Chapter XIV: The Norman Conquest

40. The Battle of Hastings: the English and the Normans

The Northmen, under the leadership of the renowned Rollo, got their first permanent foothold in that important part of France since known as Normandy in the year 911 [see p. 171]. Almost from the beginning the new county (later duchy) increased rapidly both in territorial extent and in political influence. The Northmen, or Normans, were a vigorous, ambitious, and on the whole very capable people, and they needed only the polishing which peaceful contact with the French could give to make them one of the most virile elements in the population of western Europe. They gave up their old gods and accepted Christianity, ceased to speak their own language and began the use of French, and to a considerable extent became ordinary soldiers and traders instead of the wild pirates their forefathers had been. The spirit of unrest, however, and the love of adventure so deeply ingrained in their natures did not die out, and we need not be surprised to learn that they continued still to enjoy nothing quite so much as war, especially if it involved hazardous expeditions across seas. Some went to help the Christians of Spain against the Saracens; some went to aid the Eastern emperors against the Turks; others went to Sicily and southern Italy, where they conquered weak rulers and set up principalities of their own; and finally, under the leadership of Duke William the Bastard, in 1066, they entered upon the greatest undertaking of all, i.e., the conquest of England and the establishment of a Norman chieftain upon the throne of the Anglo-Saxon kingdom.

Duke William was one of the greatest and most ambitious feudal lords of France--more powerful really than the French king himself. He had overcome practically all opposition among his unruly vassals in Normandy, and by 1066, when the death of King Edward the Confessor occurred in England, he was ready to engage in great enterprises which gave promise of enhanced power and renown. He had long cherished a claim to the English throne, and when he learned that in utter disregard of this claim the English witan had chosen Harold, son of the West Saxon Earl Godwin, to be Edward's successor, he prepared to invade the island kingdom and force an acknowledgment of what he pretended at least to believe were his rights. Briefly stated, William claimed the English throne on the ground (1) that through his wife Matilda, a descendant of Emma, Edward the Confessor's mother, he was a nearer heir than was Harold, who was only the late king's brother-in-law; (2) that on the occasion of a visit to England in 1051 Edward had promised him the inheritance; and (3) that Harold himself, when some years before he had been shipwrecked on the coast of Normandy, had sworn on sacred relics to help him gain the crown. There is some doubt as to the actual facts in connection with both of these last two points, but the truth is that all of William's claims taken together were not worth much, since the recognized principle of the English government was that the king should be chosen by the wisemen, or witan. Harold had been so chosen and hence was in every way the legitimate sovereign.

William, however, was determined to press his claims and, after obtaining the blessing of the Pope (Alexander II.), he gathered an army of perhaps 65,000 Normans and adventurers from all parts of France and prepared a fleet of some 1,500 transports at the mouth of the Dive to carry his troops across the Channel. September 28, 1066, the start was made and the following day the host landed at Pevensey in Sussex. Friday, the 29th, Hastings was selected and fortified to serve as headquarters. The English were taken at great disadvantage. Only two days before the Normans crossed the Channel Harold with all the troops he could muster had been engaged in a great battle at Stamford Bridge, in Northumberland, with Harold Hardrada, king of Norway, who was making an independent invasion. The English had won the fight, but they were not in a position to meet the Normans as they might otherwise have been. With admirable energy, however, Harold marched his weary army southward to Senlac, a hill near the town of Hastings, and there took up his position to await an attack by the duke's army. The battle came on Saturday, October 14, and after a very stubborn contest, in which Harold was slain, it resulted in a decisive victory for the Normans. Thereafter the conquest of the entire kingdom, while by no means easy, was inevitable.

William of Malmesbury, from whose _Chronicle of the Kings of England_ our account of the battle and of the two contending peoples is taken, was a Benedictine monk, born of a Norman father and an English mother. He lived about 1095-1150 and hence wrote somewhat over half a century after the Conquest. While thus not strictly a contemporary, he was a man of learning and discretion and there is every reason to believe that he made his history as accurate as he was able, with the materials at his command. His parentage must have enabled him to understand both combatants in an unusual degree and, though his sympathies were with the conquerors, we may take his characterizations of Saxon and Norman alike to be at least fairly reliable. His _Chronicle_ covers the period 449-1135, and for the years after 1066 it is the fullest, most carefully written, and most readable account of English affairs that we have.

Source--Guilielmus Monachi Malmesburiensis, _De gestis regum
Anglorum_ [William of Malmesbury, "Chronicle of the Kings of
England"], Bk. III. Adapted from translation by John Sharpe
(London, 1815), pp. 317-323.

[Sidenote: How the English prepared for battle]

The courageous leaders mutually prepared for battle, each according
to his national custom. The English passed the night[338] without
sleep, in drinking and singing, and in the morning proceeded
without delay against the enemy. All on foot, armed with
battle-axes, and covering themselves in front by joining their
shields, they formed an impenetrable body which would assuredly
have secured their safety that day had not the Normans, by a
pretended flight, induced them to open their ranks, which until
that time, according to their custom, had been closely knit
together. King Harold himself, on foot, stood with his brothers
near the standard in order that, so long as all shared equal
danger, none could think of retreating. This same standard William
sent, after his victory, to the Pope. It was richly embroidered
with gold and precious stones, and represented the figure of a man
fighting.

[Sidenote: How the Normans prepared]

On the other hand, the Normans passed the whole night in confessing
their sins, and received the communion of the Lord's body in the
morning. Their infantry, with bows and arrows, formed the vanguard,
while their cavalry, divided into wings, was placed in the rear.
The duke, with serene countenance, declaring aloud that God would
favor his as being the righteous side, called for his arms; and
when, through the haste of his attendants, he had put on his
hauberk[339] the rear part before, he corrected the mistake with a
laugh, saying, "The power of my dukedom shall be turned into a
kingdom." Then starting the song of Roland,[340] in order that the
warlike example of that hero might stimulate the soldiers, and
calling on God for assistance, the battle commenced on both sides,
and was fought with great ardor, neither side yielding ground
during the greater part of the day.

[Sidenote: William's strategem]

Observing this, William gave a signal to his troops, that,
pretending flight, they should withdraw from the field.[341] By
means of this device the solid phalanx of the English opened for
the purpose of cutting down the fleeing enemy and thus brought upon
itself swift destruction; for the Normans, facing about, attacked
them, thus disordered, and compelled them to fly. In this manner,
deceived by stratagem, they met an honorable death in avenging
their country; nor indeed were they at all without their own
revenge, for, by frequently making a stand, they slaughtered their
pursuers in heaps. Getting possession of a higher bit of ground,
they drove back the Normans, who in the heat of pursuit were
struggling up the slope, into the valley beneath, where, by hurling
their javelins and rolling down stones on them as they stood below,
the English easily destroyed them to a man. Besides, by a short
passage with which they were acquainted, they avoided a deep ditch
and trod underfoot such a multitude of their enemies in that place
that the heaps of bodies made the hollow level with the plain. This
alternating victory, first of one side and then of the other,
continued as long as Harold lived to check the retreat; but when he
fell, his brain pierced by an arrow, the flight of the English
ceased not until night.[342]

[Sidenote: The valor of Harold]

In the battle both leaders distinguished themselves by their
bravery. Harold, not content with the duties of a general and with
exhorting others, eagerly assumed himself the work of a common
soldier. He was constantly striking down the enemy at close
quarters, so that no one could approach him with impunity, for
straightway both horse and rider would be felled by a single blow.
So it was at long range, as I have said, that the enemy's deadly
arrow brought him to his death. One of the Norman soldiers gashed
his thigh with a sword, as he lay prostrate; for which shameful and
cowardly action he was branded with ignominy by William and
expelled from the army.

[Sidenote: William's bravery and ardor]

William, too, was equally ready to encourage his soldiers by his
voice and by his presence, and to be the first to rush forward to
attack the thickest of the foe. He was everywhere fierce and
furious. He lost three choice horses, which were that day killed
under him. The dauntless spirit and vigor of the intrepid general,
however, still held out. Though often called back by the thoughtful
remonstrance of his bodyguard, he still persisted until approaching
night crowned him with complete victory. And no doubt the hand of
God so protected him that the enemy could draw no blood from his
person, though they aimed so many javelins at him.

This was a fatal day to England, and melancholy havoc was wrought
in our dear country during the change of its lords.[343] For it had
long before adopted the manners of the Angles, which had indeed
altered with the times; for in the first years of their arrival
they were barbarians in their look and manner, warlike in their
usages, heathen in their rites.

[Sidenote: Religious zeal of the Saxons before the Conquest]

After embracing the faith of Christ, by degrees and, in process of
time, in consequence of the peace which they enjoyed, they
consigned warfare to a secondary place and gave their whole
attention to religion. I am not speaking of the poor, the meanness
of whose fortune often restrains them from overstepping the bounds
of justice; I omit, too, men of ecclesiastical rank, whom sometimes
respect for their profession and sometimes the fear of shame
suffers not to deviate from the true path; I speak of princes, who
from the greatness of their power might have full liberty to
indulge in pleasure. Some of these in their own country, and others
at Rome, changing their habit, obtained a heavenly kingdom and a
saintly fellowship. Many others during their whole lives devoted
themselves in outward appearance to worldly affairs, but in order
that they might expend their treasures on the poor or divide them
amongst monasteries.

What shall I say of the multitudes of bishops, hermits, and abbots?
Does not the whole island blaze with such numerous relics of its
own people that you can scarcely pass a village of any consequence
without hearing the name of some new saint? And of how many more
has all remembrance perished through the want of records?

[Sidenote: Recent decline of learning and religion]

Nevertheless, the attention to literature and religion had
gradually decreased for several years before the arrival of the
Normans. The clergy, contented with a little confused learning,
could scarcely stammer out the words of the sacraments; and a
person who understood grammar was an object of wonder and
astonishment.[344] The monks mocked the rule of their order by fine
vestments and the use of every kind of food. The nobility, given up
to luxury and wantonness, went not to church in the morning after
the manner of Christians, but merely, in a careless manner, heard
matins and masses from a hurrying priest in their chambers, amid
the blandishments of their wives. The community, left unprotected,
became a prey to the most powerful, who amassed fortunes, either by
seizing on their property or by selling their persons into foreign
countries; although it is characteristic of this people to be more
inclined to reveling than to the accumulation of wealth.

[Sidenote: The English people described]

Drinking in parties was an universal practice, in which occupation
they passed entire nights as well as days. They consumed their
whole substance in mean and despicable houses, unlike the Normans
and French, who live frugally in noble and splendid mansions. The
vices attendant on drunkenness, which enervate the human mind,
followed; hence it came about that when they resisted William, with
more rashness and precipitate fury than military skill, they doomed
themselves and their country to slavery by a single, and that an
easy, victory.[345] For nothing is less effective than rashness;
and what begins with violence quickly ceases or is repelled. The
English at that time wore short garments, reaching to the mid-knee;
they had their hair cropped, their beards shaven, their arms laden
with golden bracelets, their skin adorned with tattooed designs.
They were accustomed to eat until they became surfeited, and to
drink until they were sick. These latter qualities they imparted to
their conquerors; as for the rest, they adopted their manners. I
would not, however, have these bad characteristics ascribed to the
English universally; I know that many of the clergy at that day
trod the path of sanctity by a blameless life. I know that many of
the laity, of all ranks and conditions, in this nation were
well-pleasing to God. Be injustice far from this account; the
accusation does not involve the whole, indiscriminately. But as in
peace the mercy of God often cherishes the bad and the good
together, so, equally, does His severity sometimes include them
both in captivity.

[Sidenote: A description of the Normans]

The Normans--that I may speak of them also--were at that time, and
are even now, exceedingly particular in their dress and delicate in
their food, but not so to excess. They are a race accustomed to
war, and can hardly live without it; fierce in rushing against the
enemy, and, where force fails to succeed, ready to use stratagem or
to corrupt by bribery. As I have said, they live in spacious houses
with economy, envy their superiors, wish to excel their equals, and
plunder their subjects, though they defend them from others; they
are faithful to their lords, though a slight offense alienates
them. They weigh treachery by its chance of success, and change
their sentiments for money. The most hospitable, however, of all
nations, they esteem strangers worthy of equal honor with
themselves; they also intermarry with their vassals. They revived,
by their arrival, the rule of religion which had everywhere grown
lifeless in England.[346] You might see churches rise in every
village, and monasteries in the towns and cities, built after a
style unknown before; you might behold the country flourishing with
renewed rites; so that each wealthy man accounted that day lost to
him which he had neglected to signalize by some beneficent act.

41. William the Conqueror as Man and as King

In the following passage, taken from the Saxon Chronicle, we have an interesting summary of the character of the Conqueror and of his conduct as king of England. Both the good and bad sides of the picture are clearly brought out and perhaps it is not quite easy to say which is given the greater prominence. On the one hand there is William's devotion to the Church, his establishment of peace and order, his mildness in dealing with all but those who had antagonized him, and the virtue of his personal life; on the other is his severity, rapacity, and pride, his heavy taxes and his harsh forest laws. As one writer says, "the Conquest was bad as well as good for England; but the harm was only temporary, the good permanent." It is greatly to the credit of the English chronicler that he was able to deal so fairly with the character of one whom he had not a few patriotic reasons for maligning.

Source--_The Saxon Chronicle._ Translated by J. A. Giles
(London, 1847), pp. 461-462.

[Sidenote: William's religious zeal]

If any one would know what manner of man King William was, the
glory that he obtained, and of how many lands he was lord, then
will we describe him as we have known him, we who have looked upon
him and who once lived at his court. This King William, of whom we
are speaking, was a very wise and a great man, and more honored and
more powerful than any of his predecessors. He was mild to those
good men who loved God, but severe beyond measure towards those who
withstood his will. He founded a noble monastery on the spot where
God permitted him to conquer England, and he established monks in
it, and he made it very rich.[347] In his days the great monastery
at Canterbury was built,[348] and many others also throughout
England; moreover, this land was filled with monks who lived after
the rule of St. Benedict; and such was the state of religion in his
days that all who would might observe that which was prescribed by
their respective orders.

[Sidenote: His strong government]

King William was also held in much reverence. He wore his crown
three times every year when he was in England: at Easter he wore it
at Winchester,[349] at Pentecost at Westminster,[350] and at
Christmas at Gloucester.[351] And at these times all the men of
England were with him, archbishops, bishops, abbots and earls,
thanes[352] and knights.[353] So also was he a very stern and a
wrathful man, so that none durst do anything against his will, and
he kept in prison those earls who acted against his pleasure. He
removed bishops from their sees[354] and abbots from their offices,
and he imprisoned thanes, and at length he spared not his own
brother Odo. This Odo was a very powerful bishop in Normandy. His
see was that of Bayeux,[355] and he was foremost to serve the king.
He had an earldom in England, and when William was in Normandy he
[Odo] was the first man in this country [England], and him did
William cast into prison.[356]

[Sidenote: The extent of his power]

Amongst other things, the good order that William established is
not to be forgotten. It was such that any man, who was himself
aught, might travel over the kingdom with a bosom full of gold
unmolested; and no man durst kill another, however great the injury
he might have received from him. He reigned over England, and being
sharp-sighted to his own interest, he surveyed the kingdom so
thoroughly that there was not a single hide of land throughout the
whole of which he knew not the possessor, and how much it was
worth, and this he afterwards entered in his register.[357] The
land of the Britons [Wales] was under his sway, and he built
castles therein; moreover he had full dominion over the Isle of
Man;[358] Scotland also was subject to him, from his great
strength; the land of Normandy was his by inheritance, and he
possessed the earldom of Maine;[359] and had he lived two years
longer, he would have subdued Ireland by his prowess, and that
without a battle.[360]

[Sidenote: His faults as a ruler]

Truly there was much trouble in these times, and very great
distress. He caused castles to be built and oppressed the poor. The
king was also of great sternness, and he took from his subjects
many marks of gold, and many hundred pounds of silver, and this,
either with or without right, and with little need. He was given to
avarice, and greedily loved gain.[361] He made large forests for
the deer, and enacted laws therewith, so that whoever killed a hart
or a hind should be blinded. As he forbade killing the deer, so
also the boars; and he loved the tall stags as if he were their
father. He also commanded concerning the hares, that they should go
free.[362] The rich complained and the poor murmured, but he was so
sturdy that he recked nought of them; they must will all that the
king willed, if they would live, or would keep their lands, or
would hold their possessions, or would be maintained in their
rights. Alas that any man should so exalt himself, and carry
himself in his pride over all! May Almighty God show mercy to his
soul, and grant him the forgiveness of his sins! We have written
concerning him these things, both good and bad, that virtuous men
may follow after the good, and wholly avoid the evil, and may go in
the way that leadeth to the kingdom of heaven.

FOOTNOTES:

[338] Friday night, October 13.

[339] A long coat of mail made of interwoven metal rings.

[340] Roland, count of Brittany, was slain at the pass of Roncesvalles in the famous attack of the Gascons upon Charlemagne's retreating army in 778. One of the chronicles says simply, "In this battle Roland, count of Brittany, was slain," and we have absolutely no other historical knowledge of the man. His career was taken up by the singers of the Middle Ages, however, and employed to typify all that was brave and daring and romantic. It was some one of the many "songs of Roland" that William used at Hastings to stimulate his men.

[341] In a battle so closely contested this was a dangerous stratagem and its employment seems to indicate that William despaired of defeating the English by direct attack. His main object, in which he was altogether successful, was to entice the English into abandoning their advantageous position on the hilltop.

[342] After the Norman victory was practically assured, William sought to bring the battle to an end by having his archers shoot into the air, that their arrows might fall upon the group of soldiers, including the king, who were holding out in defense of the English standard. It was in this way that Harold was mortally wounded; he died immediately from the blows inflicted by Norman knights at close hand.

[343] The victory at Hastings did not at once make William king, but it revealed to both himself and the English people that the crown was easily within his grasp. After the battle he advanced past London into the interior of the country. Opposition melted before him and on Christmas day, 1066, the Norman duke, having already been regularly elected by the witan, was crowned at London by the archbishop of York. In the early years of his reign he succeeded in making his power recognized in the more turbulent north.

[344] The work of Alfred had not been consistently followed up during the century and a half since his death [see p. 185].

[345] The conquest of England by the Normans was really far from an enslavement. Norman rule was strict, but hardly more so than conditions warranted.

[346] It seems to be true, as William of Malmesbury says, that the century preceding the Norman Conquest had been an era of religious as well as literary decline among the English. After 1066 the native clergy, ignorant and often grossly immoral, were gradually replaced by Normans, who on the whole were better men. By 1088 there remained only one bishop of English birth in the entire kingdom. One should be careful, however, not to exaggerate the moral differences between the two peoples.

[347] The story goes that just before entering the battle of Hastings in 1066 William made a vow that if successful he would establish a monastery on the site where Harold's standard stood. The vow was fulfilled by the founding of the Abbey of St. Martin, or Battle Abbey, in the years 1070-1076. The monastery was not ready for consecration until 1094.

[348] Christchurch. This cathedral monastery had been organized before the Conqueror's day, but it was much increased in size and in importance by Lanfranc, William's archbishop of Canterbury; and the great building which it occupied in the later Middle Ages was constructed at this time.

[349] In Hampshire, in the southern part of the kingdom.

[350] In Middlesex, near London.

[351] On the Severn, in the modern county of Gloucester.

[352] A thane (or thegn) was originally a young warrior; then one who became a noble by serving the king in arms; then the possessor of five hides of land. A hide was a measure of arable ground varying in extent at the time of William the Conqueror, but by Henry II.'s reign (1154-1189) fixed at about 100 acres. The thane before the Conquest occupied nearly the same position socially as the knight after it.

[353] This assembly of dignitaries, summoned by the king three times a year, was the so-called Great Council, which in Norman times superseded the old Saxon witan. Its duties were mainly judicial. It acted also as an advisory body, but the king was not obliged to consult it or to carry out its recommendations [see p. 307, note 2].

[354] The _see_ of a bishop is his ecclesiastical office; the area over which his authority extends is more properly known as his diocese.

[355] On the Orne River, near the English Channel.

[356] Odo, though a churchman, was a man of brutal instincts and evil character. Through his high-handed course, both as a leading ecclesiastical dignitary in Normandy and as earl of Kent and vicegerent in England, he gave William no small amount of trouble. The king finally grew tired of his brother's conduct and had him imprisoned in the town of Rouen where he was left for four years, or until the end of the reign (1087).

[357] This was the famous Domesday Survey, begun in 1085.

[358] In the Irish Sea.

[359] Maine lay directly to the south of Normandy.

[360] This statement is doubtful, though it is true that Lanfranc made a beginning by consecrating a number of bishops in Ireland.

[361] All of the early Norman kings were greedy for money and apt to bear heavily upon the people in their efforts to get it. Englishmen were not accustomed to general taxation and felt the new regime to be a serious burden. There was consequently much complaint, but, as our historian says, William was strong enough to be able to ignore it.

[362] Most of William's harsh measures can be justified on the ground that they were designed to promote the ultimate welfare of his people. This is not true, however, of his elaborate forest laws, which undertook to deprive Englishmen of their accustomed freedom of hunting when and where they pleased. William's love of the chase amounted to a passion and he was not satisfied with merely enacting such stringent measures as that the slayer of a hart or a hind in his forests should be blinded, but also set apart a great stretch of additional country, the so-called New Forest, as his own exclusive hunting grounds.