Chapter XXXIX: Appendix: NOTE A. p. 3 (11)

Footnote 221

Ib. “Pallio numquam est insignitus quod ... manus Romani Pontificis,
mittere [?] solita, ei denegavit ut minus idoneo.” So Will. Malms. u.
s.

Footnote 222

Ib. 117. “Apostolici mandato sæpiùs ad Romanum concilium accitus,
renuit ire.” William is just now very zealous for the Holy See, quite
unlike the Gallicanism of Rudolf Glaber. See vol. ii. p. 275.

Footnote 223

Ib. “Sane pigebat Rotomagum, pigebat cunctam Normanniam,
archipræsulis.”

Footnote 224

Will. Malms. iii. 267. “Quum iræ adolescentis uxoriæ querelæ
accederent, excogitatas occasiones quibus persequutor peccati sede
pelleretur.” It is clear that Malger had partizans.

Footnote 225

William of Poitiers (117) does not name the Legate. He says only
“Princeps ... deposuit patruum in publico sanctæ synodi, Apostolici
vicario cunctisque Normanniæ episcopis, juxta canonum auctoritatem,
sententiam dantibus unanimi consensus.” The List in Mabillon
(Analecta, ii. 439) names Ermenfred (see vol. ii. p. 461), and
mentions the place, Lisieux. William of Jumièges (vii. 24) makes
Malger resign his see; “Eo tempore Malgerius Archipræsul Rotomagensis
desipere cœpit, et insipientiâ ductus Archipræsulatum Duci reddidit.”
The strong _regale_, or rather _ducale_, of all our accounts should
be noticed. See vol. ii. p. 209.

Footnote 226

William of Poitiers does not mention the banishment of Malger, but it
is spoken of by most of our other authorities. Will. Gem. vii. 24.
“Dux autem Malgerium in insulâ quæ dicitur Ghernervia retrusit.” The
list in Mabillon (ii. 439) says, “Dedit postea illi quamdam insulam
in Constantiniensi pago in mari sitam.” Roman de Rou, 9703;

“Es isles vint de Costentin,
Là fu è vist tresqu’ è la fin.”

On the “Isles of the Côtentin” see vol. i. p. 211 et seqq.

Footnote 227

Mabillon, u. s. “In quâ [insulâ] pluribus annis, non quidem ut
decuit, vixit.” Wace, as a Jersey man, is much fuller on this part of
the story.

Footnote 228

Roman de Rou, 9714 et seqq. He has “un deable privé” called Toret or
Toreit, who was always at his beck and call. What is Toret? Pluquet
makes it a diminutive from Thor. Sir F. Palgrave (iii. 276, 277)
speaks of French antiquaries “who discover in the name Thoreit the
exclamation Thor-aie, an invocation of Thor the Hammerer.” Pluquet
at least does not. (On Thor-aie see vol. ii. p. 257.) Sir Francis
goes on, “But the vocable is pure _hoch deutsch_, and however gained
or bestowed, simply signifies Folly.” Of two improbable explanations
Pluquet’s seems to me the less improbable. See Mr. Thorpe’s amazing
note to Lappenberg, Norman Kings, p. 86, where he mixes up Malger’s
familiar spirit with Ralph of Tesson’s war-cry. See vol. ii. p. 257,
and Taylor’s Wace, p. 20.

Footnote 229

Histoire des Archevesques de Rouen (Rouen, 1667), p. 253. The author,
a Benedictine father, is disposed to let Malger off more easily than
most people.

Footnote 230

Mabillon, ii. 439. “Postea verò, quo autem divino judicio ignoratur,
in mari submersus est.” Wace tells the story at length, 9727 et
seqq. But there must, as Prevost says, be some mistake in the name
Winçant, which suggests the Picard Witsand rather than any haven of
the Côtentin.

Footnote 231

See vol. i. p. 170. Will. Malms. iii. 246. “Omnium gentium
benignissimi advenas æquali secum honore colunt.”

Footnote 232

Mabillon, ii. 439. “Nobili prosapiâ ex Remensi pago exortus, et in
ejusdem civitatis ecclesiâ educatus, inde in Leodicensi ecclesiâ omni
liberalium artium peritiâ imbutus.” Orderic (567 C) calls him “genere
Maguntinus.” He must have confounded the birthplace of Maurilius with
the place of his preferment, Halberstadt being, at all events, in the
province of Mainz.

Footnote 233

Mabillon, ii. 440. “Halverstatensis [mark the Low-Dutch form]
ecclesiæ Scholasticus effectus est, qui locus in Saxoniâ ditissimus
habetur.” On the office of the Scholasticus, compare Adelard at
Waltham, vol. ii. p. 443.

Footnote 234

This first profession at Fécamp rests on the authority of the list in
Mabillon. Orderic (u. s.) mentions only his second sojourn there. But
does not a profession at Fécamp under the Italian Abbot William form
a kind of transition between Halberstadt and the Italian hermitage?

Footnote 235

I reserve some notice of the history of Fécamp (see vol. i. p. 218),
and of the connexion of the monastery with England, for a more
appropriate place in the fourth volume.

Footnote 236

The profession of Maurilius at Fécamp would naturally come within
the time of Abbot William, 1001–1031. After so varied a career, we
can hardly fancy him less than fifty at the time of his appointment
to the Archbishoprick, and we want several years for each of his
metamorphoses between Halberstadt and Rouen. His first sojourn at
Fécamp, his hermit life, his Abbacy at Florence, his second sojourn
at Fécamp, might well take up twenty-four years among them.

Footnote 237

See vol. ii. p. 226.

Footnote 238

Mabillon, ii. 440. “Eremi cultor solitariam vitam ducens opere manuum
vixit.”

Footnote 239

Mabillon, u. s. So Ord. Vit. 567 C, who adds a characteristic Italian
trait; “In urbe Florentiâ monachili cœnobio Abbatis jure præfuit, et
exosus transgressoribus pro rigore disciplinæ venenum in potu sibi
propinato deprehendit.”

Footnote 240

Ord. Vit. u. s. “Tempore Johannis Abbatis _compatriotæ sui_ Fiscannum
venit.” But the local accounts make John a Lombard. Orderic might
have assumed that an Abbot at Florence must be an Italian, but
how could this be reconciled with his description of Maurilius as
“Maguntinus”? Cf. Neustria Pia, 223.

Footnote 241

Bessin, 47–49. Pommeraye, 71. Mabillon, ii. 441. “Adstante
Willelmo Normannorum Duce, postea Anglorum Rege, cum omnibus
suffraganeis suis, concilium in Rothomagensi ecclesiâ de castitate
conservandâ et cæteris sanctorum patrum institutionibus, pastorum
incuriâ negligenter postpositis, viriliter restituendis religiose
celebravit.” Everything bears witness alike to the ecclesiastical
supremacy of the Norman Dukes and of the personal zeal of William in
all ecclesiastical matters.

Footnote 242

See vol. ii. p. 181.

Footnote 243

See vol. ii. pp. 213, 214.

Footnote 244

Vit. Lanfr. ap. Giles, i. 287. “Ad administranda quoque totius
patriæ negotia summus ab ipso Normannorum Duce Willelmo consiliarius
assumitur.” Allowing for the natural exaggeration of a panegyrist,
there seems enough to imply a very close relation between William and
Lanfranc. See vol. ii. p. 227.

Footnote 245

Vit. Lanfr. i. 288. “Hujus tam improvidæ jussionis caussam agunt,
quod idem Lanfrancus contradicebat nuptiis filiæ Comitis Flandriæ,
quam ipse sibi Dux copulaverat in matrimonio, quia proximâ carnis
consanguinitate jungebatur.” So Chron. Becc. 198.

Footnote 246

Ib. “Unde auctoritate Romani Papæ tota Neustria fuerat ab officio
Christianitatis suspensa et interdicta.” So Chron. Becc. u. s. Wace
(9659) makes Malger pronounce the interdict;

“Maugier ki tint l’Arceveskie
Mist Normendie tute en uie
Sor Willame è sor sa moillier.
Andui les fist escumengier.”

Footnote 247

See vol. ii. p. 169.

Footnote 248

See vol. ii. p. 287.

Footnote 249

Vit. Lanfr. 287. “Quorumdam etiam accusationibus delatorum Dux in eo
vehementer amaricatus.”

Footnote 250

See vol. ii. pp. 218, 236.

Footnote 251

Vit. Lanfr. 287. “Mandat ut monasterio exturbetur, patriâ discedat,
Lanfrancus. Nec motus animi sui hâc vindictâ sedare valens, mandavit
juris monasterii villam, quæ Parcus dicitur, flammis excidi.” On the
word _Park_, see Earle, Parallel Chronicles, p. 323.

Footnote 252

In the story in Lanfranc’s Life (287 Giles), the banished Prior sets
out on a horse which went on three legs, because the house had none
that was better (“quia melior non habebatur, tripes equus quarto
pede inutili illi tribuitur”), and accompanied by one servant. He
meets the Duke; “Protinus quà ille discedebat Duci obvius venienti
appropinquans.” The meeting may have been accidental, or Lanfranc may
have gone by a way where he was likely to meet William, but I cannot
think, with Dr. Hook (ii. 93), that “Lanfranc directed his steps
to Rouen, where he probably had been summoned to appear before the
duke.” The lame horse—the narrator quite enters into the joke—bows
its head, and his rider salutes the Prince; “Equo per singulos passus
caput ad terram submittente, dominum salutat.” William at first turns
away, but presently listens. Lanfranc begins with a joke; he is
obeying William by going out of his dominions as fast as he could; he
would go faster, if the Duke would give him a better horse. William
laughs, and asks whether any criminal before had ever ventured to ask
a present of his judge. The Duke is fairly won over, Lanfranc makes
his speech, and all is soon settled.

Footnote 253

Vit. Lanfr. 287. “Gratissimi mox succedunt amplexus et oscula.”

Footnote 254

Vit. Lanfr. 287. “Multo etiam cum augmento restituenda promittuntur
quæ Dux nuperrimè devastari jusserat.”

Footnote 255

See this point discussed by Dr. Hook, ii. 94. A quite different
account of the reconciliation of Lanfranc to the Duke, or rather of
his first introduction to him, is given in two passages of William
of Malmesbury, De Gest. Pont. 116 _b_ and 136, one in the Life of
Lanfranc himself, the other in that of Herfast, afterwards Bishop of
Thetford. William’s Chaplains excite him against Lanfranc, because
he had mocked the ignorance of one of their number. The Duke orders
him to leave Normandy, but he goes to Court, obtains an interview
with the Duke, and speedily wins his favour. In the second account
it appears that the Chaplain mocked at was Herfast himself, who came
to Lanfranc’s school with great pomp. Lanfranc then makes a mock of
his ignorance; “Ex primâ colloquutione intelligens quàm prope nihil
sciret, abecedarium ipsi expediendum apposuit, ferociam hominis
Italicâ facetiâ illudens.” The order for banishment then follows.
Lanfranc, somewhat oddly, goes to court to ask for provisions for his
journey (“Quum ad curiam commeatum petiturus venisset”). Then comes
the story of the lame horse, and the Duke is won over to Lanfranc,
mainly through the intercession of William Fitz-Osbern. There is no
mention of Lanfranc’s opposition to the marriage.

This story about the Chaplain may be true; but it can hardly be
doubted, first that Lanfranc was already known to the Duke, secondly
that the main ground of offence was the opposition to the marriage.

Footnote 256

Vit. Lanfr. 289. “Lanfrancus ... Romam venerat ... ut ageret pro Duce
Normannorum et uxore ejus apud Apostolicum.”

Footnote 257

See vol. ii. p. 458.

Footnote 258

Ib. 431.

Footnote 259

Ib. 116.

Footnote 260

He however retracted back again. Vit. Lanfr. 289. See Milman, iii. 51.

Footnote 261

See vol. ii. pp. 116, 227.

Footnote 262

Vit. Lanfr. 289. “Nam Dux puellam [Gerbod is, as usual, forgotten]
quam acceperat nullo pacto dimittere vellet.”

Footnote 263

Ib. “Loquutus cum Papâ Nicolao ostendit quia ejus sententia illos
tantùm gravabat, qui eos nec conjunxerant nec separare poterant.”

Footnote 264

Will. Gem. vii. 26. “Willelmus Dux, dum à quibusdam religiosis
[no mention of Lanfranc personally] sæpiùs redargueretur, eò quod
cognatam suam sibi in matrimonium copulâsset, missis legatis, Romanum
Papam super hâc re consuluit. At ille sagaciter considerans quòd,
si divortium fieri juberet, fortè inter Flandrenses et Normannos
grave bellum exsurgeret, maritum et conjugem à reatu absolvit.” Vit.
Lanfr. 289. “Hoc audiens et verum esse advertens summus Pontifex,
dispensatione habitâ, conjugium concessit.”

Footnote 265

Will. Gem. u.s. “Eis pœnitentiam injunxit. Mandavit enim, ut ab eis
duo cœnobia conderentur, in quibus pro ipsis ab utroque sexu Deo
sedulò preces offerentur.” Vit. Lanfr. 289. “Eo tamen modo quatenùs
Dux et uxor ejus duo monasteria construerent, in quibus singulas
congregationes virorum ac mulierum coadunarent, qui ibi sub normâ
sanctæ relligionis, die noctuque Deo deservirent et pro salute
eorum supplicarent.” William of Malmesbury (iii. 267) would almost
seem to have looked on the foundations as a voluntary expiation,
like the pilgrimage of Swegen; “Postmodùm, provectioribus annis,
pro expiatione sceleris, illum sancto Stephano Cadomis monasterium
ædificâsse, illam beatæ Trinitati in eodem vico idem fecisse, utroque
pro sexu suo personas habitantium eligente.”

On the history of Saint Stephen’s, I must refer to two excellent
local works, “L’Abbaye de Saint-Etienne de Caen, par C. Hippeau,”
Caen, 1855 (M. Hippeau is also known as the editor of the first
complete edition of Garnier’s Life of Saint Thomas), and “Analyse
Architecturale de l’Abbaye de Saint-Etienne de Caen, par G. Bouet,”
Caen, 1867, a book distinguished by the writer’s characteristic
caution and minute accuracy.

Footnote 266

Roman de Rou, 9665;

“Li Dus por satisfacion,
Ke Deus l’en face veir pardon,
E ke l’Apostoile cunsente
Ke tenir poisse sa parente,
Fist cent provendes establir
A cent povres paistre è vestir,
As meshaigniez, as non poanz,
As langoros, as non véanz,
A Chiéresborc et à Roem,
A Baieues et à Caem;
Encore i sunt et encor durent
Issi come establies furent.”

On the blind hospital at Caen, see Hippeau, p. 4. Were persons
admissible whose eyes had been put out by the Duke’s own authority?

Footnote 267

In William’s charter of 1066 (Gallia Christiana, xi. 59–61. I have
to thank M. Châtel, the Archivist of the Department of Calvados,
for the reference), he distinctly says that “honestissima conjux
mea Mathildis, nobilissimi Ducis Flandrensis Balduini filiam ...
construxit basilicam,” and goes on to record its consecration on June
18th. The charter in Neustria Pia, 658–661, is of 1082. He there says
“ecclesiam ... coædificavimus.” Either it was still unfinished, or
the nave has been rebuilt. It is only the eastern part which can be
Matilda’s work.

Footnote 268

This was the great year of consecrations in Normandy. See vol. ii.
pp. 212, 222. The consecration of Saint Stephen’s is distinctly
placed in this year by Orderic, 548 D. At Bec Lanfranc himself
officiated (Will. Gem. vi. 9), but at Caen the ceremony was performed
by the Metropolitan John. I gather from what goes before in Orderic
that William was present at Caen, though he was not at Bec. But
the Chronicle of Saint Stephen itself (Duchèsne, 1018) places the
ceremony in 1073. Other dates given are 1081 and 1086 (see Neustria
Pia, 625, Bouet, 15, 16). One cannot doubt that 1077 is right date
for the main consecration, and that the other dates, if correct,
refer to some smaller ceremony. The western towers (of course not
the upper portions) must have been added soon after the church was
finished. Their style is that of the church, and the masonry shows
that they were designed from the first, though not built at the same
time as the nave. This would quite agree with the date of 1086. For
the consecration of a steeple see vol. ii. p. 437.

Footnote 269

See vol. ii. p. 222, and the verse of Abbot Baldwin in Duchèsne, Rer.
Franc. ii. 257; “Qui Dux Normannis, qui Cæsar præfuit Anglis.”

Footnote 270

Allowing, of course, for the reconstruction of the clerestory and the
addition of the vault.

Footnote 271

See vol. ii. p. 442.

Footnote 272

Will. Gem. vi 9. “Tam domini quam Normanniæ primatum supplicatione
coactus.” I accept Orderic’s date, but the Chronicle of Bec (Giles,
197) places the appointment in 1062.

Footnote 273

Chron. Bec, 197 Giles.

Footnote 274

Will. Malms. iii. 273. “Tulit ex Matilde liberos multos, quæ, et
marito morigera et prole fecunda, nobilis viri animum in sui amoris
incitabat aculeum.” He then goes on with the story of the bridle (see
Appendix N) and the account of the difference about Robert and of
William’s grief at her death.

Footnote 275

On William’s children see Appendix O.

Footnote 276

Chron. Petrib. 1135.

Footnote 277

See Appendix O.

Footnote 278

Monstrelet, i. 324 _b_ (ed. Paris 1595). “Vous charge,” says Henry
the Fifth, “sur tant que vous povez mesprendre, que tant que vous
vivrez, ne souffrez à faire traicté avecques nostre adversaire
Charles de Vallois, ne autres pour chose qu’il advienne, que la Duché
de Normandie ne luy [to his son] demeure franchement.”

Footnote 279

Phil. Comines, i. 15 (vol. i. p. 71, ed. Godefroy 1723). “La chose du
monde qu’il desiroit le plus, c’estoit de voir un Duc en Normandie;
car par ce moyen il luy sembloit le Roy estre affoibly de la tierce
partié.” See the whole history of the grant and reconquest of
Normandy, cap. xii-xv, and Kirk, Charles the Bold, ii. 338 et seqq.

Footnote 280

Ib. i. 13 (vol. i. p. 64). “Et a tousjours bien semblé aux Normands,
et fait encores, que si grand’ Duché, comme la leur, requiert bien
un Duc; et, à dire la verité, elle est de grand’ estime, et s’y leve
de grands deniers.” So, in the same chapter, Lewis says, “que de son
conseulement n’eust jamais baillé tel partage à son frère, mais puis
que d’eux mesmes les Normands en avoient fait cette nouvelleté, il en
estoit content.”

Footnote 281

Phil. Comines, ii. 9, 15 (vol. i. pp. 116, 137). Kirk, i. 272, 334,
525.

Footnote 282

Arist. Rhet. iii. 10. Καὶ Περικλῆς τῆν Αἴγιναν ἀφελεῖν ἐκέλευσε, τὴν
λήμην τοῦ Πειραιέως.

Footnote 283

See Hist. Fed. Gov. i. 621.

Footnote 284

See Appendix P.

Footnote 285

See vol. ii. p. 290.

Footnote 286

See vol. i. p. 198.

Footnote 287

See the charter in Neustria Pia, 694.

Footnote 288

See above, p. 92.

Footnote 289

Will. Gem. vii. 22. Neustria Pia, 496.

Footnote 290

Will. Gem. vii. 22. “Monasterium Sancti Michaelis Ulterioris Portûs
ædificavit.” See the charter in Neustria Pia, 587.

Footnote 291

Will. Pict. 118. The Archdeacon of Lisieux is longer and louder in
the praise of his own diocesan than in the praise of any one except
the Duke himself.

Footnote 292

Ib. 119. “Ipse profectò, quum deponeretur Archipræsul Malgerius, vox
justitiæ sonora fuit, constanter permanens in parte Dei, propter Deum
damnans filium patrui.”

Footnote 293

Will. Gem. vii. 20. “Ducatum sibi volens vendicare, cœpit contra
Ducem minis et infestationibus cervicem erigere.”

Footnote 294

Ib. “Fortis Princeps, nolens ei cedere, exercitum congregarit, et
castrum Oucis, donec illud caperet, obsedit.”

Footnote 295

Ib. “At ille Henricum Regem Francorum expetiit, cui quid sibi
contigisset flebiliter retexit. Rex verò ipsum, utpote nobilem genere
et formâ militem, benignè suscepit, et infortunio ejus condolens
Comitatum Suessionis ei cum quâdam nobili conjuge tribuit.” The
Vermandois family was descended from King Bernard of Italy, son of
Pippin, son of Charles. See Art de Vérifier les Dates, ii. 700,
727. The supposed treason of Bernard seems to have shut out his
descendants from the Imperial and royal succession.

Footnote 296

See Appendix P.

Footnote 297

See vol. ii. pp. 243, 244.

Footnote 298

See vol. ii. p. 181.

Footnote 299

See vol. ii. pp. 242, 243.

Footnote 300

Ord. Vit. 657 B (in the death-bed speech). “Patrui mei Malgerius
Rothomagensis Archepiscopus, et Guillelmus frater ejus, cui Archas et
comitatum Calogii gratis dederam, me velut nothum contempserunt.” So
Roman de Rou, 8565;

“Ki clamout dreit en l’éritage;
Pur ke il esteit nez de muillier.”

And 8583;

“Jamez li Dus ne servireit;
Normendie à grant tort teneit,
Bastart esteit, n’i aveit dreit.”

Footnote 301

Orderic (657 B) adds, after the words last quoted about Malger and
William of Arques; “Henricus Regem et Engelrannum Comitem Pontivi
contra me accerserunt.”

Footnote 302

Will. Pict. 91. “Is ab ineunte pueri principatu infidus ei et
adversus, quamquam fidelitatem juratus et obsequium, hostilia
agitabat, modò temeritate non latente resistens, clandestinis
interdum dolis.”

Footnote 303

Ib. 92. “In supradicti Danfronti oppugnatione quasi desertoris
furtivo more discessit, nequaquam petitâ missione; satellitii
debitum, cujus antea nomine hostilitatem utcumque velabat, jam omne
detrectans.” This can hardly mean that he openly renounced his
allegiance so early as the siege of Domfront.

Footnote 304

Ib. “Ob hæc et alia tot ejus et tanta ausa, Dux uti res monuit,
suspiciens plura et majora ausurum, receptaculi, quo plurimum
confidebat, editius firmamentum occupavit, custodiam immittens, in
nullo ampliùs tamen jus ejus imminuens.”

Footnote 305

On the history of Arques and Talou, see M. Deville’s Histoire du
Chateau d’Arques, Rouen 1829; Stapleton, i. cxxiii.

Footnote 306

See vol. i. p. 240 et seqq.; Flodoard, 944; Richer, ii. 42.

Footnote 307

See above, p. 117.

Footnote 308

Will. Gem. viii. 36. “Haud procul ab oppido Arcarum, villâ quæ
dicitur Schechevilla (Equiqueville).” See vol. i. p. 279.

Footnote 309

On the Viscounts of Arques, see Deville, pp. 9, 13, 19, 87;
Stapleton, i. cxxiii.; Will. Gem. viii. 36. See the lands of
Willelmus de Arcis in Suffolk, Domesday, 431 _b_. An Osbern de Arcis
also occurs in Lincolnshire and Yorkshire.

Footnote 310

Ord. Vit. 657 B (see last page). So Roman de Rou, 8568;

“Pur honur de sun parenté,
E pur aveir sa féelté
Li ad li Dus en fieu duné
Arches è Taillou li cunté.”

Footnote 311

Will. Pict. 92. “Nempe eas latebras, id munimentum initæ elationis
atque dementiæ ipse primus fundavit, et quam operossissimè extruxit
in præalti montis Arcarum cacumine.” Will. Gem. vii. 7. “Nobilitate
verò generis elatus, castrum Archarum in cacumine ipsius montis
condidit.” So the Chronicle of Saint Wandrille in D’Achery, ii. 288.
“Willelmus videlicet qui postea Arcas castrum in pago Tellau primus
statuit.” The building was clearly something novel, and it struck
people in Normandy almost as the building of Richard’s Castle (see
vol. ii. pp. 138–143) struck people in England. I see no reason to
doubt that the ruined keep is part of the original work. As to the
gate, and the other parts assigned to the same date by M. Deville, I
am not quite so certain.

Footnote 312

See vol. ii. p. 191.

Footnote 313

See vol. ii. pp. 176, 177.

Footnote 314

His admirers however need not have carved him in bas-relief over a
gate which may belong to the days of William, and which is at any
rate much older than the days of Henry.

Footnote 315

All these points are gone into minutely by M. Deville. I went over
the castle minutely in May, 1868, with M. Deville’s book in hand,
and I can bear witness to the accuracy of his description, though I
cannot always accept his inferences.

Footnote 316

Both William of Poitiers (92) and Orderic (657 B) place William “in
Constantino pago.” The special mention of Valognes (see vol. ii. p.
247) comes from the Roman de Rou, 8698 et seqq.

Footnote 317

Will. Pict. u.s. “Malefidi custodes non multo post castri potestatem
conditori reddunt, munerum pollicitatione, et impensiùs imminente
variâ sollicitatione fatigati subactique.”

Footnote 318

On the order of events in this revolt, see Appendix Q.

Footnote 319

Will. Pict. 92. “Nam festinantem ut contrairet injuriæ suæ ampliùs
incitaverunt audita mala provinciæ suæ. Ecclesiarum bona, agrestium
labores, negotiatorum lucra militum prædam injustè fieri dolebat.
Miserando planctu imbellis vulgi, _qui multus tempore belli aut
seditionum oriri solet_, advocari se cogitabat.” The mention of
merchants as a numerous and important class marks the growing
civilization of Normandy under its great ruler.

Footnote 320

See vol. ii. p. 249.

Footnote 321

Odo could not have been now above seventeen years old (see vol. ii.
p. 210), nor William himself above twenty-six.

Footnote 322

See vol. ii. p. 240.

Footnote 323

Caudebec = Cold Beck. The arms of the town are appropriately three
fish.

Footnote 324

See Appendix Q.

Footnote 325

I here follow the narrative of William of Poitiers (93), trying
to make it intelligible by borrowing some hints from William of
Malmesbury.

Footnote 326

Will. Pict. 93. “Nihil quidem rebelles in se, quum præsentem
conspexerint, ausuros.”

Footnote 327

See the spirited illustration in Deville, p. 282.

Footnote 328

Will. Pict. 93. “Dein potiri volens munitione, jussu propere
contracto exercitu circumsedit. Fuit difficillimum quos ea natura
loci maximè defensabat expugnare. Sanè more suo illo optimo, rem
optans absque cruore confectum iri, efferatos et contumaces obice
castelli ad montis pedem exstructi ciausit.”

Footnote 329

See vol. ii. p. 264.

Footnote 330

Roman de Rou, 8610;

“Li mielx de la chevalerie
I mist de tute Normendie.”

Footnote 331

The presence of Walter Giffard comes only from a late Chronicle
(Bouquet, xi. 330), where he is prematurely called Count. But, as his
lordship of Longueville lay hard by, nothing is more likely than that
he should be there. He was the son of Osbern of Bolbec—a little town
at the foot of a hill on the way to the more famous Lillebonne—by
Avelina, one of the sisters of Gunnor (Will. Gem. viii. 37). A
brother of Osbern was Godfrey, “pater Willelmi de Archis,” that is,
of the Viscount. See Deville, p. 19. On Walter Giffard, afterwards
Earl of Buckingham, see Ellis, i. 424, and Taylor, Wace, 169.

Footnote 332

This tower, doubtless of wood, is described as a “munitio” in the
extract from William of Poitiers given above. So Will. Gem. vii. 7;
“Erectis aggeribus ad radicem montis castrum stabilivit, quod fortium
virorum robore inexpugnabile reddidit, et sic inde abiens vallatum
alimoniis reliquit.” So Will. Malms. iii. 232; “Obfirmato contra
Archas castello.” Wace (Roman de Rou, 8600) says that the Duke

“De fossez è de heriçun
E de pel fist un chasteillun,
El pié del teltre en la vallée,
Ki garde tute la cuntrée;
Ne pristrent paiz cels del chastel
Ne bués ne vache ne véel;
Li Dus tel chastelet i fist,
Tant chevaliers è tel i mist,
Ki bien le porreient desfendre
Ke Reis ne Quens ne porreit prendre.”

Cf. vol. ii. pp. 139, 264.

Footnote 333

Will. Pict. 94. “Præsidio imposito, aliis postea negotiis
invitantibus, ipse recessit; ut, dum ferro parceret, fame vinceret.”
So Wace, 8612;

“Le Dus s’en est parti atant,
Sez busuignes ailleurs quérant.”

This is by no means clear. William of Malmesbury (u. s.) is rather
more definite; “Obfirmato contra Archas castello, ad alia quæ magis
urgebant bella conversus est.” It was therefore a military operation
in another direction which called William off. We shall see directly
why he avoided personally conducting the blockade.

Footnote 334

This feudal scruple, which really seems the only intelligible
explanation of William’s conduct in leaving the most important
operations to others, comes from William of Malmesbury (u. s.);
“Simul quia sciebat Regem Francorum, jampridem, nescio quâ simultate,
sibi infensum, ad opem obsesso ferendam adventare; namque prædicandi
moderaminis consilio, quamvis justiorem caussam habere videretur, cum
eo decernere ferro cavebat, cui et pro sacramento et pro suffragio
obnoxius erat.” Henry the Second felt the like scruple at the
siege of Toulouse in 1159, but Thomas of London, then the worldly
Chancellor, thought otherwise; “Vanâ superstitione et reverentiâ Rex
tentus consilio aliorum, super urbem, in quâ esset dominus suus Rex
Franciæ, irruere noluit; dicente in contrarium Cancellario, quod
personam domini Rex Francorum ibi deposuisset, cò quod supra pacta
conventa hostem se ei opposuisset.” (Will. Fil. Steph. p. 200, ed.
Giles.)

Footnote 335

We learn the spot of the combat from Wace, Roman de Rou, 8622 et
seqq.;

“Jà ert li Rei à Saint-Albin,” &c.

And this agrees with the description of Richard of Hugleville given
by Orderic (606 B), where he sets forth the pedigree of the family;
“Tempore Guillelmi juvenis filii Rodberti Ducis, Guillelmus de Archis
contra Ducem rebellavit, et penè omnium Calogiensium parilis defectus
nothum principem deseruit; solus Ricardus contra rebelles in castello
suo secus ecclesiam Sancti Albini perstitit, et pro fidelitate Ducis
contra discursus Archacensium provinciam circumjacentem defensare
curavit.”

Footnote 336

See Ord. Vit. 606 D. It is with a thrill of sympathy alike for the
hero and for his chronicler that an Englishman reads the passage,
which I shall have to refer to again.

Footnote 337

Ord. Vit. 606 C. “Hugonem cum omnibus suis Archacenses apud
Moriummontem repente circumdederunt, seseque viriliter defendentem
interemerunt.”

Footnote 338

See vol. ii. p. 246.

Footnote 339

Ord. Vit. u. s.

Footnote 340

Roman de Rou, 8620;

“La sur d’Arches voleit garnir,
Kar li blé lur debvait faillir,
Jà ert li Rei à Saint-Albin,
Asez portout è blé è vin;
Là les fist li Rei arester,
E lur garnisun aprester
Sumiers ki lur herneis portassent,
E chevaliers k’il convéiassent.”

So Will. Gem. vii. 7. “Exercitum castra metari apud Sanctum Albinum
jussit.”

Footnote 341

See Appendix Q.

Footnote 342

Roman de Rou, 8628;

“Cil del chastel oïrent tost
La garnisun è li grant ost.”

The “tur” is the castle of Arques; the “chastel” is the wooden castle
of the besiegers.

Footnote 343

Will. Gem. vii. 7. “Cujus [Regis] adventum milites Ducis
comperientes, de suis miserunt, si quos fortè hostium à regio cœtu
abstraherent, quos illi in latibulis degentes incautos exciperent.
Quò dum venissent, non minimam exercitûs partem inde protraxerunt, et
fugientes in insidias induxerunt. Statim verò qui videbantur fugere,
versâ facie cœperunt eos acriter cædere.” So Roman de Rou, 8632 et
seqq. Less fully Will. Pict. 94; “Adducti in spem memorandi facinoris
quidam ex eo numero qui in præsidio Ducis relicti custodiunt,
Francorum adventantium itinera explorata insidunt. Et ecce numerosa
pars minus cauti excipiuntur.”

Footnote 344

Will. Malms, iii. 232. “Quorum astutiâ insidiis exceptus, Isembardum
Pontivi comitem coram se obtruncari, Hugonem Bardulfum capi, meritò
ingemuit.”

Footnote 345

All our accounts speak of the capture of Hugh Bardulf as of an event
of at least equal importance with the death of the Count of Ponthieu.
William of Poitiers (u. s.) says, “Hugo Bardulfus ipse item, vir
magnus, capitur.”

Footnote 346

“In the roll of Norman fees in the red book of the Exchequer, we
find Doon Bardulf returned as one of those ‘qui non venerunt, nec
miserunt, nec aliquid dixerunt.’” I copy this from Taylor’s Wace,
p. 44. The name of Bardulf, including several Doun Bardulfs, occurs
constantly in the Exchequer Records both of Normandy and of England
(see the Indexes to Madox and Stapleton), but I have not lighted on
the particular story referred to by Mr. Taylor.

Footnote 347

See vol. i. p. 227 et pass.

Footnote 348

Chron. Centul. iv. 21 (ap. D’Achery, ii. 343). “Attamen huic numquam
Comitis nomen accessit, sed erat illi insigne quod Sancti Richarii
vocabatur Advocatus.” On Saint Riquier see vol. ii. p. 535.

Footnote 349

Ib. “Ablatis monasterio Centulo tribus oppidis, Abbatis-villâ, Sancto
Medardo, et Incrâ, et his castellis effectis, in eorumque stippendia
multis aliis Sancti Richarii villis et reditibus ab Hugone Rege
prærogatis.” Cf. iv. 12.

Footnote 350

See Chron. Centul. ii. 7. Sir Francis Palgrave (iii. 226), by one
of the slips so natural in a chapter not revised by the author,
confounds father and son.

Footnote 351

I find that in my second volume I have written this name Ingelram
in the text (p. 217) and Enguerrand in the Appendix (p. 587). Such
accidents will happen, especially with foreign names. Ingelram
(whence Ingram) is certainly the English form, though the name was
never common in England; I therefore prefer it, as does Sir F.
Palgrave.

Footnote 352

Hariulf (Chron. Cent. iv. 21) calls the elder Hugh “Hugo Abbatensis,”
and the Ingelram slain at Saint Aubin is by William of Jumièges (vii.
7) called “Abbatis-villæ Comes.” Ingelram, according to Hariulf, took
the title of Count (“Dei gratia Comes”) on slaying Baldwin Count of
Boulogne and marrying his widow Adelaide. Chron. Cent. iv. 12.

Footnote 353

See vol. ii. p. 217.

Footnote 354

William of Jumièges (vii. 7) calls the wife of William of Arques
“soror Widonis Comitis Pontivi.” That is a daughter of Hugh. Why
is Ingelram called “Comes Abbatisvillæ,” and his brother “Comes
Pontivi,” in the same chapter?

Footnote 355

See vol. ii. p. 587.

Footnote 356

The death of Ingelram is mentioned in all our accounts, like the
capture of Hugh Bardulf.

Footnote 357

This is Guy who imprisoned Harold. His uncle, another Guy, son of
Ingelram the First, was Bishop of Amiens (see Chron. Cent. iv. 36.
p. 355), and wrote the famous poem “De Bello Hastingensi.” See Will.
Gem. vii. 44.

Footnote 358

The other daughter married Odo of Champagne. See vol. ii. p. 588, and
below, p. 142.

Footnote 359

William of Poitiers (94) calls him “nobilitate notus ac fortudine,”
and William (or Orderic) in the death-bed speech (657 B) says
“præcursores mei præoccupaverunt Engelrannum Comitem in castrum
intrare festinantem, ipsumque fortiter pugnantem, quia miles erat
asperrimus, occiderunt, et agmina ejus fugaverunt.” Hariulf, in the
Chronicle of Saint Riquier (iv. 21), calls him “homo formæ mirabilis.”

Footnote 360

Will. Pict. (u. s.) “Perveniens tamen quo ire intenderat, Rex
exacerbatissimis animis summâ vi præsidium attentavit: Willelmum
ab ærumnis uti eriperet, pariter decrementum sui, stragem suorum
vindicaret. Sed ubi negotium difficile animadvertit, quippe inimicos
impetus facilè toleraverunt castelli munimenta et militum virtus æque
validæ ... abire maturavit.”

Footnote 361

So I understand the not very clear statement of William of Poitiers
that the King went away.

Footnote 362

Will. Pict. 96. “In ipsâ morâ obsidionali Normannorum aliquanti
potentiores ab Duce ad Regem defecerunt, quos jam antea
conspirationis rebellantium occultique fuisse adjutores opinabile
erat. Malevolentiam, quâ olim contra infantem fuerant inflati nondum
evomuere totam. Eorum eo consortio Guimundus præsidens munitioni quam
Molendinas appellant in manus Regis eam dedit.” William of Malmesbury
seems to make the movement a popular one; “Hujusce obsidionis
intervallo populus castri quod Molendinis dicitur, exolescens, ad
partes Regis incentore quodam Galterio transiit.” Is this Walter the
same as the Wimund of the other William?

Footnote 363

See Stapleton, i. cxxxiii. et al.

Footnote 364

Will. Pict. 96. “Guido frater Comitis Pictavensis Willelmi atque
Romanæ Imperatricis.” So Will. Malms. This Guy (see Art de Vérifier
les Dates, ii. 356) is the same as the Geoffrey whom Geoffrey Martel
established in Gascony. See vol. ii. p. 595.

Footnote 365

Chron. Maxent. 1058 (Labbé, ii. 210). “Willermus, qui et Petrus
cognomento Acer.”

Footnote 366

See vol. ii. p. 373.

Footnote 367

In the Chronicle of Saint Maxentius he is called Geoffrey in 1044,
1058, 1060, 1061, 1062, Guy and Geoffrey in 1068, William in 1071,
lastly in 1086, “Guido qui et Goffredus.” This is certainly the way
to confuse genealogists.

Footnote 368

Will. Pict. 95. “Rex denuò accitus multo et miserè supplici nuncio
venire abnuit.” The Archdeacon now gets very eloquent, and gives
us all the inner workings of the mind of one whom he calls “Papiæ
partus.” It takes a minute or two to see that by this odd description
he means the Count of Arques.

Footnote 369

This ceremony was gone through by the Count-Bishop Hugh (see vol.
i. p. 514) to Richard the Good; “Equestrem sellam ferens humeris,
provolutus genibus Richardi,” &c. Will. Gem. v. 16. Palgrave,
iii. 133. Cf. Will. Malms. iii. 235. So we now read in William of
Poitiers; “Pars ocreis et calcaribus ornati [why?], insolito comitatu
incedentes, et eorum plerique sellam equestrem incurvo languidoque
dorso, nonnulli solum se nutabundi vix eportantes.”

Footnote 370

Will. Pict. 95. “Erat item cernere calamitatem levis armatura
egredientis fœdam ac variam.”

Footnote 371

Ib. 96. “Verum et ii, et quiqui aliàs relicti sunt a Francis, quum
deditas esse comperissent Archarum latebras, sese nostris fugâ furati
sunt.”

Footnote 372

Ib. 95. “Noluit extorrem et inopem casu magis pudendo cruciari;
sed cum gratiâ et possessionibus quibusdam amplis atque multorum
redituum, patriam ei concessit.”

Footnote 373

Will. Gem. vii. 7. See Deville, p. 78 et seqq. I see no difficulty in
reconciling the two accounts.

Footnote 374

See Deville, p. 89.

Footnote 375

See above, p. 92.

Footnote 376

See above, pp. 93, 101.

Footnote 377

See above, p. 94.

Footnote 378

See vol. i. p. 189; vol. ii. p. 202.

Footnote 379

Will. Pict. 96. “Normanniam, quæ sub Regibus Francorum egit ex
antiquo, prope in regnum evectam.” What would our old friend Dudo
(see vol. i. pp. 193, 209, 247) have said to the “prope”?

Footnote 380

Ib. “Quum Imperatorem Romanum, quo majus potentiæ sive dignitatis
nomen in orbe terrarum aliud non est, amicum et socium haberet.”

Footnote 381

Ib. “Quum provinciis multis præsideret potentibus, quarum domini aut
rectores militiæ suæ essent administri, Comitem Willelmum suum nec
amicum nec militem, sed hostem esse.”

Footnote 382

See above, p. 116.

Footnote 383

Art de Vérifier les Dates, ii. 614.

Footnote 384

Ib. But it must be borne in mind that the kinswoman of William’s whom
Odo married was not Adelaide, the Duke’s sister, but the younger
Adelaide, her daughter by Ingelram of Ponthieu. See vol. ii. p. 588.

Footnote 385

Will. Pict. 97. “Condolentes in eâdem Theobaldus, Pictavorum Comes,
Gaufredus, item reliqui summates, quâdam insuper indignatione privatâ
intolerandum ducebant sese Regis, quocumque prævia vocarent, signis
parere; Willelmum Normannorum nequaquam pro Rege, sed confidenter
atque indesinenter ad ejus magnitudinem, quam aliquantùm attrivit,
ulteriùs atterendam, vel si quâ viâ valeant, conterendam, in armis
agitare.”

Footnote 386

Will. Pict. 97. “Præterea concupiebant Normanniam, aut ejus partem,
quidam Regis proximi.”

Footnote 387

Ib. “Julium Cæsarem, vel bellandi peritiorem aliquem, si fuerit
peritior, exercitûs Romani ducem (ex mille nationibus coacti olim,
dum Roma florentissima mille provinciis imperitâsset) hujus agminis
immanitate terreri potuisse affirmares.”

Footnote 388

Ib. “Burgundiam, Arverniam, atque Wasconiam properare videres
horribiles ferro: imo vires tanti regni, quantùm in climata mundi
quatuor patent, cunctas, Franciam tamen et Britanniam, quantò nobis
viciniores, tantò ardentius infestas.” As he speaks of the “regnum,”
he clearly means by Burgundy only the Duchy which held of the French
Crown. His use of “Francia” along with the rest, as the name of one
part of Gaul, should be noticed. Compare the use of the word by
Flodoard; see vol. i. p. 199.

Footnote 389

Will. Pict. 98. “Guido, Pontivi Comes, ad vindicandum fratrem
Ingelrannum nimis avidus.” Will. Malms. iii. 233. “Guido Pontivi
Comes studiosiùs ultionis fratris intendit.”

Footnote 390

I find no mention of Geoffrey as present, except in William of
Jumièges (vii. 24), who makes him accompany the King. This account is
followed by Benoît of Saint More, 35245;

“Li quens d’Anjou Gefrei Martel,
Qui del ovraigne esteit mult bel,
I vint od riche compaignie
E od ses archers de valie.”

But it is strange that William of Poitiers and the other writers
should have left out so important a person, had he really been there,
and his absence, hard as it is to account for it, agrees better with
what follows.

Footnote 391

Ord. Vit. 657 D (cf. 638 D). “Aliam [phalangem] Odoni fratri suo
ac Rainaldo de Claro Monte, et duobus Consulibus, Radulfo de
Monte-Desiderii atque Widoni de Pontivo, commendavit.” William of
Poitiers, like Richer of old (see vol. i. p. 223, note 3, cf. 237,
note 2), is strong in his antiquated geography. He tells us (98)
about “Quantus miles inter Sequanam et Garonnam fluvios colligeretur
(quas gentes multas uno nomine Celtigallos appellant);” then about
those who were “inter flumen Rhenum [Henry the Frank’s notions about
the Rhine frontier were doubtless different] et Sequanam collecti,
quæ Gallia Belgica nuncupatur.” Lastly, “Regem insuper comitabatur
Aquitania pars Galliæ tertia.” Reginald of Clermont is “Rainaldus
familiarissimus.” Was he commissioned to supply the incapacity of
Odo? See vol. i. p. 520.

Footnote 392

Roman de Rou, 9919;

“La gent de dous parz a mandée
Si come Saine l’a devisée.”

Footnote 393

Ord. Vit. 657 D. “Ut per vada Eptæ Neustriam citò introirent, Braium
et Calcegium totumque Rothomagensem pagum invaderent ferro et flammâ,
nec ne rapinis usque ad mare penitus devastarent.”

Footnote 394

See above, p. 119.

Footnote 395

Hugh Capet was crowned at Noyon. Richer, iv. 12. See vol. i. p. 268.

Footnote 396

Roman de Rou, 9923. “Cels de Melant è de Vermendeiz.” See above, p.
120. The reigning Count was Herbert the Fourth.

Footnote 397

Guy, Bishop of Amiens, the author of the poem “De Bello Hastingensi”
(see Will. Gem. vii. 44), was a son of Ingelram the First and uncle
of Guy and of Ingelram the Second. He succeeded to the see about 1058.

Footnote 398

See above, pp. 136, 139.

Footnote 399

Wace, 9925, says “Cels de _Flandres_ è de Belmont,” and Benoît
(35255) “La furent _Flamenc_ e Poher.” But the presence of subjects
of Baldwin is exceedingly unlikely, and Benoît in some sort confutes
himself by adding “E Braibençon e Hainuer,” thus getting beyond the
borders of the Western realm within which the others strictly confine
themselves. He was most likely misled, as others have been since, by
the grand talk about the Rhine.

Footnote 400

That is, if Provins roses, brought from the East by pilgrims or
Crusaders, had reached Europe so soon.

Footnote 401

Isaiah xlvii. 7.

Footnote 402

Roman de Rou, 9943. “De Bourges è de Berri.” As usual, the names of
the city and of the district are both slightly varying forms of the
old Gaulish name; but it is curious to see them distinguished in such
a marked way, which seems not to be done in any other part of the
catalogue.

Footnote 403

Livy, v. 34. “Celtarum quæ pars Galliæ tertia est penes Bituriges
summa imperii fuit; ii Regem Celtico dabant, Ambigatus is fuit,” etc.
Then follows the account of his sending forth the Colonies under his
sister’s sons Bellovesus and Sigovesus. Did the special sanctity of a
sister’s son (see vol. ii. p. 368) extend to the Celts?

Footnote 404

Cæsar, B. G. vii. 18, 19. Merivale, Roman Empire, ii. 14.

Footnote 405

Livy, v. 35. “Senones recentissimi advenarum.” They alone seem to
have been concerned in the taking of Rome.

Footnote 406

Roman de Rou, 9941;

“Cels de Perche è del Chartrain,
Cels del boscage è cels del plain.”

Footnote 407

See vol. i. p. 189.

Footnote 408

See vol. i. p. 260.

Footnote 409

See Ord. Vit. 655 C. He gives Fulk Bishop of Amiens, the predecessor
of Guy, as a third son of Drogo and Godgifu besides Walter and Ralph.

Footnote 410

Roman de Rou, 9948;

“Normanz manace, mult se vante
K’il destruireit Evrecin,
Rosmeis destruira è Lievin
Tres k’à la mer chevalchera,
E par Auge s’en reveindra.”

Footnote 411

Ord. Vit. 657 D. “Ego è contra non segnis processi, contra Regis
mapalia per litus Sequanæ cum meis me semper opposui.” So Roman de
Rou, 9965;

“L’altre ont li Dus od sei,
Ki remaindrant cuntre li Rei.”

He then goes on with the catalogue.

Footnote 412

See vol. ii. p. 257.

Footnote 413

Ib. p. 260.

Footnote 414

Ib. p. 268.

Footnote 415

Roman de Rou, 9967;

“Venir fist cels de Beessin
E li Barunz de Costentin.”

Footnote 416

See vol. ii. p. 258.

Footnote 417

See vol. ii. p. 290 et seqq.

Footnote 418

Roman de Rou, 9968;

“E cels del val de Moretoing
E d’Avrenches ki est plus loing.”

Footnote 419

Ib. 9975;

“Mult prez sereit, ço dist, del Rei,
Prez del Rei se herbergereit,
E des forriers garde prendreit:
N’ireient mie luing en forage,
K’il ni’aient, s’il poet, damage.
La viande fist tresturner
De la ù li Reis dut passer:
Li bestes fist as bois mener
Et as vilains les fist garder.”

Footnote 420

Will. Malms. iii. 233. “Juxta Regis castra sensim obambulans, ... ut
nec cominùs pugnandi copiam faceret, nec provinciam coram se vastari
sineret.”

Footnote 421

Roman de Rou, 9960. “Et de Gornai li viel Huon.” Old indeed, as Mr.
Taylor (Wace, 217) truly says, if he had found his bride at the court
of King Pippin. Yet he lived to fight at Senlac. The name survives at
Barrow Gurney in Somersetshire and elsewhere.

Footnote 422

See Taylor’s Wace, 171. De Crisp. Gen. Giles 342.

Footnote 423

See above, p. 129. To these four William of Poitiers adds Hugh of
Montfort.

Footnote 424

Roman de Rou, 9983–9989. Cf. Benoît, 35325. William of Poitiers
rather slurs this part over, in order to bring in the carnage of
Mortemer at once.

Footnote 425

Benoît, 35339;

“Si ce fuissent genz Sarrazine,
Ne fiessent teu descepline.”

Footnote 426

Roman de Rou, 10007. “Vilains pernent, fames porgiesent.” Benoît goes
more into detail.

Footnote 427

Benoît, 35341;

“N’i espairnent à riens vivanz,
N’as vielles genz ne as enfanz.”

Footnote 428

Roman de Rou, 9990;

“A Mortemer se herbergierent;
Par l’aesement des ostelz.”

And again, 10010;

“Asez truverent biax ostelz.”

So Benoît, 35353;

“Mais la nuit aiment les deliz
Des bons mangers e les bons liz.”

Footnote 429

Will. Gem. vii. 24. “In incendiis et mulierum ludibriis occupati.”

Footnote 430

Roman de Rou, 10031 (cf. Benoît, 35394 et seqq.);

“Tel kuide son cheval munter,
Ki el frein ne poet assener,
Tel kuide de l’ostel issir
Ki à l’us ne poet avenir.”

Footnote 431

Roman de Rou, 10035;

“Normanz gardouent les iessues,
E li trepas as chiefs des rues.”

So Benoît, 35404. He tells us (35399);

“E li mortel brait sunt si grant
Que l’om n’i oïst Deu tonant.”

Compare Giovanni Villani’s (xii. 66. Murat. xiii. 948) description of
the bombards at Crecy; “Che facieno si grande tremuoto e romore, che
parea che Iddio tonasse.”

Footnote 432

Will. Gem. vii. 24. “Mane commissum bellum in continuâ cæde
occumbentium ad usque nonam ab utrisque est protractis.” So Roman de
Rou, 10039;

“Dez li matin soleil levant
Tresk’a none del jur passant.”

The war “in hieme ante Quadragesimam” (Ord. Vit. 658 A).

Footnote 433

Roman de Rou, 10051;

“N’i out gaires si vil garçon
Ki n’enmenast Franceiz prison,
E bels destriers n’out dous u treis,
Od tut l’altre menu herneis.
N’out chartre en tute Normendie,
Ki de Franceiz ne fust emplie.”

Footnote 434

“Equorum velocitate saluti consulunt,” says William of Poitiers (98),
whose account is confused, and who seems anxious to pass off the
surprise as a regular battle. Orderic (658 A) says “velocitate pedum
viguerunt.” He also calls it “terribile prœlium,” &c., but I do not
see that this contradicts Wace’s account, grounded on William of
Jumièges.

Footnote 435

Roman de Rou, 10049, after recording the captivity of Guy;

“Maiz Valeran, sun frere, unt mort,
Chevalier mult vaillant è fort.”

Footnote 436

Ord. Vit. 658 A. “Post duos annos hominium ab eo tali tenore recepi,
ut exinde mihi semper fidelis exsisteret, et militare servitium, ubi
jussissem, cum centum militibus mihi singulis annis exhiberet.”

Footnote 437

Ib. “Hominium enim jamdudum illi fecerat.”

Footnote 438

Ib. “In tali ergo necessitate pulcrum illi et competens servitium
impendit, dum in castro suo illum triduo protexit et postea salvum ad
sua perduxit.”

Footnote 439

Ord. Vit. 658 A. “Castrum tamen Mortui-maris, in quo inimicum meum
salvavit, illi _jure, ut reor_ [it is curious to see the Conqueror on
his defence], abstuli, sed Guillelmo de Guarennâ, consanguineo ejus,
tironi legitimo, dedi.” All about William of Warren and his family
will be found in Mr. Stapleton’s paper in the Archæological Journal,
iii. 8, 14.

Footnote 440

Stapleton, Arch. Journal, p. 6.

Footnote 441

William of Warren and Roger of Mortemer were both descended from
Herfast, a brother of the Duchess Gunnor. Will. Gem. viii. 37.

Footnote 442

See above, p. 86.

Footnote 443

For the famous answer of John Earl of Warren (a descendant of William
in the female line) to the Commissioners “Quo Warranto” in Edward the
First’s time, see Walter of Hemingburgh, ii. 6.

Footnote 444

Roman de Rou, 10063;

“Cele nuit méisme asez tost
Vint la novele al Duc en l’ost.”

Footnote 445

Benoît gets eloquent on this head, and gives us (35469 et seqq.) a
picture of William at his devotions; “ses mains jointes,” “od lermes
de pieté.”

Footnote 446

Benoît, 35493;

“Logée fu en teu maniere
Par son l’eve d’une riviere:
E sor eus fu grant la faleise.”

Footnote 447

See vol. i. p. 514; ii. p. 199. That the messenger was Ralph of
Toesny is affirmed by William of Jumièges (vii. 24), Orderic (658
B, where of course it is put into William’s own mouth), and Benoît
(35479). William of Poitiers (99) says only “cautè instructum
quemdam,” and Wace (10074) says expressly,

“Fist un home tost envéier,
Ne sai varlet u esquier.”

Footnote 448

See Roman de Rou, 12718.

Footnote 449

See Orderic, 576 B, 687 D. On this Elizabeth or Isabel, see Palgrave,
iv. 249, 259.

Footnote 450

Will. Gem. vii. 25.

Footnote 451

Ord. Vit. 813 D.

Footnote 452

William of Poitiers (99) and Wace (10077), who do not call the
messenger Ralph of Toesny, make him mount a tree. Orderic does not
mention his position, and William of Jumièges (vii. 24) and Benoît
(35406) make him climb the high rock—“in quodam proximo monte,”
according to William—already spoken of. To climb a tree was seemingly
below the dignity of a descendant of Malahulc.

Footnote 453

William of Jumièges, followed by Benoît, makes Ralph say who he is,
and describe the event of the battle at some length—at greater length
of course in Benoît than in William. This, I think, quite takes away
from the startling and spectral effect of the scene in Wace, 10077;

“En un arbre le fist munter,
E tute nuit en haut crier:
‘Franceiz, Franceiz, levez, levez,
Tenez vos veies, trop dormez;
Alez vos amis enterrer,
Ki sunt occiz à Mortemer.’
Li Reis oï ke cil cria
Merveilla sei, mult s’esmaia.”

William of Poitiers says only, “Dux Willelmus nocte intempestâ cautè
instructum quemdam direxit, qui tristem Regi victoriam propiùs castra
ipsius ab alto arboris per singula inclamavit.” Orderic (658 B) is
still shorter; “Per Radulfum de Toëniâ quæ trans Sequanam contigerant
Regi Francorum mandavi.”

Footnote 454

So I understand Wace (10089);

“Endementres k’al Rei parloent,
E de noveles demandoent,
Eis vus la novele venue
E par tute terre espandue,
Ke tut li mielx de lor amiz
Esteit à Mortemer occiz.”

He had just before said (10067);

“C’est une chose, ke novele,
Ki mult est errant et isnele,
E ki bone novele porte
Séurement bute à la porte.”

So Will. Pict. 100. “Famâ referente, quæ tam falsi quam veri nuntia
volat.” Compare Mr. Grote’s remarks and quotations on the φήμη. Hist.
of Greece, v. 260.

Footnote 455

Will. Pict. 99. “Rex attonitus inopinato nuntio, procul omni
cunctatione signo antelucano suos in fugam excitavit; summè
necessarium ratus quàm maximâ celeritate Normanniæ finibus discedere.”

Footnote 456

Plutarch, Moralia, ii. 51 (ed. Tauchnitz) “Πρὸς δὲ τοὺς φέγοντας
αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τῷ δι’ ἀπάτης πολλὰ πράσσειν, ὡς ἀνάξιον τοῦ Ἡρακλέους,
ἔλεγεν [ὁ Λύσανδρος], Ὅπου μὴ ἐφικνεῖται ἡ λεοντῆ, προςραπτέον ἐκεῖ
τὴν ἀλωπεκῆν.”

Footnote 457

See vol. ii. p. 261.

Footnote 458

Ib. p. 279.

Footnote 459

See above, p. 126.

Footnote 460

Will. Pict. 99. “Multa dehinc hostilia utrimque acta sunt, qualia
præter belli conflictum inter tantos hostes fieri solent.”

Footnote 461

See vol. ii. pp. 203–205.

Footnote 462

Will. Gem. vii. 25. “Postea Dux contra Tegulense castrum, quod Rex
illi dudum abstulerat, aliud oppidum non deterius, quod Bretolium
usque hodie vocatur, instaurat.”

Footnote 463

Will. Gem. vii. 25. So Benoît, 35553, who takes the opportunity to
give the life of William Fitz-Osbern at length.

Footnote 464

Roman de Rou, 10133;

“Maiz li herneiz unt tut lessié
A cels ki l’orent gaaingnié.”

Footnote 465

Will. Pict. 99. “Ejus [Regis] vero assensu et quasi dono quodam Dux
jure perpetuo retineret quod Gaufrido Andegavorum Comiti abstulerat,
quodque valeret auferre.” Will. Malms. iii. 233. “Conventum ut ...
Comes erepta vel eripienda Martello jure vendicaret legitimo.”

Footnote 466

See vol. ii. pp. 281–289.

Footnote 467

I see no reason to doubt that the present ruined tower is that taken
by William in 1049.

Footnote 468

See vol. ii. p. 289. The fortification of Ambrières in 1049 is
distinctly asserted in the passage of William of Jumièges there
referred to; but William of Poitiers certainly speaks now as if the
castle had to be built rather than merely to be strengthened.

Footnote 469

Will. Pict. 99. “In ipso conventu principes militiæ suæ jussu
commonuit Dux _intra terminos Martelli Andegavensis_ ad Ambreras
_construendas_ maturè adesse paratos.”

Footnote 470

Ib. “Et quem hujus incœpti diem eis ipse, eumdem Martello per legatos
præfinivit.” The Archdeacon here bursts into a torrent of admiration.
Compare William’s earlier challenge to Geoffrey. See vol. ii. p. 285.

Footnote 471

See below, p. 208 et seqq.

Footnote 472

Will. Pict. 99. “Cui tyrannus Martellus, ut erat elatus animo,
grandia præsumere et loqui solitus, ‘Meum,’ inquit, ‘sicut vilis et
pudendi domini, omninò abnuas dominium, si, patiente me, patrari
videas quod metuis.’”

Footnote 473

Ib. 100. “Die præfinito, Cenomannicum solum ingressus, Normannorum
rector, dum castrum, quod minatus est, erigit.”

Footnote 474

Cf. vol. i. p. 326; vol. ii. p. 398.

Footnote 475

Will. Pict. 100. “Quem [Gaufredum] ubi ampliùs opinione morari
videt, et jam de cibariorum penuriâ plebeii pariter ac proceres
conqueruntur, ne milite minùs prompto in futurum utatur, modò
dimittere statuit, castro viris et alimoniis munito, jubens tamen
ut, quum nuntium ejus acceperint, quantociùs eodem redeant cuncti.”
Compare Harold’s orders in the Welsh war at about the same time, vol.
ii. p. 394.

Footnote 476

Will. Pict. 100. “Exercitûs nostri mox divulgato discessu.”

Footnote 477

Ib. “Willelmo, Pictavorum Comite, Domino suo.” See vol. ii. p. 594.

Footnote 478

See above, p. 138.

Footnote 479

See above, p. 139.

Footnote 480

Will. Pict. 100. “Eudone, Britannorum Comite.” He was however rather
Regent for his nephew. See Art de Vérifier les Dates, ii. 896.

Footnote 481

Will. Pict. u. s. “Missilia, saxa, libriles sudes, item lanceæ
desuper feriunt. Iis plerique interemti cadunt, alii repelluntur.
Sic, audaci molimine cassato, aliud incipiunt. Tentant murum ariete,
qui percussus in virgâ castellanorum frangitur.”

Footnote 482

Ib. “Willelmus, omnis moræ impatiens, evocat exercitum, subventum ire
quam maximè properat.”

Footnote 483

Will. Pict. 100. “Quem postquam inimici, tres adeò nominati Comites,
adequitare percipiunt mirâ celeritate, ne dicam trepidâ fugâ, cum
immanibus exercitibus dilabuntur.”

Footnote 484

Ib. “Victor Gaufredum Meduanensem ... intra exiguum tempus eousque
compulit, ut in remotissimis Normanniæ partibus sibi manus perdomitas
daret, fidelitatem quam satelles domino debet jurans.” William of
Jumièges (vii. 27), followed by Wace (10189) and Benoît (35627),
places here the conquest of Le Mans and the taking of Mayenne. The
source of the confusion is obvious.

Footnote 485

See above, p. 164.

Footnote 486

See vol. ii. p. 286.

Footnote 487

On Roca Mabiliæ or Roche Mabille, see Stapleton, i. lxxiii.

Footnote 488

See above, p. 96.

Footnote 489

See above, p. 104.

Footnote 490

Will. Pict. 101. “Martellus Andegavensis, nondum tot sinistris
casibus fractus, minimè defuit, quantum ullatenùs virium colligere
potuit adducens. Vix enim hujus inimici odium et rabiem Normanniæ
tellus penitus contusa vel excisa satiaret.” So Roman de Rou, 10271;
“Par li cunseil Giffrei Martel.” So Benoît, 35855.

Footnote 491

Roman de Rou, 10272;

“Encuntre aost, el blé novel.”

Footnote 492

Will. Pict. 101. “Per Oximensem comitatum ad fluvium Divam
pervenere.” So Will. Gem. vii. 28; Roman de Rou, 10278; Benoît, 35866.

Footnote 493

Roman de Rou, 10303;

“Li Roiz son ovre apareilla,
Vers Baieues, ço dist, ira,
Béessin tot essillera,
E quant d’iluec repairera,
Par Varaville passera,
Auge è Lievin vastera.”

Footnote 494

Ib. 10289;