Chapter XL: Appendix: NOTE A. p. 3 (12)

“Li Dus out sa gent à Faleise;
Noveles out dont mult li peise,
Tort li fet li Reis, ço li semble,
Ses chevaliers mande et asemble,
Ses castiaz fist tost enforcier,
Fossez parer, murs redrecier.
Li plain païs laira gaster,
S’il ses castiax puet bien garder.
Bien porra, ço dit, recovrer,
Et as plaines terres amender.”

Footnote 495

See above, p. 117.

Footnote 496

Roman de Rou, 10313;

“Encore ert Caem sanz chastel,
N’i aveit fet mur ne quesnel.”

Footnote 497

See vol. i. p. 243.

Footnote 498

Wace alone (Roman de Rou, 10319 et al.) speaks, throughout his
narrative, of a bridge. All the other writers (Will. Pict. 101; Will.
Gem. vii. 28; Will. Malms. iii. 234; Benoît, 35899) speak only of a
ford—“vadum Divæ”—or, as Benoît calls it,

“As guez où la grant mer parfonde
C’estent e espant e sorunde.”

This is plainly one of Benoît’s exaggerations. The spot is perfectly
well marked by the causeway mentioned by Wace (10351), which is still
in use, and leads to the present bridge over the tidal stream. The
two accounts may be easily reconciled, if we suppose that a bridge
was first thrown across between the time of the battle and the time
of Wace, and that Wace naturally described the place as it was in
his own time. Benoît is therefore, for once, more accurate in his
narrative than Wace; but his accuracy is quite accidental; Benoît
simply dressed up the tale as he found it in the Latin writers; Wace,
as ever, used his own powers of local observation.

Footnote 499

Roman de Rou, 10405;

“Munté fu de suz Basteborc,
Vit Varavile è vit Caborc,
Vit les marez, vit les valées
De plusors païs lunges è lées.”

Wace alone mentions the names Varaville and Bastebourg. I visited
the battle-field in May 1868 in company with my friend M. Le Gost of
Caen, and I can, as at Val-ès-Dunes and everywhere else, bear witness
to the accuracy of Wace’s local description.

Footnote 500

Will. Pict. 101. “Nam, dum ad vadum Divæ morarentur, supervenit ipse
alacer cum exiguâ manu virorum felici horâ.”

Footnote 501

Will. Gem. vii. 28. “Quod [vadum] Rege transeunte, media exercitûs
pars substitit, mare eructuante, ob redundationem fluminis non valens
transmeare.” So Benoit, 35904. This explains the “morarentur” of
William of Poitiers, who himself says afterwards (102), “Ne vero jure
sæviens [Willelmi] gladius in adversam ripam insequeretur, rheuma
maris obstabat alveum Divæ insuperabili mole occupantis.”

Footnote 502

Roman de Rou, 10345;

“La véissiez fiere medlée,
Mainte colp de lance è maint d’espée;
Des lances fierent chevaliers,
_Et o les ars traient archiers_.”

Footnote 503

Ib. 10357;

“Mult lor anuie la cauchie,
K’il truvent lunge et empirie.”

Footnote 504

Roman de Rou, 10377;

“Mult véssiez herneiz floter,
Homes plungier et affondrer.”

Cf. Virg. Æn. i. 100;

“Ubi tot Simoeis correpta sub undis
Scuta virôm galeasque et fortia corpora volvit.”

Wace, it must be remembered, conceiving the bridge to have been
there, attributes to its breaking what was really owing to the coming
in of the tide.

Footnote 505

Roman de Rou, 10410;

“Vit sa grant gent ki a duil vait,
Prendre vit les uns è loier,
Li altres vit en mer néier;
Ciax ki neient ne pot secorre,
Ne les prisons ne puet rescorre.”

Footnote 506

Roman de Rou, 10415;

“De mautalent soufle è suspire,
De pesance ne set ke dire;
Mult véissiez sun cors desfrire;
E sun viaire taindre d’ire.
Volentiers, ço dist, retornast
S’il arière passer kuidast,
Si les barnages li loast,
Maiz nus ne loe k’il i past.”

Footnote 507

Will. Gem. vii. 28. “Amicitiam quoque Ducis, consideratâ ejus
probitate, requisivit, et Tegulense castrum, quod dudum abstulerat,
illi tradidit.”

Footnote 508

Ib. “Caussâ corporeæ salutis a Johanne medicorum peritissimo potionem
accepit. Sed, veneno nimiam sitim inferente, jussum archiatri
sprevit et a cubiculario potum accipiens dum medicus abesset, ante
purgationem bibit. Unde nimis infirmatus, eodem die post perceptionem
sacræ eucharistiæ obiit.”

Footnote 509

See vol. i. p. 507.

Footnote 510

Will. Gem. vii. 28. “Mathildem, Juliusclodii Regis Rugorum filiam,
in matrimonio habuit.” So the fragment in Duchèsne, iv. 150. But her
name was Anne, and William of Jumièges has confounded her with a
former wife Matilda. See Duchèsne, iv. 153. Chron. S. Maxent. 1050
(Labbé, ii. 209). “Ainricus Rex Francorum duxit uxorem Scythicam et
Rusam.” On this marriage see more at length Karamsin, Histoire de
Russie, ii. 38. 404.

Footnote 511

Anne, daughter of Rômanos and Theophanô and sister of Basil the
Second, married Vladimir of Russia. See Ducange, Hist. Byz. 144.

Footnote 512

Const. Porph. de Cerem. i. 96, and the commentary of Reiske, vol. ii.
p. 450, ed. Bonn. Finlay, Byz. Emp. i. 238, 272.

Footnote 513

He was crowned at Pentecost 1059. Chron. Rem. ap. Labbé, i. 360, and
the fragment in Duchèsne, iv. 150.

Footnote 514

See above, p. 82.

Footnote 515

Will. Pict. 90. “Monarchia post Franciæ, cum puero monarchâ, ipsius,
consiliosissimi viri, tutelæ, _dictaturæ_, atque administrationi
cessit.” Ord. Vit. 480 D. “Balduino Flandrensium Duci puerum cum
regno ad tutandum commendavit.” Will. Gem. vii. 28. “Philippum
filium suum in regimine Francorum hæredem constituit, et tutelæ
Balduini Flandrensis Satrapæ commendavit.” Will. Malms. ii. 188.
“Defuncto Rege Henrico, qui Philippum parvum reliquerat filium,
regnum Francorum nobiliter aliquantis annis rexit, fideliterque
adulto (nam ejus amitam uxorem habebat) restituit.” Ann. Elnonenses
Minores (Pertz, v. 20), 1061. “Henricus Rex obiit, et Balduinus
Comes Flandriæ, quasi _Interrex_ in regno judicat, salvâ fidelitate
Philippi pueri Regis. Huic verò magnum decus intervenit gloriæ. Nam
Comes Tietbaldus, Andegavensis Comes, et omnes Galliæ optimates,
salvâ fide Philippi Regis, juraverunt fidelitatem et honorem regni.
Quod autem regni erat, sapienter et honestè disponebat.” The
Chronicle of the Counts of Flanders (Corp. Chron. Flandr. i. 86)
adds, to nearly the same account, that it was done “salvâ tamen
fidelitate Philippi pueri, si viveret. Si autem non, ipse Balduinus
Comes Rex existeret, ut pote justus hæres per Athelam uxorem Regis
Henrici sororem.” Ann. Blandinienses (Pertz, v. 26), 1061. “Baldwinus
Marchisus regni Francorum _magistratus_ efficitur.” The variety of
words used to express Baldwin’s functions is remarkable. A regency
was something new.

Footnote 516

Chron. S. Maxent. 1057. “Eodem anno civitas Namnetica Gaufredo Comiti
ab Hoel Comite reddita est, qui non bonâ usus fide auferre eam illi
tentavit.”

Footnote 517

Chron. S. Maxent. 1058. “Willermus, qui et Petrus, cognomento Acer,
adunato exercitu vallavit castrum Salmurum simul et Gaufredum
Martellum inclusit in eo.”

Footnote 518

Ib. “Ubi inhiando dum aptaret ad bellum exercitum, dolore dysenteriæ
morbis percussus reversus est infirmus. Ex quâ infirmitate mortuus
est relinquens terrenum _regnum_.” Directly after we read, “Successit
in _regno_ Gosfredus.” So that “regnum” in the former entry is not a
mere figure of speech, strange as is the application of the word to
the dominions of a Duke of Aquitaine.

Footnote 519

Ib. 1060. “Monachali habitu priùs suscepto ab Airaudo abbate Sancti
Nicolai.” So Chron. And. ap. Labbé, i. 287. Fulk. ap. D’Achery, ii.
233.

Footnote 520

Ord. Vit. 532 B. Chron. S. Maxent. 1060. Gest. Cons. 258.

Footnote 521

See vol. ii. pp. 40, 430, 635–637.

Footnote 522

See vol. ii. pp. 636, 637.

Footnote 523

See above, p. 139.

Footnote 524

Chron. S. Maxent. 1061–1062 (Labbé, ii. 210). The war with Anjou
rose out of the old question about Saintogne. The Spanish expedition
is thus described; “Inde [from Saintes after its surrender by the
Angevins] abiens in Hispaniam cum multis Normannis, Barbastam
civitatem nomini Christiano, cunctis qui in eâ erant priùs perditis,
adquisivit.”

Footnote 525

Gest. Cons. c. 10 (ap. D’Achery, iii. 258). The abbey had hitherto
remained in the patronage of the King, a position quite different
from that of the Norman and Aquitanian Prelates. See vol. ii. p. 209.
This illustrates the inferior position of the Counts of Anjou, as
originally holders under the Duchy of France.

Footnote 526

Gest. Cons. c. 11. p. 259, and Fulk’s own story in p. 238.

Footnote 527

William of Poitiers (102) says of him, as compared with his uncle;
“Nomine proprio idem, probitate absimilis ei, cœlestem regem timere,
et pro comparando externo honore bona actitare cœpit.” Ord. Vit. 532
C. “Goisfredus, qui simplex et tractabilis moribus erat.”

Footnote 528

See vol. ii. p. 169.

Footnote 529

See vol. ii. p. 413.

Footnote 530

Will. Gem. vii. 29. “Tunc quibusdam maledicis vicinos comparesque
suos accusantibus ex invidiâ, Dux Willelmus exasperatus ingenti
furiâ Barones suos, scilicet Rodulfum de Toeniâ, Hugonem de
Grentemaisnilio, et Ernaldum Willelmi Geroiani filium ejecit
de Normanniâ.” Ord. Vit. 481 A. He tells us how the chief men
“cupiditate furente unus alium supplantare conabatur.” He specially
mentions the agency of Roger and Mabel, who “exortâ simultate
gaudebant et blandis adulationibus sibi Ducem alliciebant.” He goes
on to say that “animosus Dux plus æquo iræ frena relaxans præcipuos
milites ... sine probabilibus culpis diu exsulare coegit.”

Footnote 531

See above, p. 159.

Footnote 532

See vol. ii. p. 232.

Footnote 533

Orderic tells this story twice with slight differences. The first
time (464 D) he makes Robert’s death happen while he is besieged by
the Duke; “Pomo venenato, quod conjugi suæ vi rapuerat, comesto post
quinque dies mortuus est.” The second time (478 C) he tells the story
as I have given it in the text, but without any mention of the siege,
and with the important addition “uxore contradicente comedit.” The
important point of course is how far Adelaide, and how far through
her her kinsman the Duke, contemplated the death of Robert or of any
one else.

Footnote 534

Ord. Vit. 481 D.

Footnote 535

Ib. 485 A.

Footnote 536

Orderic tells the tale at length, 488, 489.

Footnote 537

See vol. ii. p. 234. See Will. Gem. vii. 29. Orderic has much to say
about the matter. Some readers may perhaps think that the story, as
told by him in p. 479, hardly bears out his own statement in p. 481
B, that he was “falsò accusatus.” The Duke is said to have designed
his mutilation in some way (“damna membrorum inferre”), on which, at
the advice of Hugh Bishop of Lisieux, he took to flight. I confess to
putting more confidence in the Duke than in the Abbot.

Footnote 538

Will. Gem. vii. 29. “Sine reatu et judicio synodi de Normanniâ
expulit.”

Footnote 539

Ib. “Quia de audaci Geroicorum prosapiâ prodierat.”

Footnote 540

Bessin. Conc. Rot. Prov. 48. Pommeraye, 72. “Ut quotidie serò signi
pulsu ad preces Deo fundendas quisque invitaretur, atque occlusis
foribus domorum ultra vagari ampliùs vetitum admoneretur.” Cf.
Palgrave, iii. 274. The reason given by the commentator is “ut furtis
nocturnis caveretur.” The Fathers of this Synod are overflowing in
their loyalty to their Duke, “qui quantâlibet locorum intercapedine
a se invicem dissiti essent, quasi urbis unius concives sub Principe
suo, non secus ac sub amantissimo patre-familias victuros invicem
spoponderunt.”

Footnote 541

As usual, the Gaulish name of the tribe appears in slightly different
forms in the present names of the city and of the county. The
original name of the city, which does not appear in Cæsar, was
Subdinnum. See Dict. Geog. art. Cenomani.

Footnote 542

Livy, v. 35. Polyb. ii. 17, 32. The Greek form is Γονομάνοι.

Footnote 543

Polyb. ii. 23–24.

Footnote 544

Cæs. Bell. Gall. vii. 75. They appear as “Aulerci Cenomani.” The name
Aulerci is common to them with several other tribes.

Footnote 545

The legend of Saint Julian is given at length in the Acts of the
Bishops of Le Mans, in Mabillon’s Vetera Analecta, iii. 50–59. On
this, and on Cenomannian legend generally, I would refer to “Les
Cenomans Anciens et Modernes” by the Abbé Voisin (Paris and Le Mans
1852). But the good Abbé’s faith is strong and his criticism is weak.

Footnote 546

On the Defensores Civitatum see the legislation in the Code, lib.
i. tit. 55. (From Valentinian and Valens in 365 to Theodosius and
Valentinian in 441.) But a more remarkable mention of the Defensor
occurs in the Veteres Formulæ Andegavenses in Mabillon, Vet. An. iv.
234. I leave the passage in the Latin of King Childebert; “Cum juxta
consuetudinem Andicavis civetate, curia puplica resederet in foro,
ibique vir magnificus illi prosecutor dixit: Rogo te, vir laudabilis
illi Defensor, illi Curator, illi Magister militum, vel reliquum
curia puplica, utique obticis puplicis patere jobeatis, quia habeo
quid apud acta prosevere debiam. Defensor principalis simul et omnis
Curia puplica dixerunt: Patent tibi cotecis puplici, prosequere quæ
optas.” What was law at Angers was not unlikely to be law at Le Mans.

Footnote 547

We shall come in my next volume to the “Conspiratio quam communionem
vocabant” in the days of Bishop Arnold. Vet. Ann. iii. *315.

Footnote 548

See the “Dissertation sur les Incursions Normandes dans Le Maine,” by
M. Lestang (Le Mans 1855).

Footnote 549

Local tradition places no less a person than the famous Roland
among the local heroes. See Voisin, i. 271. This falls in with
his description in Eginhard, Vita Car. c. ix., as “Hruodlandus
Brittannici limitis præfectus.”

Footnote 550

See vol. i. pp. 199, 200.

Footnote 551

Flod. 924. “Nortmanni cum Francis pacem ineunt sacramentis per
Hugonem et Heribertum Comites, Seulfum quoque Archiepiscopum; absente
Rege Rodulfo, ejus tamen consensu, terra illis aucta, Cinomannis et
Baiocæ pacto pacis eis concessæ.” This grant is doubtless alluded to
by William of Poitiers when he says (p. 104), “Nam et olim egit sub
Normannorum Ducum ditione regio Cenomanica.”

Footnote 552

Flod. 924. “Rex [Rodulfus] ... Heriberto denique Peronam, et Hugoni
filio Rotberti Cinomannis dedit.”

Footnote 553

See the note of Pertz, iii. 623, on Richer, iii. 77. The invasion
of Otto (see vol. i. p. 265) and the exploits of Geoffrey (see vol.
ii. pp. 274, 591) are transferred to the reign of Robert, “Robertus
filius Ducis”—a confusion, one would almost think, between Robert the
son of Hugh Capet and the elder Robert the son of Robert the Strong.

Footnote 554

M. Voisin (i. 332 et seq.) makes his Hugh-David reign from 922 to
970, when he is succeeded by Hugh the Second, father of Herbert
Wake-the-Dog. The Art de Vérifier les Dates (ii. 830) seems to know
only one Hugh, who begins to reign 955 “ou environ.” Hugh the father
of Herbert is perfectly well ascertained, the only question is
whether he is the same as the Hugh and the Hugh-David whose charters
are printed by M. Voisin (i. 341). A Count David appears in Robert de
Monte (Pertz, vi. 518) as a rebel against King Robert, in punishment
for which rebellion, “dedit Rex Gaufrido Grisagonella homagium illus,
et ipsam civitatem, et quidquid habebat in episcopatu Cenomannensi.”
This is of course the same story that we have just had before. As the
Counts of the tenth century do not immediately concern my subject,
I do not feel called on to decide between the disagreeing doctors,
ancient or modern.

Footnote 555

He was probably married; at least there was a personage in his
house whom the Biographer of the Bishops (Vet. An. iii. *298),
sarcastically perhaps rather than reverentially, speaks of as
“Episcopissa.” He is also charged with fraudulently suppressing
a college of Canons, in order to enrich his children with their
possessions.

Footnote 556

Vet. An. iii. *297. “Venit ad Burgardum Vindocinensem Comitem,” then
follows the list of the property alienated to the Count, but I do not
find any account of this matter in the life of Burchard in Duchèsne,
iv. 116.

Footnote 557

Ord. Vit. 532 B. Herbert is introduced “post mortem Hugonis patris
sui quem Fulko senior sibi violenter subjugârat.”

Footnote 558

See the story in Will. Gem. v. 10.

Footnote 559

Vet. An. iii. *299. “Sepulto Segenfrido ... domnus Avesgaudus nepos
ipsius sedem episcopalem suscepit.” The elder William of Belesme was
his brother. Like Archbishop Malger (see above, p. 94), he was fond
of hunting, and, as a punishment for his breach of canonical rule, he
had a fall from his horse, which damaged his nose for life. We have
however heard something (see vol. ii. p. 139) of his good works in
the way of building.

Footnote 560

See vol. ii. pp. 230, 231.

Footnote 561

Vet. An. iii. *300. “Constituit castellum, nomine Firmitatem, super
fluvium Idoneæ ut esset ibi in refugium.”

Footnote 562

Ib. “Habuit [comes] Alanum fortissimum Comitem Britannorum sibi in
adjutorium, et venit ad castellum, et obsedit illud. Ex unâ enim
parte vallaverunt illud Britanni, ex alterâ Cenomannici.”

Footnote 563

Fulbert, we are told (Vet. An. u. s.; see vol. i. p. 488), “tunc
temporis sapientiâ et sanctitate inter Galliarum Episcopos, velut
Lucifer inter cetera astra cœli, resplendebat.” Fulbert is to
excommunicate him “auctoritate divinâ, nisi resipisceret.” Fulbert’s
divine authority seems to have reached beyond his own diocese. He
wrote a letter “sale satis conditam,” and afterwards sat in judgement
in person between the Count and the Bishop in the city of Le Mans.
Mabillon seems to identify the letter with the one which is printed
in Duchèsne, iv. 173, denouncing the crimes of “Præcursor Antichristi
Herbertus Comes Cenomanis” and denouncing excommunication against
him. But this letter is addressed to Ebalus, who, in p. 181, appears
as Archbishop, not, as one would have expected, of Tours, but of
Rheims.

Footnote 564

See vol. ii. p. 280. Orderic (532 A) thinks it necessary to apologize
for the name; “Vulgò, sed parum Latine, cognominari _Evigilans-Canem_
pro ingenti probitate promeruit.” Geoffrey’s title of Martel seems
to be the only name of the kind in this generation which is used
familiarly and without scruple.

Footnote 565

Ord. Vit. 532 A. “In eumdem [Fulconem] arma levans nocturnas
expeditiones crebrò agebat, et Andegavenses homines et canes in ipsâ
urbe, vel in munitioribus oppidis terrebat, et horrendis assultibus
pavidos vigilare cogebat.” Yet elsewhere (487 C) he tells us, “Vulgò
_Evigilans-canem_ cognominabatur, propter gravissimas infestationes,
quas à perfidis affinibus suis Andegavensibus incessanter patiebatur.”

Footnote 566

See vol. ii. p. 274.

Footnote 567

See Count Fulk in D’Achery, iii. 233, and Gest. Cons. ib. 353.
Herbert is “miles acerrimus,” and his Cenomannian soldiers deal
“ferocissimos ictus.”

Footnote 568

See vol. ii. pp. 276, 278.

Footnote 569

Will. Pict. 103. “Ut enim alia plurima omittam, novissimè nostrâ
memoriâ Fulco Andegavensis Herbertum Cenomannicum majorem Santonas
illexit, sponsione urbis ipsius. Ibi, vinctum in medio colloquio, ad
pactiones, quas avarè concupierat, carcere ac tormentis coëgit.” So
William of Malmesbury (iii. 235), who seems to think this act the
only stain on the otherwise perfect character of Fulk; “Unum omnino
est quo eum notari audierim, Sanctonas sponsione urbis illectum,
in medio colloquio ab apparitoribus arctari, et quibus placuit
conditionibus irretiri fecit. Cætera sanctus et integer,” &c. The
length of the imprisonment comes from the fragment in Duchèsne, iv.
81; “Tunc Comes Fulco supradictus dolo accersitum secum adduxit
Sanctonas Arbertum nobilissimum Comitem Cenomannis, et primâ
quadragesimæ dominicâ post cœnam nocte intempestâ eum traditione
cepit, et in vinculis secum duxit, tenuitque in carcere biennio. Unde
eripere eum Dominus dignatus est. Sequenti anno propter ipsum scelus
combusta est ipsa civitas [Saintes?] cum sede episcopali, et dein
mansit deserta basilica.”

Footnote 570

Ord. Vit. 487 D, 655 C. See vol. i. p. 584; ii. p. 130.

Footnote 571

Vet. An. iii. *304. “Herbertus Comes, cognomine Bacco, avunculus
Herberti, qui fuit temporibus Avesgaudi episcopi.”

Footnote 572

Ib. “Sedem Avesgaudi avunculi sui gaudenter suscepit.” The succession
to the see of Le Mans had come to follow much the same law as the
succession to the see of Czetinje.

Footnote 573

Herbert Bacco kept him out of the Bishoprick for two years. Vet. An.
u. s.

Footnote 574

Compare the relations of Normandy to the Capetian Kings, vol. i. p.
272.

Footnote 575

See vol. ii. p. 209.

Footnote 576

Vet. An. iii. 305*. “Videns vero Præsul suum episcopatum nec per
Regem nec per seipsum à Baccone posse defendi, petivit quiddam
à, Rege Henrico, quod utinam non petiisset, scilicet ut daret
episcopatum Gaufrido Andegavorum Comiti, solummodò dum viveret, ut
liberiùs à, Comite Cenomannico illum defenderet, illo etenim mortuo
in regiam manum rediret.” The somewhat startling phrase of the grant
of the Bishoprick to the Count of Anjou (even though the Count of
Anjou was an hereditary Canon of Saint Martin’s at Tours) can only
mean the grant of the lay rights and duties of _Advocatio_.

Footnote 577

Ib. 306*. “Consilium iniit cum parochianis et heroibus terræ.”
“Heros” was a favourite word with Orderic, but this biographer seems
to use it as if it were a sort of standing title of the citizens of
Le Mans. Several Spanish cities, I believe,are officially styled
“heroic,” like “fidelis civitas” and the like among ourselves.

Footnote 578

Ord. Vit. 532 B.

Footnote 579

See vol. ii. p. 195. The writer in Vet. An. iii. 306 calls her
“nobilissima femina” and “uxor fortissima.”

Footnote 580

Vet. An. iii. 306*. “Sperans se pro hoc castrum Lit habiturum. Sed
nihil ei profecit, quia illud bene custodierunt milites castellani.”
Yet we had just before read how “Gaufridus castellum Lit igne
cremavit.”

Footnote 581

Labbé and Cossart, Conc. ix. 1042.

Footnote 582

Vet. An. iii. 307*. “Cives verò Cenomannici uxorem Hugonis cum
infantibus plorantem per unam portam projecerunt, et Gaufridum
Comitem gaudentem intrare fecerunt.”

Footnote 583

Ib. “Quum autem audiisset præsul Gervasius in vinculis quæ fecissent
_heroes Cenomannici_ [see last page; it can hardly be satire] vitæ
diffidens, non habuit aliquam spem ultra vivendi; venit Annolit,
castellum Lit reddidit. Dum hæc agerentur, Comes Gaufridus Gervasium
de carcere exire permisit, tali videlicet sacramento, ut quamdiu
ipse Gaufridus adviveret, intra civitatem Cenomannicam Gervasius non
intraret.”

Footnote 584

Ib. “Quum verò videret præsul quod neque in urbem neque in castellum
suum posset intrare, abiit ad Willelmum Normanniæ Comitem, ac
quidquid ei Gaufridus fecit vel quomodò eum tradidit, illi mœrens
rettulit.”

Footnote 585

Chron. Rem. 1059. Labbé, i. 360. See above, p. 178.

Footnote 586

I am here following the Norman accounts; the Angevin version in the
Gesta Consulum is very different. We there read (D’Achery, iii. 258),
“In diebus illis Willelmus Dux Normannorum Herbertum Cenomannicum
Consulem nimis impugnabat, cui Martellus auxiliator et tutor fuit,
et idcirco Willelmus Dux, qui postea Angliâ acquisitâ Rex Anglorum
exstitit, multa à Martello mala perpessus est.”

Footnote 587

This German sojourn is mentioned incidentally by William of Poitiers
(105), where Herbert’s sister, afterwards to be spoken of, is brought
“ex partibus Teutonum.”

Footnote 588

Vet. An. iii. *315. “Erat autem uxor ejusdem Marchisii Gersendis
nomine, filia Herberti Cenomannorum illustrissimi Comitis, qui
vocatus est Evigila-canem: quæ primò quidem Theobaldo Duci Campaniæ
in matrimonium tradita, sed ab eo, repudio interveniente, discedens,
præfati Athonis postmodum fuerat copulata conjugio.” See also Ord.
Vit. 532 B.

Footnote 589

See above, p. 89. Yet a fairer ground of consanguinity than usual
might have been alleged.

Footnote 590

See the life of Albert Azo in Gibbon’s Miscellaneous Works, iii. 409.
We shall hear of him again at Le Mans.

Footnote 591

Ord. Vit. 532 B. “Tertia vero Johanni Domino castri quod Flecchia
dicitur nupsit, quæ marito suo tres liberos, Goisbertum, Heliam et
Enoch peperit.” Helias will hardly come within the limits of my
central history, but he was a memorable man in the days of William
Rufus.

Footnote 592

William of Poitiers calls Margaret the daughter of Herbert (103), but
he afterwards (105) corrects the mistake and calls her “germana.”
It is plain from Orderic (u. s.) that she was the daughter of Hugh
and sister of Herbert. Benoît (35790) erroneously makes her only his
half-sister;

“Herbert aveit une soror
Devers sa mere; esteit Tieise.”

The “Tieise” comes from some misunderstanding of the “Teutonum
partes” in William of Poitiers. William has much to say about her
virtues and early death; “Hæc generosa virgo, nomine Margarita,
insigni specie, decentior fuit omni margaritâ.” This seems to be an
earlier use of the name than I had thought in vol. i. p. 522, as this
Margaret could hardly have been called after the daughter of the
Ætheling Eadward.

Footnote 593

See above, p. 169.

Footnote 594

See vol. ii. p. 180.

Footnote 595

Will. Pict. 103. “Hugo ... Gaufredi tyrannide metuens omnino deleri,
Normanniæ Ducem Willelmum, sub quo tutus foret, supplex adiit,
manibus ei sese dedit, cuncta sua ab eo, ut miles a domino, recepit.”
Ord. Vit. 487 C. “Præfatus nimirum juvenis, post obitum Herberti
senioris patris [it should of course be Hugh] ... consilio matris suæ
se suumque patrimonium fortissimo Duci Normannorum commendaverat.”
This is an excellent example of the process of _commendation_
described in vol. i. p. 129.

Footnote 596

See above, p. 188.

Footnote 597

Will. Pict. 103. “Cunctorum singulariter eum statuens heredem si non
gigneret alium.”

Footnote 598

Ib. “Præterea ut conjunctiùs attingeret tantum virum ipse et
posteritas ipsius Ducis, ei filia [see above, p. 197] petita atque
pacta est.” Ord. Vit. 532 B. “Alia, nomine Margarita, Rodberto
filio Guillelmi Ducis Neustriæ desponsata est.” And again (487 C);
“Margaritam sororem suam Rodberto ejusdem Ducis filio in conjugium
dederat, cum quâ hereditatem suam, comitatum scilicet Cenomanensem,
si sine liberis obiret, concesserat.”

Footnote 599

Will. Pict. 105. “Germanam Hereberti ... nato suo conjugare decrevit
[Willelmus], ut per eam ipse et progeniti ex ipso, jure quod nullâ
controversiâ convelli posset vel infirmari, Hereberti hæreditatem
possiderent sororius et nepotes.”

Footnote 600

Ib. 103. “Ne quærerent alium, præter quem ipse dominum eis,
hæredem sibi, relinqueret. Cui si volentes pareant, leve servitium
toleraturos fore, si vi subacti, forsitan grave.” See vol. ii. p. 169.

Footnote 601

Ord. Vit. 487 D. “Quia Normannicum jugum his quibus imminet
gravissimum est, subire nimis formidabant.”

Footnote 602

Ord. Vit. 487 D. “Walterius ... totum comitatum Cenomanensem
calumniabatur, et ex parte possidebat. Nam ipsam urbem, quæ caput
est provinciæ, Goisfridus de Meduanâ et Hubertus de Sanctâ Susannâ,
aliique potentes in fidelitate Walterii acriter tenebant.” William
of Poitiers says only (104), “At homines malefidi Galterium
Medantinum Comitem, cui soror Hugonis nupserat, receperunt invasorem
desertores.” But he presently mentions Geoffrey of Mayenne. On
Geoffrey, see above, p. 167.

Footnote 603

He was a native of Vendôme, who had been a knight (“miles quidam
primùm”), then a monk of Marmoutiers. He became Prior, and was
“Prior bonus, ædificator nimis.” Geoffrey Martel then removed him to
Angers, and made him Abbot of Saint Sergius and Bacchus, a decaying
monastery, which he restored (“destructum valdéque redactum ad
nihilum, magnum ex novo constituit”). None of his work remains there.
He was then chosen Bishop of Le Mans by the clergy and people under
a _congé d’elire_ and letter missive from Count Geoffrey (“Gaufridus
... congregavit populum terræ suæ et omnem clerum, ut Cenomannensi
ecclesiæ eligerent Episcopum.” Vet. An. iii. *311). It will be
remembered that the Count of Anjou had stepped into the position of
the King with regard to the Bishoprick. See above, p. 193.

Footnote 604

Vet. Ann. iii. 312*. “Quamvis pauperior et humilior antecessoribus
Episcopis fuerit, tamen majora opera exercere tentavit. Quinto
namque ordinationis suæ anno fundamenta matris ecclesiæ ampliora
quam fuerant inchoavit, sed morte inopinâ superveniente perficere
non potuit.” It illustrates the character of Vulgrin that this
is the only event of the year 1063 that the episcopal chronicler
finds to record. The conquest of Maine by William is mentioned only
incidentally in the life of the next Bishop, p. 314*.

Footnote 605

See above, p. 183.

Footnote 606

Ib.

Footnote 607

Will. Pict. 104. “Incendium confestim injicere, aut urbem totam
exscindere, ausos iniqua trucidare, quantùm ingenio abundavit et
viribus, potuisset. Sed hominum sanguini, quamquam nocentissimo,
parcere maluit solita illa temperantia.”

Footnote 608

Ib. “Maluit ... validissimam urbem relinquere incolumem, _caput atque
munimentum terræ_ quam in manu habebat.”

Footnote 609

This seems to be taken for granted throughout the story, and it is
implied in such expressions as that just quoted and others elsewhere.
William of Jumièges, in his shorter account (vii. 27), which, it will
be remembered (see at p. 169), is put out of place, speaks in the
same way; “Ad urbem Cenomannicam per aliquot annos arma convertit ...
Ad postremum victi Cenomanni, jam castellis per cunctum comitatum
subactis, dextras Duci dederant.”

Footnote 610

Will. Pict. 104. “Cenomannici ... anxii trepidique ... accito sæpiùs
Gaufredo, quem præses eorum Galterius dominum sibi ac tutorem
præfecit, prœlio decernere minati sunt nonnumquam, sed ausi numquam.”

Footnote 611

Will. Pict. 104. “Præsidia, ubi res postulavit, imponens.”

Footnote 612

Ib. “Perdomitis tandem castellis jam per totum comitatum subactis,
reddunt civitatem prævalenti.”

Footnote 613

We have seen (see above, p. 201) that Vulgrin began to rebuild the
church in the fifth year of his episcopate, that is this very year
1063. The only question is whether any part of his work still exists.
I will not enlarge on this purely architectural question, but will
simply refer to the account in the Vetera Analecta. The expression in
p. *313 might imply that the next Bishop Arnold destroyed every trace
of what Vulgrin began; but, as (p. 314*) it appears that Arnold’s own
work was confined to the choir and transepts, it is possible that
Vulgrin’s nave (or possibly a still earlier nave) may have survived.
The western portal of the church has a very ancient look.

Footnote 614

William of Poitiers (104) becomes eloquent on the “_joyeuse
entrée_.” Of the ecclesiastical part of the ceremony he tells us,
“Templa summoperè, quemadmodùm processiones, adornata effulgent,
redolent thymiamata, resonant sacra cantica.” So Orderic (488 A),
with a curious confusion between Bishop Vulgrin and his successor;
“Cœnomannicam urbem, civibus ultro sese dedentibus, cum ingenti
tripudio recepit, eique Domnus Ernaldus, ejusdem urbis Præsul
cum clericis et monachis revestitis textus crucesque ferentibus
honorabiliter obviam processit.” Of the laity William tells us,
“Studium est summis, mediis, infimis, placare infensum. Occurrunt,
clamant dominum suum, procidunt et inclinantur ejus dignitati;
fingunt hilares vultus, lætas voces, plausus congratulantes.”

Footnote 615

See the story of Bishop Hildebert, Vet. An. iii. 308.

Footnote 616

The building of the castle seems implied in Will. Pict. 104–105;
“Victori sufficiens pœna fuit perdomitos in potestatem suam venisse,
et urbis firmamentum suâ in reliquum custodiâ occupari.” So Roman de
Rou, 10211;

“Et il fist cax è pierre atraire;
Illoec fist une tur faire.”

This castle, “regia turris,” must be distinguished from the buildings
spoken of by William of Jumièges (vii. 27) and Benoît (35735); “In
quorum medio ad domandum eorum insolentiam, duo municipia (“deus
chasteaus” in Benoît) in Ponte Barbato, seu Barbello, stabilivit
suisque militibus custodienda commisit.” Orderic (773 A) expressly
distinguishes them; “Regia turris [elsewhere “turris principalis,
turris Cenomannica”], et Mons-Barbatus atque Barbatulus, Regi
[Guillelmo Rufo] subjiciuntur, et meritò, quia à patre ejus condita
noscuntur.”

Footnote 617

The conquest of Maine is recorded in a Latin entry in our own
Peterborough Chronicle, 1062; “Hoc anno subjugata est Cynomannia
Comiti Normanniæ Willielmo.”

Footnote 618

Will. Pict. 105. “Voluntariè Gualterus deditioni consensit, ne,
invasa protegens, hæreditaria amitteret. Clades a Normannis illata
vicinitati Medanti et Calvimontis metum ei faciebat de majori.”

Footnote 619

The direct charge against William is found only, as far as I
know, in the harangue which Orderic puts into the mouths of the
conspirators at the bride-ale of 1076 (534 B); “Gualterium Pontesii
Comitem, Eduardi Regis nepotem, cum Biotâ uxore suâ, Falesiæ
hospitavit, et nefariâ potione simul ambos unâ nocte peremit.” This
one would suppose to be after the surrender of Le Mans. But in the
account which Orderic elsewhere gives in his own person, William
is not distinctly accused, and the death of Walter and Biota is
made to happen while the war is going on (487 D); “Dum magnanimus
Dux frequenti expeditione rebelles impeteret ... prædictus Comes
Walterius et Biota conjux ejus per inimicorum machinamenta simul,
ut ferunt, letali veneno fraudulenter infecti obierunt. Quibus
defunctis, securior Dux ... rebelles expetiit.” But it is plain
from the narrative of William of Poitiers that Walter survived the
surrender of Le Mans, and it is not likely that he would be at
Falaise while the war was going on. This contradiction throws a good
deal of doubt on the whole story. See vol. ii. pp. 413–414. No one,
as far as I know, ever charged William with the death of Herbert, who
died even more opportunely for him than Walter.

Footnote 620

Will. Pict. 106. “Per legatos iterum iterumque monitus ad
obsequendum, mentem obstinatam non omisit.” William waxes very
eloquent in abuse of the “versutus homo, Gaufredus Meduanensis.” At
this distance of time he looks very like a loyal vassal, perhaps even
like a true patriot.

Footnote 621

Orderic (488 A) makes William take Ambrières, for whose capture we
have already had two dates, on the road; “Ambreras oppidum ejus
[Gaufredi] cepit,” &c.

Footnote 622

The river side, according to William of Poitiers (106), “nullâ vi,
nullo ingenio vel arte humanâ, attentari potest.” The land side was
not quite so impossible; “Alteri vero [lateri] munimenta lapidea,
pariterque difficillimus aditus propugnant.”

Footnote 623

See vol. ii. p. 206.

Footnote 624

See vol. ii. p. 286.

Footnote 625

Will. Pict. 106. “Hujus castri latus alterum ... alluitur scopuloso
rapidoque flumine, nam supra Meduanæ ripam in præruptâ montis rupe
situm est.”

Footnote 626

At Angers the cathedral crowns the hill, the castle commands the
river; the great monastery of the Holy Trinity lies on the other
side, in what was originally a mere suburb. But neither Angers nor Le
Mans has the steep double slope of Mayenne.

Footnote 627

See vol. ii. p. 264.

Footnote 628

Will. Pict. 106. “Gladiis, lanceis, missilibus, nihil geritur, nihil
gerendum speratur. Item neque ariete, neque tormento cæterisve
instrumentis bellicis. Siquidem locus omnino machinamentis importunus
erat.”

Footnote 629

Ib. “Equitum ac peditum copias tantas incassum fatigari cuncti ferè
opinantur, multi conqueruntur, nullâ spe animos eorum erigente, nisi
fortè morâ annuâ vel ampliore fames expugnet.”

Footnote 630

Ib. “En sollerti consilio ipsius [Willelmi] injecti ignes castrum
corripiunt.”

Footnote 631

Ib. 107. “Citissimè diffunduntur [ignes] more suo, sævius omni ferro
quæque obvia vastantes.”

Footnote 632

Ib. “Quae, sicut alibi capta plerumque grandia, militum potiùs quam
sua esse voluit continentissimus ac liberalissimus princeps.”

Footnote 633

William of Jumièges, as I have already said (see above, p. 169),
puts the taking of Mayenne, as a sequel to that of Le Mans, out
of place. He also makes the fire accidental (vii. 27); “Meduanum
verò, castellum cujusdam opulenti militis nomine Goiffredi, adhuc
restiterat, quod Dux exercitibus applicitis aliquamdiù oppugnans
cepit, igneque injecto per duos pueros, qui clam ad ludendum cum
oppidanis infantibus intraverant, combussit.” Wace (10250) says, “Li
bores esprit et aluma.” Ord. Vit. 488 A. “Meduanam post diutinam
obsidionem combussit.”

Footnote 634

I infer this, not only from the absence of any mention of his name
during the siege, and from the unlikelihood that such a man would
have yielded to what seems to have been a mere panic, but from the
expressions of William of Poitiers a little before (106); “Fuga,
astutia, validæque munitiones non modicum fiduciæ ministraverunt.
Statuit ergo prudentia repudiati domini latibulum carissimum
abalienare ei castrum Meduanum, æstimans multò satius ac dignius hâc
pœnâ ferire, quam fugitantem persequi, et victoriam levem ex eo capto
insignibus titulis addere.”

Footnote 635

See Vet. An. iii. *315; Ord. Vit. 706 C, 707 A, 771 D.

Footnote 636

Will. Pict. 107. “Restauratis quæ flamma corruperat, præsidioque
providenter disposito.” So Will. Gem. vii. 27. “Quod iterum
restauravit et custodibus suis mancipavit.” So Benoît, 35770. But
Wace (10253) says,

“_Lung tems aprez_ quant son leu vit
Le restora sainz cuntredit.
Gardes i mist ki l’atornerent,
Ki paiz tindrent e paiz garderent.”

Footnote 637

Will. Pict, u. s. “Insolitum triumphum, quasi de naturâ superatâ,
domum revexit cum immenso gaudio exercitûs.”

Footnote 638

Ord. Vit. 488 A. “Quo superato, penè omnes illius complices et ad
rebellandum fautores terrore curvati sunt, et Willelmum Principem,
quem divina manus protegebat, timere eique obsecundare coacti sunt.”

Footnote 639

Vet. An. iii. 314*. “Willelmus Princeps Normanorum ... Cenomannensem
comitatum, exstinctis atque omninò deletis ejusdem comitatûs
hæredibus, adquisierat.” Is this meant as a charge against William?
If so, it extends beyond Walter and Biota, and seems to prove too
much.

Footnote 640

Will. Pict. 105. “Quoniam pueri ætas nondum fuit matura conjugio
[Robert must have been four years younger than Margaret, whose father
died in 1051, two years before William’s marriage], in locis tutis
illam, prope nubilem, magno cum honore custodiri fecit, nobilium
atque sapientium virorum ac matronarum curæ commissam.” Orderic
(488 A) says she was entrusted “Stigaudo potenti viro de mansione
Odonis.” Compare the entrusting of William’s own daughter to Roger of
Beaumont; Orderic, 573 D.

Footnote 641

Ord. Vit. u. s. “Priusquam nubiles annos attingeret seculi ludibriis
erepta feliciter obiit.”

Footnote 642

Will. Pict. u. s. He enlarges on this at length.

Footnote 643

Will. Pict. u. s.

Footnote 644

Will. Pict. and Ord. Vit. u. s.

Footnote 645

See vol. ii. pp. 415, 420.

Footnote 646

See vol. ii. pp. 475, 476, 634.

Footnote 647

See vol. ii. p. 299 et seqq.

Footnote 648

See vol. ii. pp. 303, 421.

Footnote 649

See vol. ii. pp. 367 et seqq., 422.

Footnote 650

See Appendix R.

Footnote 651

See Appendix R.

Footnote 652

See vol. ii. pp. 537, 543.

Footnote 653

See vol. ii. p. 329, and cf. pp. 147, 149, 580.

Footnote 654

See vol. ii. p. 335.

Footnote 655

See Appendix R.

Footnote 656

See Appendices R. and S.

Footnote 657

Bayeux Tapestry, pl. 1.

Footnote 658

So Eadmer (4) makes him go “cum ditioribus et honestioribus hominibus
suis [his own Thegns or personal _Comitatus_], auro et argento
vesteque pretiosâ nobiliter instructis.”

Footnote 659

See vol. ii. p. 151.

Footnote 660

Tapestry, pl. 1. It is singular however that, though a large part
of Bosham Church is as old as Harold’s time, or older, the picture
in the Tapestry is in no way like it—or indeed like any other human
erection.

Footnote 661

Tapestry, pl. 1.

Footnote 662

See above, p. 157.

Footnote 663

Will. Pict. 108. “Docuit enim avaritiæ calliditas Galliarum quasdam
nationes exsecrandam consuetudinem, barbaram, et longissimè ab omni
æquitate Christianâ alienam. Illaqueant potentes aut locupletes:
trusos in ergastula afficiunt contumeliis, tormentis. Sic variâ
miseriâ prope ad necem usque contritos ejiciunt sæpissimè venditos
magno.” So Will. Malms. ii. 228. “Barbarum et effrænatum morem
regionis esse ut qui evaserant in mari naufragium in terrâ invenirent
periculum.”

Footnote 664

I infer as much from the use of the word “illaqueant” in the last
quotation from William of Poitiers.

Footnote 665

Roman de Rou, 10765 et seqq. The sums of money are thus given (10776);

“Doint li vint livres solement,
Il l’en fera gaaigner cent,
Kar tel prison li liverra,
Ki cent livres u plus donra.”

Footnote 666

Bayeux Tapestry, plate 2. “Hic apprehendit Wido Haroldum.” Benoît
de Ste. Maure (36540) adds the odd comment, that those who were
seized in this fashion might have wished themselves in Sicily; “Mieuz
vousissent estre en Sezile.” Yet, when Benoît wrote, Sicily was a
settled Norman monarchy.

Footnote 667

So at least says William of Malmesbury (ii. 228); “Manus manicis,
pedes compedibus, præbuere.”

Footnote 668

This is quite plain from the Tapestry, plate 2. “Duxit eum ad Belrem
et ibi eum tenuit.” Wace (10784) says, “A Abevile l’ont mené,” and
makes Guy take him to Beaurain only after the news has reached
William (v. 10798);

“A Belrem le fist envéier
Por fere del Duc esluingnier.”

This I conceive to arise from a misconception of the words of William
of Jumièges, vii. 31; “In manus Widonis Abbatisvillæ Comitis incidit.
Quem idem Comes captum cum suis confestim in custodiâ trusit.” But
this does not imply that Abbeville was the place of imprisonment.
William of Poitiers, William of Malmesbury, and Benoît do not mention
any particular place. Anyhow it was not Saint Valery. See below,
Chapter xv. § 2.

Footnote 669

Roman de Rou, 10785;

“E Heraut a par un privé
En Normendie el Duc mandé.”

Eadmer (5) says, “Constrictus igitur Haraldus quemlibet ex vulgo,
promissâ mercede illectum, clam ad Comitem Normanniæ dirigit;” but
that the messenger was an Englishman appears from his moustache
in the Tapestry, plate 3. “Hic venit nuntius ad Wilgelmum Ducem.”
William of Malmesbury, ii. 228, gives another turn to the message, of
which I shall have to speak elsewhere. One expression is very odd;
“Si pecuniis exuenda captivitas esset, libens daret Willelmo Comiti,
non _semiviro_ Guidoni.” I do not know the meaning of this strange
epithet and spondaic cadence.

Footnote 670

Wace understood this. Roman de Rou, 10800;

“Li Dus pensa s’il le teneit,
K’il en fereit bien son espleit.”

Footnote 671

Will. Pict. 108. “Properè missis legatis.” The speed at which
they ride in the Tapestry (pl. 3) is beyond anything of the kind
represented in the whole story, except in the very thick of the
battle.

Footnote 672

Ib. “Precatu simul ac minis extortum.” William of Jumièges (vii. 31)
puts this still more strongly; “Dux autem ut hoc comperit, missis
legatis violenter illum extorsit.” But the other narratives do not
bear this out.

Eadmer (5) makes two messages, the latter stronger than the former;
“Ille [Willelmus] festinatò per nuncios mandat Domino Pontivi,
Haraldum cum suis ab omni calumniâ liberum sibi quantociùs mitti,
si pristinâ amicitiâ suo amodò vellet ex more potiri. Sed quum ille
hominem dimittere nollet, iterum in mandato accepit se necessariò
Haraldum missurum, alioquin certissimè sciret Willelmum Normanniæ
Ducem armatum pro eo Pontivum iturum.”

Footnote 673

Eadmer however makes him still plunder his captives; “Mittit igitur
virum cum sociis, primò tamen eis quæ meliora detulerant simul
ablatis.”

Footnote 674

See above, p. 116. That Eu was the place appears from Will. Pict.
108. “Ipse [Guido] adducens apud Aucense castrum sibi præsentavit.”
So Benoît, 36572. “Li amena à Ou tot quite.”

Footnote 675

Will. Pict. 108. “Guidoni bene merito, qui, nec pretio nec violentiâ
compulsus, virum quem torquere, necare, vendere potuisset pro libitu
ipse ... sibi præsentavit, grates rettulit condignas, terras tradidit
amplas ac multum opimas, addidit insuper in pecuniis maxima dona.”
The position of the lands comes from the Roman de Rou, 10806;

“E li Dus li a fet aveir
Lez l’ewe d’Alne un bel maneir.”

Footnote 676

“Harold Dux Anglorum” in the Tapestry, pl. 1. He bears the same title
in the Saxon Annalist (Pertz, vi. 764). See vol. i. pp. 289, 470; cf.
179, and ii. 635.

Footnote 677

In the Tapestry, plate 4, we merely read, “Hic Dux Wilgelm cum
Haroldo venit ad palatium suum.” It is here that the mysterious “unus
clericus et Ælfgyva” (see Appendix S.) are seen standing at the door
of the Palace. William of Poitiers (108) says more distinctly, “In
urbem sui principatûs caput Rothomagum introduxit.” So Benoît, 36577;

“Tot dreit à Roem la citè
L’en amena li Dux od sei.”

Footnote 678

Roman de Rou, 10810;

“A maint rice torneiement
Le fit aler mult noblement.”

Footnote 679

Snorro (Johnston, 190; Laing, iii. 76). “Sat Haralldr í hássæti à
adra hönd Jarli, enn til annarar handar kona Jarls, hon var hverri
kono frídari, er menn höfdo sed ... Jarl geck optazt snemma at sofa,
enn Haralldr sat lengi à kvölldom, oc taladi vid kono Jarls.” This
is an exact picture of old Norwegian, if not of Norman life. See
Keyser’s Private Life of the Old Northmen, pp. 72, 143; “The guests
... were shown to the beds appointed for them. But even after they
had retired for the night, they often had to quaff off a horn or
two, which the hostess, or one of the women of the house, would
bring them, while she seated herself the while by their bed-side and
entertained them by her conversation.”

Footnote 680

See Appendix R.

Footnote 681

See Appendix F.

Footnote 682

Namely that of William of Poitiers. See Appendix R.

Footnote 683

Harold (see vol. ii. p. 555) could hardly have been born before 1021,
but, as he became Earl in 1045 (see vol. ii. pp. 36, 37, 43), he is
not likely to have been born many years later. William (see vol. ii.
pp. 585–587) was born in 1027 or 1028.

Footnote 684

See Appendix O.

Footnote 685

See Appendix R.

Footnote 686

William of Poitiers (109), who puts the knighthood before the Breton
expedition, seems to extend it to Harold’s followers; “Qui venerant
cum ipso”—possibly Wulfnoth and Hakon—“armis _militaribus_ et
equis delectissimis instructos secum in bellum Britannicum duxit.”
“Militaribus” is doubtless to be taken in the technical sense.
The Tapestry (pl. 6) places the knighthood after the Breton war;
“Hic Willelm dedit Haroldo arma.” Wace follows William of Poitiers
(10812). Mr. Planché (Arch. Ass. June 1867, p. 145) says that Wace
lays the scene at Avranches. He probably refers to the Roman de Rou,
13723, but the knighthood is not there spoken of.

Footnote 687

William of Malmesbury (iii. 236) attributes the opposite motive to
William. He takes Harold, “volens ejus manum explorare; simul et
strictiori consilio, apparatum ostentans suum, conspicaturo quantùm
præstaret Anglicis bipennibus ensis Normannicus.” If Harold was set
to fight on horseback with his Danish axe in his hand, it might very
likely be so.

Footnote 688

The fullest accounts are in William of Poitiers (109) and the
Tapestry (pll. 4–6), but it is not easy to reconcile the two. The
other accounts are very short. Wace (10814) makes Harold accompany
William in three or four expeditions;

“Ne sai de veir treiz feiz u quatre,
Quant as Bretuns se dut combatre.”

This, as we shall see, is quite possible. See Appendix T.

Footnote 689

See vol. ii. p. 193.

Footnote 690

Conan was the grandson of Hadwisa, daughter of Richard the Fearless.
See vol. i. p. 508.

Footnote 691

See vol. ii. p. 181; cf. i. pp. 518, 526. William of Poitiers (109)
is inclined to dwell on these earlier wars, rather than on the
later guardianship of Alan. His son Conan is “paternæ rebellionis
renovator.”

Footnote 692

See above, p. 168.

Footnote 693

Will. Pict. 109. “Is [Conanus] in virum ferocissimum adultus, a
tutelâ diu toleratâ liber, capto Eudone patruo suo, atque vinculis
ergastularibus mancipato, provinciæ, quam dono paterno accepit, magnâ
cum truculentiâ dominari cœpit.” William of Malmesbury (iii. 236)
looks on him with more favour; “Viridis juventâ et præcellens robore,
Eudonem patruum vinxerat, multa egregia fecerat.”

Footnote 694

See Art de Vérifier les Dates, ii. 896.

Footnote 695

William of Poitiers goes back to the grant of Charles the Simple, who
gave Britanny to Rolf “in servitium perpetuum.” (See vol. i. p. 191.)
But he allows the constant revolts of the Breton Counts; “Comites
Britannici e jugo Normannicæ dominationis cervicem omnino solvere
numquam valuerunt, etsi multoties id conati totâ vi obluctando.” So
William of Malmesbury (iii. 236) speaks of William as “Britanniam ut
hæreditarium solum calumnians.”

Footnote 696

Will. Pict. 111. See below, p. 238.

Footnote 697

See vol. ii. p. 592.

Footnote 698

Will. Pict. 110. Britanny is “regio longè latèque diffusa, milite,
magis quam credibile sit, referta.” He goes on to say; “Partibus
e quidem in illis miles unus quinquaginta genuerat, sortitus more
barbaro denas aut ampliùs uxores; quod de Mauris veteribus refertur,
legis divinæ atque pudici ritûs ignaris. Ad hoc populositas ipsa
armis et equis maximè, arvorum culturæ aut morum minimè student.”
The word “denas” seems to show that this patriarchal state of things
was not confined to one particular knight. One hardly sees why the
ancient Moors should have been picked out as the horrid example,
rather than the modern Saracens or any other polygamous people.

The Chronicle of St. Michael’s Mount (Labbé, i. 350), under the year
1056, says of Conan’s uncle, “Hic Eudo multos habuit filios.” Was he
the “miles” whom William of Poitiers had specially in his eye?

Footnote 699

Will. Pict. 110. “Uberrimo lacte, parcissimo pane, sese transigunt.
Pinguia pabula gignunt pecoribus loca vasta et fermè nescia segetum.”

Footnote 700

Ib. “Prœlia cum ardenti alacritate ineunt: dum prœliantur, furibundi
sæviunt. Pellere soliti, difficilè cedunt.”

Footnote 701

Ib. “Quum vacant a bello, rapinis, latrociniis, cædibus domesticis,
aluntur sive exercentur.”

Footnote 702

See above, p. 166, and vol. ii. 284.

Footnote 703

Will. Pict. 109. “Conani in tantum jam temeritas crevit, ut quo die
terminos Normanniæ aggrederetur denuntiare non formidaret.” This sort
of bravado was chivalrous heroism in William; it is mere rashness and
insolence in Conan.

Footnote 704

Ib. “Dominus ejus [Conani] antiquo jure, sicuti Normannorum,
Willelmus, castellum quod Sancti Jacobi appellatum est interim
opposuit in confinio, ne famelici prædones ecclesiis inermibus, aut
ultimo terræ suæ vulgo, excursionibus latrocinantibus nocerent.”
The castle and town are still always known as Saint-James, never as
Saint-Jaques.

Footnote 705

Will. Pict. 110. “Nihili pendens terribilitatem hanc Dux Willelmus,
in quem diem adventum Conani meminit denuntiatum, eo ipse intra fines
ejus occurrit.”

Footnote 706

I presume that the “Ruallus” of William of Poitiers represents the
name Rhiwallon.

Footnote 707

See vol. ii. p. 476.

Footnote 708

See vol. i. p. 240. For the special mention of Dol, see Flodoard, 944.

Footnote 709

See vol. i. p. 510.

Footnote 710

Will. Pict. 110. Conan is engaged in “castri terræ suæ Doli
oppugnatione.”

Footnote 711

Unless possibly a larger proportion of beggars and of way-side
crosses than is usual in Normandy.

Footnote 712

The time of the invasion was autumn. “Stabant in aristis fruges
immaturæ.” They missed therefore the snowy bloom of a Breton, Norman,
or West-Saxon land in the time of spring. Snorro also (see above, p.
227) makes Harold’s visit in the autumn, but he makes him stay all
the winter.

Footnote 713

See vol. i. p. 330.

Footnote 714

Bayeux Tapestry, pll. 4, 5. “Hic Willelm Dux et exercitus ejus
venerunt ad Montem Michaelis.”

Footnote 715

Bayeux Tapestry, pl. 5. “Hic Harold Dux trahebat eos de arenâ.” See
vol. ii. p. 38.

Footnote 716

See vol. i. p. 526.

Footnote 717

Will. Pict. 110. “Sistere tentat Conanum castri præses Ruallus,
revocat illudens, morari biduum precatur, sufficiens huic moræ
stippendium ab ipso sumpturum.”

Footnote 718

Ib. “Homo miserè exterritus, pavorem potiùs audiens, cursu instituto
longiùs profugit.” So the Tapestry, pl. 5; “Venerunt ad Dol et Conan
fugâ vertit.” On the mention of Rennes, see Appendix T.

Footnote 719

Will. Pict. 111. “Nec penes agricolas interesse, Normannico an
Britannico exercitu consumpti anni laborem amiserint.”

Footnote 720

Ib. “Sibi modo ad famam valuisse, non ad conservationem rerum, Conani
depulsionem.”

Footnote 721

Will. Pict. 110, 111. “Menstruâ penuriâ fatigatum exercitum
reducebat.” The Archdeacon’s minute setting forth of the workings of
the Duke’s mind is too long to copy.

Footnote 722

Ib. 111. “Excedenti jam Britanniæ limitem repente indicatur Gaufredum
Andegavensem cum ingentibus copiis Conano fuisse conjunctum, et ambos
postero die prœliatum affuturos.”

Footnote 723

See Appendix T.

Footnote 724

See vol. ii. pp. 220, 233.

Footnote 725

Bayeux Tapestry, pl. 5.

Footnote 726

Bayeux Tapestry, pl. 5.

Footnote 727

Ib. pl. 6. Cf. the legend of the death of Malcolm at Alnwick. See
Robertson, i. 147.

Footnote 728

See the Angevin Chronicle in Labbé, i. 276.

Footnote 729

Bayeux Tapestry, pl. 6.

Footnote 730

Cf. vol. i. pp. 436, 585; ii. 384.

Footnote 731

Bayeux Tapestry, pl. 6.

Footnote 732

See above, p. 227.

Footnote 733

Ord. Vit. 492 A. “Omnia quæ ab illo requisita fuerant super
sanctissimas reliquias juraverat.”

Footnote 734

Wace, 10828. See Appendix R.

Footnote 735

Ib. 10838;

“Quant Heraut suz sa main tendi,
La main trembla, la char frémi.”

Footnote 736

Ib. 10858;

“Heraut forment s’espoanta
Des relikes k’il li monstra.”

Footnote 737

See Appendix R.

Footnote 738

See vol. ii. p. 300.

Footnote 739

See Appendix F.

Footnote 740

See vol. ii. pp. 431, 434.

Footnote 741

So say most of the accounts. See Appendix R.

Footnote 742

Will. Malms, iii. 238. “Liberatum se sacramento asserens, quod filia
ejus quam desponderat citrà nubiles annos obierat.”

Footnote 743

See vol. ii. pp. 43, 494.

Footnote 744

The apology put into Harold’s mouth by William of Malmesbury (iii.
238) is that he was “necessitate temporis coactus.” Wace (11965) puts
it more clearly still. Harold’s Biographer (Chron. Ang. Norm. ii.
187) argues the point at length. See Appendix U.

Footnote 745

See Appendix R.

Footnote 746

Compare the homage done by Richard the Fearless to Hugh the Great on
promising to marry his daughter. See vol. i. p. 248.

Footnote 747

See Appendix R.

Footnote 748

See above, p. 157.

Footnote 749

See vol. ii. pp. 365, 384, 385, 460.

Footnote 750

See the speech of Philip, Lord Wharton, on the Abjuration Bill of
1690. Macaulay, iii. 574.

Footnote 751

See the stories of the fidelity of Geroy and his son William to their
several feudal lords, vol. ii. pp. 230–232. On the other hand it is
constantly made an aggravation of the imprisonment of William of
Aquitaine by Geoffrey Martel, that it was a wrong done against his
lord. See vol. ii. p. 594. So the Peterborough Chronicle (1087) says
of the last expedition of William himself, that he “hergode uppan his
agenne hlaford Philippe þam cynge.”

Footnote 752

The authorities for this Chapter are essentially the same as those
for the last.

Footnote 753

Will. Pict. 109. “Non enim in longum sperabatur Edwardi ægrotantis
vita.”

Footnote 754

William of Poitiers (145–146) gets very eloquent on this head; I have
quoted the passage in Appendix G.

Footnote 755

The suddenness of the news is marked by William of Poitiers (121);
“Verus rumor insperatò venit Anglicam terram Rege Edwardo orbatam
esse et ejus coronâ Heraldum ornatum.”

Footnote 756

See above, p. 52, and vol. ii. pp. 336, 346, 358.

Footnote 757

In the Tapestry (pl. 8) we see the ship; “Hic navis Anglica venit
in terram Willelmi Ducis.” See Bruce, p. 87. The language of Wace
(10991) seems to imply a special messenger;

... “Un Serjant
Ki d’Engleterre vint errant,
Al Duc vint dreit.”

Footnote 758

Roman de Rou, 10983.

Footnote 759

See Prevost’s note, ii. 120.

Footnote 760

Ib. 10989;

“Mult aveit od li chevaliers
E dameisels et esquiers.”

On “dameisels,” “domicelli,” a diminutive of “dominus,” which now
survives both in French and English in the feminine only, see Ducange
in voc. Benoît (36640) applies the name, in the form “danzel,” to
Wulfnoth. In the pretended Laws of Eadward, it translates “Æðeling,”
with the comment, “Nos de pluribus, quia filios baronum vocamus
domicellos, Angli autem nullum præter filios Regum vocant” (Schmid,
516).

Footnote 761