me amplius judicabitis.” - - [277] Ib. “Vide autem qui in domo ista remanent et me - judicare disponunt ut et canonicos judices habeant et - canonice me judicent; si enim aliter agerent, eorum judicia - penitus recusarem.” - - [278] Ib. “Rege, cum suis episcopis et consulibus et - vicecomitibus et præpositis et venatoribus aliisque - quorumlibet officiorum, in judicio remanente.” - - [279] We have met with Osgeat the Reeve in Domesday. See N. - C. vol. v. p. 812. Croc the hunter, like others of his - craft, appears in 49, 74 _b_. See Ellis, i. 403. This odd - mixture of great and small officials is not unusual. In the - “Constitutio Domus Regis” in Hearne’s Liber Niger, i. 341, - the descent from the Chancellor to the bakers and cooks――the - huntsmen come at the end――is more sudden than one would have - looked for, though certain chaplains and seneschals break - the fall. - - [280] See N. C. vol. v. pp. 423, 878. - - [281] Mon. Angl. u. s. “Dominus noster archiepiscopus et - regis curia vobis judicat quod rectitudinem regi facere - debetis antequam de _vestro feodo_ revestiat.” - - [282] Ib. “Nullus mihi hodie vel ego alicui de feodo feci - verbum,” says Bishop William. To which Archbishop Thomas - answers, “Vobis judicat curia ista, quia de nulla re debet - vos rex resaissire antequam sibi rectitudinem faciatis.” - - [283] Mon. Ang. u. s. “Episcopi sunt judices, et eos ad - consilium tuum habere non debes.” - - [284] Ib. “Cum tuis ibi consule, quia de nostris in consilio - tuo nullum prorsus habebis.” - - [285] Ib. “Parum consilii in his septem hominibus habeo - contra virtutem et scientiam totius hujus regni quod hic - adversum me video congregatum.” - - [286] Mon. Angl. u. s. “In _lege nostra_ prohibitum invenio, - ne tale judicium suspiciam.” This strange phrase, twice - repeated, most likely refers to the False Decretals, of - which he seems to have had a copy with him. See below, p. - 109. - - [287] Ib. “Apostolicam sedem Romanam, sanctam ecclesiam et - beatum Petrum ejusque vicarium appello, ut ipsius - ordinatione negotii mei justam sententiam suscipere merear, - cujus dispositioni majores causas ecclesiasticas et - episcoporum judicia antiqua apostolorum eorumque successorum - atque canonum auctoritas reservavit.” Yet, according to the - doctrine held long after by Thomas Stubbs (see N. C. vol. - iv. p. 260), the Bishop of Durham need not have gone very - far to find a Vicar of Saint Peter. - - [288] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 338. - - [289] Mon. Angl. u. s. “Dispoliatus episcopio extra - provinciam meam, absentibus omnibus comprovincialibus meis, - in laicali conventu causam meam dicere compellor.” - - [290] Mon. Ang. u. s. “Nos non de episcopio sed de tuo te - feodo judicamus, et hoc modo judicavimus Baiocensem - episcopum ante patrem hujus regis de feodo suo, nec rex - vocabat eum episcopum in placito illo, sed fratrem et - comitem.” - - [291] Ib. “Quia Dei gratia sapientissimus et nominatissimus - estis, in hoc sapere vestrum tam sublime intelligo, quod - parvitas mea illud comprehendere non potest; sed apostolicam - sedem quam ex necessitate appellavi per licentiam regis et - vestram adire volo.” - - [292] Mon. Ang. u. s. “In omni loco in quo non violentia sed - justitia dominetur, de scelere et perjurio me purgare - paratus sum, et hoc quod hic pro judicio recitasti in Romana - ecclesia falsum et injuste dictum esse monstrabo.” - - [293] Ib. “In curia ista nullum ad præsens placitum - subintrabo, quia nihil ibi tam bene dicerem quin fautores - regis depravando perverterent, qui ipsam et non reverentes - apostolicam auctoritatem post ejus appellationem me judicio - non legali gravant, sed Dei et Sancti Petri postulans - auxilium Romam vadam.” - - [294] Ib. “Tunc rex ait, ‘Modo volo ut castellum tuum mihi - reddas, quoniam judicium meæ curiæ non sequeris.’” - - [295] Mon. Ang. i. 248. “Per vultum de Luca nunquam exibis - de manibus meis donec castellum habeam.” - - [296] Ib. “Ego passus sum per tres servientes vestros - aufferri mihi terras et pecuniam ecclesiæ, præsentibus - centum meis militibus, et in nullo prorsus vobis restiti.” - - [297] Durham is described as “Urbs ipsa in qua sedes est - ecclesiæ.” The Bishop adds; “Paratus sum bonos obsides et - fiducias dare vobis, quod homines mei quos ibi dum Romam - vado volo dimittere in fidelitate vestra eam custodient, et, - si volueritis, libenter vobis servient.” - - [298] “Tunc rex ait, ‘In veritate credas, episcope, quod - nullo modo Dunelmum reverteris et quod homines tui Dunelmi - nullatenus remanebunt, nec tu manus meas evades donec - castellum tuum liberum mihi reddas.’” - - [299] Mon. Ang. u. s. “Si episcopus amplius castellum suum - vobis contradixerit, bene eum capere potestis, quia - conductum quem hactenus habuit nunc dimittit, cum prior - conventionem frangit, et barones vestros probare appetit - quod fidem suam servarent non bene.” - - [300] On Randolf Peverel and his alleged connexion with - William, see N. C. vol. iii. p. 662; iv. 200; v. 26. - - [301] Mon. Angl. i. 248. “Tunc Radulfus Piperellus et omnes - laici unanimiter conclamantes dixerunt; ‘Capite eum, capite - eum, bene enim loquitur _iste vetustus ligaminarius_.’” One - would like to have the original French of this somewhat - irreverent description of the Archbishop, but _gaoler_ seems - to be the most likely meaning of the unusual word - _ligaminarius_. - - [302] Ib. “Multum precor dominum meum regem ne fidem meam - inde faciat me mentiri, nullum enim proficuum in me haberet - ulterius.” - - [303] Ib. “Rex bene vos adquietavit; plenam namque - rectitudinem episcopo obtulit, et ipse eam vobis audientibus - recusavit, regem quoque Romam injuste invitavit; recognoscat - igitur episcopus hoc justum fecisse judicium, et si illud - sequi nollet, et rex sibi naves inveniet et conductum.” - - [304] “Christianam legem quam hic scriptam habeo, testem - invoco.” See above, p. 104. - - [305] Mon. Ang. u. s. “Non est justum ut placitum vel - judicium regis pro aliqua contradictione longius procedat, - sed quotiens in curia sua judicium agitur, ibidem necesse - est ut concedatur vel contradicatur, tu ergo judicium - nostrum vel hic concede, vel hic evidenti ratione - contradicito.” - - [306] Ib. “Rex ait, ‘Dicas licet quidquid velis, non tamen - effugies manus meas nisi castellum prius mihi reddas.’” The - Bishop has just before spoken of “Roma, ubi debeo et ubi - justitia magis quam violentia.” - - [307] Ib. “Cum vos non solum episcopatum, verum et omnia - mea, injuste abstuleritis, et ipsam modo sedem violenter - auferre velitis, pro nulla re quam facere possim capi me - patiar.” - - [308] Ib. “Constituta est ergo dies qua episcopus urbem suis - hominibus vacuaret et rex ibi suos poneret.” - - [309] Ib. “Tu pro regis damno et omnium nostrorum dedecore - vadis Romam, et ipse tibi terram dimitteret? Remane in terra - sua, et ipse episcopatum tuum præter urbem tibi reddet, ea - conditione quod in curia sua judicio baronum suorum - rectitudinem sibi facias.” - - [310] Mon. Ang. u. s. “Ego apostolicam sedem appellavi, quia - in curia ejus nullum justum judicio audio et nullo modo - dimittam quin illuc vadam.” - - [311] Ib. “Tunc rex ait, ‘Faciat mihi episcopus fiduciam - quod damnum meum citra mare non quærat vel recipiat, et quod - naves meas quas sibi inveniam non detinebit frater meus vel - aliquis suorum ad damnum meum contra nautarum voluntatem.’” - - [312] Mon. Ang. u. s. “Reginaldus Paganellus ait, ‘Certe - comites vestri promiserunt hoc quod dicit episcopus et - convenienter inde eos custodite.’” “Reginaldus” must surely - be a slip for “Radulfus.” - - [313] Ib. “‘Tace,’ inquit rex, ‘quia pro nullius fiducia - naves meas perdere patiar, sed, si episcopus inde se - fiduciam fecisse cognoverit, super illam aliam non - requiram.’” - - [314] Ib. “Tunc rex iratus ait, ‘Per vultum de Luca, in hoc - anno mare non transibis, nisi fiduciam quam de navibus - requiro prius modo feceris.’” - - [315] Ib. “Faciam hanc et multo majorem, si necesse fuerit, - fiduciam antequam hic in captione detinear; sed bene omnes - audiant quod ea invitus faciam et captionis timore coactus.” - - [316] Ib. “Rex ait, ‘Nullum conductum habebis, sed Wiltone - moraberis donec ego vere sciam quod castellum habeam in mea - potestate, et tunc demum naves recipies et conductum.’” - Wilton seems an odd place for the purpose; should it be - “Wintonie?” - - [317] Mon. Ang. u. s. “Cum quod vellem et deberem facere non - valeam, hoc ipsum quod dicitis injuste patiar et coactus.” - - [318] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 215. “Walterus de Haiencora,” or - “Haiencorn,” must be a corruption of his name. - - [319] Mon. Angl. i. 249. “Precamur vos ut faciatis domino - meo reddi pecuniam.” The name of the speaker is given as - “Willelmus de Merlao.” - - [320] Ib. “Rex ait, ‘Videant barones isti si ego juste - possum implacitare episcopum.’” - - [321] Ib. “Injustum esset si amplius implacitaretis eum, cum - de vobis mihi teneat et securum conductum habere debeat.” - - [322] Mon. Ang. u. s. “Bene scias, episcope, quod nunquam - transfretabis donec castellum tuum habeam; episcopus enim - Baiocensis inde me castigavit.” - - [323] Gilbert of Bretevile appears as a considerable - landowner in Hampshire (Domesday, 48) and Wiltshire (71). He - may have been Sheriff of either shire. - - [324] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 215, 800. Besides Erneis - himself, we have heard of a Ralph Fitz-Erneis at Senlac, - vol. iii. p. 494. - - [325] Mon. Ang. u. s. “Dissaisiverunt episcopum de ecclesia - et de castello et de omni terra sua xviii. Kal. Dec., et - liberaverunt hominibus episcopi _Helponem_ balistarium - regis.” The King’s writ follows. _Helpo_ must be _Heppo_. - See N. C. vol. iv. p. 216. See Appendix C. - - [326] Mon. Ang. u. s. “Accepit Ivo Taillesbosci duos milites - episcopi, et coegit eos placitare de animalibus - Constantiensis episcopi de quibus judicatum fuerat ante - regem Dunelmensi episcopo non debere respondere.” It is of - course possible that there might be some ground for - impleading the knights, though not for impleading the - Bishop. - - [327] He had before asked; “dum in Anglia fuero, habetote - mecum unum bonum hominem, qui et hospitia mihi inveniat et - ab impedimento me defendat.” The “good man” assigned is - “Robertus de Comitisvilla.” One would think that he was a - kinsman of the husband of Herleva, the King’s - step-grandfather. - - [328] _Roger_ in the text; but Robert must surely be meant. - - [329] Mon. Ang. u. s. “Illi responderunt se nullam sibi - navem liberaturos, et dixerunt regem sibi præcepisse ut bene - servarent episcopum, ne de potestate regis exiret usque quo - quid de eo fieri præciperet, illis per suas sigillatas - literas remandaret.” - - [330] Mon. Ang. u. s. “Venerunt ad eum Salesberiensis - episcopus et Robertus de Insula et Ricardus de Cultura, et - summonuerunt eum de parte regis, Kal. Decembr., ut in - nativitate Domini esset Londoniæ ad curiam regis, et faceret - ei rectitudinem de Gaufrido monacho suo, qui, postquam - episcopus ad curiam venerat, de dominicatu episcopi - quingenta et triginta novem animalia acceperat, et - munitionem castelli abstulerat de quibusdam suis aliis - hominibus, qui unum hominem regis occiderant.” The Gemót was - therefore to be at Westminster, not in its regular place at - Gloucester. - - [331] Ib. “Quamvis juste facere potuissem, potui enim de - meis facere quidquid volui, usquequo de mea sede me - dissaisivit.” - - [332] Ib. “Ad curiam ejus amplius ire non possum, ipse enim - omnia mea mihi abstulit, et equos meos jam venditos - manducavi.” - - [333] He offers, “Solus, si liceat, transfretabo.” - - [334] Mon. Angl. u. s. “Rex misit ei Wintoniensem episcopum - et Hugonem de Portu et Gaufridum de Traileio, et per illos - sibi mandavit ut Gaufridum monachum ad placitandum de - prædictis forisfactis Dunelmum mitteret, et ipse Londoniam - iret, ut in nativitate Domini de hominibus suis ibi - rectitudinem regi faceret.” - - [335] Ib. “Episcopus tristis misit ad comites Alanum et - Rogerum et Odonem, mandans eis impedimenta sua, et - conjuravit eos per eam fidem quam in baptismo susceperant et - quam sibi promiserant.” - - [336] Ib. “A Roberto fratre regis comite Normannorum - honorifice susceptus, totius Normanniæ curam suscepit.” - - [337] See above, p. 91, where he is afraid of the “indocta - multitudo.” - - [338] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 502, 675. - - [339] Ann. Camb. 1087. “Resus filius Teudur a regno suo - expulsus est a filiis Bledint, scilicet Madauc, Cadugan, et - Ririt. Resus vero ex Hibernia classem duxit et revertitur in - Britanniam.” The Brut is to the same effect. - - [340] Ib. “Ingentem censum captivorum gentilibus et Scotis - filius Teudur tradidit.” The Brut for “gentiles et Scoti” - has “Yscotteit ar Gúydyl,” marking the Gwyddyl as heathen - Ostmen. This is the most common use of the word in the - British writers; but we can hardly think that the Scots here - spoken of are Scots in the elder sense. - - [341] In Ann. Camb. 1082, Trahaern (see N. C. iv. 675), with - others, “a Reso filio Teudur et a Grifino filio Conani - occidisus est.” This Gruffydd must be distinguished from - Gruffydd son of Meredydd. He may be the “Grifin puer” of - Domesday, 180 _b_. “Griffin rex” in p. 269 is surely - Gruffydd son of Llywelyn. - - [342] Ord. Vit. 669 B. “Grithfridus rex Guallorum cum - exercitu suo fines Angliæ invasit, et circa Rodelentum - magnam stragem hominum et incendia fecit, ingentem quoque - prædam cepit, hominesque in captivitatem duxit.” - - [343] Orderic (u. s.) specially marks Gruffydd’s invasion as - happening “cum supradicta tempestate vehementer Anglia - undique concuteretur et mutuis vulneribus incolæ regni - quotidie mactarentur.” - - [344] See above, pp. 34, 47. Now is the time for the - exploits of the grandsons of Jestyn ap Gwrgan. See N. C. - vol. v. p. 822, and Appendix DD. - - [345] We have seen him among the rebels. See above, p. 34. - - [346] Ord. Vit. u. s. “Robertus Rodelenti princeps de - obsidione Rofensi rediens, et tam atroces damnososque sibi - rumores comperiens, vehementer dolens ingemuit, et - terribilibus minis iram suam evidenter aperuit.” - - [347] Ib. 670 B. “Tertio die Julii Grithfridus rex Guallorum - cum tribus navibus sub montem qui dicitur Hormaheva littori - appulsus est.” It needs a moment’s thought to see that - _Hormaheva_ is _Ormesheafod_, the _Orm’s Head_. Here the - name bears the Scandinavian form given to it doubtless by - Northern rovers. The _Worm’s Head_ in Gower, in its English - form, marks the presence of Low-Dutch settlers, whether - Flemish or Saxon. - - [348] Ord. Vit. 670 B. “Incolis Britonibus sævo Marte - repulsis, fines suos dilatavit, et in monte Dagaunoth, qui - mari contiguus est, fortissimum castellum condidit.” Orderic - has clearly got hold of the right names and the right - incidents; but he has misconceived the topography. - - Dwyganwy passes as the stronghold of that Maglocunus or - Maelgwyn, whom Gildas (Ep. 33) addresses as “insularis - draco, multorum tyrannorum depulsor, tam regno quam etiam - vita” (cf. Nennius, c. 62, and Ann. Camb. 547, the year of - his death). See Giraldus, It. Kamb. ii. 10; Descrip. Kamb. - i. 5 (where he calls it “nobile castellum”), vol. vi. pp. - 136, 176. - - [349] Ord. Vit. 670 C. “Interim mare fluctus suos retraxit, - et in sicco litore classis piratarum stetit. Grithfridus - autem cum suis per maritima discurrit, homines et armenta - rapuit, et ad naves exsiccatas festine remeavit.” - - [350] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 176. - - [351] Ord. Vit. u. s. “Clamor vulgi Robertum meridie - dormitantem excitavit, eique hostilem discursum per terram - suam nuntiavit. Ille vero, ut jacebat, impiger surrexit, et - mox præcones ad congregandum agmen armatorum per totam - regionem direxit. Porro ipse cum paucis bellatoribus - imparatus Guallos prosecutus est, et de vertice montis - Hormohevæ, qui nimis arduus est, captivos a piratis ligari, - et in naves cum pecoribus præcipitari speculatus est.” - - Orderic must surely have confounded the Orm’s Head itself - with the lower hill of Dwyganwy. It is there, in or near his - own castle, that we must conceive Robert sleeping, not on - the Orm’s Head itself, or on any casual point of the flat - ground between the two. To climb the higher of the two peaks - of Dwyganwy would be perfectly natural, and would give him a - wide enough view over the whole country. But to conceive him - first crossing the flat, and then climbing a huge mountain - for no particular object, seems quite out of the question. - - [352] Ib. “Marchisus audax, ut leo nobilis, vehementer - infremuit, hominesque paucos qui secum inermes erant, ut, - antequam æstus maris rediret, super Guallos in sicco litore - irruerent, admonuit.” - - [353] Ord. Vit. 670 C. “Prætendunt suorum paucitatem, et per - ardui montis præcipitium descendendi difficultatem.” - - [354] Ib. “Nimis doluit, impatiensque moræ per difficilem - descensum sine lorica cum uno milite nomine Osberno de - Orgeriis, ad hostes descendit.” I cannot identify this - Osbern, unless he be “Osbernus filius Tezonis,” who in - Domesday (267 _b_, 268 _b_) holds a good deal of land in - Cheshire under Earl Hugh, but none seemingly under Robert - himself. For Orgères see Stapleton, ii. lxxxv. - - [355] Ib. 670 D. “Quem cum viderent solo clypeo protectum et - uno tantum milite stipatum, omnes pariter in illum missilia - destinant, et scutum ejus jaculis intolerabiliter onerant, - et egregium militem letaliter vulnerant. Nullus tamen, - quamdiu stetit et parmam tenuit, ad eum comminus accedere, - vel eum ense impetere ausus fuit.” Cf. the account of the - death of Siccius in Dion. Hal. xi. 26. He has an ὑπασπιστής - [hypaspistês] to play the part of Osbern of Orgères. - - [356] Ib. “Bellicosus heros spiculis confossus genua flexit, - et scutum missilibus nimis onustum viribus effœtus dimisit.” - - [357] Ib. “In conspectu suorum caput ejus abscindunt ac - super malum navis pro signo victoriæ suspendunt.” - - [358] Ord. Vit. 670 D. “Classe parata piratas per mare - fugientes persequebantur nimis tristes, dum caput principis - sui super malum puppis intuebantur.” - - [359] Ib. 671 A. “Cum nimio luctu Anglorum et Normannorum.” - This may be well believed. Normans and English soon forgot - their own differences in warfare with the Welsh. - - [360] But Orderic has forgotten his dates when he says, - “Nuper illud cœnobium Hugo Cestrensis consul construxerat, - eique Ricardus Beccensis monachus abbas præerat.” We shall - see as we go on that the monks were not planted at Saint - Werburh’s till 1092 (see N. C. vol. iv. pp. 312, 491). It is - now that Orderic speaks of the “belluini cœtus”――we are not - told whether they were Norman, English, or Welsh――among whom - Abbot Richard had to labour. - - [361] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 489. - - [362] His gifts in lands, tithes, and villains, in Normandy - and in England, are reckoned up by Orderic, 669 C, D. Among - them was “in civitate Cestra ecclesiam sancti Petri de - mercato et tres hospites.” - - [363] Ord. Vit. 671 B. “Rainaldus pictor, cognomento - Bartolomæus, variis coloribus arcum tumulumque depinxit.” - - [364] Ib. “Vitalis Angligena satis ab Ernaldo rogatus - epitaphium elegiacis versibus hoc modo edidit.” - - [365] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 490. - - [366] Ord. Vit. 672 A; - “Eripe tartareis Robertum, Christe, camœnis [caminis]; - Est nimis ipse reus; terge, precor, facinus;” - with four more lines to the same effect. - - [367] Ord. Vit. 671 C, D. - “Montem Snaudunum fluviumque citum Colvenum, - Pluribus armatis transiliit vicibus. - Præcipuam pulcro Blideno rege fugato - Prædam cum paucis cepit in insidiis. - Duxit captivum lorisque ligavit Hoëllum - Qui tunc Wallensi rex præerat manui. - Cepit Grithfridum regem vicitque Trehellum; - Sic micuit crebris militiæ titulis. - Attamen incaute Wallenses ausus adire, - Occidit æstivi principio Julii. - Prodidit Owenius, rex est gavisus Hovellus; - Facta vindicta monte sub Hormaheva. - Ense caput secuit Grithfridus, et in mare jecit, - _Soma_ quidem reliquum possidet hunc loculum.” - The exploits of Robert fully entitled him to Orderic’s pet - Greek word. “Colvenus” must be some corrupt form of _Conwy_. - - [368] We have seen that, in describing the rebellion of - 1088, the words of the Chronicler are, “þa riceste Frencisce - men þe weron innan þisan lande wolden swican heora hlaforde - þam cynge.” In 1101 we read simply, “þa sona þæeræfter - wurdon þa heafod men her on lande wiðerræden togeanes þam - cynge.” - - [369] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 308. - - [370] I refer to the passage which I have already quoted in - N. C. vol. v. p. 830, where William Rufus, just before his - death (Ord. Vit. 782 B), mocks at the English regard for - omens; “Num prosequi me ritum autumat Anglorum, qui pro - sternutatione et somnio vetularum dimittunt iter suum seu - negotium?” - - [371] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 393. - - [372] Stigand appears in the list of deaths which - accompanied that of William in the Chronicle, where one - would think that the persons spoken of died after him; but - in the less rhetorical account of the same year in Florence - they seem to have died before him. The Life of Lanfranc at - the end of the Chronicles records the consecrations and - benediction of all the three prelates with whom we are - concerned, Geoffrey, Guy, and John, in 1088; “Cantuariæ, in - sede metropoli, examinavit atque sacravit.” Cf. Gervase, X - Scriptt. 1654. - - [373] See Stephens’ Memorials of Chichester, p. 47. - - [374] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 459. - - [375] Will. Malms. Gest. Pont. 195 draws a curious picture - of him; “Erat medicus probatissimus, non scientia sed usu, - ut fama, nescio an vera, dispersit. Litteratorum contubernio - gaudens, ut eorum societate aliquid sibi laudis ascisceret; - salsioris tamen in obloquentes dicacitatis quam gradus ejus - interesse deberet.” He had just before described him as - “natione Turonicus, professione medicus, qui non minimum - quæstum illo conflaverat artificio.” The local writer in the - Historiola (21) calls him “vir prudens et providus.” - - [376] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 417. - - [377] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 411. - - [378] See Appendix F. - - [379] See above, p. 41. - - [380] Will. Malms. Gest. Pont. 196. “Cessit Andreas Simoni, - frater fratri, minor majori.” Yet before the west front of - the church of Wells there can be no doubt who was there - looked on as the very chiefest apostle. - - [381] See Appendix F. - - [382] See Appendix F. - - [383] Will. Malms. 195. “Sepultus est in ecclesia sancti - Petri, quam a fundamentis erexerat, magno et elaborato - parietum ambitu.” - - [384] The like usage is still more remarkable at Durham and - Carlisle, churches which never had an abbot distinct from - the bishop. At Carlisle the “abbey” seems to mean the - monastic precinct rather than the church itself. - - [385] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 409. The story is told in the - Winchester Appendix to the Chronicles. - - [386] Chron. Wint. App. 1089. “Post ejus [Lanfranci] obitum, - monachi sancti Augustini, præfato abbati suo Widoni palam - resistentes, cives Cantuariæ contra eum concitaverunt, qui - illum armata manu in sua domo interimere temptaverunt. Cujus - familia cum resisteret, pluribus utrimque vulneratis et - quibusdam interfectis, vix abbas inter manus illorum illæsus - evasit, et ad matrem ecclesiam, quærendo auxilium, - _Cantuariam_, _fugit_.” This last odd expression must be - owing to the fact that Saint Augustine’s stood outside the - walls. - - [387] Chron. Wint. App. “Coram populo subire disciplinam, - quia palam peccaverant, ii qui advenerant, decreverunt; sed - prior et monachi ecclesiæ Christi, pietate moti, - restiterunt; ne, si palam punirentur, infames deinceps - fierent, sicque eorum vita ac servitus contemneretur. Igitur - concessum est ut in ecclesia fieret, ubi non populus, sed - soli ad hoc electi admitterentur.” - - Thierry, who of course colours the whole story after his - fashion, becomes (ii. 140) not a little amusing at this - point. The flogging was done by two monks of Christ Church, - “Wido et Normannus.” If one stopped to think of matters of - nationality at such a moment, we might admire the - impartiality of the Norman bishops in entrusting the painful - duty to a monk of each nation, somewhat on the principle of - a mixed jury. For no one can doubt that Normannus, - _Northman_, was as good an Englishman as Northman the son of - Earl Leofwine and other English bearers of that name. - Thierry, on the other hand, tells us that the whipping was - done by “deux religieux étrangers, appelés Guy et Le - Normand.” He seemingly mistook the Christian name - “Normannus” for the modern surname “Lenormand,” and he - forgot that this last could be borne only by one whose - forefathers had moved from Normandy to some other - French-speaking land. - - [388] Chron. Wint. App. - - [389] Ib. See N. C. vol. iv. p. 410. - - [390] See Lanfranc, Ep. 67 (i. 80, ed. Giles); N. C. vol. - iv. p. 439. - - [391] Chron. Petrib. 1089. “On þisum geare se arwurða muneca - feder and frouer Landfranc arcebisceop gewat of þissum life, - ac we hopiað þæt he ferde to þæt heofanlice rice.” - - [392] The exact date comes from his Life, 52 (i. 312, ed. - Giles); “anno archiepiscopatus xix, v. calendas Junii diem - clausit extremum.” The Latin Chronicler gives us the exact - measure of his primacy; “In sede pontificali sedit annis - decem et octo, mensibus ix. duobus diebus.” The Life gives - us his epitaph, which begins; - “Hic tumulus claudit quem nulla sub orbe Latino - Gens ignoravit.” - See N. C. vol. ii. p. 636. - - [393] Vita Lanfranci, 52 (i. 312, ed. Giles). “Cum immineret - dies ipsius dedicationis, sicut mos est, omnia corpora de - ecclesia elata fuerunt. Tunc quidam frater, sive - curiositate, seu quod magis credibile est, pro reliquiis - habendam de casula gloriosi Lanfranci abscidit particulam; - de qua miri odoris suavitas efflagrabat. Ostendit aliis, qui - et ipsi senserunt odoris fragrantiam. Qua de re intellegi - datur, quod anima illius in magna suavitate requiescit; - cujus corporis indumenta tanto odore redolent.” - - [394] Vita Lanf. ib. “Dolor omnibus incomparabilis, et - luctus inconsolabilis suis.” - - [395] See the passages from William of Malmesbury quoted in - Appendix G. - - [396] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 14. “Cum posthac in regno fuisset - confirmatus, postposita pollicitatione sua, in contraria - dilapsus est. Super quo cum a Lanfranco modeste - redargueretur, et ei sponsio fidei non servatæ opponeretur, - furore succensus, ‘Quis,’ ait, ‘est qui cuncta quæ promittit - implere possit?’ Ex hoc igitur non rectis oculis super - pontificem intendere valebat, licet a nonnullis ad quæ illum - voluntas sua trahebat, ipsius respectu, eo superstite, - temperaverit.” - - [397] See above, p. 25. - - [398] Will. Malms. iv. 321. “Si quis desiderat scire - corporis ejus qualitatem, noverit eum fuisse corpore - quadrato, colore rufo, crine subflavo, fronte fenestrata, - oculo vario, quibusdam intermicantibus guttis distincto; - præcipuo robore, quamquam non magnæ staturæ, et ventre - paullo projectiore. Eloquentiæ nullæ, sed titubantia linguæ - notabilis, maxime cum ira succresceret.” Cf. the description - of Robert, N. C. vol. iv. p. 633. - - [399] So for instance Orderic (667 B); “Rex ergo Rufus - indigenarum hortatu promptior surrexit,” and William of - Malmesbury (iv. 306), “Quomodo adversarios rex Rufus - vicerit.” So again Wace (14496); - “Por devise del nom k’il out, - Ki à son pere ressemblout, - Kar chescun Willame aveit nom, - Out li filz poiz Ros à sornom.” - Presently (14513) he is “li reis Ros.” The use of the - nickname in this way was the more easy, because Rufus was a - real name which had been borne by other men, while nobody - had ever been called _Curthose_. See on the name Martel, N. - C. vol. ii. p. 280; vol. v. p. 569. - - I do not know that any one except Matthew Paris has turned - the Red King into a Red Dragon. He does so twice. Hist. - Angl. i. 97, “Rex Willelmus, qui a multis rubeus draco - cognominabatur;” and again, i. 167, “Rex Willelmus, draco - rubeus――sic enim eum appellabant propter tyrannidem.” - - [400] M. Gaston le Hardy, the apologist of Duke Robert (Le - Dernier des Ducs Normands, Caen, 1880, p. 41), refers to the - Monasticon and Orderic for the statement that William Rufus - was called “comes” in his father’s life-time. But I cannot - find the places. Has he got hold of any signature of Earl - William Fitz-Osbern? - - [401] Will. Malms. iv. 305. “Emensa pueritia, in militari - exercitio adolescentiam egit; equitari, jaculari, certare - cum primævis obsequio, cum æquævis officio. Jacturam - virtutis putare si forte in militari tumultu alter eo prior - arma corriperet, et nisi primus ex adverso provocaret, vel - provocantem dejiceret.” - - [402] Ib. “Genitori in omnibus obsequelam gerens, ejus se - oculis in bello ostentans, ejus lateri in pace obambulans. - Spe sensim scaturiente, jam successioni inhians, maximum - post abdicationem fratris majoris, cum et tirocinium minoris - nonnihil suspiceret.” - - [403] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 644. - - [404] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 629. - - [405] A great part of the description of Tiberius given by - Tacitus (Ann. vi. 51) applies to William Rufus; only we - cannot make out quite so many stages in the moral downfall - of the Red King. “Egregium vita famaque quoad privatus vel - in imperiis sub Augusto fuit; occultum et subdolum fingendis - virtutibus donec Germanicus ac Drusus superfuere: idem inter - bona malaque mixtus, incolumi matre.” These are words of - almost the same meaning as some of the expressions of Eadmer - and William of Malmesbury. See specially Eadmer, Hist. Nov. - 14; “Confestim [after Lanfranc’s death] rex foras expressit - quod in suo pectore, illo vivente, confotum habuit.” In any - case we may say, “postremo in scelera simul ac dedecora - prorupit, postquam, remoto pudore et metu, suo tantum - ingenio utebatur.” The change in William after Lanfranc’s - death is most strongly brought out by Matthew Paris, Hist. - Angl. i. 38. - - [406] This is well drawn out by Dean Church, Anselm, 156, - 157. - - [407] Ord. Vit. 680 A. “Tenacis memoriæ, et ardentis ad - bonum seu malum voluntatis erat.” Nearly to the same effect - are the words of the Hyde writer (299); “Erat quidem - operibus levis, sed verbis, ut aiunt, in tantum stabilis ut, - si cui bonum vel malum promisisset, certus inde satis - exsistere posset.” - - [408] See Appendix G. - - [409] See Historical Essays, Second Series, p. 343. - - [410] Will. Malms. iv. 312. “Erat in foris et in conventu - hominum tumido vultu erectus, minaci oculo adstantem - defigens, et affectato rigore feroci voce colloquentem - reverberans.” - - [411] Ib. “Intus et in triclinio cum privatis, omni lenitate - accommodus, multa joco transigebat; facetissimus quoque de - aliquo suo perperam facto cavillator, ut invidiam facti - dilueret et ad sales transferret.” - - [412] This tale is told by William of Malmesbury (iv. 313) - in illustration of the general character of Rufus, as “homo - qui nesciret cujuscumque rei effringere pretium vel æstimare - commercium.” He adds, “vestium suarum pretium in immensum - extolli volebat, dedignans si quis alleviasset.” In the - story which follows, the King’s speech to the chamberlain is - characteristically vigorous; “Indignabundus et fremens, - ‘Fili,’ ait, ‘meretricis, ex quo habet rex caligas tam - exilis pretii?’” We are not surprised to hear that the - officer got rich in the service of such a master; “Ita - cubicularius ex eo pretium vestimentorum ejus pro voluntate - numerabat, multa perinde suis utilitatibus nundinatus.” So - there is a story told of a rich patient who despised the - cheapness of Galen’s prescriptions, and asked him to order - something dearer. See Friedländer, Sittengeschichte Roms, i. - 339. - - [413] Take for instance Suger (Duchèsne, iv. 283); “Ille - opulentus et Anglorum thesaurorum profusor, mirabilisque - militum mercator et solidator.” - - [414] See Appendix G. - - [415] Will. Malms. iv. 313. “Cui pro libito venditor - distraheret mercimonium et miles pacisceretur stipendium.” - This comes in the passage quoted in the last page. - - [416] Ib. “Cum primis initiis regni metu turbarum milites - congregasset, nihil illis denegandum putabat, majora in - futurum pollicitus. Itaque quia paternos thesauros evacuaret - impigre, et modicæ ei pensiones numerabantur, jam substantia - defecerat.” - - [417] Ib. “Sed animus largiendi non deerat, quod usu donandi - pene in naturam verterat.” - - [418] See the extract from the Chronicle, below, p. 155. - - [419] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 621. - - [420] Will. Malms. iv. 314. “Cujuscumque conditionis - homunculus, cujuscumque criminis reus, statim ut de lucro - regis appellasset, audiebatur; ab ipsis latronis faucibus - resolvebatur laqueus si promisisset regale commodum.” - - [421] See Appendix G. - - [422] We shall see some instances as we go on, specially the - story told by William of Malmesbury, iv. 309. - - [423] William of Malmesbury, iv. 314. “A buccis miserorum - cibos abstrahentes.” - - [424] See Appendix G. - - [425] See N. C. vol. v. p. 159. The evil went on under Henry - until the passing of this statute, as we see by the terrible - complaint of the Chronicler in the year 1104; “æfre ealswa - se cyng for, full hergung þurh his hired uppon his wreccea - folc wæs, and þær onmang for oft bærneta and manslihtas.” - - [426] Chron. Petrib. 1100. “He wæs swiðe strang and reðe - ofer his land and his mænn and wið ealle his neahheburas, - and swiðe ondrædendlic, and þurh yfelra manna rædas þe him - æfre gecweme wæran and þurh his agene gitsunga, he æfre þas - leode mid here and mid ungylde tyrwigende wæs, forþan þe on - his dagan ælc riht afeoll and ælc unriht for Gode and for - worulde úp aras.” - - [427] See N. C. vol. i. pp. 436, 754. - - [428] Will. Malms. iv. 319. “Venationes, quas rex primo - indulserat, adeo prohibuit ut capitale esset supplicium - prendisse cervum.” Contrast this with his father’s law in N. - C. vol. iv. p. 621. - - [429] The story is told by Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 48. It is - brought in as an illustration of the impiety of Rufus rather - than of his cruelty. - - [430] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 48. “Quinquaginta circiter viri - quibus adhuc illis diebus ex antiqua Anglorum ingenuitate - divitiarum quædam vestigia arridere videbantur.” - - [431] Ib. “Negant illi; unde statim ad judicium rapti, - judicantur injectam calumniam examine igniti ferri a se - propulsare debere. Statuto itaque die præfixi pœnæ judicii - pariter subacti sunt, remota pietate et misericordia.” Yet, - unless there was some special circumstance of hardship which - is not recorded, this was only the old law of England kept - on by the Conqueror. (See N. C. vol. iv. p. 624; v. pp. 400, - 874.) That is, if the accuser was English, and the King’s - reeves and huntsmen were largely English. If the accuser was - French, the accused were entitled to a choice between the - ordeal and the wager of battle. Can Eadmer mean that this - choice was not allowed them? - - [432] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 48. “Cum principi esset relatum - condemnatos illos tertio judicii die simul omnes inustis - manibus apparuisse, stomachatus taliter fertur respondisse, - ‘Quid est hoc? Deus est justus judex? Pereat qui deinceps - hoc crediderit. Quare per hoc et hoc meo judicio amodo - respondebitur. Non Dei quod pro voto cujusque hinc inde - plicatur.’” - - [433] “Judicium” is the usual Domesday name. See N. C. vol. - v. p. 875. - - [434] Ord. Vit. 682 C. “Illi modestis vestiebantur - indumentis optimeque coaptatis ad sui mensuram corporis. Et - erant habiles ad equitandum et currendum et ad omne opus - quod ratio suggerebat agendum.” - - [435] Ib. “Olim pœnitentes et capti et peregrini usualiter - intonsi erant, longasque barbas gestabant, judicioque tali - pœnitentiam, seu captionem, vel peregrinationem spectantibus - prætendebant.” - - [436] Ib. “Post obitum Gregorii papæ et Guillelmi Nothi - aliorumque principum religiosorum, in occiduis partibus pene - totus abolitus est honestus patrum mos antiquorum.” Yet, - unless we go as far north as the sainted Cnut of Denmark, it - is not easy to find any specially devout princes who died - about the same time as Gregory and William. - - [437] See Appendix G. - - [438] See Appendix G. - - [439] Take, above all, the story of Bishop Serlo’s most - practical sermon in Orderic, 815, 816. See N. C. vol. v. p. - 844, and Appendix G. - - [440] Ord. Vit. 682 B. “Nocte comessationibus et - potationibus vanisque confabulationibus, aleis et tesseris - aliisque ludicris vacabant; die vero dormiebant.” - - [441] See Appendix G. - - [442] See N. C. vol. v. p. 818. In some manuscripts of - William of Malmesbury (iv. 317) he says distinctly, “Judæi - qui Lundoniæ habitabant, quos pater a Rothomago illuc - traduxerat.” - - [443] The Jews meet us at every turn in the twelfth and - thirteenth centuries. At Lincoln and Saint Eadmundsbury they - have left their works. Those of Winchester――their - Jerusalem――shared in the perfection which marked all classes - of men in that city (see Ric. Div. c. 82). In the genuine - “Annals of an English Abbey” (Gest. Abb. i. 193) we may see - something of the “superbia magna et jactantia” which the Jew - Aaron (of Lincoln) displayed at Saint Alban’s. - - [444] As in the great massacre at York in 1189. Or the King - himself might, like John, do as he would with his own - chattels. - - [445] See Eadmer, Vit. Ans. iii. 5. We shall come across - them again. - - [446] Will. Malms. iv. 317. “Apud Londoniam contra episcopos - nostros in certamen animati [Judæi], quia ille ludibundus, - credo, dixisset quod, si vicissent Christianos apertis - argumentationibus confutatos, in eorum sectam transiret. - Magno igitur timore episcoporum et clericorum res acta est, - pia sollicitudine fidei Christianæ timentium.” - - [447] Ib. “De hoc quidem certamine nihil Judæi præter - confusionem retulerunt, quamvis multotiens jactarint se non - oratione sed factione superatos.” - - [448] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. p. 47. “Ferebant … ad eum - convenire, conquerentes nonnullos ex suis, spreto Judaismo, - Christianos tune noviter factos fuisse, atque rogantes ut, - sumpto pretio, illos, rejecto Christianismo, ad Judaismum - redire compelleret. Adquiescit ille, et, suscepto pretio - apostasiæ, jubet ex Judæis ipsis adduci ad se. Quid plura? - Plures ex illis minis et terroribus fractos, abnegato - Christo, pristinum errorem suscipere fecit.” Eadmer brings - in this story, without pledging himself to its truth, as one - which he, when in Italy, heard from those who came from - Rouen. “Sicut illa accepimus, simpliciter ponam, non - adstruens vera an secus exstiterint, an non. Ferebant igitur - hi qui veniebant,” &c. It is the same story as that which - William of Malmesbury tells, iv. 317; “Insolentiæ in Deum - Judæi suo tempore dedere indicium; semel apud Rothomagum, ut - quosdam ab errore suo refugas ad Judaismum revocarent, - muneribus inflectere conati.” - - [449] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. p. 47. The protomartyr pleads his - own example; “Uno dierum per viam forte eunti apparuit alter - juvenis, vultu et veste decorus, qui interrogatus unde vel - quis esset, dixit se jam olim ex Judæo Christianum effectum, - Stephanum protomartyrem esse.” - - [450] Ib. “Æstuans quonam modo suis sacris filium posset - restituere, didicit quemadmodum Willielmus rex Anglorum - nonnullos hujusmodi, pecuniæ gratis, nuper Judaismo - reddiderit.” This way of speaking might almost make us think - that the Jew was not living in William’s dominions; yet the - whole tenor of the story, which seems to be laid at Rouen, - looks otherwise. One phrase is odd; “paternis rogat legibus - _imperiali sanctione_ restitui.” William Rufus, as we shall - see, did not forget his imperial as well as his royal - dignity, but Rouen was an odd place in which to show himself - in the imperial character. - - [451] Ib. “Tacet ille ad rogata, nondum audiens quamobrem - tali negotio sese deberet medium facere.” - - [452] Ib. “Advertit Judæus mysterium cur suis precibus non - responderet, et e vestigio sexaginta marcas argenti se illi - daturum, si Judaismo restitueret filium suum, pollicetur.” - This almost looks as if the Jew thought at first that the - King, out of zeal for the Hebrew cause, would do the job for - him for nothing. - - [453] Eadmer, u. s. “Tecum jocarer, stercoris fili? Recede - potius et præceptum meum velocius imple, alioquin per vultum - de Luca faciam tibi oculos erui.” On the oath, see Appendix - G. - - [454] Ib. “Confusus princeps in istis, contumeliis affectum - juvenem cum dedecore jussit suis conspectibus eliminari.” - - [455] Ib. “Fili mortis et pabulum externæ perditionis, non - sufficit tibi damnatio tua, nisi et me tecum præcipites in - eam? Ego vero cui jam Christus patefactus est absit ut te - unquam pro patre agnoscam, quia pater tuus diabolus est.” - The reference must be to St. John viii. 44; but the pedigree - was a dangerous one for a presumptive grandson to meddle - with. - - [456] Ib. “Ecce feci quod rogasti, redde quod promisisti.” - - [457] Eadmer, u. s. “Filius meus jam nunc et in Christi - confessione constantior et mihi est solito factus infestior; - et dicis”――mark the scriptural turn――“‘Feci quod petisti, - redde quod promisisti?’ Immo quod cœpisti primo perfice, et - tunc demum de pollicitis age. Sic enim convenit inter nos.” - - [458] Ib. “Feci quantum potui; verum, quamvis non - proficerim, minime tamen feram me sine fructu laborasse.” - - [459] Ib. 54. “Quod Deus nunquam eum bonum habiturus esset - pro malo quod sibi inferret.” The words are spoken to Bishop - Gundulf. Eadmer comments; “In cunctis erat fortunatus, ac si - verbis ejus hoc modo respondit Deus, ‘Si te pro malo, ut - dicis, numquam bonum habebo, probabo an saltem pro bono - possim te bonum habere, et ideo in omni quod tu bonum - æstimas velle tuum adimplebo.’” - - [460] Eadmer, 48. “Ad hoc quoque lapsus est ut Dei judicio - incredulus fieret, injustitiæque illud arguens, Deum aut - facta hominum ignorare, aut æquitatis ea lance nolle pensare - adstrueret.” Then follows the story of the deer-stealers - which I have told in p. 155. Mark Eadmer’s firm belief in - the ordeal, which had not yet been condemned by the Church. - - [461] Ib. 47. “Ferebatur eum in tantam mentis elationem - corruisse ut nequaquam patienter audire valeret, si quivis - ullum negotium quod vel a se vel ex suo præcepto foret - agendum, poneret sub conditione voluntatis Dei fieri. Sed - quæque acta simul et agenda suæ soli industriæ ac - fortitudini volebat adscribi.” We have his like in Kapaneus, - Æsch. Sept. c. Theb. 409; - θεοῦ τε γὰρ θέλοντος ἐκπέρσειν πόλιν - καὶ μὴ θέλοντος φησὶν, οὐδὲ τὴν Διὸς - ἔριν πέδῳ σκήψασαν ἐκποδὼν σχέθειν. - [theou te gar thelontos ekpersein polin - kai mê thelontos phêsin, oude tên Dios - erin pedô skêpsasan ekpodôn schethein.] - - [462] Ib. “Quæ mentis elatio ita excrevit in eo ut, - quemadmodum dicebatur, crederet et publica voce assereret - nullum sanctorum cuiquam apud Deum posse prodesse, et ideo - nec se velle, nec aliquem sapientem debere, beatum Petrum - seu quemlibet alium quo se juvaret interpellare.” - - [463] Joinville, p. 217 ed. Michel; “Le roy ama tant Dieu et - sa douce mère que touz ceulz que il pooit atteindre qui - disoient de Dieu ne de sa mère chose déshoneste ne vilein - serement, que il les fesoit punir griefment.” He goes on to - tell how, like Saint Wulfstan (see N. C. vol. iv. p. 386) - but unlike Saint Eadward (ib. ii. p. 26), he never swore nor - mentioned the devil. - - [464] Giraldus (de Inst. Prin. c. iii. 11) gives a specimen - of his blasphemies, and adds, “quibus ne memoriæ refricatio - facinus atque blasphemiam posteris ad mentem revocet, - supersedere potius quam paginam nostram commaculare dignum - duximus.” - - [465] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 54. “In tantum ex successibus suis - profecit ut, sicut hi qui factis ejus die noctuque præsentes - exstiterunt attestantur, numquam vel de lecto surgeret vel - in lecto se collocaret, quin seipsum aut collocante aut - surgente semper deterior esset.” - - [466] See Appendix G. - - [467] See Appendix G. - - [468] See Appendix G. - - [469] See N. C. vol. i. p. 255. - - [470] See Appendix H. - - [471] Twice under the same year 1091 the Chronicler adds to - the record of a treaty concluded by Rufus that it “litle - hwile stode.” - - [472] See above, p. 143. - - [473] I refer to the story of the Angevin knights at Ballon, - told by Orderic (772 C, D). We shall come to it in a later - chapter. - - [474] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 220. - - [475] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 438. - - [476] This was at the siege of Padua in 1509. “Maximilien - fit proposer à La Palisse de faire mettre pied à terre à sa - gendarmerie pour monter à l’assaut avec les landsknechts. - Mais d’après le conseil de Bayard, La Palisse répondit que - la gendarmerie française était toute composée de - gentilshommes, et qu’il ne serait pas convenable de la faire - combattre pêle-mêle avec les fantassins allemands, qui - étaient roturiers.” Sismondi, Rép. Ital. xiv. 26. - - [477] The story of the massacre of Limoges, the most truly - chivalrous deed ever done, is well known. It will be found - in Froissart, i. 289 (vol. i. p. 401, ed. Sauvage). - - [478] Hallam, who thoroughly understood Henry the Eighth, - adds in a note (Const. Hist. i. 36); “After all, Henry was - every whit as good a king and man as Francis I, whom there - are still some, on the other side of the channel, servile - enough to extol; not in the least more tyrannical and - sanguinary, and of better faith towards his neighbours.” The - famous letter of Francis about all being lost except honour - is now disbelieved, but it is characteristic all the same. I - have said something about this in the Fortnightly Review, - December, 1876. - - It is singular enough that in 1546 some reader of the - “Normanniæ Nova Chronica,” after the entries about the - misdeeds of William Rufus in 1098, bursts out (p. 9) into a - fierce invective against the vices and oppressions of - Francis the First, as far surpassing those of Rufus. If men - murmured in 1098, how much more reason had they to murmur in - 1546. - - [479] There is nothing special to note as to the authorities - for this chapter, except that we now begin to make some - little use of the Lives of the Bishops of Le Mans in - Mabillon’s Vetera Analecta, of which we shall have to make - much larger use in a later chapter. - - Since this chapter was written and partly printed, I have - come across a book called “Le Dernier des Ducs Normands. - Étude de Critique Historique sur Robert Courte-Heuse; par - Gaston le Hardy (Caen, 1880).” It is a gallant apology for - Duke Robert, who however, it seems, cannot be set up without - a cruel setting down both of Orderic and of King Henry. M. - le Hardy believes in the false Ingulf and seems to be an - enemy to Italian freedom. He has worked with care at his - authorities, and I have to thank him for a few references; - but his style of criticism is odd. In p. 47 he argues - against the last speech of the Conqueror in Orderic――a - speech very open to argument against it on other - grounds――because William is there made to confess that he - had no right to the English crown. This at least cannot be. - “Comment croire que le Conquérant, dont les droits légitimes - à la couronne d’Angleterre étaient au moins fondés sur des - apparences très-respectables, _puisqu’elles décidèrent le - Pape à se prononcer en sa faveur_, se soit appliqué à les - désavouer, et à démentir ainsi toute sa vie.” I think more - highly both of the intellect and of the conscience of - William the Great. I can conceive his being led to repent of - his sins, even though the Pope told him that they were no - sins. M. le Hardy, like so many of his countrymen, seems - unable to understand any English matter, and he seems never - to have looked at any English or German book. - - I let my estimate of Robert stay where it was. His character - is best summed up in the portrait drawn by William of - Malmesbury at the end of his fourth book; - - “Patria lingua facundus ut sit jocundior nullus; in aliis - consiliosus ut nihil excellentius; militiæ peritus ut si - quis unquam; pro mollitie tamen animi nunquam regendæ - reipublicæ idoneus judicatus.” - - I think I have throughout done justice to Robert’s military - skill――it was more than mere daring――and to his gifts as a - counsellor of others. - - [480] Chron. Petrib. 1089. “Swilc eac gewarð ofer eall - Engleland mycel eorðstyrunge, on þone dæg iii. Id. Aug.” - Will. Malms. iv. 322. “Secundo anno regni ejus terræ motus - ingens totam Angliam exterruit tertio idus Augusti, horrendo - miraculo, ut ædificia omnia eminus resilirent, et mox - pristino more residerent.” Some annals, as those of Plympton - (Liebermann, 26), directly connect the events. “Obiit - Lanfrancus archiepiscopus, et terra mota est.” - - [481] Chron. u. s. “And wæs swiðe lætsum gear on corne and - on ælces cynnes wæstmum, swa þæt manig man ræpon heora corn - onbuton Martines mæssan and gyt lator.” “Vix ad festum - sancti Andreæ,” says William of Malmesbury. - - [482] Chron. Petrib. 1090. “And betwyx þisum þingum þis land - wæs swiðe fordón on unlaga gelde and on oðre manige - ungelimpe.” - - [483] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 558, 638. - - [484] Ib. p. 493. - - [485] Ord. Vit. 708 B. He does not say distinctly at what - stage he means. Geoffrey Gaimar (Chron. Angl. Norm. i. 35) - has an elaborate picture of Robert at his greatest; - “Li quens Robert, cil de Belesme, - Mil chevalers out en son esme; - En Engleterre out treis contez, - Quens de Pontif estait clamez, - Si ert conte de Leneimeis, - D’Esparlon e de Sessuneis; - Sue estait Argenton, Seis, - Roche-Mabilie estait en sa pœs. - En Rom out rues assez. - Il esteit quen de sis contez; - Ço ert le meillur chevaler - Ke l’em séust pur querreier. - Cil vint à son seignur le rei, - Mil chevalers menat od sei.” - He then goes on to mention his brothers. (See above, p. 37.) - Many of the places on this list will come in our story. - “Rom,” it is hardly needful to say, is only the capital of - Normandy, not of the world. But what are the three counties - in England? There is Shropshire, and most likely Sussex. - What is the third? Yorkshire, on the strength of Tickhill? - But Robert had no earldom there. - - [486] Ord. Vit. 675 D. - - [487] Hen. Hunt. De Cont. Mund. 11. “Gens ipsis dæmonibus - horrenda.” - - [488] See N. C. vol. i. p. 468. The Archdeacon of Huntingdon - himself, with a slight contempt of sex and species, calls - him “Pluto, Megæra, Cerberus, vel si aliquid horrendi scribi - potest.” He speaks of the proverb, “Mirabilia Roberti de - Belesme.” - - [489] See his two pictures in Orderic, 675 C, D, and 707 C, - D. In his character of engineer we shall meet him at Gisors. - See 766 B. - - [490] Ord. Vit. 707 D. “Magis affectabat supplicia miseris - inferre quam per redemptionem captivorum pecunias augere.” - So Hen. Hunt. u. s. Yet, as some of his captives escaped, he - lost the ransom for nothing. - - [491] Ib. “Homines privatione oculorum et amputatione pedum - manuumve deformare parvipendebat, sed inauditorum - commeditatione suppliciorum in torquendis miseris more - Siculi Phalaris tripudiabat. Quos in carcere pro reatu - aliquo stringebat, Nerone seu Decio vel Diocletiano sævior, - indicibiliter cruciabat, et inde jocos cum parasitis suis et - cachinnos jactabundus exercebat. Tormentorum quæ vinctis - inferebat delectatione gloriabatur, hominumque detractione - pro pœnarum nimietate crudelis lætabatur.” The special - detail of the impaling comes from Henry of Huntingdon, who - says also, “Erat ei cædes horribilis hominum cibus jucundus - animæ.” - - [492] Will. Malms. v. 398. “Simulationis et argutiarum - plenus, frontis sereno et sermonum affabilitate credulos - decipiens, gnaros autem malitiæ exterritans, ut nullum esset - majus futuræ calamitatis indicium quam prætensæ - affabilitatis eloquium.” Something of the same kind was said - of King Henry himself. See N. C. vol. v. p. 841. - - [493] Ord. Vit. 708 B. She at last escaped to Countess Adela - at Chartres, and got to her own land of Ponthieu. - - [494] The story is told with the difference spoken of in the - text by Henry of Huntingdon (de Cont. Mundi, 11) and by - William of Malmesbury (v. 398). Henry says only, “Filioli - sui oculos sub chlamide positi quasi ludens pollicibus - extraxit.” William supplies a kind of motive; “Puerulum ex - baptismo filiolum, quem in obsidatum acceperat, pro modico - delicto patris excæcarit, lumina miselli unguibus nefandis - abrumpens.” That is, the Archdeacon makes the ugly story - still uglier, just as in the case of the children of - Juliana. See N. C. vol. v. pp. 157, 841. - - [495] Ord. Vit. 708 A. “Ob insolentiam et cupiditatem - plurima contra collimitaneos prælia cœpit; sed sæpe victus - cum damno et dedecore aufugit.” - - [496] See further on in this chapter. - - [497] Ord. Vit. 675 D. - - [498] See Ord. Vit. 707 D for the Bishop; ib. 678 A and - Will. Malms. Gest. Pont. 127 for the Abbot. With the - bishopric there was a question of the right of advowson; - “Episcopium contra jus et fas comprimebat, et Guillelmo - Belesmensi avo ejus a Ricardo duce datum asserebat.” Cf. on - the bishopric of Le Mans, N. C. vol. iii. p. 194. From the - Abbot too he demanded an oath of allegiance, “de sacramento - et homagio abbatem exagitare.” This was in Henry’s time. - - [499] Ord. Vit. 668 C. “Robertus Belesmensis qui patri tuo - fuit valde dilectus, et multis honoribus olim ab ipso - promotus.” See above, p. 84. - - [500] Hen. Hunt. u. s. “Quem tantopere fama coluerat dum - viveret, in carcere utrum viveret vel obisset, nescivit, - diemque mortis ejus obmutescens ignoravit.” - - [501] Will. Malms. v. 407. “Homo antiquæ simplicitatis et - fidei, qui crebro a Willelmo primo invitatus ut Angliam - veniret, largis ad voluntatem possessionibus munerandus, - supersedit, pronuncians patrum suorum hæreditatem se velle - fovere, non transmarinas et indebitas possessiones vel - appetere vel invadere.” (Cf. N. C. vol. iv. p. 448.) We have - heard of him already; N. C. vol. ii. p. 201; iii. 288, 380, - 386; iv. 82, 192, 475, 645. - - [502] See the story in p. 186. - - [503] Will. Malms. u. s.; Will. Pict. 134; Will. Gem. vii. - 4; Ord. Vit. 709 A. - - [504] This Norman Beaumont must be distinguished from the - French and Cenomannian Beaumonts which we shall meet with, - just as there is a Norman, a French, and a Cenomannian - Montfort. - - [505] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 487. - - [506] Will. Malms. v. 407. “Cum superiorum regum tempore, - spe sensim pullulante, in gloriam procederet, hujus - [Henrici] ætate summo provectu effloruit, habebaturque ejus - consilium quasi quis divinum consuluisset sacrarium.” So - Hen. Hunt. de Cont. Mund. 7. “Fuit Robertus consul de - Mellend in rebus secularibus sapientissimus omnium hinc - usque in Jerusalem degentium.” - - [507] We shall see this presently in the story of Helias. - See Ord. Vit. 773 B. - - [508] See N. C. vol. v. p. 828. - - [509] Hen. Hunt. u. s. “Fuit scientia clarus, eloquio - blandus, astutia perspicax, providentia sagax, ingenio - versipellis, prudentia insuperabilis, consilio profundus, - sapientia magnus.” A goodly string of synonyms. William of - Malmesbury (u. s.) gives more details. He was “suasor - concordiæ, dissuasor discordiæ,” “in placitis propugnator - justitiæ, in guerris provisor victoriæ, dominum regem ad - severitatem legum custodiendam exacuens, ipse non eas - sequens sed proponens, expers in regem perfidiæ, in ceteros - ejus persecutor.” He was “ingentis in Anglia momenti, ut - inveteratum vestiendi vel comedendi exemplo suo inverteret - morem.” He brought in the “consuetudo semel prandendi,” - contrary to the custom of Harthacnut. - - [510] We shall see him in both characters as we go on. See - Appendix Y. He stood firmly by the King in the matter of - investiture. See Will. Malms. v. 417. - - [511] Will. Malms. v. 406. This was when Pope Calixtus came - into Normandy in 1110. See N. C. vol. v. p. 191. - - [512] See N. C. vol. v. pp. 197, 207, 288. - - [513] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 192. - - [514] I do not quite understand the story in Henry of - Huntingdon (8) about another earl depriving Robert of his - wife or bride; “Contigit quemdam alium consulem sponsam ei - tam factione quam dolosis viribus arripuisse. Unde in - senectute sua mente turbatus et angaria obnubilatus, in - tenebras mœroris incidit, nec usque ad mortem se lætum vel - hilarem sensit.” Earl Robert’s widow, Elizabeth or Isabel of - Crépy or Vermandois, was presently married again to the - younger Earl William of Warren. (See Ord. Vit. 686 B, 723 D, - 805 D; Will. Gem. viii. 40, 41.) Was there anything - irregular or scandalous about the marriage? Count Robert - married her in 1096, so that, as he was distinctly old at - his death in 1118, she must have been far from young. His - children therefore were children of his advanced life, which - lessens the difficulty about the child whom his daughter - Isabel is said to have borne to King Henry late in his - reign. (Will. Gem. viii. 29; cf. 37; and see N. C. vol. v. - p. 844.) - - [515] Hen. Hunt. u. s. “Ut terras quas vi vel arte multis - abstulerat, pœnitens redderet, et erratum lacrimis lavaret.” - Would this extend to English grants from the Conqueror? One - might almost suspect that his father thought so. - - [516] Ib. “Filiis omnia tradam; ipsi pro salute defuncti - misericorditer agant.” - - [517] Ib. “Filii ejus magis injuste congregata injuste - studuerunt augere quam aliquid pro salute paterna - distribuere.” - - [518] Ord. Vit. 659 B. “Indubitanter scio quod vere misera - erit regio quæ subjecta fuerit ejus dominio. Superbus enim - est et insipiens nebulo, trucique diu plectendus - infortunio.” See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 705, 854. The words must - of course take their share of the doubts which can hardly - fail to attach to the long speech of which they form a part; - but they are more likely than most parts of it to have been - preserved by a trustworthy tradition. On the speech see - Church, Anselm, 147. - - [519] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 191. - - [520] There is more than one passage in Orderic setting - forth the wretched state of things in Normandy under Robert. - See 664 B; 672 B, C; 675 A, B; 677 B. In the first passage - he gives a personal description, not unlike that quoted in - N. C. vol. iv. p. 633; “Omnes ducem Robertum mollem esse - desidemque cognoscebant, et idcirco facinorosi eum - despiciebant et pro libitu suo dolosas factiones agitabant. - Erat quippe idem dux audax et validus, multaque laude - dignus, eloquio facundus, sed in regimine sui suorumque - inconsideratus, in erogando prodigus, in promittendo - diffusus, _ad mentiendum levis et incautus_, misericors - supplicibus, ad justitiam super iniquo faciendam mollis et - mansuetus, in definitione mutabilis, in conversatione - omnibus nimis blandus et tractabilis, ideoque perversis et - insipientibus despicabilis. Corpore autem brevis et grossus, - ideoque _Brevis-ocrea_ a patre est cognominatus.” Cf. Roman - de Rou, 14470. - - The words about Robert’s tendency to falsehood would seem to - imply, not so much deliberate lying as that kind of - carelessness of truth which is quite of a piece with the - rest of his character. - - On the technical use of the word _justice_, see N. C. - vol. v. pp. 157, 253, 320, 520; cf. ii. 33, 40, 173. - - [521] Ord. Vit. 672 B. “Provincia tota erat dissoluta, et - prædones catervatim discurrebant per vicos et per rura, - nimiumque super inermes debacchabatur latrunculorum caterva. - Robertus dux nullam super malefactores exercebat - disciplinam, et grassatores per octo annos sub molli - principe super imbecillem populum suam agitabant furiam.” - Perhaps the most striking character of Robert is that which - is given of him by one who had studied him in two parts of - the world, Ralph of Caen in his Gesta Tancredi, c. xv. - (Muratori, v. 291). The virtues of Robert were “pietas”――in - the sense of _pity_――and “largitas.” But he carried both - virtues so far that they became vices. “Pietas largitasque - valde fuissent mirabiles; sed quia in neutra modum tenuit, - in utraque erravit.” He goes on to describe Robert at - greater length; “Siquidem misericordiam ejus immisericordem - sensit Normannia, dum eo consule per impunitatem rapinarum - nec homini parceret nec Deo licentia raptorum. Nam sicariis - manibus, latronum gutturi, mœchorum caudæ salaci, eamdem - quam suis se reverentiam debere consul arbitrabatur. - Quapropter nullus ad eum vinctus in lacrimis trahebatur, - quin solutus mutuas ab eo lacrimas continuo impetraret. - Ideo, ut dixi, nullis sceleribus frænum, immo omnibus - additum calcar ea tempestate Normannia querebatur.” Of - Robert’s bounty he goes on to say that he would give any sum - for a hawk or a dog; “Hujus autem pietatis sororculam eam - fuisse patet largitatem, quæ accipitrem, sive canem argenti - summa quantalibet comparabat.” - - [522] Orderic is plain-spoken enough on this head in 672 B. - - [523] Ib. “Episcopi ex auctoritate Dei exleges - anathematizabant. Theologi _prolatis sermonibus_ Dei reos - admonebant. Sed his omnibus tumor et cupiditas cum - satellitibus suis immoderate resistebant.” - - [524] See N. C. vol. v. p. 46. Cf. vol. iv. p. 688. - - [525] Orderic (664 B) records Robert’s doings at Alençon and - Bellême, and adds, “Hoc quoque fecit Bellismæ, et omnibus - aliis castellis suis, et non solum suis, sed et in vicinorum - suorum, quos sibi pares dedignabatur habere, municipiis, quæ - aut intromissis clientibus sibi subjugavit, aut penitus, ne - sibi aliquando resistere possent, destruxit.” - - [526] Ib. He adds a reflexion in his character of - “Angligena.” “Sic proceres Neustriæ de munitionibus suis - omnes regis custodes expulerunt, patriamque divitiis - opulentam propriis viribus vicissim exspoliaverunt. Opes - itaque quas Anglis aliisque gentibus violenter rapuerunt, - merito latrociniis et rapinis perdiderunt.” - - [527] Ord. Vit. 672 C. “Adulterina passim municipia - condebantur, et ibidem filii latronum ceu catuli luporum ad - dilacerandas bidentes nutriebantur.” Our Chronicler was yet - more vigorous when he peopled the castles with devils and - evil men, A. D. 1135. The “adulterina municipia” are the - castles built without the Duke’s licence. See N. C. vol. ii. - p. 193. For the German laws on the same subject, see Maurer, - Einleitung, p. 24. M. le Hardy (60) amusingly mistakes the - “municipia” for “quelques communes.” - - [528] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 537, 638. - - [529] Ord. Vit. 664 C. “Guillelmo de Britolio dedit - Ibericum, ubi arx quam Albereda proavia ejus fecit - fortissima est. Et Rogerio de Bellomonte, qui solebat - Ibericum jussu Guillelmi regis custodire, concessit - Brioniam, quod oppidum munitissimum et in corde terræ situm - est.” On Ivry, see N. C. vol. i. p. 258. See Will. Gem. - viii. 15, where the same story is told as by Orderic. On - Brionne, see N. C. vol. ii. pp. 196, 268, 624. - - [530] Ord. Vit. 664 C. “Cunctis placere studebat, cunctisque - quod petebant aut dabat aut promittebat vel concedebat. - Prodigus dominium patrum suorum quotidie imminuebat, - insipienter tribuens unicuique quod petebat, et ipse - pauperescebat, unde alios contra se roborabat.” - - [531] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 709. - - [532] The passages from Orderic which set forth Henry as the - heir of his mother have been discussed in N. C. vol. iv. p. - 854 (cf. pp. 320, 629), as also the expression of William of - Malmesbury (v. 392) which implies that the Conqueror - bequeathed Matilda’s lands to Henry, or directed that - Matilda’s earlier bequest should take effect. The same - writer also just before speaks (v. 391) of Henry, after his - father’s death, as “paterna benedictione et materna - hæreditate simul et multiplicibus thesauris [“gersuman - unateallendlice” in the Chronicle] nixus.” Wace also says - (14484), - “E Henris out des déniers asez - Ke sis peres li out donez, - Partie out del tresor son pere - E grant partie out de sa mere.” - - [533] Ord. Vit. 665 C. “Opes quas habebat militibus ubertim - distribuit, et tironum multitudinem pro spe et cupidine - munerum sibi connexuit. Deficiente ærario Henricum fratrem - suum, ut de thesauro sibi daret, requisivit. Quod ille - omnino facere noluit.” - - [534] N. C. vol. i. p. 170. - - [535] Ib. vol. i. p. 191. - - [536] Ib. vol. ii. p. 249. - - [537] The purchase is thus described by Orderic (ib.); - “Henricus duci tria millia librarum argenti erogavit, et ab - eo totum Constantinum pagum, quæ tertia Normanniæ pars est, - recepit. Sic Henricus Abrincas et Constantiam, Montemque - sancti Michaëlis in periculo maris, totumque fundum Hugonis - Cestrensis consulis, quod in Neustria possidebat, primitus - obtinuit.” This of course does not mean any disseisin of - Earl Hugh, but only the transfer of his homage from Robert - to Henry. For other versions of the transaction, see - Appendix I. - - [538] See N. C. vol. i. p. 302. - - [539] Ord. Vit. 665 C. “Constantiniensem provinciam bene - gubernavit, suamque juventutem laudabiliter exercuit.” He - was hardly twenty years old. So 689 C; “Constantinienses - Henricus clito strenue regebat.” - - [540] He is “Henricus clito [Ætheling], Constantiniensis - comes” in Orderic, 672 D; “comes Henricus” in Will. Gem. - viii. 3. - - [541] Ord. Vit. 672 D. “In Angliam transfretavit et a fratre - suo terram matris suæ requisivit.” The date is fixed by the - words “postquam certus rumor de Rofensis [oppidi] deditione - citra mare personuit.” - - [542] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 164, 759. - - [543] Ord. Vit. 672 D. “Rex Guillelmus benigniter eum, ut - decuit fratrem, suscepit, et quod poterat fraterne - concessit. Deinde, peractis pro quibus ierat, in autumno - regi valefecit.” An actual possession of something seems - implied in the words of Orderic, 689 C, “Regi Angliæ hostis - erat pro terra matris suæ, qua rex eumdem in Anglia - dissaisiverat, et Roberto Haimonis filio dederat.” - - [544] See Appendix GG. - - [545] See N. C. vol. v. p. 853; Ord. Vit. 681 A. - - [546] This flight is Orderic’s own. In 673 A we have, - “Baiocensis Odo, velut ignivolus draco projectus in terram.” - - [547] Ib. 672 D, “Baiocensis tyrannus;” 673 A, “pessimus - præsul Odo.” This last phrase comes at the beginning of - Odo’s speech in the Duke’s council; at the end of it our - historian has waxed milder, and tells us (674 A) how - “exhortatoriam antistitis allocutionem omnes qui aderant - laudaverunt.” - - [548] Ord. Vit. 673 A. “Variis seditionibus commovebat - Normanniam, ut sic de aliquo modo nepoti suo, a quo turpiter - expulsus fuerat, machinaretur injuriam.” - - [549] Orderic here (672 D) speaks only of “quidam malevoli - discordiæ satores … falsa veris immiscentes.” But surely the - Bishop was at their head. - - [550] I think we may accept this circumstantial account of - Orderic. For other versions, see Appendix I. - - [551] Ord. Vit. 672 D. “Rogerius comes Scrobesburiæ, ut - Robertum filium suum captum audivit, accepta a rege - licentia, festinus in Neustriam venit, et omnia castella sua - militari manu contra ducem munivit.” - - [552] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 297. - - [553] Ord. Vit. 673 A. “Ipsum nempe dux multum metuebat, et - quibusdam consiliis ejus adquiescebat, quædam vero flocci - pendebat.” - - [554] At least there were others besides the Duke to hear - and to cheer. See p. 198, note 4. - - [555] Ord. Vit. 673 B. “Reminiscere patrum et proavorum, - quorum magnanimitatem et virtutem pertimuit bellicosa gens - Francorum.” It is curious to see how often Norman patriotism - falls back on the memory of the wars with France rather than - on the conquest of England. So it is in the speech of Walter - of Espec before the battle of the Standard. See N. C. vol. - v. p. 832. - - [556] Ib. 673 D. “Hoc nimirum horrenda mors eorum - attestatur, quorum nullus communi et usitato fine, ut cæteri - homines, defecisse invenitur.” - - [557] See Ord. Vit. 708 B. - - [558] See above, p. 193. - - [559] The only entry which the Chronicler has on Rufus’ wars - in Maine is the short one in 1099 (more was said about the - expedition of the elder William in 1063), but some parts of - the Norman war are given in great detail. - - [560] See N. C. vol. v. pp. 543-563, 652-655. - - [561] Ib. vol. iii. pp. 182-215. - - [562] Ib. vol. iv. pp. 483, 557, 827. - - [563] Ib. vol. iv. p. 652. - - [564] Ib. vol. iv. pp. 635, 657. - - [565] N. C. vol. iv. p. 563. - - [566] Ord. Vit. 673 C. “Normannorum dux et Cœnomannorum - princeps nomine tenus multis annis factus est.” - - [567] Ord. Vit. 531 A. “Cœnomanis, _a canina rabie dicta_, - urbs est antiqua, et plebs ejus finitimis procax et - sanguinolenta, dominisque suis semper contumax et - rebellionis avida.” Following the diphthongal spelling of - the text, one might rather be tempted to derive the name - from the _commune_ or κοινόν [koinon] set up by its _men_. - - [568] N. C. vol. iii. pp. 167, 203, 209-212. - - [569] Ib. iv. 546-555. - - [570] Ib. vol. iii. p. 197. - - [571] Ib. vol. iv. pp. 545, 560, 563. - - [572] Mabillon, Vet. An. 288. “Favore totius cleri ejusdem - ecclesiæ decanum statuerat; in quo gradu tanto amore totius - populi erga se illexit affectum, ut eo jam tempore non - minorem quam episcopo omnes illi reverentiam exhiberent…. - Unde factum est, ut post decessum memorati antistitis in - electionem ipsius omnes unanimiter convenirent, ipsumque - episcopatu dignissimum voce consona proclamarent.” - - [573] Ord. Vit. 531 B. “‘Ecce in capella tua est quidam - pauper clericus, sed nobilis et bene morigeratus. Huic - præsulatum commenda in Dei timore, quia dignus est (ut - æstimo) tali honore.’ Regi autem percunctanti quis esset, - Samson respondit: ‘Hoëlus dicitur, et est genere Brito; sed - humilis est, et revera bonus homo.’” On Samson himself, see - N. C. vol. iv. p. 641. - - [574] N. C. vol. iv. p. 478. - - [575] Ord. Vit. 531 C. “Ei curam et seculare jus - Cœnomanensis episcopatus commisit” I have elsewhere spoken - of this kind of document in England (N. C. vol. ii. p. 588). - Only it would seem that in England the King either acted - wholly of himself or else confirmed an election already made - by the Chapter. Here the Chapter, as in later times, elects - on the King’s recommendation. - - [576] Ib. “Decretum regis clero insinuatum est, et præfati - clerici bonæ vitæ testimonium ab his qui noverunt ventilatum - est. Pro tam pura et simplici electione devota laus a - fidelibus Deo reddita est, et electus pastor ad caulas ovium - suarum ab episcopis et reliquis fidelibus, quibus hoc a rege - jussum fuerat, honorifice perductus est.” The _regale_, or - rather _ducale_, comes out strongly in these matters, as it - always does in Normandy. - - [577] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 194. - - [578] Vet. An. 290. “Celeberrimum est enim Cenomannensis - ecclesiæ præsulem post Turonensem archiepiscopum totius - Turonensis diœceseos obtinere primatum.” _Diœcesis_ here - stands for province, as _parochia_ constantly stands for - diocese. - - [579] Vet. An. 288. “Quia propter contentionem quæ inter - Vvillum regem Anglorum, et Fulconem Andegavorum comitem de - eodem episcopatu exorta erat, Radulfus Turonorum - archiepiscopus Turonis eum ordinare non potuit, ipsius - assensu atque præcepto omniumque suffraganeorum ejus, cum - magno honore ordinatus est in Rotomago civitate, a domno - Willelmo ejusdem urbis archiepiscopo xi. Kalend. Maii, anno - ab Incarnatione Domini millesimo lxxxv.” - - [580] See Appendix MM. - - [581] Vet. An. 290. “Cum fames populum oppressisset, - essetque impossibile unius copiis generalem afflictorum - indigentiam sustentari, _ex communi cleri plebisque - consilio_, aurum et argentum quod erat in tabula altaris - sanctorum martyrum Gervasii et Protasii pius temerator - accepit; illudque fideli dispensatione pauperibus erogavit.” - Compare the action of Abbot Leofric of Saint Alban’s, and - the “prædictæ rationes” which led him so to act, together - with the argument of Matthew Paris with regard to its - lawfulness; Gest. Abb. i. 29, 30. - - [582] See N. C. vol. iii. pp. 159, 465. - - [583] Ib. vol. iv. p. 659. - - [584] See Appendix KK. - - [585] Ord. Vit. 674 B. “Paganus de Monte Dublabelis, cum - aliis contumacibus castrum Balaonem tenebat et venienti duci - cum turmis suis acriter resistebat.” - - [586] N. C. vol. iii. p. 122. - - [587] Ord. Vit. 674 B. “Post plurima damna utriusque partis, - Balaonenses pacem cum duce fecerunt.” - - [588] Ord. Vit. 674 D. “Habitatoribus hujus municipii quies - et pax pene semper defuit, finitimique Cenomannenses, seu - Normanni insistunt. Scopulosum montem anfractus Sartæ - fluminis ex tribus partibus ambit, in quo sanctus Cerenicus - venerandus confessor tempore Milehardi Sagiorum pontificis - habitavit.” - - [589] In local belief, Saint Cenery on his own ground seems - to have supplanted the Archangel himself as the weigher of - souls. - - [590] On surnames of places, see N. C. vol. v. p. 573. - - [591] Ib. vol. ii. p. 233. - - [592] Ord. Vit. 674 D. “Carolo Simplice regnante, dum - Hastingus Danus cum gentilium phalange Neustriam depopulatus - est, sanctum corpus a fidelibus in castrum Theodorici - translatum est et dispersis monachis monasterium - destructum.” Yet at a later time (see Ord. Vit. 706 D) Saint - Cenery still possessed an arm of the eponymous saint, though - monks of Seez, not of Saint Cenery, were its keepers; and - there is still a bone or fragment of a bone under the high - altar of the parish church which claims to be a relic of - him. - - [593] Ib. “Sanguinarii prædones ibi speluncam latronum - condiderunt,” “scelesti habitatores,” &c. - - [594] Unless Orderic’s words just quoted are mere rhetoric, - we must infer that the site of the castle, and not the site - of the present church, had been the site of the forsaken - monastery. Well suited as the whole peninsula was for the - purposes of a castle, the actual isthmus, where three small - knolls rise above the general level of the hill, must have - been the most tempting spot of all. On two of the knolls - remains of its masonry are still to be seen, and the - outworks reach far down the hill on its western side. The - place seems to have been a simple fortress, with no town or - village, beyond such houses as may have grown up around the - castle. - - [595] Orderic tells the story, 674 C. - - [596] See the extract in the last page. - - [597] N. C. vol. iv. p. 184. - - [598] N. C. vol. iii. p. 169. - - [599] Ord. Vit. 674 D. “Ibi familia Roberti Belesmensis - erat, cui Robertus Quadrellus, acerrimus miles et multo - vigore conspicuus, præerat, qui hortatu Rogerii comitis - obsidentibus fortiter obstabat.” The modern form of - “Quadrellus” would be “Carrel.” “Fulcherius Quarel” appears - among the knights of Perche bearing harness under Philip - Augustus; Duchèsne, p. 1032. - - [600] Ord. Vit. 674 D. “Præfatus municeps jussu irati ducis - protinus oculis privatus est. Aliis quoque pluribus qui - contumaciter ibidem restiterant principi Normanniæ [this - almost sounds like the wording of an indictment] debilitatio - membrorum inflicta est ex sententia curiæ.” - - [601] N. C. vol. i. pp. 445, 476. - - [602] This is told by Orderic, 674 D. He adds, “Ille fere - xxxvi annis postmodum tenuit, muris et vallis zetisque - munivit, et moriens Guillermo et Roberto filiis suis - dereliquit.” Yet he lost it for a season to the old enemy. - See 706 D. - - [603] Ord. Vit. 675 A. “Municipes Alencionis et Bellesmi - aliarumque munitionum, ut audierunt quam male contigerit - Roberto Quadrello et complicibus qui cum eo fuerant, valde - territi sunt, et ut debitas venienti duci munitiones - redderent, consilium inierunt.” But the words which - immediately follow are; “Verum Robertus ab incœpta virtute - cito defecit, et mollitie suadente ad tectum et quietem - avide recurrit, exercitumque suum, ut quisque ad sua - repedaret, dimisit.” This leaves it not quite clear, whether - he stayed to receive in person the surrenders which were - ready for him. - - [604] The site of the true castle of Bellême may easily be - distinguished from the later fortress. The native home of - Mabel stands quite apart from the hill on which the town and - the later castle stand, being cut off from it by art. The - chapel is but little altered, and has a crypt, the way down - to which reminds one of Saint Zeno and other Italian - churches. - - [605] See note 1, last page. - - [606] Ord. Vit. 675 A. “Per dicaces legatos a duce pacem - filiique sui absolutionem postulans, multa falso pollicitus - est.” Robert, he adds, “qui improvidus erat et instabilis, - ad lapsum facilis, ad tenendum justitiæ rigorem mollis, ex - insperato frivolis pactionibus infidorum adquievit.” It is - now that Orderic gives us his full picture of Robert of - Bellême and his doings. - - [607] Ord. Vit. 675 B. “Liberatus intumuit, jussa ducis - atque minas minus appretiavit, præsentisque memor injuriæ - diutinam multiplicemque vindictam exercuit.” - - [608] Ib. 681 D. “Tunc Edgarus Adelinus, et Robertus - Bellesmensis, atque Guillelmus de Archis monachus - Molismensis præcipui ducis consiliarii erant”――an oddly - assorted company. This is in 1090. - - [609] Ib. 677 A. “Optimatum suorum supplicationibus - adquiescens, Henricum fratrem suum concessit, et a vinculis - in quibus cum Roberto Belesmensi constrictus fuerat - absolvit.” - - [610] Ib. 689 C. “Constantienses Henricus clito strenue - regebat, rigidusque contra fratres suos persistebat. Nam - contra ducem inimicitias agitabat pro injusta captione quam - nudiustertius, ut prædictum est, ab illo perpessus fuerat. - Regi nihilominus Angliæ hostis erat pro terra matris suæ.” - - [611] Ord. Vit. 689 C. “Oppida sua constanter firmabat, et - fautores sibi de proceribus patris sui plurimos callide - conciliabat. Abrincas et Cæsarisburgum et Constantiam atque - Guabreium, aliasque munitiones possidebat, et Hugonem - comitem et Ricardum de Radveriis, aliosque Constantinienses, - præter Robertum de Molbraio, secum habuit, et collectis - undique viribus prece pretioque quotidie crescebat.” - - [612] Ord. Vit. 680 B. “Turmas optimatum adscivit, et - Guentoniæ congregatis quæ intrinsecus ruminabat sic ore - deprompsit.” The Chronicler tells us, under 1090, how “se - cyng wæs smægende hu he mihte wrecon his broðer Rodbeard - swiðost swencean, and Normandige of him gewinnan.” The - custom of holding the Easter Gemót at Winchester seems to - fix this assembly to Easter. 1090. - - The continuance of the three yearly assemblies is well - marked by William of Malmesbury in the Life of Wulfstan - (Ang. Sac. iii. 257); “Rex Willelmus consuetudinem induxerat - [that is, he went on with what had been done T. R. E.], quam - successores aliquamdiu tritam consenescere permisere. Ea - erat, ut ter in anno cuncti optimates ad curiam convenirent, - de necessariis regni tractaturi, simulque visuri regis - insigne, quomodo iret gemmato fastigiatus diademate.” - - [613] Ord. Vit. 680 C. “Commoneo vos omnes qui patris mei - homines fuistis et feudos vestros in Normannia et Anglia de - illo tenuistis, ut sine dolo ad probitatis opus mihi - viriliter unanimiter faveatis.” - - [614] Ib. “Colligite, quæso, concilium, prudenter inite - consilium, sententiam proferte, quid in hoc agendum sit - discrimine. Mittam, si laudatis, exercitum in Normanniam, et - injuriis quas mihi frater meus sine causa machinatus est - talionem rependam. Ecclesiæ Dei subveniam, viduas et - orphanos inermes protegam, fures et sicarios gladio justitiæ - puniam.” - - [615] See N. C. vol. ii. pp. 93, 95. - - [616] Ord. Vit. 680 C. “His dictis omnes assensum dederunt - et _magnanimitatem_ regis collaudaverunt.” - - [617] See above, p. 60. - - [618] See above, p. 177. - - [619] Plutarch, Reg. et Imp. Apoph. Philip. 15. - - [620] Æsch. Pers. 861; - ὅσσας δ’ εἷλε πόλεις, πόρον οὐ διαβὰς Ἄλυος ποταμοῖο, - οὐδ’ ἀφ’ ἑστίας συθείς. - [hossas d’ heile poleis, poron ou diabas Alyos - potamoio, oud’ aph’ hestias sytheis.] - - [621] Chron. Petrib. 1090. “Ðeah þurh his geapscipe, oððe - þurh gærsuma he begeat þone castel aet S[~c]e Waleri and þa - hæfenan, and swa he begeat þone æt Albemare.” This is - followed by William of Malmesbury, iv. 307, who translates - the passage, “Castrum Sancti Walerici, et portum vicinum. et - oppidum quod Albamarla vocatur, sollertia sua acquisivit, - pecunia custodes corrumpens.” Florence however calls it - “castellum Walteri de Sancto Walarico.” This might be - understood of any castle belonging to Walter of Saint - Valery; and the change might be taken either as having the - force of a correction or as showing that Florence did not - understand what he found in the Chronicles. I do not find - any mention of the taking of Saint Valery, or of any - possession of Walter of Saint Valery, anywhere except in the - English writers. Walter, who is more than once mentioned by - Orderic (724 B, 729 D) as a crusader, was of the house of - the Advocates of Saint Valery of whom I have spoken - elsewhere (N. C. vol. iii. pp. 131, 393). - - [622] N. C. vol. iv. pp. 557, 643. - - [623] Ib. vol. iii. p. 157. - - [624] Ib. vol. ii. p. 632. - - [625] Ord. Vit. 681 A. “Primus Normannorum Stephanus de - Albamarla filius Odonis Campaniæ comitis regi adhæsit, et - regiis sumptibus castellum suum super Aucium flumen - vehementer munivit, in quo validissimam regis familiam - contra ducem suscepit.” Florence calls it “castellum Odonis - de Albamarno.” - - [626] Chron. Petrib. 1090. “And þarinne he sette his - cnihtas, and hi dydon hearmes uppon þam lande on hergunge - and on bærnete.” - - [627] N. C. vol. iii. p. 153; vol. iv. p. 280. - - [628] Ib. vol. iii. p. 226. - - [629] Ib. vol. iii. p. 93. - - [630] Domesday, 18. “Rex W. dedit comiti [de Ow] - castellariam de Hastinges.” - - [631] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 152. - - [632] See above, p. 59. - - [633] N. C. vol. iv. p. 733; vol. v. p. 560. - - [634] As Barrow _Gurney_ in Somerset. - - [635] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 121. - - [636] Ord. Vit. 681 A. “Gornacum et Firmitatem et Goisleni - fontem, aliasque munitiones suas regi tradidit, finitimosque - suos regiæ parti subjicere studuit.” - - [637] N. C. vol. iv. pp. 39, 737. - - [638] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 201. - - [639] See above, p. 209. - - [640] Will. Gem. vii. 4. See N. C. vol. i. p. 465. The - kindred is also implied in the fact that William of Breteuil - was the nephew of both Ralph and William. See Ord. Vit. 688 - B, D, and below, p. 266. - - [641] Ord. Vit. 687 D. “Perstrepentibus undique præliis in - Neustria, securitate pacis perfrui non poterat Ebroicensis - provincia. Illic nempe plus quam civile bellum inter - opulentos fratres exortum est, et maligna superbarum - æmulatione mulierum malitia nimis augmentata est. Heluisa - namque comitissa contra Isabelem de Conchis pro quibusdam - contumeliosis verbis irata est, comitemque Guillelmum cum - baronibus suis in arma per iram commovere totis viribus - conata est. Sic per suspiciones et litigia feminarum in - furore succensa sunt fortium corda virorum, quorum manibus - paulo post multus mutuo cruor effusus est mortalium, et per - villas et vicos multarum incensa sunt tecta domorum.” - - [642] She was the daughter of William the First, Count of - Auxerre and Nevers, by his first wife Ermengarde, daughter - of Reginald Count of Tonnerre. See Art de Vérifier les - Dates, ii. 559. - - [643] Orderic has two pictures of her. In the second (834 - B), drawn a few years later than our present time, when - Count William “natura senioque aliquantum hebescebat,” we - read, “Uxor ejus totum consulatum regebat, quæ in sua - sagacitate plus quam oporteret confidebat. Pulcra quidem et - facunda erat, et magnitudine corporis pene omnes feminas in - comitatu Ebroarum consistentes excellebat, et eximia - nobilitate, utpote illustris Guillelmi Nivernensis comitis - filia, satis pollebat. Hæc nimirum consilio baronum mariti - sui relicto, æstimationem suam præferebat, et ardua nimis - secularibus in rebus plerumque arripiebat atque immoderata - temptare properabat.” Elsewhere (688 A), he says, “Ambæ - mulieres quæ talia bella ciebant, loquaces et animosæ, ac - forma elegantes erant, suisque maritis imperabant, subditos - homines premebant, variisque modis terrebant.” When Orderic - (576 C), recording Isabel’s widowhood and religious - profession, speaks of her as “letalis lasciviæ cui nimis in - juventute servierat pœnitens,” the word need not be taken in - the worst sense. He uses (864 A) the same kind of language - of Juliana daughter of Henry the First, who, whatever she - was as a daughter, seems to have been a very good wife and - mother. - - [644] Ord. Vit. 834 B. “Pro feminea procacitate Rodberto - comiti de Mellento aliisque Normannis invidiosa erat.” - - [645] Ord. Vit. 576 B, C. - - [646] Ib. 834 C. - - [647] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 605, 643. - - [648] Ord. Vit. 688 A. “Magna in eisdem morum diversitas - erat. Heluisa quidem solers erat et facunda, sed atrox et - avara. Isabel vero dapsilis et audax atque jocosa, ideoque - coessentibus amabilis et grata. In expeditione inter - milites, ut miles, equitabat armata, et loricatis equitibus - ac spiculatis satellitibus non minori præstabat audacia quam - decus Italiæ Turni manipularibus virgo Camilla.” He goes on - to liken her to Penthesileia and all the other Amazons. - - [649] Ib. “Radulfus Robertum ducem adivit, querelas damnorum - quæ a contribulibus suis pertulerat intimavit, et herile - adjutorium ab eo poposcit; sed frustra, qui nihil obtinuit.” - - [650] Ib. B. “Hinc alias conversus est, et utile sibi - patrocinium quærere compulsus est. Regem Angliæ per legatos - suos interpellatur, eique sua infortunia mandavit, et si - sibi suffragaretur, se et omnia sua permisit. His auditis - rex gavisus est, et efficax adminiculum indigenti pollicitus - est. Deinde Stephano comiti et Gerardo de Gornaco, aliisque - tribunis et centurionibus qui præerant in Normannia familiis - ejus, mandavit ut Radulfum totis adjuvarent nisibus et - oppida ejus munirent necessariis omnibus.” - - [651] Ord. Vit. 681 A. “Robertus Aucensium comes, et - Gauterius Gifardus et Radulfus de Mortuomari, et pene omnes - qui trans Sequanam usque ad mare habitabant, _Anglicis - conjuncti sunt_.” - - [652] Ib. “De regiis opibus ad muniendas domos suas armis et - satellitibus copiosam pecuniam receperunt.” - - [653] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 644. - - [654] Ord. Vit. 681 A. “Robertus dux contra tot hostes - repagulum paravit, filiamque suam quam de pellice habuerat, - Heliæ filio Lamberti de Sancto Sidonio conjugem dedit.” - - [655] N. C. vol, i. p. 253. - - [656] Will. Gem. viii. 37. - - [657] Ord. Vit. 681 B. “Archas cum Buris et adjacente - provincia in maritagio tribuit, ut adversariis resisteret - Calegiique comitatum defenderet. Ille vero jussa viriliter - complere cœpit.” - - [658] Neufchâtel-en-Bray, famous for cheeses. - - [659] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 121. - - [660] Ord. Vit. 681 B. “Roberto duci et Guillelmo filio ejus - semper fidelis fuit, et sub duobus regibus Guillelmo et - Henrico multa pertulit, labores videlicet ac - exhæreditationem, damna, exsilium, ac multa pericula.” See - N. C. vol. v. pp. 84, 182. - - [661] N. C. vol. ii. p. 254. - - [662] N. C. vol. iv. p. 700. - - [663] Will. Malms. iv. 307. “Domino suo regi Franciæ per - nuntios violentiam fratris exposuit, suppetias orans. Et - ille quidem iners, et quotidianam crapulam ructans, ad - bellum singultiens ingluvie veniebat.” - - [664] The place is not mentioned in the Chronicles nor in - any other of our accounts, except by Robert of Torigny in - the Continuation of William of Jumièges, viii. 3. He tells - his story backwards in a very confused way, and mixes up the - events of this year and the next; “Facta est itaque tandem - inter eos [Robertum et Willelmum] apud Cadomum, ut diximus, - adminiculante Philippo rege Francorum, qui in auxilium ducis - contra Willelmum regem apud oppidum Auci ingenti Anglorum et - Normannorum exercitu tunc morantem venerat, qualiscumque - concordia.” This means the peace of 1092, when William was - in Normandy, and when Philip certainly did not come to Eu. - On the other hand, William was certainly not at Eu in 1091. - But as Philip did in 1091 come to some castle which must - have been either Eu, Aunde, or Gournay, we may perhaps - accept this as evidence in favour of Eu. - - [665] Chron. Petrib. 1090. “Se cyng Willelm of Englalande - sende to Philippe Francena cynge, and he _for his lufan oððe - for his_ mycele gersuma, forlet swa his man þone eorl - Rodbeard and his land, and ferde ongean to France, and let - heom swa weorðan.” The spirit is lost in the Latin of - Florence; “Quod cum regi Willelmo nuntiatum esset, non - modica pecuniæ quantitati regi Philippo occulte transmissa, - ut obsidione dimissa, domum rediret, flagitavit et - imperavit.” - - [666] Will. Malms. iv. 307. “Occurrerunt magna pollicenti - nummi regis Angliæ, quibus infractus cingulum solvit et - convivium repetiit.” - - [667] Macaulay, Hist. Eng. iv. 265. “The Elector of Saxony … - had, together with a strong appetite for subsidies, a great - desire to be a member of the most select and illustrious - orders of knighthood.” For this last passion there was as - yet no room, but William Rufus did a good deal towards - bringing about the state of things in which it arose. - - [668] N. C. vol. ii. p. 318. - - [669] So are the Norman reigns of Geoffrey Plantagenet and - his son Henry. But their position in Normandy was quite - different from Robert’s, while they claimed England in quite - a different sense from the claims of Robert, and had――the - son at least had――partisans there. - - [670] N. C. vol. v. pp. 85, 95, 96. - - [671] The character of this Count Geoffrey (son of the - Rotrou who figures in the war of the Conqueror and his son, - N. C. vol. iv. pp. 637, 639) as drawn by Orderic (675 D; see - above, p. 183) is worth studying; “Erat idem consul - magnanimus, corpore pulcher, et callidus, timens Deum et - ecclesiæ cultor devotus, clericorum pauperumque Dei defensor - strenuus, in pace quietus et amabilis, bonisque pollebat - moribus.” Yet he was also “in bello gravis et fortunatus, - finitimisque intolerabilis regibus et inimicus [cis?] - omnibus.” Moreover “multas villas combussit multasque prædas - hominesque adduxit.” The truth is that the curse of private - warfare drew the best men, no less than the worst, into the - common whirlpool; and, once in arms, they could not keep - back their followers from the usual excesses, even if any - such thought occurred to themselves. Cf. Ord. Vit. 890 B for - another mention of Geoffrey. - - [672] See above, p. 184. - - [673] Ord. Vit. 685 A, B. This Gilbert is son of Eginulf, - who died at Senlac (N. C. vol. iii. p. 503, note), and - brother of Richer, who died before Sainte-Susanne (N. C. - vol. iv. p. 659). His sister Matilda married Robert of - Mowbray. - - [674] Ib. 684 D, 685 C, D; Will. Gem. viii. 15. The - offender, a man of Belial, was Ascelin surnamed Goel. The - marriage was blessed or cursed with the birth of seven sons, - all, according to both our authorities, of evil report. - - [675] See above, p. 194. The bandying of words, as given by - Orderic (686 A), is worth notice; “Robertus comes Mellenti - muneribus et promissis Guillelmi regis turgidus de Anglia - venit, Rothomagum ad ducem accessit, et ab eo arcem Ibreii - procaciter repetiit. Cui dux respondit, Æquipotens mutuum - patri tuo dedi Brioniam nobile castrum pro arce Ibreii. - Comes Mellenti dixit, Istud mutuum non concedo, sed quod - pater tuus patri meo dedit habere volo. Alioqui per sanctum - Nigasium faciam quod tibi displicebit. Iratus igitur dux - illico eum comprehendi et in carcere vinciri præcepit, et - Brioniam Roberto Balduini filio custodiendam commisit.” This - Robert in 686 D sets forth his pedigree, as grandson of - Count Gilbert the guardian of the Conqueror (see N. C. vol. - ii. pp. 195, 196). He was nephew of Richard of Bienfaite - (see above, p. 68), the founder of the house of Clare. - - [676] He is now brought in as “callidus senex.” - - [677] Ord. Vit. 686 C. The Duke speaks of the old Roger’s - “magna _legalitas_,” “_loyalty_,” according to its - etymology. Is it characteristic of the “callidus senex” that - he addresses the Duke as “vestra sublimitas,” “vestra - serenitas,” and thanks him for imprisoning his son, - “temerarium juvenem”? Yet it was twenty-four years since the - exploits of Robert of Meulan at Senlac. - - [678] Ib. D. “Ob hoc ingens pecuniæ pondus promisit.” - - [679] Ib. 687 A. - - [680] Ib. A, B. “Tunc calor ingens incipientis æstatis, et - maxima siccitas erant, quæ forinsecus expugnantes admodum - juvabant. Callidi enim obsessores in fabrili fornace quæ in - promptu structa fuerat, ferrum missilium calefaciebant, - subitoque _super tectum principalis aulæ_ in munimento - jaciebant, et sic ferrum candens sagittarum atque pilorum in - arida veterum lanugine imbricum totis nisibus figebant.” - - [681] Ib. “Sic Robertus dux ab hora nona Brioniam ante solis - occasum obtinuit, quam Guillelmus pater ejus cum auxilio - Henrici Francorum regis sibi vix in tribus annis subigere - potuit.” See N. C. vol. ii. p. 268. - - [682] See above, p. 234. - - [683] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 145, 451. - - [684] Ib. vol. v. pp. 466, 474. - - [685] Ord. Vit. 689 D. “Hujus nimirum factionis incentor - Conanus Gisleberti Pilati filius erat, qui inter cives, - utpote ditissimus eorum, præcellebat. Is cum rege de - tradenda civitate pactum fecerat, et immensis opibus ditatus - in urbe vigebat, ingentemque militum et satellitum familiam - contra ducem turgidus jugiter pascebat.” - - [686] Ib. 691 A. “Guillelmus Ansgerii filius, Rodomensium - ditissimus.” This is after Conan’s death. - - [687] Ib. 689 D. “Cives Rothomagi regiis muneribus et - promissis illecti de mutando principe tractaverunt, ac ut - Normanniæ metropolim _cum somnolento duce_ regi proderent - consiliati sunt.” - - [688] Ib. “Maxima pars urbanorum eidem adquiescebant. - Nonnulli tamen pro fide duci servanda resistebant, et - opportunis tergiversationibus detestabile facinus - impediebant.” - - [689] Ord. Vit. 689 D. “Conanus de suorum consensu - _contribulium_ securus, terminum constituit.” Orderic most - likely means nothing in particular by this odd word - “contribules.” But the later history of free cities supplies - a certain temptation to begin thinking of gilds, _Zünfte_, - _Geschlechter_, _abbayes_, and _alberghi_. - - [690] Ib. “Dux, ubi tantam contra se machinationem - comperiit, amicos in quibus confidebat ad se convocavit.” - - [691] Ord. Vit. 690 A. “Henricus igitur primus ei suppetias - venit, et primo subsidium fratri contulit, deinde vindictam - viriliter in proditorem exercuit.” - - [692] Ib. “Fidelibus suis desolationem sui cita legatione - intimavit.” - - [693] Ib. See above, p. 76, and N. C. vol. iv. p. 654. - - [694] See above, p. 242. He was killed next year. See Ord. - Vit. 685 B. - - [695] This earlier castle of the dukes must be carefully - distinguished from the _Vieux Palais_, which, though it is - no longer standing, still lives in street nomenclature. This - last was the work of our Henry the Fifth, and lay to the - west, between the Roman wall and the wall of Saint Lewis. - - On this side of the city the modern street lately called - _Rue de l’Impératrice_, and now promoted to the name of _Rue - Jeanne Darc_, is not a bad guide. It runs a little outside - of the Roman wall and may fairly represent its fosse. So the - other great modern street called _Rue de l’Hôtel de Ville_, - and now _Rue Thiers_, runs a little further outside the - northern wall of the ancient city, which is marked by the - _Rue de la Ganterie_. - - [696] On this side again a modern street helps us. The _Rue - de la République_, lately _Rue Impériale_, marks, though - less accurately than the others, the eastern side of the - city. The Rebecq may be traced for a little way, but it - presently loses itself, or at least is lost to the inquirer. - - [697] Ord. Vit. 690 B. See below, p. 255. - - [698] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 203. - - [699] “Archimonasterium” is a title of Saint Ouen’s. See - Neustria Pia, 1. - - [700] See N. C. vol. ii. pp. 183, 468. - - [701] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 704. - - [702] The “Tour de la Grosse Horloge” and the gate close by - are conspicuous features in that quarter of Rouen. The noble - Palace of Justice was not even represented in the times with - which we have to do. - - [703] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 706. - - [704] Neustria Pia, 611. - - [705] Ord. Vit. 690 A. “Ad Calcegiensem portam properavit.” - - [706] Ord. Vit. 690 A. “Jampridem quidam de regiis - satellitibus in urbem introierant, et parati, rebellionem - tacite præstolantes, seditionis moram ægre ferebant.” - - [707] Ib. B. “Dum militaris et civilis tumultus exoritur, - nimius hinc et inde clamor attollitur, et tota civitas - pessime confunditur, et in sua viscera crudeliter - debacchatur. Plures enim civium contra cognatos vicinosque - suos ad utramque portam dimicabant, dum quædam pars duci, et - altera regi favebant…. Dum perturbationis ingens tumultus - cuncta confunderet, et nesciretur quam quisque civium sibi - partem eligeret.” - - [708] Ib. B. “Dux ubi furentes, ut dictum est, in civitate - advertit, cum Henrico fratre suo et commanipularibus suis de - arce prodiit, suisque velociter suffragari appetiit.” - - [709] Ord. Vit. 690 B. “Ne perniciem inhonestam stolido - incurreret, cunctisque Normannis perenne opprobrium fieret.” - - [710] Ib. “Fugiens cum paucis per orientalem portam egressus - est, et mox a suburbanis vici, qui Mala-palus dicitur, - fideliter ut specialis herus susceptus est.” - - [711] Ord. Vit. 690 B. “Cimba parata Sequanam intravit, et - relicto post terga conflictu trepidus ad Ermentrudis-villam - navigavit. Tunc ibidem a Guillelmo de Archis Molismensi - monacho susceptus est, ibique in basilica sanctæ Mariæ de - Prato finem commotæ seditionis præstolatus est.” On this - William of Arques, see above, p. 220. - - William of Malmesbury (v. 392) has quite another account, in - which the Duke’s flight is not spoken of, and in which Henry - at least urges him to action; “Regios eo interdiu venientes, - qui dolo civium totam jampridem occupaverant urbem, probe - expulit [Henricus], admonito per nuntios comite ut ille a - fronte propelleret quos ipse a tergo urgeret.” This account - does not come in its chronological place, but in William’s - account of the early life of Henry. And he misconceives the - date, placing the revolt of Rouen after the coming of - William into Normandy; “Willelmo veniente in Normanniam uti - se de fratre Roberto ulcisceretur, comiti obsequelam suam - exhibuit [Henricus], Rotomagi positus.” - - [712] Ord. Vit. 690 C. “Regia cohors territa fugit, - latebrasque silvarum quæ in vicinio erant, avide poscens, - delituit, et subsidio noctis discrimen mortis seu captionis - difficulter evasit.” - - [713] On the different versions of the death of Conan in - Orderic and in William of Malmesbury, see Appendix K. - - [714] Ord. Vit. 690 C. “Considera, Conane, quam pulcram tibi - patriam conatus es subjicere.” - - [715] Ord. Vit. 690 C. “En, ad meridiem delectabile parcum - patet oculis tuis. En saltuosa regio silvestribus abundans - feris. Ecce Sequana piscosum flumen Rotomagensem murum - allambit, navesque pluribus mercimoniis refertas huc - quotidie devehit.” - - [716] Ib. D. “En ex alia parte civitas populosa, mœnibus - sacrisque templis et urbanis ædibus speciosa, cui jure a - priscis temporibus subjacet Normannia tota.” - - [717] Ib. “Pro redemptione mei domino meo aurum dabo et - argentum, quantum reperire potero in thesauris meis - meorumque parentum, et pro culpa infidelitatis fidele usque - ad mortem rependam servitium.” - - [718] Ord. Vit. 690 C. “Per animam matris meæ, traditori - nulla erit redemptio, sed debitæ mortis acceleratio.” - - [719] Ib. “Conanus gemens clamavit alta voce; Pro amore, - inquit, Dei, confessionem mihi permitte.” - - [720] Ib. “Henricus acer fraternæ ultor injuriæ præ ira - infremuit.” Simple wrath is an attribute which we are more - used to assign to Henry the Second, with his hereditary - touch of the Angevin devil, than to the calm, deliberate, - Henry the First. Yet we can understand how, through the - stages of the “ironica insultatio,” as Orderic calls Henry’s - discourse to Conan, a determination taken in cold blood - might grow into the fierce delight of destruction at the - actual moment of carrying it out. - - [721] See Appendix K. - - [722] Ord. Vit. 691 A. “Locus ipse, ubi vindicta hujusmodi - perpetrata est, saltus Conani usque in hodiernam diem - vocitatus est.” - - [723] See above, p. 190. - - [724] Ord. Vit. 691 A. “Robertus dux, ut de prato ad arcem - rediit et quæ gesta fuerant comperit, pietate motus - infortunio civium condoluit, sed, fortiori magnatorum - censura prævalente, reis parcere nequivit.” - - [725] Ord. Vit. 691 A. “Robertus Belesmensis et Guillelmus - Bretoliensis affuerunt, et Rodomanos incolas velut exteros - prædones captivos abduxerunt, et squaloribus carceris - graviter afflixerunt…. Sic Belesmici et Aquilini ceterique - ducis auxiliarii contra se truculenter sæviunt, civesque - metropolis Neustriæ vinculatos attrahunt, cunctisque rebus - spoliatos, ut barbaros hostes male affligunt.” - - [726] Ib. “A Guillelmo Bretoliensi ducitur captivus, et post - longos carceris squalores redimit se librarum tribus - millibus.” - - [727] See above, p. 243. - - [728] Ib. 688 B. “Mense Novembri Guillelmus comes ingentem - exercitum aggregavit, et Conchas expugnare cœpit.” One would - like to know what number passed for “ingens exercitus” in - this kind of warfare. - - [729] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 713. - - [730] Ib. p. 713. - - [731] Ord. Vit. 834 C. “Prædictus comes et Heluisa comitissa - dangionem regis apud Ebroas funditus dejecerunt.” - - [732] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 204. - - [733] On the foundation of the abbey of Conches or - Castellion, see Neustria Pia, 567, and the passages from - Orderic and William of Jumièges there cited. William (vii. - 22) puts it among the monasteries founded in the reign of - William the Great, and calls its founder Ralph. But Orderic - (460 A) attributes the foundation to a Roger, seemingly the - old Roger who came back from Spain. I can hardly accept the - suggestion in Neustria Pia that the Roger spoken of is the - young Roger of whom we shall presently hear, the son of - Ralph and Isabel, and that he was joint-founder with his - father Ralph. - - Orderic twice (493 B, 576 A) distinguishes Ralph of - _Conches_, the husband of Isabel, from his father Roger of - _Toesny_; “Rodulphus de Conchis, Rogerii Toenitis filius,” - “Radulfus de _Conchis_, filius Rogerii de Toënia.” - - [734] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 534. - - [735] Will. Gem. vii. 22. - - [736] Ord. Vit. 688 B. - - [737] Ord. Vit. 688 B. “Dum cœnobialem curiam beati Petri - Castellionis invaderet, nec pro reverentia monachorum, qui - cum fletibus vociferantes Dominum interpellabant, ab - incœptis desisteret, hostili telo repente percussus est, - ipsoque die cum maximo luctu utriusque partis mortuus est.” - He is described as “formidabilis marchisius.” - - [738] Ib. C. “Radulfus pervalidum agmen de suis, et de - familia regis habuit.” - - [739] Ib. “Cupidis tironibus foras erumpere dixit, Armamini - et estote parati, sed de munitione non exeatis donec ego - jubeam vobis. Sinite hostes præda onerari, et discedentes - mecum viriliter insectamini. Illi autem principi suo, qui - probissimus et militiæ gnarus erat, obsecundarunt, et - abeuntes cum præda pedetentim persecuti sunt.” Cf. the same - kind of policy on the part of the Conqueror, N. C. vol. iii. - p. 152. - - [740] Ib. “Ebroicenses erubescentes quod guerram superbe - cœperant et inde maximi pondus detrimenti cum dedecore - pertulerant, conditioni pacis post triennalem guerram - adquieverunt.” The peace was clearly made about the end of - 1090 or the very beginning of 1091. The three years of war - must therefore be reckoned from the death of the Conqueror, - or from some time not long after. - - [741] Ord. Vit. 688 D. He had at least two natural children, - a daughter Isabel, of whom we have already heard (see above, - p. 243), and a son Eustace, who succeeded his father in the - teeth of all collateral claimants. Eustace is best known as - the husband of Henry the First’s natural daughter Juliana - (see N. C. vol. v. p. 157, _note_), in whose story we come - again to the ever-disputed tower of Ivry. See Will. Gem. - viii. 15; Ord. Vit. 577 B; 810 C; 848 B, C. - - [742] Ib. “Ebroicensis quoque comes eundem Rogerium, utpote - nepotem suum, consulatus sui heredem constituit.” This was - to the prejudice of his nephew Amalric of Montfort, son of - his whole sister Agnes, and half-brother of Isabel. After - Count William’s death in 1108, the strivings after his - county were great and long, till Amalric recovered full - possession in 1119. Ord. Vit. 863 C. - - [743] Ib. “Pretiosis vestibus quibus superbi nimis - insolescunt, uti dedignabatur, et in omni esse suo sese - modeste regere nitebatur.” This must be taken in connexion - with Orderic’s various protests against the vain fashions of - the day, especially the great one in p. 682. - - [744] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 219; iv. p. 448. - - [745] Ord. Vit. 688 D. “Quondam milites otiosi simul in Aula - Conchis ludebant et colloquebantur, et coram domina - Elisabeth de diversis thematibus, ut mos est hujusmodi, - confabulabantur.” Then follows this beautiful story of the - three dreams. - - [746] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 130. - - [747] Ord. Vit. 689 A. “Dextera sua me benedicentem, - signumque crucis super caput meum benigniter facientem.” - - [748] He married their daughter Godehild, the former wife of - Robert, son of Henry Earl of Warwick. See Ord. Vit. 576 C; - Will. Gem. viii. 41. The strange story of his two later - marriages does not concern us, and the way in which he - became Count of Edessa was hardly becoming in a holy - warrior. - - [749] See N. C. vol. v. pp. 94, 819, and Appendix HH. - - [750] Ord. Vit. 689 C. - - [751] Ib. 784 B. - - [752] Ib. 834 C. There is a singular contrast in the words - with which Orderic disposes of the dead bodies of the Count - and the Countess; “_Comitissa_ nempe defuncta prius apud - Nogionem _quiescit_; comes vero, postmodum apoplexia - percussus, sine viatico decessit, et _cadaver ejus_ cum - patre suo Fontinellæ _computrescit_.” - - [753] See above, p. 233. - - [754] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 496. - - [755] Ord. Vit. 691 A, B. “Ecce quibus ærumnis superba - profligatur Normannia, quæ nimis olim victa gloriabatur - Anglia, et naturalibus regni filiis trucidatis sive fugatis - usurpabat eorum possessiones et imperia. Ecce massam - divitiarum quas aliis rapuit eisque pollens ad suam - perniciem insolentur tumuit, nunc non ad delectamentum sui - sed potius ad tormentum miserabiliter distrahit.” He has an - earlier reflexion to the same effect (664 B); “Sic proceres - Neustriæ … patriam divitiis opulentam propriis viribus - vicissim exspoliaverunt, opesque quas Anglis aliisque - gentibus violenter rapuerunt merito latrociniis et rapinis - perdiderunt.” - - [756] Ord. Vit. 691 A, B. “Soli gaudent, sed non diu nec - feliciter, qui furari seu prædari possunt pertinaciter.” - - [757] Ib. “In diebus illis non erat rex neque dux - Hierusalem, aureisque vitulis Jeroboam rebellis plebs - immolabat in Dan et Bethel.” We are used to this kind of - analogy whenever any one goes after a wrong Pope; but - Normandy, with all its crimes, seems to have been perfectly - orthodox. - - [758] Ib. C. “Multa intueor in divina pagina quæ subtiliter - coaptata nostri temporis eventui videntur similia. [Every - age, except perhaps the eighteenth, has made the same - remark.] Ceterum allegoricas allegationes et idoneas humanis - moribus interpretationes studiosis rimandas relinquam, - simplicemque Normannicarum historiam rerum adhuc - aliquantulum protelare satagam.” This praiseworthy resolve - reminds us of an earlier passage (683 B) where he laments - the failure of the princes and prelates of his day to work - miracles, and his own inability to force them to the needful - pitch of holiness; “Ast ego vim illis ut sanctificentur - inferre nequeo. Unde his omissis super rebus quæ fiunt - veracem _dictatum_ facio.” - - It would seem from this that Orderic dictated his book. (See - also his complaint in 718 C, when at the age of sixty he - felt too old to write and had no one to write for him.) We - need not therefore infer in some other cases that, because - an author dictated, therefore he could not write. - - [759] The Chronicle (1091) says expressly, “On þisum geare - se cyng Willelm heold his hired to X[~p]es messan on - Wæstmynstre, and þæræfter to Candelmæssan he ferde for his - broðer unþearfe ut of Englalande into Normandige.” So - Florence; “Mense Februario rex Willelmus junior Normanniam - petiit.” Orderic (696 D) seems to place his voyage a little - earlier; “Mense Januario Guillelmus Rufus rex Anglorum cum - magna classe in Normanniam transfretavit.” But he places it - late in the month; for in 693 B, having recorded the death - of Bishop Gerard on January 23, he adds that the King’s - voyage happened “eadem septimana.” - - [760] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 234. - - [761] Richard of Courcy’s son Robert married Rohesia, one of - the many daughters of Hugh of Grantmesnil. Ord. Vit. 692 A. - - [762] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 197. - - [763] Ord. Vit. 691 C. - - [764] See Appendix L. - - [765] Ord. Vit. 693 B. “Cujus [Guillelmi] adventu audito, - territus dux cum Roberto aliisque obsidentibus actutum - recessit, et unusquisque propria repetiit.” He is more - emphatic in 697 A; “Robertus de Belesmo cum suis complicibus - aufugit.” - - [766] Ord. Vit. 693 B. “Mox omnes pene Normannorum optimates - certatim regem adierunt, eique munera, recepturi majora, cum - summo favore contulerunt. Galli quoque et Britones et - Flandritæ, ut regem apud Aucum in Neustria commorari - audierunt, aliique plures de collimitaneis provinciis, ad - eum convenerunt. Tunc magnificentiam ejus alacriter experti - sunt, domumque petentes cunctis cum principibus suis - divitiis et liberalitate præposuerunt.” - - [767] On the Treaty of 1091, see Appendix M. - - [768] See above, p. 221. - - [769] Ord. Vit. 693 B. “Tunc ingentia Robertus dux a rege - dona recepit.” - - [770] See Appendix M; and for the affairs of Maine, see - below, Chapter VI. - - [771] William of Malmesbury (v. 392) is becomingly strong on - this head; “Parum hic labor apud Robertum valuit, virum - animi mobilis, qui statim ad ingratitudinem flexus, bene - meritum urbe cedere coegit.” This comes just after the death - of Conan. His whole account is very confused. - - [772] See N. C. vol. v. pp. 87-90. - - [773] Ib. vol. v. p. 328 - - [774] Ib. vol. v. p. 388. - - [775] Ib. vol. v. p. 89. - - [776] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 288, 796. - - [777] Ib. vol. iii. p. 7; see vol. ii. p. 376. - - [778] Ib. vol. iv. p. 694. - - [779] We have seen him already as a counsellor; see above, - p. 220. Orderic, giving a picture of him some years later - (778 B), adds that “ducem sibi coævum et quasi collectaneum - fratrem diligebat.” - - [780] See Appendix M. - - [781] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 194, 508, 567. - - [782] Chron. Petrib. 1091. “And ut of Normandig for to þam - cynge his aðume to Scotlande and to his swustor.” - - [783] Chron. Petrib. 1091. “Ðas forewarde gesworan xii. þa - betste of þes cynges healfe, and xii. of þes eorles.” In - Florence the “betste” become “barones.” - - [784] “Þeah hit syððan litle hwile stode.” - - [785] Ord. Vit. 697 A. “Aggregatis Britonibus et Normannis, - Constantiam et Abrincas aliaque oppida munivit, et ad - resistendum totis nisibus insurrexit.” - - [786] Ib. 697 B. “Britones, qui sibi solummodo adminiculum - contulerant.” - - [787] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 209. - - [788] Ord. Vit. 697 A. “Hugo Cestrensis comes aliique - fautores, ejus paupertatem perpendentes, et amplas opes - terribilemque potentiam Guillelmi regis metuentes, egregium - clitonem in bellico angore deseruerunt, et municipia sua - regi tradiderunt.” Wace tells quite another tale, more - favourable to Earl Hugh, but much less likely. See - Appendix N. - - [789] Ann. S. Mich. 1023. “Hoc anno inchoatum est novum - monasterium a Richardo secundo comite et Hildeberto abbate, - qui abbas ipso anno obiit.” This is Hildebert the Second, - appointed in 1017. - - [790] Ib. 1100. “Hoc anno pars non modica ecclesiæ montis - sancti Michaelis corruit … in cujus ruina portio quædam - dormitorii monachorum destructa atque eversa est.” Ib. 1112. - “Hoc anno combusta est hæc ecclesia sancti Michaelis igne - fulmineo, cum omnibus officinis monachorum.” - - [791] Ann. S. Mich. 1085. “Huic [Rannulfo] successit - Rogerius Cadomensis, non electione monachorum, sed vi - terrenæ potestatis.” - - [792] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 468. - - [793] See Florence’s account in Appendix N. - - [794] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 235. - - [795] I take this from Wace, 14660; - “Li Munt asistrent environ, - De Genez de si à Coisnon - E la revière d’Ardenon; - N’issent del mont se par els non. - A Avrenches li reis séeit - Et a Genez li dus esteit.” - On the value of Wace’s general story, see Appendix N; but we - may trust the topography of the Jerseyman. - - [796] See Florence’s account in Appendix N. So Will. Malms. - iv. 308; “Crebris excursibus obsidentem militiam germanorum - contristavit.” Wace (14652) says, - “Sovent coreit par Costentin, - E tensout tot Avrencin; - Li vilains prist, si fist raendre, - Ne leissout rien k’il péust prendra.” - - [797] Wace, 14666; - “Mult véissiez joster sovent, - E tornéier espessement - Entre li Munt et Ardenon - E la rivière de Coisnon. - Chescun jor al flo retraiant - Vint chevaliers jostes menant.” - - [798] On the two versions of this story, if they are meant - to be the same story, in William of Malmesbury and in Wace, - see Appendix N. - - [799] Will. Malms. iv. 309. “Solus in multos irruit, - alacritate virtutis impatiens, simulque confidens nullum - sibi ausurum obsistere.” - - [800] Ib. “Fides loricæ obstitit ne læderetur.” - - [801] Ib. “Tolle, nebulo, Rex Angliæ sum.” - - [802] 1 Kings xii. 31. - - [803] Will. Malms. iv. 309. “Tremuit, nota voce jacentis, - vulgus militum, statimque reverenter de terra levato equum - alterum adducunt.” - - [804] Ib. “Non expectato ascensorio, sonipedem insiliens, - omnesque circumstantes vivido perstringens oculo, Quis, - inquit, me dejecit?” - - [805] See Appendix G. We have had this favourite oath - already. - - [806] Will. Malms. u. s. “Meus amodo eris, et meo albo - insertus laudabilis militiæ præmia reportabis.” Of William’s - “album” or muster-roll we hear elsewhere. Wace, 14492; - “N’oïst de chevalier parler - Ke de proesce oïst loer, - Ki en son brief escrit ne fust, - E ki par an del suen n’éust.” - - [807] See Roger of Howden, iv. 83. The King is wounded - before Chaluz; the castle is taken, “quo capto, præcepit rex - omnes suspendi, excepto illo solo qui eum vulneraverat, - quem, ut fas est credere, turpissima morte damnaret, si - convaluisset.” - - [808] See N. C. vol. v. p. 73. Where did William of - Malmesbury find his story of Alexander, “qui Persam militem - se a tergo ferire conatum, sed pro perfidia ensis spe sua - frustratum, incolumem pro admiratione fortitudinis - conservavit”? The story in Arrian, i. 15, is quite - different. - - [809] The stock of meat comes from Wace, 14700; - “De viande aveient plenté - Maiz de bevre aveient grant chierté; - Asez aveient a mengier, - Maiz molt trovoent li vin chier.” - The lack of water is secondary in his version. See - Appendix N. - - [810] Will. Malms. iv. 310. “Impium esse ut eum aqua - arceant, quæ esset communis mortalibus; aliter, si velit, - virtutem experiatur; nec pugnet violentia elementorum sed - virtute militum.” If this represents a real message from - Henry, it must surely have been meant as an _argumentum ad - hominem_ for Robert. - - [811] Ib. “Genuina mentis mollitie flexus, suos _qua - prætendebant_ laxius habere se jussit.” This must mean the - quarters of Robert at Genetz, as distinguished from those of - William. - - [812] See Appendix N. - - [813] Will. Malms. iv. 310. “Belle scis actitare guerram, - qui hostibus præbes aquæ copiam; et quomodo eos domabimus si - eis in pastu et in potu indulserimus?” - - [814] Ib. “Ille renidens illud come et merito famosum verbum - emisit, Papæ, dimitterem fratrem nostrum mori siti? et quem - alium habebimus si eum amiserimus?” For the other version, - see Appendix N. M. le Hardy (80), who is a knight of the - order of Pius the Ninth, translates “Papæ,” “par le Pape.” - - [815] See Appendix N. - - [816] Ord. Vit. 697 A. “Fere xv. diebus cum suis aquæ - penuria maxime coarcuerunt. Porro callidus juvenis, dum sic - a fratribus suis coarctaretur, et a cognatis atque amicis et - confœderatis affinibus undique destitueretur, et multimoda - pene omnium quibus homines indigent inedia angeretur,” &c. - The siege began “in medio quadragesimæ,” and lasted fifteen - days. Florence is therefore wrong in saying “per totam - quadragesimam montem obsederunt.” - - [817] Flor. Wig. 1091. “Frequenter cum eo prœlium - commiserunt, et homines et equos nonnullos perdiderunt. At - rex, cum obsidionis diutinæ pertæsus fuisset, impacatus - recessit.” - - [818] Ord. Vit. 697 A. “Liberum sibi sociisque suis exitum - de monte ab obsidentibus poposcit. Illi admodum gavisi sunt, - ipsumque cum omni apparatu suo egredi _honorifice_ - permiserunt.” On the honours of war, see above, p. 86. See - Appendix N. - - [819] Ib. “Rex in Neustria usque ad Augustum permansit, et - dissidentes qui eidem adquiescere voluerunt regali - auctoritate pacavit.” So in 693 C he mentions the lands of - Eu, Gournay, and Conches, and adds, “ubi præfatus rex a - Januario usque ad kal. Augusti regali more cum suis - habitavit.” I assume Eu as his actual head-quarters, as it - was before and after. - - [820] Ib. D. See the next chapter. - - [821] Ord. Vit. 697 B. “Sic regia proles in exsilio didicit - pauperiem perpeti, ut futurus rex optime sciret miseris et - indigentibus compati, eorumque dejectioni vel indigentiæ - regali potentia seu dapsilitate suffragari, et ritus - infirmorum expertus eis pie misereri.” - - [822] See N. C. vol. v. pp. 156, 843. - - [823] See Appendix O. - - [824] Will. Malms. iv. 310. “In regnum se cum ambobus - fratribus recepit.” I should hardly have accepted this - evidence, if it had not been confirmed by the signatures to - a charter of which I shall presently speak. See below, - p. 305. - - [825] Immediately after the words quoted in p. 282, follows - the entry about Malcolm; “Onmang þam þe se cyng W. ut of - Englelande wæs ferde se cyng Melcolm of Scotlande hider into - Englum, and his mycelne dæl ofer hergode.” - - [826] Ord. Vit. 701 A. “In illo tempore Melcoma rex Scotorum - contra regem Anglorum rebellavit, debitumque servitium ei - denegavit.” See Appendix P. - - [827] Flor. Wig. 1091. “Mense Maio rex Scottorum Malcolmus - cum magno exercitu Northymbriam invasit; si proventus - successisset, ulterius processurus, et vim Angliæ incolis - illaturus. Noluit Deus: ideo ab incepto est impeditus: - attamen antequam rediisset, ejus exercitus de Northymbria - secum non modicam prædam abduxit.” - - [828] Sim. Dun. 1093 (where he reckons up Malcolm’s - invasions); “Quarto, regnante Willelmo juniore, cum suis - copiis infinitis usque Ceastram, non longe a Dunelmo sitam, - pervenit, animo intendens ulterius progredi.” - - [829] Chron. Petrib. 1091. “Oð þæt þa gode men þe þis land - bewiston, him fyrde ongean sændon and hine gecyrdon.” Did - they not go in their own persons? - - [830] See above, p. 282. The words of Orderic (701 A) are - odd; “Guillelmus rex … cum Roberto fratre suo pacem fecerat, - ipsumque contra infidos proditores qui contra regem - conspiraverant secum duxerat.” This surely cannot mean the - Scots; it must mean the rebels of three years before. Robert - cannot have been brought to act in any way against them; yet - the words of Orderic must have a confused reference to some - real object of his coming. - - [831] Will. Malms. iv. 311. “Satagente Roberto comite, qui - familiarem jamdudum apud Scottum locaverat gratiam, inter - Malcolmum et Willelmum concordia inita.” See Appendix P. - - [832] See Appendix BB. - - [833] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 513. - - [834] Sim. Dun. Hist. Eccl. Dun. iv. 8. “Priori ad se - venienti humiliter assurgens, benigne illum suscepit, et ita - per omnia sub se, quemadmodum sub episcopo, curam ecclesiæ - cum omni libertate agere præcepit.” - - [835] Ib. “Licet in alia monasteria et ecclesias ferocius - ageret, ipsis tamen non solum nihil auferebat, sed etiam de - suo dabat, et ab injuriis malignorum sicut pater - defendebat.” - - [836] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 674. - - [837] Sim. Dun. u. s. “Hoc tempore refectorium, quale hodie - cernitur, monachi ædificaverunt.” - - [838] Ib. “Tertio anno expulsionis episcopi, cum homines - regis quoddam in Normannia castellum tenentes obsiderentur, - et jamjamque capiendi essent, eos episcopus a periculo - liberavit, et consilio suo ut obsidio solveretur effecit.” - - [839] Sim. Dun. Hist. Eccl. Dun. iv. 8. “Unde rex placatus, - universa quæ in Anglia prius habuerat, ei restituit.” More - formally in the Gesta Regum, 1091; “Veniens Dunelmum, - episcopum Willelmum restituit in sedem suam, ipso post annos - tres die quo eam reliquit, scilicet tertio idus Septembris.” - The time of three years is not quite exact; see above, - p. 94. - - [840] Hist. Eccl. Dun. u. s. “Ille nequaquam vacuus rediit, - sed non pauca ex auro et argento sacra altaris vasa et - diversa ornamenta, sed et libros plurimos ad ecclesiam - præmittere curavit.” - - [841] See above, p. 295, and below, p. 305. - - [842] Chron. Petrib. 1091. “Se cyng W…. sona fyrde hét ut - abeodan ægðer scipfyrde and landfyrde; and seo scipferde, ær - he to Scotlande cuman mihte, ælmæst earmlice forfór, feowan - dagon toforan S[~c]e Michæles mæssan.” Florence calls the - host “classis non modica et equestris exercitus,” and adds - that “multi de equestri exercitu ejus fame et frigore - perierunt.” - - [843] Chron. Petrib. 1091. “Ac þa þa, se cyng Melcolm - gehyrde þæt hine man mid fyrde secean wolde, he for mid his - fyrde ut of Scotlande into Loðene on Englaland, and þær - abad.” Florence, followed by Simeon, oddly enough translates - this; “Rex Malcolmus cum exercitu in provincia Loidis - occurrit.” Hence some modern writers have carried Malcolm as - far south as _Leeds_, I presume only to Leeds in Yorkshire. - Orderic (701 A), though, as we shall see, he somewhat - misconceives the story, marks the geography very well; - “Exercitum totius Angliæ conglobavit, ut usque ad magnum - flumen, quod Scotte Watra dicitur, perduxit.” The “Scots’ - Water” is of course the Firth of Forth. So Turgot in the - Life of Margaret (Surtees Simeon, p. 247) speaks of “utraque - litora maris quod Lodoneium dividit et Scotiam.” See - Appendix P. - - [844] Chron. Petrib. ib. “Ða ða se cyng William mid his - fyrde genealehte þa ferdon betwux Rodbeard eorl and Eadgar - æþeling, and þæra cinga sehte swa gemacedon.” So Florence; - “Quod videns comes Rotbertus, clitonem Eadgarum, quem rex de - Normannia expulerat, et tunc cum rege Scottorum degebat, ad - se accersivit: cujus auxilio fretus, pacem inter reges - fecit.” On the details in Orderic, see Appendix P. - - [845] “Ex consultu sapientum,” says Orderic. These ancient - formulæ cleave to us wherever we go, even in the camp. On - the action of the military Witan, see above, p. 216. - - [846] See above, p. 25. - - [847] See Appendix P. - - [848] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 175. - - [849] Ib. vol. ii. p. 272. - - [850] It is specially marked that the homage now done was - the renewal of the old homage. So the Chronicle, 1091; “Se - cyng Melcolm to uran cynge com, and his man wearð to ealle - swilcre gehyrsumnisse swa he ǽr his fæder dyde, and þæt mid - aðe gefestnode.” So Florence; “Ea conditione, ut Willelmo, - sicut patri suo obedivit, Malcolmus obediret.” - - [851] The Chronicle says only; “Se cyng William him behét on - lande and on ealle þinge þæs þe he under his fæder ǽr - hæfde.” Florence is fuller; “Et Malcolmo xii. villas, quas - in Anglia sub patre illius habuerat, Willelmus redderet, et - xii. marcas auri singulis annis daret.” See Appendix P. - - [852] Chron. Petrib. u. s. “On þisum sehte wearð eac Eadgar - eþeling wið þone cyng gesæhtlad, and þa cyngas þa mid - mycclum sehte tohwurfon, ac þæt litle hwile stod.” Florence - is to the same effect. See Appendix P. - - [853] Flor. Wig. 1091. “Post hæc rex de Northymbria per - Merciam in West-Saxoniam rediit.” - - [854] See Appendix P. - - [855] See N. C. vol. v. p. 121. The Chronicle in 1093 brings - him in as “Dunecan … se on þæs cynges hyrede W. wæs, swa swa - his fæder hine ures cynges fæder ær to gisle geseald hæfde.” - - [856] See above, p. 14. - - [857] Could there be any reference to the non-restoration of - Odo? See above, p. 283. - - [858] See above, p. 143. - - [859] Chron. Petrib. 1091. “And se eorl Rodbeard her oð - X[~p]es mæsse forneah mid þam cynge wunode, and litel soðes - þær onmang of heora forewarde onfand; and twam dagon ær þære - tide on Wiht scipode and into Normandig fór, and Eadgar - æþeling mid him.” So Florence; “Rex … secum fere usque ad - nativitatem Domini comitem retinuit, sed conventionem inter - eos factam persolvere noluit. Quod comes graviter ferens, - xᵒ. kal. Januarii die cum clitone Eadgaro Normanniam - repetiit.” - - [860] Florence (1091) tells this tale; “Magnus fumus cum - nimio fœtore subsecutus, totam ecclesiam replevit, et tamdiu - duravit, quoad loci illius monachi cum aqua benedicta et - incensu et reliquiis sanctorum, officinas monasterii psalmos - decantando circumirent.” William of Malmesbury (iv. 323) - gives more details, and is better certified as to the cause; - “Secutus est odor teterrimus, hominum importabilis naribus. - Tandem monachi, felici ausu irrumpentes, benedictæ aquæ - aspergine _præstigias_ inimici effugarunt.” A modern - diplomatist might have said that the _prestige_ of the evil - one was lowered. - - [861] Florence again tells the tale; but William of - Malmesbury (iv. 324) again is far more emphatic, and seems - to look on the winds as moral agents; “Quid illud omnibus - incognitum sæculis? Discordia ventorum inter se - dissidentium, ab Euro-austro veniens decimo sexto kal. - Novembris Londoniæ plusquam secentas domos effregit…. Majus - quoque scelus furor ventorum ausus, tectum ecclesiæ sanctæ - Mariæ quæ ‘ad Arcus’ dicitur pariter sublevavit.” But - Florence is simply setting down events under their years, - while William is making a collection of “casualties,” to - illustrate the position that “plura sub eo [Willelmo Rufo] - subita et tristia acciderunt,” and notes this year as - specially marked by “tumultus fulgurum, motus turbinum.” - - [862] Flor. Wig. 1092. “Civitas Lundonia maxima ex parte - incendio conflagravit.” - - [863] See N. C. vol. i. p. 321. - - [864] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 691. - - [865] Flor. Wig. 1092. “Osmundus Searesbyriensis episcopus, - ecclesiam quam Searesbyriæ in castello construxerat, cum - adjutorio episcoporum Walcelini Wintoniensis et Johannis - Bathoniensis, nonis Aprilis feria ii. dedicavit.” Cf. Will. - Malms. Gest. Pont. 183. The foundation charter (Mon. Ang. - vi. 1299) was signed in 1091, “Willelmo rege monarchiam - totius Angliæ strenue gubernante anno quarto regni ejus, - apud Hastinges”――most likely on his return from Normandy in - August. The signatures come in a strange order. Between the - earls and the Archbishop of York come “Signum Wlnoti. Signum - Croc venatoris.” Wulfnoth here turns up in the same strange - way in which he so often does. Croc the huntsman we have - heard of already. See above, p. 102. We get also the - signatures of Howel Bishop of Le Mans, and of Robert the - _dispenser_, who invented the surname Flambard (see below, - p. 331). On the signature of Herbert Losinga, see - Appendix X. - - [866] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 606. - - [867] Will. Malms. iv. 325. “Eadem violentia fulminis apud - Salesbiriam tectum turris ecclesiæ omnino disjecit, - multamque maceriam labefactavit, quinta sane die postquam - eam dedicaverat Osmundus, præclaræ memoriæ episcopus.” - - [868] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 419, and Giraldus, Vita Rem. c. - 3, 4, 5 (vol. vii. p. 17 et seqq. Dimock). Giraldus is, I - believe, the only writer who makes a saint of Remigius. He - enlarges on the effects of Remigius’ preaching, and - consequently on the wickedness of those to whom he had to - preach. - - [869] Giraldus, Vit. Rem. ch. v. “Prolem propriam quam - genuerat, nepotes etiam et neptes, alienigenis in servitutem - detestanda avaritia venalem ex consuetudine prostituebant.” - Cf. N. C. vol. iv. p. 381, and the stories in Will. Malms. - ii. 200, about Godwine’s supposed first wife. See N. C. vol. - i. p. 737. - - [870] I mentioned in N. C. vol. iv. p. 212, that Lincoln - minster grew out of an earlier church of Saint Mary. The - history of John of Schalby printed by Mr. Dimock shows that - this elder parish church went on within the minster. This is - a very important case of a double church. See Giraldus, vii. - xxx. 194, 209. - - [871] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 369. - - [872] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 355. - - [873] Giraldus, Vit. Rem. ch. iv. “Operam erga regem et - archiepiscopum, excambium Eboracensi pro Lindeseia donantes, - prudenter effectui, Deo cooperante mancipavit. Et sic - Lindeseiam terramque totam inter Widhemam scilicet Lincolniæ - fluvium et Humbriam diocesi suæ provinciæque Cantuariensi - viriliter adjecit.” This is Giraldus’ improvement on the - local record copied by John of Schalby (Giraldus, vii. 194); - “Datis per regem prædictum Eboracensi archiepiscopo in - excambium possessionibus, totam Lyndesyam suæ diocesi et - provinciæ Cantuariensi conjunxit.” It must be remembered - that a bishopric of Lindesey had once been set up by the - Northumbrian Ecgfrith. See Bæda, iv. 12. - - [874] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 90, 354. This seems to be - delicately referred to in the record copied by John of - Schalby (Giraldus, vii. 193); “Remigius natione Normannus ac - monachus Fiscanensis, qui _ob certam causam_ venerat cum - eodem [Willielmo rege] in episcopum Dorkecestrensem.” - - [875] So says Florence. Remigius is eager to dedicate his - church, “quia sibi diem mortis imminere sentiebat.” Thomas - objects, “affirmans eam in sua parochia esse constructam.” - “At rex Willelmus junior, _pro pecunia quam ei Remigius - dederat_, totius fere Angliæ episcopis mandavit ut, in unum - convenientes, septennis idibus Maii ecclesiam dedicarent.” - Of course there is nothing about the bribe in Giraldus, nor - yet in William of Malmesbury, Gest. Pont. 313, where the - King’s order to the bishops is issued “magnanimi - viri”――Remigius has got the King’s own epithet――“hortatu.” - Matthew Paris, in the Historia Anglorum, i. 42, credits the - Red King with an unlooked-for degree of zeal; “Postea rex - Willelmus, cujus consilio et auxilio ecclesia illa fuit a - primo loco suo remota, et quam _pro anima patris sui_ [this - at least is characteristic] multis ditaverat possessionibus, - procuravit ut ea magnifice consummaretur.” - - [876] Will. Malms. Gest. Pont. 313. “Solus Rotbertus - Herefordensis venire abnuerat, et certa inspectione siderum - dedicationem tempore Remigii non processuram viderat, nec - tacuerat.” - - [877] On the exact date, see Mr. Dimock’s note to Giraldus, - vii. 20. Ascension Day came on the feast of Saint John _ante - Portam Latinam_. - - [878] “Ecclesiæ per hoc remansit dedicatio.” William of - Malmesbury (u. s.) says, “Rem dilatam successor ejus non - graviter explevit, utpote qui in labores alterius delicatus - intrasset.” There seems to be no mention of this in the - Lincoln writers. - - [879] Giraldus (vii. 22-31) has fifteen chapters, very short - ones certainly, of the miracles of Remigius. One takes most - to the healings of the crippled women Leofgifu and Ælfgifu; - Remigius “huic præcipue languori se propitium dedit.” A - Norman, Richard by name, who tried to pull a hair from the - beard of the saint’s uncorrupted body (cf. N. C. vol. iii. - p. 32), became crippled himself. But a certain deaf and dumb - Jewess, who came to blaspheme――doubtless mentally――was - smitten to the earth and suddenly endowed with hearing and - speech, beginning by uttering the name of Remigius in - French. “Ex quo patet, quia non propter merita semper aut - devotionem, sed ut manifestetur gloria Dei, miracula fiunt.” - She was baptized by Bishop Alexander, and was carried about - by him hither and thither to declare the praises of his - predecessor. - - [880] See Appendix R. - - [881] See Bæda, Hist. Eccl. iv. 29. But we have a more - distinct notice in the Life of Saint Cuthberht, c. 27 (ii. - 101 Stevenson), of “Lugubalia civitas, quæ a populis - Anglorum corrupte Luel vocatur.” In Ecgfrith’s day there - might be seen “mœnia civitatis, fonsque in ea miro quondam - Romanorum opere extractus.” - - [882] See N. C. vol. i. pp. 58, 576. - - [883] Ib. vol. i. pp. 63, 580. - - [884] See N. C. vol. i. p. 647. - - [885] Flor. Wig. 1092. “Hæc civitas, ut illis in partibus - aliæ nonnullæ, a Danis paganis ante cc. annos diruta, et - usque ad id tempus mansit deserta.” - - [886] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 134. - - [887] Chron. Petrib. 1092. “On þisum geare se cyng W. mid - mycelre fyrde ferde horð to Cardeol, and þa burh - geæðstaþelede, and þone castel arerde, and Dolfin út adraf, - þe æror þær þæs landes weold, and þone castel mid his mannum - gesette.” Florence seems to connect this with the unwrought - ceremony at Lincoln; “His actis, rex in Northymbriam - profectus, civitatem quæ Brytannice Cairleu, Latine - Lugubalia vocatur, restauravit et in ea castellum - ædificavit.” Orderic brings together the old and the new - when he speaks (917 B) in David’s time of “Carduilum - validissimum oppidum, quod Julius Cæsar, ut dicunt, - condidit.” - - [888] The Chronicler goes on; “And syððan hider suð gewænde, - and mycele mænige cyrlisces folces mid wifan and mid orfe - þyder sænde þær to wunigenne þæt land to tilianne.” So Henry - of Huntingdon, vii. 2; “Rex reædificavit civitatem Carleol, - et ex australibus Angliæ partibus illuc habitatores - transmisit.” Florence leaves out both the colonization and - the driving out of Dolfin. - - [889] See Appendix R. - - [890] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 858. - - [891] See Appendix R. - - [892] On the bishopric, see N. C. vol. v. p. 230. - - [893] On Henry’s election at Domfront, see Appendix P. - - [894] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 287; vol. iii. p. 165. - - [895] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 198. - - [896] See Appendix P. - - [897] See Appendix P. - - [898] See Appendix P. - - [899] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 253. - - [900] See above, p. 213. - - [901] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 228. - - [902] Will. Gem. viii. 4. “Quia in hoc negotio et in - aliisque plerisque suis necessitatibus Hugo comes Cestrensis - ei fidelis exstiterat, concessit ei ex integro castellum - quod sancti Jacobi appellatum est, in quo idem comes tunc - temporis nihil aliud habebat, præter custodiam munitionis - istius oppidi.” He goes on to describe the building of the - castle, in words partly borrowed from William of Poitiers, - and the grant to Richard of Avranches. On Richard, see N. C. - vol. ii. pp. 209, 296. - - [903] During this chapter, the authorities for the life of - Anselm become of primary importance. We have the invaluable - help of the two works of Anselm’s friend and faithful - companion, the English monk Eadmer, afterwards Bishop-elect - of Saint Andrews. Both Orderic and William of Malmesbury - speak of Eadmer with the deepest reverence, and cut short - their own accounts of Anselm, referring to his. He first - wrote the _Historia Novorum_, and then the _Vita Anselmi_ as - a kind of supplement, to bring in certain points more purely - personal to his hero. The subject of the _Historia Novorum_ - we might call “Anselm and his Times.” The subject of the - _Vita_ is naturally Anselm himself. Eadmer’s history is of - course most minute and most trustworthy for all that - concerns Anselm; other matters he cuts short. In most cases - one can see his reasons; but it is not easy to see why he - should have left out the mission of Geronto recorded by Hugh - of Flavigny (see Appendix AA). Along with the works of - Eadmer, we have also a precious store in the Letters of - Anselm himself (see Appendix Y), which, besides the picture - which they give of the man, throw a flood of light on the - history. All these materials, with the other writings of - Anselm, will be found in two volumes of Migne’s Patrologia, - 158 and 159. I have used this edition for the Letters and - for the Life; the _Historia Novorum_ I have gone on quoting - in the edition of Selden. - - I need hardly say that Anselm’s English career, with which - alone I am concerned, is only one part of his many-sided - character. I have kept mainly to the history of Anselm in - England; I have cut short both his early life and even the - time of his first banishment. With his theology and - philosophy I have not ventured to meddle at all. Anselm has - had no lack of biographers from the more general point of - view; Hasse (Anselm von Canterbury, Leipzig, 1852), Charles - de Rémusat (Saint Anselme de Cantorbéry, Paris, 1853), - Charma (Saint-Anselme, Paris, 1853), Croset-Mouchet (S. - Anselme d’Aoste, Archevêque de Cantorbéry, Paris, 1859). I - have made some use of all these; but the value even of Hasse - and De Rémusat for my strictly English purpose is not great. - M. Croset-Mouchet writes with a pleasant breeze of local - feeling from the Prætorian Augusta, but he is utterly at sea - as to everything in our island. - - In our own tongue the life of Anselm has been treated by a - living and a dead friend of my own, holding the same rank in - the English Church. Dean Hook, I must say with regret, - utterly failed to do justice to Anselm. This is the more - striking, as he did thorough justice to Thomas. From Dr. - Hook’s point of view it needed an effort to do justice to - either, a smaller effort in the case of Anselm, a greater in - the case of Thomas. As sometimes happens, he made the - greater effort, but not the smaller. I am however able to - say that he came to know Anselm better before he died. Dean - Church, on the other hand, has given us an almost perfect - example of a short sketch of such a subject. The accuracy of - the tale is as remarkable as the beauty of the telling. It - lacks only the light which is thrown on the story of Anselm - by the earlier story of William of Saint-Calais. It is most - important to remember that Anselm was not the first to - appeal to the Pope. - - [904] See N. C. vol. v. p. 131. - - [905] Ib. p. 135. - - [906] Ib. vol. iv. p. 521, and see Appendix S. - - [907] See the extract from Orderic (678 C) in Appendix S. - - [908] See Appendix S. - - [909] So Liebermann truly remarks (Einleitung in den - Dialogus de Scaccario, 40). He adds; “Diese pflegten die - Priesterweihe möglichst spät zu empfangen; desto eifriger - erjagten sie fette Pfründen.” - - [910] Florence (1100) notices emphatically that the doings - of Flambard were done “contra jus ecclesiasticum, et sui - gradus ordinem, presbyter enim erat.” So he is marked by - Anselm (Epp. iv. 2) as “sacerdos.” - - [911] See Appendix S. The story about Flambard’s mother, - which Sir Francis Palgrave suggests may have come from a - ballad, is told by Orderic in another place (787 A); “Mater, - quæ sortilega erat et cum dæmone crebro locuta, ex cujus - nefaria familiaritate unum oculum amiserat,” One thinks of a - later dabbler in mischief; “Our minnie’s sair mis-set, after - her ordinar, sir――she’ll hae had some quarrel wi’ her auld - gudeman――that’s Satan, ye ken, sirs.” William of Malmesbury - (Gesta Regum, iv. 314) calls him “fomes cupiditatum, - Ranulfus clericus, ex infimo genere hominum lingua et - calliditate provectus ad summum.” In the Gesta Pontificum, - 274, he is more guarded, and says only “ex quo ambiguum - genere.” - - [912] See Appendix S. - - [913] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 522. - - [914] See Stubbs, Const. Hist. i. 348. - - [915] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 687. - - [916] Will. Malms. iv. 314. “Is, si quando edictum regium - processisset ut nominatum tributum Anglia penderet, duplum - adjiciebat.” - - [917] Ib. “Subinde, cachinnantibus quibusdam ac dicentibus, - solum esse hominem qui sciret sic agitare ingenium nec - aliorum curaret odium dummodo complacaret dominum.” This is - one of the passages where William of Malmesbury thought it - wise to soften what he first wrote. For “cachinnantibus - quibusdam ac dicentibus” some manuscripts read “cachinnante - rege ac dicente.” - - [918] See Appendix U. - - [919] See N. C. vol. v. p. 430. - - [920] Will. Malms. iv. 314. “Invictus causidicus, et tam - verbis tam rebus immodicus.” One thinks of Lanfranc’s - successes in the law-courts of Pavia (see N. C. vol. ii. p. - 226); but knowledge of the Imperial law was a matter of - professional learning; with the simpler law of England age - and experience were enough. - - [921] See Stubbs, Const. Hist. i. 384, and Appendix T. - - [922] Chron. Petrib. 1099. “Rannulfe his capellane … þe æror - ealle his gemot ofer eall Engleland draf and bewiste.” - - [923] See N. C. vol. v. p. 445. - - [924] Will. Malms. iv. 314. “Juxta in supplices ut in - rebelles furens.” - - [925] See Appendix T. - - [926] See the extract from Orderic, 786 C, in Appendix T. - - [927] See above, p. 198. - - [928] See N. C. vol. v. p. 398. - - [929] As in the case of the general redemption of lands (see - N. C. vol. iv. p. 25) and the great confiscation and - distribution in the midwinter Gemót of 1067 (ib. p. 127). - - [930] Chron. Petrib. 1100. “Forðan þe he ælces mannes - gehadodes and læwedes yrfenuma beon wolde.” - - [931] William of Malmesbury (v. 393) seems to sum up the - reforms of Henry in the words “injustitias a fratre et - Rannulfo institutas prohibuit.” “Justitiæ” is a technical - phrase (see N. C. vol. iv. pp. 559, 560). “Injustitiæ,” as - here used, is something like our “unlaw” and “ungeld.” - - [932] Revised Statutes, i. 725. By some chance this statute - is printed in this collection, which commonly leaves out the - statutes which are of most historical importance. - - [933] I borrow this phrase from the story of Count William - of Evreux in Orderic, 814 C (see Appendix K), though he was - not to be given in quite the same sense. - - [934] See N. C. vol. v. pp. 373-381. - - [935] See the charter of Henry, Select Charters, 97; “Et - omnes malas consuetudines quibus regnum Angliae injuste - opprimebatur inde aufero, quas malas consuetudines ex parte - hic pono.” He then goes through the grievances in order, - relief, marriage, wardship, and the rest. - - [936] I borrow our ancient word _lænland_, which survives in - the German _lehn_. - - [937] See N. C. vol. v. pp. 379, 867. - - [938] Select Charters, 97. “Si quis baronum, comitum meorum - sive aliorum qui de me tenent, mortuus fuerit, hæres suus - non _redimet_ terram suam sicut faciebat tempore fratris - mei, sed justa et legitima relevatione _relevabit_ eam.” - - [939] Ib. “Et si quis baronum vel hominum meorum - infirmabitur, sicut ipse dabit vel dare disponet pecuniam - suam, ita datam esse concedo. Quod si ipse præventus armis - vel infirmitate, pecuniam suam non dederit vel dare - disposuerit, uxor sua sive liberi aut parentes, et legitimi - homines ejus, eam pro anima ejus dividant, sicut eis melius - visum fuerit.” - - [940] Select Charters, 97. “Et terræ et liberorum custos - erit sive uxor sive alius propinquorum qui justius esse - debeat.” - - [941] See Tractatus de Legibus, vii. 9. 10; and Phillips, - Englische Reichs- und Rechtsgeschichte, ii. 204. - - [942] See N. C. vol. v. p. 374. - - [943] This was pointed out by Hallam, Middle Ages, i. 128, - ed. 1846. - - [944] See N. C. vol. v. p. 381. - - [945] See above, p. 81. - - [946] See above, p. 133. - - [947] Select Charters, 97. “Similiter et homines baronum - meorum justa et legitima relevatione relevabunt terras suas - de dominis suis…. Et præcipio quod barones mei similiter se - contineant erga filios et filias vel uxores hominum suorum.” - - [948] See above, p. 153. - - [949] Select Charters, 97. “Omnia placita et omnia debita - quæ fratri meo debebantur condono, exceptis rectis firmis - meis et exceptis illis quæ pacta erant pro aliorum - hæreditatibus vel pro eis rebus quæ justius aliis - contingebant.” - - [950] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 429, 821. Eadmer says - emphatically in the Preface to the Historia Novorum; “Ex eo - quippe quo Willelmus Normanniæ comes terram illam [Angliam] - debellando sibi subegit, nemo in ea episcopus vel abbas ante - Anselmum factus est qui non primo fuerit homo regis, ac de - manu illius episcopatus vel abbatiæ investituram per - dationem virgæ pastoralis suscepit.” He excepts the bishops - of Rochester, who received investiture from the Archbishop - of Canterbury, their lord as well as their metropolitan. - - A distinct witness to the antiquity of the royal rights in - England is borne by William of Malmesbury (v. 417), where he - is speaking of the controversy in Henry the First’s time. - The King refused to yield to the new claims of the Pope, - “non elationis ambitu, sed procerum et maxime comitis de - Mellento instinctu, qui, in hoc negotio magis _antiqua - consuetudine_ quam recti tenore rationem reverberans - allegabat multum regiæ majestati diminui, si _omittens morem - antecessorum_, non investiret electum per baculum et - annulum.” - - Another remarkable witness is given by one of the - continuators of Sigebert (Sigeberti Auctarium Ursicampinum, - Pertz, vi. 471). He records the death of Lanfranc under a - wrong year, 1097, and adds; “Anselmus abbas Beccensis, pro - sua sanctitate et doctrina non solum in Normannia, sed etiam - in Anglia jam celeberrimus, successit in præsulatu. Qui - licet a rege Willelmo et principibus terre totiusque - ecclesiæ conventu susceptus honorifice fuisset, multas tamen - molestias et tribulationes postmodum sub ipso rege passus - est pro statu ecclesiæ corrigendo. Nam reges Angliæ hanc - injustam legem _jam diu tenuerant_, ut electos ecclesiæ - præsules ipsi per virgam pastoralem ecclesiis investirent.” - - This is of course written by the lights of Henry the First’s - reign, as Anselm never objected to the royal investiture in - the time of Rufus. - - [951] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 588. - - [952] Ib. p. 590. - - [953] See N. C. vol. i. pp. 93, 601. - - [954] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 372. - - [955] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 37. - - [956] See Appendix W. - - [957] This comes in the great passage under 1100; “Godes - cyrcean he nyðerade, and þa bisceoprices and abbotrices þe - þa ealdras on his dagan feollan, ealle he hi oððe wið feo - gesealde, oððe on his agenre hand heold and to gafle - gesette.” - - [958] See the passage quoted from Eadmer in Appendix W. - - [959] See Appendix W. - - [960] See N. C. vol. i. pp. 505, 527; vol. ii. p. 69. - - [961] See Stubbs, Const. Hist. i. 299. We have come across a - good many cases which illustrate the difficulty of getting - back church lands, even when they had been granted away only - for a season. See N. C. vol. ii. p. 565; vol. iv. p. 803. - - [962] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 617. - - [963] See Appendix W. - - [964] See above, p. 298. - - [965] Ann. Wint. 1097. “Radulfus xvi. ecclesias carentes - pastoribus sub tutela sua habebat, episcopatus, et abbatias, - quas ad extremam paupertatem perduxit. Ecclesiæ quibus - pastores præerant, dabant singulis annis regi ccc. vel cccc. - marcas, aliæ plus, aliæ vero minus. In tanta erant tam - ordinati miseria quam laici, quod tædebat eos vitæ eorum.” - The annalist had said a little earlier (1092), in nearly the - same words, “Prædictus Radulphus, vir quo in malo nemo - subtilior, ecclesias sibi commissas exspoliavit bonis - omnibus, et divites simul et pauperes [see p. 341] ad tantam - deduxit inopiam, ut mallent mori quam sub ejus vivere - dominatu.” - - [966] See Appendix W. - - [967] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 383, 385, 481. - - [968] Ann. Wint. 1092. “Odo abbas abbatiam dimisit, nolens - eam de rege more sæcularium tenere.” Here is a distinct - protest against the new tenure. - - [969] Ib. 1100. “Odoni reddidit [Henricus] abbatiam - Certesiæ.” - - [970] Chron. Petrib. 1100. - - [971] Take two cases at random with a great interval between - them, the vacancy of the see of Lincoln under Henry the - Second, and that of Oxford, which one might have thought - hardly worth keeping vacant, under Elizabeth. Hugh Curwin - (see Godwin, 405) died in 1568, and his successor John - Underhill was not appointed till 1589. - - [972] Orderic (764 A) gives a picture of the kind of men who - became bishops under this system; “Sic utique capellani - regis et amici præsulatus Angliæ adepti sunt, et nonnulli ex - ipsis _præposituras ad opprimendos inopes_, sibique augendas - opes nihilominus tenuerunt…. Plerumque leves et indocti - eliguntur ad regimen ecclesiæ tenendum, non pro sanctitate - vitæ vel ecclesiasticorum eruditione dogmatum liberaliumve - peritia litterarum, sed nobilium pro gratia parentum et - potentum favore amicorum.” - - [973] See N. C. vol. v. p. 224. - - [974] Ib. - - [975] See Stubbs, Const. Hist. vol. iii. pp. 318, 319. He - gives amongst the reasons for the difference; “The abbots - were not so influential as the bishops in public affairs, - nor was the post equally desirable as the reward for public - service; with a very few exceptions the abbacies were much - poorer than the bishoprics, and involved a much more steady - attention to local duties, which would prevent attendance at - court.” - - [976] This story has no better authority than that of the - Hyde writer (299); still it is, to say the least, remarkable - that it should be told of William Rufus. But there is an - element of fun in the tale, and the Red King may for once - have preferred a joke to a bribe. The description of the - three monks at all events is good; “Cum coram rege astarent - pariter, et uno plura promittente, alius pluriora - promitteret, rex sagaciter cuncta perscrutans, tacentem - monachum tertium quid quæsivit, ille se nil omnino - promittere aut dare respondit, sed ad hoc tantum venisse ut - abbatem suum cum honore suscipiendo domum deduceret.” - - [977] See Stephens, Memorials of Chichester, p. 47. - - [978] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 666. - - [979] On the chronology, see Appendix X. - - [980] I have already sketched his career, N. C. vol. iv. p. - 420. - - [981] So says Bartholomew Cotton, in his History of the - Norwich Bishops; Hist. Angl., ed. Luard, p. 389; “Hic prius - fuit prior Fiscanni, postea abbas Ramesseye, et pater suus - Robertus abbas Wintoniæ. Hic Herbertus in pago Oxymensi - natus, Fiscanni monachus, post ejusdem loci prioratum - strenue administratum, translatus in Angliam a rege - Willelmo, qui secundus ex Normannis obtinuit imperium, - Ramesseye abbatis jure prælatus est.” - - [982] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 36, 747. - - [983] See Appendix X. - - [984] See Appendix X. - - [985] Ann. Wint. 1088. “Radulfo abbate Wintoniæ defuncto, - commisit rex abbatiam Radulfo Passeflabere capellano suo.” - - [986] See Appendix X. - - [987] See Appendix X. - - [988] Mon. Angl. ii. 431. - - [989] See Appendix X. - - [990] “Latenter,” says the extract from Florence quoted in - Appendix X. - - [991] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 437. So in Eadmer, Vit. Ans. ii. - 3. 23. William Rufus says, “Se illum [Urbanum] pro papa non - tenere, nec suæ consuetudinis esse, ut absque sua electione - alicui liceret in regno suo papam nominare.” - - [992] See N. C. vol. ii. pp. 118, 464; vol. iv. p. 354. - - [993] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 376, 820. - - [994] See above, p. 312. - - [995] See N. C. vol. v. pp. 661, 662. - - [996] In the poem on the captivity of Ælfheah in the - Chronicles, 1011, he is - “Se þe ær wæs heafod - Angelcynnes - And Cristendomes.” - - [997] Cf. Stubbs, Const. Hist. i. 211 et seqq. with 245. - - [998] So we read of Henry the First in Florence, 1102; “Duos - de clericis duobus episcopatibus investivit, Rogerium - videlicet cancellarium episcopatu Saresbyriensi, et Rogerium - larderarium suum pontificatu Herefordensi.” - - [999] See N. C. vol. v. p. 662, and Contemporary Review, - 1878, pp. 493, 496. - - [1000] See below, p. 418. - - [1001] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 372. - - [1002] We shall come to this again. This state of feeling is - implied in Eadmer’s whole description of the time - immediately before Anselm’s appointment. - - [1003] We have seen even under the reign of the Confessor - (see N. C. vol. ii. p. 69, and above, p. 348) a notion - afloat that the archbishopric of Canterbury was to be had by - bribery; but it was to be bribery carried on in some very - underhand way, not in the form of open gifts either to King - Eadward or to Earl Godwine. The appointment of Stigand (see - N. C. vol. ii. p. 347) might be said to be the reward of - temporal services; but they were services done to the whole - nation, and the reward was bestowed by the nation itself. - - [1004] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 69. Cf. Appendix I. - - [1005] See above, p. 352. - - [1006] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 436. - - [1007] Eadmer, Vit. Ans. ii. 3. 23. The King and his - courtiers, “quid dicerent non habentes, eum in regem - blasphemare uno strepitu conclamavere, quandoquidem ausus - erat in regno ejus, nisi eo concedente, quidquam vel Deo - ascribere.” - - [1008] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 16. “Et adjecit, Sed per sanctum - vultum de Luca (sic enim jurare consueverat) [see Appendix - G] nec ipse hoc tempore nec alius quis archiepiscopus erit, - me excepto.” - - [1009] The action of Flambard in the matter comes out most - strongly in the Winchester Annals, 1089, where a motive is - assigned for Flambard’s zeal; “Hoc anno commisit rex Radulfo - Passefiabere archiepiscopatum Cantuariæ, defuncto Lanfranco. - Ipse autem regi quicquid inde aliquo modo lucrari poterat, - ut de ejus cogitaret promotione, donavit.” But he had to - wait eight years for his reward. - - [1010] I refer to the well-known outburst of William of - Malmesbury, iv. 314, some passages of which I have quoted in - Appendix G. - - [1011] Will. Malms. iv. 314. “Nullus dives nisi nummularius, - nullus clericus nisi causidicus, nullus presbyter nisi (ut - verbo parum Latino utar) firmarius.” - - [1012] Of the birthplace of Anselm and its buildings, some - of which must have been fresh in his childhood, I attempted - a little picture in my Historical and Architectural - Sketches. The nature of the country is brought out with all - clearness by Dean Church, Anselm, p. 8. Before him it had - stirred up the local patriotism of M. Croset-Mouchet to the - best things in his book. - - [1013] I must venture to admire, though the poet has - forsaken the natural Saturnian of Nævius and Walter Map for - the foreign metre of Homer, the lines in which one of the - biographers of Saint Hugh (Metrical Life, Dimock, p. 2) - describes the country of his hero; - “Imperialis ubi Burgundia surgit in Alpes, - Et condescendit Rhodano, convallia vernant, - Duplicibus vestitur humus; sunt gramina vestis - Publica, sunt flores vestis sollennis, et uno - Illa colore nitent, sed mille coloribus illi.” - - [1014] Eadmer (Vit. Ans. i. 1. 1.) carefully marks the - geography of Aosta. It is “Augusta civitas, confinis - Burgundiæ et Langobardiæ.” I have collected some passages on - this head in Historical Geography, p. 278. The French - writers De Rémusat (Saint Anselme, 21), Charma (4), and - specially M. Croset-Mouchet (55), as a neighbour, seem to - have caught the Burgundian birth of Anselm better than the - English. Yet Charma, who knows that Aosta was Burgundian, - calls Anselm an Italian, perhaps on account of the Lombard - birth of his father. - - [1015] M. Croset-Mouchet (57) is very anxious to connect - Anselm’s mother with the house of the Counts of Savoy. He - gives a genealogical table at the end of his book, where the - pedigree of Ermenberga is traced up to Ardoin the Third, - Count of Turin and Marquess in Italy. He seems however to be - not very certain about the matter, and it does not greatly - affect Anselm’s career either at Bec or at Canterbury. - - [1016] Pope Urban (Hist. Nov. 45) counsels Anselm to avoid - the unhealthy season at Rome, “quia urbis istius aër multis - et maxime peregrinæ regionis hominibus nimis est - insalubris.” Later in the story (Hist. Nov. 72), Ivo of - Chartres gives him a like piece of advice about Italy - generally; “Accepit ab Ivone et a multis non spernendi - consilii viris, satius fore cœptum iter in aliud tempus - differendum, quam _Italicis ardoribus_ ea se tempestate cum - suis tradere cruciandum. Nimis etenim fervor æstatis ita - ubique, sed maxime, ut ferebatur, in Italia, tunc temporis - quæque torrebat, ut incolis vix tolerabilis, peregrinis vero - gravis et importabilis.” The difference of air between Aosta - and Rome or Italy generally does not depend upon the - boundaries of kingdoms; but here Anselm is distinctly - reckoned as a “peregrinus homo” in Italy no less than Eadmer - or Ivo or Pope Urban himself. - - [1017] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 441. - - [1018] See above, p. 49, and N. C. vol. iv. p. 579. - - [1019] Will. Malms. iv. 315. “Simul et supersedendum est in - historia, quam reverendissimi Edmeri præoccupavit facundia.” - - [1020] I feel towards Dean Church almost as William of - Malmesbury felt towards Eadmer. But he of course looks at - Anselm from a point of view somewhat different from mine. - And he had not been led to notice that earlier action of - William of Saint-Calais which from my point of view is - all-important for the story of Anselm. - - [1021] This beautiful story is told by Eadmer at the very - beginning of the Life, i. 1. 2. - - [1022] Eadmer, Vit. Ans. i. 1. 3. “Ille in suo proposito - perstans oravit Deum, quatenus infirmari mereretur, ut vel - sic ad monachicum quem desiderabat ordinem susciperetur.” - - [1023] Will. Malms. Vita Wlst. 245. See N. C. vol. ii. p. - 470. The confession of Anselm in this matter comes out in - his sixteenth Meditation, p. 793 of Migne’s edition. The - passage seems to imply more serious offences than would have - been guessed from the more general words of Eadmer, i. 1. 4. - The meditation is addressed to a sister. If this means his - own sister Richeza or Richera, it must have been before her - marriage with Burgundius. See his Epistles, iii. 43. - - [1024] See William Fitz-Stephen, iii. 21, Robertson, and the - remarkable story in William of Canterbury, i. 5, Robertson. - - [1025] Vit. Ans. i. 1. 45. See N. C. vol. ii. p. 228. - - [1026] Vit. Ans. i. 1. 6. He is made to say; “Ecce, inquit, - monachus fiam. Sed ubi? Si Cluniaci vel Becci, totum tempus - quod in discendis litteris posui, perdidi. Nam et Cluniaci - districtio ordinis, et Becci supereminens prudentia - Lanfranci, qui illic monachus est, me [_al._ mihi] aut nulli - prodesse, aut nihil valere comprobabit. Itaque in tali loco - perficiam quod dispono, in quo et scire meum possim - ostendere, et multis prodesse.” - - [1027] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 110. His election to the - priorship is recorded in the Life, i. 2. 9. There is no - mention of any such dislike to the promotion on Anselm’s - part as is recorded at his later election as abbot. The - whole account of Anselm’s monastic life, as given by Eadmer - and followed by his modern biographers, is of the deepest - interest. I have noticed only a few special points here and - there. - - [1028] See the story in the Life, i. 4. 30. - - [1029] Ib. i. 4. 35. His name is given as Cadulus. - - [1030] Eadmer, Vit. Ans. i. 36. The scene between the monks - and the abbot-elect, the mutual prayers and prostrations, - are very like to the later scene when he is named archbishop - at Gloucester. The command of the Archbishop of Rouen comes - out emphatically; “Vicit quoque et multo maxime vicit - præceptum, quod, ut supra retulimus, ei fuerat ab - archiepiscopo Maurilio per obedientiam injunctum, videlicet, - ut, si major prælatio quam illius prioratus exstiterat ipsi - aliquando injungeretur, nullatenus eam suscipere recusaret.” - - [1031] Ord. Vit. 530 B. “De hospitalitate Beccensium - sufficienter eloqui nequeo. Interrogati Burgundiones et - Hispani, aliique de longe seu de prope adventantes - respondeant: et quanta benignitate ab eis suscepti fuerint, - sine fraude proferant, eosque in similibus imitari sine - fictione satagant. Janua Beccensium patet omni viatori, - eorumque panis nulli denegatur charitative petenti.” - - [1032] Ib. A. “Fama sapientiæ hujus didascoli per totam - Latinitatem divulgata est, et nectare bonæ opinionis ejus - occidentalis Ecclesia nobiliter debriata est.” - - [1033] See Appendix Y. - - [1034] See Appendix Y. - - [1035] See Appendix Y. - - [1036] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 366. - - [1037] There is something amusing in the picture of the two - in the Life of Gundulf, Anglia Sacra, ii. 275. “Anselmus, - quia in scripturis eruditior erat, frequentior loquebatur. - Gundulfus vero, quia in lacrimis profusior erat, magis - fletibus rigabatur. Loquebatur ille; plorabat iste. Ille - plantabat; iste rigabat. Divina ille proferebat eloquia; - profunda iste trahebat suspiria. Christi vices ille, iste - gerebat Mariæ.” There are not a few letters of Anselm - addressed to Gundulf. See Appendix Y. - - [1038] Among these was one of the men named Osbern――there - would seem to be more than one――who play a part in the life - of Anselm. There is the Osbern mentioned in the Life, i. 2. - 13, 14, as first the bitter enemy and then the chosen friend - of Anselm. He seems to live and die at Bec, and after his - death he appears to Anselm and tells him how the old serpent - thrice rose up against him, but the Lord’s bearward, - “ursarius Domini Dei” (comp. N. C. vol. ii. p. 26), saves - him. Then there is the Osbern mentioned in the Letters, i. - 57, 58. This last Osbern is demanded by Lanfranc for his - monastery at Canterbury (“domnus Osbernus quem ad se reduci - auctoritas vestra jubet”), and he is sent to Prior Henry at - Christ Church with a letter of recommendation from Anselm. - In this are the words, “domnus Osbernus vester, qui ad vos - redit, pristinæ vitæ perversitatam sponte accusat et - execratur.” This and a good deal more would exactly suit the - Osbern of the Life, yet it is hardly possible that they can - be the same. But this second Osbern may be the same as the - one who writes the most remarkable letter to Anselm (iii. - 2), on which see Appendix Y. Osbern, Osbiorn, is one of - those names which are both English――or at least Danish――and - Norman. That the second Osbern at least was English seems - clear from Epp. i. 60, 65, where we hear of “domnus - Hulwardus [Wulfward] Anglus, consobrinus domni Osberni.” Did - Lanfranc claim all English monks anywhere? - - [1039] Domesday, 69 _b_. “Totum manerium valet xii. libras; - valebat xv. libras vivente Mathilde regina, quæ dedit eidem - ecclesiæ.” There were six hides and a half in demesne, and - one hide held by the church of the place. - - [1040] Domesday, 159 _b_. “Valuit xl. solidos; modo lx. - solidos. Hæc terra nunquam geldum reddidit.” This - exceptional privilege, designed or casual, might become a - ground of disputes. - - [1041] Domesday, 34 _b_. “Sancta Maria de Bech tenet de dono - Ricardi Totinges…. T. R. E. et modo val. c. solidos; cum - recepit xx. solidos.” On these possessions of Bec in England - during the reign of the Conqueror, see N. C. vol. iv. p. - 440. - - [1042] See Mon. Angl. vii. 1052. An earlier church of - secular canons was changed by Gilbert of Clare into a cell - of Bec. It was removed to Stoke in 1124, made denizen in - 1395, and restored to seculars in 1415. See Mon. Angl. vi. - 1415. Weedon Beck in Northamptonshire is also said to have - had a cell of Bec, founded shortly after the Conquest. - Weedon appears three times in Domesday, 223, 224 _b_, 227; - but there is no mention of Bec. Ernulf of Hesdin is also - said to have founded a cell to Bec at Ruislip in Middlesex, - Mon. Angl. vii. 1050. Ruislip appears in Domesday, 129 _b_, - as a possession of Ernulf, but there is no mention of Bec. - The chief dependency of Bec in England, Oakburn in - Wiltshire, does not claim an earlier date or founder than - Matilda of Wallingford, daughter of Robert of Oily, in 1149. - - [1043] Eadmer, Vit. Ans. i. 5. 37. “Abominabile quippe - judicabat, si quidvis lucri assequeretur ex eo quod alius - contra moderamina juris quavis astutia perdere posset. Unde - neminem in placitis patiebatur a suis aliqua fraude - circumveniri, observans ne cui faceret quod sibi fieri - nollet.” Compare the cunning lawyers whom Abbot Adelelm - found among the monks of Abingdon, N. C. vol. iv. p. 476. - - [1044] Ib. “Delegatis monasterii causis curæ ac - sollicitudini fratrum, de quorum vita et strenuitate certus - erat.” - - [1045] Ib. 41. “Cum igitur Anselmus, transito mari, - Cantuariam veniret, pro sua reverentia et omnibus nota - sanctitate, honorifice a conventu ecclesiæ Christi in ipsa - civitate sitæ susceptus est.” His discourse to the monks is - given at great length. - - [1046] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 441. - - [1047] Vit. Ans. i. 5. 41. “Accepta fraternitate monachorum, - factus est inter eos unus ex eis. Degens per dies aliquot - inter eos et quotidie, aut in capitulo, aut in claustro, - mira quædam et illis adhuc temporibus insolita de vita et - moribus monachorum coram eis rationabili facundia - disserens.” - - [1048] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 361. - - [1049] Vit. Ans. u. s. “Privatim quoque aliis horis agebat, - cum his qui profundioris ingenii erant, profundas eis de - divinis nec non sæcularibus libris quæstiones proponens, - propositasque exponens.” - - [1050] Ib. “Quo tempore et ego ad sanctitatis ejus notitiam - pervenire merui, ac, pro modulo parvitatis meæ, beata illius - familiaritate utpote adolescens, qui tunc eram, non parum - potiri.” - - [1051] Ib. 6. 45. “Vadens et ad diversa monasteria - monachorum, canonicorum, sanctimonialium, nec non ad curias - quorumque nobilium, prout eum ratio ducebat, perveniens, - lætissime suscipiebatur, et suscepto quæque charitatis - obsequia gratissime ministrabantur.” - - [1052] Ib. “Solito more cunctis se jucundum et affabilem - exhibebat, moresque singulorum in quantum sine peccato - poterat, in se suscipiebat.” Eadmer draws out the apostolic - rule at some length, and gives specimens of Anselm’s - discourses to these different classes. - - [1053] Vit. Ans. i. 6. 47. “Non eo, ut aliis mos est, - docendi modo exercebat, sed longe aliter singula quæque sub - vulgaribus et notis exemplis proponens, solidæque rationis - testimonio fulciens, ac remota omni ambiguitate, in mentibus - auditorum deponens.” - - [1054] Ib. “Lætabatur ergo quisquis illius colloquio uti - poterat, quoniam in eo quodcumque petebatur divinum - consilium in promptu erat.” He had said yet more strongly, - “Corda omnium miro modo in amorem ejus vertebantur, et ad - eum audiendum famelica aviditate replebantur.” - - [1055] Ib. 48. He became “pro sua excellenti fama totius - Angliæ partibus notus, ac pro reverenda sanctitate charus - cunctis effectus.” And directly after, “Familiaris ergo ei - dehinc Anglia facta est, et prout diversitas causarum - ferebat, ab eo frequentata.” - - [1056] No strictly physical miracle is alleged to have been - wrought by Anselm’s own hands; but several stories are told - by Eadmer in the sixth chapter of the first book of the - Life, in which cures were believed to be done by water in - which he had washed, and the like. In another class of - stories in the third chapter, the bodily wants of Anselm or - his friends are supplied in an unexpected way, but without - any physical miracle. Thus the well-known Walter Tirel, - entertaining Anselm, makes excuses for the lack of fish. The - saint announces that a fine sturgeon is on the road, and it - presently comes. - - Eadmer’s book of the Miracles of Anselm, which forms No. - xvi. in Dr. Liebermann’s collection, consists of wonders of - the usual kind at or after Anselm’s death. - - [1057] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 704, 713. - - [1058] Eadmer, Vit. Ans. i. 6. 47. “Non fuit comes in Anglia - seu comitissa, vel ulla persona potens, quæ non judicaret se - sua coram Deo merita perdidisse, si contingeret se Anselmo - abbati Beccensi gratiam cujusvis officii tunc temporis non - exhibuisse.” - - [1059] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 491. So Hist. Nov. 15, “Certe - amicus meus familiaris ab antiquo comes Cestrensis Hugo - fuit.” - - [1060] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 14. “Jam enim, quodam quasi - præsagio mentes quorundam tangebantur, et licet clanculo, - nonnulli adinvicem loquebantur, eum, si Angliam iret, - archiepiscopum Cantuariensem fore.” William of Malmesbury - (Gest. Pont. 78), “Erat tamen spes nonnulla his malis posse - imponi finem, si quando Cantuariensem archiepiscopum - viderent, qui esset os omnium, vexillifer prævius, umbo - publicus. Spargebaturque in vulgus rumor, haud equidem sine - mente et numine Dei, ut arbitror, Anselmum fore - archiepiscopum, virum penitus sanctum, anxie doctum, felicem - futuram hujus hominis benedictionibus Angliam.” - - [1061] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 312, 491. We might have - guessed from Eadmer (Hist. Nov. 14) that it is Saint - Werburh’s of which he is speaking, when he says, “Hugo comes - Cestrensis volens in sua quadam ecclesia monachorum abbatiam - instituere, missis Beccum nuntiis, rogavit abbatem Anselmum - Angliam venire, locum inspicere, eumque per monachos suos - regulari conversatione informare.” But it is William of - Malmesbury (Gest. Pont. 78) who distinctly mentions Chester. - Anselm comes to England, “ut abbatiam apud Cestrum firmaret, - quam ejusdem civitatis comes Hugo monachis potissimum - Beccensibus implere volebat.” - - [1062] He had to dwell among “belluini cœtus.” See N. C. - vol. iv. p. 491, and above, p. 127. - - [1063] Vit. Ans. ii. 1. 1. “Invitatus, imo districta - interpellatione adjuratus, ab Hugone Cestrensi comite, - multisque aliis Anglorum regni principibus, qui eum animarum - suarum medicum et advocatum elegerant.” - - [1064] Ib. “Insuper ecclesiæ suæ prece atque præcepto pro - communi utilitate coactus.” - - [1065] Hist. Nov. 14. “Quia hoc [his purpose not to accept - the archbishopric] non omnes intelligebant (providendo bona, - non tantum coram Deo, sed etiam coram omnibus hominibus), - Angliam intrare noluit, ne se hujus rei gratia intrasse - quisquam suspicaretur.” - - [1066] Ib. 15. “Si timor suscipiendi archiepiscopatus ne - veniat eum detinet, fateor, inquit, in fide mea, quoniam id, - quod rumor inde jactet, nihil est.” - - [1067] Hist. Nov. 15. “Tertio mandat illi hæc, si non - veneris, revera noveris, quia nunquam in vita æterna in - tanta requie eris quin perpetuo doleas te ad me non - venisse.” There is something very striking in the frequent - mixture of strong faith with evil practice in men of Earl - Hugh’s stamp. But his cleaving to such a man as Anselm is at - least more enlightened than the fetish-worship of Lewis the - Eleventh. Cf. Church, Anselm, 173. - - [1068] Eadmer (Hist. Nov. 15) gives his reflexions at some - length. They are summed up in the words of William of - Malmesbury, Gest. Pont. 78; “Cæterum quid homines - loquerentur ipsi viderent, cum quantum sua interesset, eorum - obloquia, honesta diu conversatione vitasset.” He adds, - “Simul et jam rumor de ejus archiepiscopatu, minas olim - intentans, longinquitate temporis detepuerat.” - - [1069] Will. Malms. Gest. Pont. 79. “Ut prædiorum suorum - vectigalia lenito intercessionibus suis rege levigaret.” - - [1070] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 15. Several letters of Anselm are - addressed to her. See Appendix Y. - - [1071] Hist. Nov. 15. “Mandatum est illi a Beccensibus ne, - si peccato inobedientiæ notari nollet, ultra monasterium - repeteret, donec transito mari, suis in Anglia rebus - subveniret.” - - [1072] “Citato gressu, ad comitem venit,” says Eadmer (Hist. - Nov. 15), where he leaves out the interview with the King - which he describes in the Life. - - [1073] Will. Malms. Gest. Pont. 79. “Hugo … quanquam in - supremis positus, omnium in confessione supercilium - recusans, Anselmum expetebat; veteris amicitiæ pignus apud - eum depositurus si moreretur.” - - [1074] Vit. Ans. ii. 1. 1. “Cum quasi ex præsagio futurorum - multi et monachi et laici conclamarent illum archiepiscopum - fore, summo mane a loco decessit, nec ullo pacto acquiescere - petentibus, ut ibi festum celebraret, voluit.” - - [1075] Vit. Ans. ii. 1. 1. “Rex ipse solio exsilit, et ad - ostium domus viro gaudens occurrit, ac in oscula ruens per - dexteram eum ad sedem suam perducit.” - - [1076] Ib. “Regem de his quæ fama de eo ferebat Anselmus - arguere cœpit, nec quidquam eorum quæ illi dicenda esse - sciebat, silentio pressit. Pene etenim totius regni homines - omnes talia quotidie nunc clam nunc palam de eo dicebant, - qualia regiam dignitatem nequaquam decebant.” - - [1077] The language of Eadmer quoted in the last note is - quite vague. In William of Malmesbury (Gest. Pont. 79) we - get one of those remarkable cases in which he first wrote - something strong, and then altered it. He seems (see his - editor’s note) to have first written, “Data secreti copia, - _flagitiorum obscœnitatem_ quibus regem accusabat fama - incunctanter aperuit.” He then struck out the strong words - in Italics and changed them to the vague “cuncta.” - - [1078] Will. Malms. Gest. Pont. 79. “Famæ licentiæ non se - posse obviare dictitans; ceterum sanctum virum non debere - illa credere. Neque enim procaciore responso exsufflare - hominem tunc volebat, sciens quanti eum pater et mater - pendere soliti essent dum adviverent.” - - [1079] Eadmer, in the passage quoted above, distinctly - implies that nothing was said about the affairs of Bec, and - adds, “Finito colloquio divisi ab invicem sunt, et de - ecclesiæ suæ negotiis ea vice ab Anselmo nihil actum est.” - William of Malmesbury, on the other hand, describes Anselm - as speaking of them at this interview (“necessitates quoque - suas modeste allegans”), and William as settling them as - Anselm wished (“ille omnia negotia Beccensis ecclesiæ ad - arbitrium rectoris componens”). I should infer from this, - and from the words “ea vice” in Eadmer, that things were - settled in the end as the monks of Bec wished, but not at - this interview. William of Malmesbury is never very strict - as to chronological order. - - [1080] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 15. “Post hæc in Normanniam - regredi volens, negata a rege licentia, copiam id agendi - habere non potuit.” It is not easy, as Dean Church remarks - (Anselm, 175), to see why the King’s leave was needed for - the subject of another prince to go back to his own country. - - [1081] Ib. “Sic hujus temporis spatium transiit, ut de - pontificatu Cantuariensi nihil ad eum vel de eo dictum - actumve sit; ipseque sui periculi et antiqui timoris securus - effectus fuerit.” - - [1082] Eadmer tells the story, with the comment, “quod - posteris mirum dictu fortasse videbitur.” - - [1083] See N. C. vol. i. p. 435. - - [1084] Eadmer, u. s. “Ipse, licet nonnihil exinde - indignatus, tamen fieri quod petebatur permisit, dicens quod - quidquid ecclesia peteret, ipse sine dubio pro nullo - dimitteret quin faceret omne quod vellet.” Will. Malms. - Gest. Pont. 79. “Respondit ludibundus, risu iram - dissimulans; ‘Orate quod vultis; ego faciam quod placebit, - quia nullius unquam oratio voluntatem meam labefactabit.’” - The _oratio directa_ of William sounds as if it came nearer - to the King’s actual words than the _oratio obliqua_ of - Eadmer. But we lose much in many of these stories from not - having the Red King’s own vigorous French. - - [1085] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 13. Anselm’s chief objection was - that the making of prayers was a specially episcopal - business; “Episcopi, ad quos ista maxime pertinebant, - Anselmum super reipsa consuluerunt. Et quod ipse orationis - agendæ modum et summam ordinaret, vix optinere suis precibus - ab eo potuerant. Episcopis enim præferri in tali statuto - ipse abbas fugiebat.” - - [1086] Ib. “Institutæ igitur preces sunt per Anglorum - ecclesias omnes.” - - [1087] See Domesday, 163. The entry of Alvestone comes - immediately before the entry of Berkeley. - - [1088] This story is told by Eadmer (Hist. Nov. 15, 16) and - William of Malmesbury (Gest. Pont. 80). One would like to - know the name of this “unus de principibus terræ, cum rege - familiariter agens,” who held Anselm in such high esteem. If - it had been Earl Hugh, one might expect that Eadmer would - have said so. - - [1089] Ib. “Nec illum quidem maxime, sicut mea multorumque - fert opinio.” - - [1090] Ib. “Obtestatus est rex quod manibus ac pedibus - plaudens, in amplexum ejus accurreret, si ullam fiduciam - haberet se ad illum posse ullatenus aspirare, et adjecit, - Sed per sanctum vultum de Luca (sic enim jurare - consueverat), nec ipse hoc tempore nec alius quis - archiepiscopus erit, me excepto.” - - [1091] Ib. “Hæc illum dicentem e vestigio valida infirmitas - corripuit, et lecto deposuit, atque indies crescendo ferme - usque ad exhalationem spiritus egit.” He mentions Gloucester - directly after, but the minute geography comes from Florence - (1093); “Rex Willelmus junior, in regia villa quæ vocatur - Alwestan vehementi percussus infirmitate, civitatem - Glawornam festinanter adiit, ibique per totam quadragesimam - languosus jacuit.” - - [1092] Here we have the pithy words of the Chronicle; “On - þisum geare to þam længtene warð se cyng W. on Gleaweceastre - to þam swiðe geseclod, þæt he wæs ofer eall dead gekyd.” So - says Eadmer (Hist. Nov. 16); “Omnes totius regni principes - coeunt; episcopi, abbates, et quique nobiles, nihil præter - mortem ejus præstolantes.” - - [1093] The good resolutions of the King come out with all - force in the Chronicle; “And on his broke he Gode fela - behæsa behét, his agen lif on riht to lædene, and Godes - cyrcean griðian and friðian, and næfre má eft wið feo - gesyllan, and ealle rihte lage on his þeode to habbene.” The - exhortations come out most clearly in Eadmer; Florence seems - to attribute them to the King’s lay counsellors; “Cum se - putaret cito moriturum, ut ei sui barones suggesserint,” &c. - - [1094] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 16. “Hac tempestate Anselmus - inscius horum morabatur in quadam villa non longe a - Glocestria ubi rex infirmabatur.” - - [1095] Ib. “Ingreditur ad regem, rogatur quid consilii - salubrius morientis animæ judicet. Exponi sibi primo - postulat, quid se absente ab assistentibus ægro consultum - sit. Audit, probat, et addit, scriptum est, Incipite Domino - in confessione.” He goes on at somewhat further length on - the duty of confession. There is something striking in the - kind of professional air with which the duty is undertaken. - The spiritual physician, called in from a distance, approves - the treatment of the local practitioners, just as a - physician of the body might do. - - [1096] Ib. “Spondet in hoc fidem suam, et vades inter se et - Deum facit episcopos suos, mittens, qui hoc votum suum Deo - super altare sua vice promittant.” - - [1097] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 16. “Scribitur edictum, regioque - sigillo firmatur, quatenus captivi quicunque sunt in omni - dominatione sua relaxentur, omnia debita irrevocabiliter - remittantur, omnes offensiones antehac perpetratæ, indulta - remissione, perpetuæ oblivioni tradantur.” More general - provisions followed; “Promittuntur insuper omni populo bonæ - et sanctæ leges, inviolabilis observatio juris, injuriarum - gravis, et quæ terreat cæteros, examinatio.” We may - specially regret that we have not the English text of this - momentary Great Charter. Its language seems to assume, like - the charter of Henry (see above, pp. 344, 392), that suits - brought in the King’s name would be unjust, and that his - claims for debts would be unjust also. - - [1098] Ib. “Gaudetur a cunctis, benedicitur Deus in istis, - obnixe oratur pro salute talis ac tanti regis.” This is the - real language of the moment, which is weakened by William of - Malmesbury, Gest. Pont. 80; “Plausu exceptum est verbum, - ibatque clamor cælo bona et salutem regi optantium.” - - [1099] So says the Chronicle; “to manegan mynstren land - geuðe.” - - [1100] There is something odd in the way in which the - Chronicler and Florence couple the two prelates now - appointed; “And þæt arcebiscoprice on Cantwarbyrig, þe ær on - his agenre hand stód. Anselme betæhte, se wæs ær abbot on - Bæc, and Rodbeard his cancelere þæt biscoprice on Lincolne.” - That is to say, they cut the whole story short; or more - truly they tell it on the same scale on which they tell - other things, while we are used to Eadmer’s minute narrative - of all that concerns Anselm. - - [1101] See above, p. 13. - - [1102] See Appendix Z. - - [1103] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 16. They exhort the King to - appoint. He consents willingly; “Sed cunctis ad nutum regis - pendentibus, prænunciavit ipse et concordi voce subsequitur - acclamatio omnium, abbatem Anselmum tali honore - dignissimum.” - - [1104] I think we may for a moment turn from the _oratio - obliqua_ of Eadmer to the vivid little picture in William of - Malmesbury; “Ille cubito sese attollens, ‘Hunc,’ ait, - ‘sanctum virum Anselmum eligo,’ ingenti subsecuto fragore - faventium.” One is reminded of the death-bed of Eadward, as - drawn in the Tapestry. See N. C. vol. iii. p. 13, note. - - [1105] Eadmer, u. s. “Cum raperetur ad regem, ut per virgam - pastoralem investituram archiepiscopatus de manu ejus - susciperet, toto conamine restitit, idque multis - obsistentibus causis nullatenus fieri posse asseruit.” - - [1106] “Accipiunt eum episcopi, et ducunt seorsum de - multitudine.” - - [1107] “Per tyrannidem istius hominis.” - - [1108] “In Deo pro nobis intende, et nos secularia tua - disponemus pro te.” - - [1109] “Abbas sum monasterii regni alterius.” “Regnum” of - course means Normandy, an inaccurate phrase, but one that we - have had already (see above, p. 25). - - [1110] “Nihil est omnino, non erit quod intenditis.” - - [1111] “Rapiunt hominem ad regem ægrotum, et pervicaciam - ejus exponunt.” - - [1112] “Contristatus est rex, pene ad suffusionem oculorum, - et dixit ad eum, ‘O Anselme quid agis? Cur me pœnis æternis - cruciandum tradis?’” He adds presently, “Certus sum enim - quod peribo, si archiepiscopatum in meo dominio tenens, - vitam finiero.” - - [1113] “Regem turbas, turbatum penitus necas, quandoquidem - illum jam morientem obstinacia tua exacerbare non formidas.” - - [1114] Of Baldwin we often hear again; he seems to have been - Anselm’s chief helper at Bec in temporal matters. - - [1115] See above, p. 372. - - [1116] “Virgam huc pastoralem, virgam, clamitant, - pastoralem. Et arrepto brachio ejus dextro, alii renitentem - trahere, alii impellere, lectoque jacentis cœperunt - applicare.” - - [1117] I am but translating Eadmer; “Indice levato, sed - protinus ab eo reflexo, clausæ manui ejus baculus appositus - est, et episcoporum manibus cum eadem manu compressus atque - retentus.” - - [1118] “Acclamante autem multitudine, ‘Vivat episcopus, - vivat;’ episcopi cum clero sublimi voce hymnum _Te Deum - laudamus_ decantare cœpere.” - - [1119] “Electum portaverunt pontificem potius quam duxerunt - in vicinam ecclesiam.” On the works of Serlo, see N. C. vol. - iv. p. 384. - - [1120] “Ipso modis, quibus poterat, resistente, atque - dicente, nihil est quod facitis, nihil est quod facitis.” - - [1121] This is Anselm’s own comparison in his letter to the - monks of Bec, Ep. iii. 1; “Quando me episcopi et abbates - aliique primates ad ecclesiam trahentes reclamantem et - contradicentem rapuerunt, ita ut dubium videri posset utrum - sanum insani, an insanum traherent sani; nisi quia illi - canebant et ego magis mortuo quam viventi colore similis - stupore et dolore pallebam.” Presently he says; “Huic autem - de me electioni, imo violentiæ, hactenus quantum potui, - servata veritate, reluctatus sum.” The last word may be - taken in its original physical sense. - - [1122] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 18. “Gestis vero quæ in tali causa - geri in ecclesia mos est, revertitur Anselmus ad regem.” - - [1123] “Dico tibi, domine rex, quia ex hac tua infirmitate - non morieris, ac pro hoc volo noveris quam bene corrigere - poteris quod de me nunc actum est, quia nec concessi nec - concedo ut ratum sit.” - - [1124] The change of place is clearly marked in Eadmer. - “Deducentibus eum episcopis, cum tota regni nobilitate, - cubiculo excessit, conversusque ad eos, in hæc verba - sciscitatus est.” The parable which follows is placed - earlier by William of Malmesbury; but this is surely the - right place. - - [1125] 1 Cor. iii. 9. - - [1126] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 18. “Hoc aratrum in Anglia duo - boves cæteris precellentes regendo trahunt et trahendo - regunt. Rex videlicet, et archiepiscopus Cantuariensis. Iste - seculari justitia et imperio, ille divina doctrina et - magisterio.” This must mean during the late reign. - - [1127] “Horum boum unus, scilicet Lanfrancus archiepiscopus, - mortuus est; et alius ferocitatem indomabilis tauri obtinens - jam juvenis aratro prælatus, et vos loco mortui bovis, me - vetulam ac debilem ovem cum indomito tauro conjungere - vultis.” - - [1128] “Indomabilis utique feritas tauri sic ovem lanæ et - lactis et agnorum fertilem per spinas et tribulos hac et - illac raptam, si jugo se non excusserit, dilacerabit.” So a - little after; “Me, de quo lanam et lac verbi Dei, et agnos - in servitium ejus, nonnulli possent habere.” The metaphor - becomes passing strange when it is thus worked out in - detail. - - [1129] “Ad hospitium suum, dimissa curia, vadit.” - - [1130] “Præcepit itaque rex, ut, sine dilatione ac - diminutione, investiretur de omnibus ad archiepiscopatum - pertinentibus intus et extra.” Eadmer goes on to speak about - the city of Canterbury, the abbey of Saint Alban’s, and - other things of which we shall have to speak again. But he - can only mean that orders were given which were not - immediately carried out; for the actual investiture was, as - we shall see, delayed for some months. - - [1131] Ep. iii. 3. “Ipsius namque inenarrabili potentia - operante, dedit dominus noster rex Anglorum, consilio et - rogatu principum suorum, cleri quoque et populi petitione et - electione, domino abbati Anselmo Cantuariensis ecclesiæ - gubernationem.” So says Anselm himself in his letter to - Archbishop Hugh of Lyons, Ep. iii. 24; “Subdidi me dolens - præcepto archiepiscopi mei et electioni totius Angliæ.” - - [1132] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 591, 593. - - [1133] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 19. - - [1134] See Appendix Y. - - [1135] Ep. iii. 8. “Reverendo domino nostro principe - Northmannorum Roberto concedente; et archiepiscopo nostro - Guillelmo præcipiente, et vobis a Deo coactis, faventibus, a - vestra cura sum absolutus, et majori involutus.” Both Anselm - and the King wrote letters; Eadmer, 19, 20. - - [1136] See the letter of the monks, Epp. iii. 6. - - [1137] This seems implied in Anselm’s presence at Winchester - at Easter, which is recorded in the Life, ii. 1. 3. But his - presence there is mentioned only to bring in a kind of - miracle, in which Anselm, Gundulf, and the monk Baldwin all - figure. - - [1138] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. i. 19. “Siquidem omne malum quod - rex fecerat, priusquam fuerat infirmatus, bonum visu est, - comparatione malorum quæ fecit ubi est sanitati redonatus,” - - [1139] “Ipse prædicto Roffensi episcopo, cum illum, - recuperata sanitate, familiari affatu moneret ut se amplius - circumspecte secundum Deum in omnibus haberet respondit.” - (See above, p. 165.) - - [1140] The Chronicler says generally; “Ac þæt he syððan - ætbræd, þa him gebotad wæs, and ealle þa gode laga forlǽt, - þe he us ær behét.” We get the details from Eadmer; “Mox - igitur cuncta quæ infirmus statuerat bona, dissolvit et - irrita esse præcepit. Captivi nempe, qui nondum fuerant - dimissi, jussit ut artius solito custodirentur, dimissi, si - capi possent, recluderentur; antiqua jamque donata debita in - integrum exigerentur; placita et offensiones in pristinum - statum revocarentur, illorumque judicio, qui justitiam - subvertere magis quam tueri defendereve curabant, - tractarentur et examinarentur.” - - [1141] Florence notices the death of Rhys ap Twdwr in the - Easter week, of which I shall have much to say in the next - chapter. - - [1142] See above, p. 370. - - [1143] See above, p. 33. - - [1144] See above, p. 276. - - [1145] This action of William of Eu is marked by Florence at - the end of the year, but without saying at what time of the - year it happened; “Eodem anno Willelmus comes de Owe, auri - ingenti victus aviditate et promissi honoris captus - magnitudine, a naturali domino suo Rotberto Normannorum - comite, cui fidelitatem juraverat, defecit et in Angliam ad - regem Willelmum veniens, illius se dominio, ut seductor - maximus, subjugavit.” - - [1146] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 538, 684. - - [1147] Anna Comnena tells us this, vii. 6. Robert, on his - return from Jerusalem (ὁ Φλάνδρας κόμης ἐξ Ἱεροσολύμων - ἐπανερχόμενος [ho Phlandras komês ex Hierosolymôn - epanerchomenos]), does homage to the Emperor (τὸν συνήθη - τοῖς Λατίνοις ἀποδίδωσιν ὅρκον [ton synêthê tois Latinois - apodidôsin horkon]) and promises five hundred knights - (ἱππεῖς [hippeis]). In viii. 7 we find that he had fulfilled - his promise, and that they are ἱππεῖς ἔκκριτοι [hippeis - ekkritoi]. In viii. 3 they figure as Κελτοί [Keltoi]. Cf. - Will. Malms. iii. 257. - - [1148] We have heard of him in N. C. vol. v. pp. 181, 850, - and we shall come across him again. - - [1149] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 20. “Jam cum virga pastorali curam - quam super Beccum abbas susceperat, pro descripta superius - absolutione, ipse Becco restituerat.” - - [1150] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 327, 328. - - [1151] This seems to be the distinction drawn by Anselm, - Hist. Nov. 19, 20; “Volo ut omnes terras quas ecclesia - Cantuariensis, ad quam regendam electus sum, tempore beatæ - memoriæ Lanfranci archiepiscopi tenebat, sine omni placito - et controversia ipsi ecclesiæ restituas, et de aliis terris - quas eadem ecclesia ante suum tempus habebat, sed perditas - nondum recuperavit, mihi rectitudinem judiciumque - consentias.” About anything which Lanfranc had actually held - there could, it is assumed, be no question, either of law or - of fact; about earlier claims there might easily be either. - - [1152] Ib. 20. “Sicut ego te volo terrenum habere dominum et - defensorem, ita et tu me spiritualem habeas patrem et animæ - tuæ provisorem.” To this day it is held that, wherever the - King may be, the Archbishop of Canterbury is his parish - priest. - - [1153] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 436. - - [1154] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 435. - - [1155] Ib. p. 436, note. - - [1156] Ib. The language of Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 25, is nearly - to the same effect; “Erant quippe (illo tempore) duo, ut in - Anglia ferebatur, qui dicebantur Romani pontifices a se - invicem discordantes, et ecclesiam Dei inter se divisam post - se trahentes.” - - [1157] There is a most important passage of William of - Malmesbury in his first draught of the Gesta Pontificum (p. - 86, note) which he afterwards, as in so many other cases, - found it expedient to tone down. As he wrote it, it stood - thus; - - “Erant his diebus duo competitores Romani præsulatus, summi - ambo et prestantes viri. Uterque causam verisimilibus - rationibus fulciebat, Urbanus electione cardinalium, - Guibertus electione imperatoris Theutonum, cujus esset Roma - et Italia. Neuter ergo pro persona sua cedebat. Guiberto - necessitatem subjectionis ministrabat terrarum tractus qui - sub imperio illius jacet; Urbano favebat omnis Gallia et - Normannia, et cetera usque ad oceanum Brittannicum. Incertum - cui faveret Divinitas, nisi quod Urbani fama prosperius - crementum sumebat. Consensu dubio fluctuabat Anglia, in - Guibertum tamen inclinatior propter metum regis.” - - [1158] See above, p. 117. - - [1159] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 25. “Urbano jamdudum pro vicario - beati Petri ab Italia Galliaque recepto; Anselmus etiam, - utpote abbas de Normannia, eum pro papa receperat, et, sicut - vir nominatissimus, necnon authoritate plenus ejus literas - susceperat, eique velut summo sanctæ ecclesiæ pastori suas - direxerat.” - - [1160] Ib. 20. “De Romano quoque pontifice Urbano, quem pro - apostolico hucusque non recepisti, et ego jam recepi atque - recipio, eique debitam obedientiam et subjectionem exhibere - volo, cautum te facio ne quod scandalum inde oriatur in - futuro.” - - [1161] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 25. “Terras de quibus ecclesia - saisita quidem fuerat sub Lanfranco omnes eo, quo tunc - erant, tibi modo restituam, sed de illis quas sub ipso non - habebat, in præsenti nullam tecum conventionem instituo. - Veruntamen de his et aliis credam tibi sicut debebo.” - - [1162] Eadmer, Nov. Hist. 25. “Quatenus et secundum totius - regni de eo factam electionem pontifex fieri ultra non - negaret.” Here are the same kind of expressions with regard - to Anselm’s election of which we have already spoken in p. - 405. - - [1163] Ib. “Et terras ecclesiæ quas ipse rex, defuncto - Lanfranco, suis dederat pro statuto servitio, illis ipsis - hæreditario jure tenendas, causa sui amoris, condonaret.” - - [1164] Ib. “Nolens ecclesiam, quam necdum re aliqua - investierat, exspoliare.” - - [1165] This letter (Ep. iii. 24) is a most important - exposition of Anselm’s own views on the whole matter of the - election and what followed it. - - [1166] Ep. iii. 24. “Sub occasione cujusdam _voluntariæ - justitiæ_, secundum quam de terris eisdem me vult - placitare.” - - [1167] Ib. “Hæc autem est illa quam dixi voluntaria - justitia. Quoniam terras easdem, antequam Northmanni Angliam - invaderent, milites Angli ab archiepiscopo Cantuariæ - tenuisse dicuntur, et mortui sunt sine hæredibus, vult - asserere se posse juste quos vult eorum hæredes - constituere.” - - [1168] See the instances collected in N. C. vol. v. Appendix - G. The lands moreover would be yet harder to get back when - they had been granted away on the new military tenures. - - [1169] Ep. iii. 24. “Si quis enim alius, ad quem ecclesiæ - custodia non pertineret, hanc faceret ei violentiam, aut - factam patienter sustineret, palam esset quia in futuro - nihil dici posset cur res ecclesiæ ad eam redire non - deberent.” - - [1170] Ib. “Nunc autem cum et ipse rex advocatus ejus sit, - et ego custos, quid dicetur in futuro nisi, quia rex fecit - et archiepiscopus sustinendo confirmavit, ratum esse debet?” - - [1171] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 194; vol. v. p. 101. - - [1172] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 20. “Unde Anselmus oppido lætatus - est, sperans se hac occasione, a prælationis onere, per Dei - gratiam, exonerandum.” And directly after; “Eo quod terras - ecclesiæ injuria dare nolebat, episcopalis officii onus sese - lætus evasisse videbat.” - - [1173] Ib. “Cum decursu non exiguo tempore, clamorem omnium, - de ecclesiarum destructione conquerentium.” - - [1174] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 20. “Multis bonis et ecclesiæ Dei - profuturis promissionibus illectus [Anselmus].” - - [1175] Ib. “More et exemplo prædecessoris sui inductus, _pro - usu terræ_, homo regis factus est, et, sicut Lanfrancus suo - tempore fuerat, de toto archiepiscopatu saisiri jussus est.” - Does not Eadmer, writing by later lights from Rome, feel - scruples which Anselm did not feel at the time? - - [1176] When one thinks of this, one is less surprised at the - astounding language of the Council in Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 53. - Yet, after all, Henry the Fourth was not Rufus. - - [1177] We have the writ in the Fœdera, i. 5. It grants - “omnes libertates in terra et mari super suos homines, infra - burgos et extra, et super tot theines quot ecclesiæ Christi - concessit Edwardus rex, cognatus meus.” This mention of the - thegns, and the King’s request about the grants, and the - words of Anselm to the Archbishop of Lyons, all hang - together. - - [1178] Ib. “Nolo pati ut aliquis hominum se intromittat de - omnibus rebus quæ ad eos pertinent, nisi ipsi et ministri - eorum quibus ipsi committere voluerint, nec Francus nec - Anglus.” - - [1179] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 18 (see above, p. 403). “At - civitas Cantuaria quam Lanfrancus suo tempore in beneficio a - rege tenebat, et abbatia sancti Albani quam non solum - Lanfrancus sed et antecessores ejus habuisse noscuntur, in - alodium ecclesiæ Christi Cantuariensis, pro redemptione - animæ suæ, perpetuo jure, transirent.” - - [1180] They were old friends. The Gesta Abbatum (i. 61) go - on to say; “Rex Willelmus secundus archiepiscopatum, quem - diu in manu sua tenuit, immisericors depauperavit. Abbas - autem Paulus Anselmum egentem juvit et consolabatur. Unde, - inthronizatus, in multis beneficia potiora gratus abbati - recompensavit, et quod imperfectum erat in ædificiis - ecclesiæ sancti Albani juvit postea consummare.” - - [1181] Ib. i. 65. “Nemora complanando, hominibus beati - Albani pecuniam, causis cavillatoriis adinventis, - extorquendo.” Rufus is described as “nullius, præcipue - mortui, verus amicus.” - - [1182] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 20. “Indignationi hoc quoque non - parum doloris adjiciebat, quod negotium unde agebatur ad - jura ecclesiæ pertinebat, nec in aliquo regalis judicii - definitionem respiciebat.” - - [1183] Ib. “A rege missus quidam nomine Ranulphus, regiæ - voluntatis maximus executor, qui, spreta consideratione - pietatis ac modestiæ, placitum contra eum ipsa die - instituit, et ferus ac tumens, tantum ecclesiæ gaudium - conturbare non timuit.” Directly after; “ut nec primum - quidem suæ dignitatis diem permitteretur in pace - transigere.” - - [1184] Ib. “Ex præsentibus futura conjecit, et quia multas - in pontificatu angustias foret passurus, intellexit atque - prædixit.” - - [1185] The consecration of Anselm and the death of Malcolm - are oddly joined together in the new Canterbury Chronicle - published by Liebermann, (p. 4); “1094. On ðison geare me - bletsede Anselm to biscope ii. ñ. Decemb.; and on ðison - geare me scloch Malculm cing.” - - [1186] T. Stubbs, X Scriptt. 1707. He adds emphatically, - “Hæc interim fecit Thomas archiepiscopus, nec quisquam - episcoporum erat qui hæc in sua ipsius diœcesi præsente - archiepiscopo præsumeret.” - - [1187] Eadmer (Hist. Nov. 21) describes the consecrators as - “Thomas archiepiscopus Eboracensis et omnes episcopi - Angliæ,” except the two who sent excuses. But Dr. Stubbs - does not seem to reckon the Bishop of Durham among the - number. - - [1188] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 417. - - [1189] The foundations had just been laid, as we shall see - in the next chapter. - - [1190] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 340. - - [1191] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 21. “Cum ante ordinandi pontificis - examinationem Walchelinus Wentanus episcopus, rogatu - Mauricii episcopi Lundoniensis cujus hoc officium est, - ecclesiastico more electionem scriptam legeret.” This is, I - suppose, as Dean of the Province, an office still held by - the Bishops of London, and by virtue of which they do - several of the things which Thomas Stubbs claims for his own - metropolitan. - - [1192] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 21. Walkelin reads the writing - till he comes to the words which set forth how “hæc - Dorobernensis ecclesia totius Britanniæ metropolitana suo - sit viduata pastore.” Then Thomas “subintulit, dicens totius - Britanniæ metropolitana? Si totius Britanniæ metropolitana, - ecclesia Eboracensis quæ metropolitana esse scitur, - metropolitana non est. Et quidem ecclesiam Cantuariensem - primatem totius Britanniæ esse scimus, non metropolitanam.” - - [1193] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 21. “Quod auditum ratione submixum - esse, quod dicebat intellectum est.” - - [1194] Ib. “Tunc statim scriptura ipsa mutata est, et pro - totius Britanniæ metropolitana, totius Britanniæ primas - scriptum est, et omnis controversia conquievit. Itaque - sacravit eum ut totius Britanniæ primatem.” - - The Yorkist version, as given by T. Stubbs (X Scriptt. - 1707), is of course quite different. Thomas is there - attended by several members of his church, Hugh the Dean and - others. This might almost imply the absence of his one - suffragan. The words objected to are in this version “Primas - totius Britanniæ.” As soon as they are heard, Thomas and his - companions go out and take off their robes. Anselm and - Walkelin follow them; they fall at the feet of Thomas, and - ask for his forgiveness (“pedibus archiepiscopi affusi - humiliter deprecati sunt, ne moleste acciperet”). Thomas - stands firm. “Cum duo tantum, inquit, sint metropolitæ in - Britannia, alter super alterum esse non potest.” He might - have erred in his youth by admitting the claims of - Canterbury; he would at least not err in the like sort - again. He would consecrate no man as primate. Anselm and - Walkelin submit; the word “primate” is struck out, and - Anselm is consecrated as “metropolitan.” - - It will be seen that in this version the place of the two - titles, “primate” and “metropolitan,” is simply turned - round. We can have no doubt as to preferring the - contemporary account; but it is well to see how matters - looked at York several centuries later. - - [1195] There is no mention of this in Eadmer’s account of - the consecration; but such seems to be the meaning of Anselm - himself in a letter to Walter, Bishop of Albano, which I - shall have to quote again (Epp. iii. 36). He there says, - “Sub professione obedientiæ Romani pontificis me - consecrarunt.” This is an answer to a charge of being - schismatically consecrated while the kingdom was not under - the obedience of Urban. - - [1196] See above, p. 311. - - [1197] See above, p. 312. - - [1198] T. Stubbs, X Scriptt. 1707. “Non prohibebat quin eum - Dorkacestrensem ordinaret episcopum, sicut et antecessores - sui fuerant; verum Lyndecoldinum oppidum, et magnam partem - provinciæ Lyndisiæ dicebat fuisse, et jure esse debere, - parochiam Eboracensis ecclesiæ, et injuria illi ereptam - esse.” - - [1199] Eadmer does not mention the place; but it appears - from the Chronicle that it was at the usual place, namely - Gloucester. - - [1200] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 21. “Consummato ordinationis suæ - die octavo, Cantuariam egrediens, ad curiam regis pro - imminente nativitate Domini vadit. Quo perveniens, hilariter - a rege totaque regni nobilitate suscipitur.” - - [1201] See N. C. vol. iii. pp. 69, 260. - - [1202] Again it is from the Chronicler that we get the most - formal statement of the words of the challenge. They would - doubtless be uttered in French; but we may believe that we - have an authorized English version; “Him þider fram his - broðer Rodbearde of Normandig bodan coman, þa cyddon þæt his - broðer grið and forewarde eall æftercwæð, butan se cyng - gelæstan wolde eall þet hi on forewarde hæfdon ær gewroht, - and uppon þæt hine forsworenne, and trywleasne clypode, - buton he þa forewarda geheolde, oððe þider ferde, and hine - þær betealde þær seo forewarde ǽr wæs gewroht and eac - gesworen.” - - [1203] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 21. “Adeo ut nonnullas etiam - difficultates pateretur, quas regiam pati excellentiam - indecens videbatur.” - - [1204] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 300. - - [1205] Eadmer, u. s. “Siquidem hunc ipse rex morem erga - cunctos quibus dominatur habebat, ut quum quis eorum aliquid - ei pecuniarum, etiam solius gratiæ obtentu, offerebat, - oblatum, nisi quantitas rei voto illius concurreret, - sperneret. Nec offerentem in suam ulterius amicitiam - admittebat, si ad determinationem suam oblatum munus non - augeret.” - - [1206] He does it only “suasus ab amicis suis.” - - [1207] Anselm himself gives this motive in his letter to - Archbishop Hugh (Ep. iii. 24); “Gratias Deo, quo miserante - simplicitatem cordis mei hoc factum est, ne, si nihil aut - parum promisissem, justam videretur habere causam irascendi; - aut si accepisset, verteretur mihi in gravamen, et in - suspicionem nefandæ emptionis.” - - [1208] Eadmer (Hist. Nov. 21) gives these motives at length. - - [1209] Ib. “Rex tali oblatione audita, bene rem quidem - laudando respondit.” - - [1210] These are the arguments which Eadmer puts into the - mouths of the King’s advisers; “Quidam malignæ mentis - homines regem, ut fieri solet, ad hoc perduxerunt quatenus - oblatam pecuniam spernendo recipere non adquiesceret.” - - [1211] Eadmer here quotes a psalm; “Mentita est iniquitas - sibi.” Ps. xxvii. 12. - - [1212] Ib. “Mandatur illi regem oblatam pecuniam refutare, - et miratus est.” - - [1213] Ib. 22. “Amica nempe libertate me et omnia mea ad - utilitatem tuam habere poteris, servili autem conditione nec - me nec mea habebis.” - - [1214] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 441. - - [1215] Eadmer, u. s. “Iratus rex, Sint, inquit, cum jurgio - tua tibi, sufficient mea mihi. Vade.” - - [1216] The story is told by Eadmer, 22. The objection of - Maurice takes this shape; “Dicebat ipsam ecclesiam in sua - parochia esse, et ob hoc, licet in terra archiepiscopi - fuerit, dedicationem illius ad se pertinere.” The right of - the Archbishop seems to have rested on good ancient - precedent; but there is something odd in Eadmer’s way of - stating the controversy. The presumption was surely in - favour of the diocesan bishop. - - [1217] The letter of Anselm to Wulfstan appears among the - Epistles (iii. 19). Wulfstan’s answer is given in the text - of the Historia Novorum. Anselm speaks of the action of the - earlier archbishops in this matter; “Quod etiam sanctus - Dunstanus et alii prædecessores mei fecisse probantur, ipsis - ecclesiis quas dedicaverunt adhuc stantibus.” This is a - little touch from a time when the churches of Dunstan’s day - were being largely rebuilt, that of Harrow most likely among - them. Wulfstan is well described by Eadmer; “Supererat adhuc - beatæ memoriæ Wolstanus episcopus unus et solus de antiquis - Anglorum patribus, vir in omni religione conspicuus, et - antiquarum Angliæ consuetudinum scientia apprime eruditus.” - There is something very remarkable in the way in which - Wulfstan speaks of the archbishop to whom he made his first - profession (see N. C. vol. ii. pp. 473, 655); “Extant quippe - et in nostra diœcesi altaria, et quædam etiam ecclesiæ in - hiis scilicet villis quas Stigandus vestræ excellentiæ - prædecessor, haut tamen jure ecclesiasticæ hæreditatis sed - ex dono possederat sæcularis potestatis, ab ipso dedicata.” - Wulfstan, speaking his own words in his own letter, speaks - of Stigand in quite another tone from that which he had used - in the profession which was put into his mouth by Lanfranc - (see N. C. vol. ii. p. 655). The places referred to are in - Gloucestershire, and will be found in Domesday, 164 _b_. - Most of the lands had passed to the Archbishop of York; some - of them first to William Fitz-Osbern, and then to the King. - It would seem then that, in whatever character Stigand held - them, it was not as Archbishop of Canterbury. Wulfstan’s - witness therefore goes so far as to give the archbishop the - right to oust the diocesan bishop, not only on the lands of - the archbishopric, but on any lands which he may hold as a - private man. - - [1218] There is something amusing in the tone of glee in - which Eadmer records his patron’s triumph; “Secure deinceps - suorum morem antecessorum emulabatur, non solum ecclesias, - inconsultis episcopis, sacrans, sed et quæque divina officia - in cunctis terris suis per se suosve dispensans.” - - [1219] Eadmer, 22. “Ex præcepto regis, omnes fere episcopi - una cum principibus Angliæ ad Hastinges convenerunt, ipsum - regem in Normanniam transfretaturum sua benedictione et - concursu prosecuti.” - - [1220] The Chronicler seems distinctly to mark the - ecclesiastical business which we have now come to as - casually filling up the time lost by the bad weather. The - whole entry runs; “Ða ferde se cyng to Hæstingan to þam - Candelmæssan, and onmang þam þe he þær wederes abad he let - halgian þæt mynster æt þære Bataille. And Herbearde Losange - þam bishop of Theotfordan his stæf bename and þæræfter to - midlengtene ofer sæ for into Normandige.” We shall take - these things in order. - - [1221] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 404. - - [1222] Ib. 401. - - [1223] In the Battle Chronicle (40) the consecration is - naturally an event of great importance. But here too the - presence of the King and so great a company is accounted for - by their presence in the neighbourhood or other grounds; - “Cumque jam operis fabricæ peroptata advenisset perfectio, - rege quibusdam causis obortis eandem provinciam cum multis - optimatibus forte adeunte, ex instinctu ejusdem abbatis, - paterni memor edicti, eandem dedicari basilicam decrevit.” - - [1224] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 405. - - [1225] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 453. - - [1226] He was consecrated the year before; the date of his - death seems not to be known. See Bessin, 531. - - [1227] See above, p. 321. - - [1228] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 411. - - [1229] See above, p. 29. - - [1230] See Appendix Z. - - [1231] So says T. Stubbs, X Scriptt. 1708. “Rex Willelmus - quamdam concordiam, vel potius dispensationem, fecit inter - illos, Thoma quidem archiepiscopo invito et renitente et - coacto nec consentiente, sed inconsulto Eboracensi - capitulo.” - - [1232] Eadmer, 23. “Quidam de episcopis atque principibus - conati sunt contra Anselmum scandalum movere, intendentes ad - hoc ut eundem episcopum absolute absque debita professione - consecraret. Quod nullo jure fulti, ea solummodo re sunt - aggressi, quia putabant se animo regis aliquid ex - conturbatione Anselmi, unde lætaretur inferre, scientes eum - pro suprascripta caussa adversum ipsum non parum esse - turbatum.” - - [1233] Eadmer, 23. “Asseruit se nullo pacto consensurum ut, - pro inimicitia quam contra archiepiscopum habebat, matri suæ - ecclesiæ Cantuariensi de sua dignitate quid quivis - detraherat.” - - [1234] See Appendix Z. - - [1235] On the history and character of Robert Bloet, see - Appendix Z. - - [1236] See above, p. 395. - - [1237] See above, p. 355, and Appendix X. - - [1238] This deprivation of Herbert by the King――most likely - with the consent of somebody, but we are not told――is quite - as contrary to strict ecclesiastical notions as the - deprivation of Stigand by the English people. The - Parliaments of Elizabeth, William and Mary, George the - First, followed that precedent. I will not speak of the - reign of Edward the Sixth, as that was a time of “unlaw” - nearly equal to the days of Rufus himself. - - [1239] See Appendix X. - - [1240] Here we come personally across the class of offenders - of whom we have before spoken generally (see above, p. 158, - and Appendix G). Eadmer draws their picture; “Eo tempore - curialis juventus ferme tota crines suos juvencularum more - nutriebat, et quotidie pexa, ac irreligiosis nutibus - circumspectans, delicatis vestigiis, tenero incessu, - obambulare solita erat. De quibus cum in capite jejunii - sermonem in populo ad missam suam et ad cineres confluente - idem pater habuisset, copiosam turbam ex illis in - pœnitentiam egit, et attonsis crinibus, in virilem formam - redegit.” - - [1241] See Appendix G. - - [1242] This is pointed out by Eadmer. “Die quadam ad eum _ex - more_ ivit, et juxta illum sedens eum his verbis alloqui - cœpit.” We shall come to other instances of this custom of - the Archbishop sitting down beside the King. - - [1243] “Obsecro primum, fer opem et consilium qualiter in - hoc regno tuo Christianitas, quæ jam fere tota in multis - periit, in statum suum redigi possit. Respondit, ‘Quam opem, - quod consilium?’” - - [1244] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 437. - - [1245] Anselm is made to say; “Generale concilium - episcoporum ex quo tu rex factus fuisti non fuit in Anglia - celebratum, _nec retroactis pluribus annis_.” Yet Lanfranc - had held many synods, and one notable one as late as 1085. - See N. C. vol. iv. p. 687. - - [1246] He passes by the smaller matters――“ut illicita - consanguineorum connubia et alia multa rerum detestandarum - facinorosa negotia taceam”――and goes straight to the sin of - the reign, “noviter in hac terra divulgatum,” which “jam - plurimum pullulavit multosque sua immanitate fœdavit.” See - Appendix G. - - [1247] “Conemur una, quæso, tu regia potestate et ego - pontificali auctoritate, quantus tale quid inde statuatur, - quod cum per totum fuerit regnum divulgatum, solo etiam - auditu quicunque illius fautor est paveat et deprimatur.” - What would have been the nature of the punishment? Something - more, one would think, than an ecclesiastical censure, as it - was to be a decree of the King. Anselm had no objection to - very severe punishments on occasion (see N. C. vol. v. p. - 159; cf. vol. iv. p. 621). But when he was able to legislate - on this subject (see N. C. vol. v. p. 223), it was in an - ecclesiastical synod, and the penalties are milder. - - [1248] “Non sederunt hæc animo principis, et paucis ita - respondit, ‘Et in hac re quid fieret pro te?’ ‘Si non,’ - inquit Anselmus, ‘pro me, spero fieret pro Deo et te.’” I - suppose the meaning is something like what I have given. - Again one longs for the actual words in their own tongue. - - [1249] “Ne in destructione monasteriorum et perditione - monachorum tibi, quod absit, damnationem adquiras.” - - [1250] “Quid ad te? Numquid sunt abbatiæ meæ? Hem, tu quod - vis agis de villis tuis, et ego non agam quod volo de - abbatiis meis?” - - [1251] “Tuæ quidem sunt ut illas quasi advocatus defendas - atque custodias, non tuæ autem ut invadas aut devastes. Dei - scimus eas esse, ut sui ministri inde vivant, non quo - expeditiones et bella tua inde fiant.” - - [1252] “Intellexit ergo Anselmus se verba in ventum - proferre, et surgens abiit.” - - [1253] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 687. - - [1254] “Considerans offenso principis animo nequaquam posse - pacem rebus dari.” - - [1255] “Deprecatus est ut in amicitiam sui sese _gratis_ - admitteret. Quod si, ait, facere nonvult, cur nolit edicat, - et si offendi, satisfacere paratus sum.” - - [1256] “De nulla re illum inculpo, nec tamen ei gratiam - meam, _quia non audio quare_, indulgere volo.” The words - which I have put in Italics in the two speeches must be - taken together. - - [1257] “Mysterium hoc, inquiunt, planum est.” - - [1258] “Tantundem pecuniæ quam ab hominibus tuis accipies - illi promitte.” - - [1259] “Aliam qua exeas viam non videmus, nec nos, pari - angustia clausi, aliam exeundi habemus.” - - [1260] “Et ego cum hucusque nihil eis unde revestiri possint - contulerim, jam eos nudos spoliarem, immo spoliatos - excoriarem.” - - [1261] “Eat quo vult, nec me transfretaturum pro danda - benedictione diutius exspectet.” - - [1262] Chron. Petrib. 1094. “Syððan he þider com, he and his - broðer Rodbeard se eorl gecwæðan, þæt hi mid griðe togædere - cuman sceoldan, and swa dydon, and gesemede beon ne mihtan.” - So Florence; “Rex … ad fratris colloquium sub statuta pace - venit, sed impacatus ab eo recessit.” - - [1263] See N. C. vol. i. p. 435. - - [1264] Chron. Petrib. 1094. “Syððan eft hi togædere coman - mid þam ilcan mannan þe ær þæt loc makedon, and eac þa aðas - sworen, and ealne þone bryce uppon þone cyng tealdon.” The - version preserved in one manuscript of Florence says, “denuo - in campo Martio convenere.” Can this be the “Champ de Mars” - just outside Rouen? I had fancied that the name was modern. - - [1265] Ib. “Ac he nolde þæs geþafa beon, ne eac þa forewarde - healdan.” - - [1266] Chron. Petrib. 1094. “And forþam hi þa mid mycelon - unsehte tocyrdon.” - - [1267] The mention of the places comes from Florence; “Comes - quidem Rotomagum perrexit; rex ad Owe rediit et in illo - resedit.” - - [1268] Flor. Wig. 1094. “Solidarios undique conduxit, aurum, - argentum, terras, quibusdam primatum Normanniæ dedit, - quibusdam promisit, ut a germano suo Rotberto deficerent, et - se cum castellis suæ ditioni subjicerent: quibus ad velle - suum paratis, per castella, vel quæ prius habuerat vel quæ - nunc conduxerat, suos milites distribuit.” - - [1269] The “castel æt Hulme” of the Chronicler is the castle - of Hulmus, Le Homme, or L’Isle Marie. See Stapleton, ii. - xxv, xxviii. It must not be confounded with the “pagus - Holmensis” or “Holmetia regio” in the Hiesmois. See - Stapleton, ii. xc, xcv, and Ord. Vit. 691 C. - - [1270] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 488. See above, p. 57. - - [1271] Ib. vol. iv. pp. 200, 201. - - [1272] Chron. Petrib. 1094. “And se cyng syððan þone castel - æt Bures gewann; and þes eorles men þærinne genam; þa sume - hyder to lande sende.” Florence adds, “partim in Normannia - custodiæ mancipavit; et fratrem suum multis modis vexans, - exhæredare laboravit.” - - [1273] The Chronicler casually mentions Philip’s coming when - speaking of the siege of Argentan; Florence is more - emphatic; “At ille, necessitate compulsus, dominum suum - regem Francorum Philippum cum exercitu Normanniam adduxit.” - - [1274] The Chronicler (1094) says only, “Ðær togeanes se - eorl mid þes cynges fultume of France gewann þone castel æt - Argentses and þearinne Rogger Peiteuin genam, and seofen - hundred þes cynges cnihta mid him.” Florence adds, “ipso die - obsessionis dec. milites regis, cum his totidem scutariis et - castellanis omnibus qui intus erant, sine sanguinis - effusione cepit [rex], captosque in custodia tamdiu detineri - mandavit, donec quisque se redimeret.” - - [1275] So says Florence; “Post hæc in Franciam rediit.” As - however he says nothing of Philip’s coming to Longueville, - he may mean his return after that. - - [1276] The Chronicler says only, after the taking of - Argentan, “and syððan þone [castel] æt Hulme.” Florence - makes it the special exploit of Robert; “Comes vero - Rotbertus castellum quod Holm nuncupatur obsedit, donec - Willelmus Peverel et dccc. homines, qui id defendebant, illi - se dederent.” - - [1277] Chron. Petrib. 1094. “And oftrædlice heora ægðer - uppon oðerne tunas bærnde, and eac men læhte.” - - [1278] Flor. Wig. 1094. “Interea gravi et assiduo tributo - hominumque mortalitate, præsenti et anno sequenti, tota - vexabatur Anglia.” - - [1279] Chron. Petrib. 1094. “Ða sende se cyng hider to - lande, and hét abeodan út xx. þusenda Engliscra manna [‘xx. - millia pedonum’ in Florence] him to fultume to Normandig.” - - [1280] Chron. Petrib. 1094. “Ac þa hi to sæ coman, þa het hi - man cyrran, and þæt feoh to þæs cynges behófe þe hi genumen - hæfdon; þet wæs ælc man healf punda, and hi swa dydon.” - Florence tells us the place and the doer; “Quibus ut mare - transirent Heastingæ congregatis, pecuniam quæ data fuerat - eis ad victum Rannulphus Passeflambardus præcepto regis - abstulit, scilicet unicuique decem solidos, et eos domum - repedare mandavit, pecuniam vero regi transmisit.” - - [1281] Chron. Petrib. 1094. “And se eorl innon Normandig - æfter þison, mid þam cynge of France and mid eallon þan þe - hi gegaderian mihton, ferdon towardes Ou þær se cyng W. inne - wæs, and þohtan hine inne to besittanne, and swa foran oð hi - coman to Lungeuile.” - - [1282] Ib. “Ðær wearð se cyng of France þurh gesmeah - gecyrred, and swa syððan eal seo fyrding tóhwearf.” - - [1283] Florence, as we have seen, stops with the taking of - La Houlme in 1094. The Chronicler goes on to Henry’s Lenten - expedition in 1095. After that, neither says anything about - Norman affairs till the agreement of 1096, though both of - them imply (see below, p. 555) that the war lasted till that - time. - - [1284] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 241. - - [1285] Ord. Vit. 706 C. See Appendix P. - - [1286] Ord. Vit. ib. See above, p. 217. - - [1287] This is one of Orderic’s best stories (706 C, D). A - false tale of its lord’s death is brought to Saint Cenery. - His allies, Pagan of Montdoubleau (see above, p. 209) and - Rotrou of Montfort, at once forsake the castle which they - had been defending. Robert’s wife Radegund cannot get them - to wait till more certain news can be had. Robert of Bellême - comes just in time for dinner. “Ingressi castrum, lebetes - super ignes ferventes invenerunt carnibus plenas, et mensas - mappulis coopertas et escas cum pane super appositas.” He - spoils and burns the castle. Robert son of Geroy is left - homeless; his wife (“proba femina et honesta”) dies; his - little son William, whom Robert of Bellême somehow has as a - hostage, is poisoned; he then defends his new castle of - Montacute against Robert of Bellême. Robert of Bellême - brings Duke Robert to besiege him. Peace is made by the - mediation of Geoffrey of Mayenne; Montacute is destroyed, - and Saint Cenery is restored to Robert son of Geroy. - - [1288] Chron. Petrib. 1094. “Her onmang þison se cyng W. - sende æfter his broðer Hennrige se wæs on þam castele æt - Damfront, ac forþi þe he mid friðe þurh Normandig faran ne - mihte, he him sende scipon æfter, and Hugo eorl of Ceastre.” - - [1289] Chron. Petrib. 1094. “Ac þa þa hi towardes Oú faran - sceoldan þær se cyng wæs, hi foran to Englelande and úp - coman æt Hamtune on ealra halgena mæsse æfne, and her syððon - wunedon, and to X[~p]es mæssan wæron on Lunden.” - - [1290] Ib. 1095. “On þisum geare wæs se cyng Willelm to - X[~p]es mæssan þa feower forewarde dagas on Hwitsand; and - æfter þam feorðan dæge hider to lande fór, and úpp com æt - Doferan.” - - [1291] Ib. “And Heanrig þes cynges broðer her on lande oð - Lengten wunode, and þa ofer sæ for to Normandig mid mycclon - gersuman, on þæs cynges heldan, uppon heora broðer Rodbeard - eorl, and gelomlice uppon þone eorl wann, and him mycelne - hearm ægðer on lande and on mannan dyde.” - - [1292] Ord. Vit. 722 D. “Rodbertus mollis dux a vigore - priorum decidit, et pigritia mollitieque torpuit, plus - provinciales subditos timens quam ab illis timebatur.” - - [1293] Ib. “Henricus frater ducis Danfrontem fortissimum - castrum possidebat, et magnam partem Neustriæ sibi favore - vel armis subegerat.” - - [1294] Ib. “Fratri suo ad libitum suum, nec aliter, - obsecundabat.” I do not see what is meant in Sigebert’s - Chronicle under 1095 (Pertz, vi. 367); “Rex Anglorum a - fratribus sollicitatur in Normania et Anglia.” - - [1295] Ib. “Porro alius frater qui Angliæ diadema gerebat in - Normannia, ut reor, plusquam xx. castra tenebat, et proceres - oppidanosque potentes muneribus sibi vel terroribus - illexerat…. Perplures cum omnibus sibi subditis munitionibus - et oppidanis regi parebant, eique, _quia metuendus erat_, - totis nisibus adhærebant.” - - [1296] He appears in Orderic’s list, 722 D. - - [1297] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 129. - - [1298] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 288. - - [1299] Ord. Vit. 708 C. He makes the remark just before, “In - diebus illis antiqui optimates qui sub Roberto duce vel - filio ejus Guillelmo rege militaverant humanæ conditionis - more hominem exuerunt.” - - [1300] Ord. Vit. 708 C. See N. C. vol. iv. p. 498. - - [1301] See above, p. 57. We shall come across his fuller - picture in a later chapter. - - [1302] Ord. Vit. 718 D. He adds the epitaph of his own - making. - - [1303] He records his death and adds his epitaph, 809 C, D. - William of Breteuil and Ralph of Conches died the same year, - 1102. - - [1304] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 465. - - [1305] Ord. Vit. 723 A. “Sic Normannia suis in se filiis - furentibus miserabiliter turbata est, et plebs inermis sine - patrono desolata est.” - - [1306] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 25. “Ipse quidem in Normanniam - transiit, expensaque immensa pecunia eam sibi nullatenus - subigere potuit. Infecto itaque negotio in Angliam reversus - est.” - - [1307] Will. Malms. iv. 327. “Septimo anno, propter tributa - quæ rex in Normannia positus edixerat, agricultura defecit, - qua fatiscente, fames e vestigio, ea quoque invalescente, - mortalitas hominum subsecuta, adeo crebra ut deesset - morituris cura, mortuis sepultura.” This is copied by the - Margam annalist. - - [1308] Flor. Wig. 1094. “Post hæc rex Willelmus iv. kal. - Januarii Angliam rediit, et ut Walanos debellaret, mox - exercitum in Waloniam duxit, ibique homines et equos - perdidit multos.” I am not at all clear that this entry in - Florence is not a confusion. The Chronicle under the same - year records the return of the King, and directly after sums - up the Welsh warfare of the year; but it is not implied that - the King took any part in it. He could not have done so - before his return from Normandy, and, to say nothing of the - unlikelihood of a winter campaign in itself, the incidental - notices of the King’s movements hardly leave time for one. - - [1309] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 9. Eadmer writes the name - _Illingham_, a change which might easily have happened after - the pattern of _Ilchester_ (see above, p. 63) and _Islip_ - (see N. C. vol. ii. p. 15), but the _g_ remains in use to - this day. There is something very amusing in the note of - Henschenius reprinted in Migne’s edition of Eadmer and - Anselm, col. 394; - - “Alia plura dominia, ut _Rochingeham_, _Ilingeham_, - _Sæftesburia_, quæ jam ante occurrerunt, et plura secutura, - potuissent designato locorum situ explicari, si operæ - pretium visum esset eorum causa totas Anglici regni tabulas - perlustrare, et esset qui exsoleta jam nomina, ubi - requirenda sint, indicaret. Poterit postea curiosior aliquis - hunc defectum supplere.” - - Fancy a man reading his Eadmer, and not making the faintest - effort to find out where any place was. But perhaps this is - better than M. Croset-Mouchet, who always turns the Bishop - of Exeter into a Bishop of _Oxford_ (cf. N. C. vol. iv. p. - 779), and who has a place _Srewsbury_, which does duty alike - for the earldom of _Shrewsbury_ and for the bishopric of - _Salisbury_. - - [1310] So say the Margam Annals, 1095; “Commotio fuit - stellarum, et obiit Wlstanus Wigorniensis episcopus.” But - unluckily it appears from Florence that the stars did not - shoot till April 4. Still it is edifying to mark the - different results of the death of a saintly and of a worldly - bishop. The next entry is, “Moritur Willelmus episcopus - Dunelmensis, et hic commotio hominum.” According to Hugh of - Flavigny (Pertz, viii. 474) the stars paid regard to the - death of an abbot who in no way concerns us; “Stellæ de cœlo - cadere visæ sunt, et eadem nocte Gyraldus abbas Silvæ - majoris [in the diocese of Bourdeaux] migravit ad Dominum.” - Sigebert’s Chronicle (Pertz, vi. 367) has some curious - physical details. - - [1311] See above, p. 297. - - [1312] The story is told by William of Malmesbury, Vit. - Wlst. Angl. Sacr. ii. 266. “Præmonuerat ministros velle se - ad illud pascha convivari accuratis epulis cum bonis - hominibus.” He then brings the poor people into the hall and - “præcepit inter eos sedili locato epulas sibi apponi.” - - [1313] The steward’s doctrine is “competentius esse, ut - episcopus convivaretur cum paucis divitibus quam cum multis - pauperibus.” The bishop makes his scriptural quotation, and - adds, “illis debere serviri, qui non haberent unde - redderent.” He then winds up, “Lætius se videre istum - consessum, quam si, ut sæpe, consedisset regi Anglorum.” One - would like to have Wulfstan’s English. We must remember that - Wulfstan was commonly surrounded at dinner by a knightly - following. Vit. Wlst. 259. “Excepto si quando cum monachis - reficeretur, semper in regia considentibus militibus palam - convivabatur.” - - [1314] Vit. Wlst. 266. “Multo eum suspiciebat rex honore, - multo proceres; ut qui sæpe ipsum ascirent convivio, et - assurgerent ejus consilio.” Then follows the list of his - foreign admirers, but it is only of the Irish kings that we - read that “magnis eum venerabantur favoribus.” Malcolm and - Margaret “ipsius se dedebant orationibus;” the foreign - prelates “epistolis quæ adhuc supersunt ejus ambierunt apud - Deum suffragia.” - - [1315] See above, p. 312. - - [1316] Vit. Wlst. 267. “Humanorum excessum [had he given in - a little too much to foreign ways?] confessione facta, etiam - disciplinam accepit. Ita vocant monachi virgarum flagra, quæ - tergo nudato cædentis infligit acrimonia.” - - [1317] Serlo we have heard of before; see N. C. vol. iv. p. - 383. Of Tewkesbury I shall have to speak below, and see N. - C. vol. v. pp. 628, 629. - - [1318] Vit. Wlst. 267. “Magis sedens quam jacens, aures - psalmis, oculos altari applicabat, sedili sic composito ut - libere cerneret quicquid in capella fieret.” That is, there - was a _squint_ between his bed-room and the chapel, a not - uncommon arrangement, one of the best instances of which is - to be seen in Beverstone Castle, in Wulfstan’s diocese, - though of a date long after Godwine’s days and his. This use - of the squint is only one of several ways for enabling the - inmates, whether of houses, hospitals, or monastic - infirmaries, to hear mass without going out of doors. - - [1319] The vision is recorded by William of Malmesbury in - the life of Wulfstan (268), where he says that Bishop Robert - was “in curia regis,” and adds that he was “homo sæculi - quidem fretus prudentia, sed nulla solutus illecebra.” - Florence says that Robert was “in oppido quod Criccelad - vocatur.” The inference is that the King was at Cricklade. - Cricklade does not appear among the King’s lordships in - Wiltshire; but both he (Domesday, 65) and other lords had - burgesses there, and there is an entry in 64 _b_ about the - third penny, which brought in five pounds yearly. - - In the Gesta Pontificum William of Malmesbury does not - mention the vision; but he brings Bishop Robert to Worcester - to bury Wulfstan without any such call. There is surely - something a little heathenish in his description of the - bishop’s body lying in “Libitina ante altare.” - - [1320] Gest. Pont. 289. “Profecto, si facilitas antiquorum - hominum adjuvaret, jamdudum elatus in altum sanctus - predicaretur, sed nostrorum incredulitas, quæ se cautelæ - umbraculo exornat, non vult miraculis adhibere fidem etiamsi - conspicetur oculo, etiamsi palpat digito.” Yet, though he - says that prayers offered at Wulfstan’s tomb were always - answered, yet he says nothing about miracles being wrought - there (unless we count the wonderful preservation of the - tomb itself during a fire), and not much of miracles done - during his lifetime. There is more in the Life. - - [1321] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 25. “Quem consistentem in quadam - villa quæ tribus miliariis a Sceftesberia distans Ilingeham - vocatur Anselmus adiit.” See above, p. 477. By what follows - this must have been some time in February. - - [1322] See above, p. 414. - - [1323] See N. C. vol. ii. pp. 122, 462, and Hook, - Archbishops, i. 27, 270. - - [1324] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 353. - - [1325] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 441. - - [1326] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 25. “Eique suam voluntatem in hoc - esse innotuit, ut Romanum pontificem pro pallii sui - petitione adiret. Ad quod rex, A quo inquit papa illud - requirere cupis?” - - [1327] Ib. “Quicunque sibi hujus dignitatis potestatem - vellet præripere, unum foret ac si coronam suam sibi - conaretur auferre.” - - [1338] Ib. “Iræ stimulis exagitatus, protestatus est illum - nequaquam fidem quam sibi debebat simul et apostolicæ sedis - obedientiam, contra suam voluntatem, posse servare.” - - [1329] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 26. “Petivit inducias ad istius - rei examinationem quatenus episcopis, abbatibus, cunctisque - regni principibus, una coëuntibus communi assensu - definiretur, utrum salva reverentia et obedientia sedis - apostolicæ posset fidem terreno regi servare, annon.” These - words must be specially attended to, as they contain the - whole root of the matter with regard to the council of - Rockingham. The word “indutiæ” is rather hard to translate. - It means an adjournment, but something more than an - adjournment. The word “truce,” commonly used to express it, - is rather too strong; yet it is sometimes hard to avoid it. - - [1330] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 26. “Quod si probatum, inquit, - fuerit, utrumque fieri minime posse, fateor malo terram - tuam, donec apostolicum suscipias, exeundo devitare, quam - beati Petri ejusque vicarii obedientiam vel ad horam - abnegare.” - - [1331] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 435. - - [1332] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 224. - - [1333] Domesday, 220. “Rex tenet Rochingeham…. Hanc terram - tenuit Bovi cum saca et soca T. R. E. Wasta erat quando rex - W. jussit ibi castellum fieri.” On Rockingham Castle, see - Mr. G. T. Clark, Archæological Journal, xxxv. 209. - - [1334] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 26. “Fit conventus omnium dominico - die, in ecclesia quæ est in ipso castro sita, ab hora prima, - rege et suis secretius in Anselmum consilia sua studiose - texentibus.” - - [1335] “Anselmus autem, episcopis, abbatibus, et - principibus, ad se a regio secreto vocatis, eos et - assistentem monachorum, clericorum, laicorum, numerosam - multitudinem hac voce alloquitur.” - - [1336] See above, p. 480, for somewhat similar arrangements. - But the present hall of Rockingham, dating from the - thirteenth century, is divided by the width of the court - from what seems to be the site of the chapel. - - [1337] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 26. “Fateor verum dico, quia salva - reverentia voluntatis Dei maluissem illa die, si optio mihi - daretur, in ardentem rogum comburendus præcipitari, quam - archiepiscopatus dignitate sublimari.” - - [1338] “Rapuistis me, et coegistis onus omnium suscipere, - qui corporis imbecillitate defessus meipsum vix poteram - ferre … attamen videns importunam voluntatem vestram, - credidi me vobis, et suscepi onus quod imposuistis, confisus - spe auxilii vestri quod polliciti estis. Nunc ergo, ecce - tempus adest quo sese causa obtulit, ut onus meum consilii - vestri manu levetis.” - - [1339] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 27. “Si, remota omni alia - conditione, simpliciter ad voluntatem domini nostri regis - consilii tui summam transferre velles, prompta tibi - voluntate, ut nobis ipsis, consuleremus.” - - [1340] “In medio procerum et conglobatæ multitudinis - _sedens_.” Judges and bishops can still deliver charges - sitting; but it would seem hard to carry on a debate in that - posture. - - [1341] “Si pure ad voluntatem domini regis consilii tui - summam transferre volueris, promptum, et quod in nobis ipsis - utile didicimus, a nobis consilium certum habebis. Si autem - secundum Deum, quod ullatenus voluntati regis obviare - possit, consilium a nobis expectas, frustra niteris; quia in - hujusmodi nunquam tibi nos adminiculari videbis.” - - [1342] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 27. “Quibus dictis conticuerunt, - et capita sua quasi ad ea quæ ipse illaturus erat - demiserunt.” - - [1343] “Tunc pater Anselmus, erectis in altum luminibus, - vivido vultu, reverenda voce, ista locutus est.” - - [1344] “Nos qui Christianæ plebis pastores, et vos qui - populorum principes vocamini.” - - [1345] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 27. “Non cuilibet imperatori, non - alicui regi, non duci, non comiti.” I have ventured to - prefer the climax to the anti-climax. - - [1346] See above, p. 104. - - [1347] See above, p. 95. - - [1348] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 27. “Turbationem suam confusis - vocibus exprimentes, ut eos illum esse reum mortis una - clamare putares.” The reference seems to be to St. Matthew’s - Gospel, xxvi. 66. - - [1349] See N. C. vol. iii. p. 295. Only the groups at - Lillebonne seem to have been larger than those at - Rockingham. - - [1350] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 28. “Hic duo, ibi tres, illic - quatuor, in unum consiliabantur, studiosissime disquirentes, - si quo modo possent aliquod responsum contra hæc componere, - quod et regiam animositatem deliniret et prælibatas - sententias Dei adversa fronte non impugnaret.” - - [1351] “Adversariis ejus conciliabula sua in longum - protelantibus, ipse ad parietem se reclinans leni somno - quiescebat.” - - [1352] “Vult dominus noster rex, omissis aliis verbis, a te - sub celeritate sententiam audire.” - - [1353] “Hæc rogamus, hæc consulimus, hæc tibi tuisque - necessaria esse dicimus et confirmamus.” - - [1354] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 28. “Noveris totum regnum conqueri - adversum te quod nostro communi domino conaris decus imperii - sui, coronam, auferre. Quicumque enim regiæ dignitatis ei - consuetudines tollit, coronam simul et regnum tollit.” - - [1355] “Urbani illius, qui offenso domino rege nil tibi - prodesse nec ipso pacato tibi quicquam valet obesse, - obedientiam abjice, subjectionis jugum excute, et _liber_, - ut archiepiscopum Cantuariensem decet, in cunctis actibus - tuis voluntatem domini regis et jussionem expecta.” What - more could Henry the Eighth have asked of Cranmer? - - [1356] “Quatenus inimici tui qui casibus tuis nunc - insultant, visa dignitatis tuæ sublevatione, erubescant.” - - [1357] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 28. “Respondeam quod Deus - inspirare dignabitur.” - - [1358] “Suspicati ilium aut quid diceret ultra nescire aut - metu addictum statim cœpto desistere.” - - [1359] “Persuaserunt inducias nulla ratione dandas, sed - causa recenti examinatione discussa, supremam, si suis - adquiescere consiliis nollet, in eum judicii sententiam - invehi juberet.” - - [1360] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 28. “Erat quasi primus et - prolocutor regis in hoc negotio Willelmus supra nominatus - Dunelmensis episcopus, homo linguæ volubilitate facetus quam - pura sapientia præditus. Hujus quoque discidii quod inter - regem et Anselmum versabatur erat auctor gravis et - incentor.” - - [1361] “Omni ingenio satagebat, si quo modo Anselmum - calumniosis objectionibus fatigatum regno eliminaret, ratus, - ut dicebatur, ipso discedente, se archiepiscopatus solio - sublimandum.” - - [1362] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 28. “Nec regia dignitate integre - se potitum suspicabatur, quamdiu aliquis in tota terra, vel - etiam secundum Deum, nisi per eum quicquam habere (not dico) - vel posse dicebatur.” - - [1363] “Spoponderat se facturum ut Anselmus aut Romani - pontificis funditus obedientiam abnegaret, aut - archiepiscopatui, reddito baculo et annulo, abrenunciaret.” - - [1364] Ib. 29. “Dicit quod quantum tua interest eum sua - dignitate spoliasti; dum Odonem episcopum Ostiensem sine sui - auctoritate præcepti papam in sua Anglia facis.” - - [1365] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 29. “Revesti eum primo, si placet, - _debita imperii sui dignitate_, et tunc demum de induciis - age.” - - [1366] “Nec jocum existimes esse quod agitur; immo in istis - magni doloris stimulis urgemur.” - - [1367] “Quod dominus tuus et noster in omni dominatione sua - præcipuum habebat, et quo eum _cunctis regibus præstare_ - certum erat.” - - [1368] See Appendix F. - - [1369] We shall come to these matters in the next chapter. - - [1370] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 29. “Aspicientes sese ad invicem, - nec invenientes quid ad ista referrent, ad dominum suum - reversi sunt.” - - [1371] “Protinus intellexerunt quod prius non - animadverterunt, nec ipsum advertere posse putaverunt, - videlicet archiepiscopum Cantuariensem a nullo hominum, nisi - a solo papa, judicari posse vel damnari, nec ab aliquo cogi - pro quavis calumnia cuiquam, eo excepto, contra suum velle - respondere.” - - [1372] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 29. “Ortum interea murmur est - totius multitudinis pro injuria tanti viri summissa inter se - voce querentis. Nemo quippe palam pro eo loqui audebat ob - metum tyranni.” We have had the word “tyrannis” already; see - above, p. 397. - - [1373] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 29. “Miles unus de multitudine - prodiens viro adstitit flexis coram eo genibus.” - - [1374] “Confidentes juxta scripturam, vocem populi vocem - esse Dei.” “Scriptura” must here be taken in some wide - sense; Eadmer could hardly have thought that these words - were to be found in any of the canonical books. - - [1375] “Ad divisionem spiritus sui exacerbatus.” - - [1376] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 29. “Dunelmensis ita inprimis - tepide et silenter per singula loquebatur, ut omnis humanæ - prudentiæ inscius et expers putaretur.” - - [1377] “Cogitabimus pro te usque ad mane.” - - [1378] “Mane reversi sedimus in solito loco exspectantes - mandatum regis. At ille cum suis omnimodo perquirebat quid - in damnationem Anselmi componere posset, nec inveniebat.” - - [1379] “Requisitus Willielmus Dunelmensis quid ipse, ex - condicto, noctu egerit apud se.” - - [1380] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 29. “Verum mihi violentia videtur - opprimendus, et, si regiæ voluntati non vult adquiescere, - ablato baculo et annulo, de regno pellendus. Non placuerunt - hæc verba principibus.” - - [1381] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 30. “Per vultum Dei si vos illum - ad voluntatem meam non damnaveritis, ego damnabo vos.” The - oath “per vultum Dei” is the same as that “per vultum de - Luca.” See Appendix G. - - [1382] “Robertus quidam ipsi regi valde familiaris” would - seem to be no other than the Count of Meulan. We shall hear - of him by name later in the story. It might be Robert the - _Dispenser_ (see above, p. 331), but that seems much less - likely. - - [1383] “De consiliis nostris quid dicam, fateor nescio. Nam - cum omni studio per totum diem inter nos illa conferimus, et - quatenus aliquo modo sibi cohereant conferendo conferimus, - ipse, nihil mali e contra cogitans, dormit, et prolata coram - eo statim uno labiorum suorum pulsu quasi telas araneæ - rumpit.” - - [1384] “Primas est, non modo istius regni, sed et Scotiæ et - Hiberniæ, necne adjacentium insularum, nosque suffraganei - ejus.” We have had one or two other cases, in which, in - Eadmer’s language at least, the Archbishop of York is spoken - of as the suffragan of Canterbury. - - [1385] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 30. “Properate igitur, et quod - dicitis citius facite, ut cum viderit se a cunctis despectum - et desolatum, verecundetur, et ingemiscat se Urbanum me - domino suo contempto secutum.” - - [1386] “Et quo ista securius faciatis, en ego primum in - imperio meo penitus ei omnem securitatem et fiduciam mei - tollo, ac deinceps in illo vel de illo nulla in causa - confidere, vel eum pro archiepiscopo aut patre spirituali - tenere volo.” - - [1387] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 30. “Paterno more diligentiam, - animæ illius curam, si ferre dignabitur, habebo.” - - [1388] “Ad hæc ille respondit,” says Eadmer; but it can only - mean an answer through messengers, as it is plain that the - King and the Archbishop were still in different rooms. - - [1389] “Omnino adversatur animo meo quod dicit, nec meus - erit, quisquis ipsius esse delegerit.” - - [1390] The answer of the lay lords must be taken as a formal - setting forth of their position; one would be glad to know - whose are the actual sentiments and words. It runs thus - (Eadmer, 30); - - “Nos nunquam fuimus homines ejus, nec fidelitatem quam ei - non fecimus abjurare valemus. Archiepiscopus noster est; - Christianitatem in hac terra gubernare habet, et ea re nos - qui Christiani sumus ejus magisterium, dum hic vivimus, - declinare non possumus, præsertim cum nullius offensæ macula - illum respiciat, quæ vos secus de illo agere compellat.” - - [1391] “Quod ipse repressa sustinuit ira, rationi eorum - palam ne nimis offenderentur contraire præcavens.” This is - perhaps a solitary case of recorded self-restraint on the - part of William Rufus, at all events since the death of - Lanfranc. It is significant that it should be in answer to - the lay lords and not to the bishops. - - [1392] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 30. “Episcopi hæc videntes, - confusione vultus sui operti sunt, intelligentes omnium - oculos in se converti, et apostasiam suam non injuste a - cunctis detestari.” It must be remembered that _apostasia_ - is a technical term, meaning, besides its usual sense, a - forsaking of his monastic vows and calling by a professed - monk. Eadmer speaks of the bishops as guilty of a like - offence towards their metropolitan. - - [1393] The picture is very graphic; “Audires si adesses, - nunc ab isto, nunc ab illo istum vel illum episcopum aliquo - cognomine cum interjectione indignantis denotari, videlicet - Judæ proditoris, Pilati, vel Herodis horumque similium.” One - of the bishops had been likened to Judas some years before - on somewhat opposite grounds. - - [1394] “Requisiti a rege, utrum omnem subjectionem et - obedientiam, nulla conditione interposita, an illam solam - subjectionem et obedientiam, quam prætenderet ex autoritate - Romani pontificis, Anselmo denegassent.” - - [1395] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 31. “Hos quidem qui, nulla - conditione interposita, funditus ei quicquid prælato suo - debebant se abjurasse professi sunt, juxta se sicut fideles - et amicos suos honorifice sedere præcepit.” - - [1396] “Illos vero qui in hoc solo quod præciperet ex parte - apostolici sese subjectionem et obedientiam illi abnegasse - dicere ausi sunt, ut perfidos ac suæ voluntatis inimicos, - procul in angulo domus sententiam suæ damnationis ira - permotus jussit præstolari. Territi ergo et confusione super - confusionem induti, in angulum domus secesserunt,” - - [1397] “Reperto statim salubri et quo niti solebant - domestico consilio, hoc est, data copiosa pecunia, in - amicitiam regis recepti sunt.” - - All this suggests the question, what was the course taken by - Gundulf of Rochester, Anselm’s old friend, and the holder of - a bishopric which stood in a specially close relation to the - archbishop. In the Historia Novorum there is no mention of - Gundulf; the bishops are spoken of as an united body, except - so far as they were divided on this last question. But it - seems implied that all disowned Anselm in one way or - another. Yet in the Life (ii. 3. 24) the bishops disown him, - “Rofensi solo excepto.” How are these accounts to be - reconciled? If Gundulf had stood out in any marked way from - the rest, Eadmer would surely have mentioned him in the - Historia Novorum. One might suppose that the Bishop of - Rochester, as holding of the Archbishop, was not in the - company of the King’s bishops at all. But, if he had stayed - outside with Anselm and Eadmer, one would have looked for - that to be mentioned also. He can hardly lurk in the first - person plural which Eadmer so often uses. - - [1398] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 31. “Donec Deus tantæ - perturbationi modum dignanter imponeret.” - - [1399] “Licet discessum ejus summopere desideraret, nolebat - tamen eum pontificatus dignitate _saisitum_ discedere, ne - novissimum scandalum quod inde poterat oriri pejus fieret - priore. Ut vero pontificatu illum _dissaisiret_, impossibile - sibi videbatur.” The feudal language creeps in at all - corners. - - [1400] “Episcoporum consilio per quod in has angustias se - devolutum querebatur omisso, cum principibus consilium - iniit.” - - [1401] “Quatenus vir cum summa pace moneatur ad hospitium - suum redire.” - - [1402] “Perturbatis etiam curialibus plurimis … rati sunt - quippe hominem a terra discedere, et ingemuerunt.” - - [1403] “Lætus et alacer sperabat se perturbationes et onera - sæculi, quod semper optabat, transito mari, evadere.” - - [1404] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 31. “Ecce principes _a latere - regis_ mane directi”――the style of Emperors and Popes. - - [1405] “Ascendimus, inimus, et supremam de negotio nostro - sententiam avidi audire, in quo soliti eramus loco - consedimus.” The word “ascendimus” might show that Anselm’s - lodgings were at some point lower than the castle. - - [1406] “Inducias utrimque de negotio dari quatenus hinc - usque ad definitum aliquod tempus inter vos pace statuta.” - - [1407] “Pacem atque concordiam non abjicio; veruntamen - videor mihi videre quid ista quam offertis pax habeat in - se.” - - [1408] “Concedo suscipere quod domino regi et vobis placet - pro pacis custodia _secundum Deum_ statuere”――Anselm’s - invariable reservation. - - [1409] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 31. “Dantur induciæ usque ad - octavas Pentecostes, ac _regia fide_ sancitur, quatenus ex - utraque parte interim omnia essent in pace.” - - [1410] “Præsciens apud se pacem et inducias illas inane et - momentaneum velamen esse odii et oppressionis mox futuræ.” - - [1411] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 31. “Baldwinum monachum, _in quo - pars major_ consiliorum Anselmi pendebat.” - - [1412] “Præscripti discidii causa.” - - [1413] “Quid referam camerarium ejus in sua camera ante suos - oculos captum, alios homines ejus injusto judicio - condemnatos, deprædatos, innumeris malis afflictos?” All - this was “infra dies induciarum et præfixæ pacis.” Eadmer - reproaches the “regalis constantia fidei.” Rufus would have - said that his faith was plighted to Anselm, not to Baldwin. - - [1414] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 32. “Ut fere universi conclamarent - melius sibi absque pastore jam olim fuisse quam nunc sub - hujusmodi pastore esse.” - - [1415] The movements of Urban at this time will be found in - the Chronicle of Bernold in the fifth volume of Pertz, p. - 461. Cf. Milman, Latin Christianity, iii. 215. - - [1416] Bernold, ib. “Henricus autem rex dictus eo tempore in - Longobardia morabatur, pene omni regia dignitate privatus. - Nam filius ejus Chonradus, jam dudum in regem coronatus, se - ab illo penitus separavit, et domnæ Mathildi reliquisque - fidelibus sancti Petri firmiter conjunctus totum robur - paterni exercitus in Longobardia obtinuit.” - - [1417] Ib. “Ad quam sinodum multitudo tam innumerabilis - confluxit, ut nequaquam in qualibet ecclesia illius loci - posset comprehendi. Unde et domnus papa extra urbem in campo - illam celebrare compulsus est; nec hoc tamen absque - probabilis exempli auctoritate.” He justifies the act by the - example of Moses; in England Godwine and William might have - been precedents enough. - - [1418] See N. C. vol. ii. p. 230. - - [1419] The matters discussed are reckoned up by Bernold, - u. s. - - [1420] See above, p. 415. - - [1421] So speaks our own Chronicler the next year. See - above, p. 415. - - [1422] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 32. “Siquidem ipse rex, ubi sensit - Anselmum suæ voluntatis in præscripto negotio nolle - obtemperare, clam et Anselmo ignorante, eosdem clericos - [Girardum et Willielmum] Romam miserat, Romanæ statum - ecclesiæ per eos volens certo dinoscere.” - - [1423] Bernold (Pertz, v. 461) gives the details. The part - which most concerns us is that the King and future Emperor - is received only “salva justitia illius [Romanæ] ecclesiæ, - et statutis apostolicis, maxime de investituris in - spiritalibus officiis a laico non usurpandis.” - - [1424] Bernold merely glances at this matter. It will be - found described more at length in the hexameters of Donizo, - ii. 9, Muratori, v. 374; and in the prose life of Matilda, - 13, Muratori, v. 395. - - [1425] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 32. “Scire veritatem hujus rei - Romam missi sunt hii duo clerici, eaque cognita, jussi sunt - sacris promissionibus illectum ad hoc si possent papam - perducere, ut ipsi regi ad opus archiepiscopi Cantuariensis - pallium, tacita persona Anselmi, destinaret, quod ipse rex, - Anselmo a pontificatu simul et regno dejecto, cui vellet cum - pontificatu vice apostolici postmodum daret.” The formal - grant of the hereditary legation to Count Roger comes - somewhat later, being given by Urban himself in 1099. (See - William of Malaterra, iv. 29, Muratori, v. 602.) But the - language used seems to imply that some such power - practically existed already. - - [1426] Ep. S. Thom, ad Cardinales, Giles, S. T. C. iii. 93. - “Eo jam perventum est ut sequatur rex noster etiam Siculos, - immo certe præcedat.” On the question of the legatine power - supposed to have been granted, or designed to be granted, to - Henry the Second, see J. C. Robertson, Becket, 106. For my - purpose the general belief that something of the kind was - done or designed is enough. - - [1427] Bernold, ap. Pertz, v. 461. - - [1428] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 32. “Hoc quippe disposuerat apud - se; hoc suspicatus est non injuria sibi concedi posse, hoc - indubitato fieri promittebat opinioni suæ.” - - [1429] Chron. Petrib. 1095. “Eac on þis ylcan geare togeanes - Eastron com þæs papan _sande_ hider to lande, þæt wæs - Waltear bisceop swiðe god lifes man, of Albin þære ceastre.” - The date is strange, as he did not and could not come till - after Easter. - - [1430] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 32. “Præfatus episcopus Angliam - veniens, secum archiepiscopatus stolam papa mittente - clanculo detulit. Et silenter Cantuaria civitate - pertransita, Anselmoque devitato, ad regem properabat, nulli - de pallio quod ferebat quicquam dicens, nullum in absentia - ductorum suorum familiariter alloquens. Rex denique - præceperat ita fieri, nolens mysterium consilii sui - publicari.” - - [1431] Ib. 33. “Sentiens rex episcopum ex parte Urbani - cuncta suæ voluntati coniventia nunciare, et ea, si ipsum - Urbanum pro papa in suo regno susciperet, velle apostolica - authoritate sibi dum viveret in privilegium promulgare, - adquievit placito.” This is put somewhat more distinctly in - the account by Hugh of Flavigny (Pertz, viii. 475, see - Appendix AA); “Conventionem fecerat cum eo [Willelmo] - Albanensis episcopus, quem primum illo miserat papa, ne - legatus Romanus ad Angliam mitteretur nisi quem rex - præciperet.” - - [1432] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 32. “Nil penitus ipsi pro Anselmo - locutus est, quod pacem inter eos conciliaret, quod - tribulationes in quibus pro fidelitate sedis apostolice - desudabat mitigaret, quod eum ad sublevandum in Anglia - Christianæ religionis cultum roboraret.” - - [1433] Ib. “Papæ, quid dicemus? Si aurum et argentum Roma - præponit justitiæ,” &c. It must be remembered that in this - sentence “Papæ” has nothing to do with “Papa.” See above, p. - 292. - - [1434] Ib. 33. “Præcipiens Urbanum _in omni imperio suo_ pro - apostolico haberi, eique vice beati Petri in Christiana - religione obediri.” - - [1435] Ib. “Egit post hæc quibus modis poterat ipse rex cum - episcopo, quatenus Romani pontificis autoritate Anselmum ab - episcopatu, regali potentia fultus, deponeret, spondens - immensum pecuniæ pondus ei et ecclesiæ Romanæ singulis annis - daturum, si in hoc suo desiderio satisfaceret.” - - [1436] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 33. “Reputans apud se nihil in - requisitione vel susceptione Romani antistitis se - profecisse.” - - [1437] “Qualiter, servata singulari celsitudinis suæ - dignitate, viro saltem specie tenus amorem suum redderet, - cui crudeliter iratus nihil poterat cupitæ damnationis pro - voto inferre.” - - [1438] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 33. “Ad eum venire et verba regis - illi et illius possent regi deferre.” - - [1439] “Dixi vobis jam, quod nunquam domino meo hanc - contumeliam faciam ut facto probem amicitiam ejus esse - venalem.” - - [1440] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 33. “Dominus papa Urbanus, rogatu - domini nostri regis, stolam illi archiepiscopatus per - episcopum qui de Roma venit direxit.” The pallium, they - said, was sent to the King, but the words which follow show - that they wished it to be understood that it was meant for - Anselm. - - [1441] “Tuum igitur erit considerare quid tanto beneficio - dignum regi rependas.” - - [1442] “Laudamus et consulimus ut saltem quod in via - expenderes si pro hoc Romam ires regi des, ne si nihil - feceris injurius judiceris.” They enlarge also on the - dangers of the way; these had certainly proved fatal to some - of Anselm’s predecessors. - - [1443] “Principum suorum consilio usus.” - - [1444] This is not mentioned now, but it comes out - afterwards; Hist. Nov. 39. See below, p. 588. - - [1445] Ib. 39. “Scio quippe me [Anselmum] spopondisse - consuetudines tuas, ipsas videlicet quas per rectitudinem et - secundum Deum in regno tuo possides, me secundum Deum - servaturum, et eas per justitiam contra omnes homines pro - meo posse defensurum.” - - [1446] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 33. “Cum curiæ illius apud - Windlesorum se præsentasset et familiari alloquio in - conspectu procerum et coadunatæ multitudinis ipsum - detinuisset.” - - [1447] “Ut pro regiæ majestatis honorificentia, illud per - manum regis susciperet.” - - [1448] “Rationabiliter ostendens hoc donum non ad regiam - dignitatem, sed ad singularem beati Petri pertinere - auctoritatem.” - - [1449] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 34. “Quasi de manu beati Petri, - pro summi quo fungebatur pontificatus honore, sumeretur.” - - [1450] “Adquievit istis multitudo omnis.” - - [1451] “Pœnitentiam apud illum agentes pro culpa suæ - abnegationis, quam cum aliis coepiscopis suis fecerant apud - Rochingeham.” - - [1452] William of Malmesbury (Gest. Pont. 302) has two - appearances of Saint Wulfstan to Robert; but both come - before Wulfstan’s burial. The one here meant is recorded by - Florence (1095). Robert was, according to the Worcester - writer, “vir magnæ religionis,” and we have a pleasing - picture of “ambo patres nimia caritate in Dei dilectione et - ad se invicem conjuncti.” In the Life of Wulfstan (Ang. Sac. - i. 268) the Bishop of Hereford is “homo seculi quidem fretus - prudentia, sed nulla solutus illecebra.” - - [1453] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 34. “Ibi etiam Wilfrido episcopo - sancti David de Gualis quæ vulgo Dewi vocatur, ipsa hora - reddidit episcopale officium, a quo, exigente culpa ejus, - jam antea ipsemet illum suspenderat.” Was Wilfrith there in - person? We shall hear of him again. - - [1454] Flor. Wig. 1095. “Pallium … quod juxta condictum die - dominica, quæ erat iv. idus Junii, ab eodem [Waltero] - Cantuariam super altare Salvatoris delatum, ab Anselmo - assumptum est, atque ab omnibus pro reverentia S. Petri - suppliciter deosculatum.” The details come from Eadmer; the - Chronicler tells only how Walter “þam arcebisceop Ansealme - uppon Pentecosten, of þæs papan healfe Urbanus, his pallium - geaf, and he hine underfeng æt his arcestole on - Cantwarabyrig.” - - [1455] I hardly know what to make of the words of Hugh of - Flavigny (Pertz, viii. 475); “Adeo auctoritas Romana apud - Anglos avaritia et cupiditate legatorum viluerat, ut eodem - Albanense præsente et consentiente nec contradicente, immo - præcipiente, Cantuariensis archiepiscopus fidelitatem beato - Petro et papæ juraverat salva fidelitate domini sui regis.” - One cannot conceive any time during the Cardinal’s visit in - which Anselm could be called on to make any such oath either - to Pope or King except at the time of his receiving the - pallium; there may be some confusion with the promise - mentioned in p. 531. - - [1456] This coincidence is noticed by Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 34. - - [1457] Such is the pious belief of Florence; “Credi fas est, - ipsum qui prius de hoc sæculo ad Deum migravit - sollicitudinem egisse sui dilectissimi, quem in hoc sæculo - reliquit, et ut quam citius simul ante Deum gauderent operam - dedisse.” - - [1458] Hugh of Flavigny, directly after the passage just - quoted (Pertz, viii. 475), goes on to say, “Quæ res in - tantum adoleverat, ut nullus ex parte papæ veniens honore - debito exciperetur, nullus esset in Anglia archiepiscopus, - episcopus, abbas, nedum monachus aut clericus, qui litteras - apostolicas suscipere auderet, nedum obedire, nisi rex - juberet.” - - [1459] This is noticed by the Chronicler; “And se bisceop - Waltear has on lande þæs geares syððan lange wunode, and man - syððan þæt Romgesceot be him sende, swa man manegan gearan - æror ne dyde.” - - [1460] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 430. - - [1461] Epp. iii. 35. “Vestra prudentia non ignorat quia nos - duo nihil efficeremus, nisi regi suggestum esset, ut ejus - assensu et auxilio ad effectum perduceretur quod - disponeremus.” The military history which this letter - casually opens to us, and of which we have no mention - elsewhere, will come in the next chapter. - - [1462] “Expecto reditum domini mei regis, et episcoporum et - principum qui cum eo sunt, quatenus illi quæ agenda sunt, - opportune et rationabiliter suggeramus.” So in the next - letter (Epp. iii. 36) he says more distinctly that he would - like to meet the Cardinal, “si congruo tempore factum esset, - id est quando dominus meus rex, et episcopi, et principes - hujus regni vobis præsentes aut propinqui erant.” - - [1463] Epp. iii. 36. “Vos ab illis et ego a vobis - discessimus, veluti non nos in hac terra amplius invicem - visuri.” - - [1464] Epp. iii. 35. See the next chapter. - - [1465] Ib. “Rex ore suo mihi præcepit … et postquam - Cantuarberiam reddi mihi mandavit per litteras proprio - sigillo signatas.” - - [1466] Ib. “Idcirco de Cantuaria exire non audeo, nisi in - illam partem ex qua hostium expectamus adventum.” - - [1467] Ib. 36. “Quod quæritis a me cur et qua justitia - episcopi alii me abnegantes a me discesserunt, nec sunt - reversi dignam agentes pœnitentiam, hoc potius ab illis - quærendum erat quam a me.” - - [1468] Ib. “Reversi hactenus sunt ut illam obedientiam quam - Cantuariensi sedi promiserant se mihi servaturos - faterentur.” - - [1469] Epp. iii. 36. “Dicitis quosdam illorum vobis dixisse - ideo non offendisse in me, quia permisi me a catholica - ecclesia transferri ad schismaticos et ab illis consecrari, - si fieri, sicut additis, potest; et a schismatico rege - investituram accepisse, et illi fidelitatem et hominium - fecisse, quos omnes sciebam esse schismaticos et divisos ab - ecclesia Christi, et a capite meo Urbano pontifice, quem - ipsi, me audiente, abnegabant.” - - [1470] Epp. iii. 36. “Illi non abnegabant canonicum Romanum - pontificem, quicunque esset, nec Urbanum negabant esse - pontificem; sed dubitabant propter illam quæ modo nata est - dissensionem, et propter dubitationem illum suscipere quasi - certum differebant; nec ullum judicium illos ab ecclesia - segregaverat, et omnino obedientiam Romanæ sedis tenere se - fatebantur et sub professione obedientiæ Romani pontificis - me consecrarunt.” - - [1471] Ib. “Denique dominus papa sciebat me esse consecratum - et a quibus, et cui regi feceram quod feci. Et tamen pallium - quod archiepiscopus Cantuariæ solet habere, mihi per vestram - caritatem, non ut schismatico, sed ut accepto, non ut - reprobans, sed ut approbans misit, et sic quod de me factum - erat confirmavit.” - - [1472] Ib. “Si vobis hæc calumnia attendenda videtur, cur - earn ante pallii concessionem mihi tacuistis? Si negligenda - putatur, vos judicate quam diligenter sit a vobis - inculcanda.” - - [1473] Ib. “Rogatis me ut fratres nostros Cantuariensis - ecclesiæ quiete ac pacifice possidere dimittam res suas.” - - [1474] Ib. “Nullus magis desiderat quietem ac pacem illorum - quam ego, nec magis sollicitus est pro utilitate ejusdem - ecclesiæ; et idcirco voluntas mea est ut res ejus, Deo - annuente, disponam ad utilitatem præsentem et futuram, prout - melius sciam et potero.” - - [1475] This question is argued by Eadmer in the Life, ii. I. - 9. - - [1476] Ib. “Si Cantuariam assidue incoleret, homines sui ex - advectione victualium oppido gravarentur; et insuper a - præpositis, ut sæpe contingebat, multis ex causis oppressi, - si quem interpellarent, nunquam præsentem haberent, magis ac - magis oppressi in destructionem funditus irent.” Of the - doings of reeves of all kinds we have often heard. See - specially N. C. vol. iv. p. 616. - - [1477] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 34. - - [1478] This would seem to be the time when Anselm’s practice - of various virtues is so fully described by Eadmer in the - first and second chapters of the second book of the Life. - - [1479] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 340. He appears in the Gesta - Pontificum, 289, as “Samson, canonicus Baiocensis, non parvæ - literaturæ vir nec contemnendæ facundiæ. Antiquorum homo - morum, ipse liberaliter vesci, et aliis dapsiliter largiri.” - But this last description is substituted for an amazing - account of his appetite, specially in the way of fowls and - swine’s flesh (cf. the account of King Æthelred in N. C. - vol. i. p. 658), and how he died of fat. He fed however - three hundred poor men daily. - - [1480] His kindred to the elder and the younger Thomas - appears in the suppressed passage of William of Malmesbury. - Eadmer (Hist. Nov. 35) says of the two bishops-elect, “Qui - cum in summum promovendi sacerdotium ad Anselmum pro more - venissent, necdum omnes inferiores ordines habuissent, - ordinavit eos pro instanti necessitate, ad diaconatum et - presbyteratum unum, et alium ad presbyteratum.” The canon of - Bayeux would be more likely than the King’s clerk to have - the higher degree. - - [1481] Will. Malms. Gest. Pont. 290. But the first and - second versions are worth comparing. It has a curiously - modern sound when we read, “Quotiens Lundonia rediret, - aliquid pretiosum afferret, quod esset ornamento ecclesiæ.” - But it is a witness to the growing importance of London. - - [1482] William of Malmesbury has a first and a second - edition (Gest. Pont. 259) in the case of Gerard also. - According to rumour, “multorum criminum et maxime libidini - obnoxius erat.” He was suspected of magic, from his constant - study of Julius Firmicus. According to Hugh of Flavigny - (Pertz, viii. 496), he sacrificed a pig to the devil, while - of his brother more wonderful things still were told. See - Pertz, viii. 496, and Appendix G. - - [1483] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 35. - - [1484] See above, p. 448, and Appendix X. - - [1485] Eadmer gives the account of these Irish bishops - (Hist. Nov. 34, 36). Samuel is described as being “a rege - Hiberniæ Murierdach nomine, necne a clero et populo in - episcopatum ipsius civitatis electus est, atque ad Anselmum, - juxta morem antiquum, sacrandus cum communi decreto - directus.” Of King Muirchertach, whose name is written - endless ways, and whom it is well perhaps to shorten into - Murtagh, we shall hear again. He was King of Leinster, and - Bretwalda, so to speak, of all Ireland, though it seems that - he was not acknowledged always and everywhere. He signs the - letter to Anselm which appears in Eadmer (Hist. Nov. 36) on - behalf of Malchus, which professes to come from the “clerus - et populus oppidi Wataferdiæ, cum rege Murchertacho, et - episcopo Dofnaldo.” There are also two letters of Anselm to - him (Ep. iii. 142, 147), chiefly about ecclesiastical - reforms in Ireland. Anselm also speaks of a brother - Cornelius, whom the Irish king had asked for, but who could - not go, because he was taking care of his aged father. This - is one of those little personal touches which make us wish - to know more. - - [1486] Orderic and William of Malmesbury stand conspicuous. - - [1487] See the Chronicle, 1096. I quoted the passage in N. - C. vol. iv. p. 93. - - [1488] Ib. - - [1489] See N. C. vol. v. p. 356. - - [1490] Ib. p. 93. - - [1491] See above, p. 411. - - [1492] Urban came from Rheims, but it is important to - remember how little entitled Auvergne was in that day to the - French name. This comes out oddly enough in an entry in the - Chronicle, 1102, when thieves of all parts seem to have - conspired to rob the minster of Peterborough; “Þa coman - þeofas sum of Aluearnie, sum of France, and sum of Flanders, - and breokan þæt mynstre of Burh.” - - [1493] William of Malmesbury (iv. 344) draws a grievous - picture of the state of things among the “Cisalpini,” who - “ad hæc calamitatis omnes devenerant, ut nullis vel minimis - causis extantibus quisque alium caperet, nec nisi magno - redemptum abire sineret.” He then speaks at some length of - simony, and adds; “Tunc legitimis uxoribus exclusis, multi - contrahebant divortium, alienum expugnantes matrimonium; - quare, quia in his et illis erat confusa criminum silva, ad - pœnam quorundam potentiorum designata sunt nomina.” - - [1494] The great provision of all is (Will. Malms. iv. 345), - “Quod ecclesia catholica sit in fide, casta, libera ab omni - servitute; ut episcopi, vel abbates, vel aliquis de clero, - aliquam ecclesiasticam dignitatem de manu principum vel - quorumlibet laicorum non accipiant.” This decree does not - appear among the acts of Piacenza in Bernold, 1095 (Pertz, - v. 462). - - Among so many more stirring affairs, one decree of this - council, which has a good deal of interest, might easily be - forgotten. This is one which was meant to reform the abuses - of the privileges of sanctuary; “Qui ad ecclesiam vel ad - crucem confugerint, data membrorum impunitate, justitiæ - tradantur, vel innocentes liberentur.” Are we to see here - the first beginning of a feeling against mutilation, which - came in bit by bit in the next century? The guilty man is to - be punished, but in some other way than by loss of limb. - - [1495] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 429. - - [1496] Philip had professed all intention of coming to - Piacenza; he had even set out; “Se ad illam itiner - incepisse, sed legitimis soniis se impeditum fuisse - mandavit.” (Bernold, u. s.) He was allowed, like Anselm, - “indutiæ” till Whitsuntide; but now the decree went forth - (Will. Malms. iv. 345) against Philip himself; “Et omnes qui - eum vel regem vel dominum suum vocaverint, et ei obedierint, - et ei locuti fuerint nisi quod pertinet ad eum corrigendum. - Similiter et illam maledictam conjugem ejus, et omnes qui - eam reginam vel dominam nominaverint, quousque ad - emendationem venerint, ita ut alter ab altero discedat.” - - [1497] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 696. - - [1498] Ib. vol. iv. p. 648. - - [1499] The marriage is recorded by Orderic (vii. 23 D). - There is a letter of Bishop Ivo of Chartres addressed to the - clergy of Meulan and to all persons within the archdeaconry - of Poissy. He denounces the intended marriage on the ground - of kindred, and bids them send the letter to the Count of - Meulan. The kindred is said to be “nec ignota, nec remota;” - but it consisted in this, that Robert and Isabel had a - common forefather removed by four degrees from Robert and - five from Isabel. Robert was thus, as we should have - expected, a generation older than his wife. - - [1500] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 130, 166, 744. - - [1501] See above, p. 269. - - [1502] See above, p. 473. - - [1503] Her second marriage with Drogo of Moncey is recorded - in Will. Gem. viii. 8. Drogo was a fellow crusader (Ord. - Vit. 723 D). - - [1504] See Ord. Vit. 535 C, 724 C, 729 D, where we hear of - him before Nikaia. - - [1505] This comes from Hugh of Flavigny, Pertz, viii. 474; - “Tunc temporis pro componenda inter fratres Willelmi regis - filios concordia, Willelmum videlicet regem Anglorum et - Robertum comitem Normannorum, abbas Divionensis ex præcepto - papæ mare transierat, et ut præscriptum regem ammoneret de - multis quæ illicite fiebant ab eo, de episcopatibus - videlicet et abbatiis quas sibi retinebat, nec eis pastores - providebat, et reditus proventusque omnium sibi assumebat, - de symonia, de fornicatione clericorum.” - - [1506] Ib. “Qui veniens tanta libertate usus est, ut rex, - integritate ejus inspecta et inadulata mentis constantia, se - consiliis et votis ejus adquieturum promitteret, ut omnes - fideles gratularentur eum advenisse, ad cujus adventum quasi - respiraret et resurgeret decus et vigor ecclesiæ Anglicæ et - libertas Romanæ auctoritatis.” - - [1507] Ib. “Sed quid imperturbatum relinquit inexplebilis - gurges Romanæ avaritiæ? Rex suspectam habens viri - auctoritatem, quem jam diu venturum audierat, legatum papæ - præmiserat, et in manu ejus auri probati et purissimi 10 - marchas.” - - [1508] See Appendix AA. - - [1509] The accounts do not exactly agree; but every version - makes the terms such that the duchy was not ceded for ever, - but could under some circumstances be recovered. The - Chronicler puts it pithily, but without details; “Ðurh þas - fare [that is the crusade] wearð se cyng and his broðor - Rodbeard eorl sehte swa þæt se cyng ofer sæ fór, and eall - Normandig æt him mid feo alisde, swa swa hi þa sehte wæron.” - Florence calls the transaction “vadimonium,” and mentions - the price, 10,000 marks, or 6,666_l._ With this William of - Malmesbury agrees; Eadmer and Hugh of Flavigny make it a - pledge for three years. Hugh’s words (Pertz, viii. 475) are; - “Pro componenda inter fratres pacis concordia in Normannia - substitit donec, pace facta, decem milium marcarum pensione - accepta, terram suam comes Normanniæ regi Anglorum usque ad - trium annorum spacium custodiendam traderet.” “Pensio” must - here be taken in the sense of a single payment. Eadmer’s - words are; “Normanniam spatio trium annorum pecuniæ gratis - in dominium tradidit.” Orderic (723 A) makes the time five - years; “Rex Anglorum … Normanniam usque ad quinque annos - servaturus recepit, fratrique suo ad viam Domini peragendam - decem milia marcos argenti erogavit.” Robert of Torigny - (Will. Gem. viii. 7) mentions no number of years, but makes - the bargain last as long as Robert shall be away; “Rex - Willelmus in Normanniam transfretans, decies mille marcas - argenti ea conditione Roberto duci commodavit, ut quamdiu - idem Dux in prædicta peregrinatione moraretur, ipse ducatum - Normanniæ pro eis vadem haberet, illum duci restituturus cum - ipse sibi prætaxatam pecuniam rediens reconsignasset.” - - [1510] See Appendix X. - - [1511] See above, p. 438. - - [1512] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 35. “Quæ pecunia per Angliam, - partim data, partim exacta, totum regnum in immensum - vastavit.” - - [1513] Chron. Petrib. 1096. “Ðis wæs swiðe hefigtíme gear - geond eall Angelcyn, ægðer ge þurh mænigfealde gylda and eac - þurh swiðe hefigtymne hunger, þe þisne eard þæs geares swiðe - gedrehte.” - - [1514] Flor. Wig. 1091. “Comites, barones, vicecomites, suos - milites et villanos spoliaverunt.” - - [1515] Will. Malms. iv. 318. “Super violentia querimoniam - facientes, non se posse ad tantum vectigal sufficere, nisi - si miseros agricolas omnino effugarent.” - - [1516] Will. Malms. iv. 318. “Quibus curiales, turbido, ut - solebant, vultu, ‘Non habetis,’ inquiunt, ‘scrinia auro et - argento composita, ossibus mortuorum plena? nullo alio - responso obsecrantes dignati.’” - - [1517] Ib. “Ita illi, intelligentes quo responsio tenderet, - capsas sanctorum nudaverunt, crucifixos despoliaverunt, - calices conflarunt, non in usum pauperum, sed in fiscum - regium: quicquid enim pene sancta servavit avorum parcitas, - illorum grassatorum absumsit aviditas.” Cf. the account of - the spoliation of Waltham in Appendix H. - - [1518] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 35. “Conventus est et Anselmus per - id temporis, et ut ipse quoque manum auxilii sui in tam - rationabili causa regi extenderet, a quibusdam suis est - amicis admonitus.” - - [1519] Eadmer describes this transaction at length; and adds - that Anselm gave the two hundred pounds to the King, “cum - illis quæ de suis habere poterat pro instanti necessitate, - ut rebus consuleret.” - - [1520] This fact comes from a letter of Bishop Ivo of - Chartres (Du Chesne, iv. 219) addressed to King Philip; - “Excellentiæ vestræ litteras nuper accepi, quibus submonebar - ut apud Pontesium vel Calvummontem cum manu militum vobis - die quam statueratis occurrerem, iturus vobiscum ad placitum - quod futurum est inter regem Anglorum, et comitem - Normannorum, quod facere ad præsens magnæ et multæ causæ me - prohibent.” One of these reasons is that he will not have - anything to do with Bertrada, against whom he again strongly - exhorts the King. He himself will not be safe in the King’s - court, because of her devices; such at least seems to be the - meaning of the general remark, “Postremo novit vestra - serenitas, quia non est mihi in curia vestra plena - securitas, in qua ille sexus mihi est suspectus et infestus, - qui etiam amicis aliquando non satis est fidus.” Another - reason is more curious, and seems to imply that some - fighting was looked for; “Præterea casati ecclesiæ, et - reliqui milites pene omnes vel absunt, vel pro pace violata - excommunicati sunt: quos sine satisfactione reconciliare non - valeo et excommunicatos in hostem mittere non debeo.” - - [1521] Ord. Vit. 675 A. “Odo Baiocensis episcopus cum - Rodberto duce, nepote suo, peregrinatus est. Tantus enim - erat rancor inter ipsum et regem pro transactis - simultatibus, ut nullatenus pacificari possent ab ullis - caduceatoribus. Rex siquidem magnanimus et iracundus et - tenacis erat memoriæ, nec injuriam sibimet irrogatam facile - obliviscebatur sine ultione.” - - [1522] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 714. - - [1523] We learn a great deal about Robert on the crusade - from the Life of Lanfranc by Ralph of Caen, in the fifth - volume of Muratori. One passage describing his character has - been already quoted. We shall see some special cases as we - go on. But it is worth while to compare the “regius sanguis - Willelmides” of c. 22 with the picture in c. 58. In this - last Robert makes up to the English at Laodikeia “spe - dominationis.” Were they to help him in any attempt on the - English crown? - - [1524] I refer to Sir Francis Palgrave’s chapter “Robert the - Crusader,” the eleventh in the fourth volume of his - “Normandy and England.” He goes further off from the scene - of our common story than I can undertake to follow him. - - [1525] Will. Malms. iv. 350. But our best account just at - this moment is that by Fulcher of Chartres in the “Gesta Dei - per Francos,” which Orderic (718 B) witnesses to as a - “certum et verax volumen.” Here we read (385), “Nos Franci - occidentales, per Italiam excursa Gallia transeuntes cum - usque Lucam pervenissemus, invenimus prope urbem illam - Urbanum apostolicum, cum quo locuti sunt comes Robertus - Normannus, et comes Stephanus, nos quoque cæteri qui - voluimus.” - - [1526] Fulcher (u. s.) graphically describes this scene; - “Cum in basilica beati Petri introissemus, invenimus ante - altare homines Guiberti, papæ stolidi, qui oblationes altari - superpositas, gladios suos in manibus tenentes, inique - arripiebant: alii vero super trabes ejusdem monasterii - cursitabant; et inde deorsum ubi prostrati orabamus, lapides - jaciebant.” - - [1527] Ord. Vit. 724 D. “Rogerius dux, cognomento Bursa, - ducem Normanniæ cum sociis suis, utpote naturalem dominum - suum, honorifice suscepit.” - - [1528] He is “Marcus Buamundus” in Orderic, who afterwards - (817 A) tells the story of his two names. When he went - through Gaul, he stood godfather to many children, “quibus - etiam cognomen suum imponebat. Marcus quippe in baptismate - nominatus est; sed a patre suo, audita in convivio joculari - fabula de Buamundo gigante, puero jocunde impositum est. - Quod nimirum postea per totum mundum personuit, et innumeris - in tripertito climate orbis alacriter innotuit. Hoc exinde - nomen celebre divulgatum est in Galliis, quod antea - inusitatum erat pene omnibus occiduis.” Orderic is always - careful about names, specially double names. See another - account in Will. Malms. iv. 387. - - [1529] Orderic (724 D) says merely “quoddam castrum,” but it - appears from Geoffrey Malaterra (iv. 24) and Lupus - Protospata, 1096 (Muratori, v. 47), that the place besieged - was Amalfi. Count Roger of Sicily brought with him ten - thousand Saracens. - - [1530] Ord. Vit. u. s. “Sibi tandem optimum afferri pallium - præcepit, quod per particulas concidit, et crucem unicuique - suorum distribuit, suamque sibi retinuit.” - - [1531] Fulcher, 585. “Tunc plurimi de pauperibus vel - ignavis, inopiam futuram metuentes, arcubus suis venditis, - et baculis peregrinationis resumptis, ad mansiones suas - regressi sunt. Qua de re viles tam Deo quam hominibus facti - sunt: et versum est eis in opprobrium.” So William of - Malmesbury, iv. 353, who adds that “pars pro intemperie soli - morbo defecit.” - - [1532] See Historical Essays, Third Series, 473, 474. - - [1533] Ord. Vit. 765 B, C. - - [1534] See N. C. vol. iv. pp. 625, 626. - - [1535] Orderic (u. s.) says, “tranquillo remige in Bulgariæ - partibus applicuit.” Fulcher is naturally more exact. They - land at Dyrrhachion (386), and then “Bulgarorum regiones, - per montium prærupta et loca satis deserta, transivimus.” He - gives several curious details of the voyage and march. - - [1536] Fulcher bursts into ecstasy at the sight of - Constantinople, and William of Malmesbury takes the - opportunity to tell its history. From iv. 356 and the note - it appears that he knew his Emperors, and that his editor - did not. - - [1537] See Fulcher, 386; Orderic, 728 A; Will. Malms. iv. - 357. They all record the homage, except in the case of Count - Raymond of Toulouse, who would only swear, but not do - homage. The Count of Flanders seems a little doubtful; but - the words of William of Malmesbury are explicit as to - Robert; “Normannus itaque et Blesensis comites hominium suum - Græco prostraverunt; nam jam Flandrita transierat, et id - facere fastidierat, quod se meminisset natum et educatum - libere.” Orderic seems to take a real pleasure in speaking - of Alexios as Augustus and Cæsar, the latter title being a - little beneath him. His subjects however are not only - “Græci,” but “Pelasgi,” “Achæi,” anything that would do for - the grand style. Presently Nikaia appears (728 B) as “totius - Romaniæ caput.” So William of Malmesbury speaks of “Minor - Asia quam Romaniam dicunt.” Here “Romania” means specially - the Turkish kingdom of _Roum_; in more accurate geography it - takes in the European provinces of the Empire. - - [1538] See above, p. 560, and Ord. Vit. 778 A, B, where he - describes the coming of Eadgar, of which more in a later - chapter, and his near friendship with Robert. - - [1539] The words of Ralph of Caen (c. 58) on this head are - very emphatic; “Normannus comes ingressus Laodiciam somno - vacabat, et otio; nec inutilis tamen, dum opulentiam nactus - aliis indigentibus large erogabat; quoniam conserva Cyprus - Baccho, Cerere, et multo pecore abundans, Laodiciam - repleverat, quippe indigentem vicinam Christicolam, et quasi - collacteam; ipsa namque una in littore Syro et Christum - colebat et Alexio serviebat. Sed nec sic excussato otio, - prædictus comes frustra semel atque iterum ad castra - revocatur. Tertio sub anathemate accitus, redit invitus; - difficilem enim habebat transitum commeatio, quæ comiti - ministrare Laodicia veniens debebat.” - - [1540] Ord. Vit. 753 A. We have heard of Hugh before, N. C. - vol. iv. p. 493. We now read that “Susceptus a Normannico - duce, multum suis profuit et mores ethnicos ac - tergiversationes subdolas et fraudes, quibus contra fideles - callent, enucleavit.” - - [1541] Ib. “Cosan etiam, nobilis heros et potens de Turcorum - prosapia, Christianos ultro adiit, multisque modis ad - capiendam urbem eos adjuvit. In Christum enim fideliter - credebat, et sacro baptismate regenerari peroptabat. Ideoque - nostratibus, ut amicis et fratribus, ad obtinendum decus - Palæstinæ et metropoli Davitici regni summopere suffragari - satagebat.” - - [1542] “Furtivi funambuli” was the name given to Ivo and - Alberic of Grantmesnil and certain others. See Orderic, 738 - D. Stephen of Chartres too decamped for a while in a manner - which did not please his wife. - - [1543] The words of William of Malmesbury (iv. 389) are - remarkable; “Robertus, Jerosolymam veniens, indelibili - macula nobilitatem suam respersit, quod regnum, consensu - omnium sibi utpote regis filio delatum, recusaret, non - reverentiæ, ut fertur, contuitu, sed laborum inextricabilium - metu.” - - [1544] His exploits in the storm come out in all the - accounts. In William of Malmesbury (iv. 369) he and his - namesake of Flanders are as usual grouped together; “Hæc - quidem victoria in parte Godefridi et duorum Robertorum - evenit.” - - [1545] Will. Malms. iv. 371. “Duces, et maxime Robertus - Normannus, qui antesignanus erat, arte artem, vel potius - virtute calliditatem eludentes, sagittariis et peditibus - deductis, medias gentilium perruperunt acies.” This seems to - prove more than the story in iv. 389, where Robert, with - Philip of Montgomery and others, makes use of the worn-out - stratagem of the feigned flight. - - [1546] Robert of Torigny, 1096. “Comes Henricus contulit se - ad regem Willermum, atque omnino cum eo remansit; cui idem - rex comitatum Constantiensem et Baiocensem, præter civitatem - Baiocas et oppidum Cadomi, ex integro concessit.” - - [1547] Ord. Vit. 721 B. This decree heads the acts of the - council; “Statuit synodus sancta, ut trevia Dei firmiter - custodiatur,” &c. - - [1548] Ib. C. All persons from twelve years of age are to - swear that they will keep the Truce, and will help their - several bishops and archdeacons, “ita ut, si me monuerint ad - eundum super eos, nec diffugiam nec dissimulabo, sed cum - armis meis cum ipso proficiscar, et omnibus, quibus potero, - juvabo adversus illos per fidem sine malo ingenio, secundum - meam conscientiam.” - - [1549] Ib. D. “Hoc anathemate feriuntur falsarii et raptores - et emptores prædarum, et qui in castris congregantur propter - exercendas rapinas, et domini qui amodo eos retinuerint in - castris suis. Et auctoritate apostolica et nostra prohibemus - ut nulla Christianitas fiat in terris dominorum illorum.” - - [1550] Ord. Vit. 721 D. “Et quod nullus laicus - participationem habeat in tertia parte decimæ, vel in - sepultura, vel in oblatione altaris.” - - [1551] Ib. “Nec servitium, nec aliquam exactionem inde - exigat, præter eam quæ tempore Guillelmi regis constituta - fuit.” - - [1552] Orderic draws a special picture (722 D, 723 C), - winding up with “Sic Normannia suis in se filiis furentibus - miserabiliter turbata est, et plebs inermis sine patrono - desolata est.” - - [1553] Ord. Vit. 765 C. “Guillelmus itaque rex Normanniam - possedit, et dominia patris sui, quæ frater suus insipienter - distraxerat, sibi mancipavit.” - - [1554] Ib. “Ecclesias pastoribus viduatas electis _pro - modulo suo_ rectoribus commisit.” Or do these words imply - simony? They might merely imply lay nomination and - investiture. - - [1555] Ib. - - [1556] Ib. - - [1557] Ord. Vit. 765 C. “Turoldo fratri Hugonis de Ebremou - episcopatum dedit.” Hugh of Evermouth occurs in the false - Ingulf, 77 (not so in Domesday), as lord of Bourne and - Deeping. - - [1558] Ib. “Pro quibusdam arcanis ultro reliquit.” - - [1559] I shall speak of these Welsh wars in full in the next - chapter. - - [1560] Chron. Petrib. 1097. “Se cyng Willelm … togeanes - Eastron hider to lande for, forðam he þohte his hired on - Winceastre to healdenne; ac he wearð þurh weder gelét oððet - Eastre æfen, þæt he up com ærost æt Arundel, and forþi his - hired æt Windlesoran heold.” - - [1561] Eadmer (Hist. Nov. 37) makes a great deal more than - enough of this submission, when he says; “Super Walenses qui - contra eum surrexerant exercitum duxit, eosque post modicum - in deditionem suscipit, et pace undique potitus est.” But - this would doubtless be the impression of the moment. - - [1562] Ib. “Cum jam multi sperarent, quod hæc pax servitio - Dei deberet militare, et attenti exspectarent aliquid magni - pro emendatione Christianitatis ex regis assensu - archiepiscopum promulgare.” - - [1563] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 37. “Ecce spei hujus et - exspectationis turbatorias literas rex, a Gualis reversus, - archiepiscopo destinat, mandans in illis se pro militibus - quos in expeditionem suam miserat nullas ei nisi malas - gratias habere, eo quod nec convenienter, sicut aiebat, - instructi, nec ad bella fuerant pro negotii qualitate - idonei.” - - [1564] See N. C. vol. v. p. 372. - - [1565] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 37. “Præcepit ut paratus esset de - his, juxta judicium curiæ suæ, sibimet rectitudinem facere, - quandocumque sibi placeret inde eum appellare.” - - [1566] Ib. “Licet jam olim sciverit se, eodem rege - superstite, in Anglia Christo non adeo fructificaturum.” - - [1567] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 37. “Rogatus de subventione - Christianitatis, nonnumquam solebat respondere se propter - hostes quos infestos circumquaque habebat eo intendere non - valere.” - - [1568] Ib. “Jam tunc illum pace potitum cogitaverat super - hac re convenire, et saltem ad consensum alicujus boni - fructus exsequendi quibus modis posset attrahendo delinire.” - - [1569] Ib. “Quod ille dinoscens, et insuper cuncta regalis - curiæ judicia pendere ad nutum regis, nilque in ipsis nisi - solum velle illius considerari certissime sciens, indecens - æstimavit pro verbi calumnia placitantium more contendere, - et veritatis suæ causam curiali judicio, quod nulla lex, - nulla æquitas, nulla ratio, muniebat, examinandam - introducere.” As I understand this, he does not decline the - authority of the court; he simply determines to make no - defence, and to leave things to take their course. - - How far did the court deserve the character which Eadmer - gives of it? At this stage of the constitution, we are met - at every step by the difficulty of distinguishing between - the greater _curia regis_, which was in truth the - Witenagemót, and the smaller _curia regis_ of the King’s - immediate officials and counsellors, the successor of the - _Theningmannagemót_ (see N. C. vol. v. pp. 423, 878). - Eadmer’s picture would, under Rufus, be true enough of the - smaller body. The event at Rockingham had shown that it was - not always true of the larger. - - [1570] We read directly after (Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 37) what - was expected to happen;――“ut culpæ addictus, aut ingentem - regi pecuniam penderet, aut ad implorandam misericordiam - ejus, caput amplius non levaturus, se totum impenderet.” - Anselm was determined to avoid the latter alternative. - - [1571] “Causa discidii utique, non ex rei veritate producta, - sed ad omnem pro Deo loquendi aditum Anselmo intercludendum - malitiose composita.” - - [1572] Ib. “Tacuit ergo, nec quicquam nuntio respondit, - reputans hoc genus mandati ad ea perturbationum genera - pertinere quæ jam olim sæpe sibi recordabatur illata, et - ideo hoc solum ut Deus talia sedaret supplici corde - precabatur.” - - [1573] Ib. “Verebatur ne hæc Dei judicio sibi damno fierent, - si quibus modis posset eis obviare non intenderet.” - - [1574] Ib. “Sed obviare sibi impossibile videbat, quod - totius regni principem aut ea facere aut eis favere - perspicuum erat. Visum itaque sibi est auctoritatem et - sententiam apostolicæ sedis super his oportere inquiri.” Yet - that he did design a last effort with the King, before he - said anything about the Pope, is plain by his actually - attempting it. - - [1575] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 37. “Cum igitur in Pentecoste, - festivitatis gratia, regiæ curiæ se præsentasset, et modo - inter prandendum, modo alias quemadmodum opportunitas se - offerebat, statum animi regalis quis erga colendam æquitatem - esset studiose perquisisset, eumque qui olim fuerat omnimodo - reperisset, nihil spei de futura ipsius emendatione in eo - ultra remansit.” - - [1576] Ib. “Peractis igitur festivioribus diebus, diversorum - negotiorum causæ in medium duci ex more cœperunt.” This - notice is important as showing us the order in which - business was done in these assemblies. - - [1577] Ib. “Ut culpæ addictus aut ingentem regi pecuniam - penderet, aut ad implorandam misericordiam, ejus caput - amplius non levaturus, se totum impenderet.” - - [1578] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 37. “Accersitis ad se quos volebat - de principibus regis, mandavit per eos regi se summa - necessitate constrictum velle, per licentiam ipsius, Romam - ire.” - - [1579] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 38. “Potestas in manu sua est; - dicit quod sibi placet. At si modo non vult concedere, - concedet forsitan alia vice. Ego preces multiplicabo.” - - [1580] Ib. “Insequenti mense Augusto cum de statu regni - acturus rex episcopos, abbates, et quosque regni proceres, - in unum præcepti sui sanctione egisset.” - - [1581] Anselm made his petition, “dispositis his quæ - adunationis illorum causæ fuerant, dum quisque in sua - repedare sategisset.” - - [1582] Ammianus, xxi. 18. - - [1583] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 38. “Conturbat me, et - intelligentem non concedendum fore quod postulat, sua - graviter importunitate fatigat; quapropter jubeo ut amplius - ab hujusmodi precibus cesset, et qui me jam sæpe vexavit, - prout judicabitur mihi emendet.” - - [1584] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 38. “Si iverit, pro certo noverit - quod totum archiepiscopatum in dominium meum redigam, nec - ilium pro archiepiscopo ultra recipiam.” - - [1585] Ib. “Orta est ex his quædam magna tempestas diversis - diversæ parti acclamantibus.” - - [1586] Ib. “Quidam permoti suaserunt in crastinum rem - differri, sperantes eam alio modo sedari.” - - [1587] Ib. “Indubitanter sciens quod causa meæ salutis, - causa sanctæ Christianitatis, et vere causa sui honoris ac - profectus, si credere velit, ire dispono.” - - [1588] Eadmer Hist. Nov. 38. “In hoc scilicet, ut, spreto - tanti pontificatus honore simul et utilitate, Romam petas, - non leve est credere quod stabilis maneas.” - - [1589] Ib. “Si ita fideliter et districte vultis in mea - parte considerare atque tueri rectitudinem et justitiam Dei, - sicut in parte alterius perpenditis atque tuemini jura et - usus mortalis hominis.” - - [1590] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 38. “Audiam sequarque consilium - quod mihi inde vestra fida Deo industria dabit.” - - [1591] Ib. 39. “Domine pater, scimus te virum religiosum - esse ac sanctum, et in cælis conversationem tuam. Nos autem, - impediti consanguineis nostris quos sustentamus et - multiplicibus sæculi rebus quas amamus, fatemur, ad - sublimitatem vitæ tuæ surgere nequimus, nec huic mundo tecum - illudere.” - - [1592] Ib. “Si volueris ad nos usque descendere, et qua - incedimus via nobiscum pergere.” - - [1593] Ib. “Si te ad Deum solummodo quemadmodum cœpisti - tenere delegeris solus.” - - [1594] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 38. “Bene dixistis, Ite ergo ad - dominum vestrum, ergo me tenebo ad Deum.” - - [1595] Ib. “Unoquoque nostrum qui admodum pauci cum eo - remansimus ad imperium illius singulatim sedente, et Deum - pro digestione ipsius negotii interpellante.” There is - something strange in this last word. - - [1596] We here get a climax; “Sæpe diversis eum querelis - exagitasti, exacerbasti, cruciasti.” - - [1597] The wording is remarkable and subtle; “Cum tandem - post placitum quod totius regni adunatione contra te apud - Rockingeham habitum est, eum tibi sicut dominum tuum - reconciliari sapienter peteres; et, adjutus meritis et - precibus plurimorum pro te studiose intervenientium, - petitioni tuæ effectum obtineres.” - - [1598] See above, p. 531. - - [1599] Hist. Nov. 39. “Quibus opem credulus factus sperabat - se de cætero quietum fore.” - - [1600] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 39. “Hanc pollicitationem, hanc - fidem, en tu patenter _egrederis_, dum Romam, non expectata - licentia ejus, te iturum minaris.” - - [1601] Ib. “Tunc te ad judicium curiæ suæ præcepit sibi - emendare, quod de re in qua non eras certus te - perseveraturum, ausus fuisti eum totiens inquietare.” - - [1602] Ib. “Dextram illius _ex more_ assedit.” Here is the - distinct mention of a custom which we have come across - before. - - [1603] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 39. “Scio me spopondisse - consuetudines tuas, ipsas videlicet quas per rectitudinem et - secundum Deum in regno tuo possides, me secundum Deum - servaturum.” - - [1604] Ib. “Cum rex et principes sui cæca mente objicerent, - ac jurisjurandi interjectione firmarent, nec Dei nec - rectitudinis in ipsa sponsione ullam mentionem factam - fuisse.” - - [1605] Ib. 40. “Cum ad hæc illi summurmurantes contra virum - capita moverent, nec tamen quid certi viva voce proferrent.” - - [1606] Ib. “Cum fides quæ fit homini per fidem Dei - roboretur, liquet quod eadem fides, si quando contraria - fidei Dei admittit, enervatur.” - - [1607] Hist. Nov. 40. “Tunc rex et comes de Mellento - Robertus nomine, interrumpentes verba ejus, ‘O, O, dixerunt, - prædicatio est quod dicit, prædicatio est: non rei de qua - agitur ulla quæ recipienda sit a prudentibus ratio.’” - - [1608] Ib. “Ipse inter ora perstrepentium, demisso vultu, - mitis sedebat, et clamores eorum quasi surda aure - despiciebat. Fatigatis autem eis a proprio strepitu, - sedatoque tumultu, Anselmus ad verba sua remeat.” - - [1609] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 40. “His verbis præfatus comes - indignando suburgens, ait, Eia, eia, Petro et papæ te - præsentabis, et nos equidem non transibit quod scimus.” I - can only guess at the meaning of these last words. - - [1610] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 40. “Ecce ibis. Veruntamen scias - dominum nostrum pati nolle te exeuntem quicquam de suis - tecum ferre.” - - [1611] See above, p. 93. - - [1612] Hist. Nov. 40. “In istis princeps pudore suffusus, - dictum suum non ita intellexisse se respondit.” - - [1613] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 41. “Mox ille surgens, levata - dextra signum sanctæ crucis super regem ad hoc caput - humiliantem edidit, et abscessit, viri alacritatem rege cum - suis admirante.” - - [1614] “Ubi sedes pontificalis, ubi totius regni caput est - atque primatus,” Eadmer takes care to add. - - [1615] For the discourse we have to go to the Life, ii. 3. - 30. It contains the remarkable passage which I referred to - in N. C. vol. iv. p. 52. - - [1616] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 41. “In qua mora idem Willielmus, - cum patre intrans et exiens et in mensa illius quotidie - comedens, nihil de causa pro qua missus fuerat agere - volebat.” - - [1617] Ib. “Patrem patriæ, primatem totius Britanniæ, - Willielmus ille, quasi fugitivum vel alicujus immanis - sceleris reum, in littore detinuit.” - - [1618] Ib. “Ingenti plebis multitudine circumstante ac - nefarium opus, pro sui novitate, admirando spectante et - spectando exsecrante.” - - [1619] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 41. “Irrita fieri omnia quæ per - ipsum mutata vel statuta fuisse probari poterant, ex quo - primo venerat in archiepiscopatum.” - - [1620] See N. C. vol. v. p. 772. - - [1621] Hist. Nov. 41. “Ut tribulationes quæ factæ sunt in - illo post mortem venerandæ memoriæ Lanfranci ante introitum - patris Anselmi parvipensæ sunt comparatione tribulationum - quæ factæ sunt his diebus.” - - [1622] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 359. - - [1623] Eadmer (Hist. Nov. 35) describes the new building as - “novum opus quod a majori turre in orientem tenditur, - quodque ipse pater Anselmus inchoasse dinoscitur.” Its - minute history must be studied in Gervase and Willis. - - [1624] This was the time when Henry the First broke out into - the fit of devout swearing of which I spoke in N. C. vol. v. - p. 844; Ann. Osney, 1130; “Rex Henricus ecclesiam Christi - Cantuariensis nobiliter dedicari fecit, adeo ut, coruscante - luminaribus ecclesia, et singulis altaribus singulis - episcopis deputatis, cum simul omnes inciperent canticum - ‘Terribilis est locus iste,’ et classicum mirabiliter - intonaret, rex illustris, præ lætitia se non capiens, - juramento per mortem Domini regio affirmaret vere terribilem - esse.” - - [1625] See above, p. 516. - - [1626] “Salvo ordine meo.” See Herbert of Bosham, iii. 24, - vol. iii. p. 273, Robertson. - - [1627] The Archbishop enters the hall (“aula”), while the - King is in “cœnaculo seorsum” (Herbert, iii. 37, vol. iii. - p. 305). From pp. 307, 309 it appears that this _cœnaculum_ - was simply a solar or upper chamber; “Universis quotquot - erant de cœnaculo ad domum inferiorem in qua nos eramus, - descendentibus.” William Fitz-Stephen (vol. iii. p. 57) - seems to speak of the hall as “camera;” cf. p. 50. - - [1628] See above, p. 94. - - [1629] Will. Fitz-Steph. 58, vol. iii. p. 67. “A comitibus - et baronibus suum exigit rex de archiepiscopo judicium. - Evocantur quidam vicecomites et secundæ dignitatis barones, - antiqui dierum, ut addantur eis et assint judicio.” - - [1630] See above, p. 508. - - [1631] The distinction between the Court of our Lord the - King in Parliament and the Court of the Lord High Steward is - most clearly brought out in Jardine’s Criminal Trials, i. - 229. Lord Macaulay (iv. 153) is less accurate. He speaks of - the Court of our Lord the King in Parliament as one form of - the Court of the Lord High Steward. But in truth, the Court - of our Lord the King in Parliament is simply the Witan - sitting for a judicial purpose. The Lords alone sit, because - the Commons have never attained to a share in the judicial - functions of the Witan. The right to be tried before the - Witan thus sitting judicially is naturally confined to those - classes of persons who have kept or acquired the right to - the personal summons, that is, to the peers. - - If it should be objected that this privilege does not now - extend to the spiritual peers, the reason is most likely to - be found in the fact that for some ages a bishop would not - be tried before any temporal court at all. When such trials - began again in the sixteenth century, the later notion of - peerage had grown up, and those peers whose holding was - still strictly official was looked on as in some measure - less fully peers than those whose peerage was “hereditary” - in the modern sense. - - [1632] See N. C. vol. v. pp. 423, 878. - - [1633] See above, p. 115. - - [1634] See N. C. vol. v. p. 145. - - [1635] See the decree of the Council, Hist. Nov. 53. - - [1636] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 42. We are told that the Duke, - “succensus amore pecuniæ quam copiosam illum ferre rumor - disperserat, proponit animo eam ipsi auferre.” But there is - really nothing in what Odo is said to have done which - implies any such bad purpose. Perhaps Eadmer judged him - uncharitably. - - [1637] See Historical Essays, Third Series, p. 20. On my - last visit to Rome (1881) I found the apse of Saint John - Lateran destroyed, not by Huns or Turks, but by its own - chapter, with the approval, it is said, of its present and - late bishops. I believe there is some pretence of enlarging - the church, and of replacing the mosaics in a new apse. - - [1638] Eadmer, Vit. Ans. ii. 5. 48. “Angli illis temporibus - Romam venientes, pedes ejus ad instar pedum Romani - pontificis sua oblatione honorare desiderabant. Quibus ille - nequaquam acquiescens, in secretiorem domus partem fugiebat, - et eos pro tali re nullo patiebatur ad se pacto accedere.” - - [1639] Hist. Nov. 49. “Hinc etiam erat quod non facile a - quoquam Romæ simpliciter homo vel archiepiscopus, sed quasi - proprio nomine sanctus homo vocabatur.” - - [1640] Eadmer brings this out with all vividness, Hist. Nov. - 49; “Sedebat enim idem pater in ordine cæterorum inter - primos concilii patres, et ego ad pedes ejus.” Then the Pope - calls him, “Pater et magister Anselme, Anglorum - archiepiscope, ubi es?” - - [1641] The whole story is charmingly told by Eadmer, Hist. - Nov. 50. His picture of himself and his curiosity in the new - world which is opened to him is delightful. So is his joy - when he sees the cope of which he has so often heard and - shows it to Anselm; “Cum, ut dixi, concilio præsens - antistitem Beneventanum, cappa reliquis præstante ornatum, - viderem, et eam ex his quæ olim audieram optime nossem, non - modice lætatus et cappam et verba mihi puero ex inde dicta - patri Anselmo ostendi.” - - [1642] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 51. Some one, seemingly the Lady - herself, requires that he shall swear “super corpus - Dominicum et super sanctorum reliquias quas ei proponam - jurejurando reliquias de quibus agitur veraciter esse de - corpore beati apostoli Bartholomæi, et id remota omni - æquivocatione atque sophismate.” The Archbishop was quite - ready to swear. - - [1643] Ib. “Inter alia mutuæ dilectionis colloquia cœpi de - eadem cappa loqui, et unde illam haberet quasi nescius - interrogavi.” - - [1644] The story is told in the Annales Capituli - Cracoviensis (Pertz, xix. 588), 1079, and more briefly in - other annals in the same volume. - - [1645] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 43. - - [1646] Ib. “Ipse rex faciebat quædam quæ facienda non - videbantur de ecclesiis, quas post obitum prælatorum aliter - quam oporteret tractabat.” - - [1647] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 43. “Legem Dei et canonicas et - apostolicas auctoritates voluntariis consuetudinibus obrui - videbam. De his omnibus cum loquebar, nihil efficiebam, et - non tam simplex rectitudo quam voluntariæ consuetudines - obtendebantur.” - - [1648] He gives among his reasons, “Nec de his placitare - poteram; nullus enim aut consilium aut auxilium mihi ad hæc - audebat dare.” - - [1649] Ib. 45. “Scribit literas Willielmo regi Angliæ, in - quibus ut res Anselmi liberas in regno suo faceret, et de - suis omnibus illum revestiret, movet, hortatur, _imperat_.” - - [1650] Ib. 51. “Susceptis quidem quoquo modo literis papæ, - literas Anselmi nullo voluisse pacto suscipere, imo, cognito - illum [nuntium] esse hominem ejus, jurasse per vultum Dei - quia, si festine terram suam non exiret, sine retractatione - oculos ei erui faceret.” - - [1651] See above, p. 526. - - [1652] Chron. Petrib. 1097. We shall come to his crossing - and returning in another chapter. - - [1653] Ib. 1099. - - [1654] See above, p. 162. - - [1655] See above, p. 155. - - [1656] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 45. “Ducit eum [abbas] in villam - suam _Sclaviam_ nomine, quæ in montis altitudine sita, sano - jugiter aere conversantibus illic habilis exstat.” - - [1657] See Historical Essays, Second Series, p. 357, ed. 2; - Arnold, Hist. Rome, ii. 365. - - [1658] Vita Anselmi, ii. 4. 43. - - [1659] We shall come to this in another chapter. - - [1660] The reception of Anselm by Duke Roger is described by - Eadmer in both his works (Hist. Nov. 46, and in the Life, - ii. 5. 45). The plots of William Rufus come from William of - Malmesbury (Gest. Pont. 98); “Adeo ut Rogerus dux Apuliæ, - apud quem rex Angliæ illum litteris insimulandum curaverat, - spretis neniis, longe aliter sententiam suam in viri honorem - transferret.” - - [1661] There is something rather singular in the picture of - the Pope and Anselm dwelling in the camp of the besiegers - (Hist. Nov. 46); “Plures exhinc dies in obsidione fecimus, - remoti in tentoriis a frequentia et tumultu perstrepentis - exercitus…. Sicque donec civitas in deditionem transiit, - obsidio illius dominum papam et Anselmum vicinos habuit, ita - ut familia illorum magis videretur una quam duæ.” This is - one of several passages in which Anselm and others seem to - take a state of war for granted. There is no protest, no - pleading of any kind, on behalf of the besieged city. There - are some remarks of M. de Rémusat (Saint Anselme, p. 362) on - this subject, with regard to the correspondence between - Henry and Anselm after the battle of Tinchebrai. But in this - last case the victory of Henry was surely a gain to - humanity. In the Life Eadmer gives some curious details of - their life in the camp, and of a remarkable escape of - Anselm. - - [1662] Eadmer seems to take a certain pleasure in little - hits against Urban, which his conduct presently made not - wholly undeserved. Thus, in Hist. Nov. 46, he points out how - the Pope came to the camp “ingenti sæcularis gloriæ pompa.” - So now in the Life (ii. 5. 46) he contrasts the demeanour of - Urban with that of Anselm at some length, and ends, “Multi - ergo, quos timor prohibebat ad papam accedere, festinabant - ad Anselmum venire, amore ducti qui nescit timere. Majestas - etenim papæ solos admittebat divites, humanitas Anselmi sine - personarum acceptione suscipiebat omnes.” - - [1663] Vita, ii. 5. 46. “Et quos omnes? Paganos etiam, ut de - Christianis taceam.” Eadmer then goes on to speak at some - length of the Saracens brought over by Count Roger, whom he - pointedly speaks of as the man of his nephew; “Homo ducis - Rogerus, comes de Sicilia.” We read how Anselm received and - entertained many of the Mussulmans, and how, when he passed - through their camp, “ingens multitudo eorum elevatis ad - cælum manibus ei prospera imprecarentur, et osculatis pro - ritu suo manibus propriis necne coram eo genibus flexis, pro - sua eum benigna largitate grates agendo venerarentur.” - - [1664] Vita, ii. 5. 46. “Quorum etiam plurimi, velut - comperimus, se libenter ejus doctrinæ instruendos - submisissent, ac Christianæ fidei jugo sua per eum colla - injecissent, si credulitatem [crudelitatem?] comitis sui per - hoc in se sævituram non formidassent. Nam revera nullum - eorum pati volebat Christianum impune fieri.” He adds the - comment; “Quod qua industria, ut ita dicam, faciebat nihil - mea interest; viderit Deus et ipse.” - - [1665] Anselm’s motives are set forth at length in Hist. - Nov. 46. One reason is that his teaching was so much more - listened to on the continent than it was in England. The - stories of William’s evil doings are brought in at this - point. - - [1666] A debate on this head, in rather long speeches - between Urban and Anselm, is given in Hist. Nov. 48. The - main doctrine stands thus; “Si propter tyrannidem principis, - qui nunc ibi dominatur, in terram illam redire non - permitteris, jure tamen Christianitatis semper illius - archiepiscopus esto, potestatem ligandi atque solvendi super - eam dum vixeris obtinens.” - - [1667] Ib. “Et insignibus pontificalibus more summi - pontificis utens ubicunque fueris.” - - [1668] He again describes his whole struggle between the two - duties, how he believed that he could reconcile both, how - others told him that he could not, and he asks, “Et ego, - pater, inter tales quid facerem?” - - [1669] Ib. 49. “De ipso rege Anglico suisque et sui - similibus qui contra libertatem ecclesiæ Dei se erexerunt.” - - [1670] See above, p. 608. - - [1671] Hist. Nov. 51. “Si causam quæris, hæc est. Quando de - terra sua discedere voluit, aperte minatus est se illo - discedente totum archiepiscopatum in dominium suum - accepturum. Quoniam igitur, nec his minis constrictus, quin - exiret omittere noluit, juste se putat fecisse quod fecit et - injuria reprehendi.” - - [1672] Ib. 52. “Quis unquam audivit talia? pro hoc solo - primatem regni suis omnibus spoliavit, quia ne sanctam - matrem ecclesiam omnium Romanam visitaret omittere noluit?… - Et pro tali responso mirabilis homo huc te fatigasti?” - - [1673] Ib. “Certissime noverit se in eodem concilio - damnationis sententia puniri quam promeruit.” - - [1674] Chron. Petrib. 1123. - - [1675] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 52. “Priusquam abeam, tecum - secretius agam.” - - [1676] Ib. “Prudenter operam dando hos et illos suæ causæ - fautores efficere, ac, ut domini sui voluntati satisfaceret, - munera quibus ea cordi esse animadvertebat dispertiendo et - pollicendo parvi habere. Deductus ergo a sententia Romanus - pontifex est.” William of Malmesbury (Gest. Pont. 101) is - still more distinct on this head; “Arte qua peritus erat - negotium conficiens, singulos ambiendo, muneribus et - pollicitationibus, regi terminum ad festum sancti Michahelis - obtinuit. Cunctatus est multum ad id concedendum Urbanus, - quod luctarentur in ejus animo Anselmi religio et munerum - oblatio; sed prævaluit tandem pecunia. Itaque omnia superat, - omnia deprimit nummus. Indignum factum ut pectori tanti - viri, Urbani dico, vilesceret famæ cura, Dei respectus - cederet, et pecunia justitiam præverteret.” - - [1677] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 52. “Quod videntes vane nos ibi - consilium, nihil auxilium operiri intelleximus.” - - [1678] Will. Malms. Gest. Pont. 102. “Visum est ergo Anselmo - circa tam venalem hominem expectationem non perdere, sed - Lugdunum remeare. Sed enim licentiam impetrare non potuit, - retinente papa, ut invidiam facti aliquo levaret solatio.” - - [1679] Hist. Nov. 53. “His dictis, virgam pastoralem quam - manu tenebat tertio pavimento illisit, indignationem - spiritus sui, compressis exploso murmure labiis et dentibus, - palam cunctis ostendens.” - - [1680] Ib. “Oppido miratus est, sciens se nec homini de re - locutum fuisse, nec a se vel ullo suorum, ut talia diceret, - processisse.” A little characteristic touch follows; - “Sedebat ergo uti solebat, silenter auscultans.” - - [1681] See above, p. 606. - - [1682] Hist. Nov. 53. “Nil judicii vel subventionis, - præterquam quod diximus, per Romanum præsulem nacti.” - - [1683] Eadmer, Hist. Nov. 54. “Dei odium habeat qui inde - curat.” - - [1684] Ib. “Ego interim libertate potitus agam quod libet.” - - - - -END OF THE FIRST VOLUME. - - - - -Transcriber’s Note - -Words and phrases in italics are surrounded by underscores, _like -this_. Footnotes were renumbered sequentially and were moved to the -end of the book. There are two anchors to Footnote [1486]. - -Obvious printing errors, such as backwards, upside down, or partially -printed letters and punctuation, were corrected. Final stops missing -at the end of sentences and abbreviations were added. Duplicate -letters at line endings or page breaks were removed. Letters with -diacriticals not available in UTF-8 are displayed within brackets, -like this: [~s]. Elipses were standardized as … . - -Sidenotes were moved to the beginning of the paragraph to which they -pertain. Some sidenotes are separated into multiple parts; these can -be identified by lack of a stop at the end of the first part, and lack -of capital letter at the beginning of the following part. - -Words and phrases in Greek are followed by transliteration within -brackets. Appendices referenced in this volume are found in Volume 2. - -Obsolete words, spelling variations, inconsistent hyphenation, and -misspelled words were not changed. - -The following additional items were changed: - -Replaced hyphen with space: lay folk. -Changed December 35 to December 25 in the Contents. -Added space in ‘u. s.’ to several footnote references for consistency. - -*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE REIGN OF WILLIAM RUFUS AND -THE ACCESSION OF HENRY THE FIRST, VOLUME I (OF 2) *** - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law 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 an eBook, except by following -the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use -of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for -copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very -easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation -of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project -Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may -do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected -by U.S. copyright law. 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 unprotected by copyright law 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 other than 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 in the United States and - most other parts of the world 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. If you are not located in the - United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where - you are located before using this eBook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (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 website -(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 the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager 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 -works not protected by U.S. copyright law 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 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 website -and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without -widespread 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 not protected by copyright 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 website which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This website 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. |