makers of history william the conqueror by jacob abbott with engravings new york and london harper & brothers publishers 1902 entered, according to act of congress, in the year one thousand eight hundred and forty-nine, by harper & brothers, in the clerk's office of the district court of the southern district of new york. copyright, 1877, by jacob abbott. preface. in selecting the subjects for the successive volumes of this series, it has been the object of the author to look for the names of those great personages whose histories constitute useful, and not merely entertaining, knowledge. there are certain names which are familiar, as names, to all mankind; and every person who seeks for any degree of mental cultivation, feels desirous of informing himself of the leading outlines of their history, that he may know, in brief, what it was in their characters or their doings which has given them so widely-extended a fame. this knowledge, which it seems incumbent on every one to obtain in respect to such personages as hannibal, alexander, cæsar, cleopatra, darius, xerxes, alfred, william the conqueror, queen elizabeth, and mary queen of scots, it is the design and object of these volumes to communicate, in a faithful, and, at the same time, if possible, in an attractive manner. consequently, great historical names alone are selected; and it has been the writer's aim to present the prominent and leading traits in their characters, and all the important events in their lives, in a bold and free manner, and yet in the plain and simple language which is so obviously required in works which aim at permanent and practical usefulness. contents. chapter page i. normandy 13 ii. birth of william 31 iii. the accession 51 iv. william's reign in normandy 72 v. the marriage 96 vi. the lady emma 119 vii. king harold 142 viii. preparations for the invasion 164 ix. crossing the channel 189 x. the battle of hastings 212 xi. prince robert's rebellion 242 xii. the conclusion 265 engravings. page map--the situation of normandy 14 william and arlotte 40 william's escape 77 the bayeux tapestry 102 the rescue 127 harold's interview with edward 147 william receiving tostig's tidings 166 map--normandy 190 the norwegians at scarborough 218 william's horse stepping on the embers 281 william the conqueror. chapter i. normandy. a.d. 870-912 the norman conquest.--claim of william to the throne.--the right of the strongest.--map of normandy.--the english channel.--nature of the french coast.--nature of the english coast.--northmen and danes.--character of the northmen.--their descendants.--the dukes of normandy.--the first duke, rollo.--history of rollo.--his rendezvous on the scottish coast.--expedition of rollo.--his descent upon flanders.--difficulties encountered.--rollo passes the straits of dover.--charles the simple.--defeated by rollo.--treaty of peace.--its conditions.--the three ceremonies.--rollo's pride.--kissing the king's foot.--the baptism and marriage.--rollo's peaceful and prosperous reign.--description of normandy.--scenery.--hamlets.--chateaux.--peasantry.--public roads.--rouen.--its situation.--the port of rouen.--its name of le havre de grace.--intermingling of races.--superiority of the norman stock. one of those great events in english history, which occur at distant intervals, and form, respectively, a sort of bound or landmark, to which all other events, preceding or following them for centuries, are referred, is what is called the norman conquest. the norman conquest was, in fact, the accession of william, duke of normandy, to the english throne. this accession was not altogether a matter of military force, for william claimed a _right_ to the throne, which, if not altogether perfect, was, as he maintained, at any rate superior to that of the prince against whom he contended. the rightfulness of his claim was, however, a matter of little consequence, except so far as the moral influence of it aided him in gaining possession. the right to rule was, in those days, rather more openly and nakedly, though not much more really, than it is now, the right of the strongest. normandy, william's native land, is a very rich and beautiful province in the north of france. the following map shows its situation: [illustration: map of england and part of france, showing the situation of normandy.] it lies, as will be seen upon the map, on the coast of france, adjoining the english channel. the channel is here irregular in form, but may be, perhaps, on the average, one hundred miles wide. the line of coast on the southern side of the channel, which forms, of course, the northern border of normandy, is a range of cliffs, which are almost perpendicular toward the sea, and which frown forbiddingly upon every ship that sails along the shore. here and there, it is true, a river opens a passage for itself among these cliffs from the interior, and these river mouths would form harbors into which ships might enter from the offing, were it not that the northwestern winds prevail so generally, and drive such a continual swell of rolling surges in upon the shore, that they choke up all these estuary openings, as well as every natural indentation of the land, with shoals and bars of sand and shingle. the reverse is the case with the northern, or english shore of this famous channel. there the harbors formed by the mouths of the rivers, or by the sinuosities of the shore, are open and accessible, and at the same time sheltered from the winds and the sea. thus, while the northern or english shore has been, for many centuries, all the time enticing the seaman in and out over the calm, deep, and sheltered waters which there penetrate the land, the southern side has been an almost impassable barrier, consisting of a long line of frowning cliffs, with every opening through it choked with shoals and sand-banks, and guarded by the rolling and tumbling of surges which scarcely ever rest. it is in a great measure owing to these great physical differences between the two shores, that the people who live upon the one side, though of the same stock and origin with those who live upon the other, have become so vastly superior to them in respect to naval exploits and power. they are really of the same stock and origin, since both england and the northern part of france were overrun and settled by what is called the scandinavian race, that is, people from norway, denmark, and other countries on the baltic. these people were called the _northmen_ in the histories of those times. those who landed in england are generally termed _danes_, though but a small portion of them came really from denmark. they were all, however, of the same parent stock, and possessed the same qualities of courage, energy, and fearless love of adventure and of danger which distinguish their descendants at the present day. they came down in those early times in great military hordes, and in fleets of piratical ships, through the german ocean and the various british seas, braving every hardship and every imaginable danger, to find new regions to dwell in, more genial, and fertile, and rich than their own native northern climes. in these days they evince the same energy, and endure equal privations and hardships, in hunting whales in the pacific ocean; in overrunning india, and seizing its sources of wealth and power; or in sallying forth, whole fleets of adventurers at a time, to go more than half round the globe, to dig for gold in california. the times and circumstances have changed, but the race and spirit are the same. normandy takes its name from the northmen. it was the province of france which the northmen made peculiarly their own. they gained access to it from the sea by the river seine, which, as will be seen from the map, flows, as it were, through the heart of the country. the lower part of this river, and the sea around its mouth, are much choked up with sand and gravel, which the waves have been for ages washing in. their incessant industry would result in closing up the passage entirely, were it not that the waters of the river must have an outlet; and thus the current, setting outward, wages perpetual war with the surf and surges which are continually breaking in. the expeditions of the northmen, however, found their way through all these obstructions. they ascended the river with their ships, and finally gained a permanent settlement in the country. they had occupied the country for some centuries at the time when our story begins--the province being governed by a line of princes--almost, if not quite, independent sovereigns--called the _dukes of normandy_. the first duke of normandy, and the founder of the line--the chieftain who originally invaded and conquered the country--was a wild and half-savage hero from the north, named _rollo_. he is often, in history, called rollo the dane. norway was his native land. he was a chieftain by birth there, and, being of a wild and adventurous disposition, he collected a band of followers, and committed with them so many piracies and robberies, that at length the king of the country expelled him. rollo seems not to have considered this banishment as any very great calamity, since, far from interrupting his career of piracy and plunder, it only widened the field on which he was to pursue it. he accordingly increased the equipment and the force of his fleet, enlisted more followers, and set sail across the northern part of the german ocean toward the british shores. off the northwestern coast of scotland there are some groups of mountainous and gloomy islands, which have been, in many different periods of the world, the refuge of fugitives and outlaws. rollo made these islands his rendezvous now; and he found collected there many other similar spirits, who had fled to these lonely retreats, some on account of political disturbances in which they had become involved, and some on account of their crimes. rollo's impetuous, ardent, and self-confident character inspired them with new energy and zeal. they gathered around him as their leader. finding his strength thus increasing, he formed a scheme of concentrating all the force that he could command, so as to organize a grand expedition to proceed to the southward, and endeavor to find some pleasant country which they could seize and settle upon, and make their own. the desperate adventurers around him were ready enough to enter into this scheme. the fleet was refitted, provisioned, and equipped. the expedition was organized, arms and munitions of war provided, and when all was ready they set sail. they had no definite plan in respect to the place of their destination, their intention being to make themselves a home on the first favorable spot that they should find. they moved southward, cruising at first along the coast of scotland, and then of england. they made several fruitless attempts to land on the english shores, but were every where repulsed. the time when these events took place was during the reign of alfred the great. through alfred's wise and efficient measures the whole of his frontier had been put into a perfect state of defense, and rollo found that there was no hope for him there. he accordingly moved on toward the straits of dover; but, before passing them, he made a descent upon the coast of flanders. here there was a country named hainault. it was governed by a potentate called the count of hainault. rollo made war upon him, defeated him in battle, took him prisoner, and then compelled the countess his wife to raise and pay him an immense sum for his ransom. thus he replenished his treasury by an exploit which was considered in those days very great and glorious. to perpetrate such a deed now, unless it were on a _very_ great scale, would be to incur the universal reprobation of mankind; but rollo, by doing it then, not only enriched his coffers, but acquired a very extended and honorable fame. for some reason or other, rollo did not attempt to take permanent possession of hainault, but, after receiving his ransom money, and replenishing his ammunition and stores, he sailed away with his fleet, and, turning westward, he passed through the straits of dover, and cruised along the coast of france. he found that the country on the french side of the channel, though equally rich and beautiful with the opposite shore, was in a very different state of defense. he entered the mouth of the seine. he was embarrassed at first by the difficulties of the navigation in entering the river; but as there was no efficient enemy to oppose him, he soon triumphed over these difficulties, and, once fairly in the river, he found no difficulty in ascending to rouen.[a] [footnote a: see the map at the commencement of this chapter.] in the mean time, the king of france, whose name was charles, and who is generally designated in history as charles the simple, began to collect an army to meet the invader. rollo, however, had made himself master of rouen before charles was able to offer him any effectual opposition. rouen was already a strong place, but rollo made it stronger. he enlarged and repaired the fortifications, built store-houses, established a garrison, and, in a word, made all the arrangements requisite for securing an impregnable position for himself and his army. a long and obstinate war followed between rollo and charles, rollo being almost uniformly victorious in the combats that took place. rollo became more and more proud and imperious in proportion to his success. he drove the french king from port to port, and from field to field, until he made himself master of a large part of the north of france, over which he gradually established a regular government of his own. charles struggled in vain to resist these encroachments. rollo continually defeated him; and finally he shut him up and besieged him in paris itself. at length charles was compelled to enter into negotiations for peace. rollo demanded that the large and rich tract on both sides of the seine, next the sea--the same, in fact, that now constitutes normandy--should be ceded to him and his followers for their permanent possession. charles was extremely unwilling thus to alienate a part of his kingdom. he would not consent to cede it absolutely and entirely, so as to make it an independent realm. it should be a _dukedom_, and not a separate _kingdom_, so that it might continue still a part of his own royal domains--rollo to reign over it as a duke, and to acknowledge a general allegiance to the french king. rollo agreed to this. the war had been now protracted so long that he began himself to desire repose. it was more than thirty years since the time of his landing. charles had a daughter named giselle, and it was a part of the treaty of peace that she should become rollo's wife. he also agreed to become a christian. thus there were, in the execution of the treaty, three ceremonies to be performed. first, rollo was to _do homage_, as it was called, for his duchy; for it was the custom in those days for subordinate princes, who held their possessions of some higher and more strictly sovereign power, to perform certain ceremonies in the presence of their superior lord, which was called doing homage. these ceremonies were of various kinds in different countries, though they were all intended to express the submission of the dependent prince to the superior authority and power of the higher potentate of whom he held his lands. this act of homage was therefore to be performed, and next to the homage was to come the baptism, and after the baptism, the marriage. when, however, the time came for the performance of the first of these ceremonies, and all the great chieftains and potentates of the respective armies were assembled to witness it, rollo, it was found, would not submit to what the customs of the french monarchy required. he ought to kneel before the king, and put his hands, clasped together, between the king's hands, in token of submission, and then to kiss his foot, which was covered with an elegantly fashioned slipper on such occasions. rollo would do all except the last; but that, no remonstrances, urgencies, or persuasions would induce him to consent to. and yet it was not a very unusual sign or token of political subordination to sovereign power in those days. the pope had exacted it even of an emperor a hundred years before; and it is continued by that dignitary to the present day, on certain state occasions; though in the case of the pope, there is embroidered on the slipper which the kneeling suppliant kisses, a _cross_, so that he who humbles himself to this ceremony may consider, if he pleases, that it is that sacred symbol of the divine redeemer's sufferings and death that he so reverently kisses, and not the human foot by which it is covered. rollo could not be made to consent, himself, to kiss king charles's foot; and, finally, the difficulty was compromised by his agreeing to do it by proxy. he ordered one of his courtiers to perform that part of the ceremony. the courtier obeyed, but when he came to lift the foot, he did it so rudely and lifted it so high as to turn the monarch over off his seat. this made a laugh, but rollo was too powerful for charles to think of resenting it. a few days after this rollo was baptized in the cathedral church at rouen, with great pomp and parade; and then, on the following week, he was married to giselle. the din of war in which he had lived for more than thirty years was now changed into festivities and rejoicings. he took full and peaceable possession of his dukedom, and governed it for the remainder of his days with great wisdom, and lived in great prosperity. he made it, in fact, one of the richest and most prosperous realms in europe, and laid the foundations of still higher degrees of greatness and power, which were gradually developed after his death. and this was the origin of normandy. it appears thus that this part of france was seized by rollo and his northmen partly because it was nearest at hand to them, being accessible from the english channel through the river seine, and partly on account of its exceeding richness and fertility. it has been famous in every age as the garden of france, and travelers at the present day gaze upon its picturesque and beautiful scenery with the highest admiration and pleasure. and yet the scenes which are there presented to the view are wholly unlike those which constitute picturesque and beautiful rural scenery in england and america. in normandy, the land is not inclosed. no hedges, fences, or walls break the continuity of the surface, but vast tracts spread in every direction, divided into plots and squares, of various sizes and forms, by the varieties of cultivation, like a vast carpet of an irregular tesselated pattern, and varied in the color by a thousand hues of brown and green. here and there vast forests extend, where countless thousands of trees, though ancient and venerable in form, stand in rows, mathematically arranged, as they were planted centuries ago. these are royal demesnes, and hunting grounds, and parks connected with the country palaces of the kings or the chateaux of the ancient nobility. the cultivators of the soil live, not, as in america, in little farm-houses built along the road-sides and dotting the slopes of the hills, but in compact villages, consisting of ancient dwellings of brick or stone, densely packed together along a single street, from which the laborers issue, in picturesque dresses, men and women together, every morning, to go miles, perhaps, to the scene of their daily toil. except these villages, and the occasional appearance of an ancient chateau, no habitations are seen. the country seems a vast solitude, teeming everywhere, however, with fertility and beauty. the roads which traverse these scenes are magnificent avenues, broad, straight, continuing for many miles an undeviating course over the undulations of the land, with nothing to separate them from the expanse of cultivation and fruitfulness on either hand but rows of ancient and venerable trees. between these rows of trees the traveler sees an interminable vista extending both before him and behind him. in england, the public road winds beautifully between walls overhung with shrubbery, or hedge-rows, with stiles or gateways here and there, revealing hamlets or cottages, which appear and disappear in a rapid and endlessly varied succession, as the road meanders, like a rivulet, between its beautiful banks. in a word, the public highway in england is beautiful; in france it is grand. the greatest city in normandy in modern times is rouen, which is situated, as will be seen by referring to the map at the commencement of this chapter, on the seine, half way between paris and the sea. at the mouth of the seine, or, rather, on the northern shore of the estuary which forms the mouth of the river, is a small inlet, which has been found to afford, on the whole, the best facilities for a harbor that can be found on the whole line of the coast. even this little port, however, is so filled up with sand, that when the water recedes at low tide it leaves the shipping all aground. the inlet would, in fact, probably become filled up entirely were it not for artificial means taken to prevent it. there are locks and gateways built in such a manner as to retain a large body of water until the tide is down, and then these gates are opened, and the water is allowed to rush out all together, carrying with it the mud and sand which had begun to accumulate. this haven, being, on the whole, the best and most commodious on the coast, was called _the_ harbor, or, as the french expressed it in their language, _le havre_, the word _havre_ meaning harbor. in fact, the name was in full _le havre de grace_, as if the normans considered it a matter of special good luck to have even such a chance of a harbor as this at the mouth of their river. the english world have, however, dropped all except the principal word from this long phrase of designation, and call the port simply havre. * * * * * from rollo the line of dukes of normandy continued in uninterrupted succession down to the time of william, a period of about a hundred and fifty years. the country increased all the time in wealth, in population, and in prosperity. the original inhabitants were not, however, expelled; they remained as peasants, herdsmen, and agriculturists, while the norman chieftains settled over them, holding severally large estates of land which william granted them. the races gradually became intermingled, though they continued for many centuries to evince the superior spirit and energy which was infused into the population by the norman stock. in fact, it is thought by many observers that that superiority continues to the present day. chapter ii. birth of william. a.d. 912-1033 castle at falaise.--present ruins of the castle.--scenery of the town and castle.--wall and buildings.--watch-towers.--sentinels.--enchanting prospect.--chronological history of the norman line.--rollo.--william i., second duke.--richard i., third duke.--richard ii., fourth duke.--richard iii., fifth duke.--intrigues of robert.--he becomes the sixth duke.--robert and henry.--william's mother.--robert's first meeting with arlotte.--he is captivated.--robert sends for arlotte.--scruples of her father.--arlotte sent to the castle.--robert's affection for her.--birth of william.--the nurse's prediction.--william's childhood.--he is a universal favorite.--robert determines to visit the holy land.--dangers of the journey.--he makes william his heir.--surprise of the assembly.--the nobles do homage to william.--william is taken to paris.--he is presented to the french king. although rouen is now very far before all the other cities of normandy in point of magnitude and importance, and though rollo, in his conquest of the country, made it his principal head-quarters and his main stronghold, it did not continue exclusively the residence of the dukes of normandy in after years. the father of william the conqueror was robert, who became subsequently the duke, the sixth in the line. he resided, at the time when william was born, in a great castle at falaise. falaise, as will be seen upon the map, is west of rouen, and it stands, like rouen, at some distance from the sea. the castle was built upon a hill, at a little distance from the town. it has long since ceased to be habitable, but the ruins still remain, giving a picturesque but mournful beauty to the eminence which they crown. they are often visited by travelers, who go to see the place where the great hero and conqueror was born. the hill on which the old castle stands terminates, on one side, at the foot of the castle walls, in a precipice of rocks, and on two other sides, also, the ascent is too steep to be practicable for an enemy. on the fourth side there is a more gradual declivity, up which the fortress could be approached by means of a winding roadway. at the foot of this roadway was the town. the access to the castle from the town was defended by a ditch and draw-bridge, with strong towers on each side of the gateway to defend the approach. there was a beautiful stream of water which meandered along through the valley, near the town, and, after passing it, it disappeared, winding around the foot of the precipice which the castle crowned. the castle inclosures were shut in with walls of stone of enormous thickness; so thick, in fact, they were, that some of the apartments were built in the body of the wall. there were various buildings within the inclosure. there was, in particular, one large, square tower, several stories in height, built of white stone. this tower, it is said, still stands in good preservation. there was a chapel, also, and various other buildings and apartments within the walls, for the use of the ducal family and their numerous retinue of servants and attendants, for the storage of munitions of war, and for the garrison. there were watch-towers on the corners of the walls, and on various lofty projecting pinnacles, where solitary sentinels watched, the livelong day and night, for any approaching danger. these sentinels looked down on a broad expanse of richly-cultivated country, fields beautified with groves of trees, and with the various colors presented by the changing vegetation, while meandering streams gleamed with their silvery radiance among them, and hamlets of laborers and peasantry were scattered here and there, giving life and animation to the scene. we have said that william's father was robert, the sixth duke of normandy, so that william himself, being his immediate successor, was the seventh in the line. and as it is the design of these narratives not merely to amuse the reader with what is entertaining as a tale, but to impart substantial historical knowledge, we must prepare the way for the account of william's birth, by presenting a brief chronological view of the whole ducal line, extending from rollo to william. we recommend to the reader to examine with special attention this brief account of william's ancestry, for the true causes which led to william's invasion of england can not be fully appreciated without thoroughly understanding certain important transactions in which some members of the family of his ancestors were concerned before he was born. this is particularly the case with the lady emma, who, as will be seen by the following summary, was the sister of the third duke in the line. the extraordinary and eventful history of her life is so intimately connected with the subsequent exploits of william, that it is necessary to relate it in full, and it becomes, accordingly, the subject of one of the subsequent chapters of this volume. _chronological history of the norman line._ rollo, first duke of normandy. from a.d. 912 to a.d. 917. it was about 870 that rollo was banished from norway, and a few years after that, at most, that he landed in france. it was not, however, until 912 that he concluded his treaty of peace with charles, so as to be fully invested with the title of duke of normandy. he was advanced in age at this time, and, after spending five years in settling the affairs of his realm, he resigned his dukedom into the hands of his son, that he might spend the remainder of his days in rest and peace. he died in 922, five years after his resignation. william i., second duke of normandy. from 917 to 942. william was rollo's son. he began to reign, of course, five years before his father's death. he had a quiet and prosperous reign of about twenty-five years, but he was assassinated at last by a political enemy, in 942. richard i., third duke of normandy. from 942 to 996. he was only ten years old when his father was assassinated. he became involved in long and arduous wars with the king of france, which compelled him to call in the aid of more northmen from the baltic. his new allies, in the end, gave him as much trouble as the old enemy, with whom they came to help william contend; and he found it very hard to get them away. he wanted, at length, to make peace with the french king, and to have them leave his dominions; but they said, "that was not what they came for." richard had a beautiful daughter, named emma, who afterward became a very important political personage, as will be seen more fully in a subsequent chapter. richard died in 996, after reigning fifty-four years. richard ii., fourth duke of normandy. from 996 to 1026. richard ii. was the son of richard i., and as his father had been engaged during his reign in contentions with his sovereign lord, the king of france, he, in his turn, was harassed by long-continued struggles with his vassals, the barons and nobles of his own realm. he, too, sent for northmen to come and assist him. during his reign there was a great contest in england between the saxons and the danes, and ethelred, who was the saxon claimant to the throne, came to normandy, and soon afterward married the lady emma, richard's sister. the particulars of this event, from which the most momentous consequences were afterward seen to flow, will be given in full in a future chapter. richard died in 1026. he left two sons, richard and robert. william the conqueror was the son of the youngest, and was born two years before this richard ii. died. richard iii., fifth duke of normandy. from 1026 to 1028. he was the oldest brother, and, of course, succeeded to the dukedom. his brother robert was then only a baron--his son william, afterward the conqueror, being then about two years old. robert was very ambitious and aspiring, and eager to get possession of the dukedom himself. he adopted every possible means to circumvent and supplant his brother, and, as is supposed, shortened his days by the anxiety and vexation which he caused him; for richard died suddenly and mysteriously only two years after his accession. it was supposed by some, in fact, that he was poisoned, though there was never any satisfactory proof of this. robert, sixth duke of normandy. from 1028 to 1035. robert, of course, succeeded his brother, and then, with the characteristic inconsistency of selfishness and ambition, he employed all the power of his realm in helping the king of france to subdue his younger brother, who was evincing the same spirit of seditiousness and insubmission that he had himself displayed. his assistance was of great importance to king henry; it, in fact, decided the contest in his favor; and thus one younger brother was put down in the commencement of his career of turbulence and rebellion, by another who had successfully accomplished a precisely similar course of crime. king henry was very grateful for the service thus rendered, and was ready to do all in his power, at all times, to co-operate with robert in the plans which the latter might form. robert died in 1035, when william was about eleven years old. and here we close this brief summary of the history of the ducal line, as we have already passed the period of william's birth; and we return, accordingly, to give in detail some of the particulars of that event. [illustration: william and arlotte.] * * * * * although the dukes of normandy were very powerful potentates, reigning, as they did, almost in the character of independent sovereigns, over one of the richest and most populous territories of the globe, and though william the conqueror was the son of one of them, his birth was nevertheless very ignoble. his mother was not the wife of robert his father, but a poor peasant girl, the daughter of an humble tanner of falaise; and, indeed, william's father, robert, was not himself the duke at this time, but a simple baron, as his father was still living. it was not even certain that he ever would be the duke, as his older brother, who, of course, would come before him, was also then alive. still, as the son and prospective heir of the reigning duke, his rank was very high. the circumstances of robert's first acquaintance with the tanner's daughter were these. he was one day returning home to the castle from some expedition on which he had been sent by his father, when he saw a group of peasant girls standing on the margin of the brook, washing clothes. they were barefooted, and their dress was in other respects disarranged. there was one named arlotte,[b] the daughter of a tanner of the town, whose countenance and figure seem to have captivated the young baron. he gazed at her with admiration and pleasure as he rode along. her complexion was fair, her eyes full and blue, and the expression of her countenance was frank, and open, and happy. she was talking joyously and merrily with her companions as robert passed, little dreaming of the conspicuous place on the page of english history which she was to occupy, in all future time, in connection with the gay horseman who was riding by. [footnote b: her name is spelled variously, arlette, arlotte, harlotte, and in other ways.] the etiquette of royal and ducal palaces and castles in those days, as now, forbade that a noble of such lofty rank should marry a peasant girl. robert could not, therefore, have arlotte for his wife; but there was nothing to prevent his proposing her coming to the castle and living with him--that is, nothing but the law of god, and this was an authority to which dukes and barons in the middle ages were accustomed to pay very little regard. there was not even a public sentiment to forbid this, for a nobility like that of england and france in the middle ages stands so far above all the mass of society as to be scarcely amenable at all to the ordinary restrictions and obligations of social life. and even to the present day, in those countries where dukes exist, public sentiment seems to tolerate pretty generally whatever dukes see fit to do. accordingly, as soon as robert had arrived at the castle, he sent a messenger from his retinue of attendants down to the village, to the father of arlotte, proposing that she should come to the castle. the father seems to have had some hesitation in respect to his duty. it is said that he had a brother who was a monk, or rather hermit, who lived a life of reading, meditation and prayer, in a solitary place not far from falaise. arlotte's father sent immediately to this religious recluse for his spiritual counsel. the monk replied that it was right to comply with the wishes of so great a man, whatever they might be. the tanner, thus relieved of all conscientious scruples on the subject by this high religious authority, and rejoicing in the opening tide of prosperity and distinction which he foresaw for his family through the baron's love, robed and decorated his daughter, like a lamb for the sacrifice, and sent her to the castle. arlotte had one of the rooms assigned her, which was built in the thickness of the wall. it communicated by a door with the other apartments and inclosures within the area, and there were narrow windows in the masonry without, through which she could look out over the broad expanse of beautiful fields and meadows which were smiling below. robert seems to have loved her with sincere and strong affection, and to have done all in his power to make her happy. her room, however, could not have been very sumptuously furnished, although she was the favorite in a ducal castle--at least so far as we can judge from the few glimpses we get of the interior through the ancient chroniclers' stories. one story is, that when william was born, his first exploit was to grasp a handful of straw, and to hold it so tenaciously in his little fist that the nurse could scarcely take it away. the nurse was greatly delighted with this infantile prowess; she considered it an omen, and predicted that the babe would some day signalize himself by seizing and holding great possessions. the prediction would have been forgotten if william had not become the conqueror of england at a future day. as it was, it was remembered and recorded; and it suggests to our imagination a very different picture of the conveniences and comforts of arlotte's chamber from those presented to the eye in ducal palaces now, where carpets of velvet silence the tread on marble floors, and favorites repose under silken canopies on beds of down. the babe was named william, and he was a great favorite with his father. he was brought up at falaise. two years after his birth, robert's father died, and his oldest brother, richard iii., succeeded to the ducal throne. in two years more, which years were spent in contention between the brothers, richard also died, and then robert himself came into possession of the castle in his own name, reigning there over all the cities and domains of normandy. william was, of course, now about four years old. he was a bright and beautiful boy, and he grew more and more engaging every year. his father, instead of neglecting and disowning him, as it might have been supposed he would do, took a great deal of pride and pleasure in witnessing the gradual development of his powers and his increasing attractiveness, and he openly acknowledged him as his son. in fact, william was a universal favorite about the castle. when he was five and six years old he was very fond of playing the soldier. he would marshal the other boys of the castle, his playmates, into a little troop, and train them around the castle inclosures, just as ardent and aspiring boys do with their comrades now. he possessed a certain vivacity and spirit too, which gave him, even then, a great ascendency over his playfellows. he invented their plays; he led them in their mischief; he settled their disputes. in a word, he possessed a temperament and character which enabled him very easily and strongly to hold the position which his rank as son of the lord of the castle so naturally assigned him. a few years thus passed away, when, at length, robert conceived the design of making a pilgrimage to the holy land. this was a plan, not of humble-minded piety, but of ambition for fame. to make a pilgrimage to the holy land was a romantic achievement that covered whoever accomplished it with a sort of sombre glory, which, in the case of a prince or potentate, mingled with, and hallowed and exalted, his military renown. robert determined on making the pilgrimage. it was a distant and dangerous journey. in fact, the difficulties and dangers of the way were perhaps what chiefly imparted to the enterprise its romance, and gave it its charms. it was customary for kings and rulers, before setting out, to arrange all the affairs of their kingdoms, to provide a regency to govern during their absence, and to determine upon their successors, so as to provide for the very probable contingency of their not living to return. as soon, therefore, as robert announced his plan of a pilgrimage, men's minds were immediately turned to the question of the succession. robert had never been married, and he had consequently no son who was entitled to succeed him. he had two brothers, and also a cousin, and some other relatives, who had claims to the succession. these all began to maneuver among the chieftains and nobles, each endeavoring to prepare the way for having his own claims advanced, while robert himself was secretly determining that the little william should be his heir. he said nothing about this, however, but he took care to magnify the importance of his little son in every way, and to bring him as much as possible into public notice. william, on his part, possessed so much personal beauty, and so many juvenile accomplishments, that he became a great favorite with all the nobles, and chieftains, and knights who saw him, sometimes at his father's castle, and sometimes away from home, in their own fortresses or towns, where his father took him, from time to time, in his train. at length, when affairs were ripe for their consummation, duke robert called together a grand council of all the subordinate dukes, and earls, and barons of his realm, to make known to them the plan of his pilgrimage. they came together from all parts of normandy, each in a splendid cavalcade, and attended by an armed retinue of retainers. when the assembly had been convened, and the preliminary forms and ceremonies had been disposed of, robert announced his grand design. as soon as he had concluded, one of the nobles, whose name and title was guy, count of burgundy, rose and addressed the duke in reply. he was sorry, he said, to hear that the duke, his cousin, entertained such a plan. he feared for the safety of the realm when the chief ruler should be gone. all the estates of the realm, he said, the barons, the knights, the chieftains and soldiers of every degree, would be all without a head. "not so," said robert: "i will leave you a master in my place." then, pointing to the beautiful boy by his side, he added, "i have a little fellow here, who, though he is little now, i acknowledge, will grow bigger by and by, with god's grace, and i have great hopes that he will become a brave and gallant man. i present him to you, and from this time forth i give him _seizin_[c] of the duchy of normandy as my known and acknowledged heir. and i appoint alan, duke of brittany, governor of normandy in my name until i shall return, and in case i shall not return, in the name of william my son, until he shall become of manly age." [footnote c: seizin, an ancient feudal term denoting the inducting of a party to a legal possession of his right.] the assembly was taken wholly by surprise at this announcement. alan, duke of brittany, who was one of the chief claimants to the succession, was pleased with the honor conferred upon him in making him at once the governor of the realm, and was inclined to prefer the present certainty of governing at once in the name of others, to the remote contingency of reigning in his own. the other claimants to the inheritance were confounded by the suddenness of the emergency, and knew not what to say or do. the rest of the assembly were pleased with the romance of having the beautiful boy for their feudal sovereign. the duke saw at once that every thing was favorable to the accomplishment of his design. he took the lad in his arms, kissed him, and held him out in view of the assembly. william gazed around upon the panoplied warriors before him with a bright and beaming eye. they knelt down as by a common accord to do him homage, and then took the oath of perpetual allegiance and fidelity to his cause. robert thought, however, that it would not be quite prudent to leave his son himself in the custody of these his rivals, so he took him with him to paris when he set out upon his pilgrimage, with view of establishing him there, in the court of henry, the french king, while he should himself be gone. young william was presented to the french king, on a day set apart for the ceremony, with great pomp and parade. the king held a special court to receive him. he seated himself on his throne in a grand apartment of his palace, and was surrounded by his nobles and officers of state, all magnificently dressed for the occasion. at the proper time, duke robert came in, dressed in his pilgrim's garb, and leading young william by the hand. his attendant pilgrim knights accompanied him. robert led the boy to the feet of their common sovereign, and, kneeling there, ordered william to kneel too, to do homage to the king. king henry received him very graciously. he embraced him, and promised to receive him into his court, and to take the best possible care of him while his father was away. the courtiers were very much struck with the beauty and noble bearing of the boy. his countenance beamed with an animated, but yet very serious expression, as he was somewhat awed by the splendor of the scene around him. he was himself then nine years old. chapter iii. the accession. a.d. 1035-1040 robert departs on his pilgrimage.--he visits rome and constantinople.--robert's illness.--litter bearers.--death of robert.--claimants to the crown.--theroulde.--william's military education.--the earl of arques.--william proclaimed duke.--the pilgrim knights.--they embrace william's cause.--debates in the council on the propriety of william's return.--william's return to normandy.--its effects.--william's accomplishments.--impression upon the army.--claimants in the field.--iron rule of the nobles.--almost a quarrel.--interview between william and henry.--henry's demand.--william's indignation.--henry destroys one of william's castles.--difficulties which followed.--war with henry.--william rescues falaise.--william received with acclamations.--punishment of the governor.--the earl of arques.--advance of henry.--a dangerous defile.--henry's order of march.--william's ambuscade.--its success.--pretended flight of the normans.--disarray of the french.--rout of the french.--william's embassage to henry.--the castle at arques taken.--william crowned at falaise. after spending a little time at paris, robert took leave of the king, and of william his son, and went forth, with a train of attendant knights, on his pilgrimage. he had a great variety of adventures, which can not be related here, as it is the history of the son, and not of the father, which is the subject of this narrative. though he traveled strictly as a pilgrim, it was still with great pomp and parade. after visiting rome, and accomplishing various services and duties connected with his pilgrimage there, he laid aside his pilgrim's garb, and, assuming his proper rank as a great norman chieftain, he went to constantinople, where he made a great display of his wealth and magnificence. at the time of the grand procession, for example, by which he entered the city of constantinople, he rode a mule, which, besides being gorgeously caparisoned, had shoes of gold instead of iron; and these shoes were purposely attached so slightly to the hoofs, that they were shaken off as the animal walked along, to be picked up by the populace. this was to impress them with grand ideas of the rider's wealth and splendor. after leaving constantinople, robert resumed his pilgrim's garb, and went on toward the holy land. the journey, however, did not pass without the usual vicissitudes of so long an absence and so distant a pilgrimage. at one time robert was sick, and, after lingering for some time in a fever, he so far recovered his strength as to be borne on a litter by the strength of other men, though he could not advance himself, either on horseback or on foot; and as for traveling carriages, there had been no such invention in those days. they made arrangements, therefore, for carrying the duke on a litter. there were sixteen moorish slaves employed to serve as his bearers. this company was divided into sets, four in each, the several sets taking the burden in rotation. robert and his attendant knights looked down with great contempt on these black pagan slaves. one day the cavalcade was met by a norman who was returning home to normandy after having accomplished his pilgrimage. he asked duke robert if he had any message to send to his friends at home. "yes," said he; "tell them you saw me here, on my way to paradise, carried by sixteen _demons_." robert reached jerusalem, and set out on his return; and soon after rumors came back to paris that he had died on his way home. the accounts of the manner of his death were contradictory and uncertain; but the fact was soon made sure, and the news produced every where a great sensation. it soon appeared that the brothers and cousins of robert, who had claimed the right to succeed him in preference to his son william, had only suspended their claims--they had not abandoned them. they began to gather their forces, each in his own separate domain, and to prepare to take the field, if necessary, in vindication of what they considered their rights to the inheritance. in a word, their oaths of fealty to william were all forgotten, and each claimant was intent only on getting possession himself of the ducal crown. in the mean time, william himself was at paris, and only eleven years of age. he had been receiving a careful education there, and was a very prepossessing and accomplished young prince. still, he was yet but a mere boy. he had been under the care of a military tutor, whose name was theroulde. theroulde was a veteran soldier, who had long been in the employ of the king of france. he took great interest in his young pupil's progress. he taught him to ride and to practice all the evolutions of horsemanship which were required by the tactics of those days. he trained him, too, in the use of arms, the bow and arrow, the javelin, the sword, the spear, and accustomed him to wear, and to exercise in, the armor of steel with which warriors were used, in those days, to load themselves in going into battle. young princes like william had suits of this armor made for them, of small size, which they were accustomed to wear in private in their military exercises and trainings, and to appear in, publicly, on great occasions of state. these dresses of iron were of course very heavy and uncomfortable, but the young princes and dukes were, nevertheless, very proud and happy to wear them. while william was thus engaged in pursuing his military education in paris, several competitors for his dukedom immediately appeared in normandy and took the field. the strongest and most prominent among them was the earl of arques. his name was william too, but, to distinguish him from the young duke, we shall call him arques. he was a brother of robert, and maintained that, as robert left no lawful heir, he was indisputably entitled to succeed him. arques assembled his forces and prepared to take possession of the country. it will be recollected that robert, when he left normandy in setting out on his pilgrimage, had appointed a nobleman named alan to act as regent, or governor of the country, until he should return; or, in case he should never return, until william should become of age. alan had a council of officers, called the council of regency, with whose aid he managed the administration of the government. this council, with alan at their head, proclaimed young william duke, and immediately began to act in his name. when they found that the earl of arques was preparing to seize the government, they began to assemble their forces also, and thus both sides prepared for war. before they actually commenced hostilities, however, the pilgrim knights who had accompanied robert on his pilgrimage, and who had been journeying home slowly by themselves ever since their leader's death, arrived in normandy. these were chieftains and nobles of high rank and influence, and each of the contending parties were eager to have them join their side. besides the actual addition of force which these men could bring to the cause they should espouse, the moral support they would give to it was a very important consideration. their having been on this long and dangerous pilgrimage invested them with a sort of romantic and religious interest in the minds of all the people, who looked up to them, in consequence of it, with a sort of veneration and awe; and then, as they had been selected by robert to accompany him on his pilgrimage, and had gone on the long and dangerous journey with him, continuing to attend upon him until he died, they were naturally regarded as his most faithful and confidential friends. for these and similar reasons, it was obvious that the cause which they should espouse in the approaching contest would gain a large accession of moral power by their adhesion. as soon as they arrived in normandy, rejecting all proposals from other quarters, they joined young william's cause with the utmost promptitude and decision. alan received them at once into his councils. an assembly was convened, and the question was discussed whether william should be sent for to come to normandy. some argued that he was yet a mere boy, incapable of rendering them any real service in the impending contest, while he would be exposed, more perhaps than they themselves, to be taken captive or slain. they thought it best, therefore, that he should remain, for the present, in paris, under the protection of the french king. others, on the other hand, contended that the influence of william's presence, boy as he was, would animate and inspire all his followers, and awaken every where, throughout the country, a warm interest in his cause; that his very tenderness and helplessness would appeal strongly to every generous heart, and that his youthful accomplishments and personal charms would enlist thousands in his favor, who would forget, and perhaps abandon him, if he kept away. besides, it was by no means certain that he was so safe as some might suppose in king henry's custody and power. king henry might himself lay claims to the vacant duchy, with a view of bestowing it upon some favorite of his own, in which case he might confine young william in one of his castles, in an honorable, but still rigid and hopeless captivity, or treacherously destroy his life by the secret administration of poison. these latter counsels prevailed. alan and the nobles who were with him sent an embassage to the court of king henry to bring william home. henry made objections and difficulties. this alarmed the nobles. they feared that it would prove true that henry himself had designs on normandy. they sent a new embassage, with demands more urgent than before. finally, after some time spent in negotiations and delays, king henry concluded to yield, and william set out on his return. he was now about twelve or thirteen years old. his military tutor, theroulde, accompanied him, and he was attended likewise by the embassadors whom alan had sent for him, and by a strong escort for his protection by the way. he arrived in safety at alan's head-quarters. william's presence in normandy had the effect which had been anticipated from it. it awakened every where a great deal of enthusiasm in his favor. the soldiers were pleased to see how handsome their young commander was in form, and how finely he could ride. he was, in fact, a very superior equestrian for one so young. he was more fond, even, than other boys of horses; and as, of course, the most graceful and the fleetest horses which could be found were provided for him, and as theroulde had given him the best and most complete instruction, he made a fine display as he rode swiftly through the camp, followed by veteran nobles, splendidly dressed and mounted, and happy to be in his train, while his own countenance beamed with a radiance in which native intelligence and beauty were heightened by the animation and excitement of pride and pleasure. in respect to the command of the army, of course the real power remained in alan's hands, but every thing was done in william's name; and in respect to all external marks and symbols of sovereignty, the beautiful boy seemed to possess the supreme command; and as the sentiment of loyalty is always the strongest when the object which calls for the exercise of it is most helpless or frail, alan found his power very much increased when he had this beautiful boy to exhibit as the true and rightful heir, in whose name and for whose benefit all his power was held. still, however, the country was very far from becoming settled. the earl of arques kept the field, and other claimants, too, strengthened themselves in their various castles and towns, as if preparing to resist. in those days, every separate district of the country was almost a separate realm, governed by its own baron, who lived, with his retainers, within his own castle walls, and ruled the land around him with a rod of iron. these barons were engaged in perpetual quarrels among themselves, each plundering the dominions of the rest, or making hostile incursions into the territories of a neighbor to revenge some real or imaginary wrong. this turbulence and disorder prevailed every where throughout normandy at the time of william's return. in the general confusion, william's government scarcely knew who were his friends or his enemies. at one time, when a deputation was sent to some of the barons in william's name, summoning them to come with their forces and join his standard, as they were in duty bound to do, they felt independent enough to send back word to him that they had "too much to do in settling their own quarrels to be able to pay any attention to his." in the course of a year or two, moreover, and while his own realm continued in this unsettled and distracted state, william became involved in what was almost a quarrel with king henry himself. when he was fifteen years old, which was two or three years after his return from paris to normandy, henry sent directions to william to come to a certain town, called evreux, situated about half way between falaise and paris, and just within the confines of normandy,[d] to do homage to him there for his duchy. there was some doubt among william's counselors whether it would be most prudent to obey or disobey this command. they finally concluded that it was best to obey. grand preparations were accordingly made for the expedition; and, when all was ready, the young duke was conducted in great state, and with much pomp and parade, to meet his sovereign. [footnote d: see map at the commencement of chapter ix.] the interview between william and his sovereign, and the ceremonies connected with it, lasted some days. in the course of this time, william remained at evreux, and was, in some sense, of course, in henry's power. william, having been so long in henry's court as a mere boy, accustomed all the time to look up to and obey henry as a father, regarded him somewhat in that light now, and approached him with great deference and respect. henry received him in a somewhat haughty and imperious manner, as if he considered him still under the same subjection as heretofore. william had a fortress or castle on the frontiers of his dukedom, toward henry's dominions. the name of the castle was tellières, and the governor of it was a faithful old soldier named de crespin. william's father, robert, had intrusted de crespin with the command of the castle, and given him a garrison to defend it. henry now began to make complaint to william in respect to this castle. the garrison, he said, were continually making incursions into his dominions. william replied that he was very sorry that there was cause for such a complaint. he would inquire into it, and if the fact were really so, he would have the evil immediately corrected. henry replied that that was not sufficient. "you must deliver up the castle to me," he said, "to be destroyed." william was indignant at such a demand; but he was so accustomed to obey implicitly whatever king henry might require of him, that he sent the order to have the castle surrendered. when, however, the order came to de crespin, the governor of the castle, he refused to obey it. the fortress, he said, had been committed to his charge by robert, duke of normandy, and he should not give it up to the possession of any foreign power. when this answer was reported to william and his counselors, it made them still more indignant than before at the domineering tyranny of the command, and more disposed than ever to refuse obedience to it. still william was in a great measure in the monarch's power. on cool reflection, they perceived that resistance would then be vain. new and more authoritative orders were accordingly issued for the surrender of the castle. de crespin now obeyed. he gave up the keys and withdrew with his garrison. william was then allowed to leave evreux and return home, and soon afterward the castle was razed to the ground. this affair produced, of course, a great deal of animosity and irritation between the governments of france and normandy; and where such a state of feeling exists between two powers separated only by an imaginary line running through a populous and fertile country, aggressions from one side and from the other are sure to follow. these are soon succeeded by acts of retaliation and revenge, leading, in the end, to an open and general war. it was so now. henry marched his armies into normandy, seized towns, destroyed castles, and, where he was resisted by the people, he laid waste the country with fire and sword. he finally laid siege to the very castle of falaise. william and his government were for a time nearly overwhelmed with the tide of disaster and calamity. the tide turned, however, at length, and the fortune of war inclined in their favor. william rescued the town and castle of falaise; it was in a very remarkable manner, too, that this exploit was accomplished. the fortress was closely invested with henry's forces, and was on the very eve of being surrendered. the story is, that henry had offered bribes to the governor of the castle to give it up to him, and that the governor had agreed to receive them and to betray his trust. while he was preparing to do so, william arrived at the head of a resolute and determined band of normans. they came with so sudden an onset upon the army of besiegers as to break up their camp and force them to abandon the siege. the people of the town and the garrison of the castle were extremely rejoiced to be thus rescued, and when they came to learn through whose instrumentality they had been saved, and saw the beautiful horseman whom they remembered as a gay and happy child playing about the precincts of the castle, they were perfectly intoxicated with delight. they filled the air with the wildest acclamations, and welcomed william back to the home of his childhood with manifestations of the most extravagant joy. as to the traitorous governor, he was dealt with very leniently. perhaps the general feeling of joy awakened emotions of leniency and forgiveness in william's mind--or perhaps the proof against the betrayer was incomplete. they did not, therefore, take his life, which would have been justly forfeited, according to the military ideas of the times, if he had been really guilty. they deprived him of his command, confiscated his property, and let him go free. after this, william's forces continued for some time to make head successfully against those of the king of france; but then, on the other hand, the danger from his uncle, the earl of arques, increased. the earl took advantage of the difficulty and danger in which william was involved in his contests with king henry, and began to organize his forces again. he fortified himself in his castle at arques,[e] and was collecting a large force there. arques was in the northeastern part of normandy, near the sea, where the ruins of the ancient castle still remain. the earl built an almost impregnable tower for himself on the summit of the rock on which the castle stood, in a situation so inaccessible that he thought he could retreat to it in any emergency, with a few chosen followers, and bid defiance to any assault. in and around this castle the earl had got quite a large army together. william advanced with his forces, and, encamping around them, shut them in. king henry, who was then in a distant part of normandy, began to put his army in motion to come to the rescue of arques. [footnote e: see map, chapter ix.] things being in this state, william left a strong body of men to continue the investment and siege of arques, and went off himself, at the head of the remainder of his force, to intercept henry on his advance. the result was a battle and a victory, gained under circumstances so extraordinary, that william, young as he was, acquired by his exploits a brilliant and universal renown. it seems that henry, in his progress to arques, had to pass through a long and gloomy valley, which was bounded on either side by precipitous and forest-covered hills. through this dangerous defile the long train of henry's army was advancing, arranged and marshaled in such an order as seemed to afford the greatest hope of security in case of an attack. first came the vanguard, a strong escort, formed of heavy bodies of soldiery, armed with battle-axes and pikes, and other similar weapons, the most efficient then known. immediately after this vanguard came a long train of baggage, the tents, the provisions, the stores, and all the munitions of war. the baggage was followed by a great company of servants--the cooks, the carters, the laborers, the camp followers of every description--a throng of non-combatants, useless, of course, in a battle, and a burden on a march, and yet the inseparable and indispensable attendant of an army, whether at rest or in motion. after this throng came the main body of the army, with the king, escorted by his guard of honor, at the head of it. an active and efficient corps of lancers and men-at-arms brought up the rear. william conceived the design of drawing this cumbrous and unmanageable body into an ambuscade. he selected, accordingly, the narrowest and most dangerous part of the defile for the purpose, and stationed vast numbers of norman soldiers, armed with javelins and arrows, upon the slopes of the hill on either side, concealing them all carefully among the thickets and rocks. he then marshaled the remainder of his forces in the valley, and sent them up the valley to meet henry as he was descending. this body of troops, which was to advance openly to meet the king, as if they constituted the whole of william's force, were to fight a pretended battle with the vanguard, and then to retreat, in hopes to draw the whole train after them in a pursuit so eager as to throw them into confusion; and then, when the column, thus disarranged, should reach the place of ambuscade, the normans were to come down upon them suddenly from their hiding-places, and complete their discomfiture. the plan was well laid, and wisely and bravely executed; and it was most triumphantly successful in its result. the vanguard of henry's army were deceived by the pretended flight of the norman detachment. they supposed, too, that it constituted the whole body of their enemies. they pressed forward, therefore, with great exultation and eagerness to pursue them. news of the attack, and of the apparent repulse with which the french soldiers had met it, passed rapidly along the valley, producing every where the wildest excitement, and an eager desire to press forward to the scene of conflict. the whole valley was filled with shouts and outcries; baggage was abandoned, that those who had charge of it might hurry on; men ran to and fro for tidings, or ascended eminences to try to see. horsemen drove at full speed from front to rear, and from rear on to the front again; orders and counter orders were given, which nobody would understand or attend to in the general confusion and din. in fact, the universal attention seemed absorbed in one general and eager desire to press forward with headlong impetuosity to the scene of victory and pursuit which they supposed was enacting in the van. the army pressed on in this confused and excited manner until they reached the place of ambuscade. they went on, too, through this narrow passage, as heedlessly as ever; and, when the densest and most powerful portion of the column was crowding through, they were suddenly thunderstruck by the issuing of a thousand weapons from the heights and thickets above them on either hand--a dreadful shower of arrows, javelins, and spears, which struck down hundreds in a moment, and overwhelmed the rest with astonishment and terror. as soon as this first discharge had been effected, the concealed enemy came pouring down the sides of the mountain, springing out from a thousand hiding-places, as if suddenly brought into being by some magic power. the discomfiture of henry's forces was complete and irremediable. the men fled every where in utter dismay, trampling upon and destroying one another, as they crowded back in terrified throngs to find some place of safety up the valley. there, after a day or two, henry got together the scattered remains of his army, and established something like a camp. it is a curious illustration of the feudal feelings of those times in respect to the gradation of ranks, or else of the extraordinary modesty and good sense of william's character, that he assumed no airs of superiority over his sovereign, and showed no signs of extravagant elation after this battle. he sent a respectful embassage to henry, recognizing his own acknowledged subjection to henry as his sovereign, and imploring his protection! he looked confidently to him, he said, for aid and support against his rebellious subjects. though he thus professed, however, to rely on henry, he really trusted most, it seems, to his own right arm; for, as soon as this battle was fairly over, and while the whole country was excited with the astonishing brilliancy of the exploit performed by so young a man, william mounted his horse, and calling upon those to follow him who wished to do so, he rode at full speed, at the head of a small cavalcade, to the castle at arques. his sudden appearance here, with the news of the victory, inspirited the besiegers to such a degree that the castle was soon taken. he allowed the rebel earl to escape, and thus, perhaps, all the more effectually put an end to the rebellion. he was now in peaceable possession of his realm. he went in triumph to falaise, where he was solemnly crowned with great ceremony and parade, and all normandy was filled with congratulations and rejoicings. chapter iv. william's reign in normandy. a.d. 1040-1060 a lapse of twenty years.--conspiracy of guy of burgundy.--the fool or jester.--meetings of the conspirators.--final plans of the conspirators.--discovered by galet.--galet sets out in search of william.--he finds him asleep.--william's flight.--his narrow escape.--william is recognized.--hubert's castle.--hubert's sons.--pursuit of the conspirators.--defeat of the rebels.--their punishment.--curious incident.--coats of armor.--origin of heraldry.--rollo de tesson.--keeping both oaths.--changing sides.--character of the ancient chieftains.--their love of war.--ancient castles.--their interior construction.--nothing respectable for the nobility but war.--rebellions.--insulting allusions to william's birth.--the ambuscade.--its failure.--insults of the garrison.--indignation of william.--william's campaign in france.--his popularity.--william's prowess.--true nature of courage.--an ambuscade.--william's bravery.--william's victory.--applause of the french army.--william firmly seated on his throne.--his new projects. from the time of william's obtaining quiet possession of his realm to his invasion of england, a long period intervened. there was a lapse of more than twenty years. during this long interval, william governed his duchy, suppressed insurrections, built castles and towns, carried on wars, regulated civil institutions, and, in fact, exercised, in a very energetic and successful manner, all the functions of government--his life being diversified all the time by the usual incidents which mark the career of a great military ruler of an independent realm in the middle ages. we will give in this chapter a description of some of these incidents. on one occasion a conspiracy was formed to take his life by secret assassination. a great chieftain, named guy of burgundy, william's uncle, was the leader of it, and a half-witted man, named galet, who occupied the place of jester or fool in william's court, was the means of discovering and exposing it. these jesters, of whom there was always one or more in the retinue of every great prince in those days, were either very eccentric or very foolish, or half-insane men, who were dressed fantastically, in gaudy colors and with cap and bells, and were kept to make amusement for the court. the name of william's jester was galet. guy of burgundy and his fellow-conspirators occupied certain gloomy castles, built in remote and lonely situations on the confines of normandy. here they were accustomed to assemble for the purpose of concocting their plans, and gathering their men and their resources--doing every thing in the most cunning and secret manner. before their scheme was fully ripe for execution, it happened that william made a hunting excursion into the neighborhood of their territory with a small band of followers--such as would be naturally got together on such a party of pleasure. galet, the fool, was among them. as soon as guy and his fellow-conspirators learned that william was so near, they determined to precipitate the execution of their plan, and waylay and assassinate him on his return. they accordingly left their secret and lonely rendezvous among the mountains one by one, in order to avoid attracting observation, and went to a town called bayeux, through which they supposed that william would have to pass on his return. here they held secret consultations, and formed their final plans. they sent out a part of their number, in small bands, into the region of country which william would have to cross, to occupy the various roads and passes, and thus to cut off all possibility of his escape. they made all these arrangements in the most secret and cautious manner, and began to think that they were sure of their prey. it happened, however, that some of william's attendants, with galet the fool among them, had preceded william on his return, and had reached bayeux[f] at the time when the conspirators arrived there. the townspeople did not observe the coming of the conspirators particularly, as many horsemen and soldiers were coming and going at that time, and they had no means of distinguishing the duke's friends from his enemies; but galet, as he sauntered about the town, noticed that there were many soldiers and knights to be seen who were not of his master's party. this attracted his attention; he began to watch the motions of these strangers, and to listen, without seeming to listen, in order to catch the words they spoke to each other as they talked in groups or passed one another in the streets. he was soon satisfied that some mischief was intended. he immediately threw aside his cap and bells, and his fantastic dress, and, taking a staff in his hand, he set off on foot to go back as fast as possible in search of the duke, and give him the alarm. he found the duke at a village called valonges. he arrived there at night. he pressed forward hastily into his master's chamber, half forcing his way through the attendants, who, accustomed to the liberties which such a personage as he was accustomed to take on all occasions, made only a feeble resistance to his wishes. he found the duke asleep, and he called upon him with a very earnest voice to awake and arise immediately, for his life was in danger. [footnote f: see map, chapter ix.] william was at first inclined to disbelieve the story which galet told him, and to think that there was no cause to fear. he was, however, soon convinced that galet was right, and that there was reason for alarm. he arose and dressed himself hastily; and, inasmuch as a monarch, in the first moments of the discovery of a treasonable plot, knows not whom to trust, william wisely concluded not to trust any body. he went himself to the stables, saddled his horse with his own hand, mounted him, and rode away. he had a very narrow escape; for, at the same time, while galet was hastening to valonges to give his master warning of his danger, the conspirators had been advancing to the same place, and had completely surrounded it; and they were on the eve of making an attack upon william's quarters at the very hour when he set out upon his flight. william had accordingly proceeded only a little way on his route before he heard the footsteps of galloping horses, and the clanking of arms, on the road behind him. it was a troop of the conspirators coming, who, finding that william had fled, had set off immediately in pursuit. william rode hastily into a wood, and let them go by. [illustration: william's escape.] he remained for some time in his hiding-place, and then cautiously emerged from it to continue his way. he did not dare to keep the public road, although it was night, but took a wild and circuitous route, in lanes and bypaths, which conducted him, at length, to the vicinity of the sea. here, about day-break, he was passing a mansion, supposing that no one would observe him at so early an hour, when, suddenly, he perceived a man sitting at the gate, armed and equipped, and in an attitude of waiting. he was waiting for his horse. he was a nobleman named hubert. he recognized william immediately as the duke, and accosted him in a tone of astonishment, saying, "why, my lord duke, is it possible that this is you?" he was amazed to see the ruler of the realm out at such an hour, in such a condition, alone, exhausted, his dress all in disorder from the haste with which he had put it on, and his steed breathless and covered with dust, and ready, apparently, to drop down with fatigue and exhaustion. william, finding that he was recognized, related his story. it appeared, in the end, that hubert held his own castle and village as a tenant of one of the principal conspirators, and was bound, according to the feudal ideas of the time, to espouse his landlord's cause. he told william, however, that he had nothing to fear. "i will defend your life," said he, "as if it were my own." so saying, he called his three sons, who were all athletic and courageous young men, and commanded them to mount their horses and get ready for a march. he took william into his castle, and gave him the food and refreshment that he needed. then he brought him again into the court-yard of the house, where william found the three young horsemen mounted and ready, and a strong and fleet steed prepared for himself. he mounted. hubert commanded his sons to conduct the prince with all dispatch to falaise, without traveling at all upon the highway or entering a town. they took, accordingly, a straight course across the country--which was probably then, as now, nearly destitute of inclosures--and conducted william safely to his castle at falaise. in the course of the morning, william's pursuers came to hubert's castle, and asked if the duke had been seen going by. hubert replied in the affirmative, and he mounted his steed with great readiness to go and show them the road which the fugitive had taken. he urged them to ride hard, in hopes of soon overtaking the object of their pursuit. they drove on, accordingly, with great impetuosity and ardor, under hubert's guidance; but, as he had purposely taken a wrong road, he was only leading them further and further astray. finally they gave up the chase, and hubert returned with the disappointed pursuers to his fortress, william having in the mean time arrived safely at falaise. the conspirators now found that it was useless any longer to attempt to conceal their plans. in fact, they were already all exposed, and they knew that william would immediately summon his troops and come out to seize them. they must, therefore, either fly from the country or attempt an open rebellion. they decided on the latter--the result was a civil war. in the end, william was victorious. he took a large number of the rebels prisoners, and he adopted the following very singular plan for inflicting a suitable punishment upon them, and at the same time erecting a permanent monument of his victory. he laid out a public road across the country, on the line over which he had been conducted by the sons of hubert, and compelled the rebels to make it. a great part of this country was low and marshy, and had been for this reason avoided by the public road, which took a circuitous course around it. the rebel prisoners were now, however, set at work to raise a terrace or embankment, on a line surveyed by william's engineers, which followed almost exactly the course of his retreat. the high road was then laid out upon this terrace, and it became immediately a public thoroughfare of great importance. it continued for several centuries one of the most frequented highways in the realm, and was known by the name of the raised road--_terre levée_--throughout the kingdom. in fact, the remains of it, appearing like the ruins of an ancient rail-road embankment, exist to the present day. in the course of the war with these rebels a curious incident occurred at one of the battles, or, rather, is said to have occurred, by the historians who tell the story, which, if true, illustrates very strikingly the romantic and chivalrous ideas of the times. just as the battle was commencing, william perceived a strong and finely-equipped body of horsemen preparing to charge upon the very spot where he himself, surrounded by his officers, was standing. now the armor worn by knights in battle in those times covered and concealed the figure and the face so fully, that it would have been impossible even for acquaintances and friends to recognize each other, were it not that the knights were all accustomed to wear certain devices upon some part of their armor--painted, for instance, upon their shields, or embroidered on little banners which they bore--by means of which they might be known. these devices became at length hereditary in the great families--sons being proud to wear, themselves, the emblems to which the deeds of their fathers had imparted a trace of glory and renown. the devices of different chieftains were combined, sometimes, in cases of intermarriage, or were modified in various ways; and with these minor changes they would descend from generation to generation as the family coat of arms. and this was the origin of heraldry. now the body of horsemen that were advancing to the charge, as above described, had each of them his device upon a little flag or banner attached to their lances. as they were advancing, william scrutinized them closely, and presently recognized in their leader a man who had formerly been upon his side. his name was rollo de tesson. he was one of those who had sworn fealty to him at the time when his father robert presented him to the council, when setting out upon his pilgrimage. william accordingly exclaimed, with a loud voice, "why, these are my friends!" the officers and the soldiers of the body-guard who were with him, taking up the cry, shouted "_friends! friends!_" rollo de tesson and the other knights, who were slowly coming up, preparing to charge upon william's party, surprised at being thus accosted, paused in their advance, and finally halted. rollo said to the other knights, who gathered around him, "i _was_ his friend. i gave my oath to his father that i would stand by him and defend him with my life; and now i have this morning sworn to the count of cotentin"--the count of cotentin was the leader of the rebellion--"that i would seek out william on the battle-field, and be the first to give him a blow. i know not what to do." "keep both oaths," replied one of his companions. "go and strike him a gentle blow, and then defend him with your life." the whole troop seconded this proposal by acclamation. rollo advanced, followed by the other knights, with gestures and shouts denoting that they were friends. he rode up to william, told him that he had that morning sworn to strike him, and then dealt him a pretended blow upon his shoulder; but as both the shoulder and the hand which struck it were armed with steel, the clanking sound was all the effect that was produced. rollo and his troop--their sworn obligation to the count of cotentin being thus fulfilled--turned now into the ranks of william's soldiery, and fought valiantly all day upon his side. although william was generally victorious in the battles that he fought, and succeeded in putting down one rebellion after another with promptness and decision, still, new rebellions and new wars were constantly breaking out, which kept his dominions in a continual state of commotion. in fact, the chieftains, the nobles, and the knights, constituting the only classes of society that exercised any influence, or were regarded with any respect in those days, were never contented except when actively employed in military campaigns. the excitements and the glory of war were the only excitements and glory that they understood, or had the means of enjoying. their dwellings were great fortresses, built on the summits of the rocks, which, however picturesque and beautiful they appear as _ruins_ now, were very gloomy and desolate as residences then. they were attractive enough when their inmates were flying to them for refuge from an enemy, or were employed within the walls in concentrating their forces and brightening up their arms for some new expedition for vengeance or plunder, but they were lonely and lifeless scenes of restlessness and discontent in times of quietness and peace. it is difficult for us, at this day, to conceive how destitute of all the ordinary means of comfort and enjoyment, in comparison with a modern dwelling, the ancient feudal castles must have been. they were placed in situations as nearly inaccessible as possible, and the natural impediments of approach were increased by walls, and gates, and ditches, and draw-bridges. the door of access was often a window in the wall, ten or fifteen feet from the ground, to which the inmates or their friends mounted by a ladder. the floors were of stone, the walls were naked, the ceiling was a rudely-constructed series of arches. the apartments, too, were ordinarily small, and were arranged one above another, in the successive stories of a tower. nor could these cell-like chambers be enlivened by the wide and cheerful windows of modern times, which not only admit the light to animate the scene within, but also afford to the spectator there, wide-spread, and sometimes enchanting views of the surrounding country. the castle windows of ancient days were, on the contrary, narrow loop-holes, each at the bottom of a deep recess in the thick wall. if they had been made wide they would have admitted too easily the arrows and javelins of besiegers, as well as the wind and rain of wintery storms. there were no books in these desolate dwellings, no furniture but armor, no pleasures but drinking and carousals. nor could these noble and valiant knights and barons occupy themselves in any useful employment. there was nothing which it was respectable for them to do but to fight. they looked down with contempt upon all the industrial pursuits of life. the cultivation of farms, the rearing of flocks and herds, arts, manufactures, and commerce--every thing of this sort, by which man can benefit his fellow-man, was entirely beneath them. in fact, their descendants to the present day, even in england, entertain the same ideas. their younger sons can enter the army or the navy, and spend their lives in killing and destroying, or in awaiting, in idleness, dissipation, and vice, for orders to kill and destroy, without dishonor; but to engage in any way in those vast and magnificent operations of peaceful industry, on which the true greatness and glory of england depend, would be perpetual and irretrievable disgrace. a young nobleman can serve, in the most subordinate official capacity, on board a man-of-war, and take pay for it, without degradation; but to _build_ a man-of-war itself and take pay for it, would be to compel his whole class to disown him. it was in consequence of this state of feeling among the knights and barons of william's day that peace was always tedious and irksome to them, and they were never contented except when engaged in battles and campaigns. it was this feeling, probably, quite as much as any settled hostility to william's right to reign, that made his barons so eager to engage in insurrections and rebellions. there was, however, after all, a real and deep-seated opposition to william's right of succession, founded in the ideas of the day. they could not well endure that one of so humble and even ignominious birth, on the mother's side, should be the heir of so illustrious a line as the great dukes of normandy. william's enemies were accustomed to designate him by opprobrious epithets, derived from the circumstances of his birth. though he was patient and enduring, and often very generous in forgiving other injuries, these insults to the memory of his mother always stung him very deeply, and awakened the strongest emotions of resentment. one instance of this was so conspicuous that it is recorded in almost all the histories of william that have been written. it was in the midst of one of the wars in which he was involved, that he was advancing across the country to the attack of a strong castle, which, in addition to the natural strength of its walls and fortifications, was defended by a numerous and powerful garrison. so confident, in fact, were the garrison in their numbers and power, that when they heard that william was advancing to attack them, they sent out a detachment to meet him. this detachment, however, were not intending to give him open battle. their plan was to lay in ambuscade, and attack william's troops when they came to the spot, and while they were unaware of the vicinity of an enemy, and off their guard. william, however, they found, was not off his guard. he attacked the ambuscade with so much vigor as to put the whole force immediately to flight. of course the fugitives directed their steps toward the castle. william and his soldiers followed them in headlong pursuit. the end was, that the detachment from the garrison had scarcely time, after making good their own entrance, to raise the draw-bridges and secure the gates, so as to keep their pursuers from entering too. they did, however, succeed in doing this, and william, establishing his troops about the castle, opened his lines and commenced a regular siege. the garrison were very naturally vexed and irritated at the bad success of their intended stratagem. to have the ambuscade not only fail of its object, but to have also the men that formed it driven thus ignominiously in, and so narrowly escaping, also, the danger of letting in the whole troop of their enemies after them, was a great disgrace. to retaliate upon william, and to throw back upon him the feelings of mortification and chagrin which they felt themselves, they mounted the walls and towers, and shouted out all sorts of reproaches and insults. finally, when they found that they could not make mere words sufficiently stinging, they went and procured skins and hides, and aprons of leather, and every thing else that they could find that was connected with the trade of a tanner, and shook them at the troops of their assailants from the towers and walls, with shouts of merriment and derision. william was desperately enraged at these insults. he organized an assaulting party, and by means of the great exertions which the exasperation of his men stimulated them to make, he carried some of the outworks, and took a number of prisoners. these prisoners he cut to pieces, and then caused their bloody and mangled limbs and members to be thrown, by great slings, over the castle walls. at one time during the period which is included within the limits of this chapter, and in the course of one of those intervals of peace and quietness within his own dominions which william sometimes enjoyed, the king of france became involved in a war with one of his own rebellious subjects, and william went, with an army of normans, to render him aid. king henry was at first highly gratified at this prompt and effectual succor, but he soon afterward began to feel jealous of the universal popularity and renown which the young duke began soon to acquire. william was at that time only about twenty-four years old, but he took the direction of every thing--moved to and fro with the utmost celerity--planned the campaigns--directed the sieges, and by his personal accomplishments and his bravery, he won all hearts, and was the subject of every body's praises. king henry found himself supplanted, in some measure, in the regard and honorable consideration of his subjects, and he began to feel very envious and jealous of his rival. sometimes particular incidents would occur, in which william's feats of prowess or dexterity would so excite the admiration of the army that he would be overwhelmed with acclamations and applause. these were generally exploits of combat on the field, or of escape from pursuers when outnumbered, in which good fortune had often, perhaps, quite as much to do in securing the result as strength or courage. but in those days a soldier's good luck was perhaps as much the subject of applause as his muscular force or his bravery; and, in fact, it was as deservedly so; for the strength of arm, and the coolness, or, rather, the ferocity of courage, which make a good combatant in personal contests on a battle-field, are qualities of brutes rather than of men. we feel a species of respect for them in the lion or tiger, but they deserve only execration when exercised in the wantonness of hatred and revenge by man against his brother man. one of the instances of william's extraordinary success was the following. he was reconnoitering the enemy on one occasion, accompanied only by four or five knights, who acted as his attendants and body-guard. the party were at a distance from the camp of the enemy, and supposed they were not observed. they were observed, however, and immediately a party of twelve chosen horsemen was formed, and ordered to ride out and surprise them. this detachment concealed themselves in an ambuscade, at a place where the reconnoitering party must pass, and when the proper moment arrived, they burst out suddenly upon them and summoned them to surrender. twelve against six seemed to render both flight and resistance equally vain. william, however, advanced immediately to the attack of the ambuscaders. he poised his long lance, and, riding on with it at full speed, he unhorsed and killed the foremost of them at a blow. then, just drawing back his weapon to gather strength for another blow, he killed the second of his enemies in the same manner. his followers were so much animated at this successful onset, that they advanced very resolutely to the combat. in the mean time, the shouts carried the alarm to william's camp, and a strong party set off to rescue william and his companions. the others then turned to fly, while william followed them so eagerly and closely, that he and they who were with him overtook and disabled seven of them, and made them prisoners. the rest escaped. william and his party then turned and began to proceed toward their own camp, conveying their prisoners in their train. they were met by king henry himself at the head of a detachment of three hundred men, who, not knowing how much necessity there might be for efficient aid, were hastening to the scene of action. the sight of william coming home victorious, and the tales told by his companions of the invincible strength and daring which he had displayed in the sudden danger, awakened a universal enthusiasm, and the plaudits and encomiums with which the whole camp resounded were doubtless as delicious and intoxicating to him as they were bitter to the king. it was by such deeds, and by such personal and mental characteristics as these, that william, notwithstanding the untoward influences of his birth, fought his way, during the twenty years of which we have been speaking, into general favor, and established a universal renown. he completely organized and arranged the internal affairs of his own kingdom, and established himself firmly upon the ducal throne. his mind had become mature, his resources were well developed, and his soul, always ambitious and aspiring, began to reach forward to the grasping of some grander objects of pursuit, and to the entering upon some wider field of action than his duchy of normandy could afford. during this interval, however, he was married; and, as the circumstances of his marriage were somewhat extraordinary, we must make that event the subject of a separate chapter. chapter v. the marriage. a.d. 1045-1052 political importance of a royal marriage.--william's views in regard to his marriage.--his choice.--matilda's genealogy.--her relationship to william.--matilda's accomplishments.--her embroidery.--matilda's industry.--the bayeux tapestry.--the designs.--uncouth drawing.--preservation.--elements of decay.--great age of the bayeux tapestry.--specimens of the designs of the bayeux tapestry.--marriage negotiations.--matilda's objections.--matilda's refusal.--her attachment to brihtric.--matilda's attachment not reciprocated.--her thirst for revenge.--william and matilda's consanguinity.--an obstacle to their marriage.--negotiations with the pope.--causes of delay.--william's quarrel with matilda.--the reconciliation.--the marriage.--rejoicings and festivities.--residence at rouen.--ancient castles and palaces.--matilda's palace.--luxury and splendor.--mauger, archbishop of rouen.--william and matilda excommunicated.--lanfranc sent to negotiate with the pope.--his success.--conditions of lanfranc's treaty.--their fulfillment.--william and matilda's children.--matilda's domestic character.--objects of william's marriage.--baldwin, count of flanders.--the blank letter.--baldwin's surprise. one of the most important points which an hereditary potentate has to attend to, in completing his political arrangements, is the question of his marriage. until he has a family and an heir, men's minds are unsettled in respect to the succession, and the various rival candidates and claimants to the throne are perpetually plotting and intriguing to put themselves into a position to spring at once into his place if sickness, or a battle, or any sudden accident should take him away. this evil was more formidable than usual in the case of william, for the men who were prepared to claim his place when he was dead were all secretly or openly maintaining that their right to it was superior to his while he was living. this gave a double intensity to the excitement with which the public was perpetually agitated in respect to the crown, and kept the minds of the ambitious and the aspiring, throughout william's dominions, in a continual fever. it was obvious that a great part of the cause of this restless looking for change and consequent planning to promote it would be removed if william had a son. it became, therefore, an important matter of state policy that the duke should be married. in fact, the barons and military chieftains who were friendly to him urged this measure upon him, on account of the great effect which they perceived it would have in settling the minds of the people of the country and consolidating his power. william accordingly began to look around for a wife. it appeared, however, in the end, that, though policy was the main consideration which first led him to contemplate marriage, love very probably exercised an important influence in determining his choice of the lady; at all events, the object of his choice was an object worthy of love. she was one of the most beautiful and accomplished princesses in europe. she was the daughter of a great potentate who ruled over the country of flanders. flanders lies upon the coast, east of normandy, beyond the frontiers of france, and on the southern shore of the german ocean. her father's title was the earl of flanders. he governed his dominions, however, like a sovereign, and was at the head of a very effective military power. his family, too, occupied a very high rank, and enjoyed great consideration among the other princes and potentates of europe. it had intermarried with the royal family of england, so that matilda, the daughter of the earl, whom william was disposed to make his bride, was found, by the genealogists, who took great interest in those days in tracing such connections, to have descended in a direct line from the great english king, alfred himself. this relationship, by making matilda's birth the more illustrious, operated strongly in favor of the match, as a great part of the motive which william had in view, in his intended marriage, was to aggrandize and strengthen his own position, by the connection which he was about to form. there was, however, another consanguinity in the case which had a contrary tendency. matilda's father had been connected with the norman as well as with the english line, and matilda and william were in some remote sense cousins. this circumstance led, in the sequel, as will presently be seen, to serious difficulty and trouble. matilda was seven years younger than william. she was brought up in her father's court, and famed far and wide for her beauty and accomplishments. the accomplishments in which ladies of high rank sought to distinguish themselves in those days were two, music and embroidery. the embroidery of tapestry was the great attainment, and in this art the young matilda acquired great skill. the tapestry which was made in the middle ages was used to hang against the walls of some of the more ornamented rooms in royal palaces and castles, to hide the naked surface of the stones of which the building was constructed. the cloths thus suspended were at first plain, afterward they began to be ornamented with embroidered borders or other decorations, and at length ladies learned to employ their own leisure hours, and beguile the tedium of the long confinement which many of them had to endure within their castles, in embroidering various devices and designs on the hangings intended for their own chambers, or to execute such work as presents for their friends. matilda's industry and skill in this kind of work were celebrated far and wide. the accomplishments which ladies take great pains to acquire in their early years are sometimes, it is said, laid almost entirely aside after their marriage; not necessarily because they are then less desirous to please, but sometimes from the abundance of domestic duty, which allows them little time, and sometimes from the pressure of their burdens of care or sorrow, which leave them no heart for the occupations of amusement or gayety. it seems not to have been so in matilda's case, however. she resumed her needle often during the years of her wedded life, and after william had accomplished his conquest of england, she worked upon a long linen web, with immense labor, a series of designs illustrating the various events and incidents of his campaign, and the work has been preserved to the present day. at least there is such a web now existing in the ancient town of bayeux, in normandy, which has been there from a period beyond the memory of men, and which tradition says was worked by matilda. it would seem, however, that if she did it at all, she must have done it "as solomon built the temple--with a great deal of help;" for this famous piece of embroidery, which has been celebrated among all the historians and scholars of the world for several hundred years by the name of the _bayeux tapestry_, is over four hundred feet long, and nearly two feet wide. the wet is of linen, while the embroidery is of woolen. it was all obviously executed with the needle, and was worked with infinite labor and care. the woolen thread which was used was of various colors, suited to represent the different objects in the design, though these colors are, of course, now much tarnished and faded. the designs themselves are very simple and even rude, evincing very little knowledge of the principles of modern art. the specimens on the following page, of engravings made from them, will give some idea of the childish style of delineation which characterizes all matilda's designs. childish, however, as such a style of drawing would be considered now, it seems to have been, in matilda's days, very much praised and admired. [illustration: plowing. from the bayeux tapestry.] [illustration: sowing. from the bayeux tapestry.] we often have occasion to observe, in watching the course of human affairs, the frailty and transitoriness of things apparently most durable and strong. in the case of this embroidery, on the contrary, we are struck with the durability and permanence of what would seem to be most frail and fleeting. william's conquest of england took place in 1066. this piece of tapestry, therefore, if matilda really worked it, is about eight hundred years old. and when we consider how delicate, slender, and frail is the fibre of a linen thread, and that the various elements of decay, always busy in the work of corrupting and destroying the works of man, have proved themselves powerful enough to waste away and crumble into ruin the proudest structures which he has ever attempted to rear, we are amazed that these slender filaments have been able to resist their action so long. the bayeux tapestry has lasted nearly a thousand years. it will probably last for a thousand years to come. so that the vast and resistless power, which destroyed babylon and troy, and is making visible progress in the work of destroying the pyramids, is foiled by the durability of a piece of needle-work, executed by the frail and delicate fingers of a woman. we may have occasion to advert to the bayeux tapestry again, when we come to narrate the exploits which it was the particular object of this historical embroidery to illustrate and adorn. in the mean time, we return to our story. the matrimonial negotiations of princes and princesses are always conducted in a formal and ceremonious manner, and through the intervention of legates, embassadors, and commissioners without number, who are, of course, interested in protracting the proceedings, so as to prolong, as much as possible, their own diplomatic importance and power. besides these accidental and temporary difficulties, it soon appeared that there were, in this case, some real and very formidable obstacles, which threatened for a time entirely to frustrate the scheme. among these difficulties there was one which was not usually, in such cases, considered of much importance, but which, in this instance, seemed for a long time to put an effectual bar to william's wishes, and that was the aversion which the young princess herself felt for the match. she could have, one would suppose, no personal feeling of repugnance against william, for he was a tall and handsome cavalier, highly graceful and accomplished, and renowned for his bravery and success in war. he was, in every respect, such a personage as would be most likely to captivate the imagination of a maiden princess in those warlike times. matilda, however, made objections to his birth. she could not consider him as the legitimate descendant and heir of the dukes of normandy. it is true, he was then in possession of the throne, but he was regarded by a large portion of the most powerful chieftains in his realm as a usurper. he was liable, at any time, on some sudden change of fortune, to be expelled from his dominions. his position, in a word, though for the time being very exalted, was too precarious and unstable, and his personal claims to high social rank were too equivocal, to justify her trusting her destiny in his hands. in a word, matilda's answer to william's proposals was an absolute refusal to become his wife. these ostensible grounds, however, on which matilda based her refusal, plausible as they were, were not the real and true ones. the secret motive was another attachment which she had formed. there had been sent to her father's court in flanders, from the english king, a young saxon embassador, whose name was brihtric. brihtric remained some little time at the court in flanders, and matilda, who saw him often at the various entertainments, celebrations, and parties of pleasure which were arranged for his amusement, conceived a strong attachment to him. he was of a very fair complexion, and his features were expressive and beautiful. he was a noble of high position in england, though, of course, his rank was inferior to that of matilda. as it would have been deemed hardly proper for him, under the circumstances of the case, to have aspired to the princess's hand, on account of the superiority of her social position, matilda felt that it was her duty to make known her sentiments to him, and thus to open the way. she did so; but she found, unhappy maiden, that brihtric did not feel, himself, the love which he had inspired in her, and all the efforts and arts to which she was impelled by the instinct of affection proved wholly unavailing to call it forth. brihtric, after fulfilling the object of his mission, took leave of matilda coldly, while _her_ heart was almost breaking, and went away. as the sweetest wine transforms itself into the sharpest vinegar, so the warmest and most ardent love turns, when it turns at all, to the most bitter and envenomed hate. love gave place soon in matilda's heart to indignation, and indignation to a burning thirst for revenge. the intensity of the first excitement subsided; but matilda never forgot and never forgave the disappointment and the indignity which she had endured. she had an opportunity long afterward to take terrible revenge on brihtric in england, by subjecting him to cruelties and hardships there which brought him to his grave. in the mean time, while her thoughts were so occupied with this attachment, she had, of course, no heart to listen favorably to william's proposals. her friends would have attached no importance to the real cause of her aversion to the match, but they felt the force of the objections which could justly be advanced against william's rank, and his real right to his throne. then the consanguinity of the parties was a great source of embarrassment and trouble. persons as nearly related to each other as they were, were forbidden by the roman catholic rules to marry. there was such a thing as getting a dispensation from the pope, by which the marriage would be authorized. william accordingly sent embassadors to rome to negotiate this business. this, of course, opened a new field for difficulties and delays. the papal authorities were accustomed, in such cases, to exact as the price, or, rather, as the condition of their dispensation, some grant or beneficial conveyance from the parties interested, to the church, such as the foundation of an abbey or a monastery, the building of a chapel, or the endowment of a charity, by way as it were, of making amends to the church, by the benefit thus received, for whatever injury the cause of religion and morality might sustain by the relaxation of a divine law. of course, this being the end in view, the tendency on the part of the authorities at rome would be to protract the negotiations, so as to obtain from the suitor's impatience better terms in the end. the embassadors and commissioners, too, on william's part, would have no strong motive for hastening the proceedings. rome was an agreeable place of residence, and to live there as the embassador of a royal duke of normandy was to enjoy a high degree of consideration, and to be surrounded continually by scenes of magnificence and splendor. then, again, william himself was not always at leisure to urge the business forward by giving it his own close attention; for, during the period while these negotiations were pending, he was occupied, from time to time, with foreign wars, or in the suppression of rebellions among his barons. thus, from one cause and another, it seemed as if the business would never come to an end. in fact, a less resolute and determined man than william would have given up in despair, for it was seven years, it is said, before the affair was brought to a conclusion. one story is told of the impetuous energy which william manifested in this suit, which seems almost incredible. it was after the negotiations had been protracted for several years, and at a time when the difficulties were principally those arising from matilda's opposition, that the occurrence took place. it was at an interview which william had with matilda in the streets of bruges, one of her father's cities. all that took place at the interview is not known, but in the end of it william's resentment at matilda's treatment of him lost all bounds. he struck her or pushed her so violently as to throw her down upon the ground. it is said that he struck her repeatedly, and then, leaving her with her clothes all soiled and disheveled, rode off in a rage. love quarrels are often the means of bringing the contending parties nearer together than they were before, but such a terrible love quarrel as this, we hope, is very rare. violent as it was, however, it was followed by a perfect reconciliation, and in the end all obstacles were removed, and william and matilda were married. the event took place in 1052. the marriage ceremony was performed at one of william's castles, on the frontiers of normandy, as it is customary for princes and kings to be married always in their own dominions. matilda was conducted there with great pomp and parade by her parents, and was accompanied by a large train of attendants and friends. this company, mounted--both knights and ladies--on horses beautifully caparisoned, moved across the country like a little army on a march, or rather like a triumphal procession escorting a queen. matilda was received at the castle with distinguished honor, and the marriage celebrations, and the entertainments accompanying it, were continued for several days. it was a scene of unusual festivity and rejoicing. the dress both of william and matilda, on this occasion, was very specially splendid. she wore a mantle studded with the most costly jewels; and, in addition to the other splendors of his dress, william too wore a mantle and a helmet, both of which were richly adorned with the same costly decorations. so much importance was attached, in those days, to this outward show, and so great was the public interest taken in it, that these dresses of william and matilda, with all the jewelry that adorned them, were deposited afterward in the great church at bayeux, where they remained a sort of public spectacle, the property of the church, for nearly five hundred years. from the castle of augi, where the marriage ceremonies were performed, william proceeded, after these first festivities and rejoicings were over, to the great city of rouen, conducting his bride thither with great pomp and parade. here the young couple established themselves, living in the enjoyment of every species of luxury and splendor which were attainable in those days. as has already been said, the interiors, even of royal castles and palaces, presented but few of the comforts and conveniences deemed essential to the happiness of a home in modern times. the european ladies of the present day delight in their suites of retired and well-furnished apartments, adorned with velvet carpets, and silken curtains, and luxuriant beds of down, with sofas and couches adapted to every fancy which the caprice of fatigue or restlessness may assume, and cabinets stored with treasures, and libraries of embellished books--the whole scene illuminated by the splendor of gas-lights, whose brilliancy is reflected by mirrors and candelabras, sparkling with a thousand hues. matilda's feudal palace presented no such scenes as these. the cold stone floors were covered with mats of rushes. the walls--if the naked masonry was hidden at all--were screened by hangings of coarse tapestry, ornamented with uncouth and hideous figures. the beds were miserable pallets, the windows were loop-holes, and the castle itself had all the architectural characteristics of a prison. still, there was a species of luxury and splendor even then. matilda had splendid horses to ride, all magnificently caparisoned. she had dresses adorned most lavishly with gold and jewels. there were troops of valiant knights, all glittering in armor of steel, to escort her on her journeys, and accompany and wait upon her on her excursions of pleasure; and there were grand banquets and carousals, from time to time, in the long castle hall, with tournaments, and races, and games, and other military shows, conducted with great parade and pageantry. matilda thus commenced her married life in luxury and splendor. in luxury and splendor, but not in peace. william had an uncle, whose name was mauger. he was the archbishop of rouen, and was a dignitary of great influence and power. now it was, of course, the interest of william's relatives that he should not be married, as every increase of probability that his crown would descend to direct heirs diminished their future chances of the succession, and of course undermined their present importance. mauger had been very much opposed to this match, and had exerted himself in every way, while the negotiations were pending, to impede and delay them. the point which he most strenuously urged was the consanguinity of the parties, a point to which it was incumbent on him, as he maintained--being the head of the church in normandy--particularly to attend. it seems that, notwithstanding william's negotiations with the pope to obtain a dispensation, the affair was not fully settled at rome before the marriage; and very soon after the celebration of the nuptials, mauger fulminated an edict of excommunication against both william and matilda, for intermarrying within the degrees of relationship which the canons of the church proscribed. an excommunication, in the middle ages, was a terrible calamity. the person thus condemned was made, so far as such a sentence could effect it, an outcast from man, and a wretch accursed of heaven. the most terrible denunciations were uttered against him, and in the case of a prince, like that of william, his subjects were all absolved from their allegiance, and forbidden to succor or defend him. a powerful potentate like william could maintain himself for a time against the influence and effects of such a course, but it was pretty sure to work more and more strongly against him through the superstitions of the people, and to wear him out in the end. william resolved to appeal at once to the pope, and to effect, by some means or other, the object of securing his dispensation. there was a certain monk, then obscure and unknown, but who afterward became a very celebrated public character, named lanfranc, whom, for some reason or other, william supposed to possess the necessary qualifications for this mission. he accordingly gave him his instructions and sent him away. lanfranc proceeded to rome, and there he managed the negotiation with the pope so dexterously as soon to bring it to a conclusion. the arrangement which he made was this. the pope was to grant the dispensation and confirm the marriage, thus removing the sentence of excommunication which the archbishop mauger had pronounced, on condition that william should build and endow a hospital for a hundred poor persons, and also erect two abbeys, one to be built by himself, for monks, and one by matilda, for nuns. lanfranc agreed to these conditions on the part of william and matilda, and they, when they came to be informed of them, accepted and confirmed them with great joy. the ban of excommunication was removed; all normandy acquiesced in the marriage, and william and matilda proceeded to form the plans and to superintend the construction of the abbeys. they selected the city of caen for the site. the place of this city will be seen marked upon the map near the northern coast of normandy.[g] it was situated in a broad and pleasant valley, at the confluence of two rivers, and was surrounded by beautiful and fertile meadows. it was strongly fortified, being surrounded by walls and towers, which william's ancestors, the dukes of normandy, had built. william and matilda took a strong interest in the plans and constructions connected with the building of the abbeys. william's was a very extensive edifice, and contained within its inclosures a royal palace for himself, where, in subsequent years, himself and matilda often resided. [footnote g: see map, chapter ix.] the principal buildings of these abbeys still stand, though the walls and fortifications of caen are gone. the buildings are used now for other purposes than those for which they were erected, but they retain the names originally given them, and are visited by great numbers of tourists, being regarded with great interest as singular memorials of the past--twin monuments commemorating an ancient marriage. the marriage being thus finally confirmed and acquiesced in, william and matilda enjoyed a long period of domestic peace. the oldest child was a son. he was born within a year of the marriage, and william named him robert, that, as the reader will recollect, having been the name of william's father. there was, in process of time, a large family of children. their names were robert, william rufus, henry, cecilia, agatha, constance, adela, adelaide, and gundred. matilda devoted herself with great maternal fidelity to the care and education of these children, and many of them became subsequently historical personages of the highest distinction. the object which, it will be recollected, was one of william's main inducements for contracting this alliance, namely, the strengthening of his power by thus connecting himself with the reigning family of flanders, was, in a great measure, accomplished. the two governments, leagued together by this natural tie, strengthened each other's power, and often rendered each other essential assistance, though there was one occasion, subsequently, when william's reliance on this aid was disappointed. it was as follows: when he was planning his invasion of england, he sent to matilda's brother, baldwin, who was then count of flanders, inviting him to raise a force and join him. baldwin, who considered the enterprise as dangerous and quixotic, sent back word to inquire what share of the english territory william would give him if he would go and help him conquer it. william thought that this attempt to make a bargain beforehand, for a division of spoil, evinced a very mercenary and distrustful spirit on the part of his brother-in-law--a spirit which he was not at all disposed to encourage. he accordingly took a sheet of parchment, and writing nothing within, he folded it in the form of a letter, and wrote upon the outside the following rhyme: "beau frère, en angleterre vous aures ce qui dedans escript, vous trouveres." which royal distich might be translated thus: "your share, good brother, of the land we win, you'll find entitled and described within." william forwarded the empty missive by the hand of a messenger, who delivered it to baldwin as if it were a dispatch of great consequence. baldwin received it eagerly, and opened it at once. he was surprised at finding nothing within; and after turning the parchment every way, in vain search after the description of his share, he asked the messenger what it meant. "it means," said he, "that as there is nothing writ within, so nothing you shall have." notwithstanding this witticism, however, some arrangement seems afterward to have been made between the parties, for flanders did, in fact, contribute an important share toward the force which william raised when preparing for the invasion. chapter vi. the lady emma. a.d. 1002-1052 william's claims to the english throne.--the lady emma.--claimants to the english throne.--ethelred.--ethelred subdued.--he flies to normandy.--massacre of the danes.--horrors of civil war.--ethelred's tyranny.--emma's policy.--emma's humiliation.--ethelred invited to return.--restoration of ethelred and emma.--war with canute.--ethelred's death.--situation of emma.--her children.--war with canute.--treaty between edmund and canute.--death of edmund.--accession of canute.--canute's wise policy.--his treatment of edmund's children.--canute marries emma.--opposition of her sons.--emma again queen of england.--the earl godwin.--canute's death.--he bequeaths the kingdom to harold.--emma's plots for her children.--her letter to them.--disastrous issue of alfred's expedition.--his terrible sentence.--edward's accession.--emma wretched and miserable.--accusations against emma.--her wretched end.--edmund's children.--godwin.--harold.--plans of edward.--plots and counterplots. it is not to be supposed that, even in the warlike times of which we are writing, such a potentate as a duke of normandy would invade a country like england, so large and powerful in comparison to his own, without some pretext. william's pretext was, that he himself was the legitimate successor to the english crown, and that the english king who possessed it at the time of his invasion was a usurper. in order that the reader may understand the nature and origin of this his claim, it is necessary to relate somewhat in full the story of the lady emma. by referring to the genealogy of the norman line of dukes contained in the second chapter of this volume, it will be seen that emma was the daughter of the first richard. she was celebrated in her early years for her great personal beauty. they called her _the pearl of normandy_. she married, at length, one of the kings of england, whose name was ethelred. england was at that time distracted by civil wars, waged between the two antagonist races of saxons and danes. there were, in fact, two separate dynasties or lines of kings, who were contending, all the time, for the mastery. in these contests, sometimes the danes would triumph for a time, and sometimes the saxons; and sometimes both races would have a royal representative in the field, each claiming the throne, and reigning over separate portions of the island. thus there were, at certain periods, two kingdoms in england, both covering the same territory, and claiming the government of the same population--with two kings, two capitals, two administrations--while the wretched inhabitants were distracted and ruined by the terrible conflicts to which these hostile pretensions gave rise. ethelred was of the saxon line. he was a widower at the time of his marriage to emma, nearly forty years old, and he had, among other children by his former wife, a son named edmund, an active, energetic young man, who afterward became king. one motive which he had in view in marrying emma was to strengthen his position by securing the alliance of the normans of normandy. the danes, his english enemies, were normans. the government of normandy would therefore be naturally inclined to take part with them. by this marriage, however, ethelred hoped to detach the normans of france from the cause of his enemies, and to unite them to his own. he would thus gain a double advantage, strengthening himself by an accession which weakened his foes. his plan succeeded so far as inducing richard himself, the duke of normandy, to espouse his cause, but it did not enable ethelred to triumph over his enemies. they, on the contrary, conquered _him_, and, in the end, drove him from the country altogether. he fled to normandy for refuge, with emma his wife, and his two young sons. their names were edward and alfred. richard ii., emma's brother, who was then the duke of normandy, received the unhappy fugitives with great kindness, although _he_, at least, scarcely deserved it. it was not surprising that he was driven from his native realm, for he possessed none of those high qualities of mind which fit men to conquer or to govern. like all other weak-minded tyrants, he substituted cruelty for wisdom and energy in his attempts to subjugate his foes. as soon as he was married to emma, for instance, feeling elated and strong at the great accession of power which he imagined he had obtained by this alliance, he planned a general massacre of the danes, and executed it on a given day, by means of private orders, sent secretly throughout the kingdom. vast numbers of the danes were destroyed; and so great was the hatred of the two races for each other, that they who had these bloody orders to obey executed them with a savage cruelty that was absolutely horrible. in one instance they buried women to the waist, and then set dogs upon them, to tear their naked flesh until they died in agony. it would be best, in narrating history, to suppress such horrid details as these, were it not that in a land like this, where so much depends upon the influence of every individual in determining whether the questions and discussions which are from time to time arising, and are hereafter to arise, shall be settled peacefully, or by a resort to violence and civil war, it is very important that we should all know what civil war is, and to what horrible atrocities it inevitably leads. alfred the great, when he was contending with the danes in england, a century before this time, treated them, so far as he gained advantages over them, with generosity and kindness; and this policy wholly conquered them in the end. ethelred, on the other hand, tried the effect of the most tyrannical cruelty, and the effect was only to arouse his enemies to a more determined and desperate resistance. it was the phrensy of vengeance and hate that these atrocities awakened every where among the danes, which nerved them with so much vigor and strength that they finally expelled him from the island; so that, when he arrived in normandy, a fugitive and an exile, he came in the character of a dethroned tyrant, execrated for his senseless and atrocious cruelties, and not in that of an unhappy prince driven from his home by the pressure of unavoidable calamity. nevertheless, richard, the duke of normandy, received him, as we have already said, with kindness. he felt the obligation of receiving the exiled monarch in a hospitable manner, if not on his own account, at least for the sake of emma and the children. the origin and end of emma's interest in ethelred seems to have been merely ambition. the "pearl of normandy" had given herself to this monster for the sake, apparently, of the glory of being the english queen. her subsequent conduct compels the readers of history to make this supposition, which otherwise would be uncharitable. she now mourned her disappointment in finding that, instead of being sustained by her husband in the lofty position to which she aspired, she was obliged to come back to her former home again, to be once more dependent, and with the additional burden of her husband himself, and her children, upon her father's family. her situation was rendered even still more humiliating, in some degree, by the circumstances that her father was no longer alive, and that it was to her brother, on whom her natural claim was far less strong, that she had now to look for shelter and protection. richard, however, received them all in a kind and generous manner. in the mean time, the wars and commotions which had driven ethelred away continued to rage in england, the saxons gradually gaining ground against the danes. at length the king of the danes, who had seized the government when ethelred was expelled, died. the saxons then regained their former power, and they sent commissioners to ethelred to propose his return to england. at the same time, they expressed their unwillingness to receive him, unless they could bind him, by a solemn treaty, to take a very different course of conduct, in the future management of his government, from that which he had pursued before. ethelred and emma were eager to regain, on any terms, their lost throne. they sent over embassadors empowered to make, in ethelred's name, any promises which the english nobles might demand; and shortly afterward the royal pair crossed the channel and went to london, and ethelred was acknowledged there by the _saxon_ portion of the population of the island once more as king. the _danes_, however, though weakened, were not yet disposed to submit. they declared their allegiance to _canute_, who was the successor in the _danish_ line. then followed a long war between canute and ethelred. canute was a man of extraordinary sagacity and intelligence, and also of great courage and energy. ethelred, on the other hand, proved himself, notwithstanding all his promises, incurably inefficient, cowardly, and cruel. in fact, his son prince edmund, the son of his first wife, was far more efficient than his father in resisting canute and the danes. edmund was active and fearless, and he soon acquired very extensive power. in fact, he seems to have held the authority of his father in very little respect. one striking instance of this insubordination occurred. ethelred had taken offense, for some reason or other, at one of the nobles in his realm, and had put him to death, and confiscated his estates; and, in addition to this, with a cruelty characteristic of him, he shut up the unhappy widow of his victim, a young and beautiful woman, in a gloomy convent, as a prisoner. edmund, his son, went to the convent, liberated the prisoner, and made her his own wife. [illustration: the rescue.] with such unfriendly relations between the king and his son, who seems to have been the ablest general in his father's army, there could be little hope of making head against such an enemy as canute the dane. in fact, the course of public affairs went on from bad to worse, emma leading all the time a life of unceasing anxiety and alarm. at length, in 1016, ethelred died, and emma's cup of disappointment and humiliation was now full. her own sons, edward and alfred, had no claims to the crown; for edmund, being the son by a former marriage, was older than they. they were too young to take personally an active part in the fierce contests of the day, and thus fight their way to importance and power. and then edmund, who was now to become king, would, of course, feel no interest in advancing _them_, or doing honor to _her_. a son who would thwart and counteract the plans and measures of a father, as edmund had done, would be little likely to evince much deference or regard for a mother-in-law, or for half brothers, whom he would naturally consider as his rivals. in a word, emma had reason to be alarmed at the situation of insignificance and danger in which she found herself suddenly placed. she fled a second time, in destitution and distress, to her brother's in normandy. she was now, however, a widow, and her children were fatherless. it is difficult to decide whether to consider her situation as better or worse on this account, than it was at her former exile. her sons were lads, but little advanced beyond the period of childhood; and edward, the eldest, on whom the duty of making exertions to advance the family interests would first devolve, was of a quiet and gentle spirit, giving little promise that he would soon be disposed to enter vigorously upon military campaigns. edmund, on the other hand, who was now king, was in the prime of life, and was a man of great spirit and energy. there was a reasonable prospect that he would live many years; and even if he were to be suddenly cut off, there seemed to be no hope of the restoration of emma to importance or power; for edmund was married and had two sons, one of whom would be entitled to succeed him in case of his decease. it seemed, therefore, to be emma's destiny now, to spend the remainder of her days with her children in neglect and obscurity. the case resulted differently, however, as we shall see in the end. edmund, notwithstanding his prospect of a long and prosperous career, was cut off suddenly, after a stormy reign of one year. during his reign, canute the dane had been fast gaining ground in england, notwithstanding the vigor and energy with which edmund had opposed him. finally, the two monarchs assembled their armies, and were about to fight a great final battle. edmund sent a flag of truce to canute's camp, proposing that, to save the effusion of blood, they should agree to decide the case by single combat, and that he and canute should be the champions, and fight in presence of the armies. canute declined this proposal. he was himself small and slender in form, while edmund was distinguished for his personal development and muscular strength. canute therefore declined the personal contest, but offered to leave the question to the decision of a council chosen from among the leading nobles on either side. this plan was finally adopted. the council convened, and, after long deliberations, they framed a treaty by which the country was divided between the two potentates, and a sort of peace was restored. a very short period after this treaty was settled, edmund was murdered. canute immediately laid claim to the whole realm. he maintained that it was a part of the treaty that the partition of the kingdom was to continue only during their joint lives, and that, on the death of either, the whole was to pass to the survivor of them. the saxon leaders did not admit this, but they were in no condition very strenuously to oppose it. ethelred's sons by emma were too young to come forward as leaders yet; and as to edmund's, they were mere children. there was, therefore, no one whom they could produce as an efficient representative of the saxon line, and thus the saxons were compelled to submit to canute's pretensions, at least for a time. they would not wholly give up the claims of edmund's children, but they consented to waive them for a season. they gave canute the guardianship of the boys until they should become of age, and allowed him, in the mean time, to reign, himself, over the whole land. canute exercised his power in a very discreet and judicious manner, seeming intent, in all his arrangements, to protect the rights and interests of the saxons as well as of the danes. it might be supposed that the lives of the young saxon princes, edmund's sons, would not have been safe in his hands; but the policy which he immediately resolved to pursue was to conciliate the saxons, and not to intimidate and coerce them. he therefore did the young children no harm, but sent them away out of the country to denmark, that they might, if possible, be gradually forgotten. perhaps he thought that, if the necessity should arise for it, they might there, at any time, be put secretly to death. there was another reason still to prevent canute's destroying these children, which was, that if _they_ were removed, the claims of the saxon line would not thereby be extinguished, but would only be transferred to emma's children in normandy, who, being older, were likely the sooner to be in a condition to give him trouble as rivals. it was therefore a very wise and sagacious policy which prompted him to keep the young children of edmund alive, but to remove them to a safe distance out of the way. in respect to emma's children, canute conceived a different plan for guarding against any danger which came from their claims, and that was, to propose to take their mother for his wife. by this plan her family would come into his power, and then her own influence and that of her norman friends would be forever prevented from taking sides against him. he accordingly made the proposal. emma was ambitious enough of again returning to her former position of greatness as english queen to accept it eagerly. the world condemned her for being so ready to marry, for her second husband, the deadly enemy and rival of the first; but it was all one to her whether her husband was saxon or dane, provided that she could be queen. the boys, or, rather, the young men, for they were now advancing to maturity, were very strongly opposed to this connection. they did all in their power to prevent its consummation, and they never forgave their mother for thus basely betraying their interests. they were the more incensed at this transaction, because it was stipulated in the marriage articles between canute and emma that their _future_ children--the offspring of the marriage then contracted--should succeed to the throne of england, to the exclusion of all previously born on either side. thus canute fancied that he had secured his title, and that of his descendants, to the crown forever, and emma prepared to return to england as once more its queen. the marriage was celebrated with great pomp and splendor, and emma, bidding normandy and her now alienated children farewell, was conducted in state to the royal palace in london. we must now pass over, with a very few words, a long interval of twenty years. it was the period of canute's reign, which was prosperous and peaceful. during this period emma's norman sons continued in normandy. she had another son in england a few years after her marriage, who was named canute, after his father, but he is generally known in history by the name of hardicanute, the prefix being a saxon word denoting energetic or strong. canute had also a very celebrated minister in his government named godwin. godwin was a saxon of a very humble origin, and the history of his life constitutes quite a romantic tale.[h] he was a man of extraordinary talents and character, and at the time of canute's death he was altogether the most powerful subject in the realm. [footnote h: it is given at length in the last chapter of our history of alfred the great.] when canute found that he was about to die, and began to consider what arrangements he should make for the succession, he concluded that it would not be safe for him to fulfill the agreement made in his marriage contract with emma, that the children of that marriage should inherit the kingdom; for hardicanute, who was entitled to succeed under that covenant, was only about sixteen or seventeen years old, and consequently too young to attempt to govern. he therefore made a will, in which he left the kingdom to an older son, named harold--a son whom he had had before his marriage with emma. this was the signal for a new struggle. the influence of the saxons and of emma's friends was of course in favor of hardicanute, while the danes espoused the cause of harold. godwin at length taking sides with this last-named party, harold was established on the throne, and emma and all her children, whether descended from ethelred or canute, were set aside and forgotten. emma was not at all disposed to acquiesce in this change of fortune. she remained in england, but was secretly incensed at her second husband's breach of faith toward her; and as he had abandoned the child of his marriage with her for _his_ former children, she now determined to abandon him for _hers_. she gave up hardicanute's cause, therefore, and began secretly to plot among the saxon population for bringing forward her son edward to the throne. when she thought that things were ripe for the execution of the plot, she wrote a letter to her children in normandy, saying to them that the saxon population were weary of the danish line, and were ready, she believed, to rise in behalf of the ancient saxon line, if the true representative of it would appear to lead them. she therefore invited them to come to london and consult with her on the subject. she directed them, however, to come, if they came at all, in a quiet and peaceful manner, and without any appearance of hostile intent, inasmuch as any thing which might seem like a foreign invasion would awaken universal jealousy and alarm. when this letter was received by the brothers in normandy, the eldest, edward, declined to go, but gave his consent that alfred should undertake the expedition if he were disposed. alfred accepted the proposal. in fact, the temperament and character of the two brothers were very different. edward was sedate, serious, and timid. alfred was ardent and aspiring. the younger, therefore, decided to take the risk of crossing the channel, while the elder preferred to remain at home. the result was very disastrous. contrary to his mother's instructions, alfred took with him quite a troop of norman soldiers. he crossed the channel in safety, and advanced across the country some distance toward london. harold sent out a force to intercept him. he was surrounded, and he himself and all his followers were taken prisoners. he was sentenced to lose his eyes, and he died in a few days after the execution of this terrible sentence, from the mingled effects of fever and of mental anguish and despair. emma fled to flanders. finally harold died, and hardicanute succeeded him. in a short time hardicanute died, leaving no heirs, and now, of course, there was no one left[i] to compete with emma's oldest son edward, who had remained all this time quietly in normandy. he was accordingly proclaimed king. this was in 1041. he reigned for twenty years, having commenced his reign about the time that william the conqueror was established in the possession of his dominions as duke of normandy. edward had known william intimately during his long residence in normandy, and william came to visit him in england in the course of his reign. william, in fact, considered himself as edward's heir; for as edward, though married, had no children, the dukes of the norman line were his nearest relatives. he obtained, he said, a promise from edward that edward would sanction and confirm his claim to the english crown, in the event of his decease, by bequeathing it to william in his will. [footnote i: the children of ethelred's oldest son, edmund, were in hungary at this time, and seem to have been wellnigh forgotten.] emma was now advanced in years. the ambition which had been the ruling principle of her life would seem to have been well satisfied, so far as it is possible to satisfy ambition, for she had had two husbands and two sons, all kings of england. but as she advanced toward the close of her career, she found herself wretched and miserable. her son edward could not forgive her for her abandonment of himself and his brother, to marry a man who was their own and their father's bitterest enemy. she had made a formal treaty in her marriage covenant to exclude them from the throne. she had treated them with neglect during all the time of canute's reign, while she was living with him in london in power and splendor. edward accused her, also, of having connived at his brother alfred's death. the story is, that he caused her to be tried on this charge by the ordeal of fire. this method consisted of laying red-hot irons upon the stone floor of a church, at certain distances from each other, and requiring the accused to walk over them with naked feet. if the accused was innocent, providence, as they supposed, would so guide his footsteps that he should not touch the irons. thus, if he was innocent, he would go over safely; if guilty, he would be burned. emma, according to the story of the times, was subjected to this test, in the cathedral of winchester, to determine whether she was cognizant of the murder of her son. whether this is true or not, there is no doubt that edward confined her a prisoner in the monastery at winchester, where she ended her days at last in neglect and wretchedness. when edward himself drew near to the close of his life, his mind was greatly perplexed in respect to the succession. there was one descendant of his brother edmund--whose children, it will be remembered, canute had sent away to denmark, in order to remove them out of the way--who was still living in hungary. the name of this descendant was edward. he was, in fact, the lawful heir to the crown. but he had spent his life in foreign countries, and was now far away; and, in the mean time, the earl godwin, who has been already mentioned as the great saxon nobleman who rose from a very humble rank to the position of the most powerful subject in the realm, obtained such an influence, and wielded so great a power, that he seemed at one time stronger than the king himself. godwin at length died, but his son harold, who was as energetic and active as his father, inherited his power, and seemed, as edward thought, to be aspiring to the future possession of the throne. edward had hated godwin and all his family, and was now extremely anxious to prevent the possibility of harold's accession. he accordingly sent to hungary to bring edward, his nephew, home. edward came, bringing his family with him. he had a young son named edgar. it was king edward's plan to make arrangements for bringing this prince edward to the throne after his death, that harold might be excluded. the plan was a very judicious one, but it was unfortunately frustrated by prince edward's death, which event took place soon after he arrived in england. the young edgar, then a child, was, of course, his heir. the king was convinced that no government which could be organized in the name of edgar would be able to resist the mighty power of harold, and he turned his thoughts, therefore, again to the accession of william of normandy, who was the nearest relative on his mother's side, as the only means of saving the realm from falling into the hands of the usurper harold. a long and vexatious contest then ensued, in which the leading powers and influences of the kingdom were divided and distracted by the plans, plots, maneuvers, and counter maneuvers of harold to obtain the accession for himself, and of edward to secure it for william of normandy. in this contest harold conquered in the first instance, and edward and william in the end. chapter vii. king harold. a.d. 1063-1066 harold and william.--quarrel between godwin and edward.--treaty between godwin and edward.--hostages.--the giving of hostages now abandoned.--cruelties inflicted.--canute's hostages.--godwin's hostages.--edward declines to give up the hostages.--harold goes to normandy.--harold's interview with edward.--the storm.--harold shipwrecked.--guy, count of ponthieu.--harold a prisoner.--he is ransomed by william.--william's hospitality.--his policy in this.--william's treatment of his guests.--william's policy.--william makes known to harold his claims to the english crown.--harold's dissimulation.--william's precautions.--the betrothment.--william retains a hostage.--harold's apparent acquiescence.--the public oath.--the great assembly of knights and nobles.--the threefold oath.--william's precaution.--the sacred relics.--harold's departure.--his measures to secure the throne.--age and infirmities of edward.--westminster.--edward's death.--the crown offered to harold.--harold's coronation.--he knights edgar.--harold violates his plighted faith to william. harold, the son of the earl godwin, who was maneuvering to gain possession of the english throne, and william of normandy, though they lived on opposite sides of the english channel, the one in france and the other in england, were still personally known to each other; for not only had william, as was stated in the last chapter, paid a visit to england, but harold himself, on one occasion, made an excursion to normandy. the circumstances of this expedition were, in some respects, quite extraordinary, and illustrate in a striking manner some of the peculiar ideas and customs of the times. they were as follows: during the life of harold's father godwin, there was a very serious quarrel between him, that is, godwin, and king edward, in which both the king and his rebellious subject marshaled their forces, and for a time waged against each other an open and sanguinary war. in this contest the power of godwin had proved so formidable, and the military forces which he succeeded in marshaling under his banners were so great, that edward's government was unable effectually to put him down. at length, after a long and terrible struggle, which involved a large part of the country in the horrors of a civil war, the belligerents made a treaty with each other, which settled their quarrel by a sort of compromise. godwin was to retain his high position and rank as a subject, and to continue in the government of certain portions of the island which had long been under his jurisdiction; he, on his part, promising to dismiss his armies, and to make war upon the king no more. he bound himself to the faithful performance of these covenants by giving the king _hostages_. the hostages given up on such occasions were always near and dear relatives and friends, and the understanding was, that if the party giving them failed in fulfilling his obligations, the innocent and helpless hostages were to be entirely at the mercy of the other party into whose custody they had been given. the latter would, in such cases, imprison them, torture them, or put them to death, with a greater or less degree of severity in respect to the infliction of pain, according to the degree of exasperation which the real or fancied injury which he had received awakened in his mind. this cruel method of binding fierce and unprincipled men to the performance of their promises has been universally abandoned in modern times, though in the rude and early stages of civilization it has been practiced among all nations, ancient and modern. the hostages chosen were often of young and tender years, and were always such as to render the separation which took place when they were torn from their friends most painful, as it was the very object of the selection to obtain those who were most beloved. they were delivered into the hands of those whom they had always regarded as their bitterest enemies, and who, of course, were objects of aversion and terror. they were sent away into places of confinement and seclusion, and kept in the custody of strangers, where they lived in perpetual fear that some new outbreak between the contending parties would occur, and consign them to torture or death. the cruelties sometimes inflicted, in such cases, on the innocent hostages, were awful. at one time, during the contentions between ethelred and canute, canute, being driven across the country to the sea-coast, and there compelled to embark on board his ships to make his escape, was cruel enough to cut off the hands and the feet of some hostages which ethelred had previously given him, and leave them writhing in agony on the sands of the shore. the hostages which are particularly named by historians as given by godwin to king edward were his son and his grandson. their names were ulnoth and hacune. ulnoth, of course, was harold's brother, and hacune his nephew. edward, thinking that godwin would contrive some means of getting these securities back into his possession again if he attempted to keep them in england, decided to send them to normandy, and to put them under the charge of william the duke for safe keeping. when godwin died, harold applied to edward to give up the hostages, since, as he alleged, there was no longer any reason for detaining them. they had been given as security for _godwin's_ good behavior, and now godwin was no more. edward could not well refuse to surrender them, and yet, as harold succeeded to the power, and evidently possessed all the ambition of his father, it seemed to be, politically, as necessary to retain the hostages now as it had been before. edward, therefore, without absolutely refusing to surrender them, postponed and evaded compliance with harold's demand, on the ground that the hostages were in normandy. he was going, he said, to send for them as soon as he could make the necessary arrangements for bringing them home in safety. under these circumstances, harold determined to go and bring them himself. he proposed this plan to edward. edward would not absolutely refuse his consent, but he did all in his power to discourage such an expedition. he told harold that william of normandy was a crafty and powerful man; that by going into his dominions he would put himself entirely into his power, and would be certain to involve himself in some serious difficulty. this interview between harold and the king is commemorated on the bayeux tapestry by the opposite uncouth design. what effect edward's disapproval of the project produced upon harold's mind is not certainly known. it is true that he went across the channel, but the accounts of the crossing are confused and contradictory, some of them stating that, while sailing for pleasure with a party of attendants and companions on the coast, he was blown off from the shore and driven across to france by a storm. the probability, however, is, that this story was only a pretense. he was determined to go, but not wishing to act openly in defiance of the king's wishes, he contrived to be blown off, in order to make it seem that he went against his will. [illustration: harold's interview with edward.] at all events, the _storm_ was real, whether his being compelled to leave the english shores by the power of it was real or pretended. it carried him, too, out of his course, driving him up the channel to the eastward of normandy, where he had intended to land, and at length throwing his galley, a wreck, on the shore, not far from the mouth of the somme. the galley itself was broken up, but harold and his company escaped to land. they found that they were in the dominions of a certain prince who held possessions on that coast, whose style and title was guy, count of ponthieu. the law in those days was, that wrecks became the property of the lord of the territory on the shores of which they occurred; and not only were the ships and the goods which they contained thus confiscated in case of such a disaster, but the owners themselves became liable to be seized and held captive for a ransom. harold, knowing his danger, was attempting to secrete himself on the coast till he could get to normandy, when a fisherman who saw him, and knew by his dress and appearance, and by the deference with which he was treated by the rest of the company, that he was a man of great consequence in his native land, went to the count, and said that for ten crowns he would show him where there was a man who would be worth a thousand to him. the count came down with his retinue to the coast, seized the unfortunate adventurers, took possession of all the goods and baggage that the waves had spared, and shut the men themselves up in his castle at abbeville till they could pay their ransom. harold remonstrated against this treatment. he said that he was on his way to normandy on business of great importance with the duke, from the king of england, and that he could not be detained. but the count was very decided in refusing to let him go without his ransom. harold then sent word to william, acquainting him with his situation, and asking him to effect his release. william sent to the count, demanding that he should give his prisoner up. all these things, however, only tended to elevate and enlarge the count's ideas of the value and importance of the prize which he had been so fortunate to secure. he persisted in refusing to give him up without ransom. finally william paid the ransom, in the shape of a large sum of money, and the cession, in addition, of a considerable territory. harold and his companions in bondage were then delivered to william's messengers, and conducted by them in safety to rouen, where william was then residing. william received his distinguished guest with every possible mark of the most honorable consideration. he was escorted with great parade and ceremony into the palace, lodged in the most sumptuous manner, provided with every necessary supply, and games, and military spectacles, and feasts and entertainments without number, were arranged to celebrate his visit. william informed him that he was at liberty to return to england whenever he pleased, and that his brother and his nephew, the hostages that he had come to seek, were at his disposal. he, however, urged him not to return immediately, but to remain a short time in normandy with his companions. harold accepted the invitation. all this exuberance of hospitality had its origin, as the reader will readily divine, in the duke's joy in finding the only important rival likely to appear to contest his claims to the english crown so fully in his power, and in the hope which he entertained of so managing affairs at this visit as to divert harold's mind from the idea of becoming the king of england himself, and to induce him to pledge himself to act in his, that is, william's favor. he took, therefore, all possible pains to make him enjoy his visit in normandy; he exhibited to him the wealth and the resources of the country--conducting him from place to place to visit the castles, the abbeys, and the towns--and, finally, he proposed that he should accompany him on a military expedition into brittany. harold, pleased with the honors conferred upon him, and with the novelty and magnificence of the scenes to which he was introduced, entered heartily into all these plans, and his companions and attendants were no less pleased than he. william knighted many of these followers of harold, and made them costly presents of horses, and banners, and suits of armor, and other such gifts as were calculated to captivate the hearts of martial adventurers such as they. william soon gained an entire ascendency over their minds, and when he invited them to accompany him on his expedition into brittany, they were all eager to go. brittany was west of normandy, and on the frontiers of it, so that the expedition was not a distant one. nor was it long protracted. it was, in fact, a sort of pleasure excursion, william taking his guest across the frontier into his neighbor's territory, on a marauding party, just as a nobleman, in modern times, would take a party into a forest to hunt. william and harold were on the most intimate and friendly terms possible during the continuance of this campaign. they occupied the same tent, and ate at the same table. harold evinced great military talents and much bravery in the various adventures which they met with in brittany, and william felt more than ever the desirableness of securing his influence on his, that is, william's side, or, at least, of preventing his becoming an open rival and enemy. on their return from brittany into normandy, he judged that the time had arrived for taking his measures. he accordingly resolved to come to an open understanding with harold in respect to his plans, and to seek his co-operation. he introduced the subject, the historians say, one day as they were riding along homeward from their excursion, and had been for some time talking familiarly on the way, relating tales to one another of wars, battles, sieges, and hair-breadth escapes, and other such adventures as formed, generally, the subjects of narrative conversation in those days. at length william, finding harold, as he judged, in a favorable mood for such a communication, introduced the subject of the english realm and the approaching demise of the crown. he told him, confidentially, that there had been an arrangement between him, william, and king edward, for some time, that edward was to _adopt_ him as his successor. william told harold, moreover, that he should rely a great deal on his co-operation and assistance in getting peaceable possession of the kingdom, and promised to bestow upon him the very highest rewards and honors in return if he would give him his aid. the only rival claimant, william said, was the young child edgar, and he had no friends, no party, no military forces, and no means whatever for maintaining his pretensions. on the other hand, he, william, and harold, had obviously all the power in their own hands, and if they could only co-operate together on a common understanding, they would be sure to have the power and the honors of the english realm entirely at their disposal. harold listened to all these suggestions, and pretended to be interested and pleased. he was, in reality, interested, but he was not pleased. he wished to secure the kingdom for himself, not merely to obtain a share, however large, of its power and its honors as the subject of another. he was, however, too wary to evince his displeasure. on the contrary, he assented to the plan, professed to enter into it with all his heart, and expressed his readiness to commence, immediately, the necessary preliminary measures for carrying it into execution. william was much gratified with the successful result of his negotiation, and the two chieftains rode home to william's palace in normandy, banded together, apparently, by very strong ties. in secret, however, harold was resolving to effect his departure from normandy as soon as possible, and to make immediate and most effectual measures for securing the kingdom of england to himself, without any regard to the promises that he had made to william. nor must it be supposed that william himself placed any positive reliance on mere promises from harold. he immediately began to form plans for binding him to the performance of his stipulations, by the modes then commonly employed for securing the fulfillment of covenants made among princes. these methods were three--intermarriages, the giving of hostages, and solemn oaths. william proposed two marriages as means of strengthening the alliance between himself and harold. harold was to give to william one of his daughters, that william might marry her to one of his norman chieftains. this would be, of course, placing her in william's power, and making her a hostage all but in name. harold, however, consented. the second marriage proposed was between william's daughter and harold himself; but as his daughter was a child of only seven years of age, it could only be a betrothment that could take place at that time. harold acceded to this proposal too, and arrangements were made for having the faith of the parties pledged to one another in the most solemn manner. a great assembly of all the knights, nobles, and ladies of the court was convened, and the ceremony of pledging the troth between the fierce warrior and the gentle and wondering child was performed with as much pomp and parade as if it had been an actual wedding. the name of the girl was adela. in respect to hostages, william determined to detain one of those whom harold, as will be recollected, had come into normandy to recover. he told him, therefore, that he might take with him his nephew hacune, but that ulnoth, his brother, should remain, and william would bring him over himself when he came to take possession of the kingdom. harold was extremely unwilling to leave his brother thus in william's power; but as he knew very well that his being allowed to return to england himself would depend upon his not evincing any reluctance to giving william security, or manifesting any other indication that he was not intending to keep his plighted faith, he readily consented, and it was thus settled that ulnoth should remain. finally, in order to hold harold to the fulfillment of his promises by every possible form of obligation, william proposed that he should take a public and solemn oath, in the presence of a large assembly of all the great potentates and chieftains of the realm, by which he should bind himself, under the most awful sanctions, to keep his word. harold made no objection to this either. he considered himself as, in fact, in duress, and his actions as not free. he was in william's power, and was influenced in all he did by a desire to escape from normandy, and once more recover his liberty. he accordingly decided, in his own mind, that whatever oaths he might take he should afterward consider as forced upon him, and consequently as null and void, and was ready, therefore, to take any that william might propose. the great assembly was accordingly convened. in the middle of the council hall there was placed a great chair of state, which was covered with a cloth of gold. upon this cloth, and raised considerably above the seat, was the _missal_, that is, the book of service of the catholic church, written on parchment and splendidly illuminated. the book was open at a passage from one of the evangelists--the evangelists being a portion of the holy scriptures which was, in those days, supposed to invest an oath with the most solemn sanctions. harold felt some slight misgivings as he advanced in the midst of such an imposing scene as the great assembly of knights and ladies presented in the council hall, to repeat his promises in the very presence of god, and to imprecate the retributive curses of the almighty on the violation of them, which he was deliberately and fully determined to incur. he had, however, gone too far to retreat now. he advanced, therefore, to the open missal, laid his hand upon the book, and, repeating the words which william dictated to him from his throne, he took the threefold oath required, namely, to aid william to the utmost of his power in his attempt to secure the succession to the english crown, to marry william's daughter adela as soon as she should arrive at a suitable age, and to send over forthwith from england his own daughter, that she might be espoused to one of william's nobles. as soon as the oath was thus taken, william caused the missal and the cloth of gold to be removed, and there appeared beneath it, on the chair of state, a chest, containing the sacred relics of the church, which william had secretly collected from the abbeys and monasteries of his dominions, and placed in this concealment, that, without harold's being conscious of it, their dreadful sanction might be added to that which the holy evangelists imposed. these relics were fragments of bones set in caskets and frames, and portions of blood--relics, as the monks alleged, of apostles or of the savior--and small pieces of wood, similarly preserved, which had been portions of the cross of christ or of his thorny crown. these things were treasured up with great solemnity in the monastic establishments and in the churches of these early times, and were regarded with a veneration and awe, of which it is almost beyond our power even to conceive. harold trembled when he saw what he had unwittingly done. he was terrified to think how much more dreadful was the force of the imprecations that he had uttered than he had imagined while uttering them. but it was too late to undo what he had done. the assembly was finally dismissed. william thought he had the conscience of his new ally firmly secured, and harold began to prepare for leaving normandy. he continued on excellent terms with william until his departure. william accompanied him to the sea-shore when the time of his embarkation arrived, and dismissed him at last with many farewell honors, and a profusion of presents. harold set sail, and, crossing the channel in safety, he landed in england. he commenced immediately an energetic system of measures to strengthen his own cause, and prepare the way for his own accession. he organized his party, collected arms and munitions of war, and did all that he could to ingratiate himself with the most powerful and wealthy nobles. he sought the favor of the king, too, and endeavored to persuade him to discard william. the king was now old and infirm, and was growing more and more inert and gloomy as he advanced in age. his mind was occupied altogether in ecclesiastical rites and observances, or plunged in a torpid and lifeless melancholy, which made him averse to giving any thought to the course which the affairs of his kingdom were to take after he was gone. he did not care whether harold or william took the crown when he laid it aside, provided they would allow him to die in peace. he had had, a few years previous to this time, a plan of making a pilgrimage to jerusalem, but had finally made an arrangement with the pope, allowing him to build a cathedral church, to be dedicated to st. peter, a few miles west of london, in lieu of his pilgrimage. there was already a cathedral church or _minster_ in the heart of london which was dedicated to st. paul. the new one was afterward often called, to distinguish it from the other, the _west_ minster, which designation, westminster, became afterward its regular name. it was on this spot, where westminster abbey now stands, that edward's church was to be built. it was just completed at the time of which we are speaking, and the king was preparing for the dedication of it. he summoned an assembly of all the prelates and great ecclesiastical dignitaries of the land to convene at london, in order to dedicate the new cathedral. before they were ready for the service, the king was taken suddenly sick. they placed him upon his couch in his palace chamber, where he lay, restless, and moaning in pain, and repeating incessantly, half in sleep and half in delirium, the gloomy and threatening texts of scripture which seemed to haunt his mind. he was eager to have the dedication go on, and they hastened the service in order to gratify him by having it performed before he died. the next day he was obviously failing. harold and his friends were very earnest to have the departing monarch declare in _his_ favor before he died, and their coming and going, and their loud discussions, rude soldiers as they were, disturbed his dying hours. he sent them word to choose whom they would for king, duke or earl, it was indifferent to him, and thus expired. harold had made his arrangements so well, and had managed so effectually to secure the influence of all the powerful nobles of the kingdom, that they immediately convened and offered him the crown. edgar was in the court of edward at the time, but he was too young to make any effort to advance his claims. he was, in fact, a foreigner, though in the english royal line. he had been brought up on the continent of europe, and could not even speak the english tongue. he acquiesced, therefore, without complaint, in these proceedings, and was even present as a consenting spectator on the occasion of harold's coronation, which ceremony was performed with great pomp and parade, at st. paul's, in london, very soon after king edward's death. harold rewarded edgar for his complaisance and discretion by conferring upon him the honor of knighthood immediately after the coronation, and in the church where the ceremony was performed. he also conferred similar distinctions and honors upon many other aspiring and ambitious men whom he wished to secure to his side. he thus seemed to have secure and settled possession of the throne. previously to this time, harold had married a young lady of england, a sister of two very powerful noblemen, and the richest heiress in the realm. this marriage greatly strengthened his influence in england, and helped to prepare the way for his accession to the supreme power. the tidings of it, however, when they crossed the channel and reached the ears of william of normandy, as the act was an open and deliberate violation of one of the covenants which harold had made with william, convinced the latter that none of these covenants would be kept, and prepared him to expect all that afterward followed. chapter viii. the preparations. a.d. 1066 harold's brother tostig.--he brings intelligence of harold's accession.--william's strength and dexterity.--his surprise.--fitzosborne.--his interview with william.--the great council of state.--the embassy to harold.--harold reminded of his promises.--his replies.--return of the messenger.--william prepares for war.--william calls a general council.--want of funds.--means of raising money.--adverse views.--various opinions.--confusion and disorder.--plan of fitzosborne.--it is adopted by william.--success of fitzosborne's plan.--supplies flow in liberally.--embassage to the pope.--its success.--reasons why the pope favored william's claims.--the banner and the ring.--excitement produced by their reception.--william's proclamations.--their effects.--william's promises.--naval preparations.--philip, king of france.--william's visit to him.--william's interview with philip.--philip opposes his plans.--council of nobles.--result of their deliberations.--william's return.--final preparations.--matilda made duchess regent.--william's motives.--republican sentiments.--hereditary sovereigns.--enthusiasm of the people.--the two-tailed comet. the messenger who brought william the tidings of harold's accession to the throne was a man named tostig, harold's brother. though he was harold's brother, he was still his bitterest enemy. brothers are seldom friends in families where there is a crown to be contended for. there were, of course, no public modes of communicating intelligence in those days, and tostig had learned the facts of edward's death and harold's coronation through spies which he had stationed at certain points on the coast. he was himself, at that time, on the continent. he rode with all speed to rouen to communicate the news to william, eager to incite him to commence hostilities against his brother. [illustration: william receiving tostig's tidings.] when tostig arrived at rouen, william was in a park which lay in the vicinity of the city, trying a new bow that had been recently made for him. william was a man of prodigious muscular strength, and they gave him the credit of being able to use easily a bow which nobody else could bend. a part of this credit was doubtless due to the etiquette which, in royal palaces and grounds, leads all sensible courtiers to take good care never to succeed in attempts to excel the king. but, notwithstanding this consideration, there is no doubt that the duke really merited a great portion of the commendation that he received for his strength and dexterity in the use of the bow. it was a weapon in which he took great interest. a new one had been made for him, of great elasticity and strength, and he had gone out into his park, with his officers, to try its powers, when tostig arrived. tostig followed him to the place, and there advancing to his side, communicated the tidings to him privately. william was greatly moved by the intelligence. his arrow dropped upon the ground. he gave the bow to an attendant. he stood for a time speechless, tying and untying the cordon of his cloak in his abstraction. presently he began slowly to move away from the place, and to return toward the city. his attendants followed him in silence, wondering what the exciting tidings could be which had produced so sudden and powerful an effect. william went into the castle hall, and walked to and fro a long time, thoughtful, and evidently agitated. his attendants waited in silence, afraid to speak to him. rumors began at length to circulate among them in respect to the nature of the intelligence which had been received. at length a great officer of state, named fitzosborne, arrived at the castle. as he passed through the court-yard and gates, the attendants and the people, knowing that he possessed in a great degree the confidence of his sovereign, asked him what the tidings were that had made such an impression. "i know nothing certain about it," said he, "but i will soon learn." so saying, he advanced toward william, and accosted him by saying, "why should you conceal from us your news? it is reported in the city that the king of england is dead, and that harold has violated his oaths to you, and has seized the kingdom. is that true?" william acknowledged that that was the intelligence by which he had been so vexed and chagrined. fitzosborne urged the duke not to allow such events to depress or dispirit him. "as for the death of edward," said he, "that is an event past and sure, and can not be recalled; but harold's usurpation and treachery admits of a very easy remedy. you have the right to the throne, and you have the soldiers necessary to enforce that right. undertake the enterprise boldly. you will be sure to succeed." william revolved the subject in his mind for a few days, during which the exasperation and anger which the first receipt of the intelligence had produced upon him was succeeded by calm but indignant deliberation, in respect to the course which he should pursue. he concluded to call a great council of state, and to lay the case before them--not for the purpose of obtaining their advice, but to call their attention to the crisis in a formal and solemn manner, and to prepare them to act in concert in the subsequent measures to be pursued. the result of the deliberations of this council, guided, doubtless, by william's own designs, was, that the first step should be to send an embassy to harold to demand of him the fulfillment of his promises. the messenger was accordingly dispatched. he proceeded to london, and laid before harold the communication with which he had been intrusted. this communication recounted the three promises which harold had made, namely, to send his daughter to normandy to be married to one of william's generals; to marry william's daughter himself; and to maintain william's claims to the english crown on the death of edward. he was to remind harold, also, of the solemnity with which he had bound himself to fulfill these obligations, by oaths taken in the presence of the most sacred relics of the church, and in the most public and deliberate manner. harold replied, 1. that as to sending over his daughter to be married to one of william's generals, he could not do it, for his daughter was dead. he presumed, he said, that william did not wish him to send the corpse. 2. in respect to marrying william's daughter, to whom he had been affianced in normandy, he was sorry to say that that was also out of his power, as he could not take a foreign wife without the consent of his people, which he was confident would never be given; besides, he was already married, he said, to a saxon lady of his own dominions. 3. in regard to the kingdom: it did not depend upon him, he said, to decide who should rule over england as edward's successor, but upon the will of edward himself, and upon the english people. the english barons and nobles had decided, with edward's concurrence, that he, harold, was their legitimate and proper sovereign, and that it was not for him to controvert their will. however much he might be disposed to comply with william's wishes, and to keep his promise, it was plain that it was out of his power, for in promising him the english crown, he had promised what did not belong to him to give. 4. as to his oaths, he said that, notwithstanding the secret presence of the sacred relics under the cloth of gold, he considered them as of no binding force upon his conscience, for he was constrained to take them as the only means of escaping from the duress in which he was virtually held in normandy. promises, and oaths even, when extorted by necessity, were null and void. the messenger returned to normandy with these replies, and william immediately began to prepare for war. his first measure was to call a council of his most confidential friends and advisers, and to lay the subject before them. they cordially approved of the plan of an invasion of england, and promised to co-operate in the accomplishment of it to the utmost of their power. the next step was to call a general council of all the chieftains and nobles of the land, and also the _notables_, as they were called, or principal officers and municipal authorities of the _towns_. the main point of interest for the consideration of this assembly was, whether the country would submit to the necessary taxation for raising the necessary funds. william had ample power, as duke, to decide upon the invasion and to undertake it. he could also, without much difficulty, raise the necessary number of men; for every baron in his realm was bound, by the feudal conditions on which he held his land, to furnish his quota of men for any military enterprise in which his sovereign might see fit to engage. but for so distant and vast an undertaking as this, william needed a much larger supply of _funds_ than were usually required in the wars of those days. for raising such large supplies, the political institutions of the middle ages had not made any adequate provision. governments then had no power of taxation, like that so freely exercised in modern times; and even now, taxes in france and england take the form of _grants_ from the people to the kings. and as to the contrivance, so exceedingly ingenious, by which inexhaustible resources are opened to governments at the present day--that is, the plan of borrowing the money, and leaving posterity to pay or repudiate the debt, as they please, no minister of finance had, in william's day, been brilliant enough to discover it. thus each ruler had to rely, then, mainly on the rents and income from his own lands, and other private resources, for the comparatively small amount of money that he needed in his brief campaigns. but now william perceived that ships must be built and equipped, and great stores of provisions accumulated, and arms and munitions of war provided, all which would require a considerable outlay; and how was this money to be obtained? the general assembly which he convened were greatly distracted by the discussion of the question. the quiet and peaceful citizens who inhabited the towns, the artisans and tradesmen, who wished for nothing but to be allowed to go on in their industrial pursuits in peace, were opposed to the whole project. they thought it unreasonable and absurd that they should be required to contribute from their earnings to enable their lord and master to go off on so distant and desperate an undertaking, from which, even if successful, they could derive no benefit whatever. many of the barons, too, were opposed to the scheme. they thought it very likely to end in disaster and defeat; and they denied that their feudal obligation to furnish men for their sovereign's wars was binding to the extent of requiring them to go out of the country, and beyond the sea, to prosecute his claims to the throne of another kingdom. others, on the other hand, among the members of william's assembly, were strongly disposed to favor the plan. they were more ardent or more courageous than the rest, or perhaps their position and circumstances were such that they had more to hope from the success of the enterprise than they, or less to fear from its failure. thus there was great diversity of opinion; and as the parliamentary system of rules, by which a body of turbulent men, in modern times, are kept in some semblance of organization and order during a debate, had not then been developed, the meeting of these norman deliberators was, for a time, a scene of uproar and confusion. the members gathered in groups, each speaker getting around him as many as he could obtain to listen to his harangue; the more quiet and passive portion of the assembly moving to and fro, from group to group, as they were attracted by the earnestness and eloquence of the different speakers, or by their approval of the sentiments which they heard them expressing. the scene, in fact, was like that presented in exciting times by a political caucus in america, before it is called to order by the chairman. fitzosborne, the confidential friend and counselor, who has already been mentioned as the one who ventured to accost the duke at the time when the tidings of edward's death and of harold's accession first reached him, now seeing that any thing like definite and harmonious action on the part of this tumultuous assembly was out of the question, went to the duke, and proposed to him to give up the assembly as such, and make the best terms and arrangements that he could with the constituent elements of it, individually and severally. he would himself, he said, furnish forty ships, manned, equipped, and provisioned; and he recommended to the duke to call each of the others into his presence, and ask them what they were individually willing to do. the duke adopted this plan, and it was wonderfully successful. those who were first invited made large offers, and their offers were immediately registered in form by the proper officers. each one who followed was emulous of the example of those who had preceded him, and desirous of evincing as much zeal and generosity as they. then, besides, the duke received these vassals with so much condescension and urbanity, and treated them with so much consideration and respect, as greatly to flatter their vanity, and raise them in their own estimation, by exalting their ideas of the importance of the services which they could render in carrying so vast an enterprise to a successful result. in a word, the tide turned like a flood in favor of granting liberal supplies. the nobles and knights promised freely men, money, ships, arms, provisions--every thing, in short, that was required; and when the work of receiving and registering the offers was completed, and the officers summed up the aggregate amount, william found, to his extreme satisfaction, that his wants were abundantly supplied. there was another very important point, which william adopted immediate measures to secure, and that was obtaining the _pope's_ approval of his intended expedition. the moral influence of having the roman pontiff on his side, would, he knew, be of incalculable advantage to him. he sent an embassage, accordingly, to rome, to lay the whole subject before his holiness, and to pray that the pope would declare that he was justly entitled to the english crown, and authorize him to proceed and take possession of it by force of arms. lanfranc was the messenger whom he employed--the same lanfranc who had been so successful, some years before, in the negotiations at rome connected with the confirmation of william and matilda's marriage. lanfranc was equally successful now. the pope, after examining william's claims, pronounced them valid. he decided that william was entitled to the rank and honors of king of england. he caused a formal diploma to be made out to this effect. the diploma was elegantly executed, signed with the cross, according to the pontifical custom, and sealed with a round leaden seal.[j] [footnote j: the latin name for such a seal was _bulla_. it is on account of this sort of seal, which is customarily affixed to them, that papal edicts have received the name of _bulls_.] it was, in fact, very natural that the roman authorities should take a favorable view of william's enterprise, and feel an interest in its success, as it was undoubtedly for the interest of the church that william, rather than harold, should reign over england, as the accession of william would bring the english realm far more fully under the influence of the roman church. william had always been very submissive to the pontifical authority, as was shown in his conduct in respect to the question of his marriage. he himself, and also matilda his wife, had always taken a warm interest in the welfare and prosperity of the abbeys, the monasteries, the churches, and the other religious establishments of the times. then the very circumstance that he sent his embassador to rome to submit his claims to the pontiff's adjudication, while harold did not do so, indicated a greater deference for the authority of the church, and made it probable that he would be a far more obedient and submissive son of the church, in his manner of ruling his realm, if he should succeed in gaining possession of it, than harold his rival. the pope and his counselors at rome thought it proper to take all these things into the account in deciding between william and harold, as they honestly believed, without doubt, that it was their first and highest duty to exalt and aggrandize, by every possible means, the spiritual authority of the sacred institution over which they were called to preside. the pope and his cardinals, accordingly, espoused william's cause very warmly. in addition to the diploma which gave william formal authority to take possession of the english crown, the pope sent him a banner and a ring. the banner was of costly and elegant workmanship; its value, however, did not consist in its elegance or its cost, but in a solemn benediction which his holiness pronounced over it, by which it was rendered sacred and inviolable. the banner, thus blessed, was forwarded to william by lanfranc with great care. it was accompanied by the ring. the ring was of gold, and it contained a diamond of great value. the gold and the diamond both, however, served only as settings to preserve and honor something of far greater value than they. this choice treasure was a hair from the head of the apostle peter! a sacred relic of miraculous virtue and of inestimable value. when the edict with its leaden seal, and the banner and the ring arrived in normandy, they produced a great and universal excitement. to have bestowed upon the enterprise thus emphatically the solemn sanction of the great spiritual head of the church, to whom the great mass of the people looked up with an awe and a reverence almost divine, was to seal indissolubly the rightfulness of the enterprise, and to insure its success. there was thenceforward no difficulty in procuring men or means. every body was eager to share in the glory, and to obtain the rewards, of an enterprise thus commended by an authority duly commissioned to express, in all such cases, the judgment of heaven. finding that the current was thus fairly setting in his favor, william sent proclamations into all the countries surrounding normandy, inviting knights, and soldiers, and adventurers of every degree to join him in his projected enterprise. these proclamations awakened universal attention. great numbers of adventurous men determined to enter william's service. horses, arms, and accoutrements were everywhere in great demand. the invasion of england and the question of joining it were the universal topics of conversation. the roads were covered with knights and soldiers, some on horseback and alone, others in bands, large or small, all proceeding to normandy to tender their services. william received them all, and made liberal promises to bestow rewards and honors upon them in england, in the event of his success. to some he offered pay in money; to others, booty; to others, office and power. every one had his price. even the priests and dignitaries of the church shared the general enthusiasm. one of them furnished a ship and twenty armed men, under an agreement to be appointed bishop of a certain valuable english diocese when william should be established on his throne. while all these movements were going on in the interior of the country, all the sea-ports and towns along the coast of normandy presented a very busy scene of naval preparation. naval architects were employed in great numbers in building and fitting out vessels. some were constructed and furnished for the transportation of men, others for conveying provisions and munitions of war; and lighters and boats were built for ascending the rivers, and for aiding in landing troops upon shelving shores. smiths and armorers were occupied incessantly in manufacturing spears, and swords, and coats of mail; while vast numbers of laboring men and beasts of burden were employed in conveying arms and materials to and from the manufactories to the ships, and from one point of embarkation to another. as soon as william had put all these busy agencies thus in successful operation, he considered that there was one more point which it was necessary for him to secure before finally embarking, and that was the co-operation and aid of the french king, whose name at this time was philip. in his character of duke of normandy the king of france was his liege lord, and he was bound to act, in some degree, under an acknowledgment of his superior authority. in his new capacity, that is, as king of england, or, rather, as heir to the english kingdom, he was, of course, wholly independent of philip, and, consequently, not bound by any feudal obligation to look to him at all. he thought it most prudent, however, to attempt, at least, to conciliate philip's favor, and, accordingly, leaving his officers and his workmen to go on with the work of organizing his army and of building and equipping the fleet, he set off, himself, on an expedition to the court of the french king. he thought it safer to undertake this delicate mission himself, rather than to intrust it to an embassador or deputy. he found philip at his palace of st. germain's, which was situated at a short distance from paris. the duke assumed, in his interview with the king, a very respectful and deferential air and manner. philip was a very young man, though haughty and vain. william was very much his superior, not only in age and experience, but in talents and character, and in personal renown. still, he approached the monarch with all the respectful observance due from a vassal to his sovereign, made known his plans, and asked for philip's approbation and aid. he was willing, he said, in case that aid was afforded him, to hold his kingdom of england, as he had done the duchy of normandy, as a dependency of the french crown. philip seemed not at all disposed to look upon the project with favor. he asked william who was going to take care of his duchy while he was running off after a kingdom. william replied, at first, that that was a subject which he did not think his neighbors need concern themselves about. then thinking, on reflection, that a more respectful answer would be more politic, under the circumstances of the case, he added, that he was providentially blessed with a prudent wife and loving subjects, and that he thought he might safely leave his domestic affairs in their hands until he should return. philip still opposed the plan. it was quixotic, he said, and dangerous. he strongly advised william to abandon the scheme, and be content with his present possessions. such desperate schemes of ambition as those he was contemplating would only involve him in ruin. before absolutely deciding the case, however, philip called a council of his great nobles and officers of state, and laid william's proposals before them. the result of their deliberations was to confirm philip in his first decision. they said that the rendering to william the aid which he desired would involve great expense, and be attended with great danger; and as to william's promises to hold england as a vassal of the king of france, they had no faith in the performance of them. it had been very difficult, they said, for many years, for the kings of france to maintain any effectual authority over the dukes of normandy, and when once master of so distant and powerful a realm as england, all control over them would be sundered forever. philip then gave william his final answer in accordance with these counsels. the answer was received, on william's part, with strong feelings of disappointment and displeasure. philip conducted the duke to his retinue when the hour of departure arrived, in order to soothe, as far as possible, his irritated feelings, by dismissing him from his court with marks of his honorable consideration and regard. william, however, was not in a mood to be pleased. he told philip, on taking leave of him, that he was losing the most powerful vassal that any lord sovereign ever had, by the course which he had decided to pursue. "i would have held the whole realm of england as a part of your dominions, acknowledging you as sovereign over all, if you had consented to render me your aid, but i will not do it since you refuse. i shall feel bound to repay only those who assist me." william returned to normandy, where all the preparations for the expedition had been going on with great vigor during his absence, and proceeded to make arrangements for the last great measure which it was necessary to take previous to his departure; that was, the regular constitution of a government to rule in normandy while he should be gone. he determined to leave the supreme power in the hands of his wife matilda, appointing, at the same time, a number of civil and military officers as a council of regency, who were to assist her in her deliberations by giving her information and advice, and to manage, under her direction, the different departments of the government. her title was "duchess regent," and she was installed into her office in a public and solemn manner, at a great assembly of the estates of the realm. at the close of the ceremonies, after william had given matilda his charge, he closed his address by adding, "and do not let us fail to enjoy the benefit of your prayers, and those of all the ladies of your court, that the blessing of god may attend us, and secure the success of our expedition." we are not necessarily to suppose, as we might at first be strongly inclined to do, that there was any special hypocrisy and pretense in william's thus professing to rely on the protection of heaven in the personal and political dangers which he was about to incur. it is probable that he honestly believed that the inheritance of the english crown was his right, and, that being the case, that a vigorous and manly effort to enforce his right was a solemn duty. in the present age of the world, now that there are so many countries in which intelligence, industry, and love of order are so extensively diffused that the mass of the community are capable of organizing and administering a government themselves, republicans are apt to look upon hereditary sovereigns as despots, ruling only for the purpose of promoting their own aggrandizement, and the ends of an unholy and selfish ambition. that there have been a great many such despots no one can deny; but then, on the other hand, there have been many others who have acted, in a greater or less degree, under the influence of principles of duty in their political career. they have honestly believed that the vast power with which, in coming forward into life, they have found themselves invested, without, in most cases, any agency of their own, was a trust imposed upon them by divine providence, which could not innocently be laid aside; that on them devolved the protection of the communities over which they ruled from external hostility, and the preservation of peace and order within, and the promotion of the general industry and welfare, as an imperious and solemn duty; and they have devoted their lives to the performance of this duty, with the usual mixture, it is true, of ambition and selfishness, but still, after all, with as much conscientiousness and honesty as the mass of men in the humbler walks of life evince in performing theirs. william of normandy appears to have been one of this latter class; and in obeying the dictates of his ambition in seeking to gain possession of the english crown, he no doubt considered himself as fulfilling the obligations of duty too. however this may be, he went on with his preparations in the most vigorous and prosperous manner. the whole country were enthusiastic in the cause; and their belief that the enterprise about to be undertaken had unquestionably secured the favor of heaven, was confirmed by an extraordinary phenomenon which occurred just before the armament was ready to set sail. a comet appeared in the sky, which, as close observers declared, had a double tail. it was universally agreed that this portended that england and normandy were about to be combined, and to form a double kingdom, which should exhibit to all mankind a wonderful spectacle of splendor. chapter ix. crossing the channel. a.d. 1066 the river dive.--final assembling of the fleet.--map.--brilliant and magnificent scene.--equinoctial gales.--the expedition detained by them.--injurious effects of the storm.--discouragement of the men.--fears and forebodings.--some of the vessels wrecked.--favorable change.--the fleet puts to sea.--various delays.--its effects.--harold's want of information.--he withdraws his troops.--harold's vigilance.--he sends spies into normandy.--harold's spies.--they are detected.--william dismisses the spies.--his confidence in his cause.--fears of william's officers.--he reassures them.--arrival of matilda with the mira.--a present to william.--the squadron puts to sea again.--its appearance.--fleetness of the mira.--leaves the fleet out of sight.--william's unconcern.--reappearance of the fleet.--the fleet enters the bay of pevensey.--disembarkation.--landing of the troops.--anecdote.--the encampment.--scouts sent out.--william's supper.--the missing ships.--the conqueror's stone.--march of the army.--flight of the inhabitants.--the army encamps.--the town of hastings.--william's fortifications.--approach of harold. the place for the final assembling of the fleet which was to convey the expedition across the channel was the mouth of a small river called the dive, which will be seen upon the following map, flowing from the neighborhood of the castle of falaise northward into the sea. the grand gathering took place in the beginning of the month of september, in the year 1066. this date, which marks the era of the norman conquest, is one of the dates which students of history fix indelibly in the memory. [illustration: normandy.] the gathering of the fleet in the estuary of the dive, and the assembling of the troops on the beach along its shores, formed a very grand and imposing spectacle. the fleets of galleys, ships, boats, and barges covering the surface of the water--the long lines of tents under the cliffs on the land--the horsemen, splendidly mounted, and glittering with steel--the groups of soldiers, all busily engaged in transporting provisions and stores to and fro, or making the preliminary arrangements for the embarkation--the thousands of spectators who came and went incessantly, and the duke himself, gorgeously dressed, and mounted on his war-horse, with the guards and officers that attended him--these, and the various other elements of martial parade and display usually witnessed on such occasions, conspired to produce a very gay and brilliant, as well as magnificent scene. of course, the assembling of so large a force of men and of vessels, and the various preparations for the embarkation, consumed some time, and when at length all was ready--which was early in september--the equinoctial gales came on, and it was found impossible to leave the port. there was, in fact, a continuance of heavy winds and seas, and stormy skies, for several weeks. short intervals, from time to time, occurred, when the clouds would break away, and the sun appear; but these intervals did not liberate the fleet from its confinement, for they were not long enough in duration to allow the sea to go down. the surf continued to come rolling and thundering in upon the shore, and over the sand-bars at the mouth of the river, making destruction the almost inevitable destiny of any ship which should undertake to brave its fury. the state of the skies gradually robbed the scene of the gay and brilliant colors which first it wore. the vessels furled their sails, and drew in their banners, and rode at anchor, presenting their heads doggedly to the storm. the men on the shore sought shelter in their tents. the spectators retired to their homes, while the duke and his officers watched the scudding clouds in the sky, day after day, with great and increasing anxiety. in fact, william had very serious cause for apprehension in respect to the effect which this long-continued storm was to have on the success of his enterprise. the delay was a very serious consideration in itself, for the winter would soon be drawing near. in one month more it would seem to be out of the question for such a vast armament to cross the channel at all. then, when men are embarking in such dark and hazardous undertakings as that in which william was now engaged, their spirits and their energy rise and sink in great fluctuations, under the influence of very slight and inadequate causes; and nothing has greater influence over them at such times than the aspect of the skies. william found that the ardor and enthusiasm of his army were fast disappearing under the effects of chilling winds and driving rain. the feelings of discontent and depression which the frowning expression of the heavens awakened in their minds, were deepened and spread by the influence of sympathy. the men had nothing to do, during the long and dreary hours of the day, but to anticipate hardships and dangers, and to entertain one another, as they watched the clouds driving along the cliffs, and the rolling of the surges in the offing, with anticipations of shipwrecks, battles, and defeats, and all the other gloomy forebodings which haunt the imagination of a discouraged and discontented soldier. nor were these ideas of wrecks and destruction wholly imaginary. although the body of the fleet remained in the river, where it was sheltered from the winds, yet there were many cases of single ships that were from time to time exposed to them. these were detached vessels coming in late to the rendezvous, or small squadrons sent out to some neighboring port under some necessity connected with the preparations, or strong galleys, whose commanders, more bold than the rest, were willing, in cases _not_ of absolute necessity, to brave the danger. many of these vessels were wrecked. the fragments of them, with the bodies of the drowned mariners, were driven to the shore. the ghastly spectacles presented by these dead bodies, swollen and mangled, and half buried in the sand, as if the sea had been endeavoring to hide the mischief it had done, shocked and terrified the spectators who saw them. william gave orders to have all these bodies gathered up and interred secretly, as fast as they were found; still, exaggerated rumors of the number and magnitude of these disasters were circulated in the camp, and the discontent and apprehensions grew every day more and more alarming. william resolved that he must put to sea at the very first possible opportunity. the favorable occasion was not long wanting. the wind changed. the storm appeared to cease. a breeze sprang up from the south, which headed back the surges from the french shore. william gave orders to embark. the tents were struck. the baggage of the soldiers was sent on board the transport vessels. the men themselves, crowded into great flat-bottomed boats, passed in masses to the ships from the shore. the spectators reappeared, and covered the cliffs and promontories near, to witness the final scene. the sails were hoisted, and the vast armament moved out upon the sea. the appearance of a favorable change in the weather proved fallacious after all, for the clouds and storm returned, and after being driven, in apprehension and danger, about a hundred miles to the northeast along the coast, the fleet was compelled to seek refuge again in a harbor. the port which received them was st. valery, near dieppe. the duke was greatly disappointed at being obliged thus again to take the land. still, the attempt to advance had not been a labor wholly lost; for as the french coast here trends to the northward, they had been gradually narrowing the channel as they proceeded, and were, in fact, so far on the way toward the english shores. then there were, besides, some reasons for touching here, before the final departure, to receive some last re-enforcements and supplies. william had also one more opportunity of communicating with his capital and with matilda. these delays, disastrous as they seemed to be, and ominous of evil, were nevertheless attended with one good effect, of which, however, william at the time was not aware. they led harold, in england, to imagine that the enterprise was abandoned, and so put him off his guard. there were in those days, as has already been remarked, no regular and public modes of intercommunication, by which intelligence of important movements and events was spread every where, as now, with promptness and certainty. governments were obliged, accordingly, to rely for information, in respect to what their enemies were doing, on rumors, or on the reports of spies. rumors had gone to england in august that william was meditating an invasion, and harold had made some extensive preparations to meet and oppose him; but, finding that he did not come--that week after week of september passed away, and no signs of an enemy appeared, and gaining no certain information of the causes of the delay, he concluded that the enterprise was abandoned, or else, perhaps, postponed to the ensuing spring. accordingly, as the winter was coming on, he deemed it best to commence his preparations for sending his troops to their winter quarters. he disbanded some of them, and sent others away, distributing them in various castles and fortified towns, where they would be sheltered from the rigors of the season, and saved from the exposure and hardships of the camp, and yet, at the same time, remain within reach of a summons in case of any sudden emergency which might call for them. they were soon summoned, though not, in the first instance, to meet harold, as will presently appear. while adopting these measures, however, which he thought the comfort and safety of his army required, harold did not relax his vigilance in watching, as well as he could, the designs and movements of his enemy. he kept his secret agents on the southern coast, ordering them to observe closely every thing that transpired, and to gather and send to him every item of intelligence which should find its way by any means across the channel. of course, william would do all in his power to intercept and cut off all communication, and he was, at this time, very much aided in these efforts by the prevalence of the storms, which made it almost impossible for the fishing and trading vessels of the coast to venture out to sea, or attempt to cross the channel. the agents of harold, therefore, on the southern coast of england, found that they could obtain but very little information. at length the king, unwilling to remain any longer so entirely in the dark, resolved on sending some messengers across the sea into normandy itself, to learn positively what the true state of the case might be. messengers going thus secretly into the enemy's territory, or into the enemy's camp, become, by so doing, in martial law, _spies_, and incur, if they are taken, the penalty of death. the undertaking, therefore, is extremely hazardous; and as the death which is inflicted in cases of detection is an ignominious one--spies being hung, not shot--most men are very averse to encountering the danger. still, desperate characters are always to be found in camps and armies, who are ready to undertake it on being promised very extraordinary pay. harold's spies contrived to make their way across the channel, probably at some point far to the east of normandy, where the passage is narrow. they then came along the shore, disguised as peasants of the country, and they arrived at st. valery while william's fleets were there. here they began to make their observations, scrutinizing every thing with close attention and care, and yet studiously endeavoring to conceal their interest in what they saw. notwithstanding all their vigilance, however, they were discovered, proved to be spies, and taken before william to receive their sentence. instead of condemning them to death, which they undoubtedly supposed would be their inevitable fate, william ordered them to be set at liberty. "go back," said he, "to king harold, and tell him he might have saved himself the expense of sending spies into normandy to learn what i am preparing for him. he will soon know by other means--much sooner, in fact, than he imagines. go and tell him from me that he may put himself, if he pleases, in the safest place he can find in all his dominions, and if he does not find my hand upon him before the year is out, he never need fear me again as long as he lives." nor was this expression of confidence in the success of the measures which he was taking a mere empty boast. william knew the power of harold, and he knew his own. the enterprise in which he had embarked was not a rash adventure. it was a cool, deliberate, well-considered plan. it appeared doubtful and dangerous in the eyes of mankind, for to mere superficial observers it seemed simply an aggressive war waged by a duke of normandy, the ruler of a comparatively small and insignificant province, against a king of england, the monarch of one of the greatest and most powerful realms in the world. william, on the other hand, regarded it as an effort on the part of the rightful heir to a throne to dispossess a usurper. he felt confident of having the sympathy and co-operation of a great part of the community, even in england, the moment he could show them that he was able to maintain his rights; and that he could show them that, by a very decisive demonstration, was evident, visibly, before him, in the vast fleet which was riding at anchor in the harbor, and in the long lines of tents, filled with soldiery, which covered the land. on one occasion, when some of his officers were expressing apprehensions of harold's power, and their fears in respect to their being able successfully to cope with it, william replied, that the more formidable harold's power should prove to be, the better he should be pleased, as the glory would be all the greater for them in having overcome it. "i have no objection," said he, "that you should entertain exalted ideas of his strength, though i wonder a little that you do not better appreciate our own. i need be under no concern lest he, at such a distance, should learn too much, by his spies, about the force which i am bringing against him, when you, who are so near me, seem to know so little about it. but do not give yourselves any concern. trust to the justice of your cause and to my foresight. perform your parts like men, and you will find that the result which i feel sure of, and you hope for, will certainly be attained." the storm at length entirely cleared away, and the army and the fleet commenced their preparations for the final departure. in the midst of this closing scene, the attention of all the vast crowds assembled on board the ships and on the shores was one morning attracted by a beautiful ship which came sailing into the harbor. it proved to be a large and splendid vessel which the duchess matilda had built, at her own expense, and was now bringing in, to offer to her husband as her parting gift. she was herself on board, with her officers and attendants, having come to witness her husband's departure, and to bid him farewell. her arrival, of course, under such circumstances, produced universal excitement and enthusiasm. the ships in harbor and the shores resounded with acclamations as the new arrival came gallantly in. matilda's vessel was finely built and splendidly decorated. the sails were of different colors, which gave it a very gay appearance. upon them were painted, in various places, the three lions, which was the device of the norman ensign. at the bows of the ship was an effigy, or figure-head, representing william and matilda's second son shooting with a bow. this was the accomplishment which, of all others, his father took most interest in seeing his little son acquire. the arrow was drawn nearly to its head, indicating great strength in the little arms which were guiding it, and it was just ready to fly. the name of this vessel was the mira. william made it his flag ship. he hoisted upon its mast head the consecrated banner which had been sent to him from rome, and went on board accompanied by his officers and guards, and with great ceremony and parade. at length the squadron was ready to put to sea. at a given signal the sails were hoisted, and the whole fleet began to move slowly out of the harbor. there were four hundred ships of large size, if we may believe the chronicles of the times, and more than a thousand transports. the decks of all these vessels were covered with men; banners were streaming from every mast and spar; and every salient point of the shore was crowded with spectators. the sea was calm, the air serene, and the mighty cloud of canvas which whitened the surface of the water moved slowly on over the gentle swell of the waves, forming a spectacle which, as a picture merely for the eye, was magnificent and grand, and, when regarded in connection with the vast results to the human race which were to flow from the success of the enterprise, must have been considered sublime. the splendidly decorated ship which matilda had presented to her husband proved itself, on trial, to be something more than a mere toy. it led the van at the commencement, of course; and as all eyes watched its progress, it soon became evident that it was slowly gaining upon the rest of the squadron, so as continually to increase its distance from those that were following it. william, pleased with the success of its performance, ordered the sailing master to keep on, without regard to those who were behind; and thus it happened that, when night came on, the fleet was at very considerable distance in rear of the flag ship. of course, under these circumstances, the fleet disappeared from sight when the sun went down, but all expected that it would come into view again in the morning. when the morning came, however, to the surprise and disappointment of every one on board the flag ship, no signs of the fleet were to be seen. the seamen, and the officers on the deck, gazed long and intently into the southern horizon as the increasing light of the morning brought it gradually into view, but there was not a speck to break its smooth and even line. they felt anxious and uneasy, but william seemed to experience no concern. he ordered the sails to be furled, and then sent a man to the mast head to look out there. nothing was to be seen. william, still apparently unconcerned, ordered breakfast to be prepared in a very sumptuous manner, loading the tables with wine and other delicacies, that the minds of all on board might be cheered by the exhilarating influence of a feast. at length the lookout was sent to the mast head again. "what do you see now?" said william. "i see," said the man, gazing very intently all the while toward the south, "four _very small specks_ just in the horizon." the intense interest which this announcement awakened on the deck was soon at the same time _heightened_ and _relieved_ by the cry, "i can see more and more--they are the ships--yes, the whole squadron is coming into view." the advancing fleet soon came up with the mira, when the latter spread her sails again, and all moved slowly on together toward the coast of england. the ships had directed their course so much to the eastward, that when they made the land they were not very far from the straits of dover. as they drew near to the english shore, they watched very narrowly for the appearance of harold's cruisers, which they naturally expected would have been stationed at various points, to guard the coast; but none were to be seen. there had been such cruisers, and there still were such off the other harbors; but it happened, very fortunately for william, that those which had been stationed to guard this part of the island had been withdrawn a few days before, on account of their provisions being exhausted. thus, when william's fleet arrived, there was no enemy to oppose their landing. there was a large and open bay, called the bay of pevensey, which lay smiling before them, extending its arms as if inviting them in. the fleet advanced to within the proper distance from the land, and there the seamen cast their anchors, and all began to prepare for the work of disembarkation. a strong body of soldiery is of course landed first on such occasions. in this instance the archers, william's favorite corps, were selected to take the lead. william accompanied them. in his eagerness to get to the shore, as he leaped from the boat, his foot slipped, and he fell. the officers and men around him would have considered this an evil omen; but he had presence of mind enough to extend his arms and grasp the ground, pretending that his prostration was designed, and saying at the same time, "thus i seize this land; from this moment it is mine." as he arose, one of his officers ran to a neighboring hut which stood near by upon the shore, and breaking off a little of the thatch, carried it to william, and, putting it into his hand, said that he thus gave him _seizin_ of his new possessions. this was a customary form, in those times, of putting a new owner into possession of lands which he had purchased or acquired in any other way. the new proprietor would repair to the ground, where the party whose province it was to deliver the property would detach something from it, such as a piece of turf from a bank, or a little of the thatch from a cottage, and offering it to him, would say, "thus i deliver thee _seizin_," that is, _possession_, "of this land." this ceremony was necessary to complete the conveyance of the estate. the soldiers, as soon as they were landed, began immediately to form an encampment, and to make such military arrangements as were necessary to guard against an attack, or the sudden appearance of an enemy. while this was going on, the boats continued to pass to and fro, accomplishing, as fast as possible, the work of disembarkation. in addition to those regularly attached to the army, there was a vast company of workmen of all kinds, engineers, pioneers, carpenters, masons, and laborers, to be landed; and there were three towers, or rather forts, built of timber, which had been framed and fashioned in normandy, ready to be put up on arriving: these had now to be landed, piece by piece, on the strand. these forts were to be erected as soon as the army should have chosen a position for a permanent encampment, and were intended as a means of protection for the provisions and stores. the circumstance shows that the plan of transporting buildings ready made, across the seas, has not been invented anew by our emigrants to california. while these operations were going on, william dispatched small squadrons of horse as reconnoitering parties, to explore the country around, to see if there were any indications that harold was near. these parties returned, one after another, after having gone some miles into the country in all directions, and reported that there were no signs of an enemy to be seen. things were now getting settled, too, in the camp, and william gave directions that the army should kindle their camp fires for the night, and prepare and eat their suppers. his own supper, or dinner, as perhaps it might be called, was also served, which he partook, with his officers, in his own tent. his mind was in a state of great contentment and satisfaction at the successful accomplishment of the landing, and at finding himself thus safely established, at the head of a vast force, within the realm of england. every circumstance of the transit had been favorable excepting one, and that was, that two of the ships belonging to the fleet were missing. william inquired at supper if any tidings of them had been received. they told him, in reply, that the missing vessels had been heard from; they had, in some way or other, been run upon the rocks and lost. there was a certain astrologer, who had made a great parade, before the expedition left normandy, of predicting its result. he had found, by consulting the stars, that william would be successful, and would meet with no opposition from harold. this astrologer had been on board one of the missing ships, and was drowned. william remarked, on receiving this information, "what an idiot a man must be, to think that he can predict, by means of the stars, the future fate of others, when it is so plain that he can not foresee his own!" it is said that william's dinner on this occasion was served on a large stone instead of a table. the stone still remains on the spot, and is called "the conqueror's stone" to this day. the next day after the landing, the army was put in motion, and advanced along the coast toward the eastward. there was no armed enemy to contend against them there or to oppose their march; the people of the country, through which the army moved, far from attempting to resist them, were filled with terror and dismay. this terror was heightened, in fact, by some excesses of which some parties of the soldiers were guilty. the inhabitants of the hamlets and villages, overwhelmed with consternation at the sudden descent upon their shores of such a vast horde of wild and desperate foreigners, fled in all directions. some made their escape into the interior; others, taking with them the helpless members of their households, and such valuables as they could carry, sought refuge in monasteries and churches, supposing that such sanctuaries as those, not even soldiers, unless they were pagans, would dare to violate. others, still, attempted to conceal themselves in thickets and fens till the vast throng which was sweeping onward like a tornado should have passed. though william afterward always evinced a decided disposition to protect the peaceful inhabitants of the country from all aggressions on the part of his troops, he had no time to attend to that subject now. he was intent on pressing forward to a place of safety. william reached at length a position which seemed to him suitable for a permanent encampment. it was an elevated land, near the sea. to the westward of it was a valley formed by a sort of recess opened in the range of chalky cliffs which here form the shore of england. in the bottom of this valley, down upon the beach, was a small town, then of no great consequence or power, but whose name, which was hastings, has since been immortalized by the battle which was fought in its vicinity a few days after william's arrival. the position which william selected for his encampment was on high land in the vicinity of the town. the lines of the encampment were marked out, and the forts or castles which had been brought from normandy were set up within the inclosures. vast multitudes of laborers were soon at work, throwing up embankments, and building redoubts and bastions, while others were transporting the arms, the provisions, and the munitions of war, and storing them in security within the lines. the encampment was soon completed, and the long line of tents were set up in streets and squares within it. by the time, however, that the work was done, some of william's agents and spies came into camp from the north, saying that in four days harold would be upon him at the head of a hundred thousand men. chapter x. the battle of hastings. a.d. 1066 tostig.--he is driven from england.--expedition of tostig.--he sails to norway.--tostig's alliance with the norwegians.--the norwegian fleet.--superstitions.--dreams of the soldiers.--the combined fleets.--attack on scarborough.--the rolling fire.--burning of scarborough.--tostig marches to york.--surrender of the city.--arrival of king harold.--movements of tostig.--surprise of tostig and his allies.--preparations for battle.--negotiations between tostig and his brother.--the battle.--death of tostig.--the norwegians retire.--harold attempts to surprise william.--his failure.--advice of harold's counselors.--he rejects it.--harold's encampment.--the country alarmed.--harold's brothers.--he proposes to visit william's camp.--harold's arrival at william's lines.--he reconnoiters the camp.--harold's despondency.--his spies.--their report.--william's embassadors.--their propositions.--william's propositions unreasonable.--harold declines them.--further proposals of william.--counter proposal of harold.--harold's forebodings.--proposals of his brothers.--night before the battle.--scenes in harold's camp.--scenes in william's camp.--religious ceremonies.--a martial bishop.--william's war-horse.--preliminary arrangements.--battle of hastings.--defeat of harold.--he is slain.--final subjugation of the island.--william crowned at westminster.--william's power.--his greatness. the reader will doubtless recollect that the tidings which william first received of the accession of king harold were brought to him by tostig, harold's brother, on the day when he was trying his bow and arrows in the park at rouen. tostig was his brother's most inveterate foe. he had been, during the reign of edward, a great chieftain, ruling over the north of england. the city of york was then his capital. he had been expelled from these his dominions, and had quarreled with his brother harold in respect to his right to be restored to them. in the course of this quarrel he was driven from the country altogether, and went to the continent, burning with rage and resentment against his brother; and when he came to inform william of harold's usurpation, his object was not merely to arouse _william_ to action--he wished to act himself. he told william that he himself had more influence in england still than his brother, and that if william would supply him with a small fleet and a moderate number of men, he would make a descent upon the coast and show what he could do. william acceded to his proposal, and furnished him with the force which he required, and tostig set sail. william had not, apparently, much confidence in the power of tostig to produce any great effect, but his efforts, he thought, might cause some alarm in england, and occasion sudden and fatiguing marches to the troops, and thus distract and weaken king harold's forces. william would not, therefore, accompany tostig himself, but, dismissing him with such force as he could readily raise on so sudden a call, he remained himself in normandy, and commenced in earnest his own grand preparations, as is described in the last chapter. tostig did not think it prudent to attempt a landing on english shores until he had obtained some accession to the force which william had given him. he accordingly passed through the straits of dover, and then turning northward, he sailed along the eastern shores of the german ocean in search of allies. he came, at length, to norway. he entered into negotiations there with the norwegian king, whose name, too, was harold. this northern harold was a wild and adventurous soldier and sailor, a sort of sea king, who had spent a considerable portion of his life in marauding excursions upon the seas. he readily entered into tostig's views. an arrangement was soon concluded, and tostig set sail again to cross the german ocean toward the british shores, while harold promised to collect and equip his own fleet as soon as possible, and follow him. all this took place early in september; so that, at the same time that william's threatened invasion was gathering strength and menacing harold's southern frontier, a cloud equally dark and gloomy, and quite as threatening in its aspect, was rising and swelling in the north; while king harold himself, though full of vague uneasiness and alarm, could gain no certain information in respect to either of these dangers. the norwegian fleet assembled at the port appointed for the rendezvous of it, but, as the season was advanced and the weather stormy, the soldiers there, like william's soldiers on the coast of france, were afraid to put to sea. some of them had dreams which they considered as bad omens; and so much superstitious importance was attached to such ideas in those times that these dreams were gravely recorded by the writers of the ancient chronicles, and have come down to us as part of the regular and sober history of the times. one soldier dreamed that the expedition had sailed and landed on the english coast, and that there the english army came out to meet them. before the front of the army rode a woman of gigantic stature, mounted on a wolf. the wolf had in his jaws a human body, dripping with blood, which he was engaged in devouring as he came along. the woman gave the wolf another victim after he had devoured the first. another of these ominous dreams was the following: just as the fleet was about setting sail, the dreamer saw a crowd of ravenous vultures and birds of prey come and alight every where upon the sails and rigging of the ships, as if they were going to accompany the expedition. upon the summit of a rock near the shore there sat the figure of a female, with a stern and ferocious countenance, and a drawn sword in her hand. she was busy counting the ships, pointing at them, as she counted, with her sword. she seemed a sort of fiend of destruction, and she called out to the birds, to encourage them to go. "go!" said she, "without fear; you shall have abundance of prey. i am going too." it is obvious that these dreams might as easily have been interpreted to portend death and destruction to their english foes as to the dreamers themselves. the soldiers were, however, inclined--in the state of mind which the season of the year, the threatening aspect of the skies, and the certain dangers of their distant expedition, produced--to apply the gloomy predictions which they imagined these dreams expressed, to themselves. their chief, however, was of too desperate and determined a character to pay any regard to such influences. he set sail. his armament crossed the german sea in safety, and joined tostig on the coast of scotland. the combined fleet moved slowly southward, along the shore, watching for an opportunity to land. [illustration: the norwegians at scarborough.] they reached, at length, the town of scarborough, and landed to attack it. the inhabitants retired within the walls, shut the gates, and bid the invaders defiance. the town was situated under a hill, which rose in a steep acclivity upon one side. the story is, that the norwegians went upon this hill, where they piled up an enormous heap of trunks and branches of trees, with the interstices filled with stubble, dried bark, and roots, and other such combustibles, and then setting the whole mass on fire, they rolled it down into the town--a vast ball of fire, roaring and crackling more and more, by the fanning of its flames in the wind, as it bounded along. the intelligent reader will, of course, pause and hesitate, in considering how far to credit such a story. it is obviously impossible that any mere _pile_, however closely packed, could be made to roll. but it is, perhaps, not absolutely impossible that trunks of trees might be framed together, or fastened with wet thongs or iron chains, after being made in the form of a rude cylinder or ball, and filled with combustibles within, so as to retain its integrity in such a descent. the account states that this strange method of bombardment was successful. the town was set on fire; the people surrendered. tostig and the norwegians plundered it, and then, embarking again in their ships, they continued their voyage. the intelligence of this descent upon his northern coasts reached harold in london toward the close of september, just as he was withdrawing his forces from the southern frontier, as was related in the last chapter, under the idea that the norman invasion would probably be postponed until the spring; so that, instead of sending his troops into their winter quarters, he had to concentrate them again with all dispatch, and march at the head of them to the north, to avert this new and unexpected danger. while king harold was thus advancing to meet them, tostig and his norwegian allies entered the river humber. their object was to reach the city of york, which had been tostig's former capital, and which was situated near the river ouse, a branch of the humber. they accordingly ascended the humber to the mouth of the ouse, and thence up the latter river to a suitable point of debarkation not far from york. here they landed and formed a great encampment. from this encampment they advanced to the siege of the city. the inhabitants made some resistance at first; but, finding that their cause was hopeless, they offered to surrender, and a treaty of surrender was finally concluded. this negotiation was closed toward the evening of the day, and tostig and his confederate forces were to be admitted on the morrow. they therefore, feeling that their prize was secure, withdrew to their encampment for the night, and left the city to its repose. it so happened that king harold arrived that very night, coming to the rescue of the city. he expected to have found an army of besiegers around the walls, but, instead of that, there was nothing to intercept his progress up to the very gates of the city. the inhabitants opened the gates to receive him, and the whole detachment which was marching under his command passed in, while tostig and his norwegian allies were sleeping quietly in their camp, wholly unconscious of the great change which had thus taken place in the situation of their affairs. the next morning tostig drew out a large portion of the army, and formed them in array, for the purpose of advancing to take possession of the city. although it was september, and the weather had been cold and stormy, it happened that, on that morning, the sun came out bright, and the air was calm, giving promise of a warm day; and as the movement into the city was to be a peaceful one--a procession, as it were, and not a hostile march--the men were ordered to leave their coats of mail and all their heavy armor in camp, that they might march the more unencumbered. while they were advancing in this unconcerned and almost defenseless condition, they saw before them, on the road leading to the city, a great cloud of dust arising. it was a strong body of king harold's troops coming out to attack them. at first, tostig and the norwegians were completely lost and bewildered at the appearance of so unexpected a spectacle. very soon they could see weapons glittering here and there, and banners flying. a cry of "the enemy! the enemy!" arose, and passed along their ranks, producing universal alarm. tostig and the norwegian harold halted their men, and marshaled them hastily in battle array. the english harold did the same, when he had drawn up near to the front of the enemy; both parties then paused, and stood surveying one another. presently there was seen advancing from the english side a squadron of twenty horsemen, splendidly armed, and bearing a flag of truce. they approached to within a short distance of the norwegian lines, when a herald, who was among them, called out aloud for tostig. tostig came forward in answer to the summons. the herald then proclaimed to tostig that his brother did not wish to contend with him, but desired, on the contrary, that they should live together in harmony. he offered him peace, therefore, if he would lay down his arms, and he promised to restore him his former possessions and honors. tostig seemed very much inclined to receive this proposition favorably. he paused and hesitated. at length he asked the messenger what terms king harold would make with his friend and ally, the norwegian harold. "he shall have," replied the messenger, "seven feet of english ground for a grave. he shall have a little more than that, for he is taller than common men." "then," replied tostig, "tell my brother to prepare for battle. it shall never be said that i abandoned and betrayed my ally and friend." the troop returned with tostig's answer to harold's lines, and the battle almost immediately began. of course the most eager and inveterate hostility of the english army would be directed against the norwegians and their king, whom they considered as foreign intruders, without any excuse or pretext for their aggression. it accordingly happened that, very soon after the commencement of the conflict, harold the norwegian fell, mortally wounded by an arrow in his throat. the english king then made new proposals to tostig to cease the combat, and come to some terms of accommodation. but, in the mean time, tostig had become himself incensed, and would listen to no overtures of peace. he continued the combat until he was himself killed. the remaining combatants in his army had now no longer any motive for resistance. harold offered them a free passage to their ships, that they might return home in peace, if they would lay down their arms. they accepted the offer, retired on board their ships, and set sail. harold then, having, in the mean time, heard of william's landing on the southern coast, set out on his return to the southward, to meet the more formidable enemy that menaced him there. his army, though victorious, was weakened by the fatigues of the march, and by the losses suffered in the battle. harold himself had been wounded, though not so severely as to prevent his continuing to exercise the command. he pressed on toward the south with great energy, sending messages on every side, into the surrounding country, on his line of march, calling upon the chieftains to arm themselves and their followers, and to come on with all possible dispatch, and join him. he hoped to advance so rapidly to the southern coast as to surprise william before he should have fully intrenched himself in his camp, and without his being aware of his enemy's approach. but william, in order to guard effectually against surprise, had sent out small reconnoitering parties of horsemen on all the roads leading northward, that they might bring him in intelligence of the first approach of the enemy. harold's advanced guard met these parties, and saw them as they drove rapidly back to the camp to give the alarm. thus the hope of surprising william was disappointed. harold found, too, by his spies, as he drew near, to his utter dismay, that william's forces were four times as numerous as his own. it would, of course, be madness for him to think of attacking an enemy in his intrenchments with such an inferior force. the only alternative left him was either to retreat, or else to take some strong position and fortify himself there, in the hope of being able to resist the invaders and arrest their advance, though he was not strong enough to attack them. some of his counselors advised him not to hazard a battle at all, but to fall back toward london, carrying with him or destroying every thing which could afford sustenance to william's army from the whole breadth of the land. this would soon, they said, reduce william's army to great distress for want of food, since it would be impossible for him to transport supplies across the channel for so vast a multitude. besides, they said, this plan would compel william, in the extremity to which he would be reduced, to make so many predatory excursions among the more distant villages and towns, as would exasperate the inhabitants, and induce them to join harold's army in great numbers to repel the invasion. harold listened to these counsels, but said, after consideration, that he could never adopt such a plan. he could not be so derelict to his duty as to lay waste a country which he was under obligations to protect and save, or compel his people to come to his aid by exposing them, designedly, to the excesses and cruelties of so ferocious an enemy. harold determined, therefore, on giving william battle. it was not necessary, however, for him to attack the invader. he perceived at once that if he should take a strong position and fortify himself in it, william must necessarily attack _him_, since a foreign army, just landed in the country, could not long remain inactive on the shore. harold accordingly chose a position six or seven miles from william's camp, and fortified himself strongly there. of course neither army was in sight of the other, or knew the numbers, disposition, or plans of the enemy. the country between them was, so far as the inhabitants were concerned, a scene of consternation and terror. no one knew at what point the two vast clouds of danger and destruction which were hovering near them would meet, or over what regions the terrible storm which was to burst forth when the hour of that meeting should come, would sweep in its destructive fury. the inhabitants, therefore, were every where flying in dismay, conveying away the aged and the helpless by any means which came most readily to hand; taking with them, too, such treasures as they could carry, and hiding, in rude and uncertain places of concealment, those which they were compelled to leave behind. the region, thus, which lay between the two encampments was rapidly becoming a solitude and a desolation, across which no communication was made, and no tidings passed to give the armies at the encampments intelligence of each other. harold had two brothers among the officers of his army, gurth and leofwin. their conduct toward the king seems to have been of a more fraternal character than that of tostig, who had acted the part of a rebel and an enemy. gurth and leofwin, on the contrary, adhered to his cause, and, as the hour of danger and the great crisis which was to decide their fate drew nigh, they kept close to his side, and evinced a truly fraternal solicitude for his safety. it was they, specially, who had recommended to harold to fall back on london, and not risk his life, and the fate of his kingdom, on the uncertain event of a battle. as soon as harold had completed his encampment, he expressed a desire to gurth to ride across the intermediate country and take a view of william's lines. such an undertaking was less dangerous then than it would be at the present day; for now, such a reconnoitering party would be discovered from the enemy's encampment, at a great distance, by means of spy-glasses, and a twenty-four-pound shot or a shell would be sent from a battery to blow the party to pieces or drive them away. the only danger _then_ was of being pursued by a detachment of horsemen from the camp, or surrounded by an ambuscade. to guard against these dangers, harold and gurth took the most powerful and fleetest horses in the camp, and they called out a small but strong guard of well-selected men to escort them. thus provided and attended, they rode over to the enemy's lines, and advanced so near that, from a small eminence to which they ascended, they could survey the whole scene of william's encampment: the palisades and embankments with which it was guarded, which extended for miles; the long lines of tents within; the vast multitude of soldiers; the knights and officers riding to and fro, glittering with steel; and the grand pavilion of the duke himself, with the consecrated banner of the cross floating above it. harold was very much impressed with the grandeur of the spectacle. after gazing on this scene for some time in silence, harold said to gurth that perhaps, after all, the policy of falling back would have been the wisest for them to adopt, rather than to risk a battle with so overwhelming a force as they saw before them. he did not know, he added, but that it would be best for them to change their plan, and adopt that policy now. gurth said that it was too late. they had taken their stand, and now for them to break up their encampment and retire would be considered a retreat and not a maneuver, and it would discourage and dishearten the whole realm. after surveying thus, as long as they desired to do so, the situation and extent of william's encampment, harold's party returned to their own lines, still determined to make a stand there against the invaders, but feeling great doubt and despondency in respect to the result. harold sent over, too, in the course of the day, some spies. the men whom he employed for this purpose were normans by birth, and they could speak the french language. there were many normans in england, who had come over in king edward's time. these norman spies could, of course, disguise themselves, and mingle, without attracting attention, among the thousands of workmen and camp followers that were going and coming continually around the grounds which william's army occupied. they did this so effectually, that they penetrated within the encampment without difficulty, examined every thing, and, in due time, returned to harold with their report. they gave a formidable account of the numbers and condition of william's troops. there was a large corps of bowmen in the army, which had adopted a fashion of being shaven and shorn in such a manner that the spies mistook them for priests. they told harold, accordingly, on their return, that there were more _priests_ in william's camp than there were soldiers in all his army. during this eventful day, william too sent a body of horsemen across the country which separated the two encampments, though his emissaries were not spies, but embassadors, with propositions for peace. william had no wish to fight a battle, if what he considered as rightfully his kingdom could be delivered to him without it; and he determined to make one final effort to obtain a peaceable surrender of it, before coming to the dreadful resort of an appeal to arms. he accordingly sent his embassy with _three_ propositions to make to the english king. the principal messenger in this company was a monk, whose name was maigrot. he rode, with a proper escort and a flag of truce, to harold's lines. the propositions were these, by accepting either of which the monk said that harold might avoid a battle. 1. that harold should surrender the kingdom to william, as he had solemnly sworn to do over the sacred relics in normandy. 2. that they should both agree to refer the whole subject of controversy between them to the pope, and abide by his decision. 3. that they should settle the dispute by single combat, the two claimants to the crown to fight a duel on the plain, in presence of their respective armies. it is obvious that harold could not accept either of these propositions. the first was to give up the whole point at issue. as for the second, the pope had already prejudged the case, and if it were to be referred to him, there could be no doubt that he would simply reaffirm his former decision. and in respect to single combat, the disadvantage on harold's part would be as great in such a contest as it would be in the proposed arbitration. he was himself a man of comparatively slender form and of little bodily strength. william, on the other hand, was distinguished for his size, and for his extraordinary muscular energy. in a modern combat with fire-arms these personal advantages would be of no avail, but in those days, when the weapons were battle-axes, lances, and swords, they were almost decisive of the result. harold therefore declined all william's propositions, and the monk returned. william seems not to have been wholly discouraged by this failure of his first attempt at negotiation, for he sent his embassage a second time to make one more proposal. it was, that if harold would consent to acknowledge william as king of england, william would assign the whole territory to him and to his brother gurth, to hold _as provinces_, under william's general sway. under this arrangement william would himself return to normandy, making the city of rouen, which was his capital there, the capital of the whole united realm. to this proposal harold replied, that he could not, on any terms, give up his rights as sovereign of england. he therefore declined this proposal also. he, however, now made a proposition in his turn. he was willing, he said, to compromise the dispute, so far as it could be done by _the payment of money_. if william would abandon his invasion and return to normandy, giving up his claims to the english crown, he would pay him, he said, any sum of money that he would name. william could not accept this proposal. he was, as he believed, the true and rightful heir to the throne of england, and there was a point of honor involved, as well as a dictate of ambition to be obeyed, in insisting on the claim. in the mean time, the day had passed, while these fruitless negotiations had been pending. night was coming on. william's officers and counselors began to be uneasy at the delay. they said that every hour new re-enforcements were coming into harold's camp, while they themselves were gaining no advantage, and, consequently, the longer the battle was delayed, the less was the certainty of victory. so william promised them that he would attack king harold in his camp the very next morning. as the time for the great final struggle drew near, harold's mind was oppressed more and more with a sense of anxiety and with foreboding fears. his brothers, too, were ill at ease. their solicitude was increased by the recollection of harold's oath, and of the awful sanctions with which they feared the sacred relics might have invested it. they were not sure that their brother's excuse for setting it aside would save him from the guilt and curse of perjury in the sight of heaven. so they proposed, on the eve of the battle, that harold himself should retire, and leave them to conduct the defense. "we can not deny," they said, "that you did take the oath; and, notwithstanding the circumstances which seem to absolve you from the obligation, it is best to avoid, if possible, the open violation of it. it will be better, on the whole, for you to leave the army and go to london. you can aid very effectually in the defense of the kingdom by raising re-enforcements there. we will stay and encounter the actual battle. heaven can not be displeased with us for so doing, for we shall be only discharging the duty incumbent on all, of defending their native land from foreign invasion." harold would not consent to adopt this plan. he could not retire himself, he said, at the hour of approaching danger, and leave his brothers and his friends exposed, when it was _his_ crown for which they were contending. such were the circumstances of the two armies on the evening before the battle; and, of course, in such a state of things, the tendency of the minds of men would be, in harold's camp, to gloom and despondency, and in william's, to confidence and exultation. harold undertook, as men in his circumstances often do, to lighten the load which weighed upon his own heart and oppressed the spirits of his men, by feasting and wine. he ordered a plentiful supper to be served, and supplied his soldiers with abundance of drink; and it is said that his whole camp exhibited, during the whole night, one wide-spread scene of carousing and revelry, the troops being gathered every where in groups around their camp fires, some half stupefied, others quarreling, and others still singing national songs, and dancing with wild excitement, according to the various effects produced upon different constitutions by the intoxicating influence of beer and wine. in william's camp there were witnessed very different scenes. there were a great many monks and ecclesiastics in the train of his army, and, on the night before the battle, they spent the time in saying masses, reading litanies and prayers, chanting anthems, and in other similar acts of worship, assisted by the soldiers, who gathered, in great congregations, for this wild worship, in the open spaces among the tents and around the camp fires. at length they all retired to rest, feeling an additional sense of safety in respect to the work of the morrow by having, as they supposed, entitled themselves, by their piety, to the protection of heaven. in the morning, too, in william's camp, the first thing done was to convene the army for a grand celebration of mass. it is a curious illustration of the mingling of the religious, or, perhaps, we ought rather to say, the superstitious sentiment of the times, with the spirit of war, that the bishop who officiated in this solemn service of the mass wore a coat of mail under his pontifical attire, and an attendant stood by his side, while he was offering his prayers, with a steel-pointed spear in his hand, ready for the martial prelate to assume as soon as the service should be ended. accordingly, when the religious duty was performed, the bishop threw off his surplice, took his spear, and mounting his white charger, which was also all saddled and bridled beside him, he headed a brigade of horse, and rode on to the assault of the enemy. william himself mounted a very magnificent war-horse from spain, a present which he had formerly received from one of his wealthy barons. the name of the horse was bayard. from william's neck were suspended some of the most sacred of the relics over which harold had taken his false oath. he imagined that there would be some sort of charm in them, to protect his life, and to make the judgment of heaven more sure against the perjurer. the standard which the pope had blessed was borne by his side by a young standard bearer, who was very proud of the honor. an older soldier, however, on whom the care of this standard officially devolved, had asked to be excused from carrying it. he wished, he said, to do his work that day with the _sword_. while making these preliminary arrangements for going into battle, william, with the party around him, stood upon a gentle eminence in the middle of the camp, and in sight of the whole army. every one was struck with admiration at the splendid figure which their commander made--his large and well-formed limbs covered with steel, and his horse, whose form was as noble as that of his master, prancing restlessly, as if impatient for the battle to begin. when all were ready, the norman army advanced gayly and joyously to attack the english lines; but the gayety and joyousness of the scene soon disappeared, as corps after corps got fairly engaged in the awful work of the day. for ten long hours there reigned over the whole field one wide-spread scene of havoc and death--every soul among all those countless thousands delivered up to the supreme dominion of the most dreadful passions, excited to a perfect phrensy of hatred, rage, and revenge, and all either mercilessly killing others, or dying themselves in agony and despair. when night came, the normans were every where victorious. they were in full possession of the field, and they rode triumphantly to and fro through harold's camp, leaping their horses over the bodies of the dead and dying which covered the ground. those of king harold's followers that had escaped the slaughter of the day fled in hopeless confusion toward the north, where the flying masses strewed the roads for miles with the bodies of men who sank down on the way, spent with wounds or exhausted by fatigue. in the morning, william marshaled his men on the field, and called over the names of the officers and men, as they had been registered in normandy, for the purpose of ascertaining who were killed. while this melancholy ceremony was going on, two monks came in, sent from the remains of the english army, and saying that king harold was missing, and that it was rumored that he had been slain. if so, his body must be lying somewhere, they said, upon the field, and they wished for permission to make search for it. the permission was granted. with the aid of some soldiers they began to explore the ground, turning over and examining every lifeless form which, by the dress or the armor, might seem to be possibly the king's. their search was for a long time vain; the ghastly faces of the dead were so mutilated and changed that nobody could be identified. at length, however, a woman who had been in harold's family, and knew his person more intimately than they, found and recognized the body, and the monks and the soldiers carried it away. * * * * * the battle of hastings sealed and settled the controversy in respect to the english crown. it is true that the adherents of harold, and also those of edgar atheling, made afterward various efforts to rally their forces and recover the kingdom, but in vain. william advanced to london, fortified himself there, and made excursions from that city as a centre until he reduced the island to his sway. he was crowned at length, at westminster abbey, with great pomp and parade. he sent for matilda to come and join him, and instated her in his palace as queen of england. he confiscated the property of all the english nobles who had fought against him, and divided it among the norman chieftains who had aided him in the invasion. he made various excursions to and from normandy himself, being received every where throughout his dominions, on both sides the channel, with the most distinguished honors. in a word, he became, in the course of a few years after he landed, one of the greatest and most powerful potentates on the globe. how far all his riches and grandeur were from making him happy, will appear in the following chapter. chapter xi. prince robert's rebellion. a.d. 1076-1077 william's oldest son.--his character.--william's conflicts with his son robert.--william rufus.--william's son henry.--robert nicknamed short boots.--robert's betrothment.--william's motives.--death of margaret.--more trouble.--robert's political power.--his ambition.--robert claims normandy.--william refuses it.--castle at l'aigle.--quarrel between robert and william rufus.--the combatants parted.--robert's rage.--robert's rebellion.--anxiety and distress of matilda.--measures of matilda.--advantages of william.--robert lays down his arms.--interview with his father.--recriminations.--the interview fruitless.--robert goes to flanders.--his treasonable correspondence.--action of philip.--he sides with robert.--robert's dissipation.--matilda sends him supplies.--matilda's secret supplies.--she is discovered.--matilda's messenger seized.--william's reproaches.--matilda's reply.--william's anger.--sampson's escape.--things grow worse.--preparations for war.--matilda's distress.--william wounded by his son.--the battle goes against him.--matilda's anguish.--the reconciliation. ambitious men, who devote their time and attention, through all the early years of life, to their personal and political aggrandizement, have little time to appropriate to the government and education of their children, and their later years are often embittered by the dissipation and vice, or by the unreasonable exactions of their sons. at least it was so in william's case. by the time that his public enemies were subdued, and he found himself undisputed master both of his kingdom and his duchy, his peace and happiness were destroyed, and the tranquillity of his whole realm was disturbed by a terrible family quarrel. the name of his oldest son was robert. he was fourteen years old when his father set off on his invasion of england. at that time he was a sort of spoiled child, having been his mother's favorite, and, as such, always greatly indulged by her. when william went away, it will be recollected that he appointed matilda regent, to govern normandy during his absence. this boy was also named in the regency, so that he was nominally associated with his mother, and he considered himself, doubtless, as the more important personage of the two. in a word, while william was engaged in england, prosecuting his conquests there, robert was growing up in normandy a vain, self-conceited, and ungovernable young man. his father, in going back and forth between england and normandy, often came into conflict with his son, as usual in such cases. in these contests matilda took sides with the son. william's second son, whose name was william rufus, was jealous of his older brother, and was often provoked by the overbearing and imperious spirit which robert displayed. william rufus thus naturally adhered to the father's part in the family feud. william rufus was as rough and turbulent in spirit as robert, but he had not been so indulged. he possessed, therefore, more self-control; he knew very well how to suppress his propensities, and conceal the unfavorable aspects of his character when in the presence of his father. there was a third brother, named henry. he was of a more quiet and inoffensive character, and avoided taking an active part in the quarrel, except so far as william rufus led him on. he was william rufus's friend and companion, and, as such, robert considered him as his enemy. all, in fact, except matilda, were against robert, who looked down, in a haughty and domineering manner--as the oldest son and heir is very apt to do in rich and powerful families--upon the comparative insignificance of his younger brethren. the king, instead of restraining this imperious spirit in his son, as he might, perhaps, have done by a considerate and kind, and, at the same time, decisive exercise of authority, teased and tormented him by sarcasms and petty vexations. among other instances of this, he gave him the nickname of _short boots_, because he was of inferior stature. as robert was, however, at this time of full age, he was stung to the quick at having such a stigma attached to him by his father, and his bosom burned with secret sentiments of resentment and revenge. he had, besides, other causes of complaint against his father, more serious still. when he was a very young child, his father, according to the custom of the times, had espoused him to the daughter and heiress of a neighboring earl, a child like himself. her name was margaret. the earldom which this little margaret was to inherit was maine. it was on the frontiers of normandy, and it was a rich and valuable possession. it was a part of the stipulation of the marriage contract that the young bride's domain was to be delivered to the father of the bridegroom, to be held by him until the bridegroom should become of age, and the marriage should be fully consummated. in fact, the getting possession of this rich inheritance, with a prospect of holding it so many years, was very probably the principal end which william had in view in contracting for a matrimonial union so very premature. if this was, in reality, william's plan, it resulted, in the end, even more favorably than he had anticipated; for the little heiress died a short time after her inheritance was put into the possession of her father-in-law. there was nobody to demand a restoration of it, and so william continued to hold it until his son, the bridegroom, became of age. robert then demanded it, contending that it was justly his. william refused to surrender it. he maintained that what had passed between his son in his infancy, and the little margaret, was not a marriage, but only a betrothment--a contract for a future marriage, which was to take place when the parties were of age--that, since margaret's death prevented the consummation of the union, robert was never her husband, and could not, consequently, acquire the rights of a husband. the lands, therefore, ought manifestly, he said, to remain in the hands of her guardian, and whatever rights any other persons might have, claiming to succeed margaret as her natural heirs, it was plain that his son could have no title whatever. however satisfactory this reasoning might be to the mind of william, robert was only exasperated by it. he looked upon the case as one of extreme injustice and oppression on the part of his father, who, not content, he said, with his own enormous possessions, must add to them by robbing his own son. in this opinion robert's mother, matilda, agreed with him. as for william rufus and henry, they paid little attention to the argument, but were pleased with the result of it, and highly enjoyed their brother's vexation and chagrin in not being able to get possession of his earldom. there was another very serious subject of dispute between robert and his father. it has already been stated, that when the duke set out on his expedition for the invasion of england, he left matilda and robert together in charge of the duchy. at the commencement of the period of his absence robert was very young, and the actual power rested mainly in his mother's hands. as he grew older, however, he began to exercise an increasing influence and control. in fact, as he was himself ambitious and aspiring, and his mother indulgent, the power passed very rapidly into his hands. it was eight years from the time that william left normandy before his power was so far settled and established in england that he could again take the affairs of his original realm into his hands. he had left robert, at that time, a mere boy of fourteen, who, though rude and turbulent in character, was still politically powerless. he found him, on his return, a man of twenty-two, ruder and more turbulent than before, and in the full possession of political power. this power, too, he found him very unwilling to surrender. in fact, when william came to receive back the province of normandy again, robert almost refused to surrender it. he said that his father had always promised him the duchy of normandy as his domain so soon as he should become of age, and he claimed now the fulfillment of this promise. besides, he said that, now that his father was king of england, his former realm was of no consequence to him. it did not add sensibly to his influence or his power, and he might, therefore, without suffering any sensible loss himself, grant it to his son. william, on his part, did not acknowledge the force of either of these arguments. he would not admit that he had ever promised normandy to his son; and as to voluntarily relinquishing any part of his possessions, he had no faith in the policy of a man's giving up his power or his property to his children until they were justly entitled to inherit it by his death; at any rate, he should not do it. he had no idea, as he expressed it, "of putting off his clothes before he was going to bed." the irritation and ill-will which these dissensions produced grew deeper and more inveterate every day, though the disagreement had been thus far a private and domestic dispute, confined, in its influence, to the king's immediate household. an occasion, however, now occurred, on which the private family feud broke out into an open public quarrel. the circumstances were these: king william had a castle in normandy, at a place called l'aigle. he was spending some time there, in the year 1076, with his court and family. one day william rufus and henry were in one of the upper apartments of the castle, playing with dice, and amusing themselves, in company with other young men of the court, in various ways. there was a window in the apartment leading out upon a balcony, from which one might look down upon the court-yard of the castle below. robert was in this court-yard with some of _his_ companions, walking there in an irritated state of mind, which had been produced by some previous disputes with his brothers. william rufus looked down from the balcony and saw him, and by way, perhaps, of quenching his anger, poured some water down upon him. the deed changed the suppressed and silent irritation in robert's heart to a perfect phrensy of rage and revenge. he drew his sword and sprang to the stair-case. he uttered loud and terrible imprecations as he went, declaring that he would kill the author of such an insult, even if he _was_ his brother. the court-yard was, of course, immediately filled with shouts and exclamations of alarm, and every body pressed forward toward the room from which the water had been thrown, some to witness, and some to prevent the affray. the king himself, who happened to be in that part of the castle at the time, was one of the number. he reached the apartment just in time to interpose between his sons, and prevent the commission of the awful crime of fratricide. as it was, he found it extremely difficult to part the ferocious combatants. it required all his paternal authority, and not a little actual force, to arrest the affray. he succeeded, however, at length, with the help of the by-standers, in parting his sons, and robert, out of breath, and pale with impotent rage, was led away. robert considered his father as taking sides against him in this quarrel, and he declared that he could not, and would not, endure such treatment any longer. he found some sympathy in the conversation of his mother, to whom he went immediately with bitter complainings. she tried to soothe and quiet his wounded spirit, but he would not be pacified. he spent the afternoon and evening in organizing a party of wild and desperate young men from among the nobles of the court, with a view of raising a rebellion against his father, and getting possession of normandy by force. they kept their designs profoundly secret, but prepared to leave l'aigle that night, to go and seize rouen, the capital, which they hoped to surprise into a surrender. accordingly, in the middle of the night, the desperate troop mounted their horses and rode away. in the morning the king found that they were gone, and he sent an armed force after them. their plan of surprising rouen failed. the king's detachment overtook them, and, after a sharp contest, succeeded in capturing a few of the rebels, though robert himself, accompanied by some of the more desperate of his followers, escaped over the frontier into a neighboring province, where he sought refuge in the castle of one of his father's enemies. this result, as might have been expected, filled the mind of matilda with anxiety and distress. a civil war between her husband and her son was now inevitable; and while every consideration of prudence and of duty required her to espouse the father's cause, her maternal love, a principle stronger far, in most cases, than prudence and duty combined, drew her irresistibly toward her son. robert collected around him all the discontented and desperate spirits of the realm, and for a long time continued to make his father infinite trouble. matilda, while she forbore to advocate his cause openly in the presence of the king, kept up a secret communication with him. she sent him information and advice from time to time, and sometimes supplies, and was thus, technically, guilty of a great crime--the crime of maintaining a treasonable correspondence with a rebel. in a moral point of view, however, her conduct may have been entirely right; at any rate, its influence was very salutary, for she did all in her power to restrain both the father and the son; and by the influence which she thus exerted, she doubtless mitigated very much the fierceness of the struggle. of course, the advantage, in such a civil war as this, would be wholly on the side of the sovereign. william had all the power and resources of the kingdom in his own hands--the army, the towns, the castles, the treasures. robert had a troop of wild, desperate, and unmanageable outlaws, without authority, without money, without a sense of justice on their side. he gradually became satisfied that the contest was vain. in proportion as the activity of the hostilities diminished, matilda became more and more open in her efforts to restrain it, and to allay the animosity on either side. she succeeded, finally, in inducing robert to lay down his arms, and then brought about an interview between the parties, in hopes of a peaceful settlement of the quarrel. it appeared very soon, however, at this interview, that there was no hope of any thing like a real and cordial reconciliation. though both the father and son had become weary of the unnatural war which they had waged against each other, yet the ambitious and selfish desires on both sides, in which the contest had originated, remained unchanged. robert began the conference by imperiously demanding of his father the fulfillment of his promise to give him the government of normandy. his father replied by reproaching him with his unnatural and wicked rebellion, and warned him of the danger he incurred, in imitating the example of absalom, of sharing that wretched rebel's fate. robert rejoined that he did not come to meet his father for the sake of hearing a sermon preached. he had had enough of sermons, he said, when he was a boy, studying grammar. he wanted his father to do him justice, not preach to him. the king said that he should never divide his dominions, while he lived, with any one; and added, notwithstanding what robert had contemptuously said about sermons, that the scripture declared that a house divided against itself could not stand. he then proceeded to reproach and incriminate the prince in the severest manner for his disloyalty as a subject, and his undutifulness and ingratitude as a son. it was intolerable, he said, that a son should become the rival and bitterest enemy of his father, when it was to him that he owed, not merely all that he enjoyed, but his very existence itself. these reproaches were probably uttered in an imperious and angry manner, and with that spirit of denunciation which only irritates the accused and arouses his resentment, instead of awakening feelings of penitence and contrition. at any rate, the thought of his filial ingratitude, as his father presented it, produced no relenting in robert's mind. he abruptly terminated the interview, and went out of his father's presence in a rage. in spite of all his mother's exertions and entreaties, he resolved to leave the country once more. he said he would rather be an exile, and wander homeless in foreign lands, than to remain in his father's court, and be treated in so unjust and ignominious a manner, by one who was bound by the strongest possible obligations to be his best and truest friend. matilda could not induce him to change this determination; and, accordingly, taking with him a few of the most desperate and dissolute of his companions, he went northward, crossed the frontier, and sought refuge in flanders. flanders, it will be recollected, was matilda's native land. her brother was the earl of flanders at this time. the earl received young robert very cordially, both for his sister's sake, and also, probably, in some degree, as a means of petty hostility against king william, his powerful neighbor, whose glory and good fortune he envied. robert had not the means or the resources necessary for renewing an open war with his father, but his disposition to do this was as strong as ever, and he began immediately to open secret communications and correspondence with all the nobles and barons in normandy whom he thought disposed to espouse his cause. he succeeded in inducing them to make secret contributions of funds to supply his pecuniary wants, of course promising to repay them with ample grants and rewards so soon as he should obtain his rights. he maintained similar communications, too, with matilda, though she kept them very profoundly secret from her husband. robert had other friends besides those whom he found thus furtively in normandy. the king of france himself was much pleased at the breaking out of this terrible feud in the family of his neighbor, who, from being his dependent and vassal, had become, by his conquest of england, his great competitor and rival in the estimation of mankind. philip was disposed to rejoice at any occurrences which tended to tarnish william's glory, or which threatened a division and diminution of his power. he directed his agents, therefore, both in normandy and in flanders, to encourage and promote the dissension by every means in their power. he took great care not to commit himself by any open and positive promises of aid, and yet still he contrived, by a thousand indirect means, to encourage robert to expect it. thus the mischief was widened and extended, while yet nothing effectual was done toward organizing an insurrection. in fact, robert had neither the means nor the mental capacity necessary for maturing and carrying into effect any actual plan of rebellion. in the mean time, months passed away, and as nothing effectual was done, robert's adherents in normandy became gradually discouraged. they ceased their contributions, and gradually forgot their absent and incompetent leader. robert spent his time in dissipation and vice, squandering in feasts and in the company of abandoned men and women the means which his followers sent him to enable him to prepare for the war; and when, at last, these supplies failed him, he would have been reduced gradually to great distress and destitution, were it not that one faithful and devoted friend still adhered to him. that friend was his mother. matilda knew very well that whatever she did for her absent son must be done in the most clandestine manner, and this required much stratagem and contrivance on her part. she was aided, however, in her efforts at concealment by her husband's absence. he was now for a time in england, having been called there by some pressing demands of public duty. he left a great minister of state in charge of normandy, whose vigilance matilda thought it would be comparatively easy to elude. she sent to robert, in flanders, first her own private funds. then she employed for this purpose a portion of such public funds as came into her hands. the more she sent, however, the more frequent and imperious were robert's demands for fresh supplies. the resources of a mother, whether great or small, are always soon exhausted by the insatiable requirements of a dissolute and profligate son. when matilda's money was gone, she sold her jewels, then her more expensive clothes, and, finally, such objects of value, belonging to herself or to her husband, as could be most easily and privately disposed of. the minister, who was very faithful and watchful in the discharge of his duties, observed indications that something mysterious was going on. his suspicions were aroused. he watched matilda's movements, and soon discovered the truth. he sent information to william. william could not believe it possible that his minister's surmises could be true; for william was simply a statesman and a soldier, and had very inadequate ideas of the absorbing and uncontrollable power which is exercised by the principle of maternal love. he, however, determined immediately to take most efficient measures to ascertain the truth. he returned to normandy, and there he succeeded in intercepting one of matilda's messengers on his way to flanders, with communications and money for robert. the name of this messenger was sampson. william seized the money and the letters, and sent the messenger to one of his castles, to be shut up in a dungeon. then, with the proofs of guilt which he had thus obtained, he went, full of astonishment and anger, to find matilda, and to upbraid her, as he thought she deserved, for her base and ungrateful betrayal of her husband. the reproaches which he addressed to her were bitter and stern, though they seem to have been spoken in a tone of sorrow rather than of anger. "i am sure," he said, "i have ever been to you a faithful and devoted husband. i do not know what more you could have desired than i have done. i have loved you with a sincere and true affection. i have honored you. i have placed you in the highest positions, intrusting you repeatedly with large shares of my own sovereign power. i have confided in you--committing my most essential and vital interests to your charge. and now this is the return. you employ the very position, and power, and means which your confiding husband has put into your hands, to betray him in the most cruel way, and to aid and encourage his worst and most dangerous enemy." to these reproaches matilda attempted no reply, except to plead the irresistible impetuosity and strength of her maternal love. "i could not bear," she said, "to leave robert in distress and suffering while i had any possible means of relieving him. he is my child. i think of him all the time. i love him more than my life. i solemnly declare to you, that if he were now dead, and i could restore him to life by dying for him, i would most gladly do it. how, then, do you suppose that i could possibly live here in abundance and luxury, while he was wandering homeless, in destitution and want, and not try to relieve him? whether it is right or wrong for me to feel so, i do not know; but this i know, i _must_ feel so: i can not help it. he is our first-born son; i can not abandon him." william went away from the presence of matilda full of resentment and anger. of course he could do nothing in respect to her but reproach her, but he determined that the unlucky sampson should suffer severely for the crime. he sent orders to the castle where he lay immured, requiring that his eyes should be put out. matilda, however, discovered the danger which threatened her messenger in time to send him warning. he contrived to make his escape, and fled to a certain monastery which was under matilda's special patronage and charge. a monastery was, in those days, a sanctuary into which the arm even of the most despotic authority scarcely dared to intrude in pursuit of its victim. to make the safety doubly sure, the abbot proposed that the trembling fugitive should join their order and become a monk. sampson was willing to do any thing to save his life. the operation of putting out the eyes was very generally fatal, so that he considered his life at stake. he was, accordingly, shaven and shorn, and clothed in the monastic garb. he assumed the vows of the order, and entered, with his brother monks, upon the course of fastings, penances, and prayers which pertained to his new vocation; and william left him to pursue it in peace. things went on worse instead of better after this discovery of the mother's participation in the councils of the son. either through the aid which his mother had rendered, or by other means, there seemed to be a strong party in and out of normandy who were inclined to espouse robert's cause. his friends, at length, raised a very considerable army, and putting him at the head of it, they advanced to attack rouen. the king, greatly alarmed at this danger, collected all the forces that he could command, and went to meet his rebel son. william rufus accompanied his father, intending to fight by his side; while matilda, in an agony of terror and distress, remained, half distracted, within her castle walls--as a wife and mother might be expected to be, on the approach of a murderous conflict between her husband and her son. the thought that one of them might, perhaps, be actually killed by the other, filled her with dismay. and, in fact, this dreadful result came very near being realized. robert, in the castle at l'aigle, had barely been prevented from destroying his brother, and now, on the plain of archembraye, where this battle was fought, his father _fell_, and was very near being killed, by his hand. in the midst of the fight, while the horsemen were impetuously charging each other in various parts of the field, all so disguised by their armor that no one could know the individual with whom he was contending, robert encountered a large and powerful knight, and drove his lance through his armor into his arm. through the shock of the encounter and the faintness produced by the agony of the wound, the horseman fell to the ground, and robert perceived, by the voice with which his fallen enemy cried out in his pain and terror, that it was his father that he had thus pierced with his steel. at the same moment, the wounded father, in looking at his victorious antagonist, recognized his son. he cursed his unnatural enemy with a bitter and terrible malediction. robert was shocked and terrified at what he had done. he leaped from his horse, knelt down by the side of his father, and called for aid. the king, distracted by the anguish of his wound, and by the burning indignation and resentment which raged in his bosom against the unnatural hostility which inflicted it, turned away from his son, and refused to receive any succor from him. besides the misfortune of being unhorsed and wounded, the battle itself went that day against the king. robert's army remained masters of the field. william rufus was wounded too, as well as his father. matilda was overwhelmed with distress and mental anguish at the result. she could not endure the idea of allowing so unnatural and dreadful a struggle to go on. she begged her husband, with the most earnest importunities and with many tears, to find some way of accommodating the dispute. her nights were sleepless, her days were spent in weeping, and her health and strength were soon found to be wasting very rapidly away. she was emaciated, wan, and pale, and it was plain that such distress, if long continued, would soon bring her to the grave. matilda's intercessions at length prevailed. the king sent for his son, and, after various negotiations, some sort of compromise was effected. the armies were disbanded, peace was restored, and robert and his father once more seemed to be friends. soon after this, william, having a campaign to make in the north of england, took robert with him as one of the generals in his army. chapter xii. the conclusion. a.d. 1078-1087 william's reign in england.--his difficulties.--feelings of the english people.--rebellions.--amalgamation of the english and normans.--william's labors.--necessity of bringing a large norman force.--providing for them.--the british realm normanized.--o yes! o yes! o yes!--relics of the past.--their future preservation.--point of view in which the norman conquest is regarded.--domesday book.--its great obscurity.--specimen of the domesday book.--translation.--matilda's health declines.--death of her daughter.--matilda retires to her palace at caen.--her distress of mind.--matilda's health.--memorials of her.--william's declining years.--his fitfulness and discontent.--philip ridicules william.--william's rage.--william's threats.--conflagration of mantes.--william's injury.--his great danger.--william's remorse.--his last acts.--robert absent.--he receives normandy.--william rufus and henry.--the king's will.--william's death.--abandonment of the body.--apprehensions of the people.--the body removed to caen.--extraordinary scenes.--the body conveyed to the monastery on a cart.--the procession broken up.--scene at the interment.--the sarcophagus too small.--the body burst.--william rufus obtains possession of the english throne. from the time of the battle of hastings, which took place in 1066, to that of william's death, which occurred in 1087, there intervened a period of about twenty years, during which the great monarch reigned over his extended dominions with a very despotic sway, though not without a large share of the usual dangers, difficulties, and struggles attending such a rule. he brought over immense numbers of normans from normandy into england, and placed all the military and civil power of the empire in their hands; and he relied almost entirely upon the superiority of his physical force for keeping the country in subjugation to his sway. it is true, he maintained that he was the rightful heir to the english crown, and that, consequently, the tenure by which he held it was the right of inheritance, and not the right of conquest; and he professed to believe that the people of england generally admitted his claim. this was, in fact, to a considerable extent, true. at least there was probably a large part of the population who believed william's right to the crown superior to that of harold, whom he had deposed. still, as william was by birth, and education, and language a foreigner, and as all the friends and followers who attended him, and, in fact, almost the whole of the army, on which he mainly relied for the preservation of his power, were foreigners too--wearing a strange dress, and speaking in an unknown tongue--the great mass of the english people could not but feel that they were under a species of foreign subjugation. quarrels were therefore continually breaking out between them and their norman masters, resulting in fierce and bloody struggles, on their part, to get free. these rebellions were always effectually put down; but when quelled in one quarter they soon broke out in another, and they kept william and his forces almost always employed. but william was not a mere warrior. he was well aware that the permanence and stability of his own and his successor's sway in england would depend finally upon the kind of basis on which the civil institutions of the country should rest, and on the proper consolidation and adjustment of the administrative and judicial functions of the realm. in the intervals of his campaigns, therefore, william devoted a great deal of time and attention to this subject, and he evinced a most profound and statesmanlike wisdom and sagacity in his manner of treating it. he had, in fact, a herculean task to perform--a double task--viz., to amalgamate two _nations_, and also to fuse and merge two _languages_ into one. he was absolutely compelled, by the circumstances under which he was placed, to grapple with both these vast undertakings. if, at the time when, in his park at rouen, he first heard of harold's accession, he had supposed that there was a party in england in his favor strong enough to allow of his proceeding there alone, or with a small norman attendance, so that he might rely mainly on the english themselves for his accession to the throne, the formidable difficulties which, as it was, he had subsequently to encounter, would all have been saved. but there was no such party--at least there was no evidence that there was one of sufficient strength to justify him in trusting himself to it. it seemed to him, then, that if he undertook to gain possession of the english throne at all, he must rely entirely on the force which he could take with him from normandy. to make this reliance effectual, the force so taken must be an overwhelming one. then, if normans in great numbers were to go to england for the purpose of putting him upon the english throne, they must be rewarded, and so vast a number of candidates for the prizes of honor and wealth could be satisfied only in england, and by confiscations there. his possessions in normandy would obviously be insufficient for such a purpose. it was evident, moreover, that if a large number of norman adventurers were placed in stations of trust and honor, and charged with civil offices and administrative functions all over england, they would form a sort of class by themselves, and would be looked upon with jealousy and envy by the original inhabitants, and that there was no hope of maintaining them safely in their position except by making the class as numerous and as strong as possible. in a word, william saw very clearly that, while it would have been very well, if it had been possible, for him to have brought _no_ normans to england, it was clearly best, since so many must go, to contrive every means to swell and increase the number. it was one of those cases where, being obliged to go far, it is best to go farther; and william resolved on thoroughly _normanizing_, so to speak, the whole british realm. this enormous undertaking he accomplished fully and permanently; and the institutions of england, the lines of family descent, the routine of judicial and administrative business, and the very language of the realm, retain the norman characteristics which he ingrafted into them to the present day. it gives us a feeling akin to that of sublimity to find, even in our own land, and in the most remote situations of it, the lingering relics of the revolutions and deeds of these early ages, still remaining, like a faint ripple rolling gently upon a beach in a deep and secluded bay, which was set in motion, perhaps, at first, as one of the mountainous surges of a wintery storm in the most distant seas. for example, if we enter the most humble court in any remote and newly-settled country in the american forests, a plain and rustic-looking man will call the equally rustic-looking assembly to order by rapping his baton, the only symbol of his office, on the floor, and calling out, in words mystic and meaningless to him, "o yes! o yes! o yes!"[k] he little thinks that he is obeying a behest of william the conqueror, issued eight hundred years ago, ordaining that his native tongue should be employed in the courts of england. the irresistible progress of improvement and reform have gradually displaced the intruding language again--except so far as it has become merged and incorporated with the common language of the country--from all the ordinary forms of legal proceedings. it lingers still, however, as it were, on the threshold, in this call to order; and as it is harmless there, the spirit of conservatism will, perhaps, preserve for it this last place of refuge for a thousand years to come, and "_o yes_" will be the phrase for ordaining silence by many generations of officers, who will, perhaps, never have heard of the authority whose orders they unwittingly obey. [footnote k: oyez! oyez! oyez! norman french for hearken! hearken! hearken!] the work of incorporating the norman and english families with one another, and fusing the two languages into one, required about a century for its full accomplishment; and when at last it was accomplished, the people of england were somewhat puzzled to know whether they ought to feel proud of william's exploits in the conquest of england, or humiliated by them. so far as they were themselves descended from the normans, the conquest was one of the glorious deeds of their ancestors. so far as they were of english parentage, it would seem to be incumbent on them to mourn over their fathers' defeat. it is obvious that from such a species of perplexity as this there was no escape, and it has accordingly continued to embarrass the successive generations of englishmen down to the present day. the norman conquest occupies, therefore, a very uncertain and equivocal position in english history, the various modern writers who look back to it now being hardly able to determine whether they are to regard it as a mortifying subjugation which their ancestors suffered, or a glorious victory which they gained. one of the great measures of william's reign, and one, in fact, for which it has been particularly famous in modern times, was a grand census or registration of the kingdom, which the conqueror ordered with a view of having on record a perfect enumeration and description of all the real and personal property in the kingdom. this grand national survey was made in 1078. the result was recorded in two volumes of different sizes, which were called the great and the little domesday book. these books are still preserved, and are to this day of the very highest authority in respect to all questions touching ancient rights of property. one is a folio, and the other a quarto volume. the records are written on vellum, in a close, abridged, and, to ordinary readers, a perfectly unintelligible character. the language is latin; but a modern latin scholar, without any means other than an inspection of the work, would be utterly unable to decipher it. in fact, though the character is highly wrought, and in some respects elegant, the whole style and arrangement of the work is pretty nearly on a par, in respect to scientific skill, with queen emma's designs upon the bayeux tapestry. about half a century ago, copies of these works were printed, by means of type made to represent the original character. but these printed editions were found unintelligible and useless until copious indexes were prepared, and published to accompany them, at great expense of time and labor. some little idea of the character and style of this celebrated record may be obtained from the following specimen, which is as faithful an imitation of the original as any ordinary typography will allow: [illustration] the passage, deciphered and expressed in full, stands thus--the letters omitted in the original, above, being supplied in italics: in brixistan hund_redo_. rex ten_et_ bermundesye. herald_us_ com_es_ tenuit. t_unc_ se def_en_d_ebat_ p_ro_ xiii. hid_is_, m_od_o pro xii. hid_is_. t_er_ra e_st_ viii. car_rucatarum_. in d_omi_nio e_st_ una car_rucata_ et xxv. vill_ani_ et xxxiii. bord_arii_ cu_m_ un_a_ car_rucata_. ibi nova et pulchra eccl_esia_, et xx. ac_ræ_ p_ra_ti. silva v. porc_is_ de pasnag_io_. the english translation is as follows: in brixistan hundred. the king holds bermundesye. earl herald held it [before]. at that time it was rated at thirteen hides; now, at twelve. the arable land is eight carrucates [_or_ plow-lands]. there is one carrucate in demesne, and twenty-five villans, and thirty-three bordars, with one carrucate. there is a new and handsome church, with twenty acres of meadow, and woodland for five hogs in pasnage [pasturage] time. but we must pass on to the conclusion of the story. about the year 1082, queen matilda's health began seriously to decline. she was harassed by a great many anxieties and cares connected with the affairs of state which devolved upon her, and arising from the situation of her family: these anxieties produced great dejection of spirits, and aggravated, if they did not wholly cause, her bodily disease. she was at this time in normandy. one great source of her mental suffering was her anxiety in respect to one of her daughters, who, as well as herself, was declining in health. forgetting her own danger in her earnest desires for the welfare of her child, she made a sort of pilgrimage to a monastery which contained the shrine of a certain saint, who, as she imagined, had power to save her daughter. she laid a rich present on the shrine; she offered before it most earnest prayers, imploring, with tears of bitter grief, the intercession of the saint, and manifesting every outward symbol of humility and faith. she took her place in the religious services of the monastery, and conformed to its usages, as if she had been in the humblest private station. but all was in vain. the health of her beloved daughter continued to fail, until at length she died; and matilda, growing herself more feeble, and almost broken hearted through grief, shut herself up in the palace at caen. it was in the same palace which william had built, within his monastery, many long years before, at the time of their marriage. matilda looked back to that period, and to the buoyant hopes and bright anticipations of power, glory, and happiness which then filled her heart, with sadness and sorrow. the power and the glory had been attained, and in a measure tenfold greater than she had imagined, but the happiness had never come. ambition had been contending unceasingly for twenty years, among all the branches of her family, against domestic peace and love. she possessed, herself, an aspiring mind, but the principles of maternal and conjugal love were stronger in her heart than those of ambition; and yet she was compelled to see ambition bearing down and destroying love in all its forms every where around her. her last days were embittered by the breaking out of new contests between her husband and her son. matilda sought for peace and comfort in multiplying her religious services and observances. she fasted, she prayed, she interceded for the forgiveness of her sins with many tears. the monks celebrated mass at her bed-side, and made, as she thought, by renewing the sacrifice of christ, a fresh propitiation for her sins. william, who was then in normandy, hearing of her forlorn and unhappy condition, came to see her. he arrived just in time to see her die. they conveyed her body from the palace in her husband's monastery at caen to the convent which she had built. it was received there in solemn state, and deposited in the tomb. for centuries afterward, there remained many memorials of her existence and her greatness there, in paintings, embroideries, sacred gifts, and records, which have been gradually wasted away by the hand of time. they have not, however, wholly disappeared, for travelers who visit the spot find that many memorials and traditions of matilda linger there still. william himself did not live many years after the death of his wife. he was several years older than she. in fact, he was now considerably advanced in age. he became extremely corpulent as he grew old, which, as he was originally of a large frame, made him excessively unwieldy. the inconvenience resulting from this habit of body was not the only evil that attended it. it affected his health, and even threatened to end in serious if not fatal disease. while he was thus made comparatively helpless in body by the infirmities of his advancing age, he was nevertheless as active and restless in spirit as ever. it was, however, no longer the activity of youth, and hope, and progress which animated him, but rather the fitful uneasiness with which age agitates itself under the vexations which it sometimes has to endure, or struggles convulsively at the approach of real or imaginary dangers, threatening the possessions which it has been the work of life to gain. the dangers in william's case were real, not imaginary. he was continually threatened on every side. in fact, the very year before he died, the dissensions between himself and robert broke out anew, and he was obliged, unwieldy and helpless as he was, to repair to normandy, at the head of an armed force, to quell the disturbances which robert and his partisans had raised. robert was countenanced and aided at this time by philip, the king of france, who had always been king william's jealous and implacable rival. philip, who, as will be recollected, was very young when william asked his aid at the time of his invasion of england, was now in middle life, and at the height of his power. as he had refused william his aid, he was naturally somewhat envious and jealous of his success, and he was always ready to take part against him. he now aided and abetted robert in his turbulence and insubordination, and ridiculed the helpless infirmities of the aged king. while william was in normandy, he submitted to a course of medical treatment, in the hope of diminishing his excessive corpulency, and relieving the disagreeable and dangerous symptoms which attended it. while thus in his physician's hands, he was, of course, confined to his chamber. philip, in ridicule, called it "being in the straw." he asked some one who appeared at his court, having recently arrived from normandy, whether the old woman of england was still in the straw. some miserable tale-bearer, such as every where infest society at the present day, who delight in quoting to one friend what they think will excite their anger against another, repeated these words to william. sick as he was, the sarcasm aroused him to a furious paroxysm of rage. he swore by "god's brightness and resurrection" that, when he got out again, he would kindle such fires in philip's dominions, in commemoration of his delivery, as should make his realms too hot to hold him. he kept his word--at least so far as respects the kindling of the fires; but the fires, instead of making philip's realms too hot to hold him, by a strange yet just retribution, were simply the means of closing forever the mortal career of the hand that kindled them. the circumstances of this final scene of the great conqueror's earthly history were these: in the execution of his threat to make philip's dominions too hot to hold him, william, as soon as he was able to mount his horse, headed an expedition, and crossed the frontiers of normandy, and moved forward into the heart of france, laying waste the country, as he advanced, with fire and sword. he came soon to the town of mantes, a town upon the seine, directly on the road to paris. william's soldiers attacked the town with furious impetuosity, carried it by assault, and set it on fire. william followed them in, through the gates, glorying in the fulfillment of his threats of vengeance. some timbers from a burning house had fallen into the street, and, burning there, had left a smoldering bed of embers, in which the fire was still remaining. william, excited with the feeling of exultation and victory, was riding unguardedly on through the scene of ruin he had made, issuing orders, and shouting in a frantic manner as he went, when he was suddenly stopped by a violent recoil of his horse from the burning embers, on which he had stepped, and which had been concealed from view by the ashes which covered them. william, unwieldy and comparatively helpless as he was, was thrown with great force upon the pommel of the saddle. he saved himself from falling from the horse, but he immediately found that he had sustained some serious internal injury. he was obliged to dismount, and to be conveyed away, by a very sudden transition, from the dreadful scene of conflagration and vengeance which he had been enacting, to the solemn chamber of death. they made a litter for him, and a corps of strong men was designated to bear the heavy and now helpless burden back to normandy. [illustration: william's horse stepping on the embers.] they took the suffering monarch to rouen. the ablest physicians were summoned to his bed-side. after examining his case, they concluded that he must die. the tidings threw the unhappy patient into a state of extreme anxiety and terror. the recollection of the thousand deeds of selfish ambition and cruelty which he had been perpetrating, he said, all his days, filled him with remorse. he shrunk back with invincible dread from the hour, now so rapidly approaching, when he was to appear in judgment before god, and answer, like any common mortal, for his crimes. he had been accustomed all his life to consider himself as above all law, superior to all power, and beyond the reach of all judicial question. but now his time had come. he who had so often made others tremble, trembled now in his turn, with an acuteness of terror and distress which only the boldest and most high-handed offenders ever feel. he cried bitterly to god for forgiveness, and brought the monks around him to help him with incessant prayers. he ordered all the money that he had on hand to be given to the poor. he sent commands to have the churches which he had burned at mantes rebuilt, and the other injuries which he had effected in his anger repaired. in a word, he gave himself very earnestly to the work of attempting, by all the means considered most efficacious in those days, to avert and appease the dreaded anger of heaven. of his three oldest sons, robert was away; the quarrel between him and his father had become irreconcilable, and he would not come to visit him, even in his dying hours. william rufus and henry were there, and they remained very constantly at their father's bed-side--not, however, from a principle of filial affection, but because they wanted to be present when he should express his last wishes in respect to the disposal of his dominions. such an expression, though oral, would be binding as a will. when, at length, the king gave his dying directions in respect to the succession, it appeared that, after all, he considered his right to the english throne as very doubtful in the sight of god. he had, in a former part of his life, promised normandy to robert, as his inheritance, when he himself should die; and though he had so often refused to surrender it to him while he himself continued to live, he confirmed his title to the succession now. "i have promised it to him," he said, "and i keep my promise; and yet i know that that will be a miserable country which is subject to his government. he is a proud and foolish knave, and can never prosper. as for my kingdom of england," he continued, "i bequeath it to no one, for it was not bequeathed to me. i acquired it by force, and at the price of blood. i leave it in the hands of god, only wishing that my son william rufus may have it, for he has been submissive to me in all things." "and what do you give _me_, father?" asked henry, eagerly, at this point. "i give you," said the king, "five thousand pounds from my treasury." "but what shall i do with my five thousand pounds," asked henry, "if you do not give me either house or land?" "be quiet, my son," rejoined the king, "and trust in god. let your brothers go before you; your turn will come after theirs." the object which had kept the young men at their father's bed-side having been now attained, they both withdrew. henry went to get his money, and william rufus set off immediately for england, to prepare the way for his own accession to the throne, as soon as his father should be no more. the king determined to be removed from his castle in rouen to a monastery which was situated at a short distance from the city, without the walls. the noise of the city disturbed him, and, besides, he thought he should feel safer to die on sacred ground. he was accordingly removed to the monastery. there, on the tenth of september, he was awakened in the morning by hearing the city bells ringing. he asked what it meant. he was told that the bells were ringing for the morning service at the church of st. mary. he lifted up his hands, looked to heaven, and said, "i commend myself to my lady mary, the holy mother of god," and almost immediately expired. the readers of history have frequent occasion to be surprised at the sudden and total change which often takes place at the moment of the death of a mighty sovereign, and even sometimes before his death, in the indications of the respect and consideration with which his attendants and followers regard him. in william's case, as has happened in many other cases since, the moment he ceased to breathe he was utterly abandoned. every body fled, carrying with them, as they went, whatever they could seize from the chamber--the arms, the furniture, the dresses, and the plate; for all these articles became their perquisites on the decease of their master. the almost incredible statement is made that the heartless monsters actually stripped the dead body of their sovereign, to make sure of all their dues, and left it naked on the stone floor, while they bore their prizes to a place of safety. the body lay in this neglected state for many hours; for the tidings of the great monarch's death, which was so sudden at last, produced, as it spread, universal excitement and apprehension. no one knew to what changes the event would lead, what wars would follow between the sons, or what insurrections or rebellions might have been secretly formed, to break out suddenly when this crisis should have arrived. thus the whole community were thrown into a state of excitement and confusion. the monk and lay brethren of the monastery at length came in, took up the body, and prepared it for burial. they then brought crosses, tapers, and censers, and began to offer prayers and to chant requiems for the repose of the soul of the deceased. they sent also the archbishop of rouen, to know what was to be done with the body. the archbishop gave orders that it should be taken to caen, and be deposited there in the monastery which william had erected at the time of his marriage. the tale which the ancient historians have told in respect to the interment is still more extraordinary, and more inconsistent with all the ideas we naturally form of the kind of consideration and honor which the remains of so great a potentate would receive at the hands of his household and his officers of state, than the account of his death. it is said that all the members of his household, and all his officers, immediately after his decease, abandoned the town--all eagerly occupied in plans and maneuvers to secure their positions under the new reign. some went in pursuit of robert, and some to follow william rufus. henry locked up his money in a strong box, well ironed, and went off with it to find some place of security. there was nobody left to take the neglected body to the grave. at last a countryman was found who undertook to transport the heavy burden from rouen to caen. he procured a cart, and conveyed it from the monastery to the river, where it was put on board a vessel, and taken down the seine to its mouth, and thence by sea to caen. the abbot of st. stephen's, which was the name of william's monastery there, came, with some monks and a procession of the people, to accompany the body to the abbey. as this procession was moving along, however, a fire broke out in the town, and the attendants, actuated either by a sense of duty requiring them to aid in extinguishing the flames, or by curiosity to witness the conflagration, abandoned the funeral cortège. the procession was broken up, and the whole multitude, clergy and laity, went off to the fire, leaving the coffin, with its bearers, alone. the bearers, however, went on, and conveyed their charge to the church within the abbey walls. when the time arrived for the interment, a great company assembled to witness the ceremonies. stones had been taken up in the church floor, and a grave dug. a stone coffin, a sort of sarcophagus, had been prepared, and placed in the grave as a receptacle for the body. when all was ready, and the body was about to be let down, a man suddenly came forward from the crowd and arrested the proceedings. he said that the land on which the abbey stood belonged to him; that william had taken forcible possession of it, for the abbey, at the time of his marriage; that he, the owner, had been compelled thus far to submit to this wrong, inasmuch as he had, during william's life-time, no means of redress, but now he protested against a spoliation. "the land," he said, "is mine; it belonged to my father. i have not sold it, or forfeited it, nor pledged it, nor given it. it is my right. i claim it. in the name of god, i forbid you to put the body of the spoiler there, or to cover him with my ground." when the excitement and surprise which this denunciation had awakened had subsided a little, the bishops called this sudden claimant aside, examined the proofs of his allegations, and, finding that the case was truly as he stated it, they paid him, on the spot, a sum equal to the value of ground enough for a grave, and promised to take immediate measures for the payment of the rest. the remonstrant then consented that the interment might proceed. in attempting to let the body down into the place prepared for it, they found that the sarcophagus was too small. they undertook to force the body in. in attempting this, the coffin was broken, and the body, already, through the long delays, advanced in decomposition, was burst. the monks brought incense and perfumes, and burned and sprinkled them around the place, but in vain. the church was so offensive that every body abandoned it at once, except the workmen who remained to fill the grave. * * * * * while these things were transpiring in normandy, william rufus had hastened to england, taking with him the evidences of his father's dying wish that he should succeed him on the english throne. before he reached head-quarters there, he heard of his father's death, and he succeeded in inducing the norman chieftains to proclaim him king. robert's friends made an effort to advance his claims, but they could do nothing effectual for him, and so it was soon settled, by a treaty between the brothers, that william rufus should reign in england, while robert was to content himself with his father's ancient domain of normandy. the end. transcriber's notes 1. minor changes have been made to correct typesetters' errors, and to ensure consistent spelling and punctuation in this etext; otherwise, every effort has been made to remain true to the original book. 2. the chapter summaries in this text were originally published as banners in the page headers, and have been moved to beginning of the chapter for the reader's convenience. 3. page numbering in the list of engravings for the "map of normandy" has been changed from 189 to 190, to be consistent with the change needed in the html version of this book. wulf the saxon a story of the norman conquest by g. a. henty preface. although the immediate results of the battle of hastings may have been of less importance to the world than were those of some other great battles, the struggle has, in the long run, had a greater influence upon the destiny of mankind than any other similar event that has ever taken place. that admixture of saxon, danish, and british races which had come to be known under the general name of english, was in most respects far behind the rest of europe. the island was, as it had always been,--except during the rule of two or three exceptionally strong kings,--distracted by internal dissensions. broad lines of division still separated the north from the south, and under weak kings the powerful earls became almost independent. the enterprise that had distinguished their saxon and danish ancestors seems to have died out. there was a general indisposition to change, and except in her ecclesiastical buildings, england made but little progress in civilization from the time of alfred to that of harold. its insular position cut it off from taking part in that rapid advance which, beginning in italy, was extending throughout europe. the arrival, however, of the impetuous norman race, securing as it did a close connection with the continent, quickened the intellect of the people, raised their intelligence, was of inestimable benefit to the english, and played a most important part in raising england among the nations. moreover, it has helped to produce the race that has peopled northern america, australia, and the south of africa, holds possession of india, and stands forth as the greatest civilizer in the world. the conquest of england by the normans was achieved without even a shadow of right or justice. it was at the time an unmixed curse to england; but now we can recognize the enormous benefits that accrued when in his turn the englishman conquered the norman, and the foreign invaders became an integral portion of the people they had overcome. for the historical details of the story, i have only had to go to freeman's magnificent _history of the norman conquest of england_, which i hope will be perused by all of my readers who are able to obtain it. g. a. henty contents. chap. i. a quarrel ii. country life iii. at court iv. a storm v. rouen vi. release of the earl vii. the oath viii. trouble with wales ix. in the welsh valleys x. porthwyn xi. the secret passage xii. edith xiii. harold, the king xiv. wulf's suspicions xv. a meeting by the river xvi. a voyage north xvii. an attempt at assassination xviii. the northern invasion xix. stamford bridge xx. the landing of the foe xxi. hastings xxii. the lord of bramber illustrations the last stand at hastings the young thane comes back to steyning wulf and his followers storm llewellyn's stronghold wulf leapt forward and caught the uplifted wrist wulf the saxon. chapter i. a quarrel. the great abbey of westminster was approaching its completion; an army of masons and labourers swarmed like bees upon and around it, and although differing widely in its massive architecture, with round saxon windows and arches, from the edifice that was two or three generations later to be reared in its place,--to serve as a still more fitting tomb for the ashes of its pious founder,--it was a stately abbey, rivalling the most famous of the english fanes of the period. from his palace hard by king edward had watched with the deepest interest the erection of the minster that was the dearest object of his life. the king was surrounded by normans, the people among whom he had lived until called from his retirement to ascend the throne of england, and whom he loved far better than those over whom he reigned. he himself still lived almost the life of a recluse. he was sincerely anxious for the good of his people, but took small pains to ensure it, his life being largely passed in religious devotions, and in watching over the rise of the abbey he had founded. a town had risen around minster and palace, and here the workmen employed found their lodgings, while craftsmen of all descriptions administered to the wants both of these and of the nobles of edward's court. from one of the side doors of the palace a page, some fifteen or sixteen years of age, ran down the steps in haste. he was evidently a saxon by his fair hair and fresh complexion, and any observer of the time would have seen that he must, therefore, be in the employment of earl harold, the great minister, who had for many years virtually ruled england in the name of its king. the young page was strongly and sturdily built. his garb was an english one, but with some admixture of norman fashions. he wore tightly-fitting leg coverings, a garment somewhat resembling a blouse of blue cloth girded in by a belt at the waist, and falling in folds to the knee. over his shoulders hung a short mantle of orange colour with a hood. on his head was a cap with a wide brim that was turned up closely behind, and projected in a pointed shovel shape in front. in his belt was a small dagger. he wore shoes of light yellow leather fastened by bands over the insteps. as he ran down the steps of the palace he came into sharp contact with another page who had just turned the corner of the street. "i crave your pardon, walter fitz-urse," he said hurriedly, "but i was in haste and saw you not." the other lad was as clearly norman as the speaker was saxon. he was perhaps a year the senior in point of age, and taller by half a head, but was of slighter build. the expression of his face differed as widely from that of the saxon as did his swarthy complexion and dark hair, for while the latter face wore a frank and pleasant expression, that of the norman was haughty and arrogant. "you did it on purpose," he said angrily, "and were we not under the shadow of the palace i would chastise you as you deserve." the smile died suddenly out from the saxon's face. "chastise me!" he repeated. "you would find it somewhat difficult, master fitz-urse. do you think you are talking to a norman serf? you will please to remember you are in england; but if you are not satisfied with my apology, i will ride with you a few miles into the country, and we will then try with equal arms where the chastisement is to fall." the norman put his hand to his dagger, but there was an ominous growl from some men who had paused to listen to the quarrel. "you are an insolent boor, wulf of steyning, and some day i will punish you as you deserve." "some day," the saxon laughed, "we shall, i hope, see you and all your tribe sent across the channel. there are few of us here who would not see your backs with pleasure." "what is this?" an imperious voice demanded; and turning round, wulf saw william, the norman bishop of london, who, followed by several monks and pages, had pushed his way through the crowd. "walter fitz-urse, what means this altercation?" "the saxon ran against me of set purpose, my lord," walter fitz-urse said, in tones of deep humility, "and because i complained he challenged me to ride with him into the country to fight, and then he said he hoped that some day all the normans would be sent across the channel." "is this so?" the prelate said sternly to wulf; "did you thus insult not only my page, but all of us, his countrymen?" "i ran against him by accident," wulf said, looking up fearlessly in the prelate's face. "i apologized, though i know not that i was more in fault than he; but instead of taking my apology as one of gentle blood should do, he spoke like a churl, and threatened me with chastisement, and then i did say that i hoped he and all other normans in the land would some day be packed across the channel." "your ears ought to be slit as an insolent varlet." "i meant no insolence, my lord bishop; and as to the slitting of my ears, i fancy earl harold, my master, would have something to say on that score." the prelate was about to reply, but glancing at the angry faces of the growing crowd, he said coldly: "i shall lay the matter before him. come, walter, enough of this. you are also somewhat to blame for not having received more courteously the apologies of this saucy page." the crowd fell back with angry mutterings as he turned, and, followed by walter fitz-urse and the ecclesiastics, made his way along the street to the principal entrance of the palace. without waiting to watch his departure, wulf, the saxon page, pushed his way through the crowd, and went off at full speed to carry the message with which he had been charged. "our king is a good king," a squarely-built man,--whose bare arms with the knotted muscles showing through the skin, and hands begrimed with charcoal, indicated that he was a smith,--remarked to a gossip as the little crowd broke up, "but it is a grievous pity that he was brought up a norman, still more that he was not left in peace to pass his life as a monk as he desired. he fills the land with his normans; soon as an english bishop dies, straightway a norman is clapped into his place. all the offices at court are filled with them, and it is seldom a word of honest english is spoken in the palace. the norman castles are rising over the land, and his favourites divide among them the territory of every english earl or thane who incurs the king's displeasure. were it not for earl harold, one might as well be under norman sway altogether." "nay, nay, neighbour ulred, matters are not so bad as that. i dare say they would have been as you say had it not been for earl godwin and his sons. but it was a great check that godwin gave them when he returned after his banishment, and the norman bishops and nobles hurried across the seas in a panic. for years now the king has left all matters in the hands of harold, and is well content if only he can fast and pray like any monk, and give all his thoughts and treasure to the building of yonder abbey." "we want neither a monk nor a norman over us," the smith said roughly, "still less one who is both norman and monk i would rather have a dane, like canute, who was a strong man and a firm one, than this king, who, i doubt not, is full of good intentions, and is a holy and pious monarch, but who is not strong enough for a ruler. he leaves it to another to preserve england in peace, to keep in order the great earls of mercia and the north, to hold the land against harold of norway, sweyn, and others, and, above all, to watch the normans across the water. a monk is well enough in a convent, but truly 'tis bad for a country to have a monk as its king." "there have been some war-loving prelates, ulred; men as ambitious as any of the great earls, and more dangerous, because they have learning." "ay, there have been great prelates," the smith agreed. "look at lyfing of worcester, to whom next only to godwin the king owed his throne. he was an englishman first and a bishop afterwards, and was a proof, if needed, that a man can be a great churchman and a great patriot and statesman too. it was he rather than godwin who overcame the opposition of the danish party, and got the witan at last to acquiesce in the choice of london and wessex, and to give their vote to edward. "well was it he did so. for had he failed we should have had as great a struggle in england as when alfred battled against the danes. we of london and the men of wessex under the great earl were bent upon being ruled by a prince of our own blood. the last two danish kings had shown us that anything is better than being governed by the northmen. it was lyfing who persuaded the earl of mercia to side with wessex rather than with northumbria, but since lyfing, what great englishman have we had in the church? every bishopric was granted by edward to norman priests, until godwin and his sons got the upper hand after their exile. since then most of them have been given to germans. it would seem that the king was so set against englishmen that only by bringing in foreigners can harold prevent all preferment going to normans. but what is the consequence? they say now that our church is governed from rome, whereas before edward's time we englishmen did not think of taking our orders from italy. "there will trouble come of it all, neighbour. perhaps not so long as edward reigns, but at his death. there is but one of the royal race surviving, and he, like edward, has lived all his life abroad. there can be no doubt what the choice of englishmen will be. harold has been our real ruler for years. he is wise and politic as well as brave, and a great general. he is our own earl, and will assuredly be chosen. then we shall have trouble with the normans. already they bear themselves as if they were our masters, and they will not give up their hold without a struggle. men say that william, their duke, makes no secret of his hope to become master of england, in which case god help us all. but that won't come as long as harold lives and englishmen can wield sword and battle-axe. as for myself, i have patched many a norman suit of armour, but, by st. swithin, i shall have far more pleasure in marring than i have ever had in mending them." "know you who were the boys who had that contention just now?" "the norman is a page of william, our norman bishop; i know no more of him than that the other is wulf, who is a ward and page of earl harold. his father was thane of steyning in south sussex, one of godwin's men, and at his death two years ago harold took the lad into his household, for he bore great affection for gyrth, who had accompanied him in his pilgrimage to rome, and fought by his side when he conquered the welsh. it was there gyrth got the wound that at last brought about his death. wulf has been to my smithy many times, sometimes about matters of repairs to arms, but more often, i think, to see my son osgod. he had seen him once or twice in calling at the shop, when one day osgod, who is somewhat given to mischief, was playing at ball, and drove it into the face of a son of one of the norman lords at court. the boy drew his dagger, and there would have been blood shed, but wulf, who was passing at the time, and saw that the thing was a pure mishap and not the result of set intention, threw himself between them. "there was a great fuss over it, for the boy took his tale to his father, who demanded that osgod should be punished, and would doubtless have gained his end had not wulf spoken to earl harold, who intervened in the matter and persuaded the norman to let it drop. since then the boys have been great friends in their way. osgod is a year older than the young thane, and has already made up his mind to be his man when he grows up, and he has got me to agree to it, though i would rather that he had stuck to my handicraft. still, the prospect is not a bad one. harold will be king of england, wulf will be a powerful thane, and will doubtless some day hold high place at court, and as he seems to have taken a real liking to osgod, the boy may have good chances. "wulf will make a good fighting man one of these days. harold sees that all his pages are well instructed in arms, and the two boys often have a bout with blunted swords when wulf comes to my smithy; and, by my faith, though i have taught osgod myself, and he already uses his arms well, the young thane is fully a match for him. you would hardly believe that the boy can read as well as a monk, but it is so. earl harold, you know, thinks a good deal of education, and has founded a college at waltham. he persuaded wulf's father to send him there, and, indeed, will take none as his pages unless they can read. i see not what good reading can do to most men, but doubtless for one who is at court and may hold some day a high post there, it is useful to be able to read deeds and grants of estates, instead of having to trust others' interpretation." "i wondered to see you press forward so suddenly into the crowd, neighbour, seeing that you are a busy man, but i understand now that you had an interest in the affair." "that had i. i was holding myself in readiness, if that norman boy drew his dagger, to give him such a blow across the wrist with my cudgel that it would be long before he handled a weapon again. i fear wulf has got himself into trouble. the bishop will doubtless complain to the king of the language used by one of harold's pages, and though the earl is well able to see that no harm comes to the lad, it is likely he will send him away to his estates for a time. for he strives always to avoid quarrels and disputes, and though he will not give way a jot in matters where it seems to him that the good of the realm is concerned, he will go much farther lengths than most men would do in the way of conciliation. look how he has borne with tostig and with the earls of mercia. he seems to have no animosity in his nature, but is ready to forgive all injuries as soon as pardon is asked." the smith was not far wrong in his opinion as to what was likely to happen. as soon as wulf returned to the palace he was told that the earl desired his presence, and he proceeded at once to the apartment where harold transacted public business. it was a hall of considerable size; the floor was strewed with rushes; three scribes sat at a table, and to them the earl dictated his replies and decisions on the various matters brought before him. when he saw wulf enter he rose from his seat, and, beckoning to him to follow, pushed aside the hangings across a door leading to an apartment behind and went in. wulf had no fear whatever of any severe consequence to himself from his quarrel with walter fitz-urse, but he was ashamed that his thoughtlessness should have given the slightest trouble to the earl, for, popular as he was among all classes of men in southern england, harold was an object of love as well as respect to his dependents, and indeed to all who came in close contact with him. the earl was now forty-one years of age. he was very tall, and was considered the strongest man in england. his face was singularly handsome, with an expression of mingled gentleness and firmness. his bearing was courteous to all. he united a frank and straightforward manner with a polished address rare among his rough countrymen. harold had travelled more and farther than any englishman of his age. he had visited foreign courts and mingled with people more advanced in civilization than were those of england or normandy, and was centuries ahead of the mass of his countrymen. he was an ardent advocate of education, a strong supporter of the national church, an upholder of the rights of all men, and although he occasionally gave way to bursts of passion, was of a singularly sweet and forgiving disposition. king edward was respected by his people because, coming after two utterly worthless kings, he had an earnest desire for their good, although that desire seldom led to any very active results. he was a member of their own royal house. he was deeply religious. his life was pure and simple, and although all his tastes and sympathies were with the land in which he had been brought up, englishmen forgave him this because at least he was a saxon, while his predecessors had been danes. but while they respected edward, for harold, their real ruler, they felt a passionate admiration. he was a worthy representative of all that was best in the saxon character. he possessed in an eminent degree the openness of nature, the frank liberality, the indomitable bravery, and the endurance of hardship that distinguished the race. he was earl of the west saxons, and as such had special claims to their fealty. london, it was true, did not lie in his earldom, but in that of his brother leofwyn, but leofwyn and harold were as one--true brothers in heart and in disposition. the gentleness and courtesy of manner that, although natural, had been softened and increased by harold's contact with foreigners, was not only pardoned but admired because he was england's champion against foreigners. he had fought, and victoriously, alike against the norwegians, the danes of northumbria, and the welsh, and he struggled as sturdily, though peacefully, against norman influence in england. already the dread of norman preponderance was present in the minds of englishmen. it was no secret that in his early days edward had held out hopes, if he had not given an actual promise, to william of normandy that he should succeed him. of late the king had been somewhat weaned from his norman predilections, and had placed himself unreservedly in harold's hands, giving to the latter all real power while he confined himself to the discharge of religious exercises, and to the supervision of the building of his abbey, varied occasionally by hunting expeditions, for he still retained a passionate love of the chase; but men knew that the warlike duke of normandy would not be likely to forget the promise, and that trouble might come to england from over the sea. harold, then, they not only regarded as their present ruler, but as their future king, and as the national leader and champion. edward had no children. the royal house was extinct save for edward the atheling, who, like the present king, had lived all his life abroad, and could have no sympathy with englishmen. there being, then, no one of the royal house available, who but harold, the head of the great house of godwin, the earl of the west saxons, the virtual ruler of england, could be chosen? the english kings, although generally selected from the royal house, ruled rather by the election of the people as declared by their representatives in the witan than by their hereditary right. the prince next in succession by blood might, at the death of the sovereign, be called king, but he was not really a monarch until elected by the witan and formally consecrated. it had been nine months after he had been acclaimed to the throne by the people of london that king edward had been elected king by the witan, and formally enthroned. thus, then, the fact that harold did not belong to the royal family mattered but little in the eyes of englishmen. to them belonged the right of choosing their own monarch, and if they chose him, who was to say them nay? wulf felt uncomfortable as he followed the stately figure into the inner room, but he faced the earl as the door closed behind him with as fearless a look as that with which he had stood before the haughty prelate of london. a slight smile played upon harold's face as he looked down upon the boy. "you are a troublesome varlet, wulf, and the lord bishop has been making serious complaint of you to the king. he says that you brawled with his page, walter fitz-urse; that you used insolent words against his countrymen; and that you even withstood himself. what have you to say to this?" "the brawling was on the part of the bishop's page and not of mine, my lord. i was running out to carry the message with which you charged me to ernulf of dover when i ran against fitz-urse. that was not my fault, but a pure mischance, nevertheless i expressed my regret in fitting terms. instead of accepting them, he spoke insolently, talked of chastising me, and put his hand on the hilt of his dagger. then, my lord, i grew angry too. why should i, the page of earl harold, submit to be thus contemptuously spoken to by this young norman, who is but the page of an upstart bishop, and whom, if your lordship will give permission, i would right willingly fight, with swords or any other weapons. doubtless, in my anger, i did not speak respectfully of walter's countrymen, and for this i am sorry, since it has been the ground of complaint and of trouble to you." "in fact, wulf, you spoke as a quarrelsome boy and not as the page of one who has the cares of this kingdom on his shoulders, and whose great desire is to keep peace between all parties," the earl put in gravely. for the first time wulf hung his head: "i was wrong, my lord." "you were wrong, wulf; it is not good always to say what we think; and you, as my page, should bear in mind that here at court it behoves you to behave and to speak not as a headstrong boy, but as one whose words may, rightly or wrongly, be considered as an echo of those you may have heard from me. and now to the third charge, that you withstood the prelate; a matter that, in the king's eyes, is a very serious one." "the bishop would give ear to nought i had to say. he listened to his own page's account and not to mine, and when i said in my defence that though i did use the words about the normans, i did so merely as one boy quarrelling with the other, he said i ought to have my ears slit. surely, my lord, a free-born thane is not to be spoken to even by a norman bishop as if he were a norman serf. i only replied that before there was any slitting of ears your lordship would have a say in the matter. so far, i admit, i did withstand the bishop, and i see not how i could have made other reply." "it would have been better to have held your peace altogether, wulf." "it would, my lord, but it would also surely have been better had the bishop abstained from talking about slitting ears." "that would have been better also, but two wrongs do not make a right. i was present when the bishop made his complaint, and upon my inquiring more into the matter, his version was somewhat similar to yours. i then pointed out to him that if holy bishops lost their tempers and used threats that were beyond their power to carry into effect, they must not be too severe upon boys who forget the respect due to their office. nevertheless, i admitted that you were wrong, and i promised the king, who was perhaps more disturbed by this incident than there was any occasion for, that i would take you to task seriously, and that to avoid any further brawl between you and young fitz-urse, you should for a time be sent away from court. i did this on the agreement that the bishop should, on his part, admonish walter fitz-urse against discourteous behaviour and unseemly brawling, and had i known that he had put his hand on his dagger, i would have gone further. have you any witnesses that he did so?" "yes, my lord; i saw the smith ulred among those standing by, and doubtless he would see the action." "that is well," harold said. "i shall acquaint the bishop with the fact when i tell him that i have ordered you to leave for your estate at steyning, and that if his page denies it, i have witnesses to prove the truth of your assertions. i think in that case he will be glad to drop the matter, for were i to mention the fact to the king, he, who has a horror of the drawing of weapons, would order walter fitz-urse to be sent back to normandy. so your exile is not likely to be of long duration. you understand, wulf, that i am not seriously angered with you in this matter. you are but a boy, and one cannot expect that you will behave as a prudent man; but remember, lad, even a boy's words may do mischief, especially when placed as you are. there may come a time when you shall show by deeds and not by words your feelings against the normans, but till then bear yourself prudently. we saxons are over given to hasty words, and this is a fault. i myself, as all men know, have no love for the normans, but no one has heard me speak against them. the king loves them, as is but natural, seeing that he was brought up amongst them, and i have not withstood his wishes in the matter, trying only that a certain amount of preferment in the land should be bestowed upon those who are its owners and not strangers to it and its tongue. you will ride this afternoon for steyning, wulf, but i hope it will not be long before you are back again. if i had my own way in the matter, i should think that sufficient had already been said and done in so trifling a matter as a boys' quarrel; but as it has been brought before our king by a bishop, it is in the king's eyes a serious business, for assuredly he himself would have borne a reproof from william of london more meekly than you did, and having therefore become a church matter, it is altogether beyond my power to interfere. at any rate, a short sojourn on your estate will do you no harm; it is sometime since you were there, and it is a good thing that the lord of the soil should be well known by those over whom he is placed." wulf bowed deeply and withdrew. the prospect of a visit for a few weeks or even months to steyning was not a terrible one. it was some years since he had stayed there for any time. he had been two years at waltham, and since his father's death had been for the most part with harold, and the thought of an unrestricted life and of spending his time as he chose, hunting and hawking, and going about among his tenants, was by no means unpleasant. he was quite satisfied that harold was not seriously angered with him, and for anything else he cared little. as he understood that his duties as a page were at present at an end, he thought he would first call upon ulred the smith, to ask him if he had seen walter fitz-urse handle his dagger, and also to tell osgod that he was going away for a time. he found the smith at work. "good morning, master wulf; though this is not the first time i have seen you today, for i was at hand when you had that quarrel with the norman page." "yes, i caught sight of your face, ulred. it was about that i have come to you. the bishop has made complaint against me to the king, and earl harold has ordered me to go down to steyning for a time. of course i acted wrongly in speaking as i did to the bishop, but so far as walter fitz-urse is concerned i maintain that i did no wrong. i told my lord as much, and that the norman put hand upon his dagger. the earl said that if i could prove that it would benefit my case. i told him that i had seen you close by, but that i did not know whether you saw the page do it." "assuredly i did," the smith replied, "and had my cudgel in readiness to tap him on the wrist if he had drawn his dagger. i would testify the same before king edward himself." "thank you, ulred, i will tell my lord so." "i am sorry you are to be sent away from court. that is a bad job, master wulf, and osgod here will miss you greatly." "that shall i," the lad said. "could you not take me down with you, young master? you could teach me there how to comport myself as your squire, so that when the time comes that you need one, i should know my duties. besides, you could practise on me with sword and battle-axe." "i could not do much in the way of teaching you, osgod, seeing as yet i am myself but a learner, but i should be glad, in truth, to have you with me, and it would be good for me to keep up my practice in arms. i shall feel almost like a stranger there, and should like to have one i know with me. i could ask earl harold to let me have a horse for you from his stables, where he has two or three score doing nothing." "with your favour, sir, i would rather trust to my own feet. i am a stout walker, and though i shall not be able to keep up with you, i think that each night i can get to the hostelrie where you may put up; but, if not, it matters little, i can make my way after you and join you there--that is, if my father will give me permission to go." "you may as well go sooner as later," the smith said. "since you have taken into your head that you will be master wulf's man, i see not that it will benefit you remaining in the forge. you know enough now to mend a broken rivet and to do such repairs to helm and armour as may be needed on an expedition; therefore, if the young thane is minded to take you i have naught to say against it." "then so shall it be," wulf said, "i shall see my lord harold before i start, and will tell him that you are minded to be my man, and that i am minded so to take you. he will not object, i am sure, but it were best to ask him, since, when i return to court, i shall have you about me." "when do you start, master wulf?" "i am ordered to go to-day; therefore, as soon as i have seen the earl again i shall be off." "where will you sleep to-night?" "i shall ride to guildford this afternoon." "then you had better lay aside your hammer at once, osgod," the smith said, "and don fresh clothes, and make your best suit into a bundle and start without delay; it is but ten o'clock, and you may be at guildford before sunset. 'tis but thirty miles, and eight hours' walking will take you there. if the young thane tells you that lord harold makes objection to his taking you, you can turn your face backward to-morrow and no harm will be done." "i shall overtake you before you are half-way, osgod, and can then take you up behind me on my horse; and now i will go back to the palace. i may have to wait some time before i can see earl harold. from sunrise to sunset he has but a few moments to himself, and i shall have to watch my time to get a word with him." it was not, indeed, until two o'clock in the afternoon that wulf had a chance of speaking to the duke. then, seeing that he was for the moment alone, he entered the room and stood with bowed head waiting for harold to address him. "so you have come to say good-bye, wulf," the latter said kindly; "it is best so, boy. a time in the country will do you good, and there will be much for you to do down there. i have ordered two of my men to be in readiness to mount and ride with you, for i would not that you should go unattended. one of them will bear a message from me and a letter under my hand to the steward, and will tell him that although you will, of course, remain as my ward until you come of age, you are in all respects to be treated as if you were already my sworn man, and thane. it would be well if you could gather among your tenants twenty stout men as house-carls. the steward is ordered to pay to you whatever moneys you may require, and to account for them to me when he sends me in his checkers. these house-carls will, of course, be paid. there must be ample store of armour at steyning for them, for your father was followed by forty house-carls when he went with me to the welsh wars. one of the men who goes with you is a stout man-at-arms and is one of my own house-carls; he will remain with you and will instruct your men in arms and teach them to fight shoulder to shoulder. there may be bad times ere long, and it is upon trained troops and not upon hasty levies that we must most depend. in time i trust you will be able to place fifty such men in the field, but at present twenty will suffice. have you aught to say to me before you go?" "yes, my lord; first, to thank you for your kindness, and to say that i will carry out your instructions; secondly, to tell you that ulred the smith saw walter fitz-urse handle his dagger, and was standing ready to knock it from his hand did he draw it. lastly, that ulred's son osgod, who is a stout lad a year older than myself, and for his age well accustomed to arms, desires to be sworn as my man and to serve me in hall and in field. i like him much and have almost daily practised with him in arms, and i should be glad to have him with me if you see no objection." "not at all, wulf; it is well that a man should have at his side one in whom he can altogether trust, be he of gentle blood or simple man-at-arms." "then i may take him down with me, my lord?" "yes, if it pleases you. can he ride?" "not as yet, my lord, i will see that he is instructed down at steyning. he started to walk this morning, understanding that if you refused him permission to be my man he would at once return. we shall overtake him on the road." "bid one of your escort take him up behind," the earl said, "i like his spirit. see that he is fittingly apparelled. you shall hear from me ere long." half an hour later wulf mounted, and with his two followers rode from westminster. chapter ii. country life. far from being depressed, wulf felt his spirits rise as he rode away on his banishment from court, for instead of feeling it a disgrace he regarded it as a step forward in life. earl harold could certainly, had he been so inclined, have smoothed down the angry prelate, and could have retained him at court; but by the way he had spoken, wulf was convinced that the earl let him go because he thought that it was good for him to be away. for four years he had been under tutelage, first at waltham, and then at the court. in the last position his life had indeed been a pleasant one, for as one of harold's pages he had mixed with all the noble youths of the court, and had had a place at every festive gathering. still, he had been but a page, and treated as a boy. now he was to go forth, and to learn his duties as his father's successor. harold's steward, who had since the thane's death acted as the earl's agent in the management of the estate, would instruct him doubtless in his civil duties, while the soldier who rode behind him would teach him how to lead men in battle, and how to make the fighting force of the estate efficient. beyond these duties his time would be his own. he would have responsibilities, but they would be the responsibilities of a thane towards his tenants, and not of a page towards his master. he was going away a boy, but if it pleased harold that he should remain away for two years he would return a thane. a young one, indeed, but one who had learned the duties of his station, and who, if needs be, could take his place in the field of battle at the head of his followers. for, even putting aside the normans, from whom the earl seemed to think the greatest danger would come, there was never any long cessation of fighting in england. there were the welsh, who were always turbulent; the danes of northumbria, who were still a distinct people, although throughout the rest of england their identity was fast being merged into that of the saxons. there were the norsemen, still ready to take every opportunity of interfering in the affairs of england, or, if none offered, to plunder and harry the coast. there were the earls of mercia, who bore no great love to the house of godwin, and who resented the ascendency of the west saxons. lastly, there was harold's brother tostig, a fiery and turbulent noble, now earl of northumbria, who was jealous of harold, ever ready to join in plots, and in close alliance with norway already; he had several times withstood the royal authority, and would assuredly again become a fomenter of trouble should he see a favourable opportunity. at the king's death, if not before, that opportunity would be sure to present itself. harold would be certainly chosen king by the people of london and by the west saxons, but almost as certainly would his claim be disputed by the earls of mercia on one hand, and by tostig and the danes on the other. wulf was sure, therefore, that the work spent in preparing his tenants to take the field when called upon to do so, would not be wasted. full of these thoughts he rode for some miles from westminster without addressing himself to the two men behind him; then, bethinking him that these were trusted followers of the earl, and had been specially told off by him to accompany and stay with him, he called them up to his side. wulf had donned a riding suit instead of court attire, which, in deference to the king's partiality for the normans, was, even among the staunchest opposers of the foreigners, a compromise between saxon and norman fashions. he now wore a tunic of a bright green cloth, girded in at the waist and reaching only to the knee. over this was worn a garment closely resembling the roman toga, though somewhat less ample. the folds in front fell below the waist, but it was looped up at each shoulder by a brooch, leaving the arms bare. his legs were clad in tightly-fitting trousers, and his feet in somewhat high shoes. on his head he wore a cap in shape closely resembling the phrygian bonnet. he was armed with a dagger, and a short sword, which hung by a leather strap, two or three inches long, from his belt. the outer garment had a hood which could in bad weather be drawn over the head. the man who was the bearer of harold's orders to the steward wore a civilian dress, not unlike that of wulf's. he occupied the position of a confidential scribe to harold. the other wore the garb of a soldier. he was clothed from head to foot in a tight fitting leather suit, upon which were sewn iron rings overlapping each other, and strongly resembling in appearance the chain-armour of later days. his casque, with a curtain of leather similarly covered and affording a protection to the neck, cheeks, and throat, hung from his saddle-bow, and he wore a cap with a long projecting peak, while a cloak was thrown over his shoulders and fell almost to his feet. "i am afraid you will find it but dull time with me, leof," wulf said as they came up abreast of him, "for the earl says that he has charged you to remain with me at steyning." "i shall not be sorry for that," the soldier said bluntly, "for i shall be right glad to be away from these normans who fill every place at court and swagger there as if englishmen were but dirt under their feet. moreover, i love not london nor its ways, and shall be glad to be down again among honest country folk, though i would still rather be following my lord the earl in the field." "and you, master gurth, will your stay down at steyning be a long one?" "no, indeed. i have but to bear my master's wishes and instructions to the steward, and to stay for a few days to see that they are carried out according to his desires. i am not like leof, for i prefer life in london, where one meets with learned monks and others, can obtain sometimes the use of a choice manuscript, and can hear the news from beyond the seas, whereas in the country there is nought to talk about save beeves and sheep. i like the journey well enough, though i would that the animal i bestrode were more gentle in his paces. he has for the last half-hour been fretting on the rein to place himself by the side of yours. horses are well enough for nobles and fighting men, but for a peaceful scrivener like myself a chair makes a far more comfortable seat." the soldier gave a contemptuous grunt, and wulf laughed. "it is well that we have not all the same tastes, but for my part a seat in a chair tires me more than one in a saddle, and i am never more happy than when galloping briskly along," and he shook the reins, a signal which the horse had been expecting for a considerable time, and at once responded to by breaking into a canter. "stay you, i pray, master wulf," the scrivener cried in great tribulation as his horse followed the example of its companion. "even if the animal does not break my neck he will jolt the life out of me. i pray you curb him in if you would not see me prone in the dust; and if i am disabled, who is to carry the earl's message to the steward?" wulf reined in his horse. "pardon me, good gurth. i had forgotten that you are not accustomed to journey on horseback. i was scarce conscious, indeed, that i touched my horse, but he is used to travel more rapidly, and was so eager to be off at the slightest hint that i was willing that he should do so. we will try and journey soberly for the rest of the distance." osgod was overtaken, plodding steadily along the road, fifteen miles from town. leof took him up on his horse, and they reached guildford just as the sun was setting. the inn, which stood in the principal street of the town, was a low building built with a massive framework filled in with bricks. the ground-floor was occupied by a single room. at one end was the great fireplace where, over a pile of blazing logs, were hung many cauldrons and pots. round the room ran a raised bench some six feet wide on which the guests disposed themselves for sleep at night; rough tables and benches occupied the rest of the room. some twenty or thirty travellers were seated at these. few were eating, but the greater portion had horns of beer or mead before them. as wulf and his companions entered, after giving over their horses to one of the helpers, the host, seeing by his attire that he was of condition above the ordinary, came forward and led him to the end of the room nearest the fire, where the floor was raised a foot and a half above the general level, forming a sort of dais where travellers of distinction could take their meals apart from the rest of the guests. leof was now spokesman. "we will have supper, and of your best, master host, for we have ridden from london. we are in the service of earl harold, and are riding with this young thane, wulf of steyning." the name of earl harold was sufficient to gain for them the best attentions of their host, and in twenty minutes supper was served, consisting of trout broiled over the fire, swine's flesh, and a stew of fowls and smoked bacon flavoured with herbs. wulf took the head of the table, and the other three sat a short distance below him. the dishes were handed round, and each with his dagger cut off his portion and ate it on his wooden platter with the assistance of dagger and fingers only, for the utility of forks was at that time a matter undreamt of. after the meal was over, the host brought a ewer of water with a napkin, and each dipped his fingers into the water, an operation necessary even for the most dainty feeder. presently a glee singer came in, and for an hour amused the guests with songs, for the most part of a patriotic character. wulf was then conducted by the host to a small chamber upstairs, where there was the luxury of a bed stuffed with straw. the rest of the travellers, including wulf's companions, merely wrapped themselves in their cloaks and lay down on the raised bench which ran round the room. on the afternoon of the third day the party arrived at steyning. it was four years since wulf had been at home, and he gave a shout of pleasure as his eye fell on the long low house with its background of trees, and touching his horse with his heel he left his companions behind and galloped towards the door. an old servitor came out. "why, cedric, do you not know me? i am wulf, whom you first taught to play single-stick and to draw a bow." "why, surely it is my young master," cedric said, taking the hand that wulf held out to him and placing it to his lips; "this is a glad day indeed for us all. we have longed sorely for a sight of you, for though i say nought against master egbert the steward, who is well liked by all, it is not the same as having our lord with us. you have come to stay, i trust." "for a time at any rate, cedric. earl harold wishes me to learn my duties as a thane and to fit myself to lead my people in the field if it be necessary." "i trust that it never will be so," cedric said, "but as we fought under your father so will we all be ready to fight under you should it be needful. the men of steyning were never backward when there was fighting to be done, and in my young days there was no lack of that, though we have had quiet times since king edward came to the throne." the house was not built for the purpose of resistance, for, unlike the normans, the saxons did not deem it necessary to convert their houses into castles. it was, however, massively framed, the windows on the ground-floor were barred, the door was strong and solid, and after nightfall none could come in or go out without the knowledge and consent of the master. wulf's companions came up just as the steward himself appeared at the door. he knew both gurth and leof, having himself been in the service of harold before being deputed by him to manage the estates of steyning during the earl's guardianship of its thane. "the earl sends his greetings to you, egbert," gurth said, "and he has sent us hither with the young thane, who, as the letter i bring from the earl will inform you, has come down to take up his position as lord here, and to learn from you all things connected with his estate." "welcome to steyning, thane," the steward said, doffing his cap; "it is well that you should be here. i have done my best to carry out the earl's commands to keep all things in readiness for your coming, and to be just and fair to the tenants, seeing that they pay their dues, and yet not pressing too hardly upon them if things go not well with them; but it is always best that the master should be in his own place, and right willingly do i give over my authority to you." "the authority has been in good hands, i know well," wulf said, "and right heartily do i thank you for having so well filled my place; but i would not take up my thaneship as yet i am but a boy, and have to learn my duties from you, and shall account myself but as your pupil. i know something of the ways of court, but nothing at all of those of the country, and it will be long before i am fit to take the control of things into my own hands." they had by this time entered the great hall which formed the common room of the establishment. its arrangement was similar to that of the room at the inn, with its raised dais for the master, his family, and guests, while the rest of the room was devoted to the retainers and servants. the cooking, however, was carried on in a room apart. there were two fireplaces, one upon the dais and the other in the body of the hall. on the walls hung trophies of the chase and arms of all sorts. the wooden roof was supported by massive beams, and with the exception of the trophies on the walls there was no attempt at decoration of any kind. during the residence of the family at the house, however, the hangings of tapestry, the work of generations of dames of steyning, their daughters and maids, hung upon the walls round the dais. the news quickly spread of the arrival of the young thane, and a score of men and eight or ten women and maids flocked into the hall to welcome him, and as he stood on the dais each in turn came forward to kiss his hand and salute him. "i think my first order must be," he said to the steward, "that a cask of your best ale be broached." "that shall be done at once," egbert replied; "there is never a lack of drink here, but the best is none too good for the occasion. and who is this youth with you?" he went on when he had given the necessary orders, pointing to osgod, who was standing somewhat shyly apart. "he is my friend, and is going to be my body attendant and squire," wulf said. "he, like myself, knows nothing as yet of his duties, but that he will be faithful and trusty i know full well, and the earl himself said that i did wisely to bring him with me." "i will myself instruct him in his duties," egbert said, "which indeed are not hard to learn by one of willing mind. he will stand behind you at table, will hand you your cup and take your orders. in the old times it would have been his duty to see that you were not struck down by a traitorous blow while you drank, but those days are passed. when in the field he will carry your helmet till you need to put it on; will keep close to you in the fight and guard you with his shield from arrows, and with his sword from attacks from behind; he will carry your banner, and see that as long as he has strength to hold it, it floats fairly out as a rallying point for your men. in the field indeed his duties are numerous, but at home in peace, beyond seeing that your arms are bright and clean, and that your orders are carried out properly, he will have but little to do. it is well that you brought him with you, for otherwise you would have had to choose one of the sons of your tenants, and the choice would have been a difficult one, for each would have desired the honour, and whichever you chose there would have been sore jealousy among the others." the next day there was a great gathering in the hall. the whole of the tenants attended, and took the oath to be wulf's men, as they had been those of his father, to obey his orders, and to follow him in the field with the due number of men according to the size of their holdings; while wulf on his part swore to protect them from all wrong and oppression, to be a just master, calling upon them only for such service as he was entitled to demand, and exacting no feus or payments beyond those customary. a bullock had been killed, and after the ceremony was over all present sat down to a banquet at which much ale was drunk and feasting went on till nightfall. the next morning wulf, accompanied by leof and egbert, rode round the estate, choosing among the sons of the tenants thirty stout young men willing to enrol themselves as house-carls, receiving a regular rate of pay, and ready at all times to give service under arms, and to remain in the field as long as they might be required, whereas the general levy could only be kept under arms for a limited time. he had already gone into the matter with leof, who pointed out that, as at present he had no wish to keep up any show or to have a body of armed men in the house, it would suffice if the men were exercised every day for a month, and after that merely practised with sword and battle-axe for two or three hours once a week. on these terms he had no difficulty in obtaining considerably more than the number he asked for, and finally fifty men were enrolled. for those carls helmets were bought and coats of ringed armour made, and for a month they exercised daily. of manoeuvring there was little indeed. the saxons and danes alike fought in line, with but room enough between them to swing their battle-axes. each carried a spear as well as an axe, and when repelling the assault of an enemy closed up so that their shields well-nigh touched each other. their exercise was generally either to engage in combats between chosen pairs, or, dividing into two parties, to fight line against line with blunted poles for spears and with stout cudgels for axes. leof in these combats acted as judge, decided which side had gained the victory, praised the skilful, and chided the careless and sluggish. he gave lessons in the use of the sword and battle-axe to wulf and osgod, sometimes pitting them against each other, sometimes fighting himself against wulf, and teaching osgod how to assist his master by covering him with his shield. sometimes he would order three or four of the men to shoot with blunted arrows at wulf, whom he taught to catch them on his shield or to sever the shafts with a blow of his sword, while osgod standing by helped to cover him when two or three arrows flew at him together. this was a daily exercise, and even after the month's regular work was over some of the men came up every day to shoot, until wulf had attained such coolness and skill that he could in the great majority of cases cut the shafts in two with his sword. but the whole day was by no means given up to warlike exercises. wulf rode out with the steward inspecting the houses and farms, learning what there was to be learned of the rude processes of agriculture, investigating the complaints of the depredations committed by errant herds of swine or by neighbours' cattle and sheep, seeing what was required in the repairs of farmhouses, and learning from egbert to discriminate between those who were unable to pay their dues owing to misfortune, illness, or murrain among the animals, and those whose losses were due to their own sloth or carelessness. upon these visits, too, the arms of the tenants were inspected to ascertain that they could properly fulfil their service if summoned to take the field. the lands embraced by wulf's feof were of considerable extent, reaching down to the sea, where they were some eight miles broad, and running back twelve miles beyond steyning. several small hamlets lay within it, and in case of war he could summon more than three hundred men to his banner. several of the neighbouring thanes rode in as soon as they heard that wulf had returned to fill his father's place at steyning, and these visits were duly returned. but accustomed as wulf had been to the orderliness of the court of the ascetic king edward the rude manners and nightly revelry of these rough thanes by no means pleased him, so that he was glad when the visits were over, and he could remain quietly at home, where he was not without frequent guests. the most regular of his visitors was the prior of the monastery at bramber, which had been founded by the piety of one of wulf's ancestors. the prior had, though wulf was ignorant of it, received a letter from earl harold asking him to befriend wulf, to encourage him to keep up the studies he had followed at waltham, and to see that he did not fall into the drinking habit so common among the saxons. the priest was well fitted for the mission. he was by no means a strict disciplinarian, but the monastery had the reputation of being one of the best managed in sussex, and among the monks were many of good blood. he was passionately fond of art, and encouraged its exercise among the monks, so that the illuminated missals of bramber were highly prized, and added largely to the revenues of the monastery. the prior had been one of the monks at waltham, and owed his elevation to the influence of earl harold with the late thane of steyning. he was well taught in all the learning of the day, and having been for a time at westminster, knew more of court life than the majority of the priors of isolated monasteries, and could suit his conversation to his hearer. harold had said in his letter, "the lad has good parts. he is somewhat full of mischief, and has got into a scrape here by a quarrel with a norman page, and by failing somewhat in the respect due to william of london, who took his compatriot's part with too much zeal. but wulf is shrewd, and benefited greatly by his stay at waltham, and both for the lad's own sake and for my friendship with the good thane, his father, i would fain that he grew up not only a sturdy englishman, as to which i have no manner of doubt, but one who may some day play his part at court, and be a worthy friend and counsellor of an english king. therefore i pray you, father, to keep an eye on the lad, and spare him what time you can from your duties. tell him not that i have written to you, for it is the nature of youth to be averse to anything that looks like guardianship." such a request from earl harold was regarded by the prior as an order, and a few days after wulf was installed at steyning the prior rode over on his palfrey, accompanied only by the almoner of the convent. "peace to you, my son," he said, as wulf bowed respectfully to him, "i have called not only as the prior of the monastery founded by the piety of one of the thanes of steyning, but to welcome one who was a pupil at earl harold's college of waltham, in which i at one time was a preceptor. not when you were there, for i was installed here just before your good father's death." "i left there two years since," wulf said, "in order to be one of earl harold's pages; but i have not forgotten my reading, for the earl insists that his pages give two hours a day to study." "tis a good rule," the prior said, "for learning is like a weapon, it soon becomes rusted when thrown aside. you will, i hope, continue the habit." "i should wish to do so, father, but there are no manuscripts here." "in that at least i can supply your wants," the prior said. "my monastery has a good library, and it will be quite at your service, and also my advice in any matters that may concern you. my almoner here, brother john, knows pretty well the circumstances of most of your people, and may be able to tell you where your alms may be well bestowed, and where they would do more harm than good. the worthless are ever the most importunate, and for every honest man in need there are twenty rogues abegging." the ice once broken, the prior came over frequently. his conversation was bright and interesting. he himself was engaged in writing a history of the saxon and danish monarchs from the times of alfred, and had stores of anecdotes of people and events of whom wulf had before heard only vague traditions from the wandering singers and story-tellers who travelled the country, and were welcome guests in every household. as wulf was urged by the prior to come over whenever time hung on his hands, his visits to the monastery were naturally very much more frequent than those of the prior to steyning. sometimes he would sit in the private apartment of the prior, but more often he spent his time studying the rare manuscripts, or watching the monks at their work of copying and illuminating. if he went in the evening he generally sat in the refectory, where the monks for the most part spent their evening in talk and harmless amusement, for the strict rules and discipline that prevailed in monastic establishments on the continent had been unknown up to that time in england, although some of the norman bishops were doing their best to introduce them into the establishments in their dioceses,--a proceeding that caused great discontent, and was strongly opposed by the english monks. these had, hitherto, regarded monastic life as one of work for the good of the poor, and as affording for those who wished it a tranquil retirement from the trials of the world. moreover, it offered special attractions to those of quiet and studious tastes, since the monasteries provided the architects and the painters, the teachers and the writers, and it was here alone that learning was maintained and fostered. consequently, at bramber there was none of that monastic asceticism that prevailed abroad, and later became the rule in england also. during the day the monks had their pursuits according to their tastes. there were those who worked in the copying and painting room. there were some who drew plans for churches or the dwellings of the wealthy, and who sometimes went out and superintended the carrying out of their designs. some were in charge of the garden, where the work was chiefly done by the lay servitors, and where the herbs and simples were grown that were used in the concoction of the medicines distributed among the sick, and highly prized throughout the country round. two or three were skilled in music, and these taught and conducted the choir, while two acted as teachers to youths, the sons of thanes and others, who, moved by the ardour with which their earl advocated learning, intrusted their sons to the monks for education. then when the day's work was done, and vespers sung in the chapel, the monks gathered in the refectory. the conversation was of a bright and varied description, and as wulf moved about from group to group he listened to the talk with far greater pleasure than he had ever derived from that at court, and largely increased his knowledge in many respects. national matters were discussed with keen interest, for the monks were all english, and viewed with bitter hostility the elevation of foreigners to the chief dignities of the church, not only because they were foreigners, but because they introduced innovations of all kinds, and sought to reduce the church of england to subjection to rome, whereas previously it had been wholly independent of papal authority. in secular matters, too, there were dangers that threatened the tranquillity of the country. chief among these were the turbulence and ambition of tostig, and the menace to the kingdom by his extensive earldom of northumbria with its alien danish population, which was rendered more serious by his alliance with the kings of norway. then, too, it was doubtful whether the great central earldom of mercia could be relied upon to act cordially with the west saxons; griffith of wales was still restless and turbulent; and lastly, there was the ever-present menace of the norman duke. had england been united it could have laughed at the pretensions of the duke of normandy; but with northumbria ready at any moment to break into civil war, and with mercia doubtful, the claim of normandy, however shadowy and indefensible, could not but be considered as a grave element of danger. listening to the talk of the monks wulf learned much more as to the actual situation than he had done in the court of the normanized king, and his feelings of patriotism became more and more developed and strengthened, while he applied himself with even greater ardour to his military exercises, as he recognized more fully the necessity that might arise for every west saxon to be ready to take his place in the line of battle. the evenings that he spent at home were by no means dull. it was only in considerable towns that there were inns for the accommodation of travellers. everywhere else these were dependent upon hospitality, and no door was ever closed in their faces. it was seldom that less than five or six travellers rested for the night at steyning, and often that number was largely exceeded. besides the wayfarers there were the professional wanderers, the minstrels, the story-tellers, and occasionally a troupe of buffoons. all these were welcome, for they brought the news from without; the last rumours in london concerning the quarrels of the earls; the movements of the danish ships that were harrying the coast, and those of the vessels earl harold despatched to cope with them; the prices of wool and hides in the chief markets; and even reports of what was happening beyond the seas. leaving the dais, wulf would go down and listen to the talk of the travellers, or, when they were of a degree above the common, have them up beside him, and question them as to their journeyings, the places they had visited, and the personages they had seen. thus his hours were fully occupied from morning until night. he found far less time than he had expected for sport, and although he occasionally went out with his falcons or hunted the stag in the forest, which covered a wide extent of country beyond the hills, it was but seldom that he could find leisure for these amusements. "it seems to me that you are always doing something, wulf," osgod said one day. "it is not at all the sort of life i should have thought a young thane would live. why, you work many more hours a day than i did in my father's forge. it is either books, or the affairs of the tenants, or visiting the monastery all day when you are not at work with your sword exercises. when i have done with my work with leof i like to lie down in the sun and take it quietly, and i cannot understand how you can be for ever on foot." "i have so many things to do, osgod; there is so much to learn, and i do not wish to grow up a mere beer swiller like edmund of angmering or ethelred of arundel. their lives are, as far as i can see, no whit higher or more worthy than that of their own serfs, from whom they differ only that they eat more, drink more, and sleep on softer beds. earl harold expects better things than that of me, and i want to make myself worthy of being one of those in whom he can place confidence and on whom he can depend in case of trouble. i have heard him say how bad it is for england that our thanes are, in learning and culture, so far behind the nobles of other countries, and that if england is ever to take her place among great nations it must be by her thanes first raising themselves to the level of the nobles abroad, who are the counsellors of their kings. i can never hope to be anything like earl harold, who is the wisest and greatest of englishmen, but i do hope so to fit myself that some day he may think me worthy of trust and confidence." "well, master," osgod said lazily, "every one to his liking. i hope to be a good soldier and your true servant, but as for all this thinking and learning it would weary me to death." chapter iii. at court. two months after wulf had gone down to steyning one of harold's men brought a short letter from the earl himself. "i am glad to hear, wulf," it began, "from my steward, egbert, that you are applying yourself so heartily to your work. i have also good accounts of you from the prior of bramber, who sometimes writes to me. he is a good and wise man, as well as a learned one, and i am right glad to hear that you are spending your time so well. i told you that you should hear if there was any alteration in your affair. some change was made as soon as you had left; for, two days later, meeting william of london in the presence of the king, i told him that i had inquired further into the matter, and had found that you were by no means the aggressor in the quarrel with young fitz-urse, for that he had fingered his dagger, and would doubtless have drawn it had there not been many bystanders. i also said that, with all respect to the bishop, it would have been better had he not inclined his ears solely to the tale of his page, and that under the circumstances it was scarcely wonderful that, being but a boy, you had defended yourself when you were, as you deemed, unjustly accused. "the prelate sent at once for his page, who stoutly denied that he had touched the hilt of his dagger, but i too had sent off for ulred, the armourer, and he brought with him a gossip who had also been present. i asked the king's permission to introduce them, and they entirely confirmed your story. fitz-urse exclaimed that it was a saxon plot to do him harm, and i could see that the bishop was of the same opinion; but the king, who is ever anxious to do justice, declared at once that he was sure that the two craftsmen were but speaking the truth. he sternly rebuked fitz-urse as a liar, and signified to the bishop that he would do well to punish him severely by sending him back to normandy, for that he would not tolerate his presence at court--an order which the bishop obeyed with very bad grace. but at any rate the lad was sent away by a ship a week later. "after the bishop had left the audience-chamber the king said that he was afraid he had acted with harshness to you, as it seemed that the fault was by no means wholly on your side, and that i could at once recall you if i wished to do so. i thanked his majesty dutifully, but said i thought it were best in all ways that for a time you should remain away from court. in the first place, you deserved some punishment for your want of respect for the bishop, to whom you should have submitted yourself, even if you had thought him unjust. in the second place, as fitz-urse had been sent away, it would create an animosity against you on the part of his countrymen at court were you to reappear at once; and lastly, that i considered it would be to your benefit to pass at least some months on your estates, learning your duties as thane, and making the acquaintance of your people. therefore, i wished you to continue at steyning. it will assuredly be pleasant for you to know that you are no longer to be considered as being there in consequence of having fallen under the king's displeasure, but simply because it is my wish that you should for a time dwell among your people, and fit yourself to be a wise lord to them." wulf was much pleased at the receipt of this letter, partly because the fact that he had been sent away in disgrace stung him, and he had felt obliged frankly to acknowledge to the neighbouring thanes that he had been sent down on account of a quarrel with a norman page; but chiefly because it showed the kindly interest that harold felt in him, and that although absent he had still thought of him. it was nigh ten months before he heard again. during that time he had grown a good deal, and although he would never be tall, his frame had so widened out that it was evident he would grow into an exceptionally powerful man. at sixteen he was still a boy, and although his position at steyning, where, although still under the nominal tutelage of the earl's steward, he was practically lord and master, accustomed to play the part of host within its walls, and that of feudal lord over the wide estates, had given him the habits of authority and the bearing of one who respected himself, the merry expression of his face, aided by a slight upward turn of his nose, showed that in other respects he was unchanged. he had learned with his weapons all that leof could teach him. he could wield a light battle-axe, and with his sword could turn aside or sever an arrow however sharply shot at him, provided that he had time to mark its flight. with a quarter-staff he was a match for any youth on the estate, and he could hurl a dart with unerring aim. osgod had sprung up into a powerful young fellow, taller than his master by well-nigh a head, and his equal in exercises requiring strength rather than quickness and skill. his duties at table had been delegated to another, for there was a certain clumsiness in osgod's strength that no teaching could correct; and in his eagerness to serve his master he so frequently spilled the contents of a cup, or upset a platter, that even egbert acknowledged that it was hopeless to attempt to make a skilful servitor of him. the earl's second letter contained only the words: "come up to london as soon as you receive this. leave egbert in charge of everything as before." although the time had not seemed long, and his occupations were so varied that he had never felt dull since he had come down, wulf was delighted to receive the summons. he had, unconsciously to himself, begun to feel restless, and to wonder whether earl harold had altogether forgotten his existence. "we are going back to london, osgod," he shouted. "i am right glad of it," the young giant said, stretching his arms lazily. "i am grievously tired of the country, and had it not been that nothing would induce me to leave your service, i have thought sometimes that i would gladly be back again in my father's smithy, hammering away on hot iron. i used to think it would be the grandest thing possible to have nothing to do, but i have found that one can have too much of a good thing. certainly i am glad to be going back, but i am not sure whether it won't be worse at court than it is here." "perhaps we may not be staying there," wulf said encouragingly. "maybe the earl is going to start on some expedition; though we have heard of no trouble, either in the north or in wales. but even if i stay at court, osgod, you will often be able to be away, and can spend some hours a day at the smithy, where, if you like, you can take off your smock and belabour iron to your heart's content. i should say you would be a rare help to your father, for, as leof says, for a downright solid blow there are not many men who could surpass you." osgod laughed. "leof has not forgiven that blow i dealt him a month ago, when i flattened in his helmet with my blunted axe and stretched him senseless on the ground; in faith, i meant not to hit so hard, but he had been taunting me with my slowness, and seeing an opening for a blow at his head i could not resist it, and struck, as he was always telling me to do, quickly." "you well-nigh killed him," wulf said, shaking his head; "he has not taken an axe in his hand since, at least not with either of us. he said to me the first time i invited him to a bout, it was high time a man should give up teaching when he came to be struck senseless by a boy." "not much of a boy," osgod replied, "seeing that i stand over six feet high, and got my muscles hardened early at the forge. however, he bears me no ill-will; all he ever said to me on the matter was, 'i am glad to see that you can shake off your sluggishness sometimes, osgod; i should have been less earnest in my advice to you to strike more quickly if i had thought that you were going to do it at my expense. keep those blows for your master's enemies, lad. if you deal them to his friends you will lessen their number.'" "have my horse brought round at once, osgod, have the wallets packed, and be ready to start in an hour's time. i cannot go without riding over to say good-bye to the prior and some of the monks. do you, when you have packed, follow me; it is not greatly out of the way, and i shall meet you on the road. a short half-hour will suffice for me there." "so harold has sent for you, wulf?" the prior said, when the young thane told him that he was on the point of starting for london. "'tis as well. come back when you may, you will now be fit to rule at steyning, and to rule well, but i foresee that we are likely to have you but seldom down here. you are in good train to rise high among englishmen. you already possess the favour of earl harold, who is, in all respects but name, king of england. you possess far more learning than most young men of your rank, and as harold rightly thinks much of such knowledge, you are likely, if you live, to learn more. but better than this, so far as your prospects are concerned in the troubled times that may be coming, you are quick witted and ready. i hear that you are already very proficient in arms, and a match for most grown men. best of all, so far as your future happiness is concerned, you have a kind heart and a good disposition. you could scarce be a page of earl harold's and not be a true englishman and patriot; therefore, my son, i think that i can predict a bright and honourable future for you if harold lives and reigns king of england. be steadfast and firm, lad. act ever in what your heart tells you is the right; be neither hasty nor quarrelsome. but,"--he broke off with a smile, "you have had one lesson that way already. now i will detain you no longer. _pax vobiscum_, may god keep and guard you! if opportunity offer, and a messenger comes this way, write me a few lines; news of you will be always welcome at bramber." leaving the prior, wulf paid a hurried visit to the chambers where the monks were engaged in their various avocations, and then started at a canter and met osgod coming along with a sumpter-horse carrying the wallets, a store of provisions for the way, and wulf's arms and armour fastened to the crupper of his saddle. "you have done well, osgod," wulf said as he turned his horse, and at a quieter pace proceeded beside him. "i forgot to give you any directions or to speak about your bringing a pack-horse with you, but i am glad you thought of it, for our steeds would have been heavily burdened had all that baggage been divided between them." "we go back more heavily laden than we came," osgod remarked. "my wardrobe was then of the scantiest, and your own has been considerably added to since we came here. truly, wulf, i feel that i have changed mightily in this year, and can scarce believe that it is but a twelvemonth back since i flung down my hammer and started on my tramp to guildford with a change of clothes dangling from the end of my cudgel. i was glad when you and your party overtook me, for i was badly scared once or twice when i met a rough fellow or two on the way, though, fortunately, they did not deem me worth robbing. we could give a good account of four or five of such knaves now." "there has been a change indeed, osgod, and in me as much as in you, though i have not shot up into such huge proportions. i was a page then, and had learned but to obey. i am a boy still, but i have begun to learn to rule; at any rate, to rule myself. i have not conquered my fault of hastiness altogether." osgod smiled broadly. "you are quick in temper still, wulf. you remember it was but yesterday that you rated me soundly because i had fed your hawks early, and they were too lazy to fly when you wanted them." "well, it was annoying," wulf laughed; "and you deserved rating, since you have been told over and over again that the hawks were not to be fed early in the morning. besides, the rating did you no harm." "none at all, master. i know that you mean not what you say, and hard words break no bones. i should have thought no more of it had you yourself not remarked that you were still somewhat hasty of temper." "i was wrong, osgod," wulf said, holding out his hand, "but you know that i love you, and that though your carelessness and forgetfulness chafe me sorely at times, i mean not what i say." "i know it, master, and i would not have you other than you are. i suppose it is the thickness of my skull that prevents me from taking in all that i am told, and perhaps if i had more to do i might do it better. i shall be able to play my part when it comes to hard blows, and you must remember that no one can excel in all things. a staghound is trusty and sure when on the chase, but he could not be taught to fetch and to carry and to perform all sorts of tricks such as were done by the little mongrel cur that danced to the order of the mountebank the other evening. my father always said i was a fool, and that, though for a piece of rough hammering i was by no means amiss, i should never learn the real intricacies of repairing fine armour. everything has its good, you see, master wulf; for had my father thought better of me in his trade, i doubt if he would ever have given me leave to quit it, and go as your man." "i have no doubt that is so, osgod, and heartily glad am i that you showed no genius for smith's work. nature evidently intended you to damage casques and armour rather than to repair them. you have not got all my clothes with you," he added, as he looked round at the led horse. "no indeed, wulf," osgod said, "nor a quarter of them, for in truth your wardrobe has grown prodigiously since we came here. i had to talk it over with egbert, having but little faith in my own wits. he advised me to take the two suits that were most fitted for court, saying that if he heard you were going to remain there he would send on the rest in charge of a couple of well-armed men." "that is the best plan, doubtless," wulf agreed. "my hawking suit and some of the others would be useless to me at court, and it would have been folly to have burdened ourselves with them if we are likely to return hither shortly." "where shall we stop to-night?" osgod asked. "at the monastery of the grey friars, where we put up on our way from london. it will not be a long ride, but we started late. to-morrow we shall of course make a long day's journey to guildford. i don't know what travellers would do were it not for the priories." "sleep in the woods, wulf, and be none the worse for it. for myself, i would rather lie on the sward with a blazing fire and the greenwood overhead, than sleep on the cold stones in a monk's kitchen, especially if it happened to be a fast-day and one had gone to rest on a well-nigh empty stomach." "it is never so bad as that," wulf laughed; "as a rule, however much the monks may fast, they entertain their guests well." "if it is an english monastery they do," osgod admitted, "but not where there is a norman prior, with his new-fangled notions, and his vigils and fasts and flagellations. if i ever become a monk, which i trust is not likely, i will take care to enter a saxon house, where a man may laugh without its being held to be a deadly sin, and can sleep honestly without being wakened up half a dozen times by the chapel bell." "you would assuredly make but a bad monk, osgod, and come what will i do not think you will ever take to that vocation. but let us urge on our horses to a better pace, or the kitchen will be closed, and there will be but a poor chance of supper when we reach the priory." "well, osgod," wulf asked the next morning as they rode on their way, "how did you fare last night?" "well enough as to the eating, there was a haunch of cold venison that a king needn't have grumbled at, but truly my bones ache now with the hardness of my couch. couch! there was but the barest handful of rushes on the cold stone floor, and i woke a score of times feeling as if my bones were coming through the skin." "you have been spoilt, osgod, by a year of sleeping softly. i marked more than once how thickly the rushes were strewn in that corner in which you always slept. how will it be when you have to stand the hardships of a soldier's life?" "i can sleep well on the ground with my cloak round me," osgod said steadily, "and if the place be hard you have but to take up a sod under your hip-bone and another under your shoulder, and you need not envy one who sleeps on a straw bed. as to cold and wet, i have never tried sleeping out of doors, but i doubt not that i can stand it as well as another. as to eating and drinking, they say that earl harold always looks closely after his men, and holds that if soldiers are to fight well they must be fed well. at any rate, master wulf, i shall be better off than you will, for i have never been accustomed, as you have, to such luxuries as a straw bed; and i doubt whether you ever went hungry to bed as i have done many and many a time, for in the days when my father hoped to make an armourer of me i was sent off supperless whenever i bungled a job or neglected his instructions. i wonder what the earl can want you for in such haste?" "i do not suppose he wants me in any haste at all. he may have spoken to the king about me, and when edward again spoke of my returning he would simply send for me to come at once." such indeed proved to be the case. when he waited on harold as soon as he arrived the latter held out his hand; "i am glad to see you back again, wulf. a year of country air and exercise has done wonders for you, and though you are not as tall as you might be, you have truly widened out into fair proportions, and should be able to swing a battle-axe of full weight. thinking it was time for you to return here, i spoke to the king, who was in high good-humour, for he had been mightily pleased that morning at some of the figures the monks have wrought in stone for the adornment of his church of st. peter; therefore he not only consented to your return, but chided me gently for not having called you up to town before. 'the matter had altogether slipped my mind,' he said; 'i told you that he might return directly it was shown that it was the bishop's page who was in fault, and from that day i have never thought of it.' "i told the king that i had purposely kept silence, for i thought the day had come when you should learn your duties down there instead of dawdling away your time at court. you need not put on a page's attire any more. you will remain here as my ward, and i have had so good an account from the good prior of bramber that in a short time i shall be able to receive your oath as thane of steyning. you will attend me to court this evening as one of my gentlemen, and i will then present you to the king, whom it is well that you should thank for having pardoned you. i hear from the prior that the varlet you took down with you has grown into a big man, and is well-nigh as tall as i am already. he must have lodging with my followers while you are here." finding that he was to remain for the present at westminster, wulf sent off a messenger at once to request egbert to forward the rest of his clothes immediately. that evening the earl took him into a chamber, where the king was seated surrounded by a few of his favourites. "this is wulf of steyning, my lord king," harold said, "the youth who was unfortunate enough to incur your royal displeasure a year since, and who has upon your order returned from his estates. i have had excellent accounts of him from my good friend the prior of bramber, who speaks well alike of his love of study and his attention to the affairs of his estate. i have also heard from other hands of his progress in military exercises, and that he bids fair to become a valiant and skilful soldier of your majesty. he has prayed me to express his thanks to your majesty for having pardoned him, and having authorized me to enrol him again in the ranks of my followers here." the king nodded pleasantly in answer to the deep bow that wulf made. "i was somewhat hasty in your matter," he said graciously, "and dealt out somewhat hard measure to you, but doubtless, as earl harold said, your stay in the country has been for your good, and i am glad to hear that the worthy prior of bramber speaks so well of you." the earl gave a little nod to wulf, and the latter, gathering that his case was concluded, and that he could now go at once, retired with another deep obeisance. leaving the palace he made his way to the armourer's, whither he had sent osgod as soon as they arrived. the smith doffed his cap as he entered. "i am right glad to see you back again, young master. my son gave me a rare surprise, for truly when he walked in i did not know him again, not having had him in my thoughts or having heard of his arrival. the varlet saw that i did not know him, and said, 'canst mend me a broken dagger, master armourer?' "'that can i,' i answered, and would have said more, when a laugh came from his great mouth that well-nigh shook the house, and i knew that it was my son, though the note was deeper than his used to be, and was, as i told him, more like the bellow of a bull than the laugh of a young fellow of eighteen. his mother looked in from behind the shop and said, 'surely that must have been osgod's laugh.' 'it was,' i said, 'and there he stands before you. the impudent rascal has topped me by over half a head, though i am a fair height myself.' then she carried him away, and i saw no more of him until i had finished my work. since supper he has been telling me somewhat of what he has been doing down with you, which, as far as i can learn, amounts to nothing, save the exercising of his arms and the devouring of victuals." "he did all there was to do, ulred, except that he could not bring that long body and those loose arms of his to offer me cup or platter without risk to my garments, and even egbert was forced to agree that he should never be able to make a courtly servant of him; but save in that matter osgod has got on right well. he has always been ready when i wanted him, and prepared at once to start with me either on foot or horseback whenever i wished to go out. he is growing into a mighty man-at-arms, and well-nigh broke the skull as well as the casque of the captain and teacher of my house carls. another two years, if he goes on as he has done and we go into battle again, no thane in the land will have a stouter body-guard." "are you going to stay in london, master wulf?" "yes; that is, while the earl is here. when he is away hunting or attending to the affairs of the state i suppose i shall go with him. osgod of course will go with me. while here i shall have but little use for his services, and he can be at home most part of the day." "then i trust you will soon be off," the smith said bluntly, "for to have a youth six feet and a hand in height hanging about doing nothing would set all the men thinking it well that they too should be idle. osgod was always ready enough for a talk, though i do not say he could not work when it was necessary, but now that he is in your worship's service and under no orders of mine, his tongue will never cease wagging." "oh, i am ready to work a bit, father. i know how long it took me to hammer out a bar before, and i shall be curious to find out in what time i can do it now." "i doubt you will spoil more than you make, osgod. still, i too shall be curious to see how many strokes you can give with the big hammer, and how quickly you can beat a bar into a blade." the stay in town was, however, of short duration, for four days later the earl told him that he was going down to his house at bosham, and that he was to accompany him. "'tis three months since i was away from london," he said. "the king is going down into hereford to hunt, and i am therefore free for a while, as there are no matters of state that press at present, though i fear that ere very long the welsh will be up again. i hear that their king griffith, not content with the beating he had a short time since, is again preparing for war. still it may be some time before the storm bursts, and i am longing to be down again among the green woods or afloat on the water." harold took with him a large party of personal friends, his brother wulfnoth, and his nephew hakon. among the party was beorn, a young thane, who also was a ward of the earl. he was two years older than wulf, but there had been a close friendship between them at edward's court. shortly after wulf's departure beorn had also been sent by the earl to his estates in hampshire, and had been recalled at the same time. beorn was far less strong and active than wulf, having been very weakly during the early years of his life, nor had he had the same advantages of education, as he only became harold's ward a year after wulf was installed as a page at westminster. he was a youth of good and generous disposition, and looked with feelings of admiration upon the strength and skill in arms of the younger lad, and especially at his power of reading. "i can never be like you there, wulf," he would say, "but i hope i may some day grow as strong as you and as skilful in arms." beorn's stay in the country had done much for him, his thin tall frame had filled out and there was a healthy colour on his cheek. he had practised diligently at military exercises, and although he found when, on the first day after wulf's arrival in london, he challenged him to a trial in arms, he was still very greatly his inferior in skill and strength, he bade fair to become a gallant fighter. "it is a disappointment to me, wulf," he said as he picked up the battle-axe that had been struck from his hand and sent flying across the hall by a sweeping blow of wulf's weapon. "i have really worked very hard, and i did think that i ought to have caught you up, seeing that i am two years the elder. but you have gained more than i have. i did as well as the other youths who were taught with me by the house-carl harold sent down with me, but i am sure i shall never be as quick or hit as strongly as you do." "oh yes, you will, beorn. age is nothing. you see you were sick and ailing till you were fifteen years old, so those years counted for nothing, and instead of being two years older than i am you are many years younger. in another four or five years you will come to your full strength, and will be able to strike a far heavier blow than i can now; although i do not say heavier than i may be able to do then, as you are neither so wide nor so deep chested as i am. but what does it matter, one only fights sometimes. you have other advantages, you are gentler in speech and manner and have a handsome face. when we were pages together the bower-maidens of the queen always made much of you, while they called me impudent, and would give me many a slap on the cheek." "well, you deserved it richly, wulf, for you were always playing tricks upon them--hiding their distaffs or tangling their thread, and giving them pert answers when they wanted you to do their errands. well, i hope we shall be always great friends, wulf. your estates lie not far from mine, and though we can scarce be called neighbours we shall be within a day's ride of each other, and i trust that we shall fight together under the good earl, and often spend our time at each other's houses, and hunt and feast together." "i hope we shall be much together, beorn," wulf said warmly, "and that we shall be sworn friends; but as for feasting, i care but little for it. we saxon thanes are too fond both of food and wine-cup, and though i am no monk i would that our customs could be altered. i hate foreigners, but their ways are in many respects better than ours. the normans, it is true, may not be much better than we are, but then they are but northmen a little civilized; but i have heard the earl say that the french, and still more the italians, are vastly ahead of us in all arts, and bear themselves with a courtesy and gentleness to each other that puts to shame our rough manners." "we should be neither happier nor better that i can see, wulf, did we adopt the manners of these italians you speak of instead of our own." "perhaps not, beorn, but we should be able to make the people happier and better if we could raise them." "i will not even grant that, wulf. think you that the smith and the shepherd, the bowmaker and the weaver, would be any the happier could they read or even write than they are as they sing saxon songs over their work? i should like to be able to read, because harold thinks much of it, but except for that i see not that it would do me much good. if the king makes me any further grant of land it will be doubtless properly made out, and i can get a clerk or a monk to read it to me. my steward will keep the tallies of the tenants' payments. i can learn the history of our forefathers as well from the songs and tales of the gleemen as from books." "you are as bad as my man osgod," wulf said indignantly. "well, you need not get hot about it, good wulf," beorn laughed. "when you come to see me i will have gleemen to sing the deeds of our fathers to you. when i come to you i will sit as mum as a mouse while you read to me from some monk's missal. i will force you neither to eat nor to drink more than it pleases you, and you shall give me as much to eat and drink as it pleases me, then we shall be both well satisfied. as for your man osgod, i wish i had such a fellow. he will be well-nigh a giant one of these days, and in strength may come to rival the earl, who is said to be the strongest man on english soil." "he is a good fellow, beorn, and i could wish for no better to hold a shield over me in the day of battle or to stand back to back with me in a hand-to-hand fight." "you should get him to stand in front of you," beorn laughed. "he would be a rare screen against arrows and javelins." the friends were well pleased when they heard they were both to accompany harold to bosham, which was one of the favourite abodes of the earls of wessex. it had originally been built as a hunting-seat, but godwin had grown to love the place, with its woods extending for miles back and its quiet landlocked harbour, and additions had been made until it had grown to be, in point of size at least, a residence worthy of the great earls, and harold preferred it to any of the many mansions belonging to him. it was a large and gay party that rode down the road through the quiet woods of surrey and sussex. they put up each night at the houses of thanes, where, as notice had been sent of their coming, they were royally entertained, and those selected were proud to afford hospitality to the earl. for a week they stayed at bosham, hunting in the forests, going off in parties under the guidance of the foresters, some who cared not for hard labour, hunting in the woods between bosham and the hills, while others went far inland into the weald, which was for the most part covered by a great forest, with but a few scattered hamlets here and there. smoke rising among the trees showed where the charcoal-burners were at work, or where the furnaces were glowing, converting the ore into the tough iron that furnished arms and armour for the greater portion of the men of the south. at the end of the week the earl announced to his guests that he had provided a new diversion for them. "you see those three ships in the harbour," he said. "they were brought here last night, and three hundred men have been at work all day preparing them for our reception. i propose that we all embark with our dogs and servants, and sail along the coast, landing where we please and taking our sport. as we sail eastward there are abundant forests, and the game is far more plentiful than here, and our trip will partake of the character of an adventure in thus dropping upon unknown places. tents have been stored on board the vessels, with abundance of good cheer of all kinds, so that we can establish ourselves where we will, and sleep on shore instead of rocking uneasily on the waves." the proposal was received with acclamation, and the following morning the whole party embarked upon the three ships. the largest was occupied by harold himself, his brother and nephew, and six or seven of his principal thanes. in this craft too went wulf and beorn with their men. on issuing from the harbour the ships' heads were turned to the east. the wind was light and fitful, the sails therefore were not loosed, and they proceeded under oars. there was but little tide until they reached the extremity of the long point of selsea, past which they were hurried at great speed by the rapid current. rowing closer inshore they got into quieter water, and continued their way until tide turned, when they anchored, and landing with their dogs hunted in the woods for some hours. on their return to the sea-shore they found the tents erected and supper prepared, and the sport having been good they remained another day. the tide took them the next day past the shore of wulf's estate, and he begged the earl to land there and to pass a day or two with his company at steyning; but all were bent upon the chase, and they kept on until they reached the point where the white cliffs began to rise from the edge of the water. here they landed again, and spent two or three days in hunting. neither wulf nor beorn had been to sea before, and the quiet motion of the ships with their bellying sails and banks of sturdy oarsmen delighted them. there had been scarcely any motion, and neither had felt the qualms which they had been warned were generally experienced for a while by those who went upon the sea for the first time. when the journey was resumed wulf was struck with surprise and almost awe by the mighty cliffs that rose up from the water's edge. neither he nor beorn had seen anything like this, for although both their estates bordered the sea, the shores were flat, and vessels, if needs be, could be hauled up on shore. "what would happen if a gale were to burst upon us here?" wulf said to his companion. "if the waves were to dash us against those white rocks the ships would be broken up like egg-shells." "your question is answered," beorn said, as a bay suddenly opened to their sight. "you see we are going in here, and shall anchor snugly somewhere up this river in front of us, which is truly the best haven we have seen since we left bosham." half an hour later the vessels were moored to the bank, close to a wooden bridge which spanned the little river. chapter iv. a storm. after hunting for two days in the forests lying behind newhaven, and in the valley in which lewes lies, they again embarked. the master of harold's ship had expressed some doubts as to the weather, but as he stated that it was but some eight miles round the great cliff that they saw to the east, and that beyond this the rocks ceased and there was a bay in which they could ride at anchor, or if necessary beach their vessels, it was determined to proceed, as harold had the day before been visited by a thane whose house lay but two miles from the shore, and had accepted his invitation for the party to take up their abode there for a few days, as he promised them good sport in the forest. the cliffs rose higher as they proceeded. they kept closer inshore, and although they could see that the clouds were flying rapidly overhead they felt no breeze whatever, being protected from the wind by the lofty cliffs. the master was evidently uneasy, for he urged the rowers to exert themselves to the utmost. wulf and beorn stood looking with amazement at the cliffs towering up beside them. "is it not strange that they should rise like this--like a wall from the water?" wulf said. "had they been built up by human hands they could scarcely have been more erect and regular. i have never seen anything at all like it on land." "then it must be something formed by the sea, wulf. do you see those caverns at the foot of the cliff, and in some places you see there is a mound of rocks as if newly formed? it may be that this white stone is soft, and that the sea beating against the foot wears it away in time, and then the rock overhead gives way by its weight and so leaves an upright wall. perhaps, long back, these hills were like other hills, sloping gradually down into the sea; but in time, perhaps many, many years before the romans landed here, the sea began to eat them away, and has continued to do so ever since, until they are as we see them." "that may be so, beorn. my father has told me that he could remember when our estates stretched a good half-mile farther seaward, but had since been eaten away by the waves, and he says that his father had told him the same thing; therefore, as you say, in many hundreds of years even hills, if the stone were soft, might also be worn away. there we are rounding the point, and beyond there are no more cliffs; doubtless it is in this bay that the shipmaster edred thinks to anchor." at that moment their conversation was cut short by a tremendous gust of wind rushing down the sloping hill into the bay striking them with such terrible force that the ship heeled over until the water rushed above the bulwark. the men were thrown against each other, and several fell down to leeward. the confusion was heightened by the fact that the great sail, which was but loosely furled to its yard, burst the ropes, and the wind catching it buried the craft still further, and she would have filled and sunk had not the ship-master seized the tiller, and aided by the two sailors there pushed it up, and so the boat's head payed off from the wind and ran before it. the master shouted to the men to lower the sail, which was bellying and flapping violently, but before his orders could be obeyed there was a crash. the mast snapped off at the slings of the yard, and the wreck fell over the bow of the boat. all hands were employed for some minutes in getting the sail on board and furling it to its yard, which was laid lengthways along the thwarts. it was found that three men standing in the bows had been killed, and several others badly hurt. the vessel was by this time some distance from shore. nothing could be done until she was freed of the water, with which she was nigh half-full, and all hands were employed in bailing it out. the squall had increased rather than lessened in fury, and by the time the water was cleared out they were two miles from the headland. orders were then given to man the oars again but it was found that several of these had been lost, having been washed away when the men leapt up, believing that the boat would capsize, or had slipped from the rowlocks unnoticed while they were engaged in getting in the sail. this was a serious misfortune, for every oar was needed to force her through the water in the teeth of the wind, which was blowing directly off shore. the remaining oars were all double-banked, harold himself and his thanes taking their places among the rowers. for an hour they laboured their hardest, but at the end of that time they were farther from shore than when they began, the force of the wind acting on the poop and broad hull driving her seaward faster than the rowers could force her shoreward. the sea, too, was now getting up, and the motion of the vessel rendered it increasingly difficult to row. edred left his place at the tiller and went forward to harold. "my lord," he said, "it is useless. in spite of your efforts we are drifting farther and farther out, and from the look of the sky i fear that we are going to have a great gale, and there is nothing to do but to set a little sail and to run before it. maybe there will presently be a shift of wind, which may enable us to make for shore. at present you are but exhausting yourselves in vain, and the sea will soon get up so much that it will be impossible to use the oars." "so be it," harold replied; and at the master's orders the oars were laid in, and the men prepared to get sail upon her. a sailor climbed up the mast and fastened the stays close to the point which was broken off. then another joined him, and a block was lashed to the mast just below the stays, and the halliards were rove through it; then edred brought out a small sail, and this was hoisted, and the vessel, which had before been rolling heavily, began to glide swiftly through the water. they had had the satisfaction of seeing that their consorts, although like themselves nearly capsized by the squall, had suffered no damage, but after lowering their sails and yards to the deck, had succeeded in rowing into the bay, their lighter hull and draught enabling the oars to drive them through the water in the teeth of the wind. "she is going along finely now," wulf said. "yes," beorn agreed; "but before night there is like to be a sea that will try her." harold held a consultation with the master, and presently all the men were called to work. the great sail was unrolled from its yard and a portion cut off, somewhat wider than the beam of the boat, and in length reaching from the bow to the mast. nails and hammers were brought up from the little cabin, and the canvas was stretched from bulwark to bulwark and strongly nailed to the wood on either side, oars being first lashed across at short intervals to support it. "i suppose that is for us to lie under, master wulf?" osgod said. "it is a pity it was not erected before, for there is not a man on board who is not drenched to the skin." "it is not put there to keep you dry, osgod, but to keep the waves from coming into the ship. but she goes over them well. the wind is getting up, osgod, and we shall have a great sea presently." "then why don't we turn and sail back again? it seems to me to be folly to be running away from the land if such is going to be the weather." "how can we sail back again? do you not see that it is the wind that is blowing us off, and the vessel must go as the wind takes her. one can go a little this way or that, but no man ever yet sailed in the teeth of the wind." "this is the first time i have ever been to sea," osgod said, "and i trust it will be the last. the tossing of the ship makes me strangely giddy, and many of the servants are downright ill with it. why men should go on the water when they can walk upon the land is more than i can say. i think i will go and lie down under the shelter of the sail, for indeed i feel as if i were about to die." wulf himself was feeling strangely uncomfortable. as long as they had been at work he had not felt unwell, for the necessity of holding on to the bulwarks or ropes, and the excitement of their strange position, had saved him from experiencing many qualms; but both he and beorn were soon glad to follow osgod's example, and to lie down on the boards under the rowers' benches. fiercer and fiercer blew the wind, more and more violent became the motion of the ship; masses of water fell on the canvas forward, as she plunged into the waves, and would have soon beaten it in had it not been for the support of the oars. by evening most of the men were lying under the shelter, while harold's brother and friends had retired to the little cabin in the stern. the earl himself remained by the side of the ship-master, who had taken his place close to the tiller, which was worked by four men. "think you that she will weather it, edred?" "i have little fear about that, my lord. she is a staunch boat, and i have been aboard her in seas as heavy as this. besides, that thought of yours of stretching the canvas across her bow has greatly improved her chances. the water runs off as fast as it falls on it, and none comes on board. had it not been for this every man would have had to bail all night. no, i have no fear of her weathering the gale. what i am afraid of is, that if this wind continues to blow we shall assuredly be lost on the coast of normandy." "that would be an ill fortune, indeed, for i know that the normans count all that are cast on their shores as lawful prey; and even if we reach the land in safety and escape murder at the hands of the lord of the soil and his people, i may fall into the hands of duke william, who is assuredly no friend of mine, seeing that i stand in the way of his designs upon the throne of england. truly it was an evil moment when the thought of taking to the sea occurred to me, and i would give a broad slice of my earldom to be back at bosham." hour by hour the waves increased in size and violence, and often poured in over the sides. the number of men on board was too great for all to work effectively. they therefore were divided into two parties, one being engaged in bailing while the other lay under cover, the change being made every hour. wulf preferred working to lying still, for as the craft rolled the water washed over them, while the din of the waves striking the ship's side, and the cataracts of spray falling on to the canvas above were deafening, and it was impossible to get a moment's sleep. all were glad when morning broke, although the scene that met their eyes was the reverse of comforting. small as was the amount of sail the vessel tore through the water under the pressure of the following wind. great waves with white crests pursued her, and as they neared her stern it seemed to wulf that they must inevitably fall over and crush her. the spray torn from the crest by the wind filled the air. the wind shrieked in the cordage, and the vessel creaked and groaned as she rolled from side to side. "i would not have believed if i had not seen it, that the sea could be so violent and ill-behaved," wulf shouted to osgod, who was then standing beside him. "if my clothes were but dry and my stomach full i would not mind so much," osgod replied; "but to be drenched in water all night and to have nought to eat in the morning, takes the courage out of one mightily. how long, think you, will this go on?" "that no one can say. it may last two or three days." "and no food all that time!" osgod exclaimed in dismay. "we could stand that well enough, osgod; but i do not think there is much chance of our being called upon to do so, for i heard one of the sailors say that unless the storm abates marvellously we are likely to be cast upon the french coast before nightfall." "i should be glad to be cast anywhere so it were out of this. at least, whether it be france or england, there must be food to be had on shore." "you do not understand, osgod. unless we happen to be cast upon a shelving coast with sand or gravel the craft may be dashed to pieces, and all lose their lives; for assuredly none could swim long in such a sea as this." "well, we must hope that we shall find a shore such as you speak of," osgod said tranquilly; "but for my part, i am content to take the risk rather than wait another three days before getting anything to eat." "and i would rather fast for a week than run the risk of the ship being broken up on the rocks," wulf replied. "i can swim but little even in calm water, and i am sure that i could do nothing among those waves." "i can swim, and will look after you," osgod said confidently. "i used to swim every day in the thames." wulf shook his head. "i daresay you might look after me if i fell into the thames, osgod, but it is a very different thing in a sea like this. these waves would dash a swimmer hither and thither as if he were but a chip of wood; besides, the spray would smother him. even at this height above the water it is difficult to breathe when one turns round and faces the wind. i think that our only hope lies in running upon a flat shore, where the waves will wash the vessel up so high that we may be able to leap out from the bow on to the land beyond the reach of their fury." late in the afternoon one of the sailors on the poop astern shouted out that land was visible, and it was not long before it could be seen from the deck. all eyes were directed anxiously towards it. "it is a rocky coast," edred said, "but the rocks are not high, and if we can manage to direct the vessel between two of them we may escape. at present it is needful that most of the crew should keep in the stern, but when we are about to strike they must all run suddenly forward, so as to leap out as soon as she touches the ground. there will be but little time given to them, for assuredly the seas will batter her to pieces the moment she falls among the rocks." harold issued the order. all were to remain at their posts until he gave the word, and were then to run forward. the master scanned the shore anxiously. "see you, my lord, that opening right ahead of us? it seems to me barely the width of the ship, but if i can direct her truly between the rocks methinks that most of the crew will gain the land. i shall myself take the helm. that is my duty and my right, and should i not succeed in making the shore, i shall at least die well contented with the thought that you who are the hope of england will be saved." "i would fain stay with you, edred." "that cannot be, my lord. as it is my duty to stay by the ship to the last, so it is your first duty to save your life for england. i need no aid, for the vessel steers well, and by the help of a rope round the tiller i can manage her alone. farewell, my lord, if we are not to meet again on earth. a very few minutes will decide our fate." "swimming will be of no use there, osgod," wulf said. "look how the spray dashes itself against the black rocks." "i thought not that it would be so bad," osgod replied. "i wonder the master does not cast anchor." "the ropes would not hold for a moment," wulf said, "and when they broke we might drift broadside on to the rocks, which would mean destruction for all. the master is steering for that narrow opening between these two great rocks ahead. it will be but two or three minutes now before our fate is decided." at this moment harold shouted: "let each man make his peace with god." and baring his head he stood silently for a minute or two, imitated by all on board. then harold again raised his voice in a shout that was heard above the storm: "move forward now all of you, but not further forward than the mast; for if her head were too far down the master could not hold her straight. moreover, the mast will assuredly fall forward and crush those in front of it. therefore, let no man go forward of it until the ship strikes." the sailors had already cut away the canvas stretched across the bow, and all on board clustered just aft the mast. wulf looked back, and saw the master standing alone on the poop, with his eyes fixed in front of him and a look of grim resolve on his face. then he turned again to look ahead. the scene was terrible. on either side extended a long line of white foam. great masses of water were hurled against the rocks with a thundering crash, and the spray flew high up into the air, and then, caught by the wind, was carried far inland. the rocks were now but a few lengths ahead, and the passage between them looked terribly narrow, so narrow that he doubted if the ship could possibly pass through them. not a word was spoken on board as the ship neared the opening. now she swerved a little to one side, now a little to the other, as the waves lifted her stern and swept her along, but the hand of the master checked her immediately, and brought her head back to the line. she was but a length away from the passage when there was a crash that shook her from stem to stern; then another great wave lifted her, and wulf saw a black wall of rock gleaming with the water that streamed down it. the wall of rock flashed past the bulwarks so closely that he could have touched it. a moment later the ship struck again, this time with a force that threw many off their feet, while the mast fell over the bow. then once more she lifted, shot a few feet further, then struck with tremendous force and remained stationary. there was a grinding and splintering of planks, as the men rushed forward, and then a wave swept over the vessel, carrying all on deck before it into the cove beyond the rock, rolling them over and over up a sandy shore behind. some managed to dig their hands and feet into the sand and to scramble out; more were sucked back again by the receding waters. as wulf found himself in the water he felt his arm clutched, and osgod shouted in his ear: "do not struggle, i can keep you up!" when thrown up on the sand wulf tried in vain to resist the backward rush of the water; he and osgod were borne out again. when the next wave again swept them up wulf saw the earl standing knee-deep in the water, and as he was swept past, harold seized him and osgod, and with tremendous strength lifted them right out of the water. "keep still!" he shouted; "your weight will help me to keep my feet." wulf felt his supporter quiver as the water rushed out, for he was waist-deep now; but directly afterwards he set them both down on their feet, saying, "run before the next wave comes." ten yards farther and they were beyond the reach of the sea. harold was with them, and directed those who had got ashore to form lines, taking hold of each other's hands, and so to advance far into the surf and grasp their comrades as they were swept up. many were saved in this way, although some of the rescuers were badly hurt by floating pieces of wreckage, for the vessel had entirely broken up immediately after her course had been arrested. as soon as all who could be seen were brought ashore it was found that ten men were missing, among whom was the master of the ship, most of them having probably been struck by floating timbers. as soon as it was certain that no more would come ashore alive harold called the men together. rough litters were made of oars and pieces of sail, for the conveyance of those who had broken limbs or were too much injured to walk, and the party prepared for a start. by this time several men, apparently of the fishing class, had approached, but stood a short distance away, evidently waiting for the departure of the party before beginning the work of collecting whatever the sea might cast up. harold went over to them, and asked in the norman tongue: "what shore is this, and how far is it to the nearest town where we can obtain shelter and assistance?" "you are in ponthieu, in the territories of count conrad. the town of st. valery is but two miles along the coast. there you can obtain all you need." returning to his men, harold ordered the wounded to be raised, and the party at once set out. harold had already taken off his gold chain and rings, and had told his companions to do the same, in order that the cupidity of the natives might not be excited nor their rank guessed at. as soon as they started wulf went up to him. "my lord," he said, "i fear that you have already been recognized by one of the fishermen. i saw him looking earnestly at you, and then whisper to one of his companions. after doing so he hurried away." "that is bad news, wulf; but i could hardly expect that i should be long unrecognized. there are many vessels come and go between the northern ports and our own, and in st. valery there must be numbers of sailors and fishermen who have seen me in london. besides, we are sure to be questioned by the count as to our rank and condition, and even could we conceal it for a while, the news is certain to be brought ere long from england of our having been blown off the coast, and when it was known it would be speedily guessed that we were the missing party. hark you, wulf; i have never heard aught good of count conrad, and one cannot say what steps he may take to force us to pay a heavy ransom, but it is like enough that he will do all he can to prevent the news of my being in his hands from reaching the ears of the duke. it is likely that you and beorn, being but lads, will be watched less rigorously than the rest of us. should this be so, try, if you find an opportunity, to send the news to the duke that we are all held prisoners here. i shall, of course, endeavour to communicate with him, but some chance may occur by which you can do so more readily than i can." "i will try to do so, my lord; but i trust this norman count will treat you with all due honour and courtesy." wulf then fell back to beorn's side, and half an hour later the shipwrecked party entered the gates of st. valery. the townspeople flocked round them, and as soon as they learned that they were a party of shipwrecked saxons who had been blown by the gale from england, they were led to the house of the officer in command of the town. he asked them a few questions, saying, "i must refer the matter to the count. by the usages of our land all who are cast upon it become his prisoners, to be put to ransom or otherwise as he may decide. however, food shall be supplied you at once, but you must be content to remain under guard until his pleasure is known." they were accordingly at once placed in a disused granary, under the charge of a strong guard. food was brought to them, and as soon as they had consumed this, most of the men threw themselves on the ground, worn out by their long exertions. "this is a sorry welcome, wulf, after our escape from the sea," beorn said. "truly the land seems as inhospitable as the ocean." "it is not pleasant, beorn, but at present i feel so thankful for my escape from those terrible waves that even the thought that we are all prisoners to this petty noble does not greatly concern me. doubtless william of normandy, who is the liege lord of the land, will speedily take us out of his hands. were we alone it may be that we should suffer a long stay in his dungeons, but harold and his brother are far too important personages to be allowed to remain in the hands of one of the duke's vassals." "it is shameful," beorn said indignantly. "i do not say that those who are cast on our shores may not be often pillaged and ill-treated by the common folk, but surely none of gentle blood would fail to show them kindness and hospitality." "that is so on our coast of sussex, but i have heard that further west, and certainly among the danes of northumbria, vessels cast on the coast are considered as gifts from the sea, and even the lives of those who gain the shore are not often respected. i regret much that harold should be with us. it is true that his being here will doubtless shorten the term of our imprisonment, but it is unfortunate that he should fall into the hands of william, who is as famous for craft and subtlety as he is for bravery and skill as a leader." "but what can he gain from harold?" beorn asked. "our earl is well-nigh as much known throughout europe as william of normandy, and all christendom would cry out with shame were he treated with ought but courtesy by the duke." "i doubt not that he will treat him with courtesy, beorn, but he may well wring some concessions from him before he lets him depart. he may bargain that the normans may be again allowed to hold land in england, and to build their castles, as they did before godwin and his sons returned from exile, and the normans had to fly the land, save those around the person of the king. he may beg so many bishoprics for norman priests. there is no saying what concessions he may extort. of all princes in europe i had rather harold had fallen into the hands of any other than into those of william of normandy." "truly i have never troubled my head about such matters, wulf, and thought that it would be time to do so when i became a thane, and had a vote at the witan." "i have heard much of them from the prior of bramber, who is a true englishman, and though a priest, learned in all matters that appertain to the history of times past and of our own; he impressed upon me that just as a boy must practise arms if he is to bear them worthily as a man, so he should study the story of our kings, and learn what is passing, not only in our own country but in others, if he is ever to raise his voice in council." harold and his thanes sat apart discussing the position, their conclusion being very similar to that arrived at by wulf. chivalry had but slight influence as yet in the west of europe. kings and princes cared little as to the means by which they attained an end. rivals to a throne were put out of the way without scruple; the profession of arms was a business like any other, carried on for gain; a captured foe was valued chiefly for the amount of ransom that could be obtained for him; petty barons and powerful nobles alike levied exactions on those who might fall into their hands, unless previously provided with a safe-conduct. years later, when king richard was made a prisoner on his return from the holy land, it was only because of his great exploits for the recapture of the holy sepulchre that any feeling of reprobation was excited against his captors. thus then, although normandy was at peace with england, it did not seem an unnatural thing to harold and his companions that the noble into whose hands they had fallen should demand a heavy ransom, or that the duke of normandy himself should utilize the opportunity for his advantage. on the following morning they heard a large body of horsemen ride up. a minute later the governor accompanied by a norman noble entered. they were followed by a number of men-at-arms, among whom was a fisherman. "now, fellow," the count said to this man, "which is the saxon harold?" "i am," harold said, advancing a step before his companions. "i am harold, earl of wessex. i have with my companions been cast on your shores. i expect honourable treatment, and am willing to pay any reasonable ransom should you demand one." "we will talk of that afterwards," the count said roughly; "for the present you go with me to my castle at beaurain. but first do you and your men hand over all valuables that you may possess; they are forfeited to me, being cast up on my land." without a word harold produced his chain of office and other ornaments, and dropped them into a helmet which a soldier at the orders of the count held out for them. his companions did the same, the thanes first and then the two lads. "that will do," the count said to the soldiers. "that is my share, you can search the rest yourselves." "i protest against this robbery," harold said haughtily, "and will proclaim you in all the courts of europe as one who is false to his station, and who condescends to pillage those whom fortune has cast on his shores." "you can wait until you get an opportunity to do so," the count sneered; "it is not likely to come for some time. you can do as you like to the others," he went on to the governor, "i want not to be cumbered with them. you can doubtless find work for them on the fortifications, but if you can put them to no use or they are troublesome, cut their throats and throw them into the sea." the saxons fingered their knives, but harold said in their own tongue, "resistance would be folly, the time may come when we may turn the tables on this fellow." the soldiers now closed round harold and the thanes and led them out of the house. here they were ordered to mount each behind a soldier, and as soon as they had done so they rode out from st. valery, and crossing the river somme at abbeville, and the authie by a ford near crecy, reached the fortress of beaurain on the river canche near the town of hesdin before nightfall. on the road wulf watched anxiously for a chance to escape, but none offered itself. soldiers rode on both sides of the captives, and had he slipped from the horse he could not have hoped to make his escape across an open country. as soon as they entered the fortress harold and the thanes were all consigned to dungeons, but the count, learning that the two lads had been harold's pages, said they should wait on himself. "and see," he said to them, "that your service is good, if you do not wish to dangle over the moat at the end of a rope." "it is a shame that such a man should be a nobleman," beorn exclaimed indignantly to wulf, as he saw that the soldiers were placing chains upon harold before they led him away. "he is a hateful-looking villain," wulf said. "it is but lately that he revolted against william. i heard of it from the prior. his brother, the last count of ponthieu, joined france in an invasion of normandy. he fell in an ambush at st. aubin, and this man became count. for a time he was held prisoner by the duke, but afterwards he was freed, and received back his dominions as a vassal. his face is at once cruel and base. i told you the instructions harold gave me, beorn; the need for carrying them out has arrived, and i will try to make my escape without loss of time from this fortress to bear the tidings to the duke." "i will escape with you, wulf; two can get on better than one." "that is so, beorn, and i would gladly have you with me, but maybe i shall be detected in attempting to escape and be slain, or i may fall into the hands of peasants and be brought back here, and if we were together all hope of letting the duke know of our lord's captivity would be at an end. therefore it were best that i made the attempt first. if i fail, which is like enough, then do you in turn try to get away and bear the news to the duke." beorn did not like to stay behind, but he saw that wulf's plan was best, and accordingly fell in with it. "will you go at once?" he asked. "no; i will stay for a day or two to lull suspicion. they may watch us just at first, but if they see that we do as we are ordered with good-will they will cease to regard us so narrowly; moreover, it will be needful to know the place well before i devise a plan of escape." chapter v. rouen. for the next two days the lives of the two young saxons were well-nigh unbearable. at meals the count by turns abused and jeered at them, and his companions, following his example, lost no opportunity of insulting them in every way. "if this goes on, wulf," beorn said as they threw themselves down on the ground late that night, when the carousal was ended, "i shall snatch the count's dagger from his belt and bury it in his heart, though they put me to death by torture afterwards." "i thought of doing so myself, beorn, to-night, when he threw a cup of wine over me. but i said to myself my life is not my own, harold's rescue depends on it. we are bound as his men to suffer in patience whatever may befall us. in another hour i shall try to make my escape. when it was your turn to wait this evening i stole away for a time, and went to the shed where they keep the war-engines and took thence a coil of rope, which i have hidden in the courtyard. you know that we noticed last night where the sentries were placed, and decided where i might best drop from the wall unobserved. fortunately the moat is dry at present, though they can turn water into it from the stream at will, so that once down i shall have no difficulty in getting away. now i want you to go to sleep directly, i shall not stir until you do so, then when you are questioned in the morning you can say that i was by your side when you went to sleep, and that when you woke in the morning the place was vacant. you can say that i told you during the day that i could not suffer these insults much longer, and that you suppose that after you had gone to sleep i must have got up and either killed myself or in some way made my escape." beorn lay quiet for a time and then wulf said suddenly, "i have changed my mind, beorn; we will go together. i feel it is likely that in his wrath at my escape the count may slay you, and thus the object with which you remained behind would come to nothing, therefore it is best that you go with me." "i was thinking so myself, wulf, though i would not say it; but in truth i think the risks we may run in making our way to rouen are small compared to those of staying here." "we must lose no time, beorn. the castle is quiet now, and we must be many miles away from here before morning, for you may be sure the count's horsemen will scour the country far and wide in pursuit of us." they had that morning, before the count was up and their services were required, wandered about the fortress, apparently paying no attention to anything, but really closely observing the approaches to the walls and the general features of the country outside. they now stole out, keeping in the shadow of the building, until they reached the staircase leading up to the battlements, close to the point wulf had fixed upon for making their descent. this had been chosen chiefly because no sentry was placed on that part of the wall, the watch generally being careless, as normandy was at present at peace with its neighbours. when they reached the top of the steps they listened for a short time, but everything was silent. then they stepped out on to the narrow pathway along the battlements, fastened one end of the rope round a piece of stonework and let the other end drop down into the fosse. "shall we both go down together, the rope is strong enough?" beorn asked. "it is strong enough, but we had better go separately, beorn; we are neither of us accustomed to climb ropes, and if the upper one were to slip down too fast he might knock the other off the rope. it makes no matter who goes first. i will if you like, only mind if you hear a footstep approaching let yourself down at once whether i am off the rope or not. be sure and twist your legs tightly round it, or it will run through your fingers." taking hold of the rope he at once swung himself over, and without much difficulty reached the bottom in safety. he had scarcely done so when beorn came down beside him with a rush. "what made you come down like that, you narrowly missed coming on my head?" "i believe i have cut my fingers to the bone," beorn groaned; "i feel as if i were holding a bar of hot iron. you had scarcely started before i heard voices; they were evidently those of men going their rounds, so i caught hold of the rope and swung myself off, but before i got my legs fairly round the rope i began to slip, and though i gripped it as hard as i could i could not stop myself, but slid down like lightning." "hush!" wulf whispered, "they are coming along above." the voices came nearer until they sounded directly overhead wulf knew that it was very unlikely they would notice the rope in the dark, but he felt much relieved as he heard them pass on. he waited until they could no longer be heard. "now, beorn, we can safely be off." it was muddy at the bottom of the fosse, but not so deep as they thought it would be, and they scrambled up the opposite side and then struck across the country south. presently they came upon a road, which they followed, until after three hours' walking they reached the authie river, at a spot where the bank was broken down. "this must be a ford, we had best try to wade across. anyhow there cannot be very many yards to swim, and we can both manage that." they found that the bottom was pebbly, and that even in the middle the water was not much above their waists. "that is something done, at any rate," beorn said. "now which way shall we go? this road we are on seems to lead south and we cannot do better than follow it, the stars give us light enough, now that our eyes are accustomed to the darkness." "yes, we can keep this road, which is no doubt that by which we travelled before, as far as the village which i heard them call noyelle, then we shall have to strike off to the left, for that place was not far from abbeville, and shall have to follow the somme up some distance, unless we can find means of crossing it." "i should think we had better leave the road before we get to the village, so as to be well away from it. if any peasant were going to work early and caught sight of us he would be sure to mention it to any horseman who might come along searching for us. i noticed that there were several woods on our right as we rode along." "that would be the safest way, no doubt," wulf agreed. "fortunately we can do without food for to-morrow"--for both had managed to get some supper after they had finished in the hall,--"and having made up my mind to escape to-night i hid away a large piece of bread under my smock. we can manage very well on that." accordingly after an hour's walking they left the road and bore to the south-west. but little of the land was cultivated, and they were fortunate in not coming upon any woodland until light began to break in the sky. then they made their way to the nearest wood, went in for some distance and then threw themselves down, and in a few minutes were fast asleep. accustomed to judge time by the position of the sun, they saw when they awoke that it was already past noon, and after eating a few mouthfuls of bread they continued their journey. for the most part their course lay among woods, and they did not venture across an open piece of country until after a careful examination to see that no one was in sight. shortly after starting they caught sight of a village in the distance, which they afterwards learned was st. riguier, but with these exceptions saw no human habitation. late in the afternoon they came down on the bank of the somme. this was thickly covered with long reeds and rushes, and among these they sat down and ate the rest of their bread, confident that however vigilant the search they would not be traced. "this is a very different matter to the last crossing," beorn said. "this is a wide river, and i fear that i could not swim across it." "nor should i like to try. but fortunately there is no occasion for us to trust to swimming; for we can pull up or break off a number of these great rushes and make them into two bunches; these will give us ample support for our passage." "so they will, wulf; i should never have thought of that." two large bundles were soon made, the reeds being tied together by a tough climber that wreathed itself everywhere among them, and as soon as it was quite dark they went down to the water's edge, and found to their satisfaction that the reeds possessed ample buoyancy for their purpose. wading in they started swimming, resting their chests on the reeds and striking out with their legs, and in a few minutes were on the southern bank of the river. "now we must make to the east of south," wulf said. "i should say if we walk steadily all night we shall be beyond the territory of this vile count. i hope before long we shall strike on some road leading in the right direction, for if we get among the woods again we shall be able to make no progress. but any road we may come upon going at all in the right direction is likely to lead to rouen." "how far is it, do you think?" "i have a very vague idea. the prior had a map of normandy, and on this he pointed out to me how the duchy had grown since william came as a boy to be its duke. i can remember the general position of the town, but not more than that. i should think from the somme to rouen must be over seventy miles and less than a hundred, but more closely than that i cannot guess." they came upon no road before morning, but as the country was open they made good progress, and when they lay down in a thicket as the day was breaking they calculated that they must be nearly thirty miles south of the somme. "i feel that i want sleep," beorn said, "but still more that i want food. if it is another sixty miles to rouen i know not how we are going to travel the distance fasting." "no, we must get some food to morrow or rather to day, beorn. we have nothing of any value to offer for it. they searched us too closely for anything to escape them. we dare not go into any town or village until we are quite sure that we are beyond the count's territories, but we might enter some solitary hut and pray for a piece of bread for charity, or we can walk all day, by which time we shall surely be well beyond the count of ponthieu's territory, and could boldly go into a town. if we are seized, we can demand to be sent to rouen, saying we are bearers of an important message to duke william, and even if they do not send us straight on, they would hardly keep us without food." after sleeping for four or five hours they again started, and after walking some miles came upon a herdsman's cottage the man was out, and his wife looked with surprise at the two lads, whose garments, though stained by sea water and travel, were evidently those of youths of a class above the common. beorn addressed her in her own language, and told her that they were wayfarers who had lost their road and were grievously in need of food. she at once invited them to come in, and set before them some black bread and some cheese made from goats' milk. they learned to their satisfaction that they had long passed the limits of ponthieu, and that rouen was distant about fifty miles. "the road from amiens lies five miles to the east," she said; "but it would be shorter for you to keep due south, for it inclines in that direction. you will strike it after seven miles' walking, and after that you cannot miss your way." after warmly thanking the woman for her hospitality the lads again started, feeling greatly strengthened and refreshed by their meal; but want of sleep told upon them, and when they got within sight of the road they again lay down, and slept until the sun was setting. resuming their journey they followed the road, and before morning crossed over a range of hills, and presently arrived at a small hamlet close to which was a monastery. towards this they directed their steps, and seating themselves on the ground near the door, waited until it was unbarred. "you are early wayfarers, my sons," the monk who opened the gates said as they went up, "and you seem to have travelled far." "that have we, father, and are sorely in need of food." the hospitality of the monasteries was unbounded, and the monk at once led them into the kitchen, where bread, meat, and wine were placed before them. "truly you were hungry," the monk said smilingly as he watched their onslaught upon the joint. "we were well-nigh starving, father. for two days we have had nought to eat save a crust of bread we had brought with us, and some that a shepherd's wife bestowed upon us out of charity, and we have walked from near hesdin." "i do not ask out of curiosity, my sons," the monk said after a pause, "and you know it is not our custom to question wayfarers who come in to ask our hospitality; but it is strange to see two youths, who by their dress and manner seem to belong to a superior station, in so pitiable a state as you are, and wandering alone, as it would seem, penniless through the country. i ask not your confidence, but if you chose to give it maybe we might aid or advise you. our prior is a kindly man and very gentle with the faults of others." "we are saxons, father. we were wrecked four days since near st. valery, and are now bound on an errand of high importance to duke william, to whom it is urgent we should arrive as soon as possible. we have run sore peril on the way, and have been stripped of our money and valuables." "is your mission of importance to the duke as well as to yourselves?" the monk asked gravely. "it is of great importance to him. i am sure that he would consider that any one who assisted us on our way had done him good service." the monk look earnestly at them. "i will speak to the prior," he said. he returned in a few minutes and bade them follow him. the prior was a tall, gentle old man. "i have heard your story from brother gregory," he said, "and i wished to see you that i might judge for myself whether so strange a tale, as that two shipwrecked boys should have important business with our duke, could be believed, before i did aught to help you forward. you look to me honest of purpose and of gentle blood, and not, i am sure, belonging to the class of wayfarer who will trump up any story for the purpose of gaining alms. whether your errand with the duke is of the importance you deem it i cannot say, but if you give me your word that you consider it an urgent matter, i will aid you to proceed at once." "we do indeed consider it most urgent, father, and we are sure that the duke will so regard it. we should not have walked well-nigh a hundred miles in two days and nights, and that almost without food, had we not deemed it so." "brother gregory," the prior said, "bid lay-brother philip at once prepare three palfreys, and tell him he is to ride himself with these two saxon youths to rouen. the distance is thirty miles," he went on as the monk left the room. "it is not yet six o'clock, and though our palfreys are not accustomed to travel at rapid speed, you will be there this afternoon in time to have audience with the duke." the lads returned their warm thanks to the prior. "we would gladly tell you the purport of our mission," beorn said, "but we are only the bearers of news, and the duke might be displeased did he know that we had confided to any before it reached his own ear." "i wish not to learn it, my son. it is sufficient for me that you have a mission to our duke, and that i am possibly furthering his interest by aiding you to reach him. but, in sooth, i am more moved by the desire to aid two stranger youths, whom the sea and man alike seem to have treated hardly. is it long since you left england?" "we have well-nigh lost account of time, father, so much has taken place in a few days. 'tis but a week since we were sailing along the english coast with a large company in three ships, when a sudden tempest arose, carried away our sail, blew us off the shore, and then increasing in fury drove us before it until we were wrecked on the coast of ponthieu, near st. valery. since then we have been prisoners, have escaped, and have journeyed here on foot." "truly a bad week's work for you," the prior said. "were all your ships wrecked?" "no; our two consorts, being lighter and more easily rowed, regained the land when we were blown off it." "conrad of ponthieu is an evil man," the prior said. "had you come ashore twenty miles farther south you would have been beyond his jurisdiction. i fear that all the seacoast people view the goods obtained from vessels cast ashore as a lawful prey, but your company would assuredly have received fair hospitality if cast on the shores of normandy itself. but now methinks i hear the patter of the palfreys' hoofs. farewell, my sons, and may god who has protected you through these dangers give you his blessing." the lads knelt before him as he placed his hands on their heads and gave them his benediction. as they rose brother gregory entered to say that the horses were ready, and with renewed thanks to the prior they followed him to the courtyard, mounted, and rode off with the lay-brother, glad indeed to find their journey on foot thus abridged. impatient as they were to reach rouen, the gentle pace at which the palfreys ambled along fretted them very much. brother philip kept up a constant string of talk on the monastery, its estates, the kindness of the prior, the strictness of the subprior, and other matters of great interest to himself, but of none to the boys, whose thoughts were with harold, chained and in prison. the palfreys, however, made very fair progress, and it was but three o'clock when they rode into the streets of rouen, whose size and grandeur would at any other time have impressed them much, for it was an incomparably finer city than london. "that is the duke's palace," brother philip said, as they approached a stately building. "i will put up the horses at the convent at the farther corner of this square, and will then go with you to the palace, as i have orders to tell any officer who may make a difficulty about you entering, that i am bid by the prior of forges to say that you are here on urgent business with the duke, and to pray that you may have immediate audience with him." in those days great men were easy accessible, and one of the ushers, on receiving the message from the prior, at once led the boys to an apartment in which the duke was sitting. he looked up in some surprise on seeing the two lads standing bareheaded at the door, while the usher repeated the message he had received. "advance," he said. "what is this business of which the prior of forges has sent me word?" the two boys advanced and knelt before the duke. he was a man of about the same age as harold, with dark hair and complexion, less tall than the earl, but of a powerful figure, and a stern, resolute face. the boys had discussed among themselves which should be the speaker. wulf had desired that beorn, being the elder, should deliver the message, but beorn insisted that as wulf himself had received it from harold, it was he who should be the one to deliver it to the duke. "my lord duke," wulf said, "we are saxons, pages of earl harold, and we bring you by his orders the news that the vessel in which he was sailing along his coast had been blown off by a tempest and cast on the shore of ponthieu, near st. valery, and that he and his companions have been villainously ill-treated by conrad, count of ponthieu, who has seized them and cast them into dungeons in his fortress of beaurain, harold and his companions being fettered like malefactors." the duke was astounded at the news. no greater piece of good fortune could have befallen him, for he had it in his power to lay his great rival under an obligation to him, to show himself a generous prince, and at the same time to obtain substantial benefits. he rose at once to his feet. "by the host," he exclaimed, "but this is foul treatment indeed of the noble earl, and brings disgrace alike upon the count of ponthieu and upon me, his liege lord. this wrong shall be remedied, and speedily. you shall see that i waste no moment in rescuing your lord from this unmannerly count." he struck his hand on the table, and an attendant entered, "pray the knights fitz-osberne and warren to come hither at once. and how is it, boys," he went on, as the attendant hurried away, "that you were enabled to bear this message to me?" "while harold and his thanes were cast into prison," wulf said, "the count kept us to wait upon him; not for our services, but that he might flout and ill-treat us. we obtained possession of a rope, and let ourselves down at night from the battlements, and made our way on foot as far as forges, where the good prior, learning from us that we had a message of importance to you, though nothing of its import, sent us forward on palfreys, so that no time might be lost." "when did you leave beaurain?" "it will be three days come midnight," wulf said. "and how did you live by the way?" "we took a piece of bread with us, and once obtained food at a shepherd's hut, and this morning we were well entertained at the convent of forges." "you have proved yourselves good and trusty messengers," the duke said. "would i were always as well served. as you are the earl's pages you are of course of gentle blood?" "we are both his wards, my lord, and shall be thanes when we come of age." "and how is it that you, young sir, who seem to be younger than your companion, are the spokesman?" "it happened thus," wulf said modestly. "some fishermen came up just after we had gained the shore with the loss of many of our company. i marked that one of them started on seeing earl harold, and whispered to a companion, and feeling sure that he had recognized my lord, i told the earl of it as we walked towards st. valery. he then charged me if he was taken prisoner by the count to endeavour to bear the news to you, and to give the same orders to my comrade beorn, saying it was likely that we might not be so strictly watched as the men of the company, and might therefore succeed in slipping away, as indeed turned out to be the case. i was desirous that beorn should tell you the tale, being older and more accustomed to the speech of the court than i was, but he held that the message, being first given to me, it was i who should deliver it." "he judged rightly," the duke said, "and deserves credit for thus standing aside." at this moment two knights entered. "fitz-osberne, warren," the duke said, "a foul wrong has been done by conrad of ponthieu to earl harold of wessex, the foremost of englishmen next to the king himself, who has, with a company of his thanes, been cast ashore near st. valery. instead of receiving honourable treatment, as was his due, he has been most foully seized, chained, and with his friends thrown into prison by the count, who has sent no intimation of what has taken place to me, his lord, and had it not been for these two brave and faithful youths, who effected their escape over the battlements of beaurain in order to bring me the news, the earl might have lingered in shameful captivity. i pray you take horse at once, with twenty chosen spears, and ride at the top of your speed to beaurain. there express in fitting terms to conrad my indignation at his foul treatment of one who should have been received as a most honoured guest. say that the earl and his company must at once be released, and be accorded the treatment due not only to themselves, but to them as my guests, and bid the count mount with them and ride to my fortress of eu, to which i myself will at once journey to receive them. tell conrad that i will account to him for any fair ransom he may claim, and if he demur to obey my orders warn him that the whole force of normandy shall at once be set on foot against him. after having been for two years my prisoner, methinks he will not care to run the risk of again being shut up within my walls." "we will use all haste," fitz-osberne said. "conrad's conduct is a disgrace to every norman noble, for all europe will cry shame when the news of the earl's treatment gets abroad. that conrad should hold him to ransom is only in accordance with his strict rights, but that he should imprison and chain him is, by the saints, almost beyond belief." as soon as the knights had left, the duke sent for his chamberlain, and ordered him to conduct beorn and wulf to an apartment and to see that they were at once furnished with garments befitting young nobles, together with a purse of money for their immediate wants. then taking a long and heavy gold chain from his neck he placed it on the table, and with a blow with his dagger cut it in sunder, and handed half to each of the lads. "take this," he said, "in token of my thanks for having brought me this news, and remember, that if at any time you should have a boon to ask that it is within my power to grant, i swear to you upon my ducal honour that it shall be yours. never have i received more joyful news than that the great earl of wessex will shortly be my guest." the lads bowed deeply, and then followed the chamberlain from the apartment. "well, what think you of it, beorn?" wulf said, when they found themselves alone in a handsome chamber. "so far as rescuing harold from the power of the count of ponthieu we have surely succeeded even beyond our hopes. as to the rest, i know not. as you were speaking i marked the satisfaction and joy on the duke's face, and i said to myself that it was greater than need have been caused by the thought that earl harold was to be his guest." "so i thought myself, beorn. there can be no doubt that, as he said, he deemed it the best news he had ever received, and i fear greatly that harold will but exchange one captivity for another. it will doubtless be a more pleasant one, but methinks harold will find himself as much a prisoner, although treated as an honoured guest by william, as he was while lying in the dungeon of conrad. it is a bad business, and i greatly fear indeed that harold will long rue the unfortunate scheme of hunting along the coast that has brought him to this pass." in a short time an attendant arrived with ewers, water, and four suits of handsome garments, belts embroidered with gold thread, and daggers, together with two plumed caps and purses, each containing ten gold pieces; he informed them that two horses had been provided for their use, and that they were to take their meals with the duke's household, and to consider themselves in all respects as his guests. "we look finer birds than we did when we rode in with brother philip," beorn laughed when they had attired themselves in their new garments. "the more sober of these suits are a good deal gayer than those we wore at home even at court ceremonies." "king edward objects to show," wulf said, "and his own pages are so sober in their attire that the earl likes not that we should outshine them, and we usually cut a poor figure beside those of william of london and the other normans of his court." in a short time the chamberlain came in and informed them that supper was served, and conducted them to the hall, where he presented them to the duke's gentlemen and pages as william's guests, and wards and pages of the earl of wessex. the news of harold's shipwreck and imprisonment travelled quickly, for orders had already been issued for the court to prepare to start early the next morning to accompany the duke to eu, in order to receive with due honour william's guest and friend, harold of england; and while the meal went on many questions were asked as to the shipwreck and prisonment of the earl, and the liveliest indignation was expressed at the conduct of conrad of ponthieu. "truly all normans will be reckoned churls," one of the gentlemen exclaimed indignantly. "the fame of harold's bravery, wisdom, and courtesy to all men is known in every court in europe, and that the duke's vassal should have dared to imprison and chain him will excite universal indignation. why, the rudest of our own norse ancestors would not have so foully treated one so noble whom fate had cast into his hands. had we been at war with england it would be shameful, but being at peace there are no words that can fitly describe the outrage." when the meal was over, one of the duke's pages who was about the same age as beorn asked him what they were going to do with themselves. "if you have nothing better," he said, "will you ride with me to my father's castle, it is but five miles away? my name is de burg. i can promise you a hearty welcome. my father was one of the knights who accompanied the duke when he paid his visit to england some fifteen years ago, and he liked the country much, and has ever since spoken of the princely hospitality with which they were received by your king. he did not meet earl harold then." "no, the earl with his father and brothers was away in exile," wulf said rather shortly, for that visit had been a most unpleasant one to englishmen. it had happened when the norman influence was altogether in the ascendant. the king was filling the chief places at court and in the church with normans, had bestowed wide domains upon them, and their castles were everywhere rising to dominate the land. englishmen then regarded with hostility this visit of the young norman duke with his great train of knights, and although at the return of godwin and his sons the greater portion of the intruders had been driven out, their influence still remained at court, and it was even said that edward had promised the duke that he should be his successor. it was true that englishmen laughed at the promise. the king of england was chosen by the nation, and edward had no shadow of right to bequeath the throne even to one of his sons much less to a foreign prince, who, although related to himself by marriage, had no drop of english blood in his veins. still, that the promise should ever have been made rankled in the minds of the english people, the more so as the power of normandy increased, and the ambition as well as the valour of its duke became more and more manifest according to english law the promise was but an empty breath, absolutely without effect or value. according to norman law it constituted a powerful claim, and duke william was assuredly not a man to let such a claim drop unpressed. wulf had heard all this again and again, and the prior of bramber had explained it to him in all its bearings, showing him that little as englishmen might think of the promise given by edward so long ago, it would be likely to bring grievous trouble on the land at his death. he might perhaps have said more in reference to william's visit had not beorn at once accepted the invitation to ride with young de burg to his father's castle. chapter vi release of the earl in a few minutes the three horses were brought out. wulf and beorn were much pleased with the animals that had been placed at their service. they were powerful horses, which could carry a knight in his full armour with ease, and seemed full of spirit and fire. they were handsomely caparisoned, and the lads felt as they sprang on to their backs that they had never been so well mounted before. "you would have made the journey more quickly and easily if you had had these horses three days ago," young de burg laughed. "yes, indeed. there would have been no occasion to hide in the woods then. with our light weight on their backs they would have made nothing of the journey." "you must not expect to see a castle," de burg said presently, "though i call it one. in his early days the duke set himself to destroy the great majority of castles throughout normandy, for as you know he had no little trouble with his nobles, and held that while the strength of these fortresses disposes men to engage either in civil war or in private feuds with each other, they were of no avail against the enemies of the country. my father, who is just the age of the duke, was his loyal follower from the first, and of his free will levelled his walls as did many others of the duke's friends, in the first place because it gave the duke pleasure, and in the second because, had only the castles of those opposed to the duke been destroyed, there would have been such jealousy and animosity on the part of their owners that matters would never have quieted down in the country. thus it is that throughout the land you will find but few castles remaining. the nobles felt it strange at first to be thus dwelling in houses undefended against attack, but they soon learnt that it was far more convenient than to be shut up within massive walls, and the present dwellings are much larger and more comfortable than those of former days. the duke said rightly that the abolition of fortresses well-nigh doubled his fighting power, for that so many men were required to garrison them as to greatly diminish the number their lords could take with them into the field. you do not have castles in england, do you?" "no, we live in open houses, and hold that it is far better and more pleasant to do so. there is no fighting between neighbours with us. the great earls may quarrel and lead their forces into the field, or may gather them against danish and norwegian pirates, but except on these occasions, which are rare, all dwell peaceably in their homes." the horses were fresh, and the five miles quickly passed over. "there is the house," de burg said, pointing to a large building standing on an eminence. it was castellated in form, and much of the old building had been incorporated with the additions, but the outer wall had been pulled down and the moat filled up. broad casements had replaced the narrow loopholes, and though the flag of the de burgs still waved over the keep, which stood a little apart from the rest, the family no longer dwelt in it. "it is chiefly used as a storehouse now," guy de burg explained; "but there, as you see, the old loopholes still remain, and in case of trouble it might be held for a time. but of that, however, there is little chance; the duke's hand is a heavy one, and he has shown himself a great leader. he has raised normandy well-nigh level with france, and so long as he lives and reigns there is no fear of domestic trouble." the gate stood open and they rode into a courtyard, when several men came out and took the horses. guy de burg ran up a broad staircase to the entrance of the house itself, and passed beneath a noble entrance with a lofty pointed arch supported by clustered pillars. inside was a spacious hall paved with stone, and from this de burg turned into an apartment whose walls were covered with rich hangings. here a lady was at work embroidering, surrounded by several of her maids similarly engaged. a girl some fourteen years old was reading a missal, while the master of the castle was sitting in a chair with low arms, and was playing with the ears of a hound whose head was lying on his knee. "well, guy, what is your news?" he asked as his son entered. "half an hour since i received a message from the duke desiring me to appear with ten men-at-arms in their best trappings to ride with him to eu. is conrad of ponthieu giving trouble again, and who are these young gentlemen with you?" guy went down on one knee to kiss his father's hand, and then did the same to his mother, then he said, "i will with your permission answer the last question first, father. my friends are young saxon thanes, pages to earl harold, and at present guests of the duke." "you are bearers, doubtless, of some message from the king to our duke?" "no, my lord," beorn said, "we were bearers of a message from earl harold." "it is to meet him, father, that we are to ride to eu to-morrow. he has been wrecked on the shores of ponthieu, and has been foully imprisoned and even fettered by count conrad. beorn and wulf escaped from the prison and brought the news to the duke, who this afternoon dispatched fitz-osberne and warren at full speed to bid the count at once free his prisoners, and deliver them over to him at eu under pain of his direst displeasure." "harold in normandy and a prisoner! this is strange news indeed. we shall surely make him welcome, for he is in all respects a great man, and save our own duke has a reputation second to none in europe." wulf thought as he looked at the speaker that at least he had no second thought in his mind. it was a frank honest face, martial in its outline, but softened by a pleasant smile. he had spoken in a genial tone of affection to his son, and wulf thought, that although no doubt he was ready to take the field at the summons of his lord, he preferred a quiet life in this stately home. "this is news for you, wife," he went on. "you will have to furbish up your gayest attire, for we shall be having grand doings in honour of this great english earl, and our dames will have to look their best in order that he may carry home a fair report of them to the saxon ladies. and how did you manage to escape, young sirs, and when did you arrive with the news?" beorn, who as the elder was specially addressed, shortly related the story of their escape and journey. "you have done well," the baron said when he had concluded. "guy, you may learn from these young saxons that even pages may be called upon to do work of more importance than handing wine-cups and standing behind their lord on state occasions. had it not been for their readiness and courage harold might have lain weeks in prison, maybe months, while the count was striving to wring the utmost ransom from him. the lads would doubtless have been slain had they been detected in making their escape or overtaken on the way, and the attempt was therefore one that required courage as well as devotion to their lord. i doubt not that you would exhibit both qualities did opportunity offer, but i question whether you could have walked the distance they did, and that on such scanty fare. we normans are too apt to trust wholly to our horses' legs to the neglect of our own, and although i have no doubt that you could ride as far as a horse could carry you, i warrant that you could hardly have performed on foot the journey from beaurain in twice the time in which they did it. they must have exercised their legs as well as their arms, and although in a campaign a norman noble depends upon his war horse both on the march and on the day of battle, there may often be times when it is well that a knight should be able to march as far as any of the footmen in the army. well, agnes, and what have you to say to these saxon youths? methinks your eyes are paying more attention to them than to your missal." "i can read my missal at any hour, father, but this is the first time that i have seen young saxon nobles. i thought there would have been more difference between them and us. their hair is fairer and more golden and their eyes bluer, but their dress differs in no way from our own." she spoke in a matter-of-fact and serious air, as if it were a horse or a dog that she was commenting upon, and both beorn and wulf smiled, while guy laughed outright. "it is little wonder that their attire is like ours, agnes," he said, "seeing that they were furnished with it by the duke's orders. you do not suppose that after being tossed about on the sea and well-nigh drowned in landing, and being made prisoners, and then travelling through the country and sleeping in the woods, beorn and wulf would arrive here with their garments new and spotless. that would indeed have been a miracle." "but, indeed," beorn said, "our garments differ not greatly from those we now have on, for norman fashions are prevalent at king edward's court, and we had no choice but to conform to them. your language is always spoken there, and methinks that were you to visit westminster you would see but little difference between king edward's court and that of your own duke." "and your sisters, do they too dress like us?" "queen edith's ladies dress like her in norman fashion, but away from the court the attire is different and more simple. sisters, wulf and i have none; we are orphans both, and wards of earl harold, who holds our estates until we are of age to take the oaths to him and to lead our men in battle." "and will you be barons like my father, or counts, or simple knights?" "we shall be none of these things, lady agnes. we have our great earls as in france you have your great dukes, but below that we have no titles. we are thanes, that is land owners, who hold their land direct from our earls. some have wider lands than others, but as free thanes we are all equal. as to knights, we have not in england the titles and ceremonies which are so much thought of in france and in other courts." "that is a pity," the girl said gravely, "for the vows of knighthood make a knight courteous and gentle to enemies and friends alike." "or rather, agnes," her mother put in, "they should do so; but in truth, looking round at the cruel wars we have had in normandy, i do not see that men have been more gentle or courteous than they would have been had they never taken the vows or had knightly spurs buckled on; and in truth it seems to me from the news of what has taken place beyond the sea, that in the civil troubles they have had in england men are much more gentle with each other, and foes are far more easily reconciled than with us in normandy, who are supposed to be bound by the laws of chivalry. had our duke been cast upon the shores of england as harold has been cast upon that of ponthieu, i think that he would not have been so dishonourably treated by one of the english thanes as harold has been by count conrad. when godwin and his sons returned from the exile into which they had been driven, and again became all powerful, there was not, as i have heard from your father, a single drop of blood shed, nor any vengeance taken upon the men who had brought about their exile. it would have been very different had such things happened here." "you speak rightly, wife. the english are of a more gentle disposition than we are, though nowise backward in battle. but now, guy, it is time that you were returning. you have already made a longer stay than usual. i shall see you again to-morrow when we start for eu. young sirs, i hope that on your return you will often ride over here when your lord does not require you. we shall always be pleased to see you, and although the forest lies some miles away, guy can show you good hunting, though not so good as that which, as i hear, you can get in england, where the population is not so thick as it is in this part of normandy." the horses were brought round, and the three lads rode into rouen just as night was falling. long before daybreak there was a stir in the streets of the city, as parties of knights and nobles rode in with bodies of their retainers in obedience to the orders of the duke. all in the palace were awake early. a hasty breakfast was eaten, while just as the sun rose the duke mounted his horse, and at the head of an array, composed of some twenty barons and knights and four hundred men-at-arms, rode out of the city. "there is a good deal more pomp and show here than there was when we rode with harold from london," wulf said. "in truth these norman nobles make a far braver appearance in their armour and robes, and with their banners carried behind them, than we do. were the king himself to ride in state through london he would scarce be so gaily attended." "duke william does not look as if he cared for show," beorn said. "nor does he," guy, who was riding beside them, put in. "for himself he is simple in his tastes, but he knows that the people are impressed by pomp, and love to see a brave cavalcade, therefore he insists on the observance of outward forms; and his court here on state occasions vies, as they tell me, with that of henry of france." "where shall we rest tonight?" wulf asked. "methinks from the appearance of the sky that we shall have rain, and unless we sleep under shelter, many of these fine robes that we see are like to be as much dabbled in mud as were those in which we arrived." "we shall sleep in no town, for there is no place on the road between this and eu that could receive so large a party; but soon after we rode out yesterday a train of waggons with tents and all else needful started from rouen, and half-way to eu we shall find the camp erected and everything in readiness for our reception." this was indeed the case. the camp had been erected in a sheltered valley, through which ran a stream that supplied the needs of man and horses. the tents were placed in regular order, that of the duke in the centre, those of his chief nobles in order of rank on either side. behind was a line for the use of the court officials, pages, and knights of less degree, while the soldiers would sleep in the open. as the party rode up a chamberlain with three or four assistants met them. each was provided with lists containing the names of all the duke's following, and these were at once conducted to the tents alloted to them, so that in a few minutes all were housed without the slightest confusion or trouble. the squires of the knights and nobles and the attendants of the officers and pages at once took the horses and picketed them in lines behind the tents, rubbing them down and cleaning them with the greatest care, and then supplying them with forage from the piles that had that morning been brought in from the neighbouring farms. fuel in abundance had also been stacked. a number of cooks had come on with the tent equipage, and supper was already prepared for the duke and his party, while animals had been slaughtered and cut up, and the men-at-arms soon had the joints hanging over their bivouac fires. "this is all wonderfully well managed, beorn," wulf said. "i doubt whether it could be done so well and orderly with us at home." "what does it matter?" beorn said contemptuously. "it makes no difference whether one sups five minutes after arrival or an hour." "it matters nothing, beorn; but what is but a question of an hour's waiting in a small party is one of going altogether supperless to bed when it is a large one. the normans have been constantly fighting for the last twenty years, and you see they have learned how important it is that everything should be regular and orderly. if they manage matters with a large force as well as they do with a small one, as it is probable that they do, see what an advantage it gives to them. were two armies to arrive near each other with the intention of fighting in the morning, and one knew exactly what to do, and could get their food in comfort and then lie down to rest, while the other was all in confusion, no one knowing where he should go or where to bestow himself, and, being unable to obtain food, forced to lie down supperless, the first army would obtain a great advantage when they met the next morning, especially if it had breakfasted well while the other went into the fight still fasting. look at ourselves how weak we were that morning when we had lain down hungry and got up fasting, while on the morning when the woman gave us that food, simple as it was, we stepped out boldly and in spirits." "that is true enough, wulf, but you know that among us it is said that earl harold is always most careful for the comfort of his soldiers." "yes, the earl always thinks of those around him. as i have never been in the field i know not what the arrangements are, but i cannot think they would be so well ordered in a great gathering of englishmen, or that we should manage matters as well as the normans with all their experience have learnt to do." "well, wulf," beorn laughed, "you had best study the matter, and then ask the earl to appoint you to take charge of the arrangements when he takes the field." "one could hardly have a more useful office," wulf said earnestly; "but it would need a man of experience and of high rank and position, for our saxon thanes are not accustomed to discipline as are these norman barons, and only one of great authority could induce them to observe regulations and carry out any plan in due order." beorn nodded. "that is true enough, wulf, and it is therefore clear that a good many years must pass before you can properly fill the post of chief chamberlain to the army. for myself, i shall be well content to do what fighting is required, and to leave all these matters in your hands." "yes; but it can't be left in the hands of one officer," wulf said warmly, "unless all give their aid willingly to carry out his plans." "well, you need not be angry about it, wulf. there will be time enough for that when you get to be grand chamberlain. you know what the saxon thanes are--how ease-loving, and averse to trouble themselves with aught save the chase. i would as soon marshal a flock of sheep in military order and teach each to keep its place as get the thanes to conform to strict orders and regulations." "and yet, beorn," said baron de burg, who had just entered the tent unnoticed by them in order to speak to his son, who with another page shared it with them, "unless all will conform to strict orders and regulations an army is but a mere gathering of armed men, animated not by one will, but by as many wills as it contains men. such an army may be valiant; every man may be a hero, and yet it may be shattered to pieces by another which gives itself up wholly to the direction of one will. that is why we normans have so badly beaten the french. every mail has his place in battle. he charges when he is ordered to charge, or he is held in reserve the whole day, and the battle ended without his ever striking a blow. we may fret under inaction, we may see what we think chances of falling upon the enemy wasted, but we know that our duke is a great leader, that he has a plan for the battle and will carry it through, and that disobedience to his orders would be an offence as great as that of riding from the field. hence we have learned to obey, and consequently we have always been victorious against men as brave as ourselves, but each obeying his own feudal lord, and so fighting in detached bodies rather than as a whole. your young companion is in the right. in a duel between two men strength and skill is everything; in a struggle between two armies obedience to orders is a virtue even higher than bravery and skill at arms. where is guy?" "he is in attendance on the duke, my lord," beorn said. "we presented ourselves also at his tent, but he told us that he required no duty from us." "let him come to my tent when he returns," the baron said; "that is as soon as he has finished supper. i shall be glad if you will also come, unless the duke sends for you, which methinks he is not likely to do. he is in thoughtful mood to-day, and will probably be alone." two or three other knights were assembled in baron de burg's tent when the three lads went in. de burg said a few words to his companions, explaining who they were, and then continued his conversation with the others. beorn and wulf, as they stood behind the chairs and listened to the talk, could not help being struck with the difference between it and the conversations they had heard at the houses of saxon thanes. with harold they had been accustomed to hear matters of state touched on. the church and the struggle going on between the norman prelates and monks on the one hand and the english clergy on the other was one that was frequently talked over, as were also the projects harold had at heart for encouraging the spread of education and raising the condition of people generally. at the houses of the thanes, however, the evenings were passed in feasting and song, and it was seldom that there was anything like discussion upon general affairs. indeed, between men heated with wine and accustomed to state their opinions bluntly anything like friendly argument was well nigh impossible. de burg and his companions made no allusion at all to public affairs, but discussed gravely and calmly, and with a courteous respect for each other's opinions, questions connected with the art of war, hunting, the changed conditions brought about by the demolition of castles, the improvements gradually being introduced in armour, and other kindred topics. the other nobles were men of about the same age as de burg, and although the latter's page from time to time carried round wine the goblets were rarely emptied. certain topics were touched upon only to be dropped at once, and wulf saw that subjects upon which there was any disagreement among them were carefully avoided. when the boys returned to their tent wulf said, "their talk reminds me of the evenings i spent with the prior, his almoner, and two or three other monks, rather than of those at the houses of saxon thanes." beorn nodded. "i am not so much against our customs of feasting and merriment as you are, wulf, and should not care to spend my evenings often in listening to such grave talk, but truly these norman barons and knights are far more courteous in their speech than our own thanes, and seem to care but little for the wine cup. i admit that such men must be far wiser advisers for a king than are our saxons, saving of course harold and his brothers." "the normans are not all so abstemious as my father and those you saw with him," guy laughed. "listen. you can hear songs and loud laughter from many of the tents, ay, and might hear quarrels too did you listen long enough. but those you saw were all men high in the confidence of the duke. they have fought together under his banner in many a field, and are all powerful barons. they are content to hold their own, and have nothing to gain at the expense of others. their value is well established, and i believe that all of them would be well pleased were they never called upon to set lance in rest again. methinks this evening they avoided all public questions chiefly because we were present; and you see no word was spoken of the unexpected accident that has thrown harold on our shores, although it must have been in all their minds; and doubtless they talked it over as they rode hither to-day. i should not be surprised if my father had us in his tent for the very reason that your being there would prevent more being said about it. i do not suppose any of them know exactly what is in the duke's mind--possibly he has not even made it up himself; and it is assuredly wise here in normandy to express no strong opinion until the duke's own mind is manifest." "i daresay you are right, guy. i rather wondered why your father had asked us as well as you to his tent when he had others with him; but it is like enough that he thought our presence would prevent any discussion on delicate topics." the next morning the cavalcade mounted early, and in the afternoon rode into the fortress of eu. it stood upon the river bresle, and had, previous to the conquest of ponthieu, been the frontier guard of normandy on the north. it lay only some ten miles from the spot where the saxon galley had been wrecked. a messenger had arrived there early in the day from fitz-osberne saying that conrad of ponthieu had assented to the demand of the duke for the surrender of his captives, that these had been at once released from their confinement, and were now honourably entertained. they would start on the following morning from beaurain, and would be accompanied by conrad, who desired to come to eu to pay his respects to the duke. although it had been certain that conrad would not venture to refuse the command of his powerful over-lord, wulf and beorn were greatly delighted to hear that harold and his companions had at once been released from their imprisonment, and that they would so speedily arrive at eu. in the afternoon of the following day a messenger arrived stating that the cavalcade was but an hour's ride away, and preparations were at once made to receive it with all honour. the garrison of the castle in their bravest attire lined the courtyard, hangings brought from rouen were disposed round the walls of the great hall, two chairs of state were placed on the dais, the men-at-arms who had come from rouen were drawn up on either side of the great entrance, and here william with his nobles assembled when the cavalcade approached the castle. the procession was headed by the norman men-at-arms of fitz-osberne and warren. after them rode conrad of ponthieu with harold by his side. both carried hawks on their wrists, and were, apparently, on the most amiable terms. behind them rode harold's brother and nephew and the two norman barons; they were followed by the saxon thanes and the officers of the count's household. behind these came on foot the saxons of inferior degree who had been left at st. valery, and who had by conrad's orders been sent to join the cavalcade where it crossed the somme at abbeville; the procession was closed by a strong body of the count's men-at-arms. they rode through the double line of spearmen until they reached the entrance. then as harold dismounted, the duke descended the steps and embraced him with the warmest expressions of satisfaction at thus meeting the most illustrious of englishmen. harold replied in suitable terms, and the duke then turned to conrad and thanked him warmly for having acceded to his request. ponthieu was but newly conquered, and might yet be a thorn in the side of normandy in the event of a renewal of war with france. it was therefore to william's interest to treat conrad's obedience to his orders as if it had been a voluntary submission, and to ignore his discourteous treatment of his captives. in order to eradicate all sense of injury on the part of his vassal, he not only paid him the ransom for harold but gave him a considerable grant of territory. the duke now presented his nobles and principal officers to harold, and then with his arm placed familiarly on his guest's shoulder led him into the hall, and placed him in the chair of state beside his own, other seats being placed for wulfnoth and hakon and for some of the principal norman barons, while the rest mingled with the saxon thanes in the body of the hall. as soon as the reception was over wulf hurried out into the courtyard to speak to osgod. "right glad am i to see you again, osgod; i have been troubled as to how you were faring." "in truth we have fared badly enough, master; we have been working like beasts of burden, without having food that would suffice for an ass. however, it was not for long, and will do us no harm, though there are more than one of those fellows at st. valery with whom i would gladly have ten minutes play with cudgel or quarter-staff. you may guess how surprised we were yesterday evening when we were suddenly called out from the shed where we were sleeping, and with many professions of regret and apology for our treatment conducted to better quarters, where a good honest meal was set before us, and we were then told that the duke himself had just arrived at eu, and that harold and all his following were there to be given up to him. we had fresh rushes for our beds, and a hearty breakfast this morning, and were then placed in boats and taken up to abbeville. we had been there but an hour when the earl arrived with the thanes, and glad were we, as you may imagine, to see his face again. they stopped there for an hour to rest their steeds and to dine, and then we marched hither as you saw. i had missed you and beorn from harold's party, and made shift to approach the earl and humbly ask him what had become of you. 'no harm has befallen your master and his friend, good fellow,' the earl said. 'they have indeed done me good service, for they made their escape from beaurain and carried the news of our detention to duke william, and it is thus that we have all obtained our liberty.' you seem to have fared bravely, wulf, judging from your attire." "yes, we were in sore plight when we arrived at rouen, but the duke saw that we were provided with clothes and with horses for our journey here." at this moment an attendant came out from the hall and informed wulf that the duke desired speech with him. beorn was already at the entrance, and they were conducted on to the dais. "here are your two pages," the duke said to harold. "i hold myself to be greatly their debtor for having carried me the news that has brought about this meeting, and given me the pleasure of having you as my guest. they are faithful lads and quick-witted, for no men could have carried out the mission better or more promptly than they did." "still more am i indebted to them," harold said as he held out his hand to the two lads, who bent on one knee while they kissed it. "i knew not of their going until i learnt from your barons that they had reached rouen with the news. they are wards of mine, and although at one time my pages they have ceased to be so for more than a year, and have both been down upon their estates learning the duties of their station, which i deemed better for them than wasting their time and getting into mischief at court." the duke nodded. "the result shows that your course was a wise one. at court youths learn but little good. the atmosphere is not healthy for men still less for boys, and these youths will shortly be of an age when they will be fit to render men's service, as indeed they have already done." the lads now retired from the dais. "it has been a fortunate week's work for us," beorn said. "we have obtained the freedom of our lord and have gained his approbation and that of duke william; though, indeed, it matters not greatly as to the duke." "i don't know, beorn; one cannot look into the future, and there is no saying what may happen. anyhow, even now it may be of advantage to us. honourably as the duke is treating harold, the earl is still wholly in his power, and until we hear something of his intentions we are all just as much prisoners as we were to conrad, although i admit the captivity is a very much more pleasant one." chapter vii. the oath. from eu the party travelled back to rouen where there were feastings and entertainments in honour of harold. nothing could be more courteous than the duke's manner to his guest. he professed an almost fraternal affection for him, and handsome lodgings were assigned in the town to his thanes. a solemn court was held, at which harold was knighted by william himself with much state and ceremonial, according to the rites of chivalry, which had then been but recently introduced, and had not as yet extended into england. there were great hunting parties in the forest, and to all outward appearance the friendship between william and harold was of the warmest and most sincere nature. harold himself was really gratified at the pains that william took to show the esteem in which he held him, and his thanes were all well satisfied with the attentions bestowed upon them by the norman barons. beorn and wulf had nothing to do save to make friends with young normans of their own age, to visit their castles and to join in the hunting parties. the duke lost no opportunity of showing the sincerity of the feelings of gratitude he had expressed to them for bringing him the news of harold's presence in his dominions, and they were always specially invited to all court ceremonials, enjoying themselves exceedingly. wulf occasionally expressed his surprise to his companion that no word was said as to their return to england, but beorn's answer always silenced him. "the earl himself seems well satisfied, wulf. why should you be more anxious for him than he is for himself?" once indeed he replied, "harold is of so open and generous nature, beorn, that he would be the last person to suspect another of dishonourable motives. moreover, it is not because he is apparently well content here that we must judge him to be without uneasiness. whatever he felt it would be impolitic to show it, and we see but little of him now save when in company of the normans. he cannot but know that his presence is required in england." it was a matter of satisfaction to wulf that walter fitz-urse was not at the court, he having a few weeks before returned to england, where he was again in the suite of the norman bishop of london. he himself had become firm friends with guy de burg, and often rode over with him to his father's residence, where they hunted in the forest together or rode out with falcons on their wrists, agnes de burg often accompanying them on her pony. three weeks after their arrival at rouen the bretons broke out in insurrection, and the duke invited harold to accompany him on an expedition to subdue them, courteously saying that he should obtain great advantage from the military experience of his guest. harold accepted the invitation, and with his thanes set out with the duke. against the disciplined forces of normandy the breton peasants had no chance whatever in the open field, but their wild and broken country, well-nigh covered with forest, afforded them an opportunity for the display of their own method of fighting by sudden surprises and attacks, and they defended their rough but formidable intrenchments with desperate valour. harold's experience gained in his warfare with the welsh was of much utility, and the duke committed to his hands the formal command of the troops engaged, averring that he himself knew comparatively little of warfare such as this. harold conducted the operations with equal vigour and prudence. stronghold after stronghold was attacked and captured, a small portion of the force only being engaged in active operations, whilst the rest were posted so as to repel the attempts of the bretons to aid the besieged. by his advice clemency was always shown to the garrisons when the fortresses were stormed, and they were permitted to return unharmed to their people, bearing the news that the duke bore no ill-will towards them, and was ready to show mercy to all who laid down their arms. wulf and beorn were permitted to share in the assaults, and with the saxon thanes followed harold, as he led the way on foot up to the intrenchments at one point, while the duke with a party of his barons attacked at another. more than once the english banner was carried into the heart of the breton fortress before the normans had fought their way in, and on each of these occasions the duke warmly expressed his admiration for the courage of his english allies. at last there remained but one formidable stronghold to be captured, and so strong was this by nature, and so desperately defended, that for some time the efforts of the besiegers were fruitless. one evening guy de burg had been with wulf in his tent. beorn was out spending the evening with some of his norman friends. when guy rose to go wulf said that he would walk with him to his father's tent, which was situated some little distance away. as there had been strict regulations that none were to move about without arms, he buckled on his sword and put on his helmet before starting. osgod, who was lying outside the tent, rose when they issued out and followed them at a short distance. they went along at the rear of the tents, when wulf suddenly said: "it seems to me that i hear sounds in the forest, guy." "de launey's men are posted behind us," guy said carelessly; "there is no fear of an attack." "not if they are vigilant," wulf agreed. "but the bretons have for some time abstained from night surprises, and de launey's men may be keeping a poor watch." suddenly there was a loud cry, followed immediately by the breton war-shout, and by a confusion of shouts, cries, and the sound of the clashing of arms. the lads drew their swords and ran towards the scene of conflict, when, from some bushes a short distance from them, a number of wild figures sprung out. it was a party of the enemy who had made their way through de launey's sleeping men unobserved, and who now, knowing that further concealment was useless, were rushing forward towards the tents. wulf's first impulse was to turn back, but young de burg, shouting his father's battle-cry, ran forward, and without hesitation wulf followed him. a moment later they were engaged with the bretons. "back to back, guy!" wulf exclaimed, as he ran his sword through the first man who attacked him. he had scarcely spoken when osgod ran up and joined them, and wielding the heavy axe he carried as if it had been a featherweight, struck down several of the bretons who ventured within its swing. wulf defended himself as firmly, but had to shift his ground continually to avoid the blows of the heavy spiked clubs with which his assailants were armed. presently he heard his name shouted, and an instant later a crash, as guy de burg was struck down. "stand over him, osgod!" he shouted, and with a bound was beside his companion, cutting down a breton who was about to thrust his spear into him. at the same moment a club descended on his helmet, bringing him for a moment to his knee. he sprang up again, osgod striking his opponent to the ground before he could repeat his blow. for two or three minutes the fight went on. wulf received more than one stab from the breton knives, as two or three of them often rushed in upon him at once, but each time when he was hard pressed osgod's axe freed him from his assailants, for so terrible were the blows dealt by the tall saxon that the bretons shrank from assailing him, and thus left him free at times to render assistance to wulf. but the combat was too unequal to last long. a pike-thrust disabled wulf for a moment, and as his arm fell a blow from a club stretched him beside guy. osgod had also received several wounds, but furious at his master's fall he still defended himself with such vigour that the bretons again fell back. they were on the point of attacking him anew, when there was a shout, and william and harold, bareheaded as they had leapt from the table, and followed by a score or two of norman barons and soldiers, fell upon the bretons. the latter with cries of alarm at once fled. by this time the norman trumpets were everywhere sounding, and the troops hastening out to repel the attack, which a few minutes later ceased as suddenly as it began, the bretons flying into the forest, where pursuit by the heavily-armed normans was hopeless. returning to the tents, the duke and harold paused where osgod, who had sunk to the ground as soon as the breton attack had ceased, was sitting by the side of his master. "whom have we here?" the duke asked. "whoever they are we owe our safety to them, harold, for had it not been for the resistance they made, the bretons would have been among our tents before we had time to catch up our arms. bring a torch here!" he shouted; and two or three soldiers came running up from the tents with lights. "methinks it is one of my men," harold said, and repeated the duke's question in saxon. "i am osgod, my lord, the servant of wulf of steyning, who with his friend, guy de burg, lies here beside me, i fear done to death." "i trust not, indeed," harold said, stooping over the bodies. at this moment the men came up with the lights. "by the rood," william exclaimed, "but they fought stoutly, whoever they are. the ground round them is covered with the bodies of these breton rascals. there must be at least a score of them, while so far as i can see there are but three of our men. who are they, harold?" "one is guy, son of the baron de burg," harold replied. "another is young wulf, and this stout fellow is his man." "right gallantly have they done," the duke exclaimed, "and i trust that their lives are not spent. let someone summon de burg here quickly. carry his son to his tent, and bid my leech attend at once to his wounds and to those of these brave saxons." "i will carry wulf to his tent myself," harold said, raising the lad and carrying him off, while four soldiers followed bearing osgod. they were laid down together in wulf's tent. as the young thane's helmet was removed, he opened his eyes and looked round in bewilderment as he saw, by the light of the torches, harold and several others standing beside him. "what has happened?" he asked faintly. "the best thing that has happened is that you have come to yourself and are able to speak, wulf," harold said. "but do not try to talk, lad, until the leech comes and examines your wounds. you have done us all a rare service to-night, for thanks to the carelessness of de launey's men, most of whom have paid for their error with their lives, we should all have been taken by surprise had it not been for the brave stand you made. now we will take off your garments and see where you are wounded. they seem to be soaked everywhere with blood." "i received three or four gashes with their knives," wulf said feebly, "and i think a spear wound. how are the others?" "i know not about guy," harold said, "but your man is able to speak, and has not, i hope, received mortal injuries." "don't trouble yourself about me, master wulf," osgod put in. "i have got a few pricks with the knaves' knives, and a spear-thrust or two, but as i was able to keep on my feet until the earl arrived with help, i think the wounds are of no great consequence." "if aught happens to me," wulf said to harold, "i pray you to see to him, my lord, and to take him as one of your own men. had it not been for him the bretons would have made short work of us." he could barely utter the words, and again became insensible from loss of blood. when he recovered the leech was kneeling beside him, pouring oil into his wounds and applying bandages. "do not try to talk," he said quietly, as wulf opened his eyes. "lie quite still, the least movement might cause your wounds to break out afresh. they are serious, but i think not of a mortal nature." "guy?" wulf whispered. "he is in a more perilous condition than you are, but it is possible that he too may live. as for your man here, i have as yet but glanced at his wounds; but though cut sorely, i have no fear for his life. now drink this potion, and then go off to sleep if you can." wulf drank off the contents of the goblet placed to his lips, and in a few minutes was fast asleep. when he woke it was broad daylight, and beorn was sitting by his side. the latter put his finger to his lips. "you are not to talk, wulf. the leech gave me the strictest orders when he was here a short time since, and said that you seemed to be doing well. osgod he says will surely recover, and be none the worse for the letting out of some of his blood. the bretons were too hasty with their strokes, and although he has a dozen wounds none of them are serious. guy de burg is alive, but as yet the leech can say nothing. it has been a bad business. it seems that de launey's men were most of them killed whilst they were asleep. the bodies of the sentries were found at their posts, but whether they were asleep, or whether, as is thought more likely, their foes stole up and killed them before they had time to utter a cry, we know not. the bretons attacked at two or three other points, but nowhere with such success, though many normans have fallen. everyone says that the party which passed through de launey's men would have reached the tents and probably killed most of those in them had they not stopped while some of their number attacked you and guy de burg. the duke and harold have both said that your bravery saved us from a great disaster. i would that i had been with you, but the tent i was in was the farthest along the line, and the bretons were in full flight before we came upon the scene." presently the baron de burg came to the side of the pallet on which wulf was lying. "i cannot say that i owe you the life of my son," he said, laying his hand gently upon wulf's, "for i know not as yet whether he will live, but he was sensible when we brought him to my tent, and he told me that you had stood over him and defended him from the bretons until you too fell. he was sensible all the time, though unable to move." "it was osgod who did most of the fighting, my lord," wulf said. "he did much, wulf, and it will be my pleasure to reward him, but the duke, who is full of admiration at the slaughter done by three alone, has caused the bodies to be examined. twelve of them were killed with axe wounds, nine by sword wounds. guy tells me that he knows that only two fell to his sword, therefore you must have slain seven. truly a feat that any man might be proud of, to say nothing of a lad of your age. guy is anxious to have you with him, and the leech said that if you keep quiet to-day, and none of your wounds break out afresh, it will do you no harm to be carried to my tent." accordingly the next day wulf was carried across to lord de burg's, and his pallet set down by the side of guy's. the latter was a little better, and the leech had faint hopes of his recovery. his right arm had been broken by a blow with a club, and so badly fractured that it had already been taken off near the shoulder. his most dangerous wound was a pike-thrust on the left side, which had penetrated his lungs. he smiled faintly as wulf was placed by his side. wulf tried to smile back again, but he was too much shocked at the change in his friend's appearance. his cheeks had fallen in, and his face was deadly pale. his lips were almost colourless, and his eyes seemed unnaturally large. wulf made an effort to speak cheerfully. "we did not expect to come to this so soon, guy," he said. "we have often talked about fighting, but we never thought that our first serious fight would end like this." "you have nothing to regret," baron de burg said. "you have both done your duty nobly, and one of gentle blood can wish for no better end than to die doing his duty against great odds. god grant that you may both be spared, but if it be otherwise, death could not come to you more gloriously than in giving your lives to save your lords from surprise." wulf's recovery was comparatively rapid. he was greatly pleased when, a week after his removal, osgod was brought into the tent by harold. he was still pale and feeble, but was able to walk, and assured his young lord that he should soon be ready for another fight with the bretons. "there will be no more fighting," harold said. "yesterday their chiefs came in to make their submission and ask for mercy, and on this being granted their fortress has surrendered this morning. they will pay a heavy fine in cattle, and their two strongest fortresses are to be garrisoned by norman troops. a considerable slice of their territory is to be taken from them. in a week i hope we shall all be on our way back to rouen." guy was mending very slowly. even yet the leech could not say with certainty that his life would be saved, and warned his father that in any case he would for a very long time be an invalid. in another week the camp was broken up. wulf declared that he was well enough to sit a horse, but the leech insisted that he should be carried on a litter. "in another fortnight," he said, "you may be able to ride, but it would not be safe to attempt to do so now. you are going on as well as could be wished, and it would be madness to risk everything by haste." accordingly he and guy were transported in litters to the baron's residence, where wulf steadily recovered his health and strength. osgod, who had received a heavy purse of gold from the baron, had at the end of that time entirely recovered; guy still lay pale and feeble on his couch. "i scarcely wish to live," he said one day to his father. "i can never be a warrior now. what have i got to live for?" "you have much to live for, guy," his father said, "even if you never bestride a war-horse. you have made a name for yourself for bravery, and will always be held in respect. it is not as if you had been from your birth weak and feeble. you will in time, i hope, come to be lord of our estates and to look after our people, and be beloved by them; and, if you cannot yourself lead them in the field, you can see that they go well equipped, and do honour to your banner. there are other things besides fighting to live for." "i would that you had had another son, father, and that wulf had been my brother. i should not so much have minded then that i could not myself carry the banner of de burg into the field." "had he been one of ourselves, guy, that might have come about," his father said, "for if i have no other son i have a daughter. but this young saxon has his own estates in his own country. he would not settle down here as a norman baron, and i would not lose agnes nor be willing that she should go from us to dwell in a foreign land. but no one can say what the future will bring about. the duke has promised one of his daughters to harold, and should the marriage come off it will bind the two peoples more closely together. besides, you know, edward of england has promised to duke william that he should succeed him." "i was speaking to wulf about that one day, father, and he said that edward had no power to make the gift, for that the people of england chose their king themselves, and that edward's promise would go for nothing with them. it is not with them as it is with us, where a prince can name his successor." "that may be saxon opinion, guy, but it is not norman, and assuredly it is not the duke's; and friendly as are the relations between him and harold, it is clear that until this question is settled no permanent friendship can be looked for between the two nations." wulf was sorry when the time came that he could no longer linger at baron de burg's chateau. the earl had more than once sent over to say that his presence was looked for at court as soon as he was sufficiently recovered to attend there, but he stayed on until he felt so thoroughly strong and well that he could not make his health any longer an excuse. on leaving, de burg and his wife both pressed him to come over whenever he could spare time. "you know, wulf," the former said, "how warm is the affection guy has for you, and he will look very eagerly for your visits. just at present he has very few pleasures in life, and chief among them will be your comings. we are all dull here, lad, and agnes will miss you sorely." "i will ride over whenever i can. i should be ungrateful indeed did i not do so, after the great kindness you and lady de burg have shown me; but even putting this aside i will come every day if i can, if only for half an hour's talk with guy." "i am glad to see you back again, wulf," earl harold said as the lad entered his room. "you look strong and well again, and might, methinks, have come to us before now." "i could have done so, doubtless, my lord, but it pained me to leave guy, who is still on his couch, and will, i fear, never be strong and well again." "we heard but a poor account of him from the duke's leech," harold said. "it is a sad thing; for one, who as a lad has shown such bravery, would have turned out a gallant knight. i should have let you linger there for some time yet, but the duke has frequently asked after you, and i thought it were best that you came over; though, in truth, there will be little for you to do here, and you will be able to ride and see your friend when you will." "are we likely to go back to england soon, my lord?" "i trust it will not be long. i have spoken of it more than once to the duke, but he chides me for being weary of his company; which indeed i am not, for no man could have treated another better than he has done me. still," he said, walking up and down the room, "i am impatient to be off, but i am no more free to choose my time here that i was at beaurain. it is a velvet glove that is placed on my shoulder, but there is an iron hand in it, i know right well." "is there no possibility of escaping, my lord?" harold looked keenly at the boy. "no, wulf, treated as i am as a guest i cannot fly without incurring the reproach of the basest ingratitude, nor even if i wished it could i escape. under the excuse of doing me honour, there are norman soldiers at the gate, and a norman sentry stands at my door. i must go through with it now, and if need be promise all that william asks. this time there is nowhere to send you to fetch aid for me. you have heard, i suppose, that william has promised me his daughter in marriage?" "yes, my lord, i have heard it. is the marriage to take place soon?" harold smiled. "the duke will not wish it to take place until he sees that he can secure my services by the marriage. if that time should never come i shall probably hear no more of it. engagements have been broken off before now many a time, and absolution for a broken promise of that kind is not hard to obtain. you must attend the court this evening, wulf." wulf bowed and withdrew, and in the evening attended the court in the suite of harold. as soon as the duke's eye fell upon him he called him up. "messieurs," he said to the barons present, "this lad is wulf, thane of steyning, and a follower of earl harold. he it was who, with the young guy de burg, and aided only by a saxon man-at-arms, withstood the first rush of the bretons, and so gained time by which i myself and my barons were able to prepare ourselves to resist the attack. had it not been for them we should all have been taken by surprise, and maybe slain. the saxon and the two lads, wulf and de burg, all fell wounded well-nigh to death, but not before twenty-one bretons lay dead around them. this was indeed a feat of arms that any of you, valiant knights and barons as you are, might have been proud to perform. "already i had promised him any boon that in reason he may ask for having borne to me the news that earl harold, my honoured guest and brother-in-arms, had been cast on our shores, and i promise him now, that should at any time it happen that i have any power or influence in england, his estates shall remain to him and to his heirs free from all service or dues, even though he has withstood me in arms;--nay, more, that they shall be largely added to. should such issue never arise, and aught occur to render him desirous of crossing the seas hither, i promise him a baron's feu as a token of my gratitude for the great service he rendered me; and i am well assured that, whether to a king of england or to a duke of normandy, he will prove himself a true and faithful follower. i call on you all here to witness this promise that i have made, and should there be need, to recall it to my memory." the normans above all things admired valour, and when wulf, after kneeling and kissing the duke's hand, retired shamefacedly to a corner of the room, where he was joined by beorn, one after another came up to him and said a few words of approbation. "you have done well, young sir," fitz-osberne, one of the duke's most trusted councillors said to him. "the duke is not given to overpraise, and assuredly no one of your age has ever won such commendation from his lips. after making so fair a commencement, it will be your own fault indeed if you do not make a great name for yourself in the future. there is not one of us who was in the duke's camp that evening but feels that he owes you much for the few minutes' delay that saved us from being taken altogether by surprise. you are young, and may think but little of the promise the duke has given you this evening, but the day may come when you will find it stand you in good stead." harold said nearly the same thing to wulf when he saw him the next morning. "but there is no chance of the duke ever having power in england, my lord," wulf said. "i trust not, wulf, but there is no doubt that his whole mind is bent upon obtaining the throne of england. he has spoken to me openly about it, and has more than hinted to me that i, if married to his daughter, would still, as earl of wessex, be the foremost man in the land next to its sovereign should he ever gain the kingdom." "and what said you, my lord, if i may be so bold as to ask?" "i said but little, lad. i am a prisoner, and i am well assured that i shall never return to england until william thinks that he can depend upon me. it is needful that i should return, and that quickly, for i hear that there is fresh trouble in wales, and i have received an urgent message from the king to hasten to his side. it is hard to see what it is best to do." four days later a grand ceremony was announced to take place, but few knew what its nature was to be. that it was something beyond the ordinary was certain by the number of barons and knights that were bidden to attend. a dais was erected in the courtyard of the palace, and on this a table covered with a cloth was placed. "i don't like this business," wulf said to beorn, as with the other saxons they took their place near the dais. "there is something very mysterious about it, and i believe that at last we are going to see what william's full intentions are." a religious ceremony was first held, and then the duke rose to his feet and addressed the barons. he first recalled to them the promise that edward of england had made to him, and then went on: "the saints have worked in my favour," he said, "by sending here as my guest my well-beloved brother-in-arms, the great earl of wessex. between us there is the closest friendship, and to cement and make even closer the bonds between us, he has become betrothed to my daughter, and through the lands i shall bestow upon her he will become a baron of normandy. relying upon his affection and friendship, i have called you here together to hear him swear in public that which he has already told me privately--that he will be my faithful feudatory, and will in all ways aid me to gain my lawful rights." harold changed colour. the matter had come upon him as a surprise. doubtless he had in a vague way when discussing his future relations as son-in-law to the duke, expressed his warm friendship and a general willingness to be of service to him, but to be called upon to take an oath publicly was a different matter. most of those present had taken oaths of allegiance to william and had broken them again and again, and william himself had not less frequently broken his feudal oaths to his suzerain, the king of france. but harold was a man with a deep sense of religion, and did not esteem as lightly as these norman barons an oath thus sworn; but he felt that he had fallen into a trap, and that resistance would but consign him to a prison, if not a grave. he at once understood how hollow had been the pretended friendship of his host; but he was in william's power, and unless as a friend the duke would never permit so formidable a rival to quit his shores. as he hesitated he saw a movement on the part of the norman knights near the dais, and understood that they had been previously informed of william's intentions, and were there to enforce them. their brows were bent on him angrily as he hesitated, and more than one hand went to the hilt of the wearer's sword. there was no drawing back, and placing his hand on the table he swore the oath william had dictated. when he concluded william snatched the cloth from the table, and below it were seen a number of bones and sacred relics that had been brought from the cathedral. enlightened as harold was, he was not altogether free from the superstitions of the age. for a moment he shuddered slightly and grew paler than before, then he drew himself up to his full height, and looked calmly into the exulting face of william. "i call you all to witness," the duke said in a loud voice, "that harold, earl of wessex, has taken a solemn oath upon the holy relics to be my faithful feudatory." the shout that answered him was by no means universal, for there were many among the norman nobles who were shocked at the base trick that the duke had played upon a guest for whom he had professed the warmest friendship. the saxon thanes could scarce contain their expressions of indignation, but harold as he sat down among them made a gesture commanding silence. "we sail for england to-morrow night," he said in low tones. "the duke told me so as we came hither. the two ships will be in readiness for us to embark in the morning. i did not understand then the price i was to pay. restrain yourselves now; when we are free men we can talk this over." an hour later they returned to the palace, where there was a brief and formal interview between harold and the duke. both dissembled their real feelings. the duke said that he regretted that the king of england's wishes forced his guest to start so suddenly, and that he much regretted his departure. harold thanked him for the hospitality he had shown him, but neither made any allusion whatever to the scene that had taken place in the courtyard. wulf rode over to say good-bye to guy and his father. the latter was walking up and down the hall with a gloomy face. "i blush for what has taken place to-day, wulf," he said. "tell the earl that had we known what was going to occur there are few indeed who would have attended at the ceremony, and that i for one shall hold him in no way dishonoured if he breaks the vow that has thus been dishonourably extorted from him. it was a trick and a base one, and i would tell duke william so to his face. what will men think of norman faith when guests are thus tricked to their disadvantage?" for an hour wulf remained talking with the baron and his family. "i hope to see you again, wulf," de burg said, as the lad rose to take leave. "guy regards you as a brother, and though assuredly no saxon will set foot on norman soil after to-day's doings, we may yet meet again." "i shall come over to england to see you, wulf, if you come not here," guy said. "i begin to think that i shall get over this, although i may never be really strong again. we shall often think and talk of you, agnes and i; and i should like, of all things, to come and stay in your saxon home." "no one would be so welcome, guy. if we are never to be brothers-in-arms as we once talked of, we shall surely be brothers in heart, whether absent or present." a few more words and wulf took leave of them all and rode back to rouen. in the morning the duke accompanied harold to the river bank and there took a courteous farewell of him. it is not probable that he thought for a moment that harold would observe the oath, but he saw that its breach would be almost as useful to him as its fulfilment, for it would enable him to denounce his rival as a perjured and faithless man, and to represent any expedition against england as being a sort of crusade to punish one who had broken the most solemn vows made on the holy relics. harold himself preserved his usual calmness of demeanour, and stood talking quietly to the duke while the latter's presents of hawks and hounds were taken on board the ship, and the saxons, silent and sullen, had passed over the gangway. then an apparently affectionate embrace was exchanged between the two rivals. harold crossed on to the ship, the great sails were hoisted, and the two vessels proceeded down the river. chapter viii. trouble with wales. harold took his place on the poop as the vessel started, and remained looking fixedly at the duke, until the latter with the group of barons turned and entered the town. "farewell, william of normandy," he said; "false friend and dishonoured host. how shall we meet next time, i wonder, and where?" hitherto the presence of the norman attendants had prevented any private converse between harold and his followers, but having the poop to themselves they now broke out into angry exclamations against the duke. "it was an unworthy and unknightly trick," harold said calmly; "but let us not talk of it now; it will be for the english people to decide the question some day, and for english bishops to determine whether i am bound by a vow thus extorted. better at all events that i should be held for all time to have been false and perjured, than that the english people should fall under the norman yoke. but maybe there will be no occasion for the oath ever to come in question, william of normandy or i may die before the king, and then there will be an end of it. let us talk of other things. thank god we are free men again, and our faces are set towards england, where, from what i hear, we may have to meet open foes instead of false friends, and may have to teach the welsh, once and for all, that they and their king cannot with impunity continually rise in rebellion against england. "well, wulf, you are the only one among us who has brought back aught from normandy, at least you and beorn, for you have your horses and chains, and the promise of the duke to grant you a boon. but these are small things. you have gained great credit, and have shown yourself a gallant fighter, and have further promises from the duke." "i care not for his promises," wulf said hotly. "i hold him to be a dishonoured noble, and i would take naught from his hands." "you are young yet, wulf," harold smiled, "and the duke's promise, made before his nobles, will be held binding by him if ever the time should come for you to claim it. do not refuse benefits, lad, because you do not like the hands that grant them. you rendered him a service, and need feel no shame at receiving the reward for it. as soon as we return i shall take steps to raise you and beorn to the full dignity of thanes, with all rights and privileges. my brother and my friends here can all testify to the service you rendered to us, for much as i may have to complain of the ending of my visit, it has at least been vastly better than our lot would have been had we remained in the hands of conrad of ponthieu. you are both very young to be placed in the position of rulers of your people, and in ordinary cases you would not have been sworn to thane's services for some years to come; but, as earl of wessex, i see good reason for departing from the rule on this occasion, and i think that my thanes here will all be of that opinion." there was a warm expression of approval from the saxons. "then as soon as we set foot on english soil we will hold a court, and invest you with your full rank." they started from the mouth of the seine, and as there was no nearer port than that from which they had sailed, harold directed the masters of the ships to make for bosham. "it is like to be a fairer voyage than the last," he said, as with a light breeze blowing behind them they sailed out from the mouth of the seine. "it will be longer, but assuredly more pleasant." no incident whatever marked the voyage. the saxons gave a shout of joy when they first made out the outline of the hills of the isle of wight, some twelve hours after leaving the mouth of the river; but it was not until eight hours afterwards that they entered the harbour of bosham. as soon as the two norman vessels were seen sailing up the quiet sheet of water, everywhere fringed with forest, boats put out to meet them, to ascertain the reason of their coming and to inquire for news of harold and his companions. as soon as his figure was made out standing on the poop, one of the boats rowed off with the news, and by the time the vessels dropped anchor off bosham the whole of the inhabitants had gathered on the shore, with loud shouts of joy and welcome. as soon as they landed harold and his companions proceeded at once to the church, where a solemn service of thanksgiving was held for their preservation from the dangers of the sea and for their safe return to england. as soon as the service was over harold sent off two horsemen to bear to the king the news of his return, and to state that he himself would ride to london on the following day. then the earl bestowed handsome presents upon the masters and crews of the ships that had brought them over, and gave into their charge hawks and hounds, rich armour, and other presents for the duke of normandy, and jewelled cups and other gifts to the principal barons of his court. the gifts were indeed of royal magnificence; but harold's wealth was vast, and, as he said to his brother, "we will at least show these normans, that in point of generosity an english earl is not to be outdone by a norman duke." as soon as these matters were attended to harold held a court in the great hall of bosham, and there received the oaths of fealty from wulf and beorn, and confirmed to them the possessions held by their fathers, and invested them with the gold chains worn by thanes as the sign of their rank. he afterwards bestowed a purse of gold upon osgod, equal in value to the one he had received from the duke of normandy. "should aught ever happen to your master," he said, "come you to me and you shall be one of my own men, and shall not lack advancement in my service." "in faith, master wulf," osgod said after the ceremony, "my father warned me that the trade of a soldier was but a poor one, and that a good handicraftsman could gain far more money. he will open his eyes when i jingle these purses before him, for i might have hammered armour for years before i gained as much as i have done in the three months since i left england. i have enough to buy a farm and settle down did it so please me, and i have clothes enough to last me well-nigh a lifetime, and rings enough to set up a goldsmith's shop. for scarce one of the duke's barons and knights but followed his example, and gave me a present for my share in that little fight with the bretons." "as for the clothes, they will always be useful, osgod; but were i you i would get a stout leathern bag and put the purses and rings into it, and bury them in some place known only to yourself, and where none are ever likely to light upon them. you have no occasion for money now, and we may hope that ere long all occasion for fighting will be over, and then, as you say, you can buy a farm and marry." "i am going always to remain your man," osgod said in an aggrieved tone. "certainly, osgod, i should wish for nothing else. you will always be my friend, and shall have any post on the estates or in the house that you may prefer. there will be no occasion for you to farm your land yourself, you can let it, receiving the value of half the produce, and so taking rank as a landowner, for which you yourself may care nothing, but which will enable your wife to hold her head higher." "i am not thinking of wives, my lord." "nonsense, osgod, i want not to be called my lord." "but you are a thane now and must be called so," osgod said sternly; "and it would be ill-becoming indeed if i your man did not so address you. but i will take your advice about the gold, and when i get down to steyning will bury it deeply under the roots of a tree. it will be safer there than if i buried it in my father's forge, for london is ever the centre of troubles, and might be sacked and burnt down should there ever be war between mercia or northumbria and wessex." "heaven forbid that we should have more civil wars, osgod." "amen to that, but there is never any saying. assuredly edwin and morcar love not our earl, and as to tostig, though he is his brother, he is hot-headed and passionate enough to play any part. and then there are the normans, and there is no doubt the duke will have to be reckoned with. altogether methinks my money will be safer under an oak-tree down at steyning than at westminster." "you are right enough there, osgod; by all means carry out your ideas. but there is the bell for supper, and i must go." the next morning the party started at daybreak, and late that night arrived at westminster. there were great rejoicings in london and throughout the south of england when it was known that the great earl had returned from normandy. much uneasiness had been felt at his long absence, and although accounts had come from time to time of the honour with which he had been treated by duke william, many felt that his prolonged stay was an enforced one, and that he was a prisoner rather than a guest of the duke. the king himself was as rejoiced as his subjects at harold's return. although in the early years of his reign he had been bitterly opposed to the powerful family of earl godwin, to whom he owed his throne, he had of late years learnt to appreciate the wisdom of harold; and although still norman in his tastes as in his language, he had become much more english at heart, and bitterly regretted the promise that he had years before rashly given to the duke of normandy. harold too had relieved him of all the cares of government, which he hated, and had enabled him to give his whole time and thought to religious exercises, and to the rearing of the splendid abbey which was his chief pleasure and pride. in his absence edward had been obliged to attend to state business. he was worried with the jealousies and demands of the earl of mercia, with the constant complaints of the northumbrians against their harsh and imperious master tostig, and by the fact that the welsh were taking advantage of the absence of harold to cause fresh troubles. it was just christmas when harold returned, and the snow fell heavily on the night of his arrival at westminster. "it was lucky it did not come a few hours earlier, beorn," wulf said, as he looked out of the casement. "we had a long and heavy ride yesterday, and we could not have done it in one day had the snow been on the ground. i suppose there will be a number of court festivities over harold's return. we have had enough of that sort of thing in normandy, and i hope that harold will let us return at once to our estates." "speak for yourself, wulf; for myself i love the court, and now that i am a thane i shall enjoy it all the more." "and i all the less," wulf said. "fifteen months ago we were but pages and could at least have some fun, now we shall have to bear ourselves as men, and the ladies of the court will be laughing at us and calling us the little thanes, and there will be no getting away and going round to the smithy to watch osgod's father and men forging weapons. it will be all very stupid." in a short time an attendant summoned them to breakfast, and here they sat down with the other thanes, harold's wing of the palace being distinct from that of the king. the earl sat at the head of the table, and talked in undertones to his brother gurth and two or three of his principal thanes. the personal retainers of the nobles stood behind their seats and served them with food, while harold's pages waited on him and those sitting next to him. "we were a merrier party in the pages' room," beorn whispered to wulf, for but few words were spoken as the meal went on. "i think there is something in the air," wulf said, "the earl looks more serious than usual. generally the meals are cheerful enough." as soon as it was finished harold said, "the king will receive you all in half an hour, he desires to express to you his pleasure at your return home. after that i beg that you will again gather here, as i have occasion to speak to you." the court was a more formal one than usual, the king's norman functionaries were all present as were several ecclesiastics. among them the bishop of london, behind whom stood wulf's old adversary, walter fitz-urse. earl harold introduced his companions in captivity, the king receiving them very graciously. "i am glad to see that you have all returned safely," he said. "the earl tells me that you have all borne yourselves well in the battles you have fought under the banner of my friend and ally duke william of normandy, and that you have proved to his countrymen that the english are in no whit inferior to themselves in courage. the earl specially recommended to me his newly-made thanes, wulf of steyning and beorn of fareham, who did him the greatest service by effecting their escape from the castle of beaurain, and at great risk bearing the news of his imprisonment to duke william. wulf of steyning, he tells me, gained the highest approval of the duke and his knights by a deed of bravery when their camp was surprised by the bretons. the earl has informed me that in consideration of these services he has advanced them to the rank of thanes, and confirmed them in their father's possessions, and as service rendered to him is service rendered to me, i thus bestow upon them a token of my approval;" and beckoning to the young thanes to advance, he took two heavy gold bracelets from his arm, and himself fastened them on those of the kneeling lads. when the ceremony was over, harold's party returned to the room where they had breakfasted. it was an hour before the earl joined them. "i have been in council with the king," he said, "and have thus been forced to keep you waiting. we heard when abroad that the welsh were again becoming troublesome, but i find that matters are much worse than i had supposed. griffith has broken out into open rebellion; he has ravaged all the borders, has entered the diocese of wulfstan, the new bishop of worcester, and carried his arms beyond the severn, laying waste part of my own earldom of hereford. edwin, who has just succeeded his father in the earldom of worcester, is young and new to his government, and, moreover, his father was an ally of griffith's. in any case, he needs far larger forces than those at his command to undertake a war with the welsh. this time we must finish with them; treaties are of no avail they are ever broken on the first opportunity, and a blow must be dealt that will render them powerless for harm for generations to come. "therefore the king has commissioned me forthwith to act in the matter, not only as lord of hereford but as earl of the west saxons. winter is upon us, and it will be impossible to undertake a regular campaign. still a blow must be struck, and that quickly and heavily in order to stop the depredation and ruin they are spreading in the west counties. the preparations must be secret and the blow sudden. there is no time for calling out levies, that must be done in the spring. i must act only with mounted men. i have already sent off a messenger to bosham to bid my housecarls mount and ride to salisbury. they will number two hundred. i pray you all to leave at once for your estates, or to send an order by a swift messenger for your housecarls to ride to salisbury, whither i myself shall proceed in three days. will each of you give me the tale of the number of armed men who can take horse at an hour's notice." each of those present gave the number of housecarls in his service, and they all expressed their willingness to ride themselves, in order to get them ready the more speedily. the total mounted to three hundred and fifty men. "that with my own two hundred will be well-nigh sufficient," harold said; "but i will send off messengers at once to some of the thanes of dorset and somerset to join us at gloucester with their men, so that we shall be fully a thousand strong, which will be ample for my purpose. i need not impress upon you all to preserve an absolute silence as to the object for which you are calling out your men. news spreads fast, and an incautious word might ruin our enterprise. there is no occasion for you all to accompany your men. those of you who have been with me in normandy will doubtless desire to stay for a while with your wives and families, and you may do equally good service by making preparations there for a more serious campaign in the spring. i beg these to send with their housecarls a trusted officer, and bid him place himself and his men under my orders." the meeting at once broke up. "i suppose you young warriors will bring your own men to salisbury?" harold said, as wulf and beorn came up to take their leave of him. "certainly, my lord," beorn said. "we have neither family nor relations to keep us at home, and even if we had it would not suffice to keep us from following your banner." "it will be a warfare like that in which you have been engaged across the sea," harold said. "the bretons you there fought with are kinsfolk of the welsh, speaking the same language, and being alike in customs and in fighting. they trust to surprises, and to their speed of foot and knowledge of their wild country, rather than to hard fighting in the open plain. they have few towns to capture, and it is therefore hard to execute reprisals upon them. like the bretons they are brave, and fight savagely until the last, neither giving nor asking for quarter. they believe that their country, which is so wild and hilly as to be a great natural fortress, is unconquerable, and certainly neither saxon nor dane has ever succeeded in getting any foothold there. but when the spring comes i hope to teach them that even their wild hills are no defence, and that their habits of savage plundering must be abandoned or we will exterminate them altogether. but i have no thought of undertaking such a campaign now. of course you will take that tall follower of yours with you, wulf." "i fear that he would not stay behind even if i ordered him to do so," wulf laughed. "he will be overjoyed when i tell him there is a prospect of fighting again, and all the more if it is against kinsmen of the bretons, against whom he feels a special grudge." "the feeling would be more natural the other way," harold said smiling, "seeing that he inflicted upon them far greater damage than he received. you will find fresh horses awaiting you. none of those that carried us from bosham yesterday are fit for another such journey to-day." wulf had told osgod the first thing in the morning that he could return to his family for a few days, only coming to the palace to serve his meals, and he now hurried away to the armourer's shop, where he found that but little work was going on, the men being absorbed in listening to osgod's account of his adventures. ulred and the men rose and saluted respectfully as wulf entered. "i am sorry to disturb you, ulred," he said, "but i have come to fetch osgod away again. that is if he would prefer riding with me to remaining quiet with you at home." "if you are going, master, assuredly i am going with you," osgod said. "i am dry with talking already, and father must wait for the rest of my story until i come back again. are we going down to steyning, my lord?" "there first and afterwards elsewhere, but that is all i can tell you now. the horses are ready, and there is not a moment to lose. we must get as far on our way as possible before nightfall, for the matter is an urgent one." "i am ready," osgod said, girding on his sword and putting his cap on his head. "good-bye, father. tell mother i shall be back when i am back, and that is all i can say about it." they reached steyning at two o'clock on the following afternoon, and messengers were instantly sent round to the farms, bidding the men who were bound as housecarls to appear on horseback and armed, with two days' food in their wallets, an hour before daybreak next morning. then a messenger was despatched with a letter to the prior of bramber, telling him of wulf's safe return, and begging him to excuse his coming over to see him, as he had ridden nigh a hundred and fifty miles in three days, and was forced to set out again at daybreak the next morning. as wulf had hoped, the letter was answered by the prior in person, and to him wulf related that evening the incidents of their stay in normandy. the prior shook his head. "i have feared ever since i heard that harold had fallen into the clutches of the duke, that he would never get off scot free, but would either have to pay a heavy ransom or make some concessions that would be even worse for england. it is a bad business, wulf, a bad business. the church has ever been ready to grant absolution from oaths extracted by violence, but this affair of the relics makes it more serious, and you may be sure that william will make the most of the advantage he has gained. harold is absolutely powerless to fulfil his oath. neither he nor the king, nor any other man, can force a foreign monarch upon free england. and did harold declare for the duke of normandy, powerful and beloved as he is, he would be driven into exile instantly. if he himself is elected king by the people, as there is no doubt whatever will be the case, he must needs obey their voice, and will have no choice between being king of england or an exile. still it is unfortunate. he will be branded as a perjurer. william's influence may even induce the pope to excommunicate him, and although the ban would go for but little here, it would serve as an excuse for the other great earls to refuse to submit to his authority. now tell me, how is it that you have to ride again so suddenly when but just arrived?" "i can tell you, father, though i can tell no one else. harold has ordered us to bring out our housecarls, and with them he means to deal a blow against the welsh, who have been devastating our western counties. the expedition is to be secret and sudden, although against what point and in what manner the blow is to be struck harold has kept his own counsel." "the welsh are ever a thorn in our side," the prior said, "and treaties with them are useless. i trust that harold will succeed in thoroughly reducing them to obedience, for whenever there is trouble in the kingdom they take advantage of it, and are ready to form alliances with any ambitious earl who hoists the standard of revolt. and so you say harold has already made you full thane? i am well pleased to hear it, if for no other reason than that it is good for people when they are ruled over by their own lord and not by a stranger; though i say nothing against egbert, harold's steward. still no man can rule like the master himself." at the first dawn of day wulf mounted, and rode away from the palace followed by osgod. he was clad now in the ringed armour, a suit of which he had had made of lighter material than usual. only on the shoulders and over the chest was the leather of the usual thickness, elsewhere it was thin and extremely soft, and the rings did not overlap each other as much as usual. the weight, therefore, was much less than that ordinarily worn by thanes, although it differed but little from it in appearance. the helmet, also, was of stout leather, thickly covered with metal rings, and the flap fell down over the neck and ears, having a bar coming down in front to protect the nose. osgod's suit was thicker and heavier, and was similar to that of the forty men who were drawn up in two lines under the soldier whom harold had sent down to train them. they were a stout set of young fellows, well mounted and armed, and as they broke into a cry of "welcome to our thane," wulf felt proud to command such a body. "thanks, my friends," he said heartily. "i am glad to see that not one is missing from your number, and feel sure that you will do credit to my banner." they rode that day to fareham, where they received a hearty welcome from beorn, and starting in the morning with his troop of thirty men, reached salisbury late that evening. they were met at the entrance to the town by one of harold's officers, who conducted them to a large barn, where straw had been thickly strewn for the men to sleep on. the horses were fastened outside. "earl harold arrived an hour since," the officer said, "and bade me tell you that he is lodged at the reeve's, where he expects you." they found on arriving at the house that many of the thanes had already come in, and that some six hundred horsemen were bestowed in the town. on a great sideboard were pies, cold joints of meat, wine and ale, and each thane as he arrived helped himself to such food as he desired, and then joined the party gathered round harold. "we shall pick up another hundred or two as we march along to-morrow," harold was saying when the two young thanes joined the group, "and shall have a good nine hundred men by the time we reach gloucester, where i expect to find four or five hundred more awaiting us. i hear that our coming has made a great stir here in salisbury, the citizens do not know what to make of so large a body of housecarls arriving in their midst. the reeve tells me that they were in some fear of being eaten out of house and home until they heard that we were to march on in the morning; after that they did their best for us, and have arranged that every man shall have his fill of meat and ale to-night, and again before starting." travelling as fast and as far as the horses could carry them, the force reached gloucester. here they received an even warmer welcome than had greeted them elsewhere, for the citizens had been greatly alarmed at the welsh forays, and as soon as they knew that the great earl himself was with the troops they had no doubt that he had come to give them protection and to punish their enemies. the contingents from somerset and dorset had already arrived, and without the delay of a single day the troops again started. the housecarls, although mounted, were not trained to fight on horseback. their steeds were valuable only as enabling them to move with greater celerity across the country than they could do on foot, and to bring them fresh and in fighting condition to the scene of action. once there they dismounted, and a portion being told off to look after the horses, the main body advanced on foot against the enemy. there was yet a long ride before them. following the severn on its western side so as to avoid the passage of the avon, they rode to worcester, and then up through dudley and shrewsbury. it would have been shorter to have passed through hereford and ludlow, but harold feared that they might there come upon some marauding party of the welsh, and any of these who escaped might carry the news across the border, when the fleet-footed mountaineers would quickly have conveyed it to the welsh king at his castle at rhuddlaw. rhuddlaw, now a small village, is situated in denbighshire, and was an important military position, situated as it was at no great distance from the sea, and commanding the vale of clwyd, the most important avenue into wales from the north. from shrewsbury they pushed forward as rapidly as possible to rhuddlaw; but quickly as they had journeyed, the news of their coming was borne more rapidly. griffith received the news an hour before their arrival, and mounting, rode down to the avon and embarked on board ship. great was the disappointment of the earl and his followers when they found that the object of their long march across england had failed, and that the capture of the welsh king, which would have put an end to the trouble, had been missed so narrowly. the castle was at once set on fire, the welsh ships on the avon were also given to the flames, and the very same day harold led his troops away and by easy marches took them back to gloucester. here they halted. the housecarls from the south, who had never been in contact with the welsh, were inclined to murmur among themselves at having been led back without striking a blow, but the contingents from the western counties, who had had experience of this wild warfare, told them that they might consider themselves fortunate. "you know not what a war with these savages is," an old housecarl who had fought them again and again said to a listening group of wulf's men. "you might as well fight with the evil spirits of the air as with them. fight! there is no fighting in it, save when they have with them danes from the north, or norwegians. with these to bear the brunt of the battle the welsh will fight valiantly in their fashion, but alone they know that they cannot withstand us for a moment. i have been after them a score of times, and it is a night-mare. you go up hills and through forests, you plunge into morasses, you scramble up precipices; you are wet, you are hungry, you are worn out, but never do you catch sight of one of them. "now and then, as you wind along the face of a hill, rocks will come thundering down; in the woods and swamps you hear their mocking yells and laughter. at the end of the day you drop down where you halt, and then just as you fall off to sleep there is a wild yell, and in a moment they are swarming among you, slashing and ripping with their long knives, crawling on the ground and springing upon you, getting among the horses and hamstringing or cutting them open. by the time those of you that are alive have got together they have gone, and all is so quiet that were it not for the scattered bodies you might believe that it was all a dream. two or three times before morning the attack will be repeated, until you are forced to keep under arms in military array. as soon as it is light you recommence your march, and so it goes on day after day, until at last, worn-out and spent, and less in strength by half than when you started, you gather under the shelter of the walls of one of the border towns. "i should have been glad indeed if we had caught their king, for if he had been held hostage in london we might have had peace; but well content am i that harold has abstained from entering upon a campaign which, terrible as it is even in summer, would be beyond endurance of the strongest in winter." "well, for my part," osgod, who was one of the listeners, remarked, "i would rather go on by myself and take the chance of getting a good blow at some of these wild men than ride all the way back to steyning to be laughed at by the women there, as brave soldiers who have marched across england and back and never unsheathed their swords. nor will i believe that earl harold can intend so to make a laughing-stock of us. the bretons were just as active as are these welshmen, but he brought them to reason there, and i warrant me he will do the same here. at any rate, he seems in no hurry to move. we have been here nigh a week already, and why should he keep us here if we are not to be employed?" it was not very long before it became known that harold had no intention of marching away and leaving the welsh unpunished, and that in the spring a campaign on a great scale was to be undertaken against them. the thanes of all the western counties were ordered to hold themselves in readiness to join with their levies in the spring. the somerset and devon men were to gather at bristol, and thence to be conveyed by ships to the southern coast of wales; the troops at gloucester were to march west, and tostig was to bring down a body of northumbrian horse, and to enter wales from chester. the housecarls, to their surprise, were ordered to lay aside their ringed armour and heavy helmets, in place of which leather jerkins and caps were served out to them; their heavy axes were to be left behind, and they were to trust to the sword alone. they were to abandon the tactics in which they had been trained of fighting shoulder to shoulder, with shield overlapping shield, and were to exercise themselves in running and climbing, in skirmishing with an imaginary foe, and rapidly gathering in close formation to resist anticipated attack. harold himself gave them these instructions. "you will have no foe to meet breast to breast," he said; "if we are to conquer and to root out these hornets it must be by showing ourselves even more active than they are. speed and activity go for everything in a war like this, while our own methods of fighting are absolutely useless. unless we make an end of this matter you may be called away from your homes once a year to repel these attacks, while if you conquer now there will be no welsh foray again during your lifetime. therefore it is worth while to make a great effort, and for once to lay aside our own method of fighting. your commanders will see that all the exercises are well carried out, and will report to me regarding those who show most zeal and energy. extra pay will be given to all, and i shall know how to reward those who are reported to me as most deserving of it." the troops set to work with great energy, and soon recognized the advantage they gained by laying aside their heavy arms and armour. swimming, running, and climbing were practised incessantly, and when may arrived, and with it the time for the commencement of the campaign, all felt confident of their ability to cope with the welsh in their own methods of warfare. chapter ix. in the welsh valleys. wulf and beorn did not form part of the expedition which was to embark with harold from bristol, and to enter wales by one of its southern valleys. it was necessary that the gathering of the levies at gloucester should be strengthened by having as a nucleus three hundred trained soldiers. the levies were lightly armed, and accustomed to fight in the same irregular manner as their welsh adversaries, whom they held in considerable dread, for the fierce hillmen had again and again proved themselves more than a match for the peaceable natives on the english side of the border. the addition then of three hundred housecarls was required to give them confidence. these had indeed abandoned for the time their armour, heavy weapons, and solid formation, but they could still were it necessary gather in a line, behind which the levies could rally, and which would be impregnable to the undisciplined attacks of the welsh. the young thanes were somewhat disappointed at finding that they were not to accompany the earl, but, as he told them, it was a mark of his confidence that he should post them with the force where the fighting was likely to be more severe and the risk greater than with that he himself led. "i shall penetrate into the heart of wales," he said. "i shall have horsemen with me, a strong force of trained soldiers and the levies, and the enemy will, i feel sure, be unable to oppose us successfully; but it is likely enough that when the welsh find that my force from the south and tostig's from the north cannot be withstood, they will pour out on their eastern frontier, and try to light such a flame in worcester, hereford, and gloucester, that we should be obliged to abandon our work, and hurry back to stem the tide of their invasion. it is necessary therefore that from this side also there should be a forward movement. my brother, gurth, will command here. i have strongly recommended you to him. your experience in the breton war will be of assistance to you, and i have told him that you can be far better trusted than many older than yourselves in carrying out expeditions among their hills and valleys. "i do not anticipate there will be any pitched battles; the welsh know that they cannot withstand our trained soldiers. it will be a war of skirmishes, of detached fighting, of surprises, long marches, and great fatigues. every valley in the country is to be harried with fire and sword. they are to be made to feel that even in their mountains they are not safe from us, and as they never take prisoners nor give quarter in the forays on our side of the border, so we will hunt them down like wolves in their own forests. the work must be done so thoroughly that for a hundred years at least the lesson will not be forgotten." in the last week of may gurth moved forward, marching first to hereford as a more central point of attack, and then crossing the border and entering wales. the troops carried no heavy baggage. meat they expected to find; flour was carried on two hundred pack-horses. the force was about 4000 strong. the housecarls marched in a body, keeping solid order. behind them came the pack animals, each led separately, so that they could the more easily make their way through forests or over broken ground. they marched in lines, forty abreast. the light-armed levies, led by their respective thanes, moved as they chose on the flanks of the trained troops or followed in the rear. when they halted on the first evening after crossing the frontier they lighted their fires and bivouacked. wulf and beorn walked together through the camp. "in spite of the fact that they are all dressed somewhat alike in leather jerkins, it is easy to see which are the trained soldiers," wulf said. "the housecarls are as merry over the food they have brought with them as if they were going upon a march of pleasure through the hills, while the border levies evidently regard the business as a serious one." "that is no wonder," beorn replied, "seeing how for years they have suffered at the hands of the welsh. look at those hills, wulf, i can count a dozen beacons alight. of course, they have heard of the preparations for attack, and they are flashing the news from hill to hill of the advance of our force. it will not be long before they gather to oppose us." "it is like enough they may attack us to-night, beorn. they may have had spies at hereford, and will have known two days ago of our coming. they may reckon that we should anticipate no attack until farther among their hills, and that we shall in consequence be careless, as in truth we seem to be. i think it would be well to offer gurth our housecarls to stand sentry to-night." "he might laugh at us," beorn said doubtfully. "well, let him laugh; he will laugh good-humouredly anyhow, for he is of a kindly and light-hearted disposition. at any rate there cannot be any harm in proposing it, and after the surprise we got from the bretons we cannot be too cautious." they walked to the fire where gurth was sitting with four or five of his friends, all of whom had furnished bodies of housecarls. the border thanes had by his orders each remained with his own following, so that at all times they should be in readiness to give orders and lead them in case of surprise. "where have you been, young thanes?" gurth asked. "you slipped away as soon as our meal was finished, as if you were afraid of the wine-cup." "we care not much for drinking," beorn said, "and have been going through the force to see how it was disposed. we have come to offer that our men shall to-night furnish guards for the camp." "there is no occasion for it," gurth said, "the welshmen will not attack us until we are entangled among their hills." "it depends upon how well they are led, my lord gurth," wulf said. "if they are well led they may attack us to-night, for they must know of our approach, and will think it probable that we shall, being so near our own border, be at first careless. the bretons gave us just such a lesson, and inflicted heavy loss upon the norman army." "well, post your men as you like," gurth said; "though it seems to me that it would be better for them to husband their strength for to-morrow's march." "they shall have half a night's sleep each," wulf said. "if i had not known how stoutly you fought, and how your courage saved the norman camp, i should have said you were over-cautious," gurth laughed. "however i will not refuse your offer, young thanes, though methinks there is no chance whatever of the welsh disturbing us here." having obtained the permission, beorn and wulf returned to the fires of their men. "we are to have the honour of furnishing the guards to-night, osgod. tell the men that gurth relies upon our watchfulness. we don't want a repetition of the surprise we had from the bretons. it will be but a short night's watch. 'tis nine now, and by four it will be broad daylight. beorn's men and ours will march a hundred yards out from the camp. half can lie down to sleep at once, the other half we can post as sentries and relieve them at half-past twelve. an attack if it comes will come from the front, therefore we will post the men twenty or thirty yards apart along there, and for some distance round the flanks. one of us will remain with the party that lies down, so as to be in readiness to lead them at once against any point attacked, the other will move round and round to see that the sentries are vigilant." "that is good news to me," osgod said. "methinks that affair in the breton wood has shaken my courage, for i have been looking at those trees in front of us, and wondering whether the welsh are gathering there, and thinking how it would be with all these raw levies if they came down upon us to-night it went hard for a bit with the normans, tried soldiers though they were, but i would not trust these levies to stand for a moment, for they hold the welsh in mighty respect." the men cheerfully took their arms and fell in. they considered it a compliment that they had been chosen to furnish the first guard. beorn's men, with a portion of wulf's, were to furnish the first line of sentries. the two young thanes, accompanied by osgod, went round with them and posted them, after giving them strict injunctions to be watchful and vigilant. "these savages," beorn said, "will creep up through the grass as noiselessly as cats, so you must keep your ears as well as your eyes well open; and if you hear but the breaking of a twig challenge at once. then, if they rise, shout the alarm at the top of your voice, and do the whole of you run back to us here if the cry comes from the front, if from either flank hurry to that spot, and we shall do the same from here; but be careful not to rouse the camp by a false alarm, for if you do, instead of gaining credit we shall become the jest of the whole force." when the sentries were placed, beorn, with the leader of his band, began to go the rounds, while wulf and osgod returned to their party. "you can sleep, master, while i watch beside you," osgod said. "i could not sleep if i lay down, for i have got the yells of those bretons in my ears, and could not close an eye." "very well, osgod; in that case i may as well take a nap." he was soon sound asleep, and remained so until osgod touched him. he sat up in a moment. "by the stars it is past midnight, my lord, and it is time for us to relieve beorn's party." the men were at once called to their feet, and the relief effected. "if an attack comes," wulf said, as with osgod he proceeded to walk backwards and forwards along the line of sentries, "i fancy it will be just before daybreak. many of them may come from long distances, and their leader would wait until the last moment in order to gather as large a force together as possible. besides, men sleep heaviest at that time, and they would reckon that hour as best for a surprise." as they walked they frequently paused to listen intently, and though once or twice they thought they heard distant sounds, these might be caused by the passage of a wild animal through the bushes. the sentries were all vigilant. it was the first time that the sussex lads had been in face of an enemy, and the stillness of the night, the sombre forest in front of them, and the possibility of a savage and unknown foe lurking there, kept them thoroughly on the alert. once or twice wulf and osgod went forward to examine some bush that had seemed to the imagination of a sentry to have moved, but in each case the alarm was groundless. "it must be nearly three o'clock now, osgod," wulf said at last. "another half hour will decide it. i shall be glad when the morning comes, for this work is trying, and i keep on fancying i hear noises." "i fancy so too," osgod said. "it seems to me like a sort of whisper or rustling of leaves." "that is just what it seems to me, osgod. let us stay where we are. we are just in the centre of the line now." "there are certainly sounds, my lord. i thought it was fancy before, but i am sure now." "i hear something," wulf said. "it comes from the front. run round to the right and bring the sentries from that flank and post them in the intervals of those in front, while i do the same on the left." they had but just returned, when they heard a sharp sound like the cracking of a stick a short distance in front. a dozen of the sentries at once challenged. in an instant a number of figures sprang to their feet at a distance of some fifty yards in front of them. then a wild yell was raised, and swarms of men came rushing towards them, while a volley of arrows and javelins whizzed through the air. "fall back on the others, men!" wulf shouted at the top of his voice, and the line of sentries rushed back to beorn's party, who leapt to their feet at the sound of the welsh war-cry. they had scarce formed in line when the enemy were upon them. they received them with a volley of javelins, and then shield to shield they withstood the attack they were fighting in their own way now, and numerous as the welsh were, they were unable, as they ran up in scattered order, to break through the line. "steady, men, steady!" wulf shouted out from his post in the middle of the line. "our friends will soon be up. show a stout front. do not give way a foot." in vain the welshmen, with wild yells, strove to beat back the saxon line. their very numbers were a hindrance to them. those in front pressed forward, so that those behind were unable to use their javelins or arrows. many creeping between the legs of the fighters of the front rank leapt with a cat-like spring upon the saxons, and strove to rip them with their knives, but the light wicker-work shields covered with leather, which had taken the place of the solid and heavy ones generally carried by the housecarls, stood wulf's followers in good stead; and although many of the shields were penetrated by the knives of the welsh, they in most cases effectually screened the bodies of the soldiers. the lightly-armed welsh, on the other hand, were hewn down by the long swords of the saxons in the front rank, while the javelins of those behind them flew with terrible effect among their assailants. there was, however, no pause in the fury of the attacks of the welsh, until, with a great shout, the main body of the saxons came up, and pressed forward in line with the little body who had hitherto borne the brunt of the battle, while on their flank the thane's levies poured in volley after volley of darts and arrows. the fight ceased as suddenly as it began. the sound of a deep-toned horn rose in the air, whereupon the welsh instantly abandoned the struggle, and before the saxons had time to realize that the fighting was over, they had disappeared in the forest. "by st. peter, young thanes!" earl gurth exclaimed as he came up to wulf's band, who were panting from their exertions, "you have saved us from a grievous mishap this night. i take shame unto myself that i treated your suggestion so lightly; for, by the saints, we should have fared badly indeed had this wild foe taken us asleep. the thanks of the whole force are due to you, and i will take care that my brother harold knows how narrow an escape we have had, and in telling the tale i shall not spare either myself or the older thanes, who were disposed to mock your proposal to keep guard over the camp, as showing an amount of caution altogether unnecessary. the attack has been a lesson to me that i shall not forget, and henceforth i shall select you and your force for any special service requiring watchfulness and valour." in going among their men wulf and beorn found that but six had fallen, for the most part under the shower of javelins with which the welsh had heralded their attack. many of the others had received wounds more or less severe, but few of them were so badly hurt as to render it necessary to leave them behind. gurth called the thanes at once to a council. fresh wood was thrown on to his fire, and some twenty of the thanes took their places round it. wulf and beorn were specially asked by gurth to attend. the attack of the welsh had shown that they were by no means dismayed at the extent of the preparations for the invasion of their mountains, and that the advance must be conducted with the greatest caution and prudence. "it is well," gurth said, "that in the absence of griffith they have many leaders, and will therefore fight without any general plan. did their whole force fall upon one or other of our columns it might go very hard with it; but we may be sure that each chief will desire to keep his followers by him, in order to defend his own valleys. nevertheless, they have shown to-night that they can gather rapidly and in considerable force, and we shall have to root them out piecemeal, and shall not be able to scatter our force too widely. i am told that the valley at whose mouth we now are contains a large number of villages, and to this we must confine ourselves until we have done the work there. i trust that they will oppose us stoutly. in that case we shall have the less trouble with them when we come to undertake the more difficult task of pursuing them among their hills." the next morning the advance began, and they had proceeded but a short distance when the welsh again poured down upon them. this time the force was prepared for the attack, and although the welsh fought obstinately, they were driven back without much difficulty. as soon as the attack ceased gurth gave the order for pursuit, and the housecarls held their course straight up the valley at full speed, while the levies swarmed up the hillsides to prevent the welsh from rallying and attacking in flank. the troops now felt the benefit of the abandonment of their heavy armour and weapons, and pressed so hotly upon the flying welsh that they entered the first village with them. for a time the natives turned and fought desperately in defence of their homes, but they were unable to withstand the skill and discipline of the saxon troops, and the measure that they had so frequently dealt out to the saxon villagers now fell on them. no quarter was given. every man, woman, and child was slaughtered, and the houses given to the flames. village after village was captured and burnt, but the resistance became fainter and fainter, and the last three villages at the head of the valley were found to be entirely deserted. then, just as the sun set, the force bivouacked for the night, the horns calling in the scattered levies, who gradually rejoined them. the next morning the force was broken up into five or six columns, each having a proportion of the regular soldiers and a body of the levies. these penetrated side valleys and climbed the hills. in many cases they encountered resistance, stones being rolled down upon them, and the welsh defending strong barricades of felled trees. but everywhere the saxons were successful, and day after day continued the work, until at the end of five days they were able to move where they would without encountering any resistance. the force now marched forward from the head of the valley, crossed a range of hills, and descended into another valley. they had now grown more confident in themselves, and while a third of the force proceeded to lay waste the valley, the rest, broken up into small columns, ascended the hills on either side, carrying fire and sword into every hamlet they came upon. several of the fortalices of the welsh chiefs, perched on almost inaccessible eminences, gave great trouble, and were only taken after serious loss. one day beorn and wulf, with their own following and two hundred and fifty light-armed levies, were despatched by gurth to porthwyn, a stronghold belonging to a powerful chief named llewellyn ap rhys. "it is, from all i hear," he said, "a very strong place, and will require all our force to capture it. indeed it is reported to be so strong that it may be necessary to leave it unmolested until we form a junction with harold, and can besiege it regularly. it would not do to make an unsuccessful attack, for that would raise the spirits of the welsh. all that i wish of you is to obtain a view of the castle from all sides if possible, to bring me back an exact account of its defences, and to give me your opinion as to our chances of capturing it if we decide to lay siege to it." porthwyn was forty miles distant, and beorn and wulf determined to march some thirty of these, and then to push forward at daybreak so as to obtain a view of the fortress in the early morning. they took with them a welsh boy as a guide. he had been spared in the last village captured, and had been told that his life depended upon his guiding them faithfully. the places of ten men who had fallen during the various fights had been filled up by an equal number of gurth's own housecarls. the seventy soldiers kept with their leaders and the guide, the levies spreading out on either side. two of the irregulars who spoke a little welsh accompanied the young thanes to question the guide if necessary. the march was a heavy one. at times they passed through thick forests in the valleys and on the lower hillsides, at times crossed over bare hills, on whose summits the ground was frequently so boggy that the men had to march with the greatest caution. the guide, a sullen lad with matted hair, whose only attire was a sheep-skin, was several times questioned sharply as to whether he was certain of the way. he answered in monosyllables, saying that he knew every foot of the road, and indeed he never hesitated for a moment. "i suppose he is right," wulf said, "although i thought it lay more to the west than we are going, but we have wound about so among these forests and hills that i am quite confused. there is one comfort, beorn, if the guide proves treacherous and we lose ourselves altogether, we have but to set our faces to the rising sun and we shall find ourselves back on the border, for i am sure that we could not retrace our steps to gurth's camp." the sun was just setting when they found themselves on a bare plateau on the crest of a range of hills higher than any they had before crossed. "ask him how far we are from porthwyn," wulf said to the interpreter. "he says twelve miles, my lord." "then when we get across this flat, which looks full two miles wide, we will camp in the first valley we come to." as they advanced the ground became more and more boggy, and the troops had to move carefully, stepping from one tussock of coarse grass to another, the intervals being filled with black slimy mud. "ask him if this gets deeper," beorn said angrily, "for if it does so we are like to be all swallowed up. i believe he must be leading us wrong." osgod had charge of the boy, and was walking close beside him. as the question was put by the interpreter the boy muttered that he knew the way. the man turned to translate his answer to beorn, when there was a sudden shout. at the moment that osgod was making a long step from one tuft to another the boy stooped and caught his foot, and with a roar of surprise and fury osgod fell head-foremost into the morass. at the same moment the lad darted away with a yell of defiance, leaping from tuft to tuft with the agility of a hare. several of the men started after him, but unaccustomed to the treacherous bog four or five were immersed in it to their waist before they had gone a dozen paces. "shoot! shoot!" beorn shouted, and a dozen javelins were thrown, but the boy was almost beyond distance, and his rapid and irregular movements rendered it well-nigh impossible to take aim with any accuracy. most of the javelins flew wide of him, and he was soon beyond reach. osgod was well-nigh smothered before he could be rescued, and some of the other men were only hauled out with the greatest difficulty. three or four of the most active men were sent forward, but presently returned with the news that the bog became worse. "the sun has already set," wulf said, "and if darkness catches us here our plight will be a bad one. let us retrace our steps at once, beorn." it was with great difficulty that they made their way back to firm ground. by the time they did so darkness had fallen. "this is a bad business altogether, beorn," wulf said. "in the first place we have lost our guide; in the second place we have no idea where we are, for we may for aught we know have been going in the wrong direction all the time; and, besides this, the boy will raise the country against us, and in the morning we may be attacked by an overwhelming force." "what do you think we had better do, wulf?" "well, i should say we had better, in the first place, retrace our steps to the valley, there we will light fires and cook the meat we have brought with us. then i should say we had best march for some hours. it matters not in what direction so that we get as far as possible from here." as beorn could suggest nothing better, wulf's counsel was carried out. supper was cooked and eaten in the forest, and after two hours for rest, for the march had been a very fatiguing one, they started. the night was moonless, and in the shadow of the trees the darkness was intense. the housecarls kept together, moving as closely as possible to each other. the levies were ordered to follow them. after proceeding for two hours, wulf said, "let us halt and see if we are all together." the housecarls halted, but when he went to the rear wulf could see no signs of the irregulars. "let no man speak or move," he said, "i want to listen." but no sound broke the stillness of the wood. "how foolish of oswald and edred," he said to beorn. "we told them to follow with their levies close behind us, and they must have allowed them to fall to the rear. however, they can't be far behind." they waited for half an hour, but the silence continued unbroken. "do you shout, osgod," wulf said; "they ought to hear miles away on a still night like this." osgod--who had scarcely spoken since his fall, so furious was he at having been outwitted by a boy, and having not only allowed him to escape, but being himself rolled in the mire--raised his voice in a tremendous shout. all listened intently, but no answering sound came back. "they must have gone altogether wrong," wulf said. "you know that we crossed a streamlet that ran into this brook soon after we started. they must have followed that up, thinking we had done so, and have gone up some other valley. what is to be done, beorn?" "we crossed that streamlet half an hour after starting," beorn said, "and as we have spent half an hour here they must have by this time marched up it two-hours' journey, and if we retrace our steps to that point they will have got an hour and a half farther away; besides, they may have gone back when they missed us. there is no saying which way to look for them. i think we had better go on as before. in the morning we shall be able to see the nature of the country, but to look for people who may be miles and miles away, when one cannot see one's own hand, would be but lost time and labour, and methinks we shall have need to husband all our strength before we get out of the scrape into which we have fallen. if the two thanes had obeyed orders and kept closer this would not have happened. they have lost us by their own carelessness, and must manage as they can. we shall have all our work to do to look out for ourselves. seventy men lost in the heart of these savage hills, which by to-morrow morning will swarm with welsh, have but a poor chance of ever seeing the english border again." "it is not so bad as that, beorn. i do not say that we are not in an unpleasant position, but at any rate we are a great deal better off than we were when we were driving headlong on to the coast of normandy, or when there were but three of us in the midst of the bretons. they have to find us in the first place, and it will need a good many of them to overcome us when they do. i fancy that we are very near the head of this valley, the ground is rising rapidly. i propose that we push on now till the trees cease, and lie down there till morning breaks, and then cross the next hill so as to find shelter in some other valley before the sun is fairly up. from the top of the hill we may get a general view of the country, and shall have some idea as to the course to take. we must first of all try to find a native who can tell us which is the direction of porthwyn and how far it lies away. our orders are to reconnoitre it and that must be done before there is any question of return. even if i were absolutely alone, i would carry out that order." beorn was silent for a minute, and then said doubtfully, "perhaps you are right, wulf; but when gurth gave us the order he gave us more than three hundred men to carry it out, and we have now but seventy." by this time they were on their way up the valley, followed by their men. "the fact that two hundred and fifty men have left us really makes the matter easier than it would otherwise have been," wulf said. "of course our guide carried the news of our coming straight to porthwyn, and it is like enough that fires are at present blazing on the hills. the larger division is more likely to be seen than ours, and to be attacked, and we shall have all the more chance of getting up unobserved. i sincerely trust that the thanes, when they discover that they have lost us, will at once lead their men back to gurth's camp. in that case they may escape before the welsh can assemble and attack them; and as it would naturally be supposed that as soon as we had lost our guide we retreated in a body, the welsh will imagine that there is no occasion for further vigilance." "you are always too full of arguments for me, wulf," beorn laughed; "and if you have made up your mind to go on, it is not of the least use my saying anything against it; so have your own way." at last the forest became less dense, and when they reached its edge they lay down. wulf slept for two or three hours, and then roused himself and waited for the first sign of dawn. it was a heavy responsibility, for though beorn was of equal rank with himself he always gave way to his opinion. he thought over whether it would not be better that beorn should march with all speed with the force to the east, and that he himself with osgod and perhaps two other men should make their way to porthwyn; already the welsh might be out all over the mountains, and it was the larger body that would be likely to be discovered and attacked. the welsh would know that on such a dark night, and in a strange country, they could not have got a very long distance from the bog where the guide had escaped from them, and the valley at whose head he now was would be the first place to be searched. however, he did not like severing himself from the men who had marched under his banner from steyning, and he finally determined that the whole should stay together. it was about half-past two when he roused the band, and they at once started up the bare hillside. "as it gets lighter," he said, "scatter and proceed singly. we shall be far less likely to be noticed by anyone at a distance than if we march together in a solid body. we must travel as fast as possible, so as to get under shelter again before the sun is really up." the men were all by this time well accustomed to climbing and hardened by exercise, and at a rapid pace they breasted the hill, although it was in some places exceedingly steep. by the time they reached its crest there was light enough to permit of a view of the country round. in all directions hills rose around them, bare and brown, and the growing light in the sky showed that the east lay behind them. after waiting for a minute or two to recover breath, they proceeded at a brisk trot. they met with no bogs of importance, and after running for a mile the ground began to slope downwards again, and they saw below them a wooded valley, similar to that which they had left. by this time the hilltops were all lit up by the rising sun. the spot where they stood, however, was still in shadow, and in scattered order they ran rapidly down the hillside until they reached the cover of the trees. chapter x. porthwyn. there was a short halt to enable the band to quench their thirst at a little rivulet that trickled down the centre of the valley; then they prepared to continue their march, wulf impressing upon them the necessity for moving as silently as possible. "if we come upon a village of any size," he said, "we must avoid it. the main point is to capture a native, and find out exactly where we are." after walking for an hour they came suddenly upon a hut. it stood in a cleared patch of ground; a small herd of goats were browsing round, and some smoke curled up from a hole in the roof. wulf halted his men. "beorn, you and i and osgod and one of the interpreters had best go in alone; there are not likely to be more than one or two men within, and it will be well at any rate that our numbers should not be known." before advancing, however, he told the band to surround the clearing. "let no one escape," he said; "it would cost us our lives did one get away to tell of our being here. see, too, that you bring down two or three of the goats. our meat is nearly exhausted, and it is well to replenish our store." after waiting until the men were in their places, wulf ran forward across the open ground with his three companions. there was no door to the hut, and on entering it they saw that its only occupant was a decrepit old woman. she gave a cry of dismay at the entrance of the strangers. "tell her not to be alarmed," wulf said to the interpreter. "we do not desire to do her any harm. now ask her if she lives here by herself," he went on, when the interpreter had spoken to the old woman. "she lives here with her two sons," the man said; "they are away. there were beacon-fires on the hills last evening, and they went out. she does not know when they will return." "ask her how far it is to porthwyn." the answer was most satisfactory. "it is but three miles away, my lord. it lies in the valley of which this is a branch." "that is good news indeed, beorn," wulf said. "the boy led us in the right direction, perhaps because he thought that if he did not do so we should perceive it and tax him with treachery. but it is more likely that he wished to lead us so close that he could, when he escaped, carry the news of our being in the neighbourhood, in time for the welshmen to surround and cut us off before we could return. as she says that the beacon-fires were lighted in the evening he can have lost no time, and the country must be aroused. i wish we had the whole force here." "what shall we do with this old crone?" beorn said. "it would never do to risk her giving an alarm, and though she looks feeble she might be able to get down to porthwyn." "we will tie her securely, beorn; we can't hurt the poor old creature. her sons are no doubt out with the welsh bands hunting for us; but they will return here sooner or later, so that no harm will come to her." by his orders osgod securely bound the old woman with a rope he found in the hut, and then leaving her they went outside and called upon the men to close in. eight of the goats were killed, and were then cut up and divided among the men. after a consultation wulf and beorn agreed that instead of following the valley down, where they might meet with other huts, or even a good-sized village, they had best keep along on the hillside, just inside the line of trees, as in that way they would come out high up on the side of the main valley, and probably obtain a good view of the fortalice. in single file they made their way among the trees, and in an hour the valley that they were in opened considerably, and through the trees they saw a large village at their feet. a quarter of a mile farther and they stood on the side of a wide valley. there were numerous flocks and herds to be seen grazing in it, and four or five villages could be made out; their attention, however, was chiefly directed to the object of their journey. some three hundred feet below the spot where they stood a rock jutted out from the hillside, and extended some five or six hundred feet into the valley. its sides were perpendicular save where it stood out from the hill. here a strong wall some forty feet high ran across it; two square towers stood at the angles, but there was no gateway visible. the wall was continued right round the top of the rock, which was crossed by two other walls each defended by flanking towers. the castle itself stood at the extremity of the rock, and was a strong and massive-looking building. the men were all ordered to lie down as soon as the castle was visible between the trees, and among these wulf and beorn followed by osgod moved cautiously, until they reached a spot whence they could obtain through the foliage a full view of the building. "it is a formidable place," said beorn. "the chief who first planted himself here knew what he was doing. yes. i should fancy from the look of it the castle at the end was built first, then gradually the walls were added until the whole rock was inclosed. this bit nearest to us is evidently an addition during the last few years. you can see that by the colour of the stone. you see the other two walls have gateways in them while this has none. i should say until this was built the entrance to the castle was along the neck, but they must have got some other way now, and so shut it up altogether. how on earth can they get in?" "certainly not at the sides," wulf said, "for they are as near perpendicular as possible. it must be at the other end of the rock, which we can't see. it may slope a little more gradually there, and they may have cut a zigzag road up. suppose we climb the hill behind us, till we get high enough to see over the trees and get a complete view of the valley. there is no fear of our being noticed. we are a good five hundred feet above it now, and even if anyone did see us up there they would take us for two herdsmen. of course we will leave our shields and weapons behind us." on attaining a spot from which a clear view of the whole valley could be obtained, wulf said: "there, beorn, do you see the hill juts out into the plain on the right, half a mile from the castle, and is wooded to its foot. i think if we were to make our way down there we should be able to obtain a view of the face of the rock below the castle without leaving the shelter of the trees." beorn agreed that it was worth trying, and they returned to the men, rearmed themselves, and spoke to osgod. "we are going to reconnoitre, osgod, and may be an hour away. as we shall not leave the forest there is no danger, and even were we seen we can climb the hill again as fast as any welshman can follow us. do you keep an eye on the castle, but do not stir until we return even if you hear shouts. i have no doubt that we shall be able to rejoin you, and it is most important that even if they do make us out they should have no reason for supposing that there is any force behind us." after half an hour's walking beorn and wulf found themselves at the edge of the wood in the valley. "there is the road, you see," wulf exclaimed. "it goes straight up that gradual slope to the bottom of the rock, then it makes two zigzags to the edge of that point that juts out a little, whence there is a bridge thrown across a gap to the point where there is a turret. i can't see it beyond that. i should think they must have driven a tunnel from there right up into the castle, for you see there are fifty feet of perpendicular rock above that turret. in case of attack, of course, they would cut away the bridge, and it would be next to impossible to throw another across. they could overwhelm any force attempting it with stones from above, besides sweeping the zigzag road below." beorn agreed that the place was absolutely impregnable on that side, and that it could only be attacked from the hillside, and by carrying the walls in succession. "well, there is nothing more to see," wulf said, "so we may as well return. you see there is a large village nestling down there just at the foot of the rock. we could not see it from where we were before. "well, osgod, have you seen anything going on in the castle?" "no, my lord, everything has been very quiet it seems to me that there are very few men about for such a strong place." "no doubt most of them are out in pursuit of us, osgod; we know that the country was roused by the beacons, and that there must be a big force somewhere in the hills. i only hope they wont find oswald and edred, or i fear it will go hard with them. the levies fight well when they have the housecarls with them, but by themselves and in a strange country i am afraid they would lose heart. now, beorn, i am going down to the wall on this side. we can see that there is no sentry on it, and i want to find out if there is any other defence besides what we can see. it is very important to know that, as we agreed that this is the side from which the attack must be made." descending among the trees wulf cautiously approached the wall. he found on nearing it that a perpendicular cut some thirty feet wide and twenty feet deep had been made across the rock. it stretched from the foot of one flanking tower to the foot of the other, the wall between them being some ten feet from its edge. having ascertained this he returned to beorn. having told him what he had seen, he sat looking at the castle. "what are you thinking of, wulf?" beorn asked. "i suppose we had better stop where we are till nightfall and then make eastward." "i am thinking, in the first place, that it would cost a great number of lives to take that place by assault." "that it would," beorn agreed. "we have seen no place of anything like equal strength in wales, or indeed anywhere else." "there is no doubt about that," wulf agreed. "if well defended it ought to hold out for weeks, for when we have taken that wall in front of us only a third of the work has been done. in the next place, i am thinking that llewellyn and the greater part of his garrison are away in the hills." beorn nodded. "and that being so, it seems to me that the best plan will be to take it ourselves." beorn looked at his friend to see if he were serious, but there was no smile on wulf's face. "do you really mean it, wulf?" "yes i mean it, certainly. what is to prevent our taking it? there may never be such a good opportunity again. we have not seen a dozen men on the walls, and i don't suppose there are fifty there altogether. but even if there are a hundred, they will have no chance with our men if we are once among them. you see the gates through those inner walls are open, and once over this first one the place will be all open to us." "that is true enough, but how in the world are we to climb that wall?" "that is what i am puzzling over, beorn. you see there is no time to lose, for llewellyn and his men may be back to-night. if they find oswald's party this morning they will return at once, if they don't they may not be back till the morning. but we cannot count on that, what has to be done must be done at once." he sat thinking a little longer. "we must cut down a couple of trees and make a ladder, beorn. the pine-trees grew very close together where we passed through them a quarter of a mile before we got here, and were very slender for their height. we have no axes or we could fell a couple of them in a few minutes; but even if we had them, we should not dare use them, for the chances are that the villagers are forbidden to cut down trees anywhere near the castle, and the sound might bring people up from below to see who was chopping. i was thinking of burning two of them down, but in this dry weather the flames might run up them, and we should get a blaze that would bring all the villagers up here." he beckoned to osgod, and when he came up told him that beorn and he had agreed to try and take the place. "that is good," osgod said joyfully. "i have been thinking of it, but i did not see how you were to climb that wall." "we must cut down two young pine-trees, but we must not chop them down." "it would take a long time with our knives," osgod said doubtfully. "it is easy enough to cut through a pole three inches thick, but when it comes to nine or ten it is a different matter." "then we must cut down small ones and tie them together. bring twenty men at once with you, osgod, let the rest lie quiet, the less movement there is the better." as soon as the men were ready wulf led them back to the point where the pine-trees grew, then he selected eight of the tallest and slightest. they were about three inches through at the foot, and were, he judged, at least an inch and a half at twenty feet from the ground. two men were set to work at each tree, and in less than half an hour the eight trees were on the ground. the branches were then lopped off, and four of the stems were cut across five-and-twenty feet from the foot. the thin ends were then placed together so as to overlap five feet. there was no difficulty about lashings, as thongs were cut off the bottom of the men's leather jerkins. the joint was made stronger by a light pole fifteen feet long being firmly lashed across the junction. thus the two poles for the ladder forty-five feet long were ready for use. it needed only to lash cross-pieces for steps, and in little over an hour from the time that work was begun the ladder was complete. from the other young trees two ladders, each twenty-five feet long, had been constructed in the meantime, and the whole were then raised and carried back to the place where the band was lying. "now, men," wulf said, "we are going to take this castle at once. i should wait until nightfall were it not that i fear the return of the welsh, but as they may come back at any time there is not a minute to be lost. now let each understand his work. the short ladders are to enable us to cross a cut twenty feet deep they have made through the rock; when we get over this we can plant the long ladder against the wall. as soon as we gain the top every man must lie down and crawl along over those who have preceded him. if we are seen before a few of us are on the top of the wall we shall fail, because they will have time to give the alarm, and shut the inner gates. "so far we have seen no one go in or out of the courts between these walls, and have every hope that we shall find no one there. i expect they are places where the cattle are kept in case of siege. our great danger is in the chance of our being noticed by men on other parts of the walls or on the castle. however, as far as we can see their attention is entirely directed the other way, for they are no doubt on the look-out for news from their chief or for his return. my intention is that all shall gain the top of the wall before a movement is made, but if an alarm is given, those who have got to the top are at once to follow us down the staircase into the courtyard and run at full speed to the gate. not a moment's halt is to be made there; we must run on to the next gate and there defend ourselves until the rest come to our aid. they will be taken so completely by surprise that, even if we are but four or five, we can hold the gate until the rest come up, and each man, as soon as he gains the top of the ladder, must run on at full speed to our aid. cut down all with arms in their hands, but do not hurt women or children. tell off six men, osgod, to carry the ladder and place it against the wall, and to be the first to follow us. let the others follow in the order in which they stand in rank." they made their way down through the trees. as soon as they reached the cut one short ladder was lowered, and the other was handed down and placed against the opposite side of the cut. the end of the long ladder was then lowered, and it was swung over and the upper end placed against the wall. six men then ascended the short ladder, and raised the long one until it stood on the rock at the foot of the castle-wall. "now, beorn, do you mount first and i will follow you." "you should go first," beorn said, "but i will do as you tell me." as soon as beorn was half-way up wulf began to follow him, saying to osgod and the men, "keep the same distance apart. do not let more than two be on the ladder at once whatever happens inside, if it were to break it would be fatal to us all." as soon as he gained the top wulf threw himself down by the side of beorn, and lay there watching the men on the other walls and on the summit of the castle. osgod and four men had joined them when wulf noticed a sudden stir and heard a shout. he leapt to his feet. "follow quickly, but be careful of the ladder," he called to those below; then he dashed along the wall to the top of the staircase, and closely followed by the others ran down and on through the gate in the next wall. here some five or six men were asleep in its shade, while some women were standing in front of some low huts which bordered the yard on either side. they gazed in astonishment for a moment at the seven men who appeared so suddenly from the outer yard, and then set up a shrill cry of alarm. without heeding them wulf ran on to the next gateway. just as he reached it a number of men came running up from the other side. "osgod, do you and alfred cover our rear while we keep these men in front at bay." the five men held the gate without difficulty against the welsh who first arrived, for these, at the shout of one of their comrades that men were climbing the wall, had run down only with their knives, and could do nothing against the saxon shields and long swords. presently, others with spears and axes ran up, but the two young thanes and their three followers still kept them back, for in the narrow gateway they could not be attacked by more than their own number. amid the yells of the welsh wulf could hear nothing of what was passing behind them, and he was delighted when he heard the voice of osgod in his ear. "there are eight here now, wulf; we have finished with the welshmen in the courtyard, so you are clear behind. our men are coming down from the wall fast. in five minutes we shall have the whole band here. now let me have a turn;" and he stepped forward and took the place of one of the saxons who staggered back with a javelin in his shoulder. every moment added to the number of the saxons. "let me know when they are all up," wulf said to one of those behind him, as he cut down a welshman who sprang at him with uplifted knife. the attack was growing weaker, as their assailants saw that instead of five men they had now to face a considerable number, and wulf had difficulty in restraining his men. "keep back!" he shouted; "we must wait until we are all up, and then drive them headlong before us and follow them into the castle. if they have once time to shut the doors there we shall have a troublesome task." as he spoke he yielded his place in the front rank to one of his followers, and turned to see how matters stood behind. "are they all up?" he asked. "the last man told me that there were six more to come, my lord." "then we need wait no longer. now, beorn, all is ready--charge!" and with a rush the saxons swept through the gate, carrying the welsh before them and hewing down the front ranks. in an instant the defenders turned and fled, but the saxons pressed hard on their heels. some of the welsh ran up the staircases to the walls, and many of the saxons would have followed them, but at wulf's "to the castle, to the castle, we can deal with them afterwards!" they followed him at once. on the steps up to the gateway of the castle a desperate struggle was going on among the welsh themselves. seeing the saxons pressing on the rear of the fugitives, those within the castle strove to shut the door, but strove in vain, as the terror-stricken men outside tried to force their way in. the two young thanes, with osgod and many of their followers, cut their way through the struggling mass and reached the door. those trying to shut it had already seen the hopelessness of the endeavour, and had fled into the hall beyond, in which a number of terrified women were wailing and shrieking. as wulf burst in he shouted to the welsh, "throw down your arms and surrender, and your lives shall be spared" but his words were not understood, and as the welsh never gave quarter themselves they had no thought of quarter being offered to them. the women ceased screaming and broke into a death chant, many of them seizing weapons from the walls, and joining the men in a last desperate effort to drive back the saxons. for a moment those who had entered had difficulty in resisting the desperate attack, but as others poured in they advanced, and although wulf continued to shout, "spare all who throw down their arms," his orders were of no avail, for the welsh continued to fight desperately until the last fell under the saxon swords, most of the women, who fought with even greater fury than the men, sharing their fate. as soon as the struggle was over wulf ordered osgod to take eight or ten men, to find the entrance to the tunnel leading down to the road on the face of the cliff, and to guard it against any attack from without. then, through his interpreters, he called to the welshmen on the walls that their lives should be spared if they would lay down their arms. he was answered by derisive shouts and a shower of javelins. "we should lose a good many men in storming those two narrow staircases, beorn. there are but twenty or thirty of them, but that is enough to defend such steep approaches. let us take twenty men up to the top of the castle, from there they can hurl javelins down at them, and they will soon see that resistance is useless." they ascended the stairs, but paused at the end of the room over the hall which had been the scene of the conflict. an aged woman, whose dress showed her high rank, was seated on a settle; beside her was a white-headed harper, while two little children, a boy and a girl, stood at her knee and looked fearlessly at the intruders. wulf despatched one of the men down to the hall to bring up the interpreter. as soon as he arrived wulf doffed his helmet and stepped forward. "ask who this lady is and who are these children." at a gesture from the old lady the harper answered: "this is my mistress, gweneth, the mother of prince llewellyn ap rhys; these are his children. in his name she bids you defiance. you have taken his castle, but he will know how to avenge her and his children." "i have no desire or intention of acting with any disrespect, still less of injuring either your mistress or the children of llewellyn," wulf replied, when this was translated to him. "my friend and i are saxon thanes, who have been forced to leave our homes and to embark on this war in order to put a stop to the ravages committed across the border--the burning of towns and villages, and the massacre of men, women, and children by your countrymen. llewellyn ap rhys has brought this misfortune upon himself, and did we render him motherless and childless, it would be but the fate that he and his followers have inflicted upon many an englishman. but we do not make war upon women or children. prisoners, of course, you must be, but be assured of honourable treatment. none shall enter this room save with your permission, and you can have your female attendants to serve you as usual." while the interpreter was repeating his speech wulf and beorn left the room, and with the men ascended to the top of the castle, where they were joined by the interpreter, who addressed the welsh on the walls. these replied with shouts of defiance, and a volley of javelins was poured down upon them. three or four were struck, the rest, seeing that all hope was gone, rapidly gathered in a body at the head of the staircase leading from the wall. "they are going to run down," beorn exclaimed, and leaning over the parapet shouted to the saxons in the courtyard below to stand on their guard. a minute later the welsh rushed down, each intent on killing at least one foe before he died. the saxons' weapons and discipline were, however, too much for them; but they fought until the last, not one of them throwing down his weapon or asking for quarter. "they are brave men. i would that we were not forced to slay them; but it is their choosing and not ours, beorn, and if they would but leave us alone i am sure that nobody would wish to interfere with these wild countrymen." "what is the next thing to be done, wulf?" "i should say let us turn all the women and children, save the old lady's attendants, out of the castle, they would only be a trouble to us. then we must examine the store of provisions, plant sentries and cut away that bridge, or, at any rate, cut away so much of it that a blow or two with an axe will suffice to send it down. we must not forget to haul up our ladders. llewellyn and his men may be back at any moment. let us go down together to that turret we saw on the face of the rock." orders were at once given, and the women and children collected and told to leave the castle. they were allowed to carry away with them some eight or ten men who were found to be still living. they went for the most part in silence, but some of the elder women poured out voluble curses on the saxons. beorn and wulf had already gone down to the turret. there was a very strong gateway in the courtyard, beyond this a tunnel sloping steeply down, eight feet high and four feet wide, had been cut in the solid rock. following it they emerged upon a platform, principally occupied by the turret. the path led through a strong gateway under this on to the wooden bridge. here osgod with his ten men had taken their station. "the women and children and a few wounded will be coming down directly, osgod. as soon as they have passed do you set to work with your men and pull up the planking of the bridge, all save a single plank; loosen that, so that you can if necessary at once cast it down after the rest. if you see the welshmen pouring up the road, throw it over at once without waiting for further orders, then close the gate and take your station in the turret." "we are all getting very hungry, master. we have eaten nothing this morning, and fighting sharpens the appetite." "i had forgotten all about it, osgod. i will see that food is cooked at once, and will send down a portion for you and your men, and some tankards of whatever liquor we can find in the cellars. we are going to make an examination of them at once." returning to the courtyard, they told off a body of men to search the cellars and granaries, and were glad to find that there was an ample store of grain to last for months, together with large quantities of ale and a few casks of wine. "so far all is well," beorn said, "but would it not be prudent to send off at once to gurth, to let him know that though we are masters of the castle at present, we may in a few hours be surrounded by a swarm of angry welshmen?" "that certainly is most desirable," wulf agreed. "the question is, who are we to send? it would be a terribly dangerous enterprise. even now there are a score of men from the village watching our movements from the wood above. at any rate we must wait until nightfall." four sentries were posted on the wall by which they had ascended, as after making a circuit of the place, this was they agreed the only point at which a surprise was possible, unless there existed some secret passage into the castle. they had just finished their inspection of the walls, when there was a shout from their look-out at the top of the castle. "a great number of men are coming down the valley," he cried to the thanes in the courtyard below, and they at once mounted to the battlements. a mile away great numbers of men could be seen running at the top of their speed. there was neither order nor formation. among them were a few horsemen riding in a knot together, and round these a number of the footmen were running in a close mass; but by far the greater proportion straggled across the valley, some being a considerable distance behind the rest. "they are like a swarm of bees," beorn said. "yes, and are just as angry. of course, the news of what has happened here was sent off to them at once, and has brought them back again. i trust that it reached them before they came upon oswald's party." "they must have been on their return," beorn said. "it was but two hours ago that we won the castle. had a swift messenger started the moment the news reached the village, and had he known exactly the position where he would find llewellyn, he could not have taken the news to him and brought them back here had they been some eight miles away. it must be farther than that to the spot where we lost oswald, and as the thanes would surely be making their way either back to camp or eastward to the border, they must have been many miles from here an hour since. we know that the welsh levies were summoned in the evening, and probably reached the spot where we were deserted by the guide, before daybreak, and took up the search at once. therefore i think, wulf, there can be no doubt that the messenger from here must have met them as they were returning; but whether they had overtaken and destroyed oswald's command, or had failed in their search for them, we cannot tell." wulf shook his head. "i fear the former is most likely. the welsh here must know every foot of their mountains, so that by scattering through the valleys they could scarcely fail to come upon the traces of oswald's passage, and they would pursue him as hotly as wolves chase a deer. my only hope is that oswald may have established himself at daybreak this morning in some strong position, and fortified himself there, in hopes that we might rejoin him, and that llewellyn had not begun the attack upon it when the news reached him of the capture of his castle. how many, think you, are there in that approaching throng?" "some four or five thousand i should say." "yes, quite five thousand, beorn." at the call of the watchmen the men had, of their own accord, all mounted to the walls. "we had better divide our commands," beorn said. "your force is double mine. for the present i will undertake the defence of the rear walls if you will take the front. of course till an attack actually commences it will not be necessary to keep more than a strong guard on duty." "certainly not," wulf agreed. "the danger will be far greater at night than by day, and we must give the men as much rest as possible. but i think that you with your men and half of mine ought to take the command in front, while i with the rest defend the rear." "not at all, wulf, this is your affair altogether. i should never have thought of trying to take the castle. it was your idea, and has been carried out by you altogether. you are much fuller of plans than i am. i will do my best to second you, but you must continue to be the head in the matter." "very well, beorn. i refuse to be considered in command, but we will apportion our forces as you suggest. we will take care that at any rate the welsh shall not capture the castle as rapidly as we did, and so will put four men always on duty at each of the gates in the interior walls, so that if by any chance they manage to effect an entrance into one of the yards they will be able to get no farther until our whole force can assemble to oppose them." chapter xi. the secret passage. beorn called his men together and distributed them along the rear wall, while wulf made a fresh examination of the front. he had before noticed that great piles of stone in blocks from fifty to a hundred pounds in weight were piled along by the parapet, in readiness to hurl down upon any foe attempting to ascend the road, while in the courtyard below was an immense reserve of these missiles. he placed twenty of his men here, and posted the other ten as sentries on the side walls, and then went down through the passage to osgod. the bridge was entirely demolished as he had directed, with the exception of a single plank, which could be thrown over in a moment. osgod had closed the gate, and had fastened a rope from the top of the turret to the plank, so that this could be hauled up, without those engaged in the operation being exposed to missiles from the other side of the chasm. "one feels almost ashamed at being so safe," osgod said, as wulf joined him on the turret. "it does not give one the chance of a fight." "you have had one good fight to-day, osgod, and can do without another. i should be glad if we did not have to strike a blow till we see gurth's banner coming down the valley." "we have done very well," osgod agreed; "and i should be quite contented if i had but come across that rascal who nearly smothered me in the bog." "you need not bear malice against him, osgod; for if he had not deserted us and led llewellyn's force away to the spot where he left us, we should not be masters of the place as at present, and it would have been a terrible business had we been obliged to take this stronghold by storm." "that is true enough, master; except by hunger or by a surprise, such as we carried out, i don't see how the place is to be taken if stoutly defended. there is no reason why the welsh should have been in such a hurry to return, for they must know as well as we do that there is but little chance of their getting in again. they have come to a halt now down there, and half of them have thrown themselves on the ground like a pack of tired hounds." "i have no fear whatever of an open attack, osgod. they can see for themselves that the bridge is destroyed, and i do not think they will dream of coming up that road, which, as they know, we can sweep with stones from above. if they attack openly at all, it will be by the wall we scaled. if they make twenty ladders such as we had they may think they might gain a footing, especially as their archers high among the trees would be able to fire down on the defenders of the wall. but what i am really afraid of is that there may be some secret passage." "do you think so?" osgod said, startled. "where could it come from?" "well, osgod, you see they have cut this winding road up the rock and have made the tunnel hence to the courtyard, so the chiefs have had abundance of labour at their disposal. they would naturally wish to provide a means of escape if the castle were besieged, and like to fall by force or famine; moreover it would enable them to send out messengers or receive messages from without. a passage four feet high and two feet wide would suffice. they may have driven such a passage from some place in the wood behind and it may come up somewhere in the courtyard, perhaps in one of the little huts along the side. of course the entrance would be covered here by a stone, and would be hidden among the bushes at the other end. still i do not think that this is likely, for a hostile force would almost certainly take up its post in that wood, and attack the place in the rear. if there is such a passage i think that it must open somewhere on the face of the rock, on one side or the other. it looks to us almost perpendicular, but there may be inequalities by which active men might ascend at some point or other. for a considerable distance we could see there were tufts of shrubs growing here and there, and one of these may conceal a small opening. from this point a staircase may have been driven up into the castle." "that would be very awkward, master, if it were so." "it would indeed. to-night all the force except the sentries shall gather in the castle, where ten men by turns shall keep guard, one or two being placed in the lower chambers. in this way we shall be safe; for before more than three or four can enter we should be all on foot, and as they can but come up in single file, could repulse them without difficulty. tomorrow we will lower men down with ropes from the walls, and examine every clump of bushes growing on the face of the rock if we find any signs of a path or entrance we shall have no difficulty in discovering where it enters into the castle, and can effectually block it up. i shall then feel much more comfortable than i do at present." "i was looking forward to a good night's sleep," osgod grumbled, "but your idea, master, has quite done away with that. if i went off i should dream that i had one of those welsh wolves at my throat. however, it is a good thing that you thought of it." "i think, my lord," one of the soldiers said, "there are a number of our men among the welsh. i can make out helmets and shields, and i think many are clad in leather jerkins." wulf looked attentively. "yes, there are certainly shields and helmets," he said. "i fear there is no doubt they have overtaken oswald's levies." "and have made them prisoners?" wulf shook his head. "they never take prisoners, you know. i fear they have slain them all and possessed themselves of their arms and clothes. in no other way can there be saxon shields and helmets among them." "by st. nicholas!" osgod exclaimed, "it is too bad that we should be standing here doing nothing. why doesn't llewellyn attack us instead of keeping his men gaping there at the castle?" "because at present he can do nothing, and is not fool enough to throw away hundreds of lives; besides, he must know that his mother and children are in our hands." presently a white flag was raised among the welsh. wulf had expected this, and had ordered a white cloth to be held in readiness to raise in reply. as soon as this flew out to the wind three men were seen to advance with the flag towards the foot of the road up to the castle. wulf at once sent for the two interpreters to join him. "shall you let them come up, master?" osgod asked. "they are as treacherous as snakes. see how that boy led us astray in the bog." "you cannot get that boy out of your head, osgod," wulf laughed. "there is no conceivable way by which three men could recapture this castle. there is nothing for them to learn. they know its strength and everything connected with it, and they can see for themselves that we have destroyed the bridge. i shall be glad to hear what they have to say. llewellyn himself is, most likely, one of the number." the little party mounted the road until they stood on the platform from which the bridge started. one of them was a tall figure, dressed in armour, and with long black hair flowing down from under his helmet over his shoulders. wulf at once, from the descriptions he had heard of the chief's appearance, recognized him as llewellyn ap rhys. "i would speak with the commander of the saxons who have, in my absence, taken my castle by treachery." "i am the commander," wulf said. the welshman's fingers clenched, and he glanced furiously at the young saxon. by a great effort, however, he restrained his passion, and said courteously: "i am llewellyn ap rhys. to whom have i the pleasure of speaking?" "i am wulf of steyning, prince. i don't know altogether that i have taken your castle by treachery, indeed i claim to have won it by fair fighting. you went out with your force to attack me among the hills, and during your absence i attacked and captured your castle. i will do your garrison credit to say they fought bravely in spite of the surprise. i would gladly have given them quarter, but they refused my offers, and, save a few wounded, whom i allowed the women to carry off, died to a man fighting bravely. no women were hurt or insulted, save those who took up arms and fought among the men, and it was no fault of ours that they were killed. methinks that in your incursions into england you have not always shown the same mercy." llewellyn was silent for a minute. he had indeed never shown any pity in his forays, but had never expected that his castle and family would be in the hands of the saxons. "i learn," he said at last, "from the women, that my mother and my children are alive in your hands, and i thank you for the honorable treatment i hear that they have received." "they are safe and well," wulf replied. "we saxons do not massacre women and children in cold blood. they will be honourably treated until i can hand them over to the care of earl gurth, who will doubtless send them to england as hostages." "i shall try to win back my castle," llewellyn said. "may i be sure that whatever happens they will be safe?" "you may. even were you forcing your way into the castle i will guarantee that no hair of their heads shall be injured. and now, prince, it is my turn to question. i see saxon helmets and shields among your followers. whence come they?" a cloud passed over llewellyn's face. he had not reckoned on their being observed from the castle. concealment was now out of question, and he said boldly: "i defeated a party of your countrymen this morning. they came with hostile intent into my territory, and they have been destroyed." although he had expected the answer, wulf was shocked at the confirmation of his fears. llewellyn, indeed, had fallen on oswald's levies and annihilated them soon after daybreak. having no idea that a party had separated from them during the night, he was returning exulting in the idea that he had destroyed the whole of the invaders, when the news had reached him of the capture of his castle. wulf was silent. "it is the fortune of war," he said gravely. "it is not to me that you have to reckon for the deed, but with earl gurth, for whom i hold this castle." llewellyn made no reply, but with a wave of his hand turned and went down the hill again. "i am even more than before convinced, osgod, that there is a secret passage. i was watching him closely when the interpreter told him that i should hand his mother and children over to gurth. he pressed his lips together, and his face lighted up with exultation for a moment." "what do you think he came here for, master?" "he came here to assure himself if possible that their lives would not be sacrificed in the event of his attacking." "it is a pity you told him they would be safe," osgod said. "but they will be safe, and even if we are surprised and slain i would not that llewellyn should say that it was only the suddenness of his attack that saved their lives. i will place two of our best men at their door with orders that come what may they are to prevent anyone from entering. but i don't think it will come to that. should the passage enter into the castle, as, if it exists, i have no doubt it does, we shall be prepared to deal with them, if it opens elsewhere we shall have all our force save a few sentries assembled, and though all the walls fall into their hands, we ought to be able to hold it successfully till gurth arrives to our rescue." wulf returned to the castle, and then joined beorn at his post on the wall facing the wood. he communicated to him his ideas as to the probable existence of a secret passage. "we must provide a mode of retreat for your men on guard here, beorn, in case the welsh enter by either of these yards instead of by the castle. these flanking towers at the angles of the walls cut off all passage. we will construct bridges with two or three planks across these towers, so that your sentries can retreat from the rear wall to the next, and again on to the inner wall. the doors between the courtyards shall be closed, so that should they enter either of these outer courts they will be delayed, and your men will have plenty of time to join us in the defence of the last wall. however, i am convinced the castle itself will be the scene of action. five sentries will be enough to place on this wall. i will put two on each of the cross walls, so that if your men give the alarm it will be passed along speedily. i shall remove the last plank of the bridge at nightfall, and have osgod and four men in the turret and two on the wall above them. we shall therefore have fifty-five men in the castle, and that should be ample. they can keep watch and watch, so there will be over twenty-five men under arms, and ready to throw themselves upon the welsh wherever they may enter." these arrangements were carried out. at ten o'clock all lights were extinguished, save a torch burning in each room on the ground floor. the floors and walls had been carefully examined and sounded, but nothing suspicious had been discovered. four men were told off to each room except the great hall, where twenty were gathered in reserve. half were to keep watch, but all were to lie down. the orders to those who were to keep awake were strict if they heard a noise or saw a stone move they were to keep silent, until two or three men had stepped out, then they were to give the alarm, leap up, and throw themselves upon them. "were the alarm given," he said, "before they fairly issued out the stone might be moved back again, and it would give us immense trouble before we could demolish it or find the secret of the spring. therefore, let them get a footing first." from time to time either beorn or wulf got up and went noiselessly round to the different rooms to see that the watch was vigilant. as had been arranged, each of those on guard raised a hand as they entered a room, so as to show that they were awake. wulf did not expect that any attempt would be made before midnight. after that hour he sat in a corner of the dais, leaning as if asleep, but with his eyes wandering round the room watching every stone, and his ears listening for the faintest sound. he had no feeling of sleepiness whatever, his senses being all strung up to the highest pitch. from time to time he held up a hand, and ten others were at once elevated, showing that the watchers were as vigilant as himself. it was, he thought, about one o'clock when he heard a faint creaking sound. it did not seem to him to be in the hall itself, but in a room adjoining it, the doors having all been left open. he rose to his feet, touched beorn, who lay a pace or two away, and stole noiselessly out, grasping his sword in his hand. he stopped before he got to the open door of the next room and listened. all seemed perfectly quiet. he stood motionless, until a minute later there was a sudden shout, followed almost instantly by a clash of arms. with a shout to his followers wulf ran into the room. the four saxons were on their feet, and were attacking three men, who, as he entered, were joined by a fourth from behind. he and beorn threw themselves into the fray just as one of the saxons fell with his head cloven by a sweeping blow from the tall figure opposed to him. one after another in rapid succession the welsh poured in from a narrow opening, but the saxons rushed up in overwhelming numbers. there was a brief fierce fight, and the welsh were slain or overpowered. the men who last emerged turned to fly, but meeting those crowding up from behind were unable to do so. others ran in only to be cut down as soon as they appeared; a sound of fierce shouting and angry struggle came through the opening. when no more showed themselves, wulf called for torches, and a dozen were soon at hand. seizing one he passed through the narrow opening. a winding staircase met his view. with beorn and some saxons following close behind him, he descended for a considerable distance, then he found himself in a low and narrow passage, and following this for twenty yards stepped out into the open air. "we need do no more to-night, beorn," he said. "we will see where this comes out and block it up in the morning, though they are not likely to try again. we can sleep now without fear of interruption." his first step was to examine the bodies of the fallen welshmen. he had recognized in the tall man with whom he had crossed swords llewellyn ap rhys, and found him lying beneath four of his followers, who had stood over him and defended him to the last. he was glad to find that the welsh prince still lived, and directed that he should be at once carried to a room and that every attention should be shown him. none of the other fourteen welshmen who had fallen showed any signs of life. ordering their bodies to be carried out into the courtyard, wulf placed four men on guard at the upper opening of the secret passage. they were to be relieved every hour. he then went out and saw to the relief of the sentries on the walls, and called down to osgod that the attack had been made and repulsed. he then went back and slept soundly till daybreak. on going to the walls he learned that there had been a great commotion down in the valley. fierce shouts, loud wailing cries, and a confused sound of running and talking had been heard. at daybreak the welsh were still there, and their fires had been lighted: one party were seen to march away as soon as it was light, but others arrived, and their numbers appeared about the same as on the previous evening. there was no general movement, but it could be seen that they gathered in clusters, and listened to men who addressed them with animated gestures. "they don't know what to do," wulf said to osgod, whom he had joined in the turret. "they believe their chief to be dead; they know that his mother and children are prisoners in our hands; they can have little hope of capturing this place, which they believe to be impregnable to open attack. at present they must be without a leader, and yet they must be so animated by a spirit of hate and revenge, and by the desire to wipe out their humiliation by retaking this place, that they will not stir from in front of it." as he spoke a messenger came from beorn, saying that the welsh were pouring arrows and javelins from the hill upon his sentries on the walls, and that these were unable to show a head above the parapet. in one of the sheds a large quantity of hides had been found, and taking a party laden with them wulf proceeded to the wall at the rear. here he directed the ladders that were still lying there to be cut up into lengths of eight feet. these were fixed at intervals upon the parapet, and a cord fastened along the top, the men engaged in the operations being protected by the shields of their comrades from the rain of missiles from the trees. hides were thrown over the ropes, and these hid those on the wall from the view of the enemy, while they themselves could peep out from time to time between the hides to see that no preparations were being made for an attack. the secret passage was next investigated; it was found that the opening was about half-way down the rock, and that the assailants must have climbed up by a path that a goat could scarce traverse. wulf set a party to work to carry down stones from the courtyard, and to block up the passage solidly for ten feet from the opening, a sentry being posted on the wall above. after the erection of the shelter of hides the welsh only sent an occasional javelin from the trees, but by the loud yells that were from time to time raised, there was no doubt they were still there in force. "it is evident that they are going to besiege us, beorn," wulf said when they sat down to breakfast together. "the question is, are we to remain here until rumour carries the report of our capture of the place to gurth, or shall we despatch messengers to him?" "as you yourself said yesterday, the messengers could never get away, wulf. i would give a year's revenue if we could do so, for it may be a long time before news comes to gurth's ears. he may possibly hear of the annihilation of oswald's force, for any welsh woman taken captive might mention that in triumph, but they would certainly say nothing of such a grievous blow to the welsh cause as the capture of porthwyn and the death of llewellyn in an attempt to recapture it. gurth, therefore, naturally supposing that we had been involved in oswald's disaster, may abandon all idea of moving against this place until the greater part of the country was reduced to obedience." "i see, beorn, that the difficulty of a messenger getting through would be indeed enormous; the welsh must know that we are but a small band, and that our first aim would be to communicate with gurth. you may be sure, therefore, that they will keep a vigilant guard all round the place at night to see that no messenger makes his way out. our two interpreters do not know anything like enough welsh to pass as natives, none of our people know a word of the language, it would be sending anyone to almost certain death. i think we must be content to depend upon ourselves. gurth is sure to learn the news sooner or later, for it will make a great stir all through the country. i have just seen llewellyn, he is very sorely wounded. i think it would be a good thing to let the welsh know that he is in our hands, it will render them more chary of attacking us. we might hang out a flag of truce, and when they come up in reply tell them that he is alive but sorely wounded, and that they may send up a leech, who would better attend to his wounds than we can do." this was accordingly done. two welshmen of rank came up to the broken bridge and were informed that their prince was sorely wounded, and that a leech would be allowed to enter to attend upon him. an hour later a man with a boy carrying a large basket came up the hill and crossed the plank into the turret. the basket, which contained various herbs and medicaments, was taken from the boy, who was then sent back again, while the leech was taken up to the room where llewellyn was lying, in the care of his mother and her maids. three days passed without any change. the force in the valley was seen to be considerably diminished, no hostile demonstration had taken place; but twenty men always remained in the courtyard in the rear, in readiness to run up to the wall in case the sentries gave an alarm. on the fourth morning, just as day was breaking, a man ran into the castle with the news that the welsh were attacking the wall. beorn and wulf sprung to their feet, and with every man except those on duty as sentries ran off to the scene of attack. that it was a serious assault was evident by the wild yells and shouts that were heard. wulf ran up the stairs to the wall. a storm of missiles was striking against the hides; many of them failed to penetrate, but others did so, and several of the men were lying wounded under shelter of the parapet, while the rest were hurling down javelins between the openings of the hides. "what are they doing?" he asked the sub-officer in command of the party. "they are preparing to scale the wall, my lord; they have numbers of ladders." wulf was about to look out between the hides, but the officer exclaimed, "do not so risk your life, my lord; you can see down without danger;" and he pushed out the lower side of one of the skins from the wall, so that wulf could look down without being seen by the welsh archers. the fosse in the rock and the narrow platform at the foot of the wall were alike crowded with foes, who were planting a number of ladders side by side. these were strongly constructed, and were each wide enough for two men to mount abreast. eight or ten of these ladders were already planted against the wall, and the enemy were climbing up them. wulf turned, and waving his sword shouted to the men running into the courtyard from the walls and castle to hasten up. already a dozen had joined him, and scarce had these placed themselves along the battlements when the heads of the welshmen appeared above it. for a minute or two it seemed that these would overmaster the defence. several succeeded in crossing the parapet, but they were either cut down or cast headlong into the courtyard. by this time the whole of the saxons, save the guard in the turret by the bridge, were on the wall, and were able to form a close line along the parapet against which the ladders were placed. the welsh fought with an utter disregard of life; as fast as those at the top were cut down or hurled backwards others took their place. so closely did they swarm up the ladders that several of these broke with their weight, killing many of those clustered below as well as those on the rungs. but for an hour there was no pause. it was well for the defenders that they had the protection of the line of hides, and were therefore screened from the arrows of the bowmen on the hill; but these soon ceased to shoot, as many of their comrades were hit by their missiles, while they were unable to see whether the arrows had any effect whatever upon the hidden defenders. at length the leaders of the assailants saw that the task could not be achieved, and gave the signal by the blowing of cow-horns that the attack should cease; but so furious were their followers that many disregarded the summons, and continued their efforts to gain a footing upon the wall, or at least to kill one of its defenders, for some time after the main body had withdrawn. as soon as the last of these was killed the garrison hurled the ladders backwards and then gave a shout of triumph, which was answered by renewed yells of defiance by the welsh. "it has been a hard fight, wulf," beorn said, as he removed his helmet. "it has indeed. it was a well-planned attack, and was nearly successful. we ought to have had a stronger guard there; but i did not think that they would venture to attack at daylight, nor that they could have so quickly run forward and placed their ladders. had we been but a minute later in arriving here they would have gained this wall and the courtyard. they would, indeed, have got no farther, but their success would have so excited them that we should have had to fight night and day. what has been our loss?" five of the men were killed; many of the others had received severe wounds on the head and shoulders from the knives of their assailants, and had it not been for the protection afforded by the leathern helmets and jerkins the number of killed would have been very much larger. "i would as lief fight with a troop of wild cats," exclaimed osgod--who, as soon as he saw that there was no movement down on the plain, had run up with half his little garrison to join in the defence of the wall,--as he tried to staunch a deep wound that extended from his ear to his chin. "over and over again i saw a shock head come up above the wall, and before i had time to take a fair blow at it the man would hurl himself over upon me like a wild animal. three times was i knocked down, and i am no chicken either; if it had not been for my comrades on each side it would have gone hard with me. i was able to return the service several times, but had the welsh been imps they could not have been more active or more fierce. there must be a hundred lying slain along here or in the courtyard. i do not wonder that oswald's men were all killed by them, though after our previous fights i held them in but small respect." "it is a different thing, osgod," beorn said. "in the field we have always had the advantage from our order and our discipline; but here it was man against man. we had the advantage of position and they of numbers; but discipline went for nothing on either side, and i doubt if we should have done as well as they did had we been the assailants." "i am ready to own that," osgod agreed. "i like to fight with my feet on firm ground, and should make but a poor figure balanced on the top of a ladder." when the tumult in the wood had died away wulf raised a white flag, and ordered one of the men who spoke welsh to shout to the enemy that they might approach without molestation and remove their wounded and dead from the foot of the wall, and also said that the saxon leaders desired to speak to an officer of rank. two of these came out from the trees. "hitherto," the interpreter cried with a loud voice, "my lords, the noble thanes, beorn of fareham and wulf of steyning, have given the most honourable treatment to your chief, llewellyn ap rhys, wounded and a prisoner in their hands, and to his family. nor have they altered that treatment while you were attacking our walls; but they bid me warn you and all others in arms against the authority of our sovereign lord the king, that henceforth they will hold them as hostages, and that their lives will be forfeited if any fresh attack be made upon the castle." three days passed without any further acts of hostility by the welsh. at the end of that time llewellyn was sufficiently recovered to sit up supported by pillows on his couch. he had already heard of the defeat, with terrible slaughter, of the attempt of his countrymen to recapture the castle, and of the warning that had been given the welsh that if the attack was renewed the lives of himself and his family would be forfeited. beorn and wulf paid him a visit as soon as they heard that he was in a condition to talk to them. "prince," wulf said through his interpreter, "it is, you must see, hopeless for your followers to attempt to recapture this castle. the bridge is destroyed, the secret passage by which you entered blocked up, and we can resist any attack upon the rear wall. we have shown you and yours a mercy such as you would certainly not have extended to english men and women under similar circumstances, and grieved as we should be to be obliged to proceed to extremities with prisoners, yet were the castle again attacked, and were we to see that there was a prospect of its being recaptured, we should not hesitate to slay you, as it would be treachery to the king to allow so formidable an enemy as yourself to regain his freedom. "your cause is hopeless. harold, tostig, and gurth are carrying fire and sword through your valleys, and your people will have to choose between submission and death. why should so hopeless a struggle continue? gurth will be here shortly, and then the fate that has befallen the districts already subdued will light upon yours. surely it will be better for yourself and your people that this should be averted. this can only be done by your sending orders to your followers to scatter to their homes and to lay down their arms. we will at once in that case send a messenger to the earl to tell him that the district has submitted. i must request that in order the message shall reach him you shall bid two officers of rank accompany our messenger to gurth's camp; we giving them our undertaking that they shall be allowed to leave it unmolested." "your offer tallies with my own intentions," llewellyn said. "had i been free i would have resisted to the last, but as a prisoner, and with my mother and children in your hands, i am powerless. my harper tells me that fully four hundred of my followers fell in the attack, and with my stronghold in your power, my tribesmen without a leader, and your armies desolating the land, i see that further resistance here would but add to the misfortunes of my people. i am ready, therefore, to send down my harper and doctor to bid four of my chiefs come up here, under your safe conduct. i shall lay the matter before them, and tell them that i being a prisoner can no longer give them orders, but shall point out to them that in my opinion further resistance can but bring terrible disasters upon the district. this, on their return, they will lay before their men, and if, as i trust, these will agree to scatter to their homes, they will furnish the escort you desire for your messenger." two hours later three of the chiefs summoned arrived, the fourth having fallen in the assault. they had a private interview with llewellyn and then left. a great meeting was held down in the valley, and in the afternoon the three chiefs and six others came up to the castle and formally made their submission before beorn and wulf, and besought them to send a messenger to the earl praying him to forgive past offences and to have mercy on the people. an hour later two of the saxons bearing a letter from beorn and wulf to gurth started under an escort provided by the chiefs. chapter xii. edith. two days after the departure of the messengers from the castle the look-out gave notice that he perceived a large body of horsemen and footmen coming down the valley, and half an hour later the banner of gurth could be made out. the garrison at once set to work to replace the planking of the bridge, and this was accomplished by the time that the saxon earl, accompanied by several thanes, and followed by a strong body of troops, reached the platform at the other end. as he did so beorn and wulf crossed the bridge to meet him. "you have done well indeed, thanes!" gurth exclaimed. "you have made a conquest to be proud of; for as we rode along this place seemed to us well-nigh impregnable. but your messengers have told me how you captured it, and how stoutly you have since defended it. it was a daring thought, indeed, to attempt the assault of such a place with a handful of men. you have rendered a splendid service to the king; for with the capture of this fortress, and of llewellyn himself and his children, there is no fear that there will be trouble in this part of wales for years to come. we, too, are specially indebted to you, for had we been forced to besiege this place it could only have been taken with a vast loss of life, and it might well have resisted all our efforts. that seventy men should have taken it, even if weakly defended, is wonderful indeed." "it is to wulf, my lord, that the credit is chiefly due," beorn said. "it was he who proposed and planned the attack; and though i have done my best to support him, i have but acted as his second in command. he is quicker-witted than i am, and far more fitted to lead." wulf was about to speak, when gurth stopped him with a gesture of the hand. "at any rate, beorn," he said, "you possess qualities that are by no means common. that you are a brave soldier i know well, but so i trust are all my thanes; still, it is not every one who has the wit to perceive that another has sharper wits than himself, still fewer who would have the generosity to stand aside and to give the major share in an exploit like this to another. what you may lose in credit by your avowal you will at least gain in the esteem of us all. now, commandant," he said to wulf with a smile, "show us the way into this capture of yours." before entering the castle itself gurth made a detour of the walls, and upon seeing them was still more surprised than before at the manner in which the capture had been effected. "you see, thanes," he said, "the matter hinged on the possession of these gates through the cross walls. that the rear walls should have been taken by surprise was a daring action, but it would have availed nothing had the garrison had time to close even the second of these gates; for though, as it seems, no more numerous than our men, they could have easily held it until reinforced from the village below, and would then have turned the tables on their assailants. the capture was due to the quickness and boldness with which wulf and beorn, with the few men who had obtained a footing on the wall when the alarm was given, rushed forward and held the inner gateway until the rest came up." gurth paused for a time on the wall above the point where the secret passage came out on the face of the rock, and having asked many questions as to how it was that they were so well prepared for llewellyn and his followers when they made the attack, he commended wulf very strongly for his conduct in this matter. "others might have taken the castle as you did, young thane," he said, "but assuredly most would have lost it again, for having set guards on the walls they would have given themselves up to feasting and sleep, without a thought that there might possibly exist a secret passage through this rock, which looks as if nothing short of a winged army could scale it. what say you, thanes?" the saxons cordially agreed with the earl. they were stout fighters, but better in the field than in council, and it was in no small degree to the danish blood in their veins that the sons of godwin owed the vigour and intellect that had raised the family to so lofty a position among their countrymen. on concluding his inspection of the walls gurth entered the castle, and after first examining the entrance to the secret passage, sat down with the thanes to a banquet, the preparation of which had been begun as soon as their coming was perceived. after that gurth paid a visit to llewellyn. "your fate is not in my hands, prince," he said to him, "but in that of my brother harold. as, however, you have used your influence to persuade your people to submit, i shall do my best to induce him to take a favourable view of your case." the next day the main body of gurth's force arrived, and encamped in the valley. llewellyn's chiefs all came in and made their submission, but the people for the most part took to the hills. as, day after day, news came of the terrible retaliation dealt out by the troops of harold and tostig they lost heart altogether, and sent in messengers craving to be allowed to come in and lay down their arms. gurth at once accepted their submission, and hundreds returned to their homes. in other parts of wales the feeling that resistance was vain rapidly extended. their most fertile valleys had all been turned into deserts, and even on their own hills and among their own forests, where they had hitherto deemed themselves safe from attack, they were pursued and hunted down by the now lightly-armed saxons. from all parts, therefore, offers to submit were sent in, and as a proof of their submission and regret for past behaviour, they seized griffith their king, killed him, and sent his head to harold, who thereupon granted them terms, and ordered his forces to withdraw beyond the border. the campaign had lasted less than three months, but so terrible had been the blow dealt to the welsh that a hundred years passed before they again ventured to renew their incursions into england. llewellyn was pardoned, but great breaches were made in the walls of the fortress facing the hill, and these he was forbidden ever to repair. his children were taken to england, to be brought up there, and to serve as hostages for his future good behaviour. harold, when he learnt the particulars of the capture and defence of porthwyn, expressed his approval in the warmest terms. "you have performed the greatest and most important feat of the war, wulf," he said. "yes, it is right that you should give every credit beorn for his share in the matter; but i know you both well, and am assured that beorn would never have conceived and carried out the attack, and that had he done so successfully, he and his men would all have been slain by llewellyn that night. beorn is a good youth; he is brave and kind-hearted; he is no fool, and will make and excellent thane; will become a favourite at court, and be always loyal and staunch. but i shall look to see you more than this. you have a head quick to plan, readiness and decision in danger, and, as you have shown, a genius for war. study the writings of the romans, the greatest masters of war the world has ever seen, make yourself acquainted with the methods of caesar and other great commanders, and do not neglect to ponder on their laws and customs. "when matters are settled here, travel to the various courts of europe and acquaint yourself with the ways of peoples who are far more advanced than we in civilization, and you may come to stand some day among the most trusted councillors of the king, and as one of the best leaders of his troops. i see that the success you have attained while as yet so young has not puffed you up in any way. always remember, wulf, that though success may be envied, those who are successful may yet be liked if only they themselves do not seem conscious of success. i should say you had best not make a long stay at court, but betake you, shortly, to your estate. it is a good school, and one who can rule his own people wisely has a sound preparation for posts of larger responsibility. you will always find in the prior of bramber a wise adviser, who will direct your studies, and will aid you where your latinity falls short. "it will be time enough in another five years for you to go abroad; but, of course, i do not wish you to remain all that time away from court. it is never good to be forgotten; therefore, come up two or three times a year. i trust that there will be no fresh wars or troubles to hinder your studies or interfere with your life; but remember that there is always danger from normandy, therefore always keep on foot your force of housecarls; and if, as i think, your estates can afford it, add to their number, so that if trouble does come you will be able to again play a prominent part in it." wulf's contingent marched with the rest of the troops from the east as far as reading, and there struck off by the nearest road to steyning. he and beorn accompanied harold to london, and after staying there for a short time, and taking part in the fetes with which the conquest of the welsh was celebrated, wulf returned to steyning and took up the life he had previously led there. before starting he asked harold's advice as to whether he should fortify steyning after the manner of the norman castles. "by no means, wulf. such castles are useful only against quarrelsome neighbours. wars are decided by great battles, and if these are lost a castle does but bring ruin upon its possessor, for it must sooner or later be taken. the man who, when a cause is lost, returns quietly to his home and goes about his usual work may escape unnoticed, while one who shuts himself up in a castle is certain to suffer at last from the vengeance of the conquerors. resistance maintained in forests and swamps, as was done by the bretons and welsh, may weary out a foe, but a conqueror can wish for nothing better than that the defeated may assemble themselves in towns and castles, where he can slowly, perhaps, but surely destroy them piecemeal." the time passed quickly and pleasantly at steyning. wulf studied hard for three or four hours a day, looked after his tenants, hunted and hawked, doubled the number of his company of housecarls, and often rode over to the priory of an evening. he now took his place naturally among the thanes in that part of the country, the reputation he had gained in the two wars giving him a standing among them, to which, from his youth, he would not otherwise have been entitled. in accordance with harold's advice he went three times during the year up to court, where he generally met beorn, who spent the greater part of his time there. "how you can like all this formality and ceremony is more than i can imagine, beorn." "i don't care either for the formality or the ceremony, but i like the amusement and the gaiety, and should ask with much more reason how can you like to spend your time studying parchments and reading the doings of those old romans, when you might be enjoying yourself here. the matter is altogether beyond me." "i like it for itself, and i like it because it may some day be of great service to me." "you see you are ambitious, wulf, and i am not. i don't want to be a great commander or a state-councillor, and if i did want it ever so much i know i should never be one or the other. i am content to be a thane, as my father was before me, and seek no greater change than that of a stay for a month at court. that brightens one up more than anything; and one cannot be all one's life hunting in the woods and seeing after the tenants. by the way, i had a quarrel the other day with your old norman enemy, fitz-urse. your name was mentioned, and he chose to sneer offensively. i told him that you had done more already than he would ever do if he lived to be an old man. we came to high words, and next day met in the forest and there settled it. he ran me through the arm, and i slashed his cheek. as quarrelling is strictly forbidden he made some excuse and went over to france, while i went down home till my arm was well again. i fancy we hurt each other about equally, but the scar on my arm won't show, while i fancy, from what the leech who dressed his wound told me, the scar is likely to spoil his beauty for life." "i am sorry you quarrelled with him about me, beorn. it would have been better to have said nothing, though i thank you for your championship." "nonsense, wulf. i know very well you would not hear anyone speak ill of me without taking up the cudgels for me." wulf could not deny this. "certainly not, beorn; still it is a pity to make an enemy, and fitz-urse has shown in my case that he is not one who forgives." the welsh campaign had terminated at the end of august, and it was a month later that wulf had returned to steyning. just a year afterwards he received a message from harold to come up to london, and to order his housecarls to hold themselves in readiness to start immediately on receiving an order from him. somewhat surprised, for no news had reached him of any trouble that could call for the employment of an armed force, wulf rode for london alone, bidding osgod follow with the housecarls as soon as he heard from him. when he reached the palace he heard news that explained the cause of his summons. northumbria had risen in rebellion against earl tostig. he was accused of tyranny and oppression, and had been continually away from his earldom, leaving it to be governed in his absence by a thane. the country north of the humber had for a long period of years been independent, appointing their own rulers, who owed no allegiance whatever to the kings of the west saxons. although now incorporated in the kingdom of england the northumbrians regretted their lost independence, and this all the more, that the population were for the most part danish, and viewed with an intense feeling of jealousy the preponderance gained by the west saxons. tostig at the time the revolt declared itself was hunting with the king--who had a great affection for him--in the forests of wiltshire, and had not arrived in town when wulf reached the capital. it was not until the afternoon that wulf had an interview with harold. the earl had just come from a council and was alone. "thank you for coming up so speedily," he said as he shook the young thane by the hand. "you have heard the news, i suppose?" "i have heard that northumberland has risen in rebellion." "yes, that was the news that arrived four days since." "is it serious?" "yes, very serious; the rebellion grows each day. it is headed by several of the greatest landowners in the north, both danish and saxon, and the worst part of the news is that the trouble has, as i hear, been stirred up by edwin of mercia and his brother. it is the old rivalry between the house of leofric and ours. they are jealous of our influence with the king, and would gladly rend england into two kingdoms again. we hear to-day that the northumbrian nobles have summoned a gemot to meet, which amounts in fact to a rebellion, not only against tostig but against the king." "if mercia joins northumbria it would be a more serious business than that in wales." "i think not that it will be so," harold said. "edwin has been always conspiring. he stirred up the welsh, he has encouraged the norwegians, he has intrigued in northumbria. he and his brother have ever been a source of trouble, and yet he has never openly rebelled; he sets others to do the fighting for him, prepared if they are successful to reap the fruits of their victory. there is, of course, still hope that moderate councils may prevail, but i fear that the northumbrians will consider that they have gone too far to turn back. at present, at any rate, no steps will be taken. as long as no armed forces are set in motion there are hopes that matters may be arranged, but the approach of an army would set all northumbria on fire. the gemot is summoned to meet this day week--that is on the third of october--and we shall wait to hear what steps they take. messengers have already been sent to a large number of thanes to be prepared for service. i would that all kept a force of housecarls as you do. i am going down to-night to my house near hampton. do you come down with me, wulf. edith will be glad to see you." wulf had in the days of his pageship several times accompanied harold to hampton, and knew well the lady, who was known to the saxons as edith of the swan-neck. she was by birth far inferior in position to harold. the relation between them was similar to that known throughout the middle ages as left-hand marriages. these were marriages contracted between men of high rank and ladies of inferior position, and while they lasted were regarded as being lawful; but they could be, and frequently were, broken off, when for politic or other reasons the prince or noble had to seek another alliance. the lady was of great beauty and talent, and exercised a large influence over harold. this was always employed for good, and she was much beloved by the saxons. the alliance had been formed while harold was quite a young man, and he and edith were fondly attached to each other. his rise, however, to the position of the foremost man in england, and the prospect of his accession to the throne, rendered it probable that ere long he would be obliged to marry one who would strengthen his position, and would from her high birth be fitted to share the crown with him. william of normandy was perfectly well aware of the relation in which edith stood to harold, and had not regarded her as any obstacle to the earl's marriage with his daughter; and even harold himself had not attempted to give it as a reason for declining the offer of the hand of the norman princess. as they rode down to hampton the earl said, "i dare say you are somewhat surprised at my leaving the court at this crisis, wulf, but in truth i want to keep my hands free. tostig, you know, is rash and impetuous. i love him well, but am not blind to his faults; and i fear that the people of northumbria have some just cause for complaint against him. he is constantly away from his earldom. he was absent for months when he went to rome, and he spends a great part of his time either at the court here or with the king at his hunting-lodges. the northumbrians are a proud people, and it is small wonder that they object to be governed by an absent earl. tostig is furious at what he terms the insolence of the northumbrians, and i would fain avoid all questions of dispute with him. it is not improbable that the king and his councillors may be called upon to hear the complaints of the northumbrians, and to decide between them and tostig. this will be bitter enough for my brother. he may return at any moment, and i greatly wish to avoid all argument with him before the matter is discussed in council." the house at hampton was a large one, and here edith lived in considerable state. grooms ran up and took the horses as harold and wulf dismounted. six retainers in jerkins embroidered with the earl's cognizance appeared at the doors. as they entered the house, edith came out from an inner room and fondly embraced harold. "who is this you have with you, harold?" "what, have you forgotten wulf of steyning, who has, as i told you, turned out a great fighter, and was the captor of the castle of porthwyn, and of its owner, llewellyn ap rhys?" "i did not know you again, wulf," edith said holding out her hand to him, "but now that i hear who you are i recognize you. why, it is four years since i saw you, and you were then a mischievous little page. harold has often spoken to me about you, and your adventures in normandy and wales. i did not expect to see you, harold," she went on turning to the earl, "after what you told me in the letter you sent me yesterday, about the troubles in the north. i feared that you would be kept at court." "tostig and the king are still away," he said, "and he will return so furious at this revolt against his authority, that, thinking as i do that he is in no small degree at fault--for i have frequently remonstrated with him at spending so large a portion of his time away from his earldom,--i thought it best to get away." "it is strange how tostig differs from the rest of you," edith said. "you and leofwyn, and gurth are all gentle and courteous, while tostig is fierce and impetuous." "tostig has his faults," harold said; "but we love each other dearly, and from the time we were boys together we have never had a dispute. it will be hard indeed upon me if i am called upon to side against him. we have learnt, edith, that edwin and morcar have been intriguing with the northumbrians. these mercian earls are ever bringing troubles upon the country, and i fear they will give even greater trouble in the future. if they stir up disturbances, as they have done, against the king, who is king by the will of the people, and also by right of birth, what will it be when--" and he stopped. "when you shall mount the throne, my harold," edith said proudly. "oh, that this feud between leofric's house and godwin's were at an end. it bodes ill for england." "it is natural," harold said gently. "it is as gall and wormwood to the earls of mercia to see the ascendancy of the west saxons, and still more would it be so were i, godwin's son, without a drop of royal blood in my veins, to come to be their king." "the feud must be closed," edith said firmly, though wulf noticed that her face paled. "i have told you so before, harold, and there is but one way." "it shall never be closed in that way, edith; rather would i lie in my grave." "you have not to think of yourself, harold, still less of me. it is of england you have to think--this england that will assuredly choose you as its king, and who will have a right to expect that you will make any or every sacrifice for its sake." "any but that," harold said. she smiled faintly and shook her head. wulf did not understand the conversation, but there was a look of earnest resolve in her face that deeply impressed him. he had moved a short distance away, and now turned and looked out of the window, while they exchanged a few more words, having been, as he saw, altogether oblivious of his presence in the earnestness with which they both spoke. for a week harold remained at hampton. wulf saw that he was much troubled in his mind, and concluded that the messengers who came and went every day were the bearers of bad tidings. it was seldom that he was away from the side of edith. when they were together she was always bright, but once or twice when wulf found her alone her features bore an expression of deep sadness. "we must ride for london, wulf," harold said one morning after reading a letter brought by a royal messenger. "the king has laid his orders on me to proceed at once to town, and indeed the news is well-nigh as bad as can be. the gemot has voted the deposition of tostig, has even had the insolence to declare him an outlaw, and has elected morcar in his place. it has also issued decrees declaring all partisans of tostig outlaws, and confiscating their estates. two of tostig's danish housecarls were slain on the first day of their meeting. two hundred of tostig's personal followers have since been massacred; his treasury has been broken open, and all its contents carried off. the election of morcar shows but too plainly the designs of the earls of mercia. they wish to divide england into two portions, and to reign supreme north of the wellan. this will give them full half of england, and would assuredly, even did we not oppose them now, lead to a terrible war. the more terrible as william of normandy will be watching from across the channel, ready to take instant advantage of our dissensions. god avert a war like this. every sacrifice must be made rather than that the men of the north and south of england should fly at each other's throats." the earl scarcely spoke a word during the ride to london, but rode absorbed in his thoughts with a sad and anxious countenance. day after day the news became more serious. morcar accepted the earldom of northumbria, hurried to york, and placing himself at the head of the northumbrian forces, marched south, being joined on the way by the men of lincoln, nottingham, and derby, in all of which shires the danish element was very strong. at northampton, which had formed part of the government of tostig, morcar was joined by his brother edwin at the head of the forces of mercia, together with a large body of welsh. they found the people of northampton less favourable to their cause than they had expected, and in revenge harried the whole country, killing and burning, and carrying off the cattle as booty and the men as slaves. harold bore the brunt of the trouble alone, for, regardless of the fact that half the kingdom was in a flame, king edward and tostig continued their hunting expeditions in wiltshire, in spite of the urgent messages sent by harold entreating them to return. in the meantime, still hoping that peace might in some way be preserved, harold sent messages to all the thanes of importance in wessex, ordering them to prepare to march to london with the whole of their retainers and levies, as soon as they received orders to get in motion. but while he still tarried in wiltshire the king acceded to harold's request that he might be empowered to go to northampton to treat in edward's name with the rebels. as soon as he received this permission harold hastened to northampton, accompanied by only half a dozen of his thanes, among whom was wulf. he was received with respect by the rebels, but when their leaders assembled, and in the king's name he called upon them to lay down their arms, to cease from ravaging, and to lay any complaints they might have to make against tostig before the king or the national gemot, he met with a flat refusal. they would not listen to any proposition that involved the possibility of the return of tostig, and boldly said that if the king wished to retain northumbria as part of his realm he must confirm the sentence of their gemot upon tostig, and must recognize their election of morcar to the earldom. in all this harold perceived clearly enough that, although it was the northumbrian leaders who were speaking, they were acting entirely under the influence of edwin and morcar. all that he could obtain was that some of the northern thanes should accompany him to lay their demands before the king himself. edward, upon hearing, by a swift messenger sent by harold, of the failure of his attempt to induce the northumbrians to lay down their arms, reluctantly abandoned the pleasures of the chase, and proceeded to bretford, near salisbury, where there was a royal house, and summoned a witenagemot. as, however, the occasion was urgent, it was attended only by the king's chief councillors, and by the thanes of that part of wessex. between tostig and harold the quarrel that the latter had feared had already broken out. harold was anxious above all things for peace, and although the blow to his own interests and to those of his family, by the transfer of northumbria from his brother to one of the mercian earls, was a most serious one, he preferred that even this should take place to embarking in a war that would involve the whole of england. tostig was so furious at finding that harold was not willing to push matters to the last extremity in his favour, that he accused him of being the secret instigator of the northumbrian revolt. the absurdity of such an accusation was evident. it was as much to harold's interest as to that of tostig that the great northern earldom should remain in the hands of his family; but an angry man does not reason, and tostig's fury was roused to the highest point by the outspoken utterances of many of the members of the witenagemot. these boldly accused him of cruelty and avarice, and declared that many of his acts of severity were caused by his determination, under a show of justice, to possess himself of the wealth of those he condemned. tostig then rose and declared before the assembly that the whole rising was the work of harold. the latter simply denied the charge on oath, and his word was accepted as sufficient. the witan then turned to the question as to how the revolt was to be dealt with. the king was vehemently in favour of putting it down by force of arms. tostig was of all the saxons his favourite friend, and he considered the insult offered to him as dealt against himself. so determined was he, that he sent out orders for the whole of the forces of wessex to march and join the royal standard. in vain harold and edward's wisest councillors endeavoured to dissuade him from a step that would deluge the country in blood, and might lead to terrible disaster. in vain they pointed out that while all the thanes would willingly put their forces at his disposal to resist a foreign foe, or even to repel an invasion from the north, they would not risk life and fortune in an endeavour to force a governor upon a people who hated him, and, as most thought, with good reason. the king was immovable; but harold and his councillors took steps quietly to inform the thanes that the witan was opposed to the order, and that for the present no harm would be done by disregarding the royal mandate. the king, in his anger and mortification at finding himself unable to march against the rebels with an overwhelming force, fell ill, and the control of affairs passed into harold's hands; and the king, whose fits of passion, though extreme while they lasted, were but short-lived gave him full power to deal with the matter as he thought best. harold had done all that he could for tostig when he went to northampton, but had failed. there was no alternative now between a great war, followed probably by a complete split of the kingdom, or acquiescence in the demands of the men of the north. he did not hesitate, but in the name of the king confirmed the decisions arrived at by the gemot of york--recognized morcar as earl of northumbria, and granted a complete amnesty for all offences committed during the rising, on condition only that a general witenagemot should be held at oxford. at this meeting northern and southern england were again solemnly reconciled, as they had been forty-seven years before at an assembly held at the same place. chapter xiii. harold, the king. the day before the great witenagemot was to assemble, wulf, as he came out from the house where harold had taken up his abode, was approached by a man, who by his attire appeared to be a retainer of a thane; his face seemed familiar to him, as he placed a letter in his hand. wulf was now very much in the confidence of harold. it was a relief to the earl in the midst of his trials and heavy responsibilities to open his mind freely to one of whose faith and loyalty he was well assured, and he therefore was far more communicative to the young thane than to the older councillors by whom he was surrounded. wulf opened the letter. it contained only the words: "i am here; the bearer of this will lead you to me. edith." looking more closely at the man he recognized him at once as one of the servitors at hampton, though his dress bore no signs of any cognizance. greatly surprised to hear of edith's presence in oxford unknown to harold, he at once followed the servant, who conducted him to a house on the outskirts of the town. wulf was ushered into a room, and the servant then left him. a moment later edith entered. "my message must have surprised you, wulf," she said, as he knelt on one knee to kiss the hand she held out to him. "it did indeed, lady, for it was but yesterday that the earl received a letter from you written at hampton. he said to me as he opened it, 'would i were in peace at hampton, free from all these troubles and intrigues.'" "i have come down in a horse-litter," she said, "and save the two retainers who accompanied me none knew of my intentions. i know, wulf, that you have the confidence of the earl and that you love him and would do your best for him." "i would lay down my life for him, lady. even did i not love and honour him as i do, i would die for him, for he is the hope of england, and he alone can guide the country through its troubles, both from within and without. the life of a single man is as nought in the scale." "nor the happiness of a single woman," she added. "now, wulf, i want to know from you exactly how matters stand here. my lord, when he writes to me always does so cheerfully, ever making the best of things; but it is most important that i should know his real mind. it is for that that i have travelled here. this witenagemot that assembles to-morrow--what will come of it?" "the earl thinks it will doubtless pass the resolution reconciling the north and south, and declaring that there shall be oblivion for the past, and that all things shall go back to their former footing save as to the change of earls." "it is easy to vote that," she said quietly; "but will it be held to? it depends not upon northumbrians nor saxons, but upon edwin and morcar. they have made a great step forward towards their end; they have united under their government the northern half of england, and have wrested northumbria from godwin's family. after making this great step, will they rest and abstain from taking the next? northumbria and mercia united are as strong as wessex and east anglia. will they be content to remain under a west saxon king? above all, will they submit to the rule of one of godwin's sons? i feel sure that they will not. what thinks the earl?" "he thinks as you do, lady, although he considers that for the time the danger is averted. he himself said to me yesterday, 'if these mercian earls are ready to defy the head of the royal line of england, think you that they will ever recognize the sway of a member of my father's house?'" "and what said you, wulf?" "i said that i did not doubt the ill-will of the mercian earls, but that i doubted whether mercia would follow them if they strove to break up the kingdom. 'mercia is following them now,' he said; 'and has with northumbria stood in arms for some weeks past. there has ever been jealousy of the supremacy of the west saxons since the days when the kingdom was united in one. these brothers will intrigue as their father did before them. they will bring down the welsh from their hills to aid them, for though these people will not for generations try their strength alone against us, they would gladly take advantage of it should such an opportunity for revenge occur. even now, when the blood is scarce dry on their hearthstones, there is a large force of them under edwin's banner.'" "it is a grievous look-out for england," edith said. "it would seem that nothing can bring about peace and unity save the end of this terrible feud between the families of godwin and leofric." "that would indeed be a blessing for the country," wulf agreed; "but of all things that seems to me most hopeless." "they must be reconciled!" edith said, rising from her seat. "what is a woman's love or a woman's life that they should stand in the way of the peace of england? see you not, wulf, there is but one way in which the feud can be healed? were it not for me harold could marry the sister of these earls, and if she were queen of england the feud would be at an end. a daughter of the house of leofric, and a son of the house of godwin, would command the support of mercia and wessex alike, and as brothers of the queen, edwin and morcar might well be content to be friends with her husband and his brothers. i only stand in the way of this. i have already urged this upon harold, but he will not hear of it. until now the mercian brothers might be a trouble, but they were not strong enough to be a danger to the kingdom. now that they hold half of it in their hands this marriage has become a necessity. i must stand aside. what is my happiness and my life that i should be an obstacle alike to my lord's glory and the peace of england? go to harold; tell him that i am here, and pray that he will come to me. give your message to him briefly; say naught of what i have said to you, though his heart will tell him at once what has brought me here." silent, and confounded by the immensity of the sacrifice she proposed, for he knew how deep and tender was her love for harold, wulf knelt on both knees and reverently placed her hand to his lips, and then without a word left the house, half blinded with tears, signing to the servant, who was waiting without, to follow him. when he reached harold's house he found that the earl was with his brother gurth and several of his councillors. he did not hesitate, however, but entering the room, said, "my lord harold, i pray to have speech of you for a minute upon an affair of urgent importance." somewhat surprised the earl followed him out. "what is it, wulf?" he asked as they entered harold's private closet. "you look pale and strange, lad." "i have a message to give you, my lord. the lady edith is here, and prays that you will go to her at once." the earl started as if struck with a blow. "edith here!" he exclaimed, and then with a troubled face he took several short turns up and down the room. "where is she?" he said at last in a low voice. "her servant is without, my lord, and will conduct you to her." "tell gurth and the others i am called away for an hour on urgent business," he said. "say nothing of edith being here." then he went out. the man who was waiting doffed his hat, and at once led the way to the house where edith was staying. she moved swiftly towards him as he entered the room and fell on his neck. not a word was spoken for a minute or two, then he said: "why have you come, edith? but i need not ask, i know. i will not have it, i will not have it! i have told you so before. why is our happiness to be sacrificed? i have given my work and my life to england, but i will not give my happiness too, nor will i sacrifice yours." "you would not be worthy of the trust england reposes in you, harold," she said quietly, "were you not ready to give all. as to my happiness, it is at an end, for i should deem myself as a guilty wretch, as the cause of countless woes to englishmen, did i remain as i am. i have been happy, dear, most happy, many long years. to my last day it will be a joy and a pride, that nothing can take away, that i have been loved by the greatest of englishmen, and my sacrifice will seem light to me under the feeling that it has purchased the happiness of england." "but is my happiness to go for nothing?" harold exclaimed passionately. "you too, harold, will have the knowledge that you have sacrificed yourself, that as you have often risked your life, so have you for england's sake given up your love. i have seen that it must be so for years. as earl of wessex i might always have stood by your side, but as soon as i saw that the people of england looked to you as their future monarch, i knew that i could not share your throne. a king's heart is not his own, as is that of a private man. as he must lead his people in battle, and if needs be give his life for them, so must he give his hand where it will most advantage them." "i cannot do it," harold said. "i will not sacrifice you even for england. i will remain earl of wessex, and edwin may reign as king if he so chooses." "that cannot be, harold. if the people of england call you to the throne, it is your duty to accept the summons. you know that none other could guide them as you can, for already for years you have been their ruler. they love you, they trust in you, and it were a shame indeed if the love we bear each other should stand in the way of what is above all things needful for the good of england. you know well enough that when the national council meets to choose a king the south will declare for you. but if edwin and morcar influence mercia and the north to declare for another, what remains but a breaking up of the kingdom, with perhaps a great war?" "i cannot do it, and i will not," harold said, stopping in his walk and standing before her. "my life, my work, all save you i will give up for england--but you i will not." edith turned even paler than before. "you will not give me up, harold, but you cannot hold me. i can bear my life in seclusion and retirement, and can even be happy in the thought of our past love, of your greatness, and in the peace of england, which, i should have the consolation of knowing, was due to the sacrifice that we had both made, but i could not live happy, even with your love and your companionship, knowing that i have brought woes upon england. nor will i live so. death will break the knot if you will not do so, and i could die with a smile on my lips, knowing that i was dying for your good and england's. if you will not break the bond death shall do so, and ere to-morrow's sun rises, either by your sacrifice or by my own hand, you will be free. marry for the good of england. here is the ring by which you pledged your troth to me," and she took it from her finger and dropped it in the fire that blazed on the hearth. "there is the end of it, but not the end of our love. i shall think of you, and pray for you always, harold. oh, my dear lord and master, do not make it too hard for me!" and she threw herself on his neck in a passion of tears. for two or three minutes they stood locked in each other's close embrace, then she withdrew herself from his arms. "farewell," she said. "you have left my side many a time for battle, and we parted bravely though we knew we might never meet again. let us part so now. we have each our battles to fight, but god will comfort us both, for our sacrifice will have brought peace to england. farewell, my dear lord, farewell!" she touched his hand lightly and then tottered from the room, falling senseless as soon as she had closed the door behind her. harold sank into a chair and covered his face with his hands, while his breast heaved with short sobs. so he sat for some time; then he stood up. "she is stronger and braver than i," he murmured; "but she is right. only by this sacrifice can england be saved, but even so i could not have made it; but i know her so well that i feel she would carry out her threat without hesitation." then he went out of the house, but instead of returning to the town took his way to the lonely path by the river, and there for hours paced up and down. at last his mind was made up, the sacrifice must be accepted. as she had said, their happiness must not stand in the way of that of all england. he walked with a firm step back to oxford, and went straight to the house where edwin and morcar had taken up their quarters. "tell earl edwin that harold would speak with him," he said to the retainer at the door. the man returned in a minute, and led the way to the room where edwin and his brother were standing awaiting him. they had had several interviews since they arrived at oxford, and supposed that he had come to arrange some detail as to the assembly on the following day. "edwin," harold said abruptly, "methinks that for the good of our country it would be well that our houses should be united. why should the sons of leofric and godwin regard each other as rivals? we are earls of the english people, and we cannot deny that the unfriendly feeling between us has brought trouble on the country. why should there not be an end of this?" greatly surprised at this frank address, edwin and morcar both hastened to say that for their part they had no quarrel whatever with any of the house of godwin, save with tostig. "tostig will soon be beyond the sea, and will no longer be a source of trouble. there is, it seems to me, but one way by which we can unite and bind our interests into one. i have come to you to ask for the hand of your sister ealdgyth in marriage." the two earls looked at each other in surprise. the proposition was altogether unexpected, but they at once saw its advantages. they knew as well as others that the choice of the nation at edward's death was likely to fall upon harold, and it would add both to their dignity and security that they should be brothers-in-law of the king. such an alliance would do away with the danger, that once seated on the throne harold might become reconciled with tostig, and endeavour to replace him in the earldom of northumbria. this danger would be dissipated by the marriage. "you would perhaps like to consult together before giving an answer," harold said courteously. "by no means," edwin said warmly. "such an alliance is, as you say, in all respects to be desired. ealdgyth could wish for no nobler husband. we should rejoice in obtaining such a spouse for her, and the union would assuredly unite our families, do away with the unfriendly feeling of which you spoke, and be of vast advantage to the realm in general. we need no word of consultation, but accept your offer, and will with pleasure give ealdgyth in marriage to you. but is there not an obstacle?" "the obstacle is at an end," harold said gravely. "of her own free will and wish, and in order that there should be peace and union in england, the lady edith has broken the tie that bound us." the brothers, seeing that the subject was a painful one, wisely said no more, but turned the conversation to the meeting on the following day, and assured harold that they hoped the decision would now be unanimous, and then after a short time skilfully brought it round again to the subject of the marriage. by nightfall the news was known throughout the city, and was received with universal joy. the union seemed to all men a guarantee for peace in england. the two great rival houses would now be bound by common interests, and the feud that had several times been near breaking out into civil war was extinguished. the moment he returned to his house harold called wulf. "wulf, go at once to the lady edith. tell her that though it has taken all the brightness out of my life, and has made all my future dark, i have done her bidding, and have sacrificed myself for england. tell her that i will write to her to-night, and send the letter to hampton, where, i trust, it will find her." wulf at once carried the message. he found edith sitting with eyes swollen with weeping, and yet with a calm and composed expression on her face. "i knew that my lord would do as i prayed him," she said; "he has ever thought first of england and then of himself. tell him that i start in an hour for hampton, and shall there stay till i get his letter; there i will answer it. tell him i thank him from my heart, and that, much as i loved and honoured him before, i shall to the end of my life love and honour him yet more for having thus sacrificed himself for england. tell him that you found me calm and confident that he would grant my prayer, and that with all my heart i wish him happiness." her lips quivered and her voice broke, and wulf hurried away without saying another word, for he felt that he himself was at the point of bursting into tears. harold was anxiously awaiting his return, and after listening to the message turned abruptly and entered his private closet, with a wave of the hand signifying that wulf would not be further required. the next day the witenagemot met. it was solemnly decreed that all old scores should be wiped out; that northern and southern england were again to be reconciled, as they had been forty-seven years before in an assembly held by canute in oxford. it was decreed unanimously that the laws of canute should be renewed, and should have force in all parts of the kingdom. until this decision was arrived at by the assembly tostig had remained with the king, but he now went into exile, and crossed the sea to flanders, where he had at an earlier period of his life, when godwin's whole family were in disgrace, taken refuge. he was accompanied by his wife and many personal adherents. he left filled with rage and bitterness, especially against harold, who ought, he considered, to have supported him to the utmost, and who should have been ready to put the whole forces of wessex in the field to replace him in the earldom. by the time that harold returned to london edith had left his abode at hampton. he would have gladly handed it over to her and maintained it as before, but she would not hear of this, though she had accepted from him an income which would enable her to live comfortably in seclusion. "i only do this," she said in her letter to him, "because i know that it would grieve you if i refused; but i entreat you, harold, make no inquiries whither i have gone. i do not say that we can never meet again, but years must pass over before we do so. you must not think of me as always grieving. i have done what i am sure is right, and this will give me comfort, and enable me to bear your absence; but you know that, even if i never see you again, you will dwell in my heart as long as i live, its sole lord and master. i have so many happy memories to look back upon that i should be sorely to blame did i repine, and although i may not share the throne that will ere long be yours, nor the love which englishmen will give their king, i shall be none the less proud of you, and shall be sure that there will be always in your heart a kind thought of me. forbear, i pray you earnestly, to cause any search to be made for me. doubtless you might discover me if you chose, but it would only renew my pain. in time we may be able to meet calmly and affectionately, as two old friends, but till then it were best that we stood altogether apart." harold put down the letter with a sigh. but he had little time to lament over private troubles. the king was ill; he had not rallied from the state of prostration that succeeded his outburst of passion when he found himself powerless to put down the northern insurrection by force, and to restore his favourite tostig to his earldom. day succeeded day, but he did not rally. in vain the monks most famous for their skill in medicine came from canterbury and glastonbury; in vain prayers were offered up in all the cathedrals, and especially in his own abbey of westminster, and soon the report spread among the people that edward, the king, was sick unto death, and all felt that it was a misfortune for england. edward was in no sense of the word a great king. he was a monk rather than a monarch. the greatest object of his life had been to rear an abbey that in point of magnificence should rival the stateliest fane in england. to that his chief care was devoted, and for many years he was well content to leave the care of government to harold. but after the monarchs who had immediately preceded him, his merits, if of a passive kind, were warmly appreciated by his subjects. his rule had been free from oppression, and he had always desired that justice should be done to all. in the earlier part of his reign he was norman in tongue, in heart, and in education; but in the latter years of his life he had become far more english in his leanings, and there can be no doubt that he bitterly regretted the promise he had rashly given to william of normandy that he should succeed him. it was not only because the people respected and even loved the king that they were grieved to hear that his days were numbered, but because they saw that his death would bring trouble on the land. with him the line of the oethelings would become extinct, save for the boy edgar and his sisters. the boy had been born beyond the sea, and was as much a foreigner as edward himself had been, and edward's partiality for the normans in the early years of his reign had so angered the english that edgar's claims would on this account alone have been dismissed. moreover, boys' hands were unfit to hold the sceptre of england in such troubled times. it was to harold that all eyes turned. he had for years exercised at least joint authority with edward; he was the foremost and most noble of englishmen. he was skilled in war, and wise in counsel, and the charm of his manner, the strength and stateliness of his figure, and the singular beauty of his face rendered him the popular idol. and yet men felt that it was a new departure in english life and customs for one who had in his veins no drop of royal blood to be chosen as king. his sister was edward's wife, he was edward's friend and counsellor, but although the men of the south felt that he was in all ways fitted to be king, they saw too that northumbria would assuredly stand aloof, and that the mercian earls, brothers-in-law as they were to be to harold, would yet feel jealous that one of their own rank was to be their sovereign. the witan, as the representative of the nation, had alone the right of choosing the sovereign; but though they had often passed over those who by birth stood nearest to the throne, they had never yet chosen one altogether outside the royal family. it was a necessary step--for young edgar was not to be thought of--and yet men felt uneasy, now that the time had come, at so complete a departure from custom. rapidly the king grew worse, and prayers were uttered up for him in every church in england. the christmas witan met at westminster, but little was done. the great minster was consecrated on december 18th, and the absence of its founder and builder was keenly missed at the ceremony. the members of the witan remained in attendance near the palace, hoping for some guidance from the dying king. he had no power to leave the throne to whom he wished, and yet his words could not but have great weight; but he lay almost unconscious, and for two days remained speechless. but on the 5th of january, the year being 1066, he suddenly awoke from sleep, in the full possession of his senses. harold was standing on one side of his bed, archbishop stigand at the other. his wife sat at the foot of the bed, chaffing her husband's feet; robert wymarc, his personal attendant, stood by his head. the king on awakening prayed aloud, that if a vision he had had was truly from heaven he might have strength to declare it; if it were but the offspring of a disordered brain he prayed that he might not be able to tell it. then he sat up in bed, supported by robert; some of his chosen friends were called in, and to them, with a strangely clear voice and with much energy, he told the vision. it was that some monks he had known in his youth had appeared to him, and told him that god had sent them to tell him that on account of the sins of the earls, the bishops, and the men in holy orders of every rank, god had put a curse upon england, and that within a year and a day of his death fiends should stalk through the whole land, and should harry it from one end to another with fire and sword. the king's words filled his hearers with awe, stigand alone deeming the story but the dream of a dying man. then edward gave orders as to his burial. he bade his friends not to grieve for him, but to rejoice in his approaching deliverance, and he asked for the prayers of all his people for his soul. at last those standing round called his mind to the great subject which was for the moment first in the heart of every englishman. who, when he was gone, they asked, would he wish to wear the royal crown of england? the king stretched out his hand to harold and said, "to thee, harold, my brother, i commit my kingdom." then, after commending his wife and his norman favourites to harold's care and protection, he turned his thoughts from all earthly matters, received the last rites of the church, and soon afterwards passed away tranquilly. rapidly the news spread through london that the king was dead. the members of the witan were still there, for the assembly had not separated, but knowing that the king was dying had waited for the event. the earls and great thanes of the south and west, of east anglia and wessex, were all there together, probably with many from mercia. there was no time lost. in the afternoon they assembled. all knew on whom the choice would fall, for harold had been for long regarded as the only possible successor to the throne, and the news that the dying king had, as far as he could, chosen him as his successor, doubtless went for much in the minds of many who had hitherto felt that it was a strange and unknown thing to accept as monarch of england one who was not a member of the royal house. there was no hesitation, no debate. by acclamation harold was chosen king of the land, and two great nobles were selected to inform him that the choice of the witan had fallen upon him. they bore with them the two symbols of royalty, the crown and the axe, and bade him accept them as being chosen both by the voice of the witan and by the king, whom he had so well and faithfully served. there was no hesitation on the part of harold. he had already counted the cost and taken his resolution. he knew that he alone could hope to receive the general support of the great earls. leofric and gurth were his brothers, the earls of mercia and northumbria had been mollified by the alliance arranged with their sister. the last male of the royal line was a lad of feeble character, and would be unable either to preserve peace at home or to unite the nation against a foreign invader. the oath he had sworn to william, although obtained partly by force partly by fraud, weighed upon him, but he was powerless to keep it. did he decline the crown it would fall upon some other englishman, and not upon the norman. the vote of england had chosen him, and it was clearly his duty to accept. the die had been cast when edith had bade him sacrifice her and himself for the good of england, and it was too late to turn back now. gravely he accepted the dignity offered him. throughout london first, and then throughout the country, the news that the witan had unanimously chosen him, and that he had accepted, was received with deep satisfaction. there was no time to be lost. the next day was epiphany, the termination of the christian festival, the last upon which the witan could legally sit, and had the ceremony not taken place then it must have been delayed until another great feast of the church--another calling together of the witan. all night the preparations for the two great ceremonials were carried on. at daybreak the body of the dead king was borne to the noble minster, that had been the chief object of his life to raise and beautify, and there before the great altar it was laid to rest with all the solemn pomp of the church. a few hours passed away and the symbols of mourning were removed. then the great prelates of the church, the earls and the thanes of england, gathered for the coronation of the successor of the king whom they had just laid in his last resting-place. eldred the primate of northumberland performed the rites of consecration--for stigand, primate of england, had been irregularly appointed, and was therefore deemed unfit for the high function. before investing him with the royal robes eldred, according to custom, demanded in a loud voice of the english people whether they were willing that harold should be crowned their king, and a mighty shout of assent rang through the abbey. then the earl swore first to preserve peace to the church and all christian people; secondly, to prevent wrong and robbery to men of every rank; thirdly, to enforce justice and mercy in all his judgments as he would that god should have mercy on him. then after a solemn prayer the prelate poured the oil of consecration upon harold's head; he was vested in royal robes, and with symbols appertaining to the priesthood. a sword was girded to his side, that he might defend his realm, and smite his enemies and those of the church of god. then the crown was placed on his head, the sceptre surmounted with the cross and the rod with the holy dove placed in his hands, and harold stood before the people as the king chosen by themselves, named by his predecessor, and consecrated by the church. a great banquet followed the coronation, and then this day memorable in the history of england came to its close. wulf had been present at the two great events at the abbey and at the banquet, and knew, better than most of those present, that the gravity on harold's face was not caused solely by the mighty responsibility that he had assumed, but by sad thoughts in his heart. wulf on his return from the abbey had handed to harold a small roll of parchment that had been slipped into his hand by a man, who at once disappeared in the crowd after handing it to him, with the words, "for the king". in the interval before the banquet he handed this to harold, who had opened and glanced at it, and had then abruptly turned away. it contained but the words: "_that god may bless my dear lord and king is the prayer of edith._" "do you know where she is?" harold asked abruptly, turning upon wulf. "no, my lord." "i have respected her wishes and made no inquiry," the king said. "others think, doubtless, that i am rejoicing at having gained the object of my ambition, but as god knows, i would far rather have remained earl of the west saxons with her by my side than rule over england." "i know it, my lord," wulf said. "but who beside yourself could rule here?" "no one," harold answered; "and it is for england's sake and not my own that i have this day accepted the crown. if you can find out where she has betaken herself without making public inquiry i charge you to do so, and to tell her that on this day i have thought mostly of her. tell me not where she is. what is done cannot be undone, but i would fain that, in the time that is to come, i may at least know where to send her a message should it be needful." chapter xiv. wulf's suspicions. beyond the fact that the name of the king had changed, the death of edward and the accession of harold made no sensible difference in the government of the southern half of england. harold had practically reigned for years, and the fact that he was now able to give his orders direct instead of having nominally to consult edward, had only the effect that the affairs of the state moved somewhat more promptly. such of the norman favourites of edward as desired to leave were permitted to do so, and were honourably escorted to the coast, but many remained. the norman prelates and abbots retained their dignities undisturbed, and several of the court officials of edward held the same positions under harold. a fortnight after the coronation a party of norman barons arrived, bearing a summons from duke william to harold to fulfil the oath he had sworn to be his man, and also to carry out his engagement to marry one of william's daughters. they were received with all honour, and harold informed them that he would, without delay, reply to the duke's summons. a few days later three thanes of high rank started for normandy with harold's reply. wulf accompanied them. "i would that you should go with them, wulf," harold had said to him. "you are too young to be one of my embassy to duke william, but it would be well that you should form one of the party. the duke knows you and has a liking for you, and possibly may speak more freely to you than to my official messengers. moreover, you have many acquaintances and friends there, and may gather valuable news as to the feeling in normandy and the probability of william's barons embarking in a desperate war for his advantage." "i shall be glad to go, my lord." "the duke knows well enough what my answer must be. he is aware that were i ready either to resign my kingship to him, or to agree to hold my crown as his vassal, the people of england would laugh to scorn my assumption so to dispose of them, and would assuredly renounce and slay me as a traitor who had broken the oath i swore at my coronation. it is a mere formal summons william makes, as one summons a city to surrender before undertaking its siege. it is but a move in the game. that he will, if he can, strike for the kingdom, i doubt not in any way, but it may well be that his barons will refuse to embark in a war beyond the seas, which is altogether beyond the military service they are bound to render. at any rate, we have breathing time. vast preparations must be made before he can invade england, and until he is ready we shall have messengers passing to and fro. a few of my chief councillors, the earls and great thanes, refuse to believe that william will ever attempt by force of arms to grasp the crown of england, but for myself i have no doubt he will do so. i shall at once prepare for war; and the first step of all is to unite england from the northern border to the southern sea, so that we may oppose the normans with our whole strength. this must be my personal work, other matters i must for a time intrust to the earls." the train was not a large one. one ship bore the thanes and their attendants from southampton to rouen. they were received with all honour at their landing, conducted to a house that had been assigned to their use, and informed that they would be received by the duke on the following day. they had brought their horses with them, and as soon as they were housed wulf mounted, and attended by osgod rode to the castle of the de burgs. three years had past since he had last been there. he had from time to time received letters and greetings from guy de burg by the hands of normans who visited the court, and knew that although he had gained in health and strength the predictions of the surgeons had been fulfilled, and that he would never be able to take part in knightly exercises or deeds of arms. the warden at the gate had sent in wulf's name, and as he alighted a tall young man ran down the steps and embraced him. "i am overjoyed to see you, wulf," he exclaimed. "when we heard that harold would send over an english embassy to answer the duke's demands, i hoped that you would be among the number. harold would be likely to choose you, and i felt sure that you would come over to see me. i had a messenger waiting at rouen to bring me tidings of the arrival of your ship, and it is scarcely an hour since he rode in with the news that, by inquiries among the servants as they landed, he had learned that you were indeed of the party. but i had hardly looked to see you until to-morrow morning, and had indeed intended to ride over on my palfrey at daybreak." "i would not delay, guy, for the answer we bear will not be to the duke's liking, and for aught i know he may pack us off again as soon as the interview is ended. therefore, i thought it best to lose not a moment." "i see you have brought your tall retainer with you, wulf. i am glad to see the stout fellow again. but come in, they will chide me for keeping you so long at the entrance." wulf was warmly received by the baron and his wife. "you are just what i thought you would grow up, wulf," the former said. "indeed your figure was so set and square before, that there was little chance of great alteration. we have heard of you from time to time, and that you distinguished yourself greatly in the war against the welsh, and stood high in the favour and affection of harold. guy has overshot you, you see, in point of height, though he is scarce half your breadth," and the baron looked with a suppressed sigh at the fragile young fellow, who stood with his hand on wulf's shoulder. "he looks better and stronger than i expected, my lord," wulf said. "you must remember when i last saw him he could scarce walk across the room, and in my heart i scarce hoped to ever see him again." "he gains strength very slowly," de burg said wistfully; "but although he has to be careful of himself, he has no ailment." "he could hardly gain strength while growing so fast," wulf said; "but now that he has gained his full height he will, doubtless, gather strength, and as three years have done so much for him, another three years will i hope do far more. the lady agnes is well, i trust?" "she is well, and will be here anon," the baroness said. guy laughed with something of his former heartiness. "she was here when the man brought news of your arrival, wulf, but she fled away like a startled deer, and has, i suppose, gone to put on her best kirtle in your honour." as he spoke agnes entered the room. considerable as was the change that three years had wrought in the young men, it was still greater in her case, for she had grown from a pretty young girl into a very lovely maiden, whose cheek flushed as she presented it for wulf's salute. "would you have known her again, wulf?" guy asked with a smile. "i should certainly have known her, though she has so greatly changed," wulf replied. "i thought that you would be grown up and altered, but i scarcely looked for so great an alteration in her, though i might of course have known that it would be so." "and now tell me, wulf," the baron said, abruptly changing the conversation, "how go things in england--are people united in choosing harold as their king?" "the south, the east, and west are as one man," wulf said. "mercia, which comprises the midlands, has accepted the choice. northumbria has as yet held itself aloof, although its earl has sworn allegiance and its primate has placed the crown on harold's head; but in time, i am well assured, the north will also accept him. as i said when we spoke about it after harold had been tricked into taking an oath to be william's man, he had no more power to pledge himself for england than i had. englishmen are free to choose their own king, and as harold has long been their ruler, their choice naturally fell on him. "harold is about to marry the sister of the earls of northumbria and mercia, the widow of griffith of wales, and this will, i hope, bind these two powerful nobles to him. the only trouble is likely to come from tostig, who is, as you know, at the court of norway. but as he is hated in northumbria, and the earl and his brother of mercia both have personal enmity against him, he can gather no following there, while anglia and wessex are devoted to harold. still he and the king of norway may cause trouble." "the answer of harold's ambassadors is, of course, a refusal?" "assuredly," wulf said. "i do not know the exact import of the reply, as, although i have accompanied them, i am not a member of the embassy, being too young to be intrusted with so weighty a matter. but there can be but one answer. harold is powerless to carry out his oath. he had the choice of becoming king of england, and thus defending our rights and freedom, or of refusing the crown, in which case he must have fled here, and could have given no aid whatever to william, as he himself would be regarded as the worst of traitors by the english. the duke must be perfectly well aware that a king of england could not, without the assent of the people, accept a foreign prince as his liege lord." de burg nodded. "that is plainly so, wulf; and although the duke professes intense indignation against harold, he himself has, over and over again, broken his own oaths of allegiance to the king of france. breaches of oaths go for little, except they serve as pretexts for war. it would have been the same thing if harold had never taken the oath, except that his breach of it will be an aid to william in a war against him. we northmen came to france and conquered a province, simply by the right of the strongest. the duke has doubled his dominions by the same right. he deems himself now strong enough to conquer england; whether he is so remains to be seen. at present methinks that but few of us are disposed to follow him in such an enterprise, but there is never any saying how things will go at last. when war is in the air men's minds become heated. there will be dignities, estates, and titles to be won, and when many are ready to go, few like to hang back. more than once already william has embarked on a war against the wishes of the majority, but he has finally carried all with him, and it may be so again, especially if he can win over the pope to excommunicate harold for the breach of an oath sworn on the relics." "his excommunication will go for little in england," wulf said sturdily. "many of our prelates, and almost all our clergy are englishmen, and hold in very small respect the claim of the pope to interfere in the affairs of england." "and if harold died who would be likely to succeed him?" "i have never thought of that," wulf said, "and i should think that few englishmen have done so. if such a misfortune should happen, methinks that england would be rent in two, and that while wessex and anglia would choose one of his brothers, mercia and the north would take edwin or his brother morcar as their king, but assuredly no foreign prince would be chosen." "no, but with england divided the chance of conquest would be easier. you are about the king, wulf. keep a shrewd guard over him. i say not for a moment that the duke would countenance any attempt to do him harm, but there are many rough spirits who might think that they would gain his favour greatly did they clear his path of harold, and who would feel all the less scruple in doing so, should the pope be induced to excommunicate him. such things have happened again and again. mind, i have no warrant for my speech. methinks the honour of de burg is too well known for anyone to venture to broach such a project before him, but so many kings and great princes have fallen by an assassin's knife to clear the way for the next heir or for an ambitious rival, that i cannot close my eyes to the fact that one in harold's position might well be made the subject of such an attempt. the history of your own country will furnish you with examples of what i say." "thank you, my lord," wulf said gravely. "the thought that an assassin's knife might be raised against harold, who is of all men the most beloved in england, has never once entered my mind, but i see there may be indeed a danger of such an attempt being made. i do not greatly trust morcar or his brother, and the danger may come from them, or, as you say, from one desirous of gaining favour with your duke. i will lay your warning to heart." the conversation now turned on other topics, on the welsh war and the life wulf had been leading since they last met, and upon what had happened to the many acquaintances wulf had made in normandy. they talked until long past the usual hour for retiring to rest; wulf slept at the chateau, and rode into rouen at an early hour in the morning. the audience next day was a public one. william was surrounded by his officers of state, and by a large number of his barons. the english envoys were ushered in, and the duke asked them in a loud voice what answer they brought to his just demands on the part of his sworn liegeman, harold. "the king of england bids us state, duke, that he holds an oath taken by a prisoner under force to be invalid, especially when taken in ignorance of the sanctity of the concealed relics; secondly, he says that he has been elected by the people of england, and that he has no power whatever to transfer the rights that they have conferred upon him, and which he has sworn to maintain, and that they would absolutely refuse to be bound by any act on his part contrary to the welfare of the kingdom, and to their rights as freemen; thirdly, as to your demand that he should carry out his promise to marry your daughter, he points out that the lady whose hand was promised to him has since that time died; and lastly, that although as earl of wessex he might transfer that engagement to another of your daughters, as king of england he is unable to do so, as the will of the people is that their king shall marry no foreign princess, but that the royal family shall be of unmixed english blood." william frowned heavily. "you hear, my lords," he said, after a pause, to the norman barons, "this english earl who was here as my guest refuses to carry out the engagements to which he swore upon the holy relics. i cannot, however, bring myself to believe that he will really persist in this foul perjury, and shall persevere in my endeavours to bring him to a sense of his duty, and to show him the foul dishonour that will rest upon him should he persist in this contempt alike of our holy church and his honour as a knight and a christian, conduct that would bring upon him eternal infamy and the scorn and contempt of all the princes and nobles of europe, and draw upon his head the wrath of the church." then he abruptly turned on his heel and left the audience-chamber, while the english envoys returned to their house and made preparations for immediate departure. a few minutes after his arrival there one of the duke's pages brought word to wulf that the duke desired to speak to him in private. he at once went across to the palace. the duke received him cordially. "i marked you were with the other thanes, and was glad to see one whom i count as my friend. tell me frankly, what think the people of england of this monstrous act of perjury on the part of harold?" "to speak the truth, my lord duke," wulf replied, "they trouble their heads in no way about it. they hold that the right of electing their king rests wholly with them, and that harold's promise, to do what he had no more power to do than the lowest born of englishmen, was but a waste of words. harold himself feels the obligation far more than anyone else, and had there been any other englishman who could have united the people as well as he could himself, he would gladly have stood aside; but there is none such, and he had no choice but to accept the decision of the witan, and, for the sake of england, to lay aside his own scruples. the late king, too, nominated him as his successor, and although his voice had no legal weight, he is now regarded as almost a saint among the people. the fact, therefore, that he, full of piety and religion as he was, should have held that harold's oath in no way prevented the people from choosing him, has gone very far to satisfy any scruples that might have been felt." "edward at one time named me as his successor," the duke said shortly. "so i have heard, my lord duke; but as he grew in years and learned more of english feeling and character he became fully aware that the people would accept no foreign prince, and that only the man who had for thirteen years governed in his name could be their choice." "and the great earls and thanes are likewise of that opinion?" "assuredly in anglia and wessex they are so. i know not the minds of earls morcar and edwin, but they were at the witan and stood by his side at the coronation, and doubtless felt that they could not rely upon their own people if they attempted any open opposition to harold." "and you will support this usurper against me, wulf?" "i shall fight, my lord duke, for the king chosen by the people of england. should that choice some day fall on you i should be as faithful a follower of yours as i am now of harold." "well answered, young thane. you have twice done me loyal service, and i at least do not forget my promises. as yet my mind is not made up as to my course, but should fate will it so, william of england will not forget the services rendered to william of normandy." a few minutes later wulf rejoined his companions, and before nightfall the ship was far on her way down the river. "shall we go back to steyning, my lord, when we return home?" osgod asked as they stood by the bulwark together watching the passing shores. "no, osgod. i mean for a time to remain with the king. baron de burg yesterday hinted to me that he thought it possible that some of the duke's followers might endeavour to remove the obstacle between him and the throne of england. there are in every country desperate men, who are ready for any crime or deed of violence if they but think that its committal will bring them a reward. we have had english kings assassinated before now, and it has been the same in other countries. moreover, there are many normans who were forced to fly from england when godwin's family returned from exile. these having a personal grudge against him would be willing to gratify it, and at the same time to earn a place in william's favour. harold is so frank and unsuspicious that he will never think of taking precautions for his personal safety. you and i, then, must serve as his watch-dogs. it may be a difficult task, for we have no idea from what quarter that danger may come, and yet by chance we may discover some clue or other that will set us on the right track at any rate, if we are near him, and keep a watchful eye on any strangers approaching him, we may save him from a treacherous blow." "good, my lord. methinks that harold was wrong in not sending every norman across the seas, and every man with whom i have spoken thinks the same. but at any rate we can, as you say, keep a sharp look-out, and although i cannot be always near his person, i shall go about and listen; and it will be hard if anything is on foot without my hearing some whisper of it. you will tell him no word of your suspicions, i suppose?" "certainly not. i have fears rather than suspicions, and baron de burg certainly spoke as if he regarded it as likely that such an attempt might be made, and he knows his own people better than i do. he expressly said that he had no special reason for giving me the warning, but he may have heard some angry remark or some covert threat against harold; and although the duke would not, i feel sure, openly countenance his slaying, i think that the slayers might confidently look for a reward from his gratitude did they by their daggers open a way for him to the throne of england." on the return of the embassy to london king harold said to wulf: "i have no further occasion for your services at present, wulf, and i suppose you will return home and increase the number of your housecarls. it is not with undisciplined levies that the normans, if they come, must be met. it is no question this time of welsh mountaineers but of trained warriors, and should they land they must be met by men as firm and as obedient to orders as themselves. i am trying to impress this on all our thanes, but most of them are hard to move, and deem that all that is necessary on the day of battle is that men shall have strength and courage and arms." "with your permission, my lord, i would rather abide near you, and leave the training of my men to the officer who taught those who fought by my side in wales." "i thought you did not care for the gaieties of the court?" harold said, in some surprise. "nor do i, my lord. for its gaieties i care nothing, but in times like these there is much to be learned, and i would not bury myself in steyning when there is so much of importance going on in london." "then stay, wulf, i shall be glad to have you here. i have but little time to myself now, but it is a relief to put aside grave matters sometimes. i will appoint a room for you near my own chamber. you have heard no news of her, i suppose?" "in truth, my lord, i know not how to set about the task, and it seems to me that my only chance is to run against one of her serving-men in the street." "that is but a slight chance, wulf; but even i, with all the power of england in my hands, am equally at a loss. i cannot send round to all the thanes of wessex to ask if a strange lady has taken a house in their jurisdiction, nor to all the parish priests to ask if a new worshipper has come to their church. however, i believe that sooner or later she will herself advise me where she has hidden. it may be that your stay here will not be a long one, for i purpose journeying to the north." "to northumbria!" wulf said in surprise. "yes; the people there refuse to recognize me, and i would win them by going among them rather than by force. my dear friend bishop wulfstan will accompany me. i shall take with me a body of my housecarls, partly as a guard, but more because i cannot now travel as a private person. it is very many years since an english king has visited northumbria, and it is not strange that these northern men should object to be ruled by a stranger from the south. i shall take with me two or three of my thanes only, but shall be glad for you to ride with me. young as you are, you have a quick eye and ready wit, and in case trouble should arise, i can rely upon you more than upon many men far older than yourself." the palace of westminster was not an imposing edifice. london had not yet become the capital of england, oxford being the seat of government of most of the kings, so that the palace was built on a simple plan, and had been altered by edward until the interior arrangements more nearly resembled those of a convent than of a palace. below was the great banqueting-hall, and beyond this the chamber where the king heard complaints and administered justice. leading from this were the king and queen's private chambers, where the one sat and read or received his chief councillors, and the other worked with her maids, and listened to the music of the harpers or the tales of war and love sung by bards. behind was the chapel. on the floor above a corridor ran from one end of the building to the doors which separated the royal sleeping-rooms from the rest. on either side of the corridor were small bed-chambers, where the officers of the household and guests at the court slept, their attendants lying in the corridor itself or in the kitchens, which with other offices were contained in a separate building. the room assigned to wulf, and which harold had ordered was henceforth to be retained for him, was that on the right hand of the corridor, next to the door leading to the royal apartments. like the others it was a mere cell, with the straw pallet covered with sheep-skins, with some rugs for covering. this constituted the whole of the furniture. in the morning water was brought in brass ewers and basins, either by the pages or servants of the guests. "nothing could be better, my lord, than this," osgod said. "i am a light sleeper, and lying across your door i am sure that no one could enter the king's apartments without my hearing those heavy doors move." "there is but little chance, osgod, of an attack being made on him in that fashion. doubtless some of the royal servants sleep on the other side of the door. no, if any design be attempted against his life it will be when he is travelling, or when he is abroad amid a crowd." "i saw walter fitz-urse to-day, master, in the train of william of london." "then he must have returned within the last day or two, osgod, for he has been absent for more than a year, and i know that when we sailed for normandy he was still absent, for i inquired of one of the court officials if he had been here of late. what should bring him back again, i wonder. he has long been out of his pageship, and he can hope for no preferment in england while harold is king. he has, i know, no great possessions in normandy, for i asked guy about him, and learned that his father was a knight of but small consideration, either as to his state or character, and that the boy owed his place as page to william of london, to the fact that he was a distant relation of the prelate. "i would say harm of no man, but i should think he is as likely as another to be mixed up in such a plot as we are talking of. he is landless, hot-tempered, and ambitious. he owes no goodwill to harold, for it was by his intervention that he was sent away in disgrace after that quarrel with me. at any rate, osgod, since we have no one else to suspect, we will in the first place watch him, or rather have him looked after, for i see not how we ourselves can in any way keep near him. he knows me well, and has doubtless seen you with me, and having seen you once would not be likely to forget you." "i think i can manage that," osgod said confidently. "my father has a small apprentice who well-nigh worries his life out with tricks and trifling. i have more than once begged him off a beating, and methinks he will do anything for me. he is as full of cunning as an ape, and, i warrant me, would act his part marvellously. my father will be glad enough to get him out of the forge for a while, and when i tell him that it is in your service he will make no difficulty about it. he is fifteen years old, but so small for his age that he would pass for three years younger than he is." "i think it is a very good plan, osgod. you had best see your father in the morning, and if he consents to your having the boy, bring him down to the river-bank behind the abbey, where i will be awaiting you, and can there talk to him without observation. you are sure that he can be trusted to keep silence regarding what i tell him?" "he can be trusted, my lord. in the first place he will enjoy playing his part, and in the second he will know well enough that i should nearly flay him alive with my stirrup-leather if he were to fail me, and that his life in the forge would be worse than ever." the next morning wulf strolled down to the river-bank after breaking his fast, and it was not long before osgod joined him with the boy. "have you told him what he is required for, osgod?" wulf asked, as the boy, doffing his cap, stood before him with an air of extreme humility. "i am not good at the telling of tales, as you know, my lord, and i thought it better that you should tell him just as much or as little as you chose." "you don't like your work at the forge, ulf?" for that wulf had learned was the boy's name. "i think that i like it better than it likes me," the boy replied. "when i get to do the fine work i shall like it, but at present it is 'fetch this tool, ulf, or file that iron, or blow those bellows,' and if i do but smile i get a cuff." "no, no, ulf," osgod said. "of course, at present you are but a beginner, and at your age i too had to fetch and carry and be at the bidding of all the men; and it is not for smiling that you get cuffed, but for playing tricks and being away for hours when you are sent on a message to the next street, and doing your errands wrongly. my father tells me you will be a good workman some day. you will never be strong enough to wield a heavy hammer or to forge a battle-axe, but he says your fingers are quick and nimble, and that you will some day be able to do fine work such as clumsy hands could not compass. but that is not to the point now." "you will be glad to be out of the forge for a bit, ulf?" wulf asked. "that should i, but not always." "it will not be for very long. i want a watch set upon a norman in order to know where he goes, and whom he meets, and what he purposes. osgod tells me that he thinks you could play the part rarely, and that you would be willing for his sake to do our bidding." the boy looked up into osgod's face with an expression of earnest affection. "i would do anything for him," he said, "even if i were to be cut to pieces." "osgod is as much interested in the matter as i am, ulf; and as he has assured me that you are to be trusted, i will tell you more as to the man, and my object in setting you to watch him." "you can trust me, my lord," the boy said earnestly. "i will do your bidding whatever it is." "you know, ulf, that the duke of normandy desires the crown of england?" "so i have heard men say, my lord." "were king harold out of the way, his chances of obtaining it would be improved." the boy nodded. "i am sure that the duke himself would take no hand in bringing about harold's death, but there are many of his people who might think that they would obtain a great reward were they to do so." the boy nodded again. "the man i wish you to watch is walter fitz-urse, who is in the train of the bishop. i have no particular reason for suspecting him, beyond the fact that he has but just come over here, and this is scarcely a time a norman would come to london; though as the bishop is a relation and patron of his he may have come merely to visit him. still he has, as he thinks, a cause for enmity against the king. he is needy, and, as i know, somewhat unscrupulous. all this is little enough against a man; still it seems to me that his coming bodes danger to the king, and this being so i desire that he shall be watched, in order that i may find out what is his real object in coming over here. i want you to post yourself near the gate of the bishop's palace, and whenever he comes out to follow him save when he is in the train of the bishop--most of all if he sallies out alone or after dark. "it will not do for you to be always dressed as an apprentice. osgod will procure for you such clothes as you may require for disguises. one day you can be sitting there as a beggar asking alms, another as a girl from one of the villages with eggs or fowls. you understand that you will have to follow him, to mark where he goes in, and especially, should he be joined by anybody when out, to endeavour to overhear something of what they say to each other. even a few words might suffice to show me whether my suspicions are true or not. do you think you can do that? osgod tells me that you are good at playing a part." "i will do it, my lord, and that right gladly. it is a business after my own heart, and i will warrant that those who see me one day will not know me when they see me the next." "osgod will go with you now, and will stay near the bishop's palace until the man you are to watch comes out, and will point him out to you. in a day or two i may be going away with the king; when we return you will tell us what you have found out. till we go, osgod will meet you here each morning as the abbey bell rings out the hour of seven. you can tell him anything that you have learned, and then he will give you such further instructions as may seem needful; and remember you must be cautious, for walter fitz-urse would not hesitate to use his dagger on you did he come upon you eaves-dropping." "i will give him leave to do so if he catches me," the boy said. "very well, then; osgod will go with you to buy such clothes as may be necessary, and remember that you will be well rewarded for your work." "i want no reward," the boy said, almost indignantly. "i am an apprentice, and as my master has bid me do whatever osgod commands, he has a right to my services. but this is nothing. there is not one in london who would not do aught in his power for harold, and who would scorn to take pay for it. as this is a matter in which his very life may be concerned, though i am but a boy, and a small one at that, there is nought that i would not do, even to the giving of my life, to spoil these norman plots." osgod was about to chide the boy angrily for this freedom of speech, but wulf checked him. "you are right, lad; and i am sorry i spoke of a reward. i myself would have answered the same at your age, and would have died for harold then as i would now. i should have bethought me that the feelings of englishmen, gentle or simple, are the same towards the king, and i crave your pardon for treating your loyal service as a thing to be paid for with money." the boy's eyes filled with tears; he dropped on one knee, and seizing wulf's hand placed it to his lips, and then without a word sped away, halting a hundred yards off till osgod should join him. "you have made a good choice," wulf said; "the boy is wholly trustworthy, and unless his face belies him he is as shrewd as he is faithful. my only fear in the matter is, that he may be over rash in his desire to carry out the trust we have given him. warn him against that, and tell him that should he be discovered and killed it would upset all our plans." chapter xv. a meeting by the river. during the three days that elapsed between ulf's being set upon the track of walter fitz-urse and the departure of the king for the north, the boy had no news to report to osgod. the young norman had not left the bishop's palace alone. he had accompanied the prelate several times when he went abroad, and had gone out with some of his countrymen who still held office at the court. in one or other of the disguises wulf had suggested, the boy had hung about the gate of the bishop's palace until late in the evening, but walter fitz-urse had not come out after dark. on the day before starting, wulf was with osgod when the latter met the boy at the rendezvous. after he heard ulf's report wulf said: "as we leave to-morrow this is the last report you will have to make to us. so far it would seem that there is nothing whatever to give grounds for suspicion, and if, after a few days, you find that the norman still remains quietly at the bishop's, there will be no occasion for you to continue your watch until the time is approaching for the king's return." "yes, my lord. but i cannot say surely that he does not go out of an evening." "why, i thought you said that he certainly had not done so?" "no, my lord; i said only that i had not seen him. he has certainly not gone out through the great gates in his norman dress, but that it seems to me shows very little. as the bishop's guest he would pass out there, but there is another entrance behind that he might use did he wish to go out unobserved. even at the main entrance i cannot tell but that, beneath the cowl and frock of one of the many monks who pass in and out, walter fitz-urse may not be hidden. he would scarce go about such a business as we suspect in his dress as a norman noble, which is viewed with little favour here in london, and would draw attention towards him, but would assume, as i do, some disguise in which he could go about unremarked--it might be that of a monk, it might be that of a lay servitor of the palace." "you are right, ulf; i had not thought of that. that is indeed a difficulty, and one that i do not see how you can get over. are you sure that he has not passed out by the main gate?" "i have marked his walk and carriage closely, my lord. he steps along with a long stride, and unless he be a better mummer than i judge him to be, i should know him whether in a monk's gown or a servitor's cloak. it is no easy thing to change a knight's stride into the shuffle of a sandalled monk, or the noiseless step of a well-trained servitor in a bishop's palace." "you are a shrewd lad indeed, ulf," wulf said warmly; "and i feel that you will fathom this matter if there be aught at the bottom. but, as you say, you cannot watch more than one place." "the other entrance is not altogether unwatched, my lord. the first day you gave me my orders i went to one of my cronies, who has shared with me in many an expedition when our master deemed that we were soundly asleep. without, as you may be sure, giving any reason, i told him that i had come to believe that the norman i pointed out to him was in the habit of going out in disguise, and that i was mightily curious to find whither he went and why, and therefore wanted him to watch, at the entrance behind the palace. i bade him mark the walk of the persons that went out, and their height, for the norman is tall, and to follow any who might come out of lofty stature, and with a walk and carriage that seemed to accord ill with his appearance. so each evening, as soon as his house was closed and the lights extinguished, he has slipped out, as he knows how, and has watched till ten o'clock at the gate. it seemed to me that that would be late enough, and indeed the doors are closed at that hour." "you have done well, ulf; but has not the boy questioned you as to your reasons for thus setting a watch on the norman?" "i have told him nought beyond what i have said, my lord. he may guess shrewdly enough that i should not myself take so much trouble in the matter unless i had more reason than i have given; but we are closely banded together, and just as i should do, without asking the reasons, any such action did he propose it to me, so he carried out my wishes. i cannot feel as sure as if i had watched him myself that fitz-urse has not passed out in disguise unnoticed, but i have a strong belief that it is so. at any rate, my lord, you can go away with the assurance that all that is possible shall be done by us, and that even if he pass out once or twice undiscovered there is good hope that we shall at last detect him." after again commending the boy, wulf returned to the palace with osgod. "i feel half ashamed of having entertained a suspicion of fitz-urse on such slight grounds, osgod." "i think you have done quite right, my lord. you know how the fellow gave a false report to the bishop of that quarrel with you. at any rate, should nothing come of it, no harm will have been done. as to the boys, so far from regarding it as a trouble, i feel sure that they view it as an exciting pleasure, and are as keenly anxious to detect the norman going out in a disguise as you yourself can be. when they get tired of it they will give it up." ulf, at any rate, was determined not to relax his watch during the absence of the king. the more he thought of it the more certain he felt that if walter fitz-urse went out on any private business after nightfall he would use one or other of the entrances at the rear of the palace, and accordingly next day he arranged that one friend should watch the front entrance of an evening, while he himself took post behind. as soon as it was dark he lay down by the wall close to the entrance at which the servitors generally passed in and out. the moon was up but was still young, and the back of the palace lay in deep shadow; a projecting buttress screened him to a great extent from view, while by peeping round the corner he could watch those who came out and see them as they passed from the shadow of the building into the comparatively light space beyond. many came in and out. the evening was bitterly cold, and his teeth chattered as he lay, cautiously putting his head beyond the edge of the stonework every time he heard any one leaving the palace. the heavy bell had just struck eight, when a man wrapt up in a cloak passed out. he differed in no respect from many of those who had preceded him, save that he was somewhat taller. the hood of the cloak was drawn over his head. ulf raised himself to his knees and gazed after the figure. the man was walking more slowly than the others had done, for most of them had hurried along as if in haste to get their errands finished and to be in shelter again from the keen wind. "if that is fitz-urse, he is walking so as to avoid the appearance of haste in case anyone should be looking after him," ulf muttered to himself. "at any rate i will follow him, he is more like the norman than anyone i have yet seen, though he carries his head forwarder and his shoulders more rounded." as he watched him, the boy saw that as he increased the distance from the palace the man quickened his pace, and when he came into the moonlight was stepping rapidly along. "that is my man," ulf exclaimed. "he knows well enough that no one is likely to be standing at the door, and thinks he need no longer walk cautiously." feeling sure that even if the man looked back he would not be able to see him in the shadow, he started forward at a run, paused before he reached the edge of the moonlight, and then, as soon as the figure entered a lane between some houses, ran forward at the top of his speed. the man was but a hundred yards in front of him when ulf came to the entrance of the lane. just as he turned into it the man stopped and looked round, and ulf threw himself down by the side of a wall. "that settles it," he said to himself. "no one who had not a fear of being followed would turn and look round on such a night as this." ulf was barefooted, for although he generally wore soft shoes which were almost as noiseless as the naked foot, he was dressed in rags, and a foot covering of any sort would have been out of place. always keeping in the shade, having his eyes fixed on the man he was pursuing, and holding himself in readiness to leap into a doorway or throw himself down should he see him turn his head, he lessened the distance until he was within some fifty yards of the other. the man took several turns, and at last entered a long street leading down to the river. as soon as ulf saw him enter it he darted off at full speed, turned down another lane, and then, when he got beyond the houses, and on to the broken ground that lay between them and the river, ran until he was nearly facing the end of the street which he had seen the man enter, and then threw himself down. he had scarcely done so when he saw the figure issue from the street and strike across the open ground towards the water. crawling along on his stomach ulf followed him, until he halted on the bank. the man looked up and down the river, stamped his foot impatiently, and then began to walk to and fro. presently he stopped and appeared to be listening; ulf did the same, and soon heard the distant splash of oars. they came nearer and nearer. ulf could not see the boat, for it was close under the bank, which was some twenty yards away from him, but presently when the boat seemed almost abreast of him the man on the bank said, "where do you come from?" "from fishing in deep water," a voice replied. "that is right, come ashore." the words were spoken by both in a language ulf could not understand, and he muttered a saxon oath. the thought that any conversation fitz-urse might have with a norman would naturally be in that tongue had never once occurred to him. three men mounted the bank. one shook hands with fitz-urse, the others had doffed their caps and stood listening bareheaded to the conversation between their superiors. it was long and animated. at first the stranger stamped his foot and seemed disappointed at the news fitz-urse gave him, then as the latter continued to speak he seemed more satisfied. for fully half an hour they talked, then the men got into the boat and rowed away, and fitz-urse turned and walked back to the palace. ulf did not follow him. the meeting for which fitz-urse had come out had taken place, he would be sure to go straight back to the palace. ulf lay there for some time fairly crying with vexation. he had done something, he had discovered that fitz-urse was indeed engaged in some undertaking that had to be conducted with the greatest secrecy; but this was little to what he would have learned had he understood the language. his only consolation was that both wulf and osgod had likewise forgotten the probability that the conversations he was charged to overhear might be in norman. had wulf still been in london he could have gone to him for fresh instructions, but he had started at daybreak, and the king's party would assuredly ride fast. there was no time to be lost. these men had a boat, and probably came from a ship in the port. were there really a conspiracy against the king they might sail north and land in the humber, though it seemed more probable that they would wait for his return, for on his journey he would be surrounded by his housecarls, and there would be far less chance of finding him alone and unguarded than in london. had it been their intention to sail at once for the north, walter fitz-urse would probably have rowed away with them without returning to the palace. at any rate it was too important a matter for him to trust to his own judgment, and he determined to take counsel with his master. he had not been near the forge since he had begun the search, and was supposed to have gone down to stay with his family, who lived near reading. he had hidden away his apprentice dress beneath some stones in a field half a mile from westminster, and he presented himself in this at the forge in the morning. "you are back sooner than i expected, ulf," ulred said as he entered. "i did not look for you for another week to come. is all well at home?" "all is well, master; but i have a message to deliver to you concerning some business." the armourer saw that his apprentice wished to speak to him in private. he knew nothing of the reason for which osgod had asked him to release the boy from his work at the forge for a time, but had quite understood that the wish to pay a visit to his family was but a cloak, and that the boy was to be employed in some service for wulf. guessing, therefore, that the message was one that should be delivered in private, he bade the boy follow him from the forge and took him into the room above. "what is it you would say to me, ulf? mind, i wish to hear nothing about any private matter in which you may be engaged either by wulf or osgod. they are both away and may not return for a month or more. i judged the matter was a private one, as osgod said nought of it to me." "the matter is a private one, master, but as they are away i would fain take your counsel on it." the armourer shook his head decidedly. "i can listen to nought about it, boy. it can be no business of mine, and unless he has given you license to speak i would not on any account meddle with the affairs of the young thane, who is a good lord to my son." "that he has not done, sir; but i pray you to hear me," he added urgently as the armourer was turning to leave the room. "it is a matter that may touch the safety of our lord the king." the armourer stopped. "art well assured of what you say, ulf?" "for myself i can say nothing, master, but the young thane told me that he had fears that some attempt or other might be made from the other side of the sea against the king's life, and that although he had no strong grounds, he thought that walter fitz-urse, who had just returned here, might be concerned in it, he having reasons for enmity against the king. therefore he appointed me to watch him." he then related the scene he had witnessed on the river bank the evening before. "it is a strange story indeed, ulf, and whatever it may mean, this meeting can have been for no good purpose. the secrecy with which it was conducted is enough to prove it. it is indeed unfortunate that you did not understand what was said, for much may depend upon it. well, this is a grave affair, and i must think it over, ulf. you have done well in telling me. has any plan occurred to you?" "i thought that you might accompany me, master." "that would i willingly, but though i have picked up enough of their tongue to enable me to do business with the normans at the king's court when they come in to buy a dagger or to have a piece of armour repaired, i could not follow their talk one with another. we must obtain someone who can speak their language well, and who can be trusted to be discreet and silent. why, were it but whispered abroad that some normans are plotting against the life of the king, there would be so angry a stir that every norman in the land might be hunted down and slain. do not go down to the forge, i will tell my wife to give you some food, and you had best then go up to the attic and sleep. you will have to be afoot again to-night, and it were well that you kept altogether away from the others, so as to avoid inconvenient questions. i will come up to you when i have thought the matter over." "is aught troubling you, ulred?" the armourer's wife asked when breakfast was over and the men had gone downstairs again to their work. "never have i seen you sit so silently at the board." "i am worried about a matter which i have learned this morning. it matters not what it is now. some time later you shall hear of it, but at present i am pledged to say no word about it. i want above all things to find one who speaks the norman tongue well, and is yet a true englishman. i have been puzzling my brains, but cannot bethink me of anyone. canst thou help me?" "except about the court there are few such to be found, ulred. if wulf of steyning had been here he could doubtless have assisted you had it been a matter you could have confided to him; for osgod said that although he himself had learned but little norman his master was able to talk freely with the norman nobles." "ay, he learnt it partly when a page at court. but what you say reminds me that it was but yesterday afternoon his friend beorn came into my shop. he had just arrived from his estate, and said how disappointed he was at finding that wulf had left london. i will go to the palace and see him at once. i know but little of him save that i have heard from osgod that he is wulf's firmest friend, and they fought together across in normandy and again against the welsh. he has been here several times to have weapons repaired, and knows that osgod is wulf's man. i wonder i did not think of him, but my thoughts were running on people of our own condition." ulred at once put on his cap and proceeded to the palace, where he found beorn without difficulty. "you have not come to tell me that the blade i left with you yesterday cannot be fitted with a new hilt, master ulred? it is a favourite weapon of mine, and i would rather pay twice the price of a new one than lose it." "i have come on another matter, my lord beorn. it is for your private ear. may i pray you to come with me to my house, where i can enter upon it without fear of being overheard?" "certainly i will come, ulred, though i cannot think what this matter may be." "it concerns in some way the thane of steyning, my lord, and others even higher in position." "that is enough," beorn said. "anything that concerns wulf concerns me, and as he is in the matter you can count on me without question." upon reaching his house ulred left beorn for a moment in the room upstairs, and fetched ulf down from the attic. "this is an apprentice lad of mine," he said, "and as it is he who has been employed by the thane of steyning in this affair, it were best that he himself informed you of it." when ulf had finished his story beorn exclaimed, "i will go at once, and will put such an affront upon this walter fitz-urse that he must needs meet me in mortal combat." "but even if you slay him, my lord, that may not interfere with the carrying out of this enterprise, in which, as we know, another of equal rank with him is engaged." "that is true, master armourer, and i spoke hastily. i thought perhaps it was for this that you had informed me of the matter." "no, my lord; it seemed to me that the first thing was to assure ourselves for a certainty that the affair is really a plot against the king's life, of which we have as yet no manner of proof, but simply the suspicion entertained by my son's master. the first necessity is to find out for a truth that it is so, and secondly to learn how and when it is to be carried out; and this can only be by overhearing another conversation between the plotters. as you have heard, ulf could have learnt all this if he had but understood the norman tongue. could i have spoken it well enough to follow the conversation i would not have troubled you, but it seemed to me that at their next meeting it needed that one should be present who could speak norman well. after considering in vain how to find one who should at once know the norman tongue and be a true and trustworthy englishman, my thoughts fell upon you, of whom i have always heard my son speak as the companion and friend of his master, and i made bold to come and lay the matter before you, thinking that you might either take it in hand yourself or name one suitable for it." "certainly i will take it in hand myself," beorn said, "and right glad am i that you came to me. a matter in which the king's life is concerned i would trust to no one but myself. and now, how think you shall we proceed? for it may well be that these plotters may not meet again for some time, seeing that the king is away." "so it seems to me," the armourer said; "and, moreover, they may in their talk last night have appointed some other place of meeting." "what think you, ulf?" beorn said, turning to the boy. "wulf would not have chosen you for this business had he not had a good opinion of your shrewdness; and, indeed, you have shown yourself well worthy of his confidence." "i should say, my lord, that i must go on the watch as before. it is most likely that the norman will, sooner or later, go out in the same disguise and by the same way as before, and that the hour will be between seven and nine in the evening--most likely between seven and eight, in order that he may return from the meeting before the bishop's doors are closed for the night." "i will keep watch with you, ulf. were i sure that the meeting would take place at the same spot as before you should show me where they landed, and i would lie down there in readiness, but as they may meet elsewhere, it seems to me that i must post myself by your side." "it would be better, my lord, if you would take your place on the other side of the open space, for although i, being small, can escape notice, you might well be seen by those approaching the door. it will be necessary, too, that you should put on sandals of soft leather or cloth, so that your footfall should not be heard. then, as i follow him, i would run to where you are posted, and you could follow me, so that you could keep me in sight and yet be beyond his view, for all our plans would be foiled should he suspect that he was being followed." "i will do as you advise. come with me now and we will fix upon a station to night, and afterwards you may be sure of finding me there between half-past six and ten. should you wish to see me at any other time you will find me at the palace; i will not stir out between eight and nine in the morning. i must say i wish it were warmer weather, for a watch of three hours with the snow on the ground--and it is beginning to fall now--is not so pleasant a way of spending the evening as i had looked for when i came hither." beorn went out with ulf, and they fixed upon a doorway some twenty yards from the street down which the norman had before gone. "we must hope he will go by the same way," beorn said, "for should he turn to the right or left after issuing from the gate he will have gone so far before you can run across and fetch me that we may well fail to pick up his track again. it were well if we could arrange some signal by which you would let me know should he so turn off. it would not do for you to call or whistle." "no, my lord; but i could howl like a dog. he would but think it some cur lying under the wall i might howl once if he turns to the right, twice if he turns to the left, and you could then cross the ground in that direction, and i could meet you on the way without losing sight of him for long." "that would do well, ulf, if you are sure you could imitate the howl of a dog so nearly that he would not suspect it." "i can do that," ulf said confidently. "i have used the signal before with my comrades, and to make sure will go out to the fields and practise daily." a month passed. harold was still away in the north, and complete success was attending his journey. the influence of bishop wulfstan, who was greatly respected throughout the kingdom, did much, but harold himself did more. his noble presence, his courtesy to all, the assurances he gave of his desire that all men should be well and justly ruled, that evil-doers of whatever rank should be punished, that there should be no oppression and no exaction of taxes beyond those borne by the whole community, won the hearts of the people. they were, moreover, gratified by the confidence that he had shown in coming among them, and in seeing for the first time in the memory of man a monarch of england in northumbria. ulf and beorn had kept regular watch, but without success, and ulf's comrades had as steadily watched the other entrances. beorn had two or three conferences with ulf. he was becoming impatient at the long delay, though he acknowledged that it was possible it had been arranged that no more meetings should take place until it was known that harold was about to return. the armourer was perhaps the most impatient of the three. he was doing nothing, and his anxiety made him so irritable and captious at his work that his men wondered what had come over their master. after fretting for three weeks over his own inaction, he one morning told ulf to go to beorn and say that he begged to have speech with him. an hour later beorn returned with ulf. "i bethought me last night, my lord," ulred said, "while i lay awake wondering over the matter, whether these fellows are still on board ship or are in lodgings in london." "it might be either, ulred. i have frequently thought over the matter. possibly they may have stayed on board their ship till she left, and then have come on shore in the guise of peaceful traders." "if the ship did not return at once they may still be on board," the armourer said, "for the wind has blown steadily from the east for the last five weeks, and no ships have been able to leave the port. i blame myself sorely that i did not think of it before, but at least i will lose no time now if you think that good might come of it." "it would certainly be good if you could find either the ship or the house where the men are in lodging, but seeing that you know nothing of their appearance or number, nor the name of the ship in which they came nor the port she sailed from, i see not how you could set about it." "i will first go to the port-reeve's office and find out the names of the ships that arrived just before the time that the meeting by the river took place. she may have come in early that day, or on the day before. they would surely send word at once to him that they had arrived." "you might learn something that way, ulred, but we do not know that the meeting ulf saw was their first." "that is true. but as ulf's friend declares that he certainly had not gone out that way during the evenings that he had been keeping watch, it is likely that it was their first meeting." "that is so, ulred; and at any rate it would be well that you should make the inquiries, and that, while we are keeping our watch as before, you should try to gather some tidings of the fellows in another way." chapter xvi. a voyage north. the armourer found without any difficulty that twenty-five vessels, exclusive of small coasters, had arrived in the port during the thirty-six hours previous to the time of the meeting on the bank. of these, eighteen were from english ports, seven from normandy, france, or flanders. three of the latter had sailed away, and of the four remaining in the port two were from rouen, one from calais, and one from flanders. having obtained the names of these, he took boat and rowed down the river and ascertained where each lay at anchor. he then, with the assistance of some citizens of standing of his acquaintance, obtained a view of the manifests of their cargoes. the flemish vessel carried cloth, the other three miscellaneous cargoes--wine, dried fish, cloth, and other goods. the flemish vessel was the largest, those from rouen and calais were about the same size. all had discharged their cargoes, and were waiting for a change of wind to drop down the river. there was nothing unusual to be observed on any of the ships. the men were for the most part down in the forecastle, for the weather was too severe for them to lounge about on deck. he talked the matter over with beorn, and they agreed that it was most probable that the men would embark from calais rather than rouen. it was a far shorter and less perilous voyage, and moreover, as frenchmen they could move about without attracting attention, while as normans they would be viewed with a certain amount of hostility and suspicion. "i will make it my business to watch that vessel. i know not whether any good can come of it, but i would fain be doing something. if the wind changes she will doubtless proceed to sea, and if they are still on board of her they will come ashore, and i could see their numbers and where they put up." "that will indeed be important," beorn said, "for we should then have two places to watch, and should be almost certain to get to the root of the matter. but how will you watch her?" "there are many houses near the water's edge, on the southern side of the river near which the ship is lying, she having moved away from the quays when she discharged her cargo. i will hire a room in one of these, and will there pass as much of my time as i can; and i will take with me my apprentice ernulf, whom i shall bid keep his eye upon the ship whenever i myself am away. i need say nothing whatever of the reason of my desire that i should be acquainted with everything that passes on board." ulred succeeded in getting a room exactly opposite the french vessel, and sitting back from the window, was able, himself unseen, to notice everything that passed on board the ship, which lay scarce her own length from the shore. upon the third day a boat containing a man wearing an ample cloak with a hood, which was pulled far over his face, rowed up to the side of the ship, and climbed up right nimbly into her waist. "it is a saxon cloak," the armourer said to himself, "but those are norman leggings. the man is tall, and the quickness with which he climbed over shows that he is young. i doubt not that it is our man. i would give a year's profits of the forge to be hidden down below at present. however, it is much to have learnt that this is really the ship, and that the norman's friends are still on board. i would that wulf were in london. he has a keen wit, and would hit on some plan by which we might get to the bottom of the matter. beorn is a brave young thane, and were wulf here would second him valiantly, but he has none of the other's quickness of thought. as soon as this fellow leaves the ship i will hurry back to take counsel with him, and hear what the boy ulf, who is a marvellously shrewd little knave, may think of the matter." half an hour later the boat put off again; a man came to the side with the visitor and retired below as soon as he left the ship. ulred at once hurried off, hailed a boat a short distance higher up and was rowed to westminster. as soon as he gained the house he despatched ulf to beorn. the latter listened to the discovery that had been made, and then asked the armourer what he advised should be done. "that is just what i am at a loss about, my lord. doubtless were we to go to the city and tell the port-reeve that there are men on that craft who have designs against the king's life, he would pounce upon them and throw them into jail. but we have no evidence to give in support of the charge." beorn nodded his head in agreement. "if i had half a dozen of my own men here," he said hotly, "i would go down in a boat after nightfall, seize the vessel, and put all on board to the sword." "that would hardly do, my lord," the armourer said gravely. "on the high sea doubtless the thing might be done, but here in the port of london it would be a desperate undertaking, especially as we have nought that in the eyes of the law would in any way justify such action." "well, let us have your own advice, then," beorn said impatiently. "you think they cannot be arrested and they may not be slain. what do you counsel shall be done!" "i see nought to do but to continue to wait and to watch. we are better off than we were before, inasmuch as we know where these men are." "yes, but we do not know where they will be to-morrow, for we know nothing of what passed between fitz-urse and them; doubtless some settlement of their plans has been come to. they may land or may sail away, for methinks from the look of the sky there is like to be a change in the weather. you see, the norman may have taken them news that harold will soon be on his way back, for indeed a message arrived from him this morning with news that all things had been well-nigh settled, and that he will shortly make for york, where he is to wed the sister of the northern earls. it may be that the ship may be bound thither also. you left your apprentice on the watch, i suppose?" "yes, i bade him keep his eye on the ship, and should any men leave her he is to follow on their track and mark their movements." "at any rate there can be little need for me to watch this evening," beorn said. "as fitz-urse has seen the others to-day he cannot want to meet them to-night." "no, that is certain," the armourer agreed; "but with your permission i will call ulf in. i told him before i sent him to you what i had observed. are you going to watch again this evening, boy?" he asked when ulf entered. "methinks there can be little chance of his going out again to-night." "i shall keep even a stricter watch than usual, master," ulf said, "for it may be that the agreement at which they arrived to-day is that they sail north, and in that case walter fitz-urse may go on board the ship, and hide there until the wind changes and they can get up sail." "i think the boy is right, my lord. in a dark matter like this, where we know so little, it behoves us to provide for every chance. but i think not that there can be any need for you to be on watch, for it can hardly be that they will hold another consultation on the river bank." ulf returned soon after ten o'clock. "he has not gone out by my gate, master, but i find that my comrade is missing. when i went round as usual to the other entrance he was not there." "perhaps he was tired and went home." "no, indeed," the boy replied indignantly; "he has sworn to do what i told him, and he knows that it would be bad for him if he broke his word; besides, we are sworn comrades. he has never before failed me, and i cannot but think that he must have seen the man go out and followed him. i instructed him that if at any time he saw a man like the one we are looking for he was to follow him wherever he went, and to bring me word whether he met anyone and whether he returned to the palace or went into any house. if he did so he was to make a small mark on the door-post with chalk, so that in the morning he would be able to point it out with surety. i will sit at my window and watch, and i warrant it will not be long before he is here." half an hour later ulf heard steps rapidly approaching; then a low whistle. he put his head out of the window. "what is the news, edwyn?" "a man came out in a cloak. he was tall. i followed him and heard a sword clink under the cloak, and so felt sure it was the man we have been looking for. i stole after him. he went straight down to the river and gave two short calls. a boat was rowed up. only a word or two was spoken, and then he took his seat in it, and it was rowed away down the river." "you have done well, comrade," ulf said. "i warrant that some good will come to us through your discovery. good-night." ulf went and knocked at his master's door, and on ulred opening it he told him the news. "i will go down right early," the armourer said. "it is beginning to rain, master. the frost has broken, and the wind is soft and warm." "so much the worse, boy. i will be up at daylight, and you shall go down the river with me. i may want to send you back with a message to beorn." next morning they had rowed near to london bridge when they saw a boat approaching. the day had broken, but the light was still uncertain. as the boat approached, however, ulf said: "there is a boy in the boat, master, and he wears an apprentice's cap. maybe that it is ernulf." the other boat was keeping close inshore, for the tide had begun to run down. the armourer told the boatman to row closer in, and presently called the boy's name. "yes, master, it is i; i was just coming to you with news." in a couple of minutes the boats were alongside of each other. "what is your news, ernulf? but i can guess; the ship has sailed." "yes, master; i lay down by the open window, and an hour before day broke i was aroused by the creaking of ropes, and looking out could see that the ship was getting up sail. tide was then just on the turn, and five minutes later her sails were spread and she went down the river. i came off to tell you, but was some time before i could get a boat." "come on board here, ernulf," the armourer said, "your message has saved us further journey." he then paid off the lad's boatman, and with his two apprentices returned to westminster. "beorn will be up by this time, ulf. you had best go and tell him the news. i will come with you to save time, though i see not that there is aught to be done." the thane at once came out and chatted for some time with ulred, while ulf stood by, cap in hand. "it is certain that something should be done, and yet i see not what it can be. what think you, boy? i see by your eyes that you would fain speak." "i should say, my lord, that it would be a good thing if we could discover whether the norman is still at the bishop's palace. he may have returned early this morning." "that can easily be done," beorn said. "i will send my man to the bishop's and bid him ask one of the servants if walter fitz-urse is in. he need not say that he comes from me, only that he has a message to deliver. if the servant says he is there i will bid my fellow slip away when the man goes to fetch him down. supposing he has gone, as i should think he has done, what then?" "then, my lord, i think there is more danger than if the norman remained here. it may be that the normans have returned to france and abandoned any plans they may have entertained. but it seems to me far more likely that they have gone north to carry out the enterprise." "whither, think you, will they be bound, ulf?" "i should say to the humber, my lord. they may on landing proceed to york, or, if they have really designs against the king's life, may take post somewhere on the road down from that city." "by my faith the boy is right," beorn said. "what say you, master armourer?" "i say the same, my lord. the villains have slipped through our fingers, and we can do nought to stay them. it seems to me that not an hour should be lost in sending a warning to the thane of steyning." "i will mount myself and ride north," beorn said. "and i, my lord, will at once go down to the port and inquire if there be a ship sailing to-day for the humber. scarce a day passes that one or more do not start for the northern ports. yes, ulf, i shall take you with me. you are charged with this business by the thane of steyning, and i am but aiding you in it. i will go straight away to the city, my lord, and if a ship be sailing--and after so long a bout of east wind it is like that many will be doing so--i will be back in an hour with the news. maybe i can find a quick sailer, and shall be at one of the ports in the humber before the craft that left this morning." "by the time you return i shall have found out whether fitz-urse is at the bishop's palace, and shall have my horses ready to mount." the armourer learnt in the city that several ships for the north had already dropped down the river, and that three others were hastily completing their lading, and would follow by the next tide. he learnt from a trader that one of them was considered especially fast, and being acquainted with the owner, he took the armourer with him, and arranged for a passage for him and the boy. "you will have to be on board this afternoon," the owner said. "the shipmaster will not waste a tide, but as soon as it turns will up anchor and make his way down the river in the dark. he knows the channel well, and there will be light enough to enable him to hold on his course all night. the east wind may return again, and he might be caught; so he has decided to start as soon as the last bale is on board. he knows the sands well, and you may reckon on a speedy passage if the wind holds as it is, or even if it goes round to the east again, when he is once abreast of harwich." on returning to westminster ulred learnt from beorn that fitz-urse was there no longer, having, as the servant said, left for normandy. "i am just starting, ulred. which will be at york first, you or i?" "it depends upon the wind, my lord. a ship can sail night and day, but a horse and rider must take some rest. it may be that we shall lay to at night, but that must depend upon the shipmaster. if the breeze holds and the ship goes on without stopping, methinks we shall be there before you." "at any rate," beorn said, "we may feel sure that we shall both be in time. whatever their designs they will have to lay their plans and wait their opportunity, and such may not come for some time. farewell, then, ulred, and a safe voyage to you. as for me, i have had enough of the sea, and never wish to set foot on board ship again; for what with the want of space and the tossing and the sickness, i would rather pass the time in bonds in a prison cell than be cooped up in a ship." a few minutes later beorn, attended by his servants, started for the north, and in the afternoon ulred, after giving many orders to his head man as to the conduct of his business during his absence, took boat, and with ulf went on board the ship. to the armourer it was a very serious undertaking upon which he was embarking. he had never before set foot on board of a ship, and a sea-voyage in those days was regarded as a very dangerous business. nothing short of his loyalty to harold would have induced him to have ventured on such an expedition. it was but a few months since that the northumbrians had been burning and sacking the country round northampton, and even putting aside the dangers of the sea, he regarded the visit to the north as full of peril. ulf on the other hand was delighted. to him the journey was full of interest and excitement, and on his return he would be regarded as a great traveller by his comrades. his face, therefore, as he climbed on board ship, was in strong contrast to the grave and serious visage of his master. before the vessel had passed greenwich he had made the acquaintance of the two ship's-boys, and soon felt perfectly at home on board. he watched with great interest other craft that they met or passed, and noted with great satisfaction that they overhauled several who had, when first seen, been two or three miles ahead. the wind was blowing briskly from the south-west, and with her great sail set the vessel ran quickly through the water. even when the tide turned she held on her course, and keeping close inshore made good way against it. many times during the night he went out from the close sleeping-place to assure himself that the vessel was still making way. when morning broke the tide had again turned, and ulf found that the vessel was now holding her course near the middle of the river, which had widened to an extent that seemed wonderful to him. "where have we got to now?" he asked one of the boys. "are we out at sea? there does not seem to be any land on the right hand." "you would see it if it were clear. we are just opposite foulness." "the vessel rolls about a good deal." "do you feel ill?" the boy laughed. "this is nothing." "no; i feel hungry, but that is all." "if the wind holds as it is we shall not have it rougher than this, for we shall steer more and more north, and as we always keep inside the sands the land will shelter us. the shortest passage is straight ahead, but we generally go through a channel between two sands into the wallet, which lies between the sands and the essex shore. there are not many ship-masters who will come down the river below sheerness at night, and even our master would not try it with a falling tide; but even if one does touch when the tide is rising, one soon gets off again. she won't roll about so much when we get inside the sands; and besides, i heard the master say that he thought the wind would fall lighter as the sun got up." "i should like it to keep on just as it is," ulf said. "i do not want it to blow so hard that we must go into port, and i don't want it to blow so light that we shall go slowly." "what are you in such a hurry for?" the boy asked. "there are some people my master knows who have gone up in a ship that started yesterday morning, and my master wants to be there before them." "you need not be afraid, he is sure to be there first. like enough we have passed them already. the wind was not so strong yesterday as it was in the night, and i expect they had to anchor when the tide turned. if they have a master who knows the sands well they may have gone on when the tide turned again, but it was likely they would anchor before they got down to sheerness. if they did, we passed them three or four hours ago. but anyhow you are sure to be in first. we often beat vessels that started with us, by a week. most of them go outside all the sands when it is fine weather, but we always keep inside; and it makes a great difference, for the tides do not run so strong, and even with a light wind we can make way against them, while those outside have to anchor." "i can't make out how you can find your way in the dark." "if it is a thick night and the weather is bad we anchor, but when it is clear enough to see the stars, or if the wind is steady so as to give us our direction, we go on. there is a man always standing at the side with a lead-line, and that tells us the depth of water, which is quite guide enough for the master. of course we never sail in rough weather, for if we went on the sand then we should soon go to pieces; but if it is fine when we stick fast, which is very seldom, we put out the anchor and lower the sail, and go to sleep until the tide floats us again. come up into the top; you can see a great deal farther from there than you can from the deck." ulf found no difficulty in mounting to the top, although he was much longer than his companion in getting up. there were several sail following them, and ulf was surprised at the knowledge his companion showed of vessels that appeared to him almost precisely similar. "the one nearest to us is the alfred," he said. "i know her by that patch on her sail. she trades with harwich. those two smaller craft behind are bound, i should say, for colchester or maldon. that craft two miles ahead of us is a foreigner. you can see her sail has a longer yard than the others, and the sail is narrower at the bottom than it is at the top. those two or three small craft you see more inshore have passed through the channel we shall follow into the wallet. the farthest one is going on to harwich, the others into the rivers. there is a craft about our own size hull down close by the land. she may be going to harwich, or may be going on north. she looks to me like a foreigner. if so, she has come last from london. french and flemish ships do not come within fifty miles of this. and now i must go down. we do the cooking, and breakfast must be ready in half an hour, or the master will be storming at us." the wind held steadily from the south-west, and the vessel ran along near the shore in smooth water. the armourer had been ill the first night, but he came on deck soon after breakfast, and when once the vessel was past the mouth of harwich bay and was close inland, he soon recovered. on the morning of the fourth day after leaving port she entered the mouth of the humber, and by nine o'clock arrived at hull. landing at once the armourer found a small vessel on the point of starting for york, and in half an hour from the time of weighing anchor the tide turned, and they ran rapidly along, helped by the flood. "at what time will you reach york?" the armourer asked the master. "by daylight to-morrow. we shall sail on until the flood is spent, and then anchor and go on again as soon as the ebb has done." "how far will you be from york when you anchor?" "we shall most likely get to selby, some fourteen miles away by the road, though farther by the turns of the river." "could you put us ashore there, for we are anxious to reach the city as soon as possible?" "oh, yes. i will put you ashore in the boat either there or wherever else we may bring up." they were three miles short of selby when the ebb began to come down and the anchor was dropped. the armourer and ulf were at once landed, and shouldering their bundles they set out at a brisk pace and passed through selby at four o'clock. no questions were asked them. there was but small difference of dress between the people of the various parts of england, and it was no unusual sight to see traders and others passing along the road on their way to the northern capital. "i am right glad to be on firm land again," ulred said; "for although, after the first night, matters have been better than i expected, there was always a movement that seemed to make my head swim." "i liked it, master," ulf said, "and if it were not that i am going to be an armourer i would gladly be a sailor." "you might not have said so if you had seen bad weather; and moreover, it is one thing to be a passenger with nought to do but to amuse yourself, and another to be always hauling at ropes and washing down decks as a sailor. i am glad night is coming on, for i feel strange in this country i know nothing of, and in the dark one place is like another." "i would much rather walk along this road in the dark," ulf laughed, "than along some of the streets of london, where one may step any moment into a deep hole or stumble into a heap of refuse." "at any rate, in the dark no one can see we are strangers, ulf, and though i should not think there would be robbers on the road so near to york, these danes are rough folk, and i want to meet none of them. one man, or even two, i in no ways fear, but when it comes to half a dozen even the best sword-player may wish himself out of it." they met, however, but one or two men on the road, and beyond exchanging the usual salutation nothing was said; but ulred was well pleased when about seven o'clock they entered the streets of york. they had already learned that the royal marriage had taken place on the previous day, and that the king was expected to remain in york two days longer before journeying south. there was a banquet being held at the archbishop's palace, where the king was lodged, and on arriving there they found that it would at present be impossible to get at wulf, as supper had just been served. a small bribe, however, was sufficient to induce one of the bishop's servants to take the message to osgod, who would be stationed near his master's chair, that his father was at the entrance and prayed him to come out to him as soon as possible. a few minutes later the tall saxon came out with an expression of utter bewilderment on his face. "is it really you, father, in flesh and blood?" he exclaimed as his eyes fell on ulred. "i have never been taken for a ghost, osgod, and if i were to give thee a buffet methinks you would have no doubt upon the matter." "but what brings you here, father? if they had told me that the great abbey tower stood without i could not be more surprised." "do you not see that i have brought ulf with me, osgod? if your head were not so thick you would guess at once that i have come about the business with which he was charged." osgod looked relieved. that his father should be in york had seemed to him so strange and outrageous that he had first doubted his own eyes, and then his father's sanity. now for the first time the object of his coming flashed upon him. "is there danger, father?" "methinks there is great danger. but the story is a long one." "then i cannot wait to hear it now, for i must needs return to wulf. i whispered in his ear that i must leave for a moment, but that i should be back directly." "then just whisper to him again, osgod, that i have urgent need for speech with him. i suppose beorn has not arrived?" "beorn!" osgod repeated vaguely. "the thane of fareham," the armourer said sharply. "are your wits wool-gathering altogether?" "no, he is not here; nor has wulf said a word of his coming, as he assuredly would have done had he expected him." "well, when i tell you that he is riding from london, while i have come thence by sea, you may suppose that we thought the matter urgent." "i will tell wulf at once, father, but i am sure that he cannot come out for an hour yet." "the matter will keep that while. i will go and look for a lodging for us and get something to eat, for we have walked some seventeen miles, and my legs are not so accustomed to exercise as my arms. in an hour we will be here again." ulred and his apprentice had returned to the gate of the bishop's palace but a few minutes when wulf came out, followed by osgod. "your message must be an important one, indeed, ulred, to cause you to leave the forge and to undertake so long a voyage. and you say beorn is riding hither on the same errand?" "he is. it is a sort of race between us, and it seems that we have won." "let us step aside from here," wulf said. "there are too many gathered about to stare at the guests as they come and go for us to talk unobserved. the cathedral yard is close by, and there will be no fear of eaves-droppers there." "it is ulf's story," the armourer said when they reached the shadow of the cathedral. "it is to him that the matter was committed, and though he was forced to take me into his confidence, the merit of following up the matter, if merit there be, is his." ulf accordingly related the story of his watching, the discovery he had made by the river, and how walter fitz-urse had been afterwards seen to embark and had not returned. ulred then stated how he had discovered the ship from which the boat had come, and had seen the norman go on board, and how, when he learned that the ship had sailed, he had, after seeing beorn, taken passage in another vessel. "we have come up fast," he said, "and the opinion of the master was that we have gained a full day on any craft that started that morning. of course, we know not that the villains have come hither; they may have returned to france, they may have gone up some of the other rivers in order to take post on the road the king will follow on his way south. but at any rate we felt it right that you should know that fitz-urse, with those with whom he has been holding secret communication, have left london." "you have done rightly indeed, ulred, and in the king's name and for myself i thank you heartily. of course, we are still without any proof that fitz-urse is conspiring against the king's life. it was unfortunate indeed that ulf did not understand the first conversation he heard, but i ought to have foreseen that it was likely that any talk fitz-urse might have with others would be in norman. i cannot think now how i could have overlooked such a probability. of course, in the years that he has been over here he has learnt to speak our language, but it would be with normans he would deal in the matter of which we suspect him. i will give myself the night to think over the matter before i decide what steps we had better take. inside the bishop's palace, at any rate, the king is safe, and, as you say, it is not likely that the normans can be here for a day at least. if their ship is a french one the master will be ignorant of the dangers of the coast, and instead of threading his way through the channels of the sands, as your master did, will have held his course far outside them. i would we knew how many men are engaged in the matter." "as to that we have no clue," the armourer said. "there was the man of his own rank and the other two who met him on the bank, but whether these were all, or whether there were a score of others on board the ship, i know not. certainly none showed themselves on the deck while i was watching them. but this proves nothing. they would naturally be kept in concealment, for had there been an unusual number of men on board, inquiries would have been made as to whom they were and their business." "i will meet you here at seven to-morrow morning, ulred, and we shall then have time to talk the matter over more fully." chapter xvii. an attempt at assassination. when wulf met the armourer next morning in the cathedral close he was accompanied by beorn, who said, laughing, to the latter, "you have beaten me fairly, friend ulred, and it is well that i had no wager with you on the race. but it was not by much, for i rode in here as the bells were chiming eleven. i was glad to hear from wulf when i roused him up that he had learnt all the news from you, for indeed i was sore weary, and was right pleased to wrap myself in my cloak and go straight to sleep instead of having to sit up for an hour expounding my story." "we have resolved in the first place, ulred, to say nought of this matter to the king," began wulf. "he will have enough to occupy all his thoughts in the affairs of the kingdom, and in the second place his nature is so open that he will refuse to believe in such villainy unless upon strong proof, and of actual proof we have none. beorn's appearance here will excite no surprise. he will say that having nought in particular to occupy him he had ridden north to be at the wedding, and finding that he was too late, would at any rate ride back with the king. with him and me and osgod ever on the watch, methinks there will be little fear of a surprise; and it is by surprise only that they can succeed, for harold himself is a match for any four or five ordinary men if he has but time to draw his sword. i will, however, on some excuse have half a score of harold's housecarls placed under my orders, and sleeping or waking the king shall never be a moment unguarded. "i should not think it is likely that fitz-urse will have more than five or six men associated with him in such an enterprise. he would not take more into his confidence than he could help, and six would suffice as well as a score for a surprise; and that number could travel in disguise without exciting attention, while twenty would assuredly do so; therefore i feel sure that we shall not have to deal with more than six, including the two leaders. ulf, do you station yourself at the river-bank and mark any vessels arriving. if the men come hither they will probably do as you did, leave their ship at hull and come up by a local trader. they would thus avoid all questions they might be asked if passing through the country on foot." "and what is there for me to do, my lord wulf?" the armourer said. "frankly, i have gone so far in this matter that i would fain see it through." "of course we reckon upon you, ulred. i have been talking it over with beorn, and it seemed to us that the best thing will be for you to ride with osgod. you can either make some slight change in your clothes and ride as a man of mine, or you can ride as osgod's father, who, having come up here on matters connected with your business, have obtained permission to ride in my train with him. i will see that you have that permission." "i care not how i go so that i can be at hand if there is a blow to be struck for the king." "then in that case, ulred, it were best you went as my man, for you would then have the entry of the houses where the king will stop and can aid us in keeping guard." "that will do well for me," ulred replied. "ulf had best journey back as he came. he might go by ship after the king has left here." "no, he shall travel with us. i will see the chamberlain who has charge of the arrangements of the journey, and will get leave for him to ride in the waggons with the servants." during the three days before the king left york ulf kept a vigilant watch over the boats that came up the river, but he could see nothing of the men he was searching for. wulf had bought a horse for the armourer, and when they started the latter took his place by osgod's side, while ulf was seated in one of the waggons. the king rode with bishop wulfstan, next to them rode the four thanes who had accompanied them through their journey, and next to these wulf and beorn came on together. behind came the queen's litter, with a guard of housecarls, the main body of whom rode just behind, while the waggons and servants brought up the rear. "we need not trouble ourselves on the march, beorn. it is not while the king rides with so strong a following that the blow will be struck." "i see not when they can ever get a chance," beorn said. "the king will stop always at religious houses, and they will scarcely storm a convent to get at him." "they would not attempt to storm it, beorn, but they might enter it secretly. but for my own part i think the most dangerous time is when he mounts or dismounts. there is always a crowd assembled to see him, and two or three reckless men might rush forward and stab him." "it would be at the cost of their own lives," beorn objected. "it might be, but they would reckon much on the confusion that would follow, and might think so to get away. they would probably have horses somewhere close at hand, and might ride for the port where they had left their ship. it is a great stake they are playing for, and doubtless they are desperate men; though they would know the danger they might calculate that some at least would escape to claim the reward. then again, they might manage to mingle with the servitors at one of the places where we stop. this would not be difficult, for many beside the usual establishment would be hired to aid in the preparations for the reception of the king. that might be their safest plan, for were he stabbed suddenly at a meal the assassins might very well escape in the confusion." the first night they slept at a monastery at the village of bautre. the establishment was but a small one, and could entertain only the king and queen, with the thanes and their personal attendants. the rest of the train were lodged in the village. although they had little fear that an attack would be ventured in so quiet a village where the presence of strangers would at once attract attention, wulf, beorn, and osgod kept watch in turns all night in the corridor. the night passed without cause of alarm, and the next day they rode to nottingham, where they were lodged in the bishop's palace. beorn and wulf agreed that this was the place where there was the greatest likelihood of an attack being made on harold's life. the ship might have sailed up the river and landed her passengers a few miles from the town, where, among the number of country people who would flock in to obtain sight of the king, no one would think of questioning strangers. the armourer and ulf were charged to wander about the streets, and to closely scan every face. wulf had with some difficulty obtained from harold the command of twelve of the soldiers. "i have my reasons, my lord king, though i would rather not state them. i would remind you that i have shown that it is not my habit to take alarm lightly. your brother gurth laughed at me when i begged to watch over his camp with my housecarls, and i saved him from a sudden attack by the welsh thereby." "then you think that there is danger of an attack upon me, wulf?" "i said not so, my lord. i have only begged you to appoint twelve of your men to obey my orders solely, during your journey to london." "you shall do as you like, wulf," the king said at last. "you have proved yourself brave as well as prudent before now, and are not given to vain fears, therefore do as you please, but let me know nought about it. i shall have to receive the visits of all the thanes of the neighbourhood when i reach nottingham, and the same in other towns. there will be many persons coming in with petitions for the redress of grievances, and i would not have my thoughts disturbed by other matters." "you shall know nought about it, my lord," wulf said. "it is like enough that nothing will come of the matter, and none will be more glad than myself to find that i am mistaken." orders accordingly had been given to the officer of the king's guard to hand over twelve of his men to wulf, and the latter had begged him to choose twelve of his most intelligent men for this service. as soon as they reached nottingham wulf took his small command aside. "you have been chosen," he said, "for a special duty. i have learned that there are disaffected men who may possibly make an attempt on the king's life. you are to say no word of what i tell you to anyone. meet me over by that wall half an hour after sunset. gather quietly one by one so as to attract no attention. you will be posted round the palace, to keep watch and ward during the night. as soon as it is daylight half of you will lie down and sleep till mid-day, and then be in readiness for fresh duty. the others i will instruct as to where to hold themselves. the king will remain here two days, and watch must be kept over his safety night and day." as soon as their apartments were assigned to the different guests wulf went outside and examined the windows of the rooms to be occupied by the king. they were on the first floor, and looked into a garden surrounded by a high wall. "at any rate, there is little fear of a successful surprise from this side," wulf said to beorn, who was with him. "it would need a ladder to scale the wall; this would have to be pulled up for them to descend into the garden, and then carried across to mount to the window. if we post ulred with two men here and let four others lie down near to change guard every two hours, it will be ample, for on an alarm being given, the normans however numerous will see that their attempt must fail. we can therefore send the other six to bed after supper is over, for we cannot suppose that they would be so daring as to force their way into the palace at any other point." as soon as it was dark ulred and six of the soldiers were placed in the garden; the others were directed to hold themselves in readiness to take their post in the banqueting-hall. just before the bell sounded for supper wulf was told that a boy desired to speak to him at the gate. he hurried out, and, as he expected, saw ulf waiting there. "what news, ulf,--hast seen walter fitz-urse?" "i have not seen him, my lord, but i am sure that i heard him speak. there was a great crowd in the square after the king had entered, and among those round me i heard one man speak to another in a foreign tongue, and the voice was assuredly that of walter fitz-urse. it was but two or three words he said, but having listened to him for well-nigh half an hour that night by the river, i am certain i was not mistaken in the voice. close beside me were two cowled monks, and i believe that it was one of them who spoke. i looked round at the faces of the other men standing near, but they all seemed honest countrymen or town folk. i should have followed the monks to see where they went, but at that moment there was a rush among the crowd to see some mummers who had just commenced their antics, and i was swept along by it; and though i have been searching ever since, and have so stared up into the cowls of monks, that i have been cursed as an insolent boy many times, i have not seen our man." "thanks, ulf. it is something to have learned that he is here. as to his disguise, he may by this time have changed it. still, i will be on my guard, and will take care that no cowled monk approaches too closely to the king. take your place here at the gate and watch all who come in and out, and if you see aught suspicious send in a soldier, whom i will place by your side, to fetch me out." one of the men was accordingly placed with the boy with orders to come to wulf, whether at the table or in the king's room, the moment ulf told him to do so. when the others went into the banquet wulf posted two men just outside the door, and placed the other three back against the wall nearest to the king's chair. here, standing against the arras, they were concealed from the sight of the guests by the crowd of servitors passing to and fro. "stand with your hands on your daggers," wulf said to them, "and watch every man who approaches the king, no matter of what degree he may appear. be ready to spring forward in an instant if you see his hand go to his dagger." the bishop and king sat next to each other in the centre of the table on the dais; on either side were the king's thanes, abbots and other dignitaries of the church, and the nobles of the country. wulf and beorn had begged to be excused from supping, and permission had been readily granted by the king, as he knew that the bishop would be glad at having two extra seats at his disposal; and they also, standing back by the wall, closely scrutinized the movements of the attendants. it was a relief to them when supper was over and the bishop and his principal guests retired to a private room. the five soldiers were then told that they would not be required until morning. wulf went out to the gate, and learnt from ulf that he had seen no one enter whom he took for fitz-urse. "he may have gone in by some other entrance, my lord," he said, "for there are three or four ways into the palace." "we shall be on watch inside, ulf. you need stay no longer. be here in the morning at seven." after the king and queen had retired to bed and the palace was quiet wulf, beorn, and osgod stole from their room, and noiselessly passed along the corridors until they came to the king's apartment, and then lay down across the door. they were to keep watch in turns, osgod being told to keep the first watch and to rouse wulf at midnight. this he did, and wulf lay for some time listening intently. the corridor was faintly lit by two lamps, one at either end. wulf had chosen the middle watch, because he thought that if any attempt was made it would be soon after midnight, as the assassins would wish to have many hours of darkness in which to make their escape. he knew that beorn was a sound sleeper, and could scarcely be trusted to keep awake from midnight until four o'clock, and that it were best he himself watched during that time. half an hour passed, and then he heard a very slight noise. a moment later four figures appeared at the end of the corridor. he dared not wake his companions, for they might speak or move, but he grasped his sword-hilt, having drawn the blade in readiness when osgod woke him. the men advanced stealthily, and as they approached he saw they had drawn swords in their hands. they paused a few paces away, and in a whisper one said: "here are three fellows asleep; what shall we do with them?" "draw your daggers and stab them to the heart," another replied. "each take one, and do not bungle over it. as you strike i will open the door and rush in. now!" wulf had gathered his legs under him in readiness to spring to his feet as soon as he saw the figures, and as they swiftly advanced he leapt up with a shout and crossed swords with the man nearest to him. "cut him down! kill him! it is too late to draw back now!" one of the men cried. the others, who had recoiled a moment when wulf sprang up, rushed at him just as he cut down the man he had first engaged. "cut them down and fly!" the one who had before given orders exclaimed, lunging furiously at wulf. "easier said than done, walter fitz-urse!" wulf exclaimed, as he parried a blow and dealt one in return. it lighted on his opponent's shoulder, but the blade shivered in his hand, for it had fallen upon mail armour concealed under the norman's garment. "it is my turn now!" fitz-urse exclaimed, and raised his sword to strike a sweeping blow at wulf's head, but before it could fall the latter leapt forward and caught the uplifted wrist, the impetus of the spring throwing his opponent backwards, while wulf fell heavily upon him, and for a moment they rolled over and over. but wulf was by far the most powerful, and speedily got the upper hand. he had not noticed that his opponent, while holding his sword in his right hand, had his dagger already drawn in his left. the sword had flown from fitz-urse's hand as he fell, and wulf, believing him to be powerless, glanced round to see how the fray went with the others, when the norman stabbed him deeply in the side. before he could repeat the blow wulf snatched his own dagger from his girdle and buried it in the assassin's throat then he raised himself on his left hand. it was but a matter of seconds since the fight had commenced, but it was already over. osgod had slain one man, beorn was following a flying opponent down the corridor, and harold, sword in hand, had just rushed from his chamber. wulf saw no more, but fell over insensible by the side of his adversary. "what is all this?" harold shouted as he turned to osgod, the only figure standing, raising his sword as he spoke, for in the dim light he did not recognize him. "it means, my lord, that there has been an attempt on your life. i am osgod, wulf's man. i fear my brave young master is killed!" and he dropped on his knees by wulf's side. by this time doors were opening all along the corridor, and the king's thanes and other guests, awakened by wulf's shout and the clashing of swords, were pouring out, armed with the first weapon they could snatch up. "bring lights!" harold shouted. "my life has been attempted, and i fear that the brave thane of steyning is killed." the alarm spread fast, and the palace so lately hushed and silent was now in an uproar, while the bishop with many other ecclesiastics, with servants, retainers, and men-at-arms, mingled with the thanes. "keep all back!" harold cried. "let none approach these bodies until we have examined them." torches were soon brought. harold seized one, and bent over wulf's body. "is he dead?" "his heart beats, but feebly, my lord," osgod replied. "where is he hurt?" "there is a great patch of blood here on his right side just over the hip. i see no other sign of a wound." "we will carry him into my chamber," the king said. "but no; i forgot, the queen is there. we will take him into the room opposite; it matters not whose it is. now, osgod, aid me to lift him gently. bishop, i pray you send for the leeches most skilled in the treatment of sword wounds in the city." then he and osgod carried wulf into the chamber opposite his own, and laid him on a pallet. "now see to the staunching of the flow of blood till the leeches arrive. i must inquire into this matter. who knows aught about it?" he asked as he went out into the corridor. "i do, my lord king," beorn replied as he pushed his way through the throng. "it was a plot to take your life. wulf, his man osgod, and myself had no certain knowledge of it, but we had cause for suspicion, and therefore lay outside your door. we were to take it in turns to watch. wulf was on guard, and as i awoke at his shout i saw him cut down that villain who lies there with a cleft skull there were three others. i fell upon one, osgod took another, while wulf engaged the man who seemed to be the leader. wulf's sword broke, but he closed with his opponent and they fell together. osgod ran his man through, and my opponent fled. i could not catch him until he reached the door, but as that was closed he could fly no farther, and i slew him there." "who and what are these men, good beorn?" "they are, i believe, normans; but i know naught for certain beyond the fact that the leader, he with whom wulf was engaged, is walter fitz-urse, who was a page of the bishop william of london, and was well known at the court." exclamations of fury and indignation broke from those around, with the cries of "death to the normans!" harold raised his hand. "silence, my friends. let us be fair and just as it becomes englishmen. there are villains of all nations, and it is not because four caitiffs have thought to do a good service to their duke by getting rid of me that we should blame men who will abhor this crime as much as we can do. first let us see if beorn is right as to this man. hold a torch to his face. it is fitz-urse truly. he was of knightly blood, but has died in a most unknightly business. wulf's dagger is still in his throat. let us see if we know anything of the others." "i think that you will find them all strangers, my lord," beorn said. "i believe they came from beyond the sea to do this deed." the man whom wulf had first slain was evidently by his dress a person of some rank; the other was of inferior station, as was also, as it was found, the man beorn had killed. "now, my lord bishop," the king said calmly, "we have a right next to ask you how these men came to be in your palace. know you aught of them?" "i know nothing of them," the bishop replied. "so far as i am aware i have never seen any of their faces before, and assuredly they were not here with my cognizance. i will at once question all my people shrewdly, and woe be to him who has admitted strangers here unknown to me at the time when you were beneath my roof." "and have this house searched from basement to roof, bishop. it may be that there are others in hiding." "with your permission, my lord," said beorn, "i will at once take your men, of whom we have posted six under your window, and will call up some more and search the town. it is likely that there are others without with horses held in readiness for these assassins to escape." "do so, beorn. it will be well if we can catch some at least, so that we can get to the bottom of this matter." the bishop at once ordered his armed retainers to accompany beorn, and then proceeded to interrogate his officials and the domestics, and to see that the latter made a complete search of the palace. all denied any knowledge of strangers having entered, and the search revealed nothing but four monks' gowns and hoods found wrapped up in a bundle in a small room downstairs. further questions had been then put. some of the domestics remembered that four monks had entered the palace late in the evening, and one of the under chamberlains said that he had seen them, and they had told him that they had just arrived from flanders, and craved permission to sleep in the palace for the night, as they were going on to peterborough in the morning. he had told them that this was impossible, as he could give no permission without the leave of the bishop, who was at present with the king and could not be disturbed, and that, moreover, every room in the palace was occupied. he had given them the address of a citizen, who would he was sure take them in. they had thanked him, and said that they would go there, but doubtless instead of doing so they had slipped aside, and had hidden themselves in the room where their gowns were found. it was one used only for the storage of garments for poor travellers who came along, and no one was likely to enter it on such an evening. this discovery was a great relief to the bishop and all within the palace, as it showed that they were not there with the connivance of any of the prelate's people. before the matter was fully unravelled beorn returned. they had in a quiet spot a short distance from the palace come upon two men with six horses. before they could run up and seize them the two men had leapt up into the saddles and galloped furiously away. unfortunately the other four horses had followed, and immediate pursuit was therefore impossible. the housecarls had run to the spot where their horses were stabled and had gone off in pursuit, but beorn feared that the men would have far too great a start to be overtaken. one of the officers had ridden with the housecarls, and beorn had told him to keep by the river-bank, as the men would assuredly make for a ship that was lying somewhere down the river, though whether at a distance of two miles or of twenty he knew not. long before beorn's return wulf's wound had been examined. unguents had been poured into it and bandages applied. the surgeons were of opinion that it was a very grave one, but that at present they could not say how the matter would terminate. "your story will keep till the morning, beorn," the king said. "it is still five hours to daylight, and we may as well retire to rest, unless, indeed, you know that there are others engaged in the affair in london or elsewhere who should be arrested before the news of the night's business reaches them." "i know of none such," beorn said, "and believe that these four and the two who have escaped were alone concerned in it. i will bring with me in the morning a man and a boy who know more than i do of the matter; they and osgod, with whom wulf will assuredly have talked it over, will be able to tell you all that was known up to the moment when these men entered the palace." the armourer and ulf told their story in the morning, and beorn took osgod's place by wulf's bedside, while he too was questioned by the king. the latter then went to wulf's chamber. "what say the leeches this morning, beorn? "they are somewhat more hopeful, my lord. they say that his heart beats more strongly than it did last night, osgod says that he has not moved or opened his eyes, but they say that this is not a bad sign, and that it may be anxiety has brought on an exhaustion, for his breathing is more like that of one who sleeps than of a man wounded to death." "his face has grieviously changed since yesterday," the king said sadly, looking down upon wulf. "i would give my right hand rather than that he should die. you have of a surety saved my life among you, beorn, you and his stout man-at-arms and the worthy armourer and that shrewd apprentice of his for had they entered my chamber and taken me unawares they would have slain me without doubt." "i have done the best i could since i learnt from the armourer the suspicion that wulf entertained, but the whole thing is wulf's doing. had i heard that walter fitz-urse was back in london i should have given the matter no further thought than that it was one norman the more. it was, as he told me, some words that baron de burg said when he saw him over in normandy the other day that first set him thinking. then, he could not understand why fitz-urse should return to london at this time, when normans are not overwelcome there, and this caused him to have some sort of suspicion as to his reasons for undertaking such a journey, and determined him to set a watch on the fellow's movements. had it been any other than wulf who had so acted i should have laughed at his suspicions. but he is as a brother to me, and knowing how sharp are his wits i am always well content to follow him without question. i first heard of the matter after the discovery that the norman was having secret meetings with some of his countrymen who were concealed on board a ship, and i at once felt sure that wulf had not been running on a false trail, and so did the little i could to aid those who had the matter in hand." "you have done well, beorn, though as you say it is doubtless wulf to whom the chief credit is due. i regretted at first that the other two men had escaped, but had they been taken they might, to save their own lives, have implicated others, and i might have been forced to lay a complaint against the duke of normandy. as it is now, the matter is at an end. four men have tried to murder me, and have been killed. their bodies have been buried this morning, and there is no more to be said about it. "i was obliged to go down and show myself to the people an hour since, for they assembled in a great crowd, clamouring to see me so that they might know i was safe. i told them that while i thanked them for their loyal care, there was nought to be alarmed about. it was true that there had been an attempt on my life by four men, of whom the leader had a private grudge against me for a disservice i did him some years ago, but that all had been killed by my guards without even penetrating my chamber, and that i had run no sort of personal risk, nor had i any reason whatever to suppose that the malefactors had accomplices either within or without the palace." late in the evening, when the surgeons were applying pungent salts to his nostrils, wulf opened his eyes. osgod was standing beside him holding one of his hands. "it is all well, master," he said. "we finished them all off, and no harm has happened to the king. you have been hurt, but i hope you will soon be better. the leeches say that you are not to talk, and you had best sleep as much as you can. they have got some stuff for you to drink here; do you lie still and i will pour it between your lips." a look of intelligence came into wulf's eyes as osgod spoke; he smiled faintly, and murmured, "thank god, the king is safe!" he swallowed a few spoonfuls of the potion osgod held to his lips, and then closing his eyes his regular breathing soon showed that he was again asleep. on the following day the king proceeded on his way to london, beorn remaining to nurse wulf. the king would have loaded ulred with presents, but the sturdy armourer refused to receive anything save a small gold cup in remembrance. "i want no reward for doing my duty," he said. "i have my trade that keeps me, and should be no happier were i laden with money. all that i have done in the matter has been to watch for a few hours at a window, and to make a journey by ship to york, and i should be ashamed of myself indeed if i could not take that slight trouble for my king without looking for a reward." as to ulf he was thanked and praised, but the king decided to take no steps to alter his condition until wulf should be well enough to be consulted in the matter. it was a fortnight before the doctors were able to state with any confidence that the young thane was on the road towards recovery, and still another month before he had gained sufficient strength to be carried in a litter to london. chapter xviii. the northern invasion. the news of harold's marriage to ealdgyth put an end to the demands of william of normandy that harold should take one of his daughters to wife, and in the complaints that he addressed to all christendom against harold the breach of his promise in this respect was placed far more prominently than his failure to carry out his oath to be the duke's man. it must have been evident indeed to all that it was beyond the power of the english king to keep this oath, obtained from him by force and treachery. he had been elected by the voice of the english people, and had no more power than the meanest of his subjects to hand the crown they had bestowed to another. the breach of this oath, however, served to obtain all the aid that the church could give to william. harold was solemnly excommunicated, and the struggle for which the duke was preparing thereupon assumed the character of a sacred war. in england itself the bull of excommunication had no effect whatever. the great bulk of bishops and clergy were englishmen, and thought far more of their king than of any foreign prince or prelate. even the bishops and abbots of norman blood disregarded the commination, and remained staunch to harold. he had been a generous patron to the church, had maintained them in all the privileges and dignities that edward had bestowed upon them, and possessed the love of the whole english people; therefore, in spite of bann and interdict the churches remained open, services were held as usual, and people were married and buried as if the papal bull had never been issued. but it was not so on the continent. the norman barons as a body had at first refused to support the duke in an invasion of england, but as individuals they had been brought round to join in william's project, and to give far more aid in ships and men than they were bound to do by their feudal engagements. having accomplished this, william issued an invitation to all adventurous spirits in europe to join him in his crusade against the excommunicated king of england, promising that all should share alike in the plunder of england and in the division of its land. the bait was a tempting one. some joined the enterprise merely for the sake of gaining glory under the banner of one who was regarded as the greatest military leader in europe, others were influenced by love of gain, while, as in the crusades, numbers joined to obtain absolution for past misdeeds by taking part in an enterprise blessed by the pope. thus the force which william was collecting greatly exceeded that which the resources of normandy alone could have set on foot. among the first to hurry to the court of william, as soon as harold's accession to the throne was known, was tostig, in whose mind the refusal of harold to embark in a civil war for his sake, and to force him upon the people of northumbria in spite of their detestation of him, was an injury not to be forgiven. the fact that tostig was ready thus to sacrifice england to his own private quarrel showed a baseness and recklessness that could hardly be expected from his early career. william naturally accepted the alliance, received tostig's oath of allegiance, and aided him in fitting out a number of ships manned by norman and flemish adventurers. evading the watch kept by the english fleet they crossed the sea, landed, and plundered and ravaged a considerable extent of country, and then retired, tostig being enraged that william of normandy was unwilling to send an expedition to act in concert with him until the whole of his plans were prepared and his great army ready for sea. normandy indeed had been converted into a vast camp. in every port great numbers of workmen laboured night and day building ships, for normandy had ceased to be a naval power, and its shipping was utterly insufficient to carry the great army across. tostig, impatient and hasty, thought no more of the oath of allegiance that he had sworn to william. driven from yorkshire by the forces of the northern earls he sailed to scotland, where he was welcomed by king malcolm, both as a sworn brother and as the enemy of england. from scotland he entered into negotiations with harold hardrada of norway. this warlike monarch was in a fit mood to listen to his advances; he had for years been engaged in a struggle with denmark, which he had ineffectually attempted to conquer, and had at last been forced to conclude a treaty of peace with sweyn, its king. tostig had already endeavoured by personal persuasions to induce sweyn to revive his claim to the crown of england, and to undertake its conquest; but he altogether declined to undertake so dangerous and difficult an enterprise, and tostig had then turned to harold of norway. whether his interview with him was before he went to scotland or whether he went thence to norway is a point on which historians differ. some deny that any interview took place, but the balance of probability lies strongly in favour of an early interview, at which harold entered heartily into tostig's plans, and began at once to make preparations for the enterprise. it was certain that an invading force from norway would land in northumbria, and harold, although he might not be able to rely greatly upon the assistance of the northern earls as against the normans, knew that they would do their best to defeat an expedition landing on their own shores, especially when tostig was a sharer in the invasion. his own thoughts were wholly bent upon repelling the mighty expedition gathering in normandy, and for this purpose, by immense efforts, he collected the greatest army and fleet that had ever been got together in england. an incessant watch was kept up along the coast where the normans might be expected to land, while the fleet cruised for months between the thames and the isle of wight prepared to give battle to the invaders. but the conditions of service in england were such that it was impossible to keep a great force on foot for an indefinite time. the housecarls were the only regular portion of the army the great bulk of the force, both land and sea, consisting of the levies or militia, whose term of service was very limited. it says much for the influence of harold that he was able for four months to keep his army and navy together. had the foe appeared, soldiers and sailors would have done their duty, but the long term of inaction, the weary waiting for a foe that never came, was too much, and when september arrived and the harvest was ready to be gathered it was impossible even for him to keep the men longer together. the army disbanded, the levies went to their homes, and the ships of the fleet sailed away to the ports to which they belonged. all the efforts and anxieties of harold, all his lavish expenditure in feeding and providing for so great a number of men had been thrown away. england lay for a time absolutely defenceless against the coming storm. it was not until august that wulf had completely recovered his strength, and was able to join the army. "this is not a time," harold said to him on the day he arrived at the camp, "for the granting of dignities or the bestowal of grants. but if we are successful, and i remain king of england, the services you have rendered me at the risk of your life, wulf, shall be worthily rewarded." "i need no reward," wulf replied. "my estates are sufficient for all my needs, and i desire neither land nor dignity, being more than content that i have been enabled to render a service to you and to england." wulf was, however, at once appointed as commander of the whole of the housecarls supplied by the thanes of the south coast of sussex. none of these bodies were equal in strength to his own carefully prepared contingent, few of the thanes having kept up more than fifteen or twenty men constantly under arms, and these only for the past few months, in consequence of harold's exhortations. altogether the force amounted to about four hundred men. each party had its own sub-officer, and wulf did his best to weld them into one body. when the army broke up, he returned with the king to westminster. the day after he arrived there a man met him as he issued from the palace, and handed him a letter. it contained but the words: "_i would fain see you. if you will follow the bearer he will bring you to me. say naught to any one of this message. edith._" "is the distance far?" he asked the man. "it is to croydon, my lord. i have ridden here on horseback." wulf at once ordered his horse to be brought to him. "will you be back to-night, my lord," osgod asked, as he mounted, "in case the king should wish to see you?" "i shall not be back till late, possibly not until to-morrow i do not tell you where i am going, in order that if you are asked you may be able truly to reply that i said nothing before i mounted, as to my destination." it was just mid-day when wulf drew up his horse before a modest house standing in a secluded position a quarter of a mile from the village of croydon. edith met him at the doorway. "i thank you, wulf, for answering my request so speedily. there is much that i would ask you about my lord. i hear of him only by general report, for although from time to time i send him messages i give him no opportunity for writing to me, and i know that he has respected my wishes, and has caused no search to be made for me." "harold sometimes speaks to me of you, lady, and has in no way forgotten you. he did charge me to find out if i could the place of your abode; not that he would seek an interview with you, but, should there be need, he might be able to send a message." by this time they were seated in the room where edith spent the greater part of her time. "it is better that we should not meet," she said earnestly. "his mission is to work and to fight for england; mine to remain apart from all men and to spend my time in prayers for him. i know that he places great confidence in you, as indeed he well may, for i heard how you had saved his life, well nigh at the expense of your own. is he happy with his new queen?" "his thoughts at present, lady, are altogether turned to public affairs, and it is well perhaps that it should be so. i do not think that he receives much sympathy from the queen, who cares more, i should say, for her brothers, the northern earls, than for her husband." "it is scarce a wonder that it should be so," edith replied; "though it seems strange to me that any woman could live with harold without loving him with all her heart. and yet she may well feel that she, like harold, has been sacrificed. there was no shadow of love between them before their marriage, in fact she may even have hated him, for it was he who brought ruin and death upon her husband, the welsh king. she must know that he only married her in order to gain the firm alliance of her brothers, and that her hand was given by them to harold without any reference to her feelings. i would that the king were happy, even though it were with another. but it was not for his happiness that i left him, but that england might be one. is it true that the army is broken up and the fleet scattered?" "it is true, lady. save for three or four thousand housecarls, there is not an armed man in readiness to defend england." "it must be a terrible trial to him." "it is, my lady. he returned to town yesterday dispirited and cast down at the failure of the work of months." "still they will reassemble rapidly," she said, "when the normans really come?" "doubtless they will. but the loss of the fleet is greater than that of the army, for at sea we could have met and almost assuredly have conquered them, for the normans are no match for our sailors; whereas to meet so great an army of trained soldiers, with hastily assembled levies, is to fight under every disadvantage." "and is the rumour true which says that tostig and harold of norway are also preparing for an invasion?" "all reports that come to us through denmark are to that effect." "it is enough to make the stones cry out," edith said indignantly, "that a son of godwin should thus betray england. i never thought it of him. he was headstrong and passionate; yet as a young man he was loved almost as much as harold himself, nay, some loved him more. but it was not on account of public affairs that i brought you here, but to talk of harold. i know nought of his daily doings, of his thoughts, or his troubles. tell me all you can of him, wulf." for a long time they talked of the king. she had from the first been drawn towards wulf by seeing how he loved harold, and as they talked her tears often fell. "i am proud of him," she said at last; "more proud of him than when he was the light of my life. my sacrifice has not been in vain. he is what i would have him. one whose thoughts are all fixed upon his country; who gives all his energy, all his wisdom, all his time to her service. humbler men can be happy, but a king has higher duties than others, and for him love and marriage, wife and children, the joys of the peasant, must be altogether secondary. the good of his country, the happiness and welfare of tens of thousands are in his hands; and if in these respects he acts worthily, if he gains the blessings of his people, he can afford to do without the home joys that are so much to lesser men. you are sure that he is not unhappy? if i did but know this, i would be content." "i do not think he is unhappy," wulf said confidently. "he has the applause and love of all men, and the knowledge that all his work is for the good of his country and his people. he may have regrets, but he has little time to spend upon them when he has in hand so vast a work, upon which night and day his every thought is directed." "i suppose you wish to get back to-night, wulf?" "i should greatly prefer it," he said. "and i would rather that you did not remain here. it may seem inhospitable, but i feel it would be better so. no one here knows who i am, and at first my servants were plied with questions whenever they went abroad; but the wonder has died away, and the villagers have come to believe that i am, as i gave out, the widow of a court official. should it be known that a young thane stayed here the night, it would set them gossiping afresh. stay and sup with me before you start." "and am i to tell the king i have seen you?" he asked. "what think you yourself, wulf?" "i am sure that he would be glad to know. i need not say where you are living. i will say that you have charged me to keep it secret, and he will forbear questioning me. but i am sure that it will give him deep pleasure to know that i have seen you, to learn how you look, how you are living, how you occupy yourself, and how you think of him. it cannot but be a trial to him to know nothing of one he so loves. more than once he has told me that he wondered whether you had entered a convent, whether you were in health, how you bore yourself, and other matters." "tell him then, wulf. you can tell him that great as has been my grief over our separation, i can yet feel happy in my solitude in knowing how nobly he is doing his kingly work, and that i have never wavered in my assurance that i was right when i bade him go. tell him that i have no thought of entering a cloister; that i have my old servants and my garden and needle-work; that i spend much of my time in ministering to my poorer neighbours, and that i am getting to be loved by them. say that my health is good, and that i have every comfort i need save his presence. tell him that if i fall ill, and the leeches say that i shall die, i shall send for him to see me once again, but that in such manner only will we meet in this life; and that it is my prayer that he will not seek to alter my resolution, for that the pain of parting again would be more than the joy of seeing him. he is another woman's now, and that by my act, therefore it would be a grievous sin for us, loving each other as we do, to meet again, unless he or i was on a death-bed." the supper was served early, and when it was eaten wulf's horse was brought round to the door. "am i to come again?" he asked. she did not answer for a time. "not unless i send for you, wulf. our meeting has given me much pleasure, and i shall be the happier for it, but for a time our talk of the past and present will unsettle me and stir up afresh regrets and longings. therefore, it were best that you come not again until i send for you." the darkness was just closing in when wulf rode into westminster. "the king has twice asked for you, my lord," osgod said, as he alighted. "the last time a quarter of an hour since." wulf at once went to the king's closet, where he was at work with two or three secretaries, to whom he was dictating. "i want you, wulf," the king said as he entered. "where hast been?" wulf glanced at the secretaries, and harold bade them retire till he summoned them again. wulf then related at length his interview with edith. harold listened in silence. "i am right glad at your news," he said, when the latter had finished. "it is just what i thought she would do. her words are lofty and wise; truly a king can little hope for happiness such as that which is in the reach of the humblest of his subjects. but we will talk of this again. for the present i must think of public business. news has been brought me by a sure hand from denmark that the fleet of norway has sailed. 'tis said that harold has called out a levy of half the fighting men of his kingdom, and that he has five hundred war-ships besides transports. his son, magnus, has been left behind to rule norway with the title of king. harold intends to conquer england and reign here. i must lose no moment in sending the news to the northern earls. doubtless it is on their coast he will first land. there is no one i would sooner trust than yourself, and you shall be my messenger. "i have the letters already written to them, warning them that every man capable of bearing arms should be summoned to their standard, and every preparation made to repulse the foe. of help at present i can give them none; my army is dispersed, my shores undefended, and at any moment william's fleet may appear off the coast. let them meet the norwegians, while i meet the normans. it is for you to press upon them the counsels i give in my letters; and i would that you should remain with them, sending messages to me from time to time, giving me full tidings of what takes place at york and how they fare in their struggle with harold of norway, and, as i fear, with my brother tostig. they met you at northampton, and they know the confidence i place in you and the services you rendered in the welsh campaign. however, although they may receive you well i fear that your counsel will go for nought. they are haughty and headstrong, and assuredly they will not be guided by one of my thanes. do not, therefore, press the matter with them, or risk incurring their anger. i want you to stand well with them, for so only can you learn their views and keep me informed of what is doing. being assured that you would undertake the duty i have highly commended you to them as my representative at york, and i doubt not that you will be well received. brothers-in-law though they are i can count on but little aid from them in our struggle with the normans, but there they will be fighting for their own earldoms and will do their best, though i fear the result, for they have been deaf to my entreaties to keep an army on foot, and the hurried levies of the north will scarce stand against the mighty army harold hardrada is bringing against them." "i will start immediately, my lord." "here is a royal order upon all governors and thanes to give you changes of horses and to aid you in all ways. take that giant of yours with you, he is a faithful fellow and is not wanting in sense; you will find him of great use there. you will, of course, accompany the earls to the field. watch well how the levies fight, it is long since they have been called upon to meet a foe, and i would fain know how much they can be trusted on the day of battle. as your own horse has travelled to-day take two of my best, here is an order to the head of the stables to deliver them to you. is there aught else that i can do for you?" "nothing, my lord. i understand your wishes, and will follow them as closely as i can." "do not expose yourself too much on the field of battle, wulf. i cannot spare you, and therefore charge you not to be rash, and if matters go ill to provide for your safety as far as you may." wulf found osgod awaiting him in the hall below. "i thought you might require me, master, so i waited till you had seen the king." "you did well, osgod. i am starting on a journey to york and you are to accompany me. we ride armed, so get on your coat of mail and take your favourite axe, then carry this order to the stables and tell them to have the two horses ready at the gates in half an hour's time; then go to the kitchen and eat a hearty meal and put up some bread and cold meat in a wallet. we shall ride fast and with few stoppages, for i have the royal order for change of horses everywhere." "that is good news, my lord. after dawdling away the last four months doing nothing i am glad to hear that there is a chance of striking a strong blow on someone, though who it is i know not." "now go, osgod, i have also to change my clothes and drink a horn of ale and eat something, though i supped but three hours since. put my gayest suit into the saddle-bag, for i may stay some time at york, and must make a fair show, going as i do as harold's messenger." the journey was accomplished at an extraordinary rate of speed, harold's order procuring them a change of horses when ever they stopped; and they but once halted for a few hours' sleep. wulf found that edwin and morcar were both at york, and alighted at the gate of their residence. announcing himself as a messenger from the king, he was at once conducted into their presence. "it is wulf of steyning, is it not?" edwin said courteously. "the message must be urgent indeed since harold has chosen you to carry it. when did you leave him?" "i left westminster at nine o'clock on the evening of tuesday." "and it is now but mid-day on thursday," the earl said in a tone of astonishment. "you have ridden nigh two hundred miles in less than forty hours." "the roads are good, my lord, and i had the king's order for changes of horses whenever needed. i slept six hours at northampton, but have ridden without other stop save to take meals. i knew that the message i bore was of importance, as you will see by the king's letter." edwin opened the letter and laid it before morcar, and the two read it together. "this is serious news indeed," edwin said when they had perused it. "so harold of norway is on his way hither with five hundred warships and half the males of norway. since the news has come from denmark he must already have been nigh a fortnight at sea, and if he had sailed hitherwards we should have heard long ere this of his being within sight of our shores. as we have heard nought of him it may be that his object has been misreported, and that it is not against us that his fleet is bound." "i fear that it can have no other destination," wulf said; "though it may be that it has sailed first to scotland to obtain assistance from malcolm. there, too, he will find tostig, whom the king fears is in alliance with him." "then assuredly it is against us that he comes," morcar said, "and unless the winds shatter his fleet we shall hear of him before long. but he may land anywhere from the border of scotland to the humber, and it is useless our trying to hinder him along so great a line. he may delay his coming as william of normandy has done, and our men, like those of harold, will not remain under arms for months doing nothing. with so great an army he must move slowly and we shall have plenty of time to gather our forces to meet him. harold urges us to call out the levies at once, but he does not know the northumbrians as we do. they will fight, and stoutly, but they will scatter as soon as their term expires. it is but six weeks since we called them under arms to repulse tostig, and unless they themselves see the danger presses they will not leave their homes again after so short an interval. i am glad to see by the king's letter that he has charged you to stay with us for a while. we shall be glad of your presence, both as the agent of our royal brother and as one who has already proved himself a valiant and skilful soldier." apartments were at once assigned to wulf in the palace, and he was treated as an honoured guest. he had been furnished by the royal chamberlain with an ample sum of money, and every two or three days despatched messengers to london. he was greatly disturbed in mind, for the earls made no preparation whatever to meet the coming storm, but continued to hunt or to hawk, to give entertainments, and to pass their time as if the news of a mighty invasion had never reached them. the first attempts he made to urge them to follow harold's counsel were dismissed so curtly that he felt it useless to persevere. a fortnight passed by, and then a messenger rode into york with the news that a vast fleet had entered the tyne, and that the norsemen were harrying and burning the country. harold hardrada had first sailed to the isles of shetland and orkney, which, with the northern districts of the mainland, formed a powerful scandinavian province. paul and erning, the two young earls of the state, and a large number of their subjects, joined the fleet, as did a scotch contingent sent by malcolm and commanded by tostig, who also had with him the force he had brought from flanders. iceland, then a great norwegian colony, sent ships and men, as did an irish sovereign of danish descent. roused to action at last the northern earls sent out summonses in all directions for the levies to assemble. the invaders were next heard of at scarborough, which made a brave resistance, but the norsemen took post on the steep hill overhanging the town, and gathering there a vast pile of wood set it on fire, and hurled blazing timbers down on the place. many of the houses caught fire, and this spread rapidly. the inhabitants surrendered, but the greater portion was slaughtered and the town given up to plunder. holderness, like scarborough, bravely but unsuccessfully resisted the attack, and the great fleet sailing south entered the humber. hour by hour messengers rode into york bringing news of the progress of the invaders; hour by hour the northumbrian levies poured into the capital. much as he had disapproved of their previous carelessness and delay, wulf acknowledged that the two northern earls now bore themselves as men. they saw to the defences of the town, mustered all the inhabitants capable of bearing arms, arranged for the feeding and disposition of the levies, and did all that was possible at so short a notice to get them to take the field. but he saw, too, that this raw militia was but little calculated to stand before the assault of the norsemen. there was no body of seasoned troops like the housecarls to serve as a nucleus, and to bear the chief brunt of the battle. all alike were raw, inexperienced, and badly armed, save for the axe, which was the favourite weapon of the english. the great fleet made no stay but sailed up the humber, packing closely in the river as it narrowed, till it seemed well-nigh covered from shore to shore with the crowded ships. it passed the little village of selby, and cast anchor beside the left bank of the ouse, near the village of riccall, but nine miles' march from york. olaf, the king's son, the two earls of orkney, and the bishop of those islands remained on board to guard the ships, for the northumbrian fleet, which was far too small to encounter so great an armament, had taken refuge up the wharfe, and might descend and attack the norse vessels were they left unguarded. the main body of the great army under the king and tostig landed and prepared to march upon york. sudden as the call had been there was no lack of spirit or patriotism in the english levies. among their ranks were many priests and monks, who felt that it was their duty to aid in the defence of the land against the semi-heathen host that invaded it. the memory of the past invasion of the norsemen, when the churches had been sacked and the priests slain on the altar, inspired them, and they and the monks responded as readily as did the laymen to the summons of the earls. these had not hesitated to consult wulf as to the post where they had best station themselves to give battle, and the disposition of their forces. one who had distinguished himself under duke william of normandy, and under harold in wales, had, young though he was, more experience of war than any of the northern thanes, and as the representative of harold all these were ready to listen with respect to his advice. he had already spent four or five days in surveying the ground in the direction from which the norsemen were likely to advance, and had decided that a place known as gate fulford, two miles from the city, was best calculated for defence, it being situated on a narrow ridge, having the river and its swampy banks on one side, and a flat marshy country on the other. thither the army of the earls marched to take up its position. chapter xix. stamford bridge. owing to the difficulty of getting the levies formed up and set in motion, the norsemen had arrived on the ground and had taken up a defensive position before the english reached it. had the force contained a strong body of housecarls, wulf, who had talked the matter over with the earls, would have advised that they should fight on the defensive and allow the norsemen to attack; but with freshly-raised troops, ready and eager for battle, but wanting the discipline that alone enables trained soldiers to endure patiently a long series of attacks, he thought that there was more chance of victory in attacking the enemy. morcar commanded on the left, edwin on the right. wulf took up his position by the side of morcar, and exchanged a few words with osgod before advancing to the charge. "this will be a right royal contest, master," the latter said as he fingered his heavy axe. "never before have i seen a set battle like this." "do you keep close to me, osgod." "that i am sure to do, master," the latter broke in. "yes, i know that while we fight you will be by my side, but it may be that we shall have to fly. the norsemen outnumber us greatly, and their king is a host in himself. this is a good position to defend, but a bad one to fly from. the king's last words were a charge to me not to throw away my life, and therefore while i shall fight as long as fighting can avail, i shall also do my best to save myself if we are defeated. as we came along i kept near to the edge of the swamp, and some hundred yards back i marked a spot where, as it seemed to me, there was a sort of path, worn either by broken men and outlaws, who may dwell somewhere in its recesses, or by men from a village beyond it. for this point, then, i shall make if we are defeated. it may be that it was not a path, but at least it offers a chance of escape. so when i give you the word, keep close to my side." osgod nodded. his confidence in wulf was absolutely boundless, and though he revolted at the thought of retreat he knew well that so long as a chance of victory remained wulf would not quit the field. when within two or three hundred yards of the enemy, morcar advanced to the front of the line with his standard-bearer beside him. "on men!" he shouted, and with a yell the english poured down to the attack the line of the norsemen was on this side less strong than it was near the river where their king had posted himself, and the norsemen gave way before the furious attack of the english. morcar and many of his thanes fought in the front rank. wulf was close beside him, and before their swords and the terrible axe of osgod the invaders fell back foot by foot, and shouts of triumph rose from the english; but it was not for long. on the left edwin could make no impression on the shield-wall of the enemy, and presently their king caused his horns to blow the signal for attack, and his line, hitherto immovable, flung itself on the english. the king, a head taller than any of his men, fought in their front rank, his terrible two-handed sword hewing down every man who opposed him. as the english gave way the assault became more and more impetuous, and in a few minutes the english broke and fled all along the line. "all is lost, osgod," wulf said; as after fighting to the last he turned his back on the foe. the scene on the ridge was now terrible; the exulting norsemen followed hard upon the flying english, uttering their shouts of victory and cutting down all they overtook. hampered by the crowd in front of them great numbers of the english fell beneath the weapons of their pursuers, others turned to the right or left, and hundreds were smothered in the swamp by the river or in that on the other side. once the flight began, osgod placed himself in front of his master, his powerful figure and his weight enabling him to push his way through the crowd of fugitives. wulf kept close behind him, and they followed the edge of the swamp until wulf saw the faint indication of a path he had before noticed. "turn off here, osgod; this is the place i spoke of. let me go first, i am lightest." the ground shook beneath their feet, the slime oozed up to their ankles, but, moderating their pace now, they sprang from tussock to tussock until two or three hundred yards from the edge of the swamp. then they paused and looked round. the work of slaughter was still proceeding. along the edge of the swamp numbers of english could be seen, some half immerged, some fast disappearing. in the din of the struggle none heard or heeded their cries, each man was occupied solely with the thought of flight or slaughter. some half-dozen of the fugitives, seeing the two men were making their way across the swamp, had followed in their footsteps. slowly and cautiously wulf moved forward again. sometimes a treacherous tuft gave way and he slipped waist-deep into the mire, but osgod was always close at hand, and his long arm enabled him to reach forward to his master from a firmer spot and to draw him from the bog. after an hour's painful work the ground began to be firmer, and before long they were safe in the forest beyond the swamp. here for a while the party threw themselves down exhausted. after an hour's rest the others asked wulf what they had best do. "there is but one thing to be done," he replied; "make off to your homes. the remnant of the army will reach york, and the norsemen will doubtless surround the city and lay siege to it. for the present our cause is lost, and there is nought for us to do but to try and save our lives, which have been spared well-nigh by a miracle." keeping south through the forest wulf and his follower were several hours before they emerged from its shade. another three miles' walking brought them to a village, where they learned they were six miles west of selby. here they obtained some food, and then bearing off so as to strike the south road arrived soon after nightfall at the house of the thane who had supplied them with their last change of horses on their way north. the news they brought excited the greatest consternation, but their host saw at once that the only hope now was that harold might bring help, and at once placed the two horses which they had ridden to his house at their disposal. wulf and osgod mounted at once, and travelled southwards at a speed equal to that at which they had journeyed north. when within a few miles of peterborough they received news that seemed almost too good to be true. harold at the head of a great army had already reached that town, and was pressing north at the top of his speed. from east and west he was being joined by the levies of the thanes. riding forward to peterborough they found the town crowded with troops, who, as they learned, were to march forward again in half an hour. wulf at once made his way to the monastery, in which harold was lodged. "i need not ask your news, wulf," harold said, as, covered with dust and mire, and almost reeling with exhaustion, the young thane entered his private closet. "the army of the northern earls has been well-nigh destroyed two miles from york. whether the earls themselves escaped i know not, for i left the field while the slaughter was still going on. york will be at once besieged, and as most of its fighting men went out to the battle and a large proportion must have been slain, i fear that it can resist but a short time the attack of the norsemen. it was good news indeed when i heard that you were advancing north." "it is bad tidings that you bring, wulf, but not unexpected. directly i heard that the enemy's fleet were off our northern coast and were burning and pillaging unopposed, i speedily gathered what force i could in the south, and sending on messengers ahead to summon the levies of east anglia to join me on the way, started north. yesterday the news reached me that the great fleet of norway had sailed up the humber, and i saw that i should be too late to join edwin and morcar before they were forced to give battle before york. now tell me of the fight, and how you managed to escape, for i see by your mail-coat and helmet, which are dinted and frayed and the steel rings shorn off in many places, that you were in the thick of it." wulf related the story of the battle, and the manner in which he had escaped. "you did wisely, wulf, to mark a way of retreat before the battle commenced. a good general should ever be prepared for defeat as well as for victory. so the levies fought well?" "they did, my lord. they engaged the norsemen gallantly and well--much better, indeed, than i had looked for them to do, and the day went favourably until the king of norway with his picked men threw themselves upon them. even after that they fought sturdily for a short time, and had there been but a body of housecarls to form a shield-wall, behind which they could have rallied, the day might still have been theirs. but you look ill, my lord." "i was on a bed of sickness when the news came; but it was no time for lying abed. for the first two or three days' marches i was carried on a litter, but i am now well enough to sit my horse. it cost me a sore struggle to leave the south unguarded simply because my orders were not obeyed here in the north. but there was no help for it, and we have been marching well-nigh night and day in hopes that we might bring this matter to a close, and return south before the norman fleet appears off the coast. we have already marched farther than would seem possible in the time, but the men are all in good heart and eager to meet the norsemen, and i have addressed them and shown them the urgent necessity for speed. we shall set forward again in half an hour. they have had six hours for rest, so they can do another fifty miles before they halt again. you can tarry here for a day to rest yourself, and can then ride on and overtake us." "i will go down and take a plunge in the river," wulf said, "and shall be ready to mount again by the time that the rearguard is in motion. i could have kept on to london had it been needful, and shall be quite ready to proceed with the army." they were within a day's march of york when the news came that the city had surrendered without waiting for an assault. the king of norway had offered favourable terms; a local gemot had been held, and it had been agreed to make peace with harold of norway, and not only to receive him as king but to join him in his warfare against the south. hostages were given for their fidelity to their new lord, who in return gave hostages to york for the good conduct of his troops. it was the city only that had so treacherously behaved, and the surrender by no means included the whole province. it was arranged, however, by the earls, that hostages should be given for northumbria at large, and they promised that a hundred and fifty of these should be handed over at stamford bridge, eight miles north-east of the city. here there was a palace of the old northumbrian kings. the spot was favourable for the encampment of an army, for the country round was fertile and the bridge across the derwent afforded facilities for the collection of provisions over a large area. the bridge was a wooden one, the country on either side of the river was flat, but considerably elevated above the stream, with a slope down to it on both sides of the bridge. the news of the surrender of york made no change in harold's plans. he had come to give battle to the norsemen, whether he did so under the walls of the northern capital or elsewhere; accordingly he pressed rapidly forward. in a few hours the army arrived in sight of york, which, had it resisted but a day longer, would have been saved the humiliation of the surrender and treaty. the invaders had all marched to stamford bridge, and the people opened its gates and received with rejoicing the king, whose authority they had the day before cast off. beyond a short pause for food there was no delay. harold's thoughts were on the south, and he grudged every hour that delayed his return to his post there. the men of the city and the survivors of the army defeated at fulford joined the force, which kept on its way east to stamford bridge. the invaders, believing that northumbria lay at their feet, and without a thought that harold was advancing, were encamped in careless security on the low ground by the river. the greater portion of their host had crossed the bridge; their king, tostig, and many of the great chiefs had taken up their abode in the royal palace at aldby, and were preparing to return to york, where the king was to hold his court and formally to assume the government and to proclaim the laws for his new kingdom. already the cortege had set out, clad not in warlike armour but in court habiliments, when on the long road leading gently down to the river a cloud of dust and the sparkle of arms was seen. there was little room for doubt as to the nature of the arriving force. northumbria could gather no array that would venture thus to approach the army that had but five days before crushed the levies of the north. it could only be harold himself who, with the men of the south, had thus unexpectedly arrived. tostig at once proposed a retreat to the ships at riccall, so that the whole army might be gathered together, but harold hardrada strove to marshal his army for the battle, at the same time sending off mounted messengers to summons the party left at the ships. but while all was in confusion among the main body of the invaders on the eastern bank of the river, while men were buckling on their armour and gathering in their ranks, the cloud of war rolled rapidly down the descent, and with a mighty shout the english vanguard fell upon the norsemen on the western bank. valiantly they fought, but there was no resisting the solid array of the english housecarls, or thingmen as they were also called. taken altogether unprepared, and for the most part without their defensive armour, the norsemen could offer no successful resistance to the english host. great numbers were killed; others were driven headlong across the bridge or were drowned in the stream, which is said to have been literally choked with dead. but for a time the advance of the english was stayed; for one norseman, a man of great stature and prodigious strength, took post in the middle of the narrow bridge and barred the way to the english host. but one foe could attack him at a time, and so great was his strength and prowess that it is said forty englishmen fell under the mighty blows of his two-handed sword, and at last he was only over-powered by one who made his way along beneath the timbers of the bridge and stabbed him with his spear from below. his gallant stand, however, had sufficed to give his countrymen time to complete their preparations, and the shield-wall of the norsemen stretched across the gentle ascent from the bridge. with his hands raised aloft, as a sign that his mission was a peaceful one, an english thane with twenty mounted horsemen rode across the bridge. he was met by the king, tostig, and his chiefs. raising his voice the thane addressed tostig, "i bring to tostig the greeting and message of his brother king harold. let him return to his allegiance and he shall again have the earldom of northumberland; nay, he shall have a third of the kingdom to rule together with the king." "what, then," tostig asked, "shall be given to king harold of norway?" "seven feet of english ground!" the thane said sternly, "or more, perchance, seeing he is taller than other men." "return to king harold of england," tostig said, "and bid him make ready for the battle. never shall men say in norway that i brought their king hither to england and then went over to his foes." harold's ambassador returned with his men across the river with tostig's message, and then in solid array the english thingmen moved forward to the attack. had the king of norway advanced to the end of the bridge a battle would have been impossible, for the english could never have forced their way across. but the kings were equally anxious for a battle. harold of norway knew as well as the king of england that the host of normandy was on the point of sailing, and it was as essential for him to crush the english army before the normans landed as it was for harold of england to dispose at once of the norse invaders. there were three claimants for the english crown, and both kings felt the necessity of having their hands free to meet the normans. harold of norway may well have believed that his host of tried warriors was capable of disposing of an army that, save for its small body of regular troops, was wholly unused to war; therefore, he held his array immovable while the english army crossed the bridge and formed up for battle. steadily and firmly the solid line of the housecarls moved up the ascent, and then as harold's trumpet gave the signal of attack, flung themselves upon the shield-wall of the norsemen. the conflict was a terrible one. the heavy two-handed axes of the english clashed against the long two-handed swords of the norsemen. against such terrible weapons wielded by such powerful arms, helmet and hauberk afforded but a poor defence. casques and the heads beneath them were cleft like egg-shells under the terrible blows; but the gaps thus made in the ranks were at once filled from behind, and for hours the struggle continued with unabated vigour on both sides. harold himself with a body of his thanes fought in the front line, his position marked to his followers by his standard kept flying close behind him. his great strength and height made him so formidable an assailant that his standard generally flew well in advance of his fighting line, while on the other side the still greater height and strength of the king of norway rendered him equally conspicuous. at last the obstinate valour of the english housecarls prevailed over the resistance of the fierce norsemen, and the invading host was driven backward step by step up the ascent until the level ground was reached. here the battle again raged as fiercely as ever. in vain did harold of norway, followed by his bravest warriors, hurl himself upon the ranks of the english, his terrible sword carrying death in its path. in vain did his followers again and again strive to take the offensive. the english line ever bore up against their attacks. the battle was still undecided when, as the sun was going down, an english arrow pierced the throat of the giant king of norway. how tostig, who had throughout the day fought by his side, fell, we know not, but he died, as did the irish prince who had brought his followers to share in the plunder of england. there fell, too, most of the bravest warriors of norway, the last of the sea-kings who had carried the banner, known as the land-waster, far and wide over europe. the slaughter was terrible, and at nightfall the norsemen who survived broke and fled to the shelter of their ships. never in the history of england was there a harder fought battle; never were english valour and endurance more splendidly shown. terrible, too, had been the losses on their side. many of the king's bravest thanes had fallen, and the ranks of the housecarls were fearfully thinned. complete as had been the victory, absolute as had been the destruction of their foes, there was but little rejoicing in the english camp that night. so exhausted were the troops by their long march and the desperate struggle of the day that they threw themselves down to sleep on the ground they had won, thickly covered as it was with the bodies of friend and foe. wulf throughout the day had fought close to harold. osgod had kept close beside him, and had warded off many a sweeping blow and cut down many a pressing enemy. at the end of the day his left arm hung useless by his side, well-nigh cleft off by the blow of a norseman's sword. wulf himself had escaped without a scratch, thanks in a large measure to his follower's watchfulness. when the battle was over he was one of the few thanes who gathered round harold. the latter felt no exultation at this victory. it had cost him the flower of his army and numbers of his most valued thanes. it had cost him, too, the life of a brother, to whom in spite of his faults he had been deeply attached. he knew that there was before him a struggle even more serious than that from which he had just emerged a victor, and there was no saying how that struggle might end. "i thank god that you are spared to me, wulf," he said as the young thane came up. "i marked you near me all through the battle, and none fought more bravely. it has been a terrible day, and our victory is dearly purchased indeed. i have sent a messenger to york, praying that every monk skilled in surgery will at once hasten hither, that all men and boys shall come and help to collect the wounded, and that such women as can aid will accompany them. i cannot ask the men who have marched well-nigh night and day since we left london, and borne the brunt of the day's battle, to do more. england has need of their strength. the messenger was to stop at helmsley, and bid every soul left there to hurry to the field. it is but two miles away, and in half an hour they will be here. the first thing for them to do is to carry water to the wounded; there are no lack of vessels in the norsemen's camp." "i will go to the bridge, my lord, and take them in charge when they arrive, and set them at the work." "you need rest as much as any, wulf." "i can rest to-morrow," wulf said; "and at any rate could not sleep to-night, for i must see to osgod, who will, i fear, lose an arm." "i am sorry to hear it," harold said, "for one could ill spare so brave a fellow. i saw the norsemen going down under his axe, and assuredly no man did more than he to-day." "i will tell him what you say, my lord; it will do him good. i left him sitting down on a bank bemoaning himself that he might not be cured in time to fight the normans." harold shook his head. "i would give half my estates, wulf, that he should be well enough to fight by your side in our first battle with the normans. that would mean that they would not land before two months have passed, and by that time i would have all the force of england gathered to receive them. as you are willing that it should be so, i will leave you in charge of the camp to-night. it will be three hours before help can arrive from york. till then there is nought to do but to carry water to the wounded. when they arrive the monks will dress the wounds, and the men and women carry such as can be moved down by the river, where they can be treated more easily than lying in the fields. have a strict search made for the body of my brother, and place a guard over it. sweyn is in charge of the norse camp. there is great treasure there, which shall to-morrow be partly divided among the troops." wulf went at once down to the bridge, while harold and his thanes lay down like the soldiers on the field of battle. in a short time men, women, and children came in from helmsley. having been told what they were required for, they had brought with them jugs and drinking cups, and also a supply of torches. the first search was made over the ground west of the river. here few english had fallen, but the norsemen lay thickly. wulf ordered that water should be given to all, foe as well as friend. the number of living was small, for the heavy two handed axes had done their work thoroughly. when such as survived had been seen to, wulf led the villagers over the bridge. "scatter right and left," he said, "and then move forward. you cannot go wrong." having seen them all at work, he hurried away to the spot where he had left osgod sitting. he had before leaving him staunched the flow of blood by winding a bow string round the arm above the wound and then twisting it tightly. "how fares it with you, osgod? here is a ewer of water." "that is good," osgod said, after taking a mighty draught. "truly i felt as if the moisture of my body had all dried up, and not only my mouth but my whole frame was parched." "why, osgod," wulf exclaimed, as he held the torch he carried close to him, "your arm has gone!" "that is so, master, an arm after the bone has been cleft through is of no use to anyone, so i thought the sooner i got rid of it the better, and having my knife handy i just cut through the flesh that remained. that was the end of it. would that we could get rid of all our evils as readily. to-morrow i will walk to york and get the wound seared." "the king sent to york for aid directly the battle was over, and we shall have all the townsfolk here soon, among them monks and others skilled in the dressing of wounds. i told the king of your misfortune." and he then repeated what harold had said. "it does me good to hear that harold is satisfied with me. i hope to strike many a good blow for him yet." "how still it is here, osgod! there is scarce a sound to be heard from all those lying round." "there are but few with life in them, i reckon," osgod said. "a norse sword and an english axe let out the life quickly when they strike fair. this blow fell on my arm as my axe was raised to strike, and it were well it did so, or it would have taken me in the neck, and then neither monk nor leech could have brought me back to life. had it been my right arm i would as lief have been killed at once, for what good is a man without his right arm?" "you would have learned to use your left in time, osgod. now if you can walk, come down to the river, and i will see that you are among the first attended to." "i will lie down here," osgod said, "for in truth i feel as if i need sleep. for the last two days i have been scarce able to keep my eyes open, and now that i have had a drink i feel that a few hours' rest will do me more good than any monk." osgod's words came slowly and heavily, and as he ended he lay down on his back. wulf saw that it was best that he should sleep, and so left him. in two hours a great number of lights were seen along the road, and soon a crowd of men and women from york appeared and scattered themselves over the battlefield, the monks pouring balm into wounds and bandaging them up, while the men and women carried the wounded, as fast as they were attended to, down to the river. the bodies of tostig and of the king of norway were both found, and a guard placed over them, and in the morning that of tostig was carried to york for burial in the cathedral, while harold hardrada was buried where he fell. harold sent messengers to the norsemen's fleet offering mercy to them if they would surrender, and their chiefs come to york and swear never again to raise their swords against england--an offer which was thankfully accepted, for the english fleet had entered the humber, and their retreat was cut off. the next day the norse chiefs went to york and took the required oath, and were then escorted back to their ships. so terrible had been the slaughter, so complete the destruction of the invading army, that, even including the guard that remained at the fleet, twenty-four ships sufficed to carry away home the survivors of the mighty host. the task of burying the slain was too great to be undertaken, and for many years afterwards the field of battle was whitened with the bones of the invaders who had fallen there. on the day after the battle harold returned with his army to york. here all who had fallen away from the cause of england were pardoned. measures were taken for making the fighting strength of the north available for the general defence of the country. the wounded were cared for in the houses of the citizens, and for five days the troops rested after their prodigious exertions. early in the morning after the battle osgod's wound had been seared with red-hot irons. he had borne the pain unflinchingly, saying that he had suffered as much from burns more than once while learning his trade as an armourer. wulf was not present, as he had thrown himself down to sleep as soon as he had been relieved at daylight, but he saw him before he started with the king for york. "yes, it hurts a bit, master," osgod replied in answer to his inquiries. "i could not expect otherwise. you will have to do without me for a few days. i have made friends with some peasants at helmsley. i shall stay with them till the army marches south. if i were at york i should never keep quiet; and the monks tell me the quieter i am the sooner my wounds will heal. they are poor creatures, these monks; they wanted to make out that it might be two or three months before i was fit for service again. i told them it would be a shame to my manhood if in a fortnight i could not wield an axe again. it is not as if i had been brought up softly. i have burnt myself with hot irons many a time, and know that a few days suffices to heal a sore." "it is not the sore, osgod; it is the veins that might burst out bleeding again." "that is what they said, master; but at present there is not much blood left in me, i think, and by the time it comes again my veins ought to have healed themselves. this plaguey bowstring hurts me well-nigh as much as the smart of the irons; but the monks say i must bear it for a couple of days, when they will put on some tight bandages in its place, but if i can bear the pain it were better that it should be kept there for a week or two." five days passed. the king laboured incessantly at making a settlement of the affairs of the north. the thanes came in from all northumbria. they were full of thankfulness at the deliverance that had been wrought for them, and the victor of stamford bridge was far more to them than the king of england had ever been. all were received with kindness and courtesy, and harold felt that at stamford bridge he had conquered not only the host of norway but the northern earldoms. on the evening of the fifth day after the battle they held a great banquet at york. the feasting was at its height when harold was told that a messenger had arrived with urgent news, and the man was at once brought in. he had ridden in two days from the south, and brought the momentous news that on the third day after the victory of stamford bridge the norman host had landed in sussex. chapter xx. the landing of the foe. while harold with his army had been anxiously and impatiently watching the sea on the southern coast of england, the mixed host of the duke of normandy had been no less anxiously awaiting a favourable breeze at the port where the whole of the expedition was gathered. william had, however, one great advantage. while harold's army and navy were composed of levies, bound by feudal obligations to remain but a certain time under arms, and eager to return to their harvest operations, their wives and families, william's was made up to a great extent of seasoned troops and professional soldiers, gathered not only from his own dominions but from all parts of europe. these were far more amenable to orders than were the english militia. tempted by the thought of the plunder of england, they had enlisted under the duke's banner for the expedition. they had no thought of returning home, and as long as they were well supplied with food, the delay in starting mattered comparatively little to them; and thus while at length the fleet and army of harold scattered to their homes the normans remained in their camp, ready to embark on board the ships as soon as a favourable wind blew. they were kept in good temper by receiving regular pay and provisions, and as all plundering was strictly forbidden the country people freely brought in supplies, and for a month the great army was fed without difficulty; but as the resources of the country became exhausted the duke grew more and more anxious to move to another port, and taking advantage of a change of wind to the west he embarked his army and sailed north along the coast of normandy to the mouth of the somme, and the troops disembarked and encamped round the town of st. valery. here there was another long delay, and while harold was marching north to meet the king of norway the normans were praying for a favourable wind at the holy shrine at the abbey of st. valery. two days after the host of harold hardrada had been destroyed the wind suddenly shifted to the south. there had on the previous day been a great religious ceremony; the holy relics had been brought by the priests into the camp; the whole army had joined in a solemn service; precious gifts had been offered at the shrine, and as the change of wind was naturally ascribed to the influence of the saint, the army was filled with enthusiasm, and believed that heaven had declared in their favour. from morning till night the scene of bustle and preparation went on, and when darkness fell the whole host had embarked. every ship was ordered to bear a light, and a huge lantern was hoisted at the masthead of the _mora_, the duke's own ship, and orders were issued that all vessels should follow the light. the _mora_, however, was a quick sailer, and was not, like the other vessels, deeply laden down with horses and men. when daylight broke, therefore, she had so far outstripped the rest that no other sail was in sight, and she anchored until the fleet came up, when the voyage was continued, and at nine on the morning of thursday the 28th of september the normans landed on english soil, near the village of pevensey. the landing was unopposed; the housecarls were away north with their king, the levies were scattered to their homes. to the surprise of the normans who landed in battle array no armed man was to be seen. parties of mounted men at once examined the country for miles round, but without finding signs of the defending army they expected to meet. on the following morning a small force was left in the roman fortifications near pevensey to guard the ships, hauled up on the beach, from attack, and the duke with his army marched away along the roman road to hastings, where william established his headquarters and resolved to await the approach of the army of england. a wooden castle was raised on the height, and the country for miles round was harried by the norman horse. every house was given to the flames; men were slain, women and children taken as slaves, and the destruction was so complete that it seemed as if it had been done with the deliberate purpose of forcing harold to come down and give battle. no sooner did harold hear the news that the normans had landed and were harrying the land than he ordered the hall to be cleared and issued a summons for the assembly of a gemot, and in an hour an assemblage of all the thanes gathered at york was held in the hall that had so shortly before been the scene of peaceful feasting. harold proclaimed to them the news he had heard, and called upon them to arm and call together their levies for the defence of england. an enthusiastic reply was given. as the men of the south had crushed the invaders of the north, so would the men of the north assist to repel the invasion of the south. morcar and edwin promised solemnly to lead the forces of northumbria and mercia to london without a day's delay, and though harold trusted his brothers-in-law but little, he hoped they would have to yield to the patriotic spirit of the thanes and to play their part as englishmen. an hour later messengers started on horseback for the south, bidding all men to assemble at london to fight for home and freedom against the foreign invader, and orders were issued that the troops who had fought at stamford bridge should march at daybreak. as soon as the council was over wulf mounted his horse and rode at full speed to helmsley. he had each day ridden over to see osgod, who in his anxiety for a rapid cure was proving himself a most amenable patient, and was strictly carrying out the prescriptions of the monk who had taken charge of him and of other wounded who were lying in the village. he was asleep on a rough pallet when wulf entered. "a pest upon the norman!" he exclaimed angrily when he heard wulf's news. "he might have given me a week longer at any rate. i am feeling mightily better already, for to-day the monk has bandaged my arm, and that so tight as almost to numb it. but that i care little for, as he has now taken off that bow-string which was cutting its way into the flesh. he told me that everything depended upon my keeping absolutely quiet for another week, for the slightest exertion might make the wound break out afresh, and that if it burst there would be but a poor chance for me. well, i must travel in a waggon instead of on horseback." "you will do nothing of the sort, osgod; i absolutely forbid it. it would be an act of sheer madness. besides, you would be useless at present even if you went south, while if you rest here for three or four weeks you may be able to take part in some of the battles; and, moreover, it may be weeks before harold moves against the normans. at any rate, it is out of the question that you should move at present. i am not going to have you risk your life by such folly." osgod was silent for a minute or two and then said, "well, master, i must obey your orders, but never before did i feel it so hard a thing to do." "it is for your own good and mine, osgod. i am not going to lose so faithful a follower, and would rather do without you for two months than for all my life. but now i must be going, for i shall ride on ahead so as to go down to steyning and fetch our men. i was before sorry that, owing to my being here, they did not come down with the king; now i am glad, for i might have lost half of them, while as it is i shall have a hundred men as good as his own to help to fill up the ranks of harold's housecarls, besides the general levy of my tenants." on his march south harold was joined by large numbers of men. the news of the destruction of the army of harold hardrada had excited the greatest enthusiasm, and the thanes presented themselves as a rule with more than the number of men they were bound to furnish. wulf rode on fast to london. as soon as he arrived there he went to the armourer's shop. ulred paused at his work as he entered. "welcome back, my lord wulf!" he said. "so you have come safe through the two great battles in the north. has osgod fared equally well, i see that you have come without him?" "not equally well, ulred. he fought with me at fulford and received no serious hurt, but at stamford bridge he was wounded so sorely that for a time we thought it would go hard with him; but he has rallied and is doing well, and save that he will come home without his left arm, he will, i trust, soon be recovered. no man fought more stoutly than he did at stamford bridge, and the king himself noticed his valour. although his wound was but five days' old when we started, he would have come south at once if i would have suffered him, though he must assuredly have been carried the whole way in a litter. it troubled him greatly to hear that we should be face to face with the normans, and he not there to strike a blow for england." "i am glad to hear that the boy lives," the armourer said; "for indeed when i saw you alone my first thoughts were that he had fought his last battle. we have terrible news from the south. the normans are plundering and slaying from beachy head well-nigh to dover, and the people are flying before them in crowds. however, matters will be changed as soon as the king returns to town. london will send her militia in full strength, and we hear that the thanes of the west are hurrying hither. 'tis a pity indeed that harold was drawn off north, for had he been here the normans would have had to fight their best before they established themselves on our shores." "they could have landed in any case, ulred. it was not the king of norway and tostig, but the impatience of our sailors and troops, that left our shores unguarded. harold tried his best to keep them together, but in vain. however, they rallied quickly when they heard of the landing in the north, and are coming in freely now." "will the troops of northumbria be here?" "i doubt it greatly, ulred. they are not true men, edwin and morcar; they surrendered york before an arrow was shot against its walls, and received harold hardrada as their king. they would be equally willing to acknowledge william of normandy so that they might but preserve their earldoms under him. they have promised to send their whole forces forward without delay, but i have no belief that they will be here. i am going to steyning as soon as i have eaten a meal and rested for a few hours. i shall miss osgod sorely. i trust that it will not be long before i have him by my side." "when will the army be back here, master?" "in three days at most, i imagine. there will be but short stay here before harold marches south to meet the normans. the news of the wanton destruction they are making has roused him to fury, and he will assuredly lose no time, even though he have but half the force of england behind him." "it is as well to have something to fall back on," the armourer said. "it is not by one battle that england is to be conquered, and even if we lose the first we may gain the second. we can stand the loss better than the normans, for doubtless william has brought all his strength with him, and if beaten must make his way back to his ships, while harold would in a short time find himself at the head of a larger army than that with which he may first meet them. was the slaughter as great as they say at stamford bridge?" "it was terrible, ulred; and though the norsemen suffered vastly more than we did, the ranks of the housecarls, on whom the brunt of the fighting fell, have been sorely thinned. we shall feel their loss when we meet the normans. against their heavily-armed troops and their squadrons of knights and horsemen one of the thingmen was worth three untried peasants. had we but half the number of our foe, and that half all housecarls, i should not for a moment doubt the issue." "london will put a strong body in the field, and though we have not the training of the thingmen you may trust us to fight sternly, master wulf; and if we are beaten i will warrant that there will not be many of us to bring the tidings back." "of that i am sure, ulred. the citizens have more to lose and better know what they are fighting for than the country levies, and as you say, i am sure they will do their part stoutly. well, i must stay here no longer. i shall sleep for two or three hours, and then take a fresh horse from the king's stable and to-morrow shall be at steyning. by nightfall i shall be on my way back with every man on the estate, a hundred and fifty besides the housecarls, and two days' march will bring us here again. ulf is well, i hope? i do not see him." "he has but carried home some arms i have been mending. we are working night and day; since the news that the normans had landed came, there has been no thought of bed among the armourers and smiths of westminster and london. each man works until he can work no longer, then throws himself down for two or three hours' sleep, and then wakes up to work again; and so it will be till the army has moved south with most of us in its ranks." wulf reached steyning soon after daybreak, and as soon as the news that he had arrived went round, the tenants flocked in. his coming had been anxiously expected, for the alarm caused by the incursions all over the country by the norman horse was intense; and although, so far, none had come west of beachy head, there was a general feeling that at any moment they might make their appearance. the news, therefore, that harold was marching south with his army, and that all were to share in a pitched battle with the invader instead of being slaughtered on their hearthstones, caused a deep feeling of satisfaction. wulf gave orders that every man should assemble in fighting array at noon, and that if, later on, news came that the enemy were approaching, the houses were to be deserted, the stacks fired, and, driving the cattle before them, the women and children should cross the hills and take shelter in the great forest beyond. a few of the older men who were unfit to take part in a long day's fighting were to aid the women in their work. the arms of all the men were carefully inspected, and the weapons remaining in the armoury served out to those worst provided. at one o'clock the force marched off, wulf riding at the head of the hundred housecarls, while the tenants, a hundred and fifty strong, followed in good order. each man carried six days' provisions. they camped that night in a forest twenty miles from steyning, marched thirty miles the next day, and early the following morning joined the great array that was gathering on the hills south of london. to his great pleasure wulf found that beorn had arrived the day before with his levy. they had not met since they had returned from the north with harold. "so you have been up there again, wulf, and fought at fulford and stamford bridge. it was very unlucky i was not in london when the army marched north; but i received no summons, and heard nothing of it until the king was well on his march. none of the thanes along the south coast were summoned." "so i heard, beorn. i fancy the king thought that in case of a landing by the normans the men near the coast would all be wanted to help take the women and cattle to places of security." "no doubt that was the reason," beorn said. "at any rate, i am sorry i missed the fight at stamford bridge. the other seems to have been a bad affair." "very bad; we suffered terribly. so much so, indeed, that the earls will have a good excuse for not getting their levies together in time for the battle with the normans." "they are false loons," beorn said; "and brothers-in-law as they are of his, it would have been well had the king after stamford bridge had their heads smitten off for their traitorous surrender to the norsemen." "i have no doubt they will hold aloof now, beorn, until they see how matters go in the south, and if we are worsted they will hasten to make their peace with william, and to swear to be his liegemen, just as they swore to be liegemen to harold hardrada. but they will find out their mistake in the end. william has promised to divide england among his needy adventurers if he wins, and edwin and morcar will very speedily find that they will not, in that case, be allowed to keep half the country as their share." it was a great host that was gathered ready for the march south. gurth had brought down the fighting men of east anglia; the thanes of the west were there with their tenants; the bishop of winchester, harold's uncle, not only brought the tenants of the church lands, but he himself with twelve of his monks had put on armour under their monkish robes. the abbot of peterborough headed a contingent from the fen country; the men of london under the sheriff of the mid saxons were there, and prepared to die in defence of the royal standard, which it was the special privilege of london to guard. in the abbey of westminster, where harold had received his crown, and in every church of london, mass was celebrated day and night, and was attended by crowds of troops and citizens. harold himself snatched a day from the cares of preparation to visit waltham, the abbey that he had founded, and in which he had taken so lively an interest, and there earnestly prayed for victory, with the vow that did he conquer in the strife he would regard himself as god's ransomed servant, and would throughout his life specially devote himself to his service. a day or two after wulf's arrival in london a messenger came from william of normandy calling upon harold to come down from his throne, and to become, as he had sworn to be, the duke's man. harold in reply sent back a full answer to william's claims. he admitted that edward had promised the crown to william, but he said that according to the law of england a man might at any time revoke his will, and this edward had done, and had named him as his successor. as to the oath he himself had sworn, he maintained that it was an extorted oath, and therefore of no binding force. finally, he offered rich gifts to william if he would depart quietly, but added that if he was bent on war he would meet him in battle on the coming saturday. it is probable that william's insolent message was meant to have the effect of inducing harold to march against him. the norman position was a very strong one, and had been carefully fortified, and he hoped that harold would attempt to storm it. gurth urged his brother to remain in london, while he himself went with the army to battle. a large number of the levies had as yet not come in, and with these, should the first battle be unsuccessful, another army could be gathered to continue the struggle. moreover, whether the oath harold had sworn was binding or not, he had sworn, and it were better that another who was perfectly free in his conscience should lead the english to battle. then, too, gurth urged, if he himself was slain, it would matter comparatively little, while harold's death would jeopardize the whole kingdom. he prayed him therefore to stay in london, and to gather another and greater force, and to lay waste the whole land between london and the coast, so that the normans, whether successful or not in their first battle, would be starved into a departure from the land. the counsel of gurth was approved of by the thanes, but harold rejected it. he declared that he would never let his brothers and friends go forth to danger on his behalf while he himself drew back from facing it, neither could he bring himself to harm the lands or the goods of any englishman. for six days harold remained in london waiting, but in vain, for the forces from the north to join him, and on the thursday morning set out with his army in order to meet the invaders on the day he had named. accounts differ very widely as to the strength of that army. norman writers, in order to glorify their own victory, speak of it as one of prodigious numbers. english writers, on the other hand, endeavour to explain the defeat by minimizing the number of those who followed harold's standard. doubtless the english king, knowing the proved valour of his housecarls, and fresh from the crushing defeat inflicted on the norsemen, considered the numbers to be sufficient. his military genius was unquestionable, and next only to william the norman he was regarded as the greatest general in europe. as there was no occasion for haste so long as the normans remained at hastings he would not have moved forward with a force he deemed insufficient, when he knew that in another week its numbers would have been doubled. on the day that the king made his last visit to waltham, wulf rode over to croydon in compliance with an entreaty he received from edith. "when does the army march?" she asked anxiously as she entered. "the day after to-morrow, lady." "and my lord goes with it?" "he does. i myself think that gurth's counsel was good, and that it were best for england that he remained at westminster; and yet i can understand well that he himself would feel it a shame did he remain behind." "i feel sore misgivings," edith said, bursting into tears. "when he marched north against the king of norway and tostig i felt no doubt he would return victorious; but night after night i have had evil dreams, and though i pray continually my spirit has no relief. i have never feared for him before. i have always felt sure that whoever died harold would be spared for the sake of england, but i have no such feeling now. it seems to me that i sacrificed him and myself in vain when i bade him leave me and marry the sister of the northern earls. no good has come of it. they are behaving now as traitors, and he has lost his life's happiness. and yet i did it for the best." "it was a noble sacrifice, lady, and come what may you have no cause to regret it." "the queen is not with him," edith said bitterly. "no, she is at oxford. you must not think, lady, that the king has been unhappy since he came to the throne. he has been so incessantly occupied with work that he has had no time for domestic happiness, even if it had been within his reach. his thoughts are ever on england, and he has no thought of self. labouring ever for the good of his subjects, he has his happiness alike in their love, and in the knowledge that he is doing all that man can for their welfare. if he dies, he will die the death not only of a soldier but of the noblest king that ever sat on the english throne, and at all times he will be enshrined in the hearts of the english people, whether normans or englishmen reign over the land." "that is true, and i must take comfort from it, wulf; but it was not for this that i sent for you, but to ask you where the battle is likely to be fought." "near hastings, assuredly," wulf replied. "i shall travel south to-morrow. i have had a message from the king praying me to see him, but that would be too much for me. he is another woman's husband and i dare not meet him, it were sin for me to do so; but i would fain be nearer to the scene of battle, so that in a few hours i might journey there, in order that, if my lord dies, i might see him once again. i know the superior of a convent at lewes, and there i will betake myself. thence, as i believe, it is some sixteen miles to hastings, and so far as i have heard the norman plunderers have not gone so far west. should aught happen to him, will you send a speedy messenger to me?" "should i live through the fight i will do so, lady, but even should i not return the news will travel swiftly; but god forfend that so great a loss should fall upon england." "amen," edith murmured, "and yet i fear. thanks, wulf, for coming, perchance we may not meet again. i am thinking of entering a convent, probably that at lewes. the struggle and pain here is well-nigh too great for me, but in the walls of a cloister i may find peace. if my fears are fulfilled i shall assuredly do this, and when i return to the convent i shall leave it no more. my life is over. i have a happy past to look back upon, in that am blest, and shall be happier than those who have no such consolation. moreover, i can still be proud of harold, and may love him as i might love the memory of a husband who is lost. god bless you, wulf, and protect you through the coming battle!" wulf rode sadly back to the camp. although he had denied it to edith, he could not but admit to himself that the sacrifice that she and harold had made had, so far, been unavailing. it had failed to draw the northern earls closer to the king. the marriage had been productive of no happiness to harold, and the only reward he had gained had been in the sympathy of the people, who knew well enough that he had sacrificed his love for the good of his country. the army marched rapidly. beorn and wulf rode together, and talked over the chances of the coming battle. "i cannot blame harold for not remaining behind," wulf said, "though it were certainly more politic for him to have stayed in london. as he could not do so, i think it would have been well had he bidden gurth remain behind to gather another army with which to meet the normans should we be defeated; or if he could not spare gurth he might have left leofric behind. it is assuredly a mistake for the three brothers all to come, for should all fall england would no longer have a head." "surely no such misfortune as that will befall us, wulf." "i know not. they will fight side by side, and should one fall all may perish together. one at least ought to remain behind. it matters not how many of us are killed, so that one of godwin's sons is left to rally the kingdom. you may be sure that if we are conquered the victors will be in but poor condition to meet another foe; but if there is no one to gather an army and unite all england against the normans they will eat us up piecemeal." "we must not think of so terrible a thing, wulf. it is not like you to look at the dark side. why, when we were in wales, and in as bad a plight as could well be, you always made light of danger, and managed affairs as if we were certain to succeed. why should we be defeated? why should the king be killed? he went through the terrible fight at stamford bridge without a scratch. we have seen the normans at work, and know that they are not such terrible fellows; and as for their duke, i would assuredly rather meet him in battle, doughty as he may be, than have faced harold hardrada with his two-handed sword." "i have every hope of winning the day, beorn, but still i do regret much that gurth and leofric are both here. do you remember that in wales we agreed that it was always well to have a way of retreat in case of defeat? well, i feel that defeat this time will mean not only the defeat of an army but the ruin of england." on friday afternoon the army reached rising ground near the village of senlac, which harold had beforehand fixed upon as the place where he would give battle to the invaders. kent and sussex he knew well. they had been the home of his family, and he owned vast estates there. doubtless in the long weeks of waiting for the coming of the norman fleet he had fixed upon this spot as one well suited for a battle. it was necessary that the english should fight on the defensive. the normans were strong in cavalry, while the english were unaccustomed to fight on horseback, and would have been at a grievous disadvantage had they attacked the enemy. the hill offered many advantages to a force standing on the defensive. the great eastern road passed close to its foot, and its possession barred the passage of the invaders in that direction. the ground between it and the sea was marshy and broken, and its occupation by an english force left the normans no choice but to come out and attack them. the sides were steep and the ground rose rapidly in the rear, so that the norman cavalry could not attack from behind. it was, indeed, a sort of peninsula running southward from the main range of hills. the moment the troops reached the ground the royal standard was planted, and the men set to work to fell trees and to form a triple palisade along the accessible sides of the hills. the force at harold's command must have been far nearer to the estimate given of its strength by the english chroniclers than by the normans, for the space occupied was insufficient for the standing room of such an army as that enumerated by the latter writers. harold relied almost entirely upon the housecarls. the levies might be brave, but they were undisciplined, and might easily be thrown into disorder; they would, too, be impatient under the trial of a long day's battle. it is even said that he sent away some of the ill-armed levies, who came flocking in from the country round, eager to revenge the injuries received at the hands of the normans. it was upon the shield-wall, the favourite formation of the english, that he relied to win the battle. it was their national mode of fighting. it was that in which alfred had led the saxons to victory over the danes. it was that in which they clashed against the shield-wall of norway and shattered it, and he might well hope that the barons of normandy and the adventurers from all parts of europe who fought under william's banner might well try in vain to break it. in the evening a messenger arrived from william, again bidding harold resign the kingdom or meet the duke in single combat, the crown of england to be the prize of the victor. harold refused the challenge. he had proved his personal courage too often for it to be supposed that he declined from any feeling of cowardice, but he knew well that the issue could not be thus decided. were he to fall, the people would still refuse to accept william as their king; were william to fall, the host that had gathered for the plunder of england would still give battle. nothing was therefore to be gained by the proposed combat. chapter xxi. hastings. the fiction of the norman historians, that while the normans passed the night preceding the battle in prayer, the english spent it in feasting, is even more palpably absurd than the many other falsehoods invented for the purpose of damaging the character of harold. the english army had marched nearly seventy miles in the course of two days, and had in addition laboured incessantly for many hours in erecting the palisades and in digging ditches. we may be sure that after two such days the great mass of the army lay down dog-tired directly their work was done, and slept till morning. harold and his thanes had shared in their labours, and knowing the terrible work that awaited them in the morning, would most surely be disposed to get as long a sleep as possible to prepare for it. but what is most opposed to the norman story is the fact that harold was a sincerely and deeply religious man, far more so than his rival. the life of the one man was in accordance with his professions--he was gentle and merciful, ever ready to forgive his enemies, averse to bloodshed, and so true a friend of the church that the whole of the prelates and clergy set the interdict of the pope at naught for his sake. the only exception in his clemency to the conquered was in the case of the welsh, and in this instance the stern measures he adopted were in the end the most merciful. no oaths could bind these marauders, and the stern punishment he inflicted was the means of procuring for the west of england a respite from their incursions that lasted for three generations. william of normandy, on the contrary, was absolutely merciless in warfare. he was not cruel for the sake of cruelty, but where he deemed that the policy demanded it, he was ruthless, and spared neither age nor sex. he was lavish to the church, but it was rather because he needed and obtained its aid than from any feeling of real piety. in point of ability, both civil and military, the duke of normandy and harold of england were perhaps about equal; in point of nobility of character there was no comparison between them. we may be sure that the night before the battle harold prayed as earnestly as he had prayed at waltham for the aid of heaven. wulf and beorn lay down among the thanes, after harold, sitting with them round a fire, had explained his plans for the battle. so calmly and confidently did he speak, and so strong was their position, that even those who had, like wulf, doubted the wisdom of an advance until the whole force of england had assembled, now felt something like an assurance of victory, and all lay down to sleep with the belief that the victory at stamford bridge would be repeated. on waking, wulf visited his men. they were already astir, and he was astounded at seeing among them the towering figure of osgod. "why, what means this, osgod?" he exclaimed. "did i not order you to rest quietly at york?" "that did you, my lord," osgod said, "and no man obeys your orders more readily than i, and anything that you bid me do i am willing to do if possible; but in this it was not possible, for i could not remain at york, either in rest or quiet. i should have had fever in my blood, and would by this time have been lying as deep in the earth as harold of norway himself. therefore, in order to get the rest and quiet you had ordered, it was necessary for me to come south. as you had left me well supplied with money, i was able to do so in comfort, and though i could well enough walk i have had myself carried in a litter by easy stages. i reached london on wednesday night, having been a fortnight on the way, and i arrived here an hour since. each day i walked a little, so as to keep my health and exercise my limbs, and so well have i succeeded that my wound has well-nigh healed; and although i doubt whether i shall be able to use a heavy axe, i trust i shall be able to strike hard enough with the right hand to split a few norman helms." "but the exertion may set your wounds bleeding afresh, osgod," wulf said, unable to repress a smile at osgod's argument. "methinks there is no fear of that. the most nights i have slept at monasteries, and have inquired from the monks, whom i told that i must needs stand by your side to-day, whether i should be fit. they said at first that there would be some risk in the matter, but that if i continued to take rest and quiet as i was doing, and the wound continued to heal favourably, it was possible, if i abstained from actual fighting, i might do so; but of late they have spoken more confidently. i told the monk who seared my arm to do it heartily, for a little pain more or less was of small account, so that he made a good job of it. and so, what with the rest and quiet and my mind being at ease, it went on so well that a monk who examined it at westminster on wednesday evening told me that save for the healing of the skin the wound was pretty nigh cured, and that he thought there was no chance whatever of its breaking out afresh. he bandaged it tightly to prevent any rush of blood into the veins, and though when i drove an axe just now into that stump yonder, i felt that i had not got back my strength fully, i expect when i warm to the work i shall strike as strongly as most." "well, at any rate you must take care of yourself, osgod. you can aid me in keeping our men steady, but i charge you not to fight yourself unless you see the line waver. then you can, of course, throw yourself into the fray." "i will keep myself back for that, master; but i am sure we shall all have to do our best before sunset, and as all will be risking their lives there is no reason why i should not do so as well as the rest." the troops made a hearty breakfast from the food they carried, and quenched their thirst at the little stream that ran down by the side of the slope, then they were told off to the ground they were to occupy. at nine in the morning the vanguard of the norman army appeared over the brow of a rise, and the english at once took up their positions. in the centre were the housecarls of the royal house and those of the thanes, together with the men of kent, whose right it was ever to be in the front of a battle, and the london citizens under their sheriff. all these were armed and attired like the housecarls. in the centre of this array flew the royal standard, and around it were the three royal brothers, aelfwig their uncle, with his monk's cowl over his helmet, and their nephew, hakon, the son of sweyn. the housecarls were in a triple line. to the left and right of them were the levies, as brave as their more heavily armed comrades, but altogether without discipline, and armed in the most primitive manner. a few only carried swords or axes, the majority had spears or javelins. many had only forks or sharp stakes, while some carried stone hammers and axes, such as were used by their primitive ancestors. as the norman army wound down from the opposite hill and formed up in the order of battle, harold rode along in front of his line exhorting all to stand firm. "they were there," he said, "to defend their country, and to defend their country they had but to hold the hill. were they steadfast and firm they could assuredly resist the attack of this host who came to capture and plunder england." the order in which the normans prepared for battle was similar to that of the english. both commanders had been well informed by spies of the strength and position of their opponents, and the duke placed his tried norman troops in the centre to match themselves against the english housecarls. his breton contingent was on his left, while on the right were the french, the flemings, and the other foreign adventurers who had come to fight under his banner. in the front line were the archers and slingers, who were to open the battle and shake the line of the defenders. behind these came the infantry, who were to hew down the palisades and clear a way for the cavalry charge full into the centre of the english host. a norman trumpet gave the signal for the commencement of the battle, and the archers along the whole line poured a storm of arrows into the english. it was unanswered, for there were few bowmen among the defenders of the hill, and the distance was too great for the javelin-men to hurl their missiles. after the archers had shot several volleys of arrows they fell back, and the infantry advanced against the hill; but before they did so taillifer, a norman minstrel, dashed forward on horseback, and spurring up the ascent, tossing his sword in the air and catching it as it fell, rode up to the english line. one man he pierced with a lance, another he cut down with his sword, and then fell dead under the blow of a heavy axe. this mad exploit had scarce terminated when the norman infantry advanced up the hill. they were greeted with a shower of stones and javelins, which slew many, but with unbroken front they pressed upwards until they reached the palisade. here a desperate struggle began. the norman sword and spear were met by the axes of the housecarls, and the clubs, spears, and forks of the levies. in vain norman, breton, frenchmen, and fleming strove to break the english line. the high position of the defenders gave them a great advantage over their assailants, among whose crowded ranks the javelin-men did great execution, while the normans could receive little aid from their archers. both sides fought with obstinate valour. the norman battle-cry was "god help us!" the english "god almighty and the holy cross!" the latter invocation being to the relic at waltham, which was the king's special object of devotion. with jeering cries too they greeted the efforts of their assailants to cross the palisade and break their line. at last the norman infantry fell back broken and baffled, having suffered terrible loss, and now the knights and horsemen, who formed the backbone of william's army, rode up the hill. the duke himself, as well as his brother odo, bishop of bayeau, who fought beside him, had laid aside their norman swords, and were armed with heavy maces, weapons as formidable as the english axe. but the valour of the horsemen, the strength of their armour, the length of their lances, and the weight of their horses, availed no more against the shield-wall of the housecarls than the infantry had done. the superior height and strength of the english, and the sweep of their terrible battle-axes, counterbalanced the advantage the horses afforded to the normans, and the hitherto irresistible chivalry of normandy and france were, for the first time, dashed backwards by trained infantry. in front of the english line the ground was thickly covered with fallen men and horses. there were but few wounded among them, for where the english axe fell, whether on horse or rider, it did its work thoroughly. but the english, too, had suffered. the action of swinging the axe with both arms above the head left the neck and upper part of the body exposed, and many had fallen pierced through and through by the norman spears. a great shout of triumph rose from the english line as the norman horsemen, unable to do more, fell sullenly back down the hill. as in the centre the king with his thanes and housecarls had repelled the attack of the normans, so on the flanks the english levies had held their ground against the bretons and french; but, carried away by their exultation, the levies on the right, forgetful of harold's express orders that no man was to stir from his place until he himself gave the signal for pursuit, broke their line, and rushing down the hill fell on the retreating bretons. unable to withstand the onslaught, and already disheartened by their failure, the bretons fled in wild alarm, and rushing towards the centre for protection threw the normans also into confusion. the panic spread rapidly, the host wavered, and had already begun to fly, when william, throwing off his helmet, rode among them, and exhorting some and striking others with a lance he had caught up, at last restored order, and the breton infantry rallied and fell upon their pursuers, killing many and driving the rest back up the hill. again the norman infantry and cavalry together advanced up the hill, and the terrible struggle recommenced. william and his brother the bishop performed prodigies of valour, but not less valiantly fought harold of england and his brothers. the palisade was by this time destroyed in many places, and desperate hand-to-hand contests now took place. cutting his way through meaner foes the duke strove to reach the royal standard and encounter harold himself. he was nearing his goal, when gurth sprang forward, eager above all things to protect harold from harm. he hurled a javelin at william, but the dart struck the norman's horse only, and it fell beneath him. william leapt to his feet, and springing upon gurth smote with his heavy mace full on his helmet, and the noble earl of east anglia fell dead at his feet. almost at the same moment his brother leofwin, fighting sword in hand, was slain. but the fall of the two royal brothers in no way changed the fate of the battle. the men of kent and essex, furious at the fall of their beloved earls, fought even more fiercely than before to avenge their deaths. william had remounted, but his second horse was also slain. eustace of boulogne offered him his horse, and himself mounting that of one of his followers they fell together upon the english line, but all the valour of the duke and his chivalry failed to break it. on the french left the bretons had, indeed, succeeded in completely destroying the palisade, but the levies stood firm, and no impression was made upon their solid line. the attack had failed, and even william saw that it was hopeless any more to hurl his troops against the shield-wall, but the manner in which the english irregulars had been induced to break their array led him to try by a feigned retreat to induce them to repeat their error. while the fight yet raged around him he sent orders to the bretons to turn and flee, and then if the defenders pursued them to turn upon them while he ordered a portion of his norman force to make straight for the gap as soon as the english left their posts. the stratagem was successful. again with exulting shouts the levies poured out in pursuit of the bretons. these fled for some distance, and then suddenly turning fell on their pursuers. ill-armed and undisciplined as the levies were, and unable to withstand the attack of such overwhelming numbers, they bore themselves gallantly. one party took possession of a small outlying hill, and with showers of darts and stones they killed or drove off all who attacked them. the greater part, however, made their way to broken ground to the west of the hill, and made a stand on the steep bank of a small ravine. the french horsemen charging down upon them, unaware of the existence of the ravine, fell into it, and were slaughtered in such numbers by the knives and spears of the english that the ravine was well-nigh filled up with their dead bodies. but gallantly as the levies had retrieved their error, it was a fatal one. as soon as they had left their line, the normans told off for the duty pressed into the gap, and were followed by the whole of their main body, and thus the english lost the advantage of position, and the contending hosts faced each other on the hill, the ground now occupied by the normans being somewhat higher than that on which the housecarls stood. it was now about three in the afternoon, and the fight had been raging for six hours, but though thus outflanked and the order of their battle destroyed, the veterans of harold showed neither alarm nor discouragement. their formation was changed, the shield-wall still faced the normans, and for a time every effort to break it failed. in vain the norman cavalry charged down upon it, in vain their duke plied his terrible mace. occasionally men worn out by the long defensive battle sprang from the english ranks and engaged knight or baron hand to hand. all along the line such single-handed conflicts were going on, and the roar of battle was as loud and fierce as at the beginning of the day. so for three more hours the fight went on; with diminishing numbers, but with undiminished bravery the english still held their ground, and as twilight was now closing in, it seemed as if they would maintain it till nightfall. then william ordered up his archers again, bade them shoot their arrows high into the air, so that they should fall among the king and his thanes grouped round the standard. the effect was terrible. through helm and shoulder-guard the arrows made their way; the soldiers held their shields above their heads, but the thanes had no such protection. harold glanced up for a moment, and as if directed by the hand of fate an arrow struck him full in the eye, and he fell prostrate as if struck by a thunderbolt. a cry of horror and dismay burst from the thanes around him, but there was no time for the indulgence of grief. the normans too had seen the king fall, and with shouts of triumph a body of knights tried to force their way in to take possession of his body. but so long as an englishman could swing axe this was not to be, and the assault was repulsed as others had been before. nor, when the news of harold's fall spread, did the brave housecarls lose heart, but sternly and obstinately as ever held together. at last the normans burst in at the centre, each baron and knight striving to be the first to pluck down the standards, the one the king's own cognizance, the other the national banner, that waved side by side. one after another the thanes were smitten down. not one asked for quarter, not one turned his back upon the foe. beorn and wulf had, through the long fight, stood side by side, and the watchfulness with which they guarded each other had carried them so far unharmed through it. "it is all over now, beorn," wulf said. "but it is not hard to die, for with harold the cause of england is lost." "at any rate we will sell our lives dearly," beorn said, as he struck a norman knight from his horse. but they were the last defenders of the standards, and the end was at hand. blows rained down upon them. beorn was beaten on to one knee; wulf was so exhausted by his exertions that he could scarce swing his axe, when a norman baron pressed his horse through the throng, and springing to the ground held his sword aloft and shouted: "stand back! stand back! these two men hold the duke's solemn pledge for their lives!" some of the others still pressed on, but he shouted again: "whoever strikes at them strikes at me!" there was still hesitation, so furious were the normans at the resistance they had met with and the tremendous losses they had suffered. but another baron exclaimed, "de burg is right! i heard the pledge given, and so did many of you. this is the young saxon who saved the duke's camp from the attack by the bretons, and bore the brunt of their assault till we had time to arm. the other brought with him the news that harold was wrecked." the words were decisive, and the normans turned aside their horses to attack other foes. "thank god i arrived in time, wulf," baron de burg said. "i knew you would be near the standard, but i was fighting elsewhere when the news reached me that the line was broken and the standard on the point of capture. are you badly hurt, beorn?" "i am dizzy and faint," beorn, who had risen to his feet, replied unsteadily, "but i think not badly wounded." "walk by me one on each side holding my stirrup-leathers. i would place you on my horse, but it were best that i myself should be seen." he removed his helmet, and bareheaded moved off with the young thanes walking beside him. many normans stopped as he made his way down the hill, but to their questions he replied, "the duke has himself guaranteed the safety of these thanes," and as he was well known to stand high in the duke's favour his word was at once accepted. in the meantime harold's standard, whose emblem was a fighting man, and the golden dragon, the national banner, had been carried off in triumph. four of the normans whose names were long held in infamy by the english discovered the body of the dying king, for it is said that he still breathed. one of these was eustace of boulogne, the only man in the two armies who had during the engagement shown signs of craven fear. another was the son of that count of ponthieu, who had once held harold prisoner. the others were gifford and montfort. one ran his spear through harold's breast, another struck off his head with his sword, a third pierced the dead body, while the fourth further insulted the dead hero by cutting off one of his legs--an action, however, which william when he heard of it pronounced to be shameful, and expelled its perpetrator from the army. but though the king was dead and the standard lost, the survivors of the housecarls still fought on until darkness fell. the levies had fled just before, hotly pursued by the norman horse. knowing the ground well the light-armed footmen fled across a bog, and in the fast-gathering darkness their pursuers did not notice the nature of the ground, but galloping on plunged into the morass, where great numbers of them perished miserably, either suffocated in the mud or slain by the english, who turned and fell upon them with axe and spear as soon as they saw their plight. so great was the slaughter, that those who had reined up their horses in time were stricken with horror even after all the carnage they had witnessed on the field of battle. with darkness the battle came to an end. few indeed of the housecarls drew off under cover of the darkness; their force being almost annihilated. with them had perished almost the whole of the thanes of the south of england and east anglia. the sheriff of london had been carried off desperately wounded by a few of his friends, but with this exception none of harold's companions and thanes left the field alive while daylight lasted. a few only the next morning were found breathing among the mass of dead, and some of these survived and returned at last to their homes: for william, satisfied with the complete victory he had gained, issued orders that all found alive on the field were to be well treated. he felt that he was now king of england, and that clemency was his best policy. permission was given to the women who flocked in from the country round, to search for the bodies of their friends and to remove them for burial. he also commanded a search to be made for the body of harold, but during the night, while the exhausted soldiers slept heavily after their labours, the camp-followers had been busy with the work of plunder, busiest round the spot where the standards had stood, for here were stores of gold bracelets and rings, the emblems of authority of the thanes, to be collected, and rich garments to be carried off. thus then, the heaps of corpses that marked the spot where the fighting had all day been heaviest, were unrecognizable, so terrible had been the wounds dealt by sword, battle-axe, and mace. de burg had kept wulf and beorn with him all night, and they had lain down and slept together. in the morning he committed them to the charge of some of his personal followers, while he went to the duke to inform him of what he had done. "thank you, de burg," william said; "they are two brave young fellows. i marked them in the fight more than once when i was near the standard, and i should have grieved if ill had befallen them, for they did me loyal service. i had given my word that they should retain their estates in case i ever came to the throne here. i know not what to do with them. were i to let them go now, they would assuredly take part in any further resistance that the english may offer to me. i will not ask them now to swear allegiance to me, for fresh from the battle where they have lost so many friends and the earl they loved so loyally, they would assuredly refuse." "if you will grant me a short leave i will take ship back to normandy and place them in the care of my wife, where they can remain until matters have settled down here." "it is a good idea, de burg; do so without delay. methinks that after yesterday there will be no real resistance offered to me. harold and his brothers and all the leading thanes lie dead. there is no one left to lead the people or organize a resistance, therefore i can spare you for a time." thanking the duke, de burg returned to his captives and told them what had been arranged. "we owe you our heartiest thanks, lord de burg, for your kindness," beorn said. "assuredly so long as england resists we will not acknowledge william of normandy as king, but when resistance ceases, we will of course take the oath to him if only for the sake of our people; partial risings could but bring down his vengeance and cause suffering and ruin to all concerned. therefore, we gratefully accept your offer, but first of all we beg you to let us go to the spot where our housecarls fought. you remember wulf's man, osgod?" "that do i indeed," de burg replied. "the great fellow who fought by his side that night against the bretons, and saved my son's life. was he there?" "he was," wulf said, "though greatly against my wishes; for he had lost an arm in the fight at stamford bridge, and though it is little more than a fortnight since, he had himself carried down here, contrary to my orders, and insisted upon joining in the battle. i would fain search for his body and give him burial." "i will come with you at once," the norman said, "i too owe him a debt of gratitude." the housecarls of steyning had fallen to a man where they stood, and among them after some searching they came upon the body of osgod, distinguished alike by its bulk and the loss of an arm. his axe lay with a broken shaft by his side. his helmet was cleft asunder, and his face covered with blood. "his body is yet warm," wulf said, as he lifted his arm. "i believe he still lives." de burg called upon two norman soldiers near to aid, and with their assistance wulf and beorn carried osgod down to the stream, where they washed the blood from his face and bathed the wound in his head. "he is certainly alive," beorn said. "doubtless he was stunned by the blow, and has remained unconscious from the loss of blood." de burg sent for a flask of wine, and a little of this was poured through osgod's lips. presently there was a deep sigh and a slight motion of the figure, and then osgod opened his eyes. at first he seemed bewildered, but as his eyes fell on wulf a look of pleasure came into them, and he smiled faintly. "i am alive, osgod, and glad indeed to find that you are also. beorn has also escaped. take a draught of wine; you have lost a lot of blood and had none to spare." they lifted him into a sitting position, and held the cup to his lips while he drank a long draught. "that is better," he murmured. "i can feel it going through my veins. i shall be able to wield an axe yet again. this comes of fighting with a weapon you don't know. the shaft broke as i was guarding my head, and i don't remember anything after." "it saved your life though, osgod, for it broke the force of the blow which would otherwise have cleft your skull. as it is, it has not gone very deep, and the blood you have lost has run chiefly from a wound on your left shoulder." "how is it that you are here?" osgod asked, looking round at the normans. "we are prisoners, though we have not surrendered," wulf replied. "we were saved by our good friend lord de burg, who has joined us in our search for you. we are to be taken to normandy as prisoners, and to remain in charge of lady de burg." "you shall go too, osgod," de burg said. "you will find it hard to be nursed here, and my wife will see that your wounds are well cared for. your master will stay with you for the present, for i have matters to see about before we start for the coast." in half an hour he returned. "i have to ask you to perform a last service to your dead king," he said. "the bodies of gurth and leofwin have been found and borne away by your people for burial, but none can find the body of harold. all the dead that were near the standard were removed last night by the soldiers, and among the great pile of dead none can recognize that of your king." well as they knew him, wulf and beorn were unable to recognize the body of harold among the ghastly heap of mutilated corpses. after a time wulf said: "there is one who might recognize it when all others failed. it is edith, whom he so long loved as his wife. she may recognize it by some mark or sign unknown to others. if you will give me leave i will ride to lewes, where she is staying, and bring her hither." "certainly, wulf; i will obtain a safe conduct for you from the duke." wulf had ridden, however, but a mile along the western road when he saw a litter approaching borne by four men. he reined in his horse by its side. an order was given from within, and as the bearers lowered it to the ground edith stepped out. she was deadly pale. her eyes were red with weeping, and she seemed to wulf to have aged years since he saw her a week before. "my presentiments have come true, wulf," she said. "it was no surprise to me when last night the news came that the battle was lost and harold slain. i had looked and waited for it. you were coming to fetch me?" "yes, lady; harold's body has not been found. early this morning two monks of waltham, who had followed the army and seen the fight afar off, came into camp, and with them gytha, harold's mother. she saw the duke, and begged for harold's body, offering its weight in gold if she might carry it for burial to the abbey of waltham. the duke refused, saying that an excommunicated man could not be buried in a holy place; she might remove the bodies of her other two sons, but harold's, when found, should be buried by the seacoast. the monks searched in vain for the body. beorn and i have done the same, but have failed to recognize it in so vast a heap of slain." "i shall know it," edith said. "among a thousand dead i should know harold." "it is a terrible sight, lady, for a woman to look upon," wulf said gently. "i shall see nothing but him," she replied firmly. he accompanied her back to the battle-ground, where the two monks joined her. wulf, who was greatly shaken by the sight of her set and white face, left her with them. what the eye of friendship had failed to accomplish, that of love detected unerringly. there were marks on harold's body by which edith recognized it. one of the monks bore the news to the duke, who charged sir william malet to superintend the burial, and to do it with all honour. the remains were collected and reverently placed together. they were wrapped in a purple robe, and laid on a litter. beorn and wulf and the two monks lifted it; edith walked behind, followed by lord de burg and several other norman knights and barons who had known harold in normandy, and could admire and appreciate the valour of the dead hero. the little procession went down to the shore, where norman soldiers had already dug a grave, and there by the coast he had defended so well harold was laid to rest, and over his body a great cairn of stones was raised by order of the duke. chapter xxii. the lord of bramber. edith stood by while the norman soldiers piled the stones over the grave. no tear had fallen from her eyes from the time that she had reached the field of battle. her face was as pale as marble, and looked almost as rigid. when the last stone was placed on the top of the cairn she turned to wulf and beorn: "farewell, wulf! farewell, beorn! i am glad you were here. i am glad that beside me stood two of his most trusted thanes, and two of the monks from the abbey he founded, and whose welfare was so dear to him. i go to lewes, and when the doors of the convent close on me i shall be dead to the world. would that i were lying beneath that cairn by the side of my dear lord. i cannot weep for him now, the springs of my heart seem frozen, but i have time for that. farewell, thanes! i shall remember you in my prayers." so saying she turned away, and walked back to the litter. "poor lady!" beorn exclaimed as he watched the litter, escorted by the two monks, carried along the road. "poor lady indeed!" wulf repeated; "and yet there are thousands in england and normandy who were widowed yesterday, and maybe she is better off than many. she lost harold the day she resigned him to another, and it was harder perhaps to be parted from him in that fashion than to know that he is dead now. she can think of him as his true widow, for assuredly the queen who never cared aught for him is a widow but in name. before, edith was tortured by the desire to see him and to comfort him, and yet his marriage stood as a gulf between them, a gulf that she would never have passed. now she can think of him as her very own, as the man who had loved her even as she had loved him. it is a grief, a terrible grief, but one without bitterness. but see, lord de burg is coming this way, and as there is a litter behind him i suppose all is ready for our departure." "i am ready, young thanes," de burg said as he came up. "we ride at once for pevensey, whither an order was sent some hours ago for a ship to be in readiness to sail for normandy." three horses were led up and mounted. they rode away, followed by an armed party and the litter on which osgod was laid. "you have done your last duty to your king," the norman said. "it is a fit grave for a hero, and assuredly harold was one. maybe that it is not his last resting-place. the duke at present doubtless felt constrained at first to refuse him christian burial, for had he granted gytha's request, it would have been an acknowledgment that the charges brought against him were unfounded, and the excommunication of no avail; but i doubt not that in time he will allow his body to be taken to his abbey at waltham. now," he said less gravely, in order to turn their thoughts from the sad scenes they had witnessed, "what think you of the future, will the northern earls head a national movement against us?" "they are foul traitors!" beorn exclaimed passionately; "and i would that wulf and i could meet them in fair lists and fight them." "they will do nothing," wulf said more quietly. "they will hasten to make the best terms they can for themselves, and will ask to be permitted to hold their earldoms as his vassals. but they will not long enjoy their treachery; they are ever intriguers, and as soon as they see their opportunity will conspire against william as they conspired against harold. thank heaven they will receive scantier mercy at his hands than they received at the king's. as for the south and east, who is to lead them? there is no one left to whom they can look for guidance; doubtless in some places they will resist, but such resistance can only bring ruin upon those who attempt it. maybe some will take to the forests or the great eastern marshes, and may perhaps hold out for months, or even years. but what can it avail in the end? had harold escaped alive there would have been many a battle as obstinate as that of yesterday to fight before england was conquered. had any of the greater thanes escaped men would have flocked to them, but they are all gone, save the few that were found well-nigh lifeless this morning. perhaps it is better as it is; for now that william is victorious he will soon receive large bodies of reinforcements, and as resistance would be vain, it were best that no resistance were made. duke william has shown himself a wise and just ruler in normandy, and will doubtless prove himself the same in england if he be not angered by revolts and risings. it is hard that englishmen should be ruled by a foreigner, but it is no new thing for us. we saxons conquered the britons, and in turn danish kings have ruled over us; but saxon and dane have become almost one, and the old grudges have died out. maybe in time you normans also may become english." "you would take the oath of allegiance to william then, wulf?" "not now, my lord, but when england accepts him as her king i should be willing to hold my lands from him as i have held them before from our kings, that is, if the lands remain mine." "they will remain yours," lord de burg said confidently. "the duke's promise was publicly made, and he will certainly adhere to it; even if he wished it, he could not, after charging harold with perjury, break his own promise." the sun was sinking when they reached pevensey, for the search for harold's body and the building of his cairn had occupied many hours. they went at once on board one of the ships de burg had himself furnished for the expedition, and two days later landed at rouen. they had brought horses with them, and the two young thanes at once rode with the baron to his chateau, leaving osgod to be brought after them in his litter. lord de burg was received with the greatest joy by his wife, guy, and agnes. they had been in a state of terrible anxiety for the last twenty-four hours, for a swift ship had been despatched by the duke with the news of the victory, at daybreak after the battle, and it was known that the fight had been long and desperately contested, and that a great number of barons and knights had fallen. as soon as the first outburst of delight was over the baron called in wulf and beorn, who had not followed him into the room, feeling that he would prefer to greet his family alone. guy gave an exclamation of surprise and pleasure as they came forward. "these are my prisoners," the baron said with a smile, "if i can call prisoners those who have never surrendered. the duke has intrusted them to my keeping, and has ordered that you shall hold them in safe custody." "lord de burg does not tell you, lady, that he saved our lives, which but for him were assuredly lost. we were well-nigh spent, and were surrounded by a ring of foes when he broke in and stood beside us proclaiming that the duke himself had given a pledge for our safety." "i have paid part of the debt we owe," the baron said, "though i saved them at no cost to myself, while wulf defended guy at the risk of his life." "how long do you stay with us, my lord?" "as long as i can, wife. i went, as you know, unwillingly to the war, but when all the norman barons followed the duke i could not hold back. but i trust to have no more of it; so terrible a field no man living has seen, and in truth until twilight fell it seemed that we should be beaten, with such obstinacy and endurance did the english fight. we won, but it was a victory over the dead rather than the living. of harold's regular troops no man turned, no man asked for quarter, they fell where they stood; and even the irregulars, who had fought with equal bravery, when, as night fell and all was lost, they fled, inflicted well-nigh as heavy a blow upon us as had been dealt during the day. i have no animosity against them, they are valiant men, and were in their right in defending their country, and i would that i could stay peacefully here until the last blow has been struck. i am well content with my estates, and need no foot of english land, no share in english spoil i must fight for my liege lord as long as fighting goes on, but that over i hope to return here and live in peace. at any rate i can tarry quietly here for a week. certainly no force can be raised in time to oppose the duke's advance on london, and my sword therefore may well rest in its scabbard. i suppose, thanes, you will not object to give me your parole to attempt no escape?" "willingly, my lord," beorn said. "if, contrary to our opinion, england should rise and fight one more battle for freedom, we will give you due notice that we shall if possible escape and cross the sea to join our countrymen." "that is fair enough," de burg said with a smile, "and the moment you give me notice i will clap you into so firm a cage that i warrant you will not escape from it; but i trust the necessity will not arise. now, guy, take your friends to their chambers and see to their comfort. i will not tell the story of the battle until you return, for doubtless you are burning to hear it, and in truth it will be famous in all times, both as one of the sturdiest fights ever heard of, and because such great issues depended on its results." when guy returned with his friends and a meal had been eaten, de burg told the story of the battle of senlac. "such is the story as far as i know it," he added in conclusion, "but in truth beyond the beginning and the end, and the fact that we twice fell back and at one time were flying in headlong rout to our ships, i know nothing. all day i was striving to break through a living wall, and striving in vain. i can see now the close line of shields, the helmet covered faces above them, and the terrible axes rising and falling, cleaving through helmet and hauberk as if they had been pasteboard. it may well-nigh be said that we have no wounded, for each man struck fell in his track as if smitten by lightning. can you add more, thanes?" beorn shook his head. "it is like a dream," wulf said. "we never moved through the long day. at times there was a short lull, and then each man was fighting as best he could. i know that my arms grew tired and that my axe seemed to grow heavier, that horse and foot swept up to us, and there was occasionally breathing time; that the royal brothers' voices rose ever cheeringly and encouragingly until gurth and leofwin fell, and after that harold's alone was heard, though i think it came to my ears as from a distance, so great was the tumult, so great our exertions. when harold died i knew that all was lost, but even that did not seem to affect me. i had become a sort of machine, and fought almost mechanically, with a dim consciousness that the end was close at hand. it was only at the last, when beorn and i stood back to back, that i seemed myself again, and was animated with new strength that came, i suppose, from despair." "it was an awful day," de burg said. "i have fought in many battles under the duke's banner, but the sternest of them were but paltry skirmishes in comparison to this. half of the nobles of normandy lie dead, half the army that filled the mighty fleet that sailed from st. valery have fallen. william is king of england, but whether that will in the end repay normandy for the loss she has suffered seems to me very doubtful. and now let us to bed. i sleep not well on shipboard, and in truth i had such dreams of death and slaughter that i ever awoke bathed with sweat, and in such fear that i dared not go to sleep again." at the end of a week the baron sailed again for england. to the two young englishmen the following weeks passed pleasantly. ships came frequently from england with news of what was doing there. william had tarried for some time at his camp at hastings, expecting to receive the submission of all england. but not an englishman came to bow before him. the northern earls had hurried to london as soon as they heard of the defeat at senlac and the death of the king and his brothers, and a witan was instantly summoned to choose his successor to the throne. edwin and morcar thought that the choice of the nation would surely fall upon one or other of them, as in rank and position they were now the first men in the realm. they exerted themselves to the utmost to bring this about, but no true-hearted englishman could forgive either their acceptance of harold hardrada as their king, or the long and treacherous delay that had left southern england to stand alone on the day of battle. the choice of the witan fell on the young edgar, the grandson of edmund ironside, the last male survivor of the royal blood. edgar, however, was never crowned, as that ceremony could only take place at one of the festivals of the church, and it was therefore postponed until christmas. london was eager for resistance. alfred had fought battle after battle against the danes, and though without their natural leaders, the people throughout southern england looked forward to a long and determined struggle. with the army of the north as a rallying centre a force more numerous than that which harold had led might soon be gathered. but these hopes were dashed to the ground by the treacherous northern earls. had one of them been chosen to sit on the vacant throne they would doubtless have done their best to maintain that throne, but they had been passed over, and oblivious of the fact that it was to the south they owed the rescue of their earldoms from the sway of the king of norway and tostig, they sullenly marched away with their army and left the south to its fate. while the cause of england was thus being betrayed and ruined, william was advancing eastward along the coast ravaging and destroying. romney was levelled to the ground and its inhabitants slain. dover opened its gates. it is probable that most of the male population had joined harold, and had fallen at senlac; and that the terrible fate of romney had struck such terror into the hearts of the inhabitants, who knew there was no army that could advance to their assistance, that they surrendered at the conqueror's approach. to them william behaved with lenity and kindness. his severity at romney and his lenity at dover had their effect. there being no central authority, no army in the field, each town and district was left to shift for itself; and assuredly none of them unaided could hope to offer prolonged resistance to the normans. as, after eight days' stay at dover, william advanced towards canterbury, he was met by a deputation of the citizens offering their submission, and soon from all parts of kent similar messages came in. kent had done its full share in the national defence on the hill near hastings, and was not to be blamed if, when all england remained supine and inactive, its villagers refused to throw away their lives uselessly. the duke was detained by sickness for a month near canterbury, and there received the submission of kent and sussex, and also that of the great ecclesiastical city of winchester; but the spirit of resistance in london still burned brightly, and william was indisposed to risk the loss that would be incurred by an assault upon its walls. he, therefore, moved round in a wide circle, wasting the land, plundering and destroying, till the citizens, convinced that resistance could only bring destruction upon themselves and their city, and in spite of the efforts of their wounded sheriff, sent an embassy to the duke at berkhampstead to submit and do homage to him. not london alone was represented by this embassy. the young king, elected but uncrowned, was with it; two archbishops, two bishops, and many of the chief men in england accompanied it, and although they were not the spokesmen of any witan, they might be said fairly to represent london and southern england. deserted by the north, without a leader, and seeing their land exposed to wholesale ravages, the south and west saxons were scarcely to be blamed for preferring submission to destruction. they doubtless thought that william, the wise ruler of normandy, would make a far better king than the boy they had chosen, who was himself almost as much a foreigner as william, save that there was a strain of english royal blood in his veins. so had england accepted canute the dane as her king, and he had ruled as an english monarch wisely and well. the embassy offered william the crown. the norman prelates and priests, who held so many of the dignities in the english church, had worked hard to incline men's minds to this end. silent while england stood united under its king to oppose the invader, their tongues were loosed as soon as the strength of england was broken and its king dead, and they pointed out that god had clearly designated william as their king by giving him victory and by destroying alike harold and his brothers. william went through the farce of hesitating to accept the offer of the crown, and held a consultation with his officers as to the answer he should give. they of course replied that he should accept the offer. william, therefore, marched with his army to london, where on christmas-day the same prelate who had anointed harold king of england crowned william as his successor. a few days later beorn and wulf with osgod, who had now completely recovered from his wounds, set sail for england. there was no longer any reason why they should not take their oaths to serve william. he was the crowned king of england, the accepted of the people, as harold had been, and when all southern england had submitted it was not for them, who had received special favours at william's hand, to hold back. with them went lady de burg, guy, and agnes, with many other norman ladies on their way to rejoin their lords in london. baron de burg, on the day after their arrival at westminster, led the two young thanes to the private apartment of the king. he received them graciously. "there are none of your nation," he said, "whose homage i more gladly accept. you fought valiantly before under my banner, and will, i am sure, be ready to do so again should occasion arise. i am thankful to my lord de burg that he interposed in my name and saved your lives. i have not forgotten the other part of my promise, and have this morning ordered my justiciar to add to your estates forfeited lands adjoining." beorn and wulf had previously talked the matter over. their own inclinations would have led them to refuse the offer, but as it was certain that all the land forfeited to the crown by the death of its holders in battle would be apportioned among william's norman followers, they thought that it would be wholly for the benefit both of the families of the late thanes and for their tenants and people that they should accept any estate william might bestow on them. they, therefore, thanked the duke in suitable terms, and at once took the oaths for the lands he might be pleased to bestow on them. a week later they received the formal deeds, which in both cases more than doubled the estates they before possessed. the same evening lord de burg said to wulf, who had tarried in london, while beorn had at once set out for fareham: "i think the time has come, wulf, when i can speak of a subject that has been in my thoughts for a long time, and which, although you have not spoken, has, as my wife and i have both seen, been dear to you. normandy and england are now one, and we are vassals of the same king. as long as there was a probability that englishmen and normans might again be ranged in battle against each other, it was not expedient that aught should be done in the matter, but, now this obstacle is removed, i can offer you the alliance on which i am sure your heart is set, and give you the hand of my daughter in marriage." "it is the greatest wish of my life," wulf replied gratefully. "i should have asked you for her hand before had it not been for the position of public affairs. i love her dearly, though i have until now abstained from speaking; and yet i would not wed her unless her heart went freely with her hand." "i think not that she will be disobedient to my wishes," de burg said smiling. "she has proved deaf to all her norman suitors, and although among them were some whom few maidens would have said no to, her mother and i had no wish to force her inclinations, especially as we both shrewdly suspected where her heart had been bestowed. this alliance, too, has long been the dearest wish of guy. on the bed of sickness where he lay so long, and from which it seemed at one time that he would never rise, he often spoke to me of it. he was fondly attached to his sister, and again and again said that he wished of all things that you should some day become her husband, as he was sure her happiness would be safe with you, and that you would worthily fill his place to us, and would, when the time came, rule nobly over the lands of de burg." "god forbid that that should ever be the case," wulf said earnestly. "i trust that guy will live long, and that he will marry and leave descendants to follow him." the baron shook his head sadly. "guy is better," he said, "but he is still weak and fragile, and the leeches tell me that a rough winter or an illness that would be nought to others might carry him off. i have small hopes that he will ever marry. i am sure that no such thought is in his mind. he is as eager now as he was four years ago that you should be a son to us, and a husband to agnes. he has also earnestly expressed the wish, in which i also join, that you should take our name. you english have no family names, but that will come with other norman customs, and marrying a de burg it would seem natural that you should yourself become wulf de burg." "i should feel it a high honour. there is no more noble name in normandy, and i trust i may prove worthy of bearing it." "that i have no fear of, wulf, else i should not have offered you the hand of my daughter. i will bring my wife and guy in. i have offered you the hand of agnes, but it is right that you should ask her mother's consent, although beforehand assured of it." he left the room, and soon returned with lady de burg and guy. "my lord has told me," she said, before wulf could speak, "that you would ask my consent to your marriage with agnes. i give it you unasked, freely and gladly. i have but one regret--that the seas will divide us." "not so," the baron said; "william's court will be held in london, and for years he will reside here far more than in normandy, and will expect his nobles to be frequently with him. i certainly shall not come alone, and you will therefore have as many opportunities of seeing agnes as if she were married to a norman whose estates did not lie near our own." "i thank you most deeply, lady de burg, for the confidence which you show in intrusting your daughter's happiness to me. i swear that with all my might and power i will strive to make her happy, and will spare her to visit you in normandy whensoever you may wish it." guy came forward now and grasped wulf's hand. "how i have longed for this time, my brother," he said. "how i have hoped that i might at least live long enough to know that the dearest wish of my heart would be gratified. i can go hence now right willingly when god calls me, knowing that my father and mother have another son to fill my place, and that the happiness of my sister is secured." "and now, wife, will you fetch agnes from her chamber," the baron said. in two or three minutes the baroness returned, leading agnes, to whom she had told the reason of her summons. the baron stepped forward and took her hand. "my daughter," he said, "the thane of steyning has asked for your hand in marriage, and your mother and i have given our free and full consent, but he would fain know from your own lips that you will come to him willingly." "i have loved you, agnes, since while still but a boy i first saw you, and my love has grown ever since. the happiness of my life depends upon your answer, but unless your heart goes with your hand i would rather remain unmarried to my dying day." the girl had stood with downcast eyes and with flushed face until now. when wulf ceased speaking she looked up into his face: "i love you, wulf; i have always loved you. it is for your sake that i have said no to the suitors of my own race who have sought my hand. i will be a true wife and loving to you." "then take her, wulf," the baron said, placing her hand in his. "you are now her betrothed husband and our adopted son." wulf stooped and kissed the girl's lips, and the betrothal was completed. after some talk it was arranged that wulf should at once journey down to steyning, assume possession of his new estates, set the house in order, and prepare for their coming. guy was to accompany him, and as soon as all was in readiness wulf would come up to london and return with lord and lady de burg and agnes, who would pay a short visit and all would then cross to normandy, for the marriage was to take place at their chateau there. "i was sure how it would be," osgod said when wulf told him the news that night. "i should have been blind indeed if i had not seen it long ago. i love not the normans, but i make exception in the case of lord de burg and his family. and truly it will in all respects be a good thing for your tenants. although the duke, or i suppose i ought to say the king, promises greatly at present, there is no saying what he may do later on; and he has all these locusts to provide for. 'tis well indeed, then, that there should be a norman lady as well as an english thane at steyning." wulf's return home gave rise to demonstrations of the greatest joy among his tenants. they had heard nothing of him since the battle, and had deemed him to have fallen with the rest of the defenders of the standard, and had been living in fear of the arrival of some norman baron to be their lord. wulf was greatly pleased to find that, although not one of his housecarls had returned from hastings, the greater portion of his irregular levies had escaped at nightfall with the party who had inflicted so heavy a blow upon their pursuers. for the next few days wulf was thoroughly occupied. the tenants of his new estates received him almost as joyfully as his own had done, for, like them, they had expected the advent of a norman master. in one of the two estates that had fallen to him the thane he had succeeded had left no heirs; while the other thane had left a widow and a young family. wulf arranged that these should remain in their home, receiving for their maintenance half the rents of the estate. guy was greatly pleased with the fair country in which his sister's lot was to be cast, but he owned frankly that the house seemed unworthy now of the large estate, and was indeed but a poor place in comparison with the noble chateau in which she had been brought up. "that shall be remedied, guy, as soon as matters settle down. i have laid by none of my revenues, for the keeping up of a hundred housecarls has taxed them to the utmost, but now that my income is more than doubled, and this expense has altogether ceased, i shall have funds with which i can soon begin to build. when i was young, steyning seemed to me a fine house, but after your norman castles it is indeed but a poor place." when, a fortnight later, the de burgs arrived with wulf, while agnes expressed herself delighted with the quaintness of the old saxon home, her father and mother were decidedly of guy's opinion. "the house is a good house in its way," the baron said, "but there will be great changes in the land. much of it will be transferred to norman hands, and ere long castles and chateaux like ours at home will rise everywhere, and as an english noble with broad lands it is but fit that your residence should vie with others. but this shall be my care, and shall be my daughter's special dowry. i foresee that it will be long ere matters wholly settle down. moreover, though william's hand is strong that of his successor may be weak, and in time there will be the same troubles here among the barons that there were in normandy before william put them down with a strong hand. therefore, i should say we will build a castle rather than a chateau, for such i am sure will be the style of all the norman buildings here, until england settles down to peace and quiet. i would not disturb this house, wulf; it is doubtless dear to you, and will, moreover, serve as a dowager-house or as an abode for a younger son. we will fix on a new site altogether, and there we will rear a castle worthy of the estate. by the way, i have spoken to the king of your betrothal to my daughter, and he is highly pleased. he says that it is his earnest wish that his norman nobles shall marry english heiresses, both because they will thus come into possession of lands without disturbing the owners, and because such mixture of blood will the more speedily weld the two peoples into one; and that, similarly, he is glad to see a norman maiden united to an english noble of whom he has so high an opinion." fond as wulf was of his old home he saw that it would be best to abandon it for a new residence more suited to the times and more in accordance with his own increased possessions and the home from which he was taking his wife. after riding round the estates lord de burg and he fixed upon a knoll of rising ground near the village of bramber, and not far from the religious house where wulf had spent so many evenings, and whose prior had been one of the first to welcome his return. "i will charter a ship at rouen," lord de burg said, "and send over a master craftsman, skilful in designing and building castles, and a large number of quarrymen, masons, and carpenters. labour here is scarce, and the men are unskilled at this kind of work. rough labour can doubtless be obtained, and your tenants can transport the stones from the quarry and dig the fosse. i will send over a goodly number of men. it will cost no more to employ three hundred for six months than fifty for three years." a week later wulf sailed for rouen with the de burgs. beorn accompanied him, as well as osgod, to be present at the wedding, which took place at rouen cathedral. a month later wulf returned with his wife to steyning. already an army of men were at work at bramber. the tenants all gave their assistance readily, and far beyond the amount their feudal tenure required, for they saw the advantage it would be to them to have a strong castle in their midst to which they could retire in case of danger. labourers had been engaged in large numbers from the country round by the master craftsmen. the outlines of the castle had been traced, and the ground dug for its foundations, while already the broad deep fosse which was to surround it had been dug to a depth of several feet. the stones had to be brought from a considerable distance, but as at this time of year there was little work for the carts, those belonging not only to the tenants of the estate, but to the cultivators for miles round were engaged in the service. in six months a stately pile had risen in the midst of the tranquil glade. when it was ready for occupation lord and lady de burg and their son came over, and great festivities were held when wulf de burg (now lord of bramber) moved into the castle. soon after the birth of their first son wulf and his wife received a hasty summons to cross the sea, and arrived in time to stand by the death-bed of guy. wulf had been greatly moved by the storm of war that had swept over the north of england, and the terrible vengeance taken by william there. he had no pity for the traitor earls, but he grieved for the men who, but for their treachery, would have fought at hastings. he regretted deeply the isolated risings in various parts of the country, whose only effect was to bring ruin upon whole districts and to increase the sternness and rigour of william's rule. wulf's after-life was divided between england and normandy, as he became a baron of the latter country at the death of lord de burg. he fought no more in england, but more than once followed william's banner in his struggles with his rebellious sons and turbulent nobles. he lived to see the animosities between englishmen and normans beginning to die out, and to find our kings relying upon sturdy english men-at-arms and bow-men in their struggles with french kings and with the norman barons who held so large a portion of english soil. osgod became the seneschal of the castle, and held it for his lord during his absences in normandy. wulf took an interest in the fortunes of ulf, who in the course of time succeeded to the business of ulred, and became one of the most skilled and famous armourers in london. beorn married the former heiress of one of the estates william had granted him, and his firm friendship with the lord of bramber remained unbroken to the end of their lives. the early norman castles of the british isles [illustration: motte-castles from the bayeux tapestry.] the early norman castles of the british isles by ella s. armitage honorary fellow of the society of antiquaries of scotland author of "the childhood of the english nation"; "the connection of england and scotland"; "an introduction to english antiquities," etc., etc. with plans by d. h. montgomerie, f.s.a. london john murray, albemarle street, w. 1912 errata page 34, _note_ 1.--_for_ "construerat" _read_ "construxerat." page 40, line 9.--_for_ "there was only one motte, the site of the castle of the norman giffards is now almost obliterated," _read_ "there was only one motte, site of the castle of the norman giffards, now almost obliterated." page 133, line 16.--_for_ "1282" _read_ "1182." page 145, _note_ 1.--_for_ "legercestria" _read_ "legecestria." page 147, line 15.--delete comma after "castle." page 216, _note_ 2.--_for_ "instalment" _read_ "statement." page 304, _note_ 3.--_for_ "galloway, wigton, kirkcudbright, and dumfries," _read_ "galloway (wigton, kirkcudbright, and dumfries)." preface some portions of this book have already appeared in print. of these, the most important is the _catalogue raisonné_ of early norman castles in england which will be found in chapter vii., and which was originally published in the _english historical review_ (vol. xix., 1904). it has, however, been enlarged by the inclusion of five fresh castles, and by notes upon thirty-four others, of which the article in the _review_ gave only the names; the historical notes in that essay being confined to the castles mentioned in domesday book. the chapter on irish mottes appeared in the _antiquary_ (vol. xlii., 1906), but it has been revised, corrected, and added to. portions of a still earlier paper, read before the society of antiquaries of scotland in march 1900, are incorporated in various parts of the book, but these have been recast in the fuller treatment of the subject which is aimed at here. the rest of the work is entirely new. no serious attempt had been made to ascertain the exact nature of saxon and danish fortifications by a comparison of the existing remains with the historical records which have come down to us, until the publication of mr allcroft's valuable book on _earthwork of england_. the chapters on saxon and danish earthworks in the present volume were written before the appearance of his book, though the results arrived at are only slightly different. in chapter v. an effort is made to trace the first appearance of the private castle in european history. the private castle is an institution which is often carelessly supposed to have existed from time immemorial. the writer contends that it only appears after the establishment of the feudal system. the favourable reception given by archæologists to the paper read before the scottish society led the writer to follow up this interesting subject, and to make a closer study of the motte-castles of wales, scotland, and ireland. the book now offered is the fruit of eleven years of further research. the result of the inquiry is to establish the theory advanced in that earlier paper, that these castles, in the british islands, are in every case of norman origin. the writer does not claim to have originated this theory. dr round was the first to attack (in the _quarterly review_, 1894) the assertion of the late mr g. t. clark that the moated mound was a saxon castle. mr george neilson continued the same line of argument in his illuminating paper on "the motes in norman scotland" (_scottish review_, vol. xxxii., 1898).[1] all that the writer claims is to have carried the contention a stage further, and to have shown that the private castle did not exist at all in britain until it was brought here by the normans. the author feels that some apology is necessary for the enormous length of chapter vii., containing the catalogue of early english castles. it may be urged in extenuation that much of the information it contains has never before appeared in print, seeing that it has been taken from unpublished portions of the pipe rolls; further, that contemporary authorities have in all cases been used, and that the chapter contains a mass of material, previously scattered and almost inaccessible, which is here for the first time collated, and placed, as the author thinks, in its right setting. it is hoped that the chapter will prove a useful storehouse to those who are working at the history of any particular castle mentioned in the list. to many it may seem a waste of labour to devote a whole book to the establishment of a proposition which is now generally adopted by the best english archæologists; but the subject is an important one, and there is no book which deals with it in detail, and in the light of the evidence which has recently been accumulated. the writer hopes that such fuller statement of the case as is here attempted may help not only to a right ascription of british castle-mounds, and of the stone castles built upon many of them, but may also furnish material to the historian who seeks to trace the progress of the norman occupation. students of the architecture of castles are aware that this subject presents much more difficult questions than does the architecture of churches. those who are seriously working on castle architecture are very few in number, and are as yet little known to the world at large. from time to time, books on castles are issued from the press, which show that the writers have not even an idea of the preliminary studies without which their work has no value at all. it is hoped that the sketch of castle architecture from the 10th century to the 13th, which is given in the last chapter, may prove a useful contribution to the subject, at any rate in its lists of dated castles. the pipe rolls have been too little used hitherto for the general history of castle architecture, and no list has ever been published before of the keeps built by henry ii. but without the evidence of the pipe rolls we are in the land of guesswork, unsupported, as a rule, by the decorative details which render it easy to read the structural history of most churches. my warmest thanks are due to mr duncan h. montgomerie, f.s.a., for his generous labour on the plans and illustrations of this book, and for effective assistance in the course of the work, especially in many toilsome pilgrimages for the purpose of comparing the ordnance survey with the actual remains. i also owe grateful thanks to mr goddard h. orpen, r.i.a., for most kindly revising the chapter on irish mottes; to mr w. st john hope (late assistant secretary of the society of antiquaries), for information on many difficult points; to mr harold sands, f.s.a., whose readiness to lay his great stores of knowledge at my disposal has been always unfailing; to mr george neilson, f.s.a.scot., for most valuable help towards my chapter on scottish mottes; to mr charles dawson, f.s.a., for granting the use of his admirable photographs from the bayeux tapestry; to mr cooper, author of the _history of york castle_, for important facts and documents relating to his subject; to the rev. herbert white, m.a., and to mr basil stallybrass, for reports of visits to castles; and to correspondents too numerous to mention who have kindly, and often very fully, answered my inquiries. ella s. armitage. westholm, rawdon, leeds. contents page preface vii chapter i introductory 1 chapter ii anglo-saxon fortifications 11 chapter iii anglo-saxon fortifications--continued 31 chapter iv danish fortifications 48 chapter v the origin of private castles 63 chapter vi distribution and characteristics of motte-castles 80 chapter vii the castles of the normans in england 94 chapter viii motte-castles in north wales 251 chapter ix motte-castles in south wales 273 chapter x motte-castles in scotland 302 chapter xi motte-castles in ireland 323 chapter xii stone castles of the norman period 351 appendices a. primitive folk-moots 381 b. watling street and the danelagh 382 c. the military origin of the boroughs 382 d. the words "castrum" and "castellum" 383 e. the burghal hidage 385 f. thelwall 385 g. the word "bretasche" 386 h. the word "hurdicium" 387 i. the word "hericio" 388 k. the castle of yale 388 l. the castle of tullow 389 m. the castle of slane 390 n. the word "donjon" 390 o. the arrangements in early keeps 391 p. keeps as residences 392 q. castles built by henry i. 392 r. the so-called shell keep 393 s. professor lloyd's "history of wales" 393 schedule of english castles from the eleventh century 396 index 401 list of illustrations and plans fig. motte-castles from the bayeux tapestry:--dol, rennes, dinan, bayeux, hastings _frontispiece_ facing page 1. typical motte-castles:--topcliffe, yorks; laughton-en-le-morthen, yorks; anstey, herts; dingestow, monmouth; hedingham, essex 4 2. anglo-saxon ms. of prudentius 19 3. wallingford, berks; wareham, dorset 28 4. eddisbury, cheshire; witham, essex 36 5. plan of towcester about 1830 42 6. shoebury, essex 52 7. willington, beds 59 8. arundel, sussex; abergavenny, monmouth 98 9. barnstaple, devon; berkhampstead, herts; bishop's stortford, herts 102 10. bourn, lincs; bramber, sussex 108 11. caerleon, monmouth; carisbrooke 114 12. carlisle; castle acre, norfolk 124 13. clifford, hereford; clitheroe, lancs; corfe, dorset 128 14. dover (from a plan in the british museum, 1756) 138 15. dunster, somerset; dudley, staffs 144 16. durham 146 17. ely, cambs; ewias harold, hereford; eye, suffolk 150 18. hastings, sussex; huntingdon 158 19. launceston, cornwall; lewes, sussex 164 20. lincoln 166 21. monmouth; montacute, somerset; morpeth, northumberland 168 22. norham; nottingham 172 23. norwich (from harrod's _gleanings among the castles and convents of norfolk_, p. 133) 174 24. okehampton, devon; penwortham, lancs; pevensey, sussex 178 25. oxford (from _oxonia illustrata_, david loggan, 1675) 180 26. pontefract, yorks; preston capes, northants; quatford, salop 188 27. rayleigh, essex; richard's castle, hereford 192 28. richmond, yorks; rochester, kent 194 29. rockingham, northants 202 30. old sarum, wilts 204 31. shrewsbury; skipsea, yorks 208 32. stafford; tamworth, staffs; stanton holgate, salop; tickhill, yorks 212 33. tonbridge, kent; totnes, devon 220 34. trematon, cornwall; tutbury, staffs 226 35. wallingford, berks 228 36. warwick; wigmore, hereford 232 37. winchester (from a plan by w. godson, 1750) 234 38. windsor castle (from ashmole's _order of the garter_) 236 39. york castle and baile hill (from a plan by p. chassereau, 1750) 244 40. motte-castles of north wales:--mold, welshpool, wrexham, mathraval 260 41. motte-castles of south wales:--cilgerran, blaenporth, chastell gwalter 282 42. motte-castles of south wales:--builth, gemaron, payn's castle 290 43. motte-castles of south wales:--cardiff, loughor 294 44. scottish motte-castles:--annan, moffat, duffus, old hermitage 310 45. irish motte-castles:--ardmayle, downpatrick, drogheda, castleknock 336 the early norman castles of the british isles chapter i introductory the study of earthworks has been one of the most neglected subjects in english archæology until quite recent years. it may even be said that during the first half of the 19th century, less attention was paid to earthworks than by our older topographical writers. leland, in the reign of henry viii., never failed to notice the "dikes and hilles, which were campes of men of warre," nor the "hilles of yerth cast up like the dungeon of sum olde castelle," which he saw in his pilgrimages through england. and many of our 17thand 18th-century topographers have left us invaluable notices of earthworks which were extant in their time. but if we turn over the archæological journals of some fifty years ago, we shall be struck by the paucity of papers on earthworks, and especially by the complete ignoring, in most cases, of those connected with castles. the misfortune attending this neglect, was that it left the ground open to individual fancy, and each observer formed his own theory of the earthworks which he happened to have seen, and as often as not, stated that theory as a fact. we need not be surprised to find camden doing this, as he wrote before the dawn of scientific observation; but that such methods should have been carried on until late in the 19th century is little to the credit of english archæology. mr clark's work on _mediæval military architecture_ (published in 1884), which has the merit of being one of the first to pay due attention to castle earthworks, counterbalances that merit by enunciating as a fact a mere guess of his own, which, as we shall afterwards show, was absolutely devoid of solid foundation. the scientific study of english earthworks may be said to have been begun by general pitt-rivers in the last quarter of the 19th century; but we must not forget that he described himself as a pupil of canon greenwell, whose careful investigations of british barrows form such an important chapter of prehistoric archæology. general pitt-rivers applied the lessons he had thus learned to the excavation of camps and dykes, and his labours opened a new era in that branch of research. by accumulating an immense body of observations, and by recording those observations with a minuteness intended to forestall future questions, he built up a storehouse of facts which will furnish materials to all future workers in prehistoric antiquities. he was too cautious ever to dogmatise, and if he arrived at conclusions, he was careful to state them merely as suggestions. but his work destroyed many favourite antiquarian delusions, even some which had been cherished by very learned writers, such as dr guest's theory of the "belgic ditches" of wiltshire. a further important step in the study of earthworks was taken by the late mr i. chalkley gould, when he founded the committee for ancient earthworks, and drew up the classification of earthworks which is now being generally adopted by archæological writers. this classification may be abridged into (_a_) promontory or cliff forts, (_b_) hill forts, (_c_) rectangular forts, (_d_) moated hillocks, (_e_) moated hillocks with courts attached, (_f_) banks and ditches surrounding homesteads, (_g_) manorial works, (_h_) fortified villages. we venture to think that still further divisions are needed, to include (1) boundary earthworks; (2) sepulchral or religious circles or squares; (3) enclosures clearly non-military, intended to protect sheep and cattle from wolves, or to aid in the capture of wild animals.[2] this classification, it will be observed, makes no attempt to decide the dates of the different types of earthworks enumerated. but a great step forward was taken when these different types were separated from one another. there had been no greater source of confusion in the writings of our older antiquaries, than the unscientific idea that one earthwork was as good as another; that is to say, that one type of earthwork would do as well as another for any date or any circumstances. when it is recognised that large classes of earthworks show similar features, it becomes probable that even if they were not thrown up in the same historic period, they were at any rate raised to meet similar sets of circumstances. we may be quite sure that a camp which contains an area of 60 or 80 acres was not constructed for the same purpose as one which only contains an area of three. we are not concerned here, however, with the attempt to disentangle the dates of the various classes of prehistoric earthworks.[3] such generalisations are for the most part premature; and although some advance is being made in this direction, it is still impossible to decide without excavation whether a camp of class (_a_) or (_b_) belongs to the stone age, the bronze age, or the iron age. our business is with classes (_d_) and (_e_) of mr gould's list, that is, with the moated hillocks. we shall only treat of the other classes to the extent which is necessary to bring out the special character of classes (_d_) and (_e_). let us look more closely into these earthworks in their perfect form, the class (_e_) of the earthwork committee's list. they consist, when fully preserved, of an artificial hillock, 20, 30, 40, or in some rare instances 100 feet high. the hillock carried a breastwork of earth round the top, which in many cases is still preserved; this breastwork enclosed a small court, sometimes only 30 feet in diameter, in rare cases as large as half an acre; it must have been crowned by a stockade of timber, and the representations in the bayeux tapestry would lead us to think that it always enclosed a wooden tower.[4] as a rule the hillock is round, but it is not unfrequently oval, and occasionally square. the base of the hillock is surrounded by a ditch. below the hillock is a court, much larger than the small space enclosed on the top of the mount. it also has been surrounded by a ditch, which joins the ditch of the mount, and thus encloses the whole fortification. the court is defended by earthen banks, both on the scarp and counterscarp of the ditch, and these banks of course had also their timber stockades, the remains of which have sometimes been found on excavation.[5] [illustration: fig. 1.--typical motte-castles. topcliffe, yorks. laughton-en-le-morthen, yorks. anstey, herts. dingestow, monmouth. hedingham, essex.] these are the main features of the earthworks in question. some variations may be noticed. the ditch is not invariably carried all round the hillock, occasionally it is not continued between the hillock and the court.[6] sometimes the length of the ditch separating the hillock from the court is at a higher level than the main ditch.[7] often the ditches were evidently dry from the first, but not infrequently they are wet, and sometimes vestiges of the arrangements for feeding them are still apparent. the hillock is not invariably artificial; often it is a natural hill scarped into a conical shape; sometimes an isolated rock is made use of to serve as a citadel, which saved much spade-work. the shape of the court is very variable: it may be square or oblong, with greatly rounded corners, or it may be oval, or semilunar, or triangular; a very common form is the bean-shaped. the area covered by these fortifications is much more uniform; one of the features contrasting them most strongly with the great prehistoric "camps" of southern england is their comparatively small size. we know of only one (skipsea) in which the bailey covers as much as eight acres; in by far the greater number the whole area included in the hillock, court, and ditches does not exceed three acres, and often it is not more than one and a half.[8] now this type of fort will tell us a good deal about itself if we examine it carefully. in the first place, its character is more pronounced than that of any other class of earthwork. it differs entirely from the great camps which belong to the tribal period. it was evidently not designed to accommodate a mass of people with their flocks and herds. it is small in area, and its citadel, as a rule, is very small indeed. dr sophus müller, the eminent danish archæologist, when dealing with the specimens of this class of fortification which are to be found in denmark, made the luminous remark that "the fortresses of prehistoric times are the defences of the _community_, north of the alps as in the old classical lands. small castles for an individual and his warrior-band belong to the middle ages."[9] these words give the true direction to which we must turn for the interpretation of these earthworks. in the second place, this type presents a peculiar development of plan, such as we do not expect to find in the earliest times in these islands. it has a citadel of a most pronounced type. this alone differentiates it from the prehistoric or keltic camps which are so abundant in great britain. it might be too hasty a generalisation to say that no prehistoric camps have citadels, but as a rule the traverses by which some of these camps are divided appear to have been made for the purpose of separating the cattle from the people, rather than as ultimate retreats in time of war. the early german camps, according to köhler, have inner enclosures which he thinks were intended for the residence of the chief; but he calls attention to the great difference between these camps and the class we are now considering, in that the inner enclosure is of much greater size.[10] it would appear that some of the fortifications in england which are known or suspected to be saxon have also these inner enclosures of considerable size (6 acres in the case of witham), but without any vestige of the hillock which is the principal feature of class (_e_). it is clear, in the third place, that the man who threw up earthworks of this latter class was not only suspicious of his neighbours, but was even suspicious of his own garrison. for the hillock in the great majority of cases is so constructed as to be capable of complete isolation, and capable of defending itself, if necessary, against its own court. thus it is probable that the force which followed this chieftain was not composed of men of his own blood, in whom he could repose absolute trust; and the earthworks themselves suggest that they are the work of an invader who came to settle in these islands, who employed mercenaries instead of tribesmen, and who had to maintain his settlement by force. when on further inquiry we find that earthworks of this type are exceedingly common in france, and are generally found in connection with feudal castles,[11] and when we consider the area of their distribution in the united kingdom, and see that they are to be found in every county in england, as well as in wales and in the normanised parts of ireland and scotland, we see that the norman invader is the one to whom they seem to point. we see also that small forts of this kind, easily and cheaply constructed, and defensible by a small number of men, exactly correspond to the needs of the norman invader, both during the period of the conquest and for a long time after his first settlement here. but it will at once occur to an objector that there have been other invaders of britain before the normans, and it may be asked why these earthworks were not equally suited to the needs of the saxon or the danish conquerors, and why they may not with equal reason be attributed to them. to answer this question we will try to discover what kind of fortifications actually were constructed by the saxons and danes, and to this inquiry we will address ourselves in the succeeding chapters. it will clear the ground greatly if it is recognised at the outset that these earthworks are _castles_, in the usual sense of the word; that is, the private fortified residences of great landowners. it was the chief merit of mr g. t. clark's work on _mediæval military architecture_, that he showed the perfect correspondence in plan of these earthen and timber structures with the stone castles which immediately succeeded them, so that it was only necessary to add a stone tower and stone walls to these works to convert them into a norman castle of the popularly accepted type. we regard the military character of these works as so fully established that we have not thought it necessary to discuss the theory that they were temples, which was suggested by some of our older writers, nor even the more modern idea that they were moot-hills, which has been defended with considerable learning by mr g. l. gomme.[12] dr christison remarks in his valuable work on scottish fortifications that an overweening importance has been attached to moot-hills, without historical evidence.[13] and mr george neilson, in his essay on "the motes in norman scotland"[14] (to which we shall often have occasion to refer hereafter), shows that moot-hill in scotland means nothing but mote-hill, the hill of the mote or _motte_; but that _moots_ or courts were held there, just because it had formerly been the site of a castle, and consequently a seat of jurisdiction.[15] that some of these hillocks have anciently been sepulchral, we do not attempt to deny. the norman seems to have been free from any superstitious fear which might have hindered him from utilising the sepulchres of the dead for his personal defence; or else he was unaware that they were burial-places. there are some very few recorded instances of prehistoric burials found under the hillocks of castles; but in ordinary cases, these hillocks would not be large enough for the _mottes_ of castles.[16] there are, however, some sepulchral barrows of such great size that it is difficult to distinguish them from mottes; the absence of a court attached is not sufficient evidence, as there are some mottes which stand alone, without any accompanying court. excavation or documentary evidence can alone decide in these cases, though the presence of an earthen breastwork on top of the mount furnishes a strong presumption of a military origin. but the undoubtedly sepulchral barrows of new grange and dowth in ireland show signs of having been utilised as castles, having remains of breastworks on their summits.[17] chapter ii anglo-saxon fortifications we have pointed out in the preceding chapter that when it is asked whether the earthworks of the moated mound-and-court type were the work of the anglo-saxons, the question resolves itself into another, namely, did the anglo-saxons build castles? as far as we know, they did not; and although to prove a negative we can only bring negative evidence, that evidence appears to us to be very conclusive. but before we deal with it, we will try to find out what sort of fortifications the anglo-saxons actually did construct. the first fortification which we read of in the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ is that of bamborough, in northumberland. the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ tells us that in 547 ida began to reign in northumberland, and adds that he built "bebbanburh," which was first enclosed with a hedge, and afterwards with a wall. unfortunately this celebrated passage is merely the interpolation of a 12th-century scribe, and is consequently of no authority whatever,[18] though there is nothing improbable in the statement, and it is supported by nennius.[19] ida's grandson ethelfrith gave this fortress to his wife bebba, from whom it received the name of bebbanburh, now bamborough. it was built without doubt on the same lofty insulated rock where the castle now stands; for when it was attacked by penda in 633, he found the situation so strong that it was impossible to storm it, and it was only by heaping up wood on the most accessible side that he was able to set fire to the wooden stockade.[20] modern historians talk of this fort as a castle, but all the older authorities call it a town;[21] nor is there any mention of a castle at bamborough till the reign of william ii. the area of the basaltic headland of bamborough covers 4-3/4 acres, a site large enough for a city of ida's day. the church of st peter was placed on the highest point. the castle which was built there in norman times does not seem to have occupied at first more than a portion of this site,[22] though it is probable that eventually the townsmen were expelled from the rock, and that thus the modern town of bamborough arose in the levels below. although 4-3/4 acres may seem a small size for an _urbs_, it was certainly regarded as such, and was large enough to protect a considerable body of invaders. strange to say, this is the only record which we have of any fortress-building by the invading saxons. until we come to the time of alfred, there is hardly an allusion to any fortification in use in saxon times.[23] it is mentioned in 571 that the saxons took four towns (_tunas_) of the britons, and the apparent allusion to sieges seems to show that these british towns had some kind of fortification. the three _chesters_, which were taken by the saxons in 577, gloucester, cirencester, and bath, prove that some roman cities still kept their defences. in 755 the slaughter of cynewulf, king of the west saxons, by the etheling cyneard, is told with unusual detail by the _chronicle_. the king was slain in a _bur_ (bower, or isolated women's chamber[24]), the door of which he attempted to defend; but this _bur_ was itself enclosed in a _burh_, the gates of which were locked by the etheling who had killed the king, and were defended until they were forced by the king's avengers. here it seems to be doubtful whether the _burh_ was a town or a private enclosure resembling a stable-yard of modern times. the description of the storming of york by the danes in 867 shows that the roman walls of that city were still preserved. these passages are the solitary instances of fortifications in england mentioned by the _chronicle_ before the time of alfred.[25] the invasions of the danes led at last to a great fortifying epoch, which preserved our country from being totally overwhelmed by those northern immigrants. the little saxon kingdom of wessex was the germ of the british empire. when alfred came to the throne it had already absorbed the neighbouring kingdoms of kent, sussex, and surrey, and the issue hanging in the balance was whether this small english state would survive the desolating flood of pagan barbarism which had already overwhelmed the sister kingdoms of the midlands and the north. it was given to alfred to raise again the fallen standard of christendom and civilisation, and to establish an english kingdom on so sound a basis that when, in later centuries, it successively became the prey of the dane and the norman, the english polity survived both conquests. the wisdom, energy, and steadfastness of king alfred and his children and grandchildren were amongst the most important of the many factors which have helped to build up the great empire of britain. we are concerned here with only one of the measures by which alfred and his family secured the triumph of wessex in her mortal struggle with the danes, the fortifications which they raised for the protection of their subjects. from the pages of the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ we might be led to think that alfred's son and daughter, edward and ethelfleda, were the chief builders of fortifications. but there is ample evidence that they only carried out a systematic purpose which had been initiated by alfred. we know that alfred was a great builder. "what shall i say," cries asser, "of the cities and towns which he restored, and of others which he built which had never existed before! of the royal halls and chambers, wonderfully built of stone and wood by his command!"[26] the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ notices the restoration of london (886),[27] about which two extant charters are more precise.[28] it also mentions the building of a work (geweorc) at athelney, and another at limene-muthan (doubtless a repair of the roman fort at lympne), and two works built by alfred on the banks of the river lea.[29] william of malmesbury tells us that in his boyhood there was a stone in the nunnery of shaftesbury which had been taken out of the walls of the town, which bore this inscription: "anno dominicæ incarnationis alfredus rex fecit hanc urbem, dccclxxx, regni sui viii."[30] ethelred, alfred's son-in-law, built the _burh_ at worcester in alfred's lifetime, as a most interesting charter tells us.[31] it may be safely assumed, then, that when edward came to the throne he found wessex well provided with defensive places, and that when he and his sister signalised their conquests in the midlands by building strongholds at every fresh step of their advance, they were only carrying out the policy of their father. at the time of alfred's death, and the succession of edward the elder to the crown (901), ethelfleda, daughter of alfred, was the wife of ethelred, ealdorman of mercia, who appears to have been a sort of under-king of that province.[32] on the death of ethelred in 912,[33] edward took possession of london and oxford and "of all the lands which owed obedience thereto"--in other words, of that small portion of eastern mercia which was still in english hands; that is, not only the present oxfordshire and middlesex, but part of herts, part of bedfordshire, all buckinghamshire, and the southern part of northants. the watling street, which runs north-west from london to shrewsbury, and thence north to chester and manchester, formed at that time the dividing line between the english and danish rule.[34] it would seem from the course of the story that after ethelred's death there was some arrangement between ethelfleda and her brother, possibly due to the surrender of the territory mentioned above, which enabled her to rule english mercia in greater independence than her husband had enjoyed. up to this date we find edward disposing of the _fyrd_ of mercia;[35] this is not mentioned again in ethelfleda's lifetime. nothing is clearer, both from the _chronicle_ and from florence, than that the brother and sister each "did their own," to use an expressive provincial phrase. ethelfleda goes her own way, subduing western mercia, while edward pushes up through eastern mercia and essex to complete the conquest of east anglia. a certain concert may be observed in their movements, but they did not work in company. the work of fortification begun in alfred's reign had been continued by the restoration of the roman walls of chester in 908, by ethelred and his wife; and ethelfleda herself (possibly during the lingering illness which later chroniclers give to her husband) had built a _burh_ at bremesbyrig. during the twelve years which elapsed between ethelred's death and that of edward in 924, the brother and sister built no less than twenty-seven _burhs_, giving a total of thirty, if we add chester and bremesbyrig, and worcester, which was built in alfred's reign. now what was the nature of these fortifications, which the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ uniformly calls _burhs_? there is really not the slightest difficulty in answering this question. the word is with us still; it is our word _borough_. it is true we have altered the meaning somewhat, because a borough means now an enfranchised town; but we must remember that it got that meaning because the fortified towns, the only ones which were called _burhs_ or _burgi_, were the first to be enfranchised, and while the fortifications have become less and less important, the franchise has become of supreme importance. bede, in the earliest times of our history, equated _burh_ with _urbs_, a city; alfred in his _orosius_ translates _civitas_ by _burh_;[36] the anglo-saxon gospels of the 11th century do the same;[36] and the confederacy of five danish towns which existed in mercia in the 10th century is called in contemporary records _fif burga_, the five boroughs.[37] _burh_ is a noun derived from the word _beorgan_, to protect. undoubtedly its primitive meaning was that of a _protective enclosure_. as in the case of the words _tun_, _yard_, or _garth_, and _worth_ or _ward_, the sense of the word became extended from the protecting bulwark to the place protected. in this sense of a _fortified enclosure_, the word was naturally applied by the anglo-saxons to the prehistoric and british "camps" which they found in britain, such as cissbury. moreover, it is clear that some kind of enclosure must have existed round every farmstead in saxon times, if only as a protection against wolves. the illustrated saxon manuscripts show that the hall in which the thane dwelt, the ladies' bower, the chapel and other buildings dependent on the hall, were enclosed in a stockade, and had gates which without doubt were closed at night.[38] this enclosure may have been called a _burh_, and the innumerable place-names in england ending in _borough_ or _bury_[39] seem to suggest that the _burh_ was often nothing more than a stockade, as in so many of these sites not a vestige of defensive works remains.[40] we may concede that the original meaning of an _enclosure_ was never entirely lost, and that it appears to be preserved in a few passages in the anglo-saxon laws. thus edmund speaks of _mine burh_ as an asylum, the violation of which brings its special punishment; and ethelred ii. ordains that every compurgation shall take place in _thaes kyninges byrig_; and the _rectitudines singularum personum_ tells us that one of the duties of the geneat was to build for his lord, and to hedge his _burh_.[41] but it is absolutely clear that even in these cases a _burh_ was an enclosure and not a tump; and it is equally clear from the general use of the word that its main meaning was a _fortified town_. athelstan ordains that there shall be a mint in every _burh_; and his laws show that already the _burh_ has its _gemot_ or meeting, and its _reeve_ or mayor.[42] he ordains that all _burhs_ are to be repaired fourteen days after rogations, and that no market shall be held outside the town.[43] in the laws of edgar's time not only the borough-moot and the borough-reeve are spoken of, but the _burh-waru_ or burgesses.[44] _burh_ is contrasted with wapentake as town with country.[45] [illustration: fig. 2.--anglo-saxon ms. of prudentius. if we wish to multiply proofs that a _burh_ was the same thing as a borough, we can turn to the anglo-saxon illustrated manuscripts, and we shall find that they give us many pictures of _burhs_, and that in all cases they are fortified towns.[46] finally, florence of worcester, one of the most careful of our early chroniclers, who lived when anglo-saxon was still a living language, and who must have known what a _burh_ meant, translates it by _urbs_ in nineteen cases out of twenty-six.[47] his authority alone is sufficient to settle this question, and we need no longer have any doubt that a _burh_ was the same thing which in mediæval latin is called a _burgus_, that is a fortified town, and that our word _borough_ is lawfully descended from it. it would not have been necessary to spend so much time on the history of the word _burh_ if this unfortunate word had not been made the subject of one of the strangest delusions which ever was imposed on the archæological world. we refer of course to the theory of the late mr g. t. clark, who contended in his _mediæval military architecture_[48] that the moated mound of class (_e_), which we have described in our first chapter, was what the anglo-saxons called a _burh_. in other words, he maintained that the burhs were saxon castles. it is one of the most extraordinary and inexplicable things in the history of english archæology that a man who was not in any sense an anglo-saxon scholar was allowed to affix an entirely new meaning to a very common anglo-saxon word, and that this meaning was at once accepted without question by historians who had made anglo-saxon history their special study! the present writer makes no pretensions to be an anglo-saxon scholar, but it is easy to pick out the word _burh_ in the _chronicle_ and the anglo-saxon _laws_, and to find out how the word is translated in the latin chronicles; and this little exercise is sufficient in itself to prove the futility of mr clark's contention. sentiment perhaps had something to do with mr clark's remarkable success. there is an almost utter lack of tangible monuments of our national heroes; and therefore people who justly esteemed the labours of alfred and his house were pleased when they were told that the mounds at tamworth, warwick, and elsewhere were the work of ethelfleda, and that other mounds were the work of edward the elder. it did not occur to them that they were doing a great wrong to the memory of the children of alfred in supposing them capable of building these little earthen and timber castles for their personal defence and that of their nobles, and leaving the mass of their people at the mercy of the danes. far other was the thought of ethelfleda, when she and her husband built the borough of worcester. as they expressed it in their memorable charter, it was not only for the defence of the bishop and the churches of worcester, but "to shelter all the folk."[49] and we may be sure that the same idea lay at the founding of all the boroughs which were built by alfred and by edward and ethelfleda. they were to be places where the whole countryside could take refuge during a danish raid. the _chronicle_ tells us in 894 how alfred divided his forces into three parts, the duty of one part being to defend the boroughs; and from this time forth we constantly find the men of the boroughs doing good service against the danes.[50] it was by defending and thus developing the boroughs of england that alfred and his descendants saved england from the danes. thus far we have seen that all the fortifications which we know to have been built by the anglo-saxons were the fortifications of society and not of the individual. we have heard nothing whatever of the private castle as an institution in saxon times; and although this evidence is only negative, it appears to us to be entitled to much more weight than has hitherto been given to it. some writers seem to think that the private castle was a modest little thing which was content to blush unseen. this is wholly to mistake the position of the private castle in history. such a castle is not merely a social arrangement, it is a political institution of the highest importance. where such castles exist, we are certain to hear of some of them, sooner or later, in the pages of history. we can easily test this by comparing anglo-saxon history with norman of the same period, after castles had arisen in normandy. who among saxon nobles was more likely to possess a castle than the powerful earl godwin, and his independent sons? yet when godwin left the court of edward the confessor, because he would not obey the king's order to punish the men of dover for insulting count eustace of boulogne, we do not hear that he retired to his castle, or that his sons fortified their castles against the king; we only hear that they met together at beverstone (a place where there was no castle before the 14th century)[51] and "arrayed themselves resolutely."[52] neither do we hear of any castle belonging to the powerful earl siward of northumbria, or leofric, earl of mercia. and when godwin returned triumphantly to england in 1052 we do not hear of any castles being restored to him. now let us contrast this piece of english history, as told by the _anglo-saxon chronicle_, with the norman history of about the same period, the history of the rebellion of the norman nobles against their young duke, william the bastard. the first thing the nobles do is to put their castles into a state of defence. william has to take refuge in the castle of a faithful vassal, hubert of rye, until he can safely reach his own castle of falaise. after the victory of val-ès-dunes, william had to reduce the castles which still held out, and then to order the destruction of all the castles which had been erected against him.[53] or let us contrast the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ of 1051 with that of 1088, when certain norman barons and bishops in england conspired against the new king, william rufus. the first thing told us is that each of the head conspirators "went to his castle, and manned it and victualled it." then bishop geoffrey makes bristol castle the base of a series of plundering raids. bishop wulfstan, on the other hand, aids the cause of william by preventing an attempt of the rebels on the castle of worcester. roger bigod throws himself into norwich castle, and harries the shire; bishop odo brings the plunder of kent into his castle of rochester. finally the king's cause wins the day through the taking of the castles of tonbridge, pevensey, rochester, and durham. if we reflect on the contrast which these narratives afford, it surely is difficult to avoid the conclusion that if the chronicler never mentions any saxon castles it is because there were no saxon castles to mention. had earl godwin possessed a stronghold in which he could fortify himself, he would certainly have used it in 1051. and as the norman favourites of edward the confessor had already begun to build castles in england, we can imagine no reason why godwin did not do the same, except that such a step was impossible to a man who desired popularity amongst his countrymen. the welshmen, we are told (that is the foreigners, the normans), had erected a castle in herefordshire among the people of earl sweyn, and had wrought all possible harm and disgrace to the king's men thereabout.[54] the language of the _chronicle_ shows the unpopularity, to say the least of it, of this castle-building; and one of the conditions which godwin, when posing as popular champion, wished to exact from the king, was that the _frenchmen who were in the castle_ should be given up to him.[55] when godwin returned from his exile, and the normans took to flight, the chronicler tells us that some fled west to pentecost's castle, some north to robert's castle. thus we learn that there were several castles in england belonging to the norman favourites. it is in connection with these norman favourites that the word _castel_ appears for the first time in the _anglo-saxon chronicle_. this is a fact of considerable importance in itself; and when we weigh it in connection with the expressions of dislike recorded above which become much more explicit and vehement after the norman conquest, we cannot but feel that mr freeman's conclusion, that the thing as well as the word was new, is highly probable.[56] for the hall of the anglo-saxon ealdorman or thane, even when enclosed in an earthwork or stockade, was a very different thing from the castle of a norman noble. a castle is built by a man who lives among enemies, who distrusts his nearest neighbours as much as any foe from a distance. the anglo-saxon noble had no reason to distrust his neighbours, or to fortify himself against them. later historians, who were familiar with the state of things in norman times, tell us frequently of castles in the saxon period; but it can generally be proved that they misunderstood their authorities. the genuine contemporary chroniclers of saxon times never make the slightest allusion to a saxon castle. the word _castellum_, it is true, appears occasionally in anglo-saxon charters, but when it is used it clearly means a town. thus egbert of kent says in 765: "trado terram intra castelli moenia supranominati, id est hrofescestri, unum viculum cum duobus jugeribus, etc.," where _castellum_ is evidently the city of rochester.[57] offa calls wermund "episcopus castelli quod nominatur hroffeceastre."[58] these instances can easily be multiplied. mr w. h. stevenson remarks that "in old-english glosses, from the 8th century corpus glossary downwards, _castellum_ is glossed by _wic_, that is town."[59] in this sense no doubt we must interpret asser's "castellum quod dicitur werham."[60] henry of huntingdon probably meant a town when he says that edward the elder built at hertford "castrum non immensum sed pulcherrimum." he generally translates the _burh_ of the _chronicle_ by _burgus_, and he shows that he had a correct idea of edward's work when he says that at buckingham edward "fecit _vallum_ ex utraque parte aquæ"--where _vallum_ is a translation of _burh_. the difference between a _burh_ and a castle is very clearly expressed by the _chronicle_ in 1092, when it says concerning the restoration of carlisle on its conquest by william rufus, "he repaired the borough (burh) and ordered the castle to be built." the following is a table of the thirty boroughs built by ethelfleda and edward, arranged chronologically, which will show that we never find a _motte_, that is a moated mound, on the site of one of these boroughs unless a norman castle-builder has been at work there subsequently. the weak point in mr clark's argument was that when he found a motte on a site which had once been saxon, he did not stop to inquire what any subsequent builders might have done there, but at once assumed that the motte was saxon. of course, if we invariably found a motte at _every_ place where edward or ethelfleda are said to have built a _burh_, it would raise a strong presumption that mottes and burhs were the same thing. but out of the twenty-five burhs which can be identified, in only ten is there a motte on the same site; and in every case where a motte is found, except at bakewell and towcester, there is recorded proof of the existence of a norman castle. in this list, the _burhs_ on both sides of the river at hertford, buckingham, and nottingham are counted as two, because the very precise indications given in the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ show that each _burh_ was a separate construction. _burhs of ethelfleda._ worcester 873-899 a motte and a norman castle. chester 908 a motte and a norman castle. bremesburh 911 unidentified. scærgate 913 unidentified. bridgenorth 913 no motte, but a norman stone keep. tamworth 914 a motte and a norman castle. stafford, n. of sowe 914 no motte and no norman castle. eddisbury 915 no motte and no norman castle. warwick 915 a motte and a norman castle. cyricbyrig (monk's kirby) 916 no motte and no norman castle. weardbyrig 916 unidentified. runcorn 916 no motte; a mediæval castle (?). _burhs of edward the elder._ hertford, n. of lea 913 no motte and no norman castle. hertford, s. of lea 913 a motte and a norman castle. witham 914 no motte and no norman castle. buckingham, s. of ouse 915 no motte and no norman castle. buckingham, n. of ouse 915 a motte and a norman castle. bedford, s. of ouse 916 no motte and no norman castle. maldon 917 no motte and no norman castle. towcester 918 a motte. wigingamere 918 unidentified. huntingdon 918 a motte and a norman castle. colchester 918 no motte; an early norman keep. cledemuthan 918 unidentified. stamford, s. of welland 919 no motte and no norman castle. nottingham, n. of trent 919 a motte and a norman castle. thelwall 920 no motte and no norman castle. manchester 920 no castle on the ancient site. nottingham, s. of trent 921 no motte and no norman castle. bakewell (near to) 921 a motte and bailey. out of this list of the _burhs_ of ethelfleda and edward, thirteen are mentioned as boroughs in domesday book;[61] and as we ought to subtract five from the list as unidentified, and also to reckon as one the boroughs built on two sides of the river, the whole number should be reduced to twenty-two. so that more than half the boroughs built by the children of alfred continued to maintain their existence during the succeeding centuries, and in fact until the present day. but the others, for some reason or other, did not take root. professor maitland remarked that many of the boroughs of edward's day became rotten boroughs before they were ripe;[62] and it is a proof of the difficulty of the task which the royal brethren undertook that, with the exception of chester, none of the boroughs which they built in the north-western districts survived till domesday. in all their boroughs, except bakewell, the purpose of defending the great roman roads and the main waterways is very apparent. our list is very far from being a complete list of all the anglo-saxon boroughs existing in edward's day. in the document known as the "burghal hidage" we have another quite different list of thirty-two boroughs,[63] which, according to professor maitland, "sets forth certain arrangements made early in the 10th century for the defence of wessex against the danish inroads."[64] five at least on the list are roman chesters; twenty are mentioned as boroughs in domesday book. there are two among them which are of special interest, because there is reason to believe that the earthen ramparts which still surround them are of saxon origin: wallingford and wareham. both these fortifications are after the roman pattern, the earthen banks forming a square with rounded corners.[65] see fig. 3. to complete our knowledge of anglo-saxon fortification, we ought to examine the places mentioned in anglo-saxon charters as royal seats, where possibly defensive works of some kind may have existed. unfortunately we are unable to learn that there are any such works, except at one place, bensington in oxfordshire, where about a hundred years ago "a bank and trench, which seem to have been of a square form," were to be seen.[66] [illustration:fig. 3. wallingford, berks. wareham, dorset.] in the following chapter we shall deal in detail with such archæological remains as still exist of the boroughs of edward and ethelfleda, but here we will briefly summarise by anticipation the results to which that chapter will lead. we see that sites defensible by nature were often seized upon for fortification, as at bamborough, bridgenorth, and eddisbury; but that this was by no means always the case, as a weak site, such as witham, for example, was sometimes rendered defensible by works which appear to have fulfilled their purpose. in only one case (witham) do we find an inner enclosure; and as it is of large size (9-1/2 acres) it is more probable that the outer enclosure was for cattle, than that the inner one was designed solely for the protection of the king and his court. we are not told of stone walls more than once (at towcester); but the use of the word _timbrian_, which does not exclusively mean to build in wood,[67] does not preclude walls of stone in important places. in the square or oblong form, with rounded corners, we see the influence which roman models exercised on eyes which still beheld them existing. we see that the main idea of the borough was the same as that of the prehistoric or british "camp of refuge," in that it was intended for the defence of society and not of the individual. it was intended to be a place of refuge for the whole countryside. but it was also something much more than this, something which belongs to a much more advanced state of society than the hill-fort.[68] it was a town, a place where people were expected to live permanently and do their daily work. it provided a fostering seat for trade and manufactures, two of the chief factors in the history of civilisation. the men who kept watch and ward on the ramparts, or who sallied forth in their bands to fight the danes, were the men who were slowly building up the prosperity of the stricken land of england. by studding the great highways of england with fortified towns, alfred and his children were not only saving the kernel of the british empire, they were laying the sure foundations of its future progress in the arts and habits of civilised life. chapter iii anglo-saxon fortifications--_continued_ the bare list which we have given of the boroughs of edward and ethelfleda calls for some explanatory remarks. let us take first the boroughs of ethelfleda. worcester.--we have already noticed the charter of ethelred and ethelfleda which tells of the building of the burh at worcester.[69] there appears to have been a small roman settlement at worcester, but there is no evidence that it was a fortified place.[70] this case lends some support to the conjecture of dr christison, that the saxons gave the name of _chester_ to towns which they had themselves fortified.[71] the mediæval walls of worcester were probably more extensive than ethelfleda's borough, of which no trace remains. chester is spoken of by the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ in 894 as "a waste _chester_ in wirral." it had undoubtedly been a roman city, and therefore the work of ethelred and ethelfleda here was solely one of restoration. brompton, who wrote at the close of the 13th century "a poor compilation of little authority,"[72] was the first writer to state that the walls of chester were enlarged by ethelfleda so as to take in the castle, which he fancied to be roman;[73] and this statement, being repeated by leland, has acquired considerable vogue. it is very unlikely that any extension of the walls was made by the mercian pair, seeing that the city was deserted at the time when it was occupied by the danes, only fourteen years before. but it is quite certain that the norman castle of chester lay outside the city walls, as the manor of gloverstone, which was not within the jurisdiction of the city, lay between the city and the castle.[74] a charter of henry vii. shows that the civic boundary did not extend to the present south wall in his reign. ethelfleda's borough probably followed the lines of the old roman castrum. bremesbyrig.--this place has not yet been identified. bromborough on the mersey has been suggested, and is not impossible, for the loss of the _s_ sometimes occurs in place-names; thus melbury, in wilts, was melsburie in domesday. bremesbyrig was the first place restored after chester, and as the estuary of the dee had been secured by the repair of chester, so an advance on bromborough would have for its aim to secure the estuary of the mersey. it was outside the danish frontier of watling street, and could thus be fortified without breach of the peace in 911. there is a large moated work at bromborough, enclosing an area of 10 acres, in the midst of which stands the courthouse of the manor of bromborough. but this manor was given by the earl of chester to the monks of st werburgh about 1152, and it is possible that the monks fortified it, as they did their manor of irby in wirral, against the incursions of the welsh. one of the conditions of the earl's grant was that the manor is to be maintained in a state of security and convenience for the holding of the courts appertaining to chester abbey.[75] thus the fortification appears to be of manorial use, though this does not preclude the possibility of an earlier origin. on the other hand, if bromborough is the same as brunanburh, where athelstan's great battle was fought (and there is much in favour of this), it cannot possibly have been bremesbyrig in the days of edward. another site has been suggested by the rev. c. s. taylor, in a paper on _the danes in gloucestershire_, bromsberrow in s. gloucestershire, one of the last spurs of the malvern hills. here the top of a small hill has been encircled with a ditch; but the ditch is so narrow that it does not suggest a defensive work, and it is remote from any roman road or navigable river. scergeat has not yet been identified. mr kerslake argued with some probability that shrewsbury is the place;[76] but the etymological considerations are adverse, and it is more likely that such an important place as shrewsbury was fortified before edward's time. leland calls it scorgate, and says it is "about severn side."[77] it should probably be sought within the frontier of watling street, which ethelfleda does not appear to have yet crossed in 911. bridgenorth is undoubtedly the bricge of the _anglo-saxon chronicle_, as florence of worcester identifies it with the bridgenorth which robert belesme fortified against henry i. in 1101.[78] bridgenorth is on a natural fortification of steep rock, which would only require a stout wall to make it secure against all the military resources of the 10th century. we may therefore be quite certain that it was here ethelfleda planted her borough, and not (as mr eyton unfortunately conjectured) on the mound outside the city, in the parish of oldbury.[79] this mound was far more probably the site of the siege castle (no doubt of wood) which was erected by henry i. when he besieged the city.[80] tamworth was an ancient city of the mercian kings, and therefore may have been fortified before its walls were rebuilt by ethelfleda.[81] the line of the ancient town-wall can still be traced in parts, though it is rapidly disappearing. dugdale says the town ditch was 45 feet broad. tamworth was a borough at the time of domesday. stafford has a motte on which stood a norman castle; but this is not mentioned in the table, because it stands a mile and a half from the town on the _southern_ side of the river sowe, while we are expressly told by florence that ethelfleda's borough was on the _northern_ side, as the town is now. stafford was a domesday borough; some parts of the mediæval walls still remain. the walls are mentioned in domesday book.[82] eddisbury, in cheshire (fig. 4), is the only case in which the work of ethelfleda is preserved in a practically unaltered form, as no town or village has ever grown out of it. the _burh_ stands at the top of a hill, commanding the junction of two great roman roads, the watling street from chester to manchester, and the branch which it sends forth to kinderton on the east. as a very misleading plan of this work has been published in the _journal of the british archæological association_ for 1906, the _burh_ has been specially surveyed for this book by mr d. h. montgomerie, who has also furnished the following description:-"this plan is approximately oval, and is governed by the shape of the ground; the work lies at the end of a spur, running s.e. and terminating in abrupt slopes to the e. and s. the defences on the n. and w. consist of a ditch and a high outer bank, the proportions of these varying according to the slope of the hill. there are slight remains of a light inner rampart along the western half of this side. the remains of an original entrance (shown in ormerod's _cheshire_) are visible in the middle of the n.w. side, beyond which the ditch and outer bank have been partially levelled by the encroachments of the farm buildings. the defences of the s. side seem to have consisted of a long natural slope, crowned by a steeper scarp, cut back into the rock, and having traces of a bank along its crest. the s.e. end of the spur presents several interesting details, for it has been occupied in mediæval times by a small fortified enclosure, whose defences are apt to be confused with those of the older saxon town. the rock makes a triangular projection at this end, containing the foundations of mediæval buildings,[83] and strengthened on the n.e. by a slight ditch some 7 to 10 feet below the crest; the rock on the inner side of this ditch has been cut back to a nearly vertical face, while on the outer bank are the footings of a masonry wall extending almost to the point of the spur. there are traces of another wall defending the crest on the n.e. and s.; but the base of the triangle, facing the old enclosure, does not appear to have been strengthened by a cross ditch or bank. "it may be noted that this enclosure presents not the slightest appearance of a motte. it is at a lower level than the body of the hill, and belongs most certainly to the edwardian period of the masonry buildings." [illustration: fig. 4. eddisbury, cheshire. witham, essex.] warwick castle has a motte which has been confidently attributed to ethelfleda, only because dugdale copied the assertion of thomas rous, a very imaginative writer of the 15th century, that she was its builder. the borough which ethelfleda fortified probably occupied a smaller area than the mediæval walls built in edward i.'s reign; and it is probable that it did not include the site of the castle, as domesday states that only four houses were destroyed when the castle was built.[84] the borough was doubtless erected to protect the roman road from bath to lincoln, the foss way, which passes near it. domesday book, after mentioning that the king's barons have 112 houses in the borough, and the abbot of coventry 36, goes on to say that these houses belong to the lands which the barons hold outside the city, and are rated there.[85] this is one of the passages from which the late professor maitland concluded that the boroughs planted by ethelfleda and edward were organised on a system of military defence, whereby the magnates in the country were bound to keep houses in the towns.[86] cyricbyrig.--about this place we adopt the conjecture of dugdale, who identified it with monk's kirby in warwickshire, not far from the borders of leicestershire, and therefore on the edge of ethelfleda's dominions. it lies close to the foss way, and about three miles from watling street; like eddisbury, it is near the junction of two roman roads. there are remains of banks and ditches below the church. dugdale says "there are certain apparent tokens that the romans had some station here; for by digging the ground near the church, there have been discovered foundations of old walls and roman bricks."[87] possibly ethelfleda restored a roman castrum here. at any rate, it seems a much more likely site than chirbury in shropshire, which is commonly proposed, but which does not lie on any roman road, and is not on ethelfleda's line of advance; nor are there any earthworks there. weardbyrig has not been identified. wednesbury was stated by camden to be the place,[88] and but for the impossibility of the etymology, the situation would suit well enough. weardbyrig must have been an important place, for it had a mint.[89] warburton, on the mersey, has been gravely suggested, but is impossible, as it takes its name from st werburgh. runcorn has not a vestige to show of ethelfleda's borough; but local historians have preserved some rather vague accounts of a promontory fort which once existed at the point where the london and north-western railway bridge enters the river. a rocky headland formerly projected here into the mersey, narrowing its course to 400 yards at high water; a ditch with a circular curve cut off this headland from the shore. this ditch, from 12 to 16 feet wide, with an inner bank 6 or 7 feet high, could still be traced in the early part of the 19th century. eighteen feet of the headland were cut off when the duke of bridgewater made his canal in 1773, and the ditch was obliterated when the railway bridge was built. from the measurements which have been preserved, the area of this fort must have been very small, not exceeding 3 acres at the outside;[90] and it is unlikely that it represented ethelfleda's borough, as the church, which was of pre-conquest foundation, stood outside its bounds, and we should certainly have expected to find it within. as the norman earls of chester established a ferry at runcorn in the 12th century, and as a castle at runcorn is spoken of in a mediæval document,[91] it seems not impossible that there may have been a norman castle on this site, as we constantly find such small fortifications placed to defend a ferry or ford. it is probable that ethelfleda's borough was destroyed at an early period by the northmen, for runcorn was not a borough at domesday, but was then a mere dependency of the honour of halton. _the burhs of edward the elder._ hertford.--two burhs were built by edward at hertford in 913, one on the north and the other on the south side of the river lea. therefore if a burh were the same thing as a motte, there ought to be two mottes at hertford, one on each side of the river; whereas there is only one, and that forms part of the works of the norman castle. mr clark, with his usual confidence, says that the northern mound has "long been laid low";[92] but there is not the slightest proof that it ever existed except in his imagination. hertford was a borough at the time of domesday. no earthworks remain. witham (fig. 4).--there are some remains of a _burh_ here which are very remarkable, as they show an inner enclosure within the outer one. they have been carefully surveyed by mr f. c. j. spurrell, who has published a plan of them.[93] each enclosure formed roughly a square with much-rounded corners. the ditch round the outer work was 30 feet wide; the inner work was not ditched. the area enclosed by the outer bank was 26-1/4 acres, an enclosure much too large for a castle; the area of the inner enclosure was 9-1/2 acres. as far as is at present known, witham is the only instance we have of an anglo-saxon earthwork which has a double enclosure.[94] witham is not mentioned as a borough in domesday book, but the fact that it had a mint in the days of hardicanute shows that it maintained its borough rights for more than a hundred years. the name chipping hill points to a market within the borough. buckingham is another case where a _burh_ was built on both sides of the river, and as at hertford, there was only one motte, site of the castle of the norman giffards, now almost obliterated. the river ouse here makes a long narrow loop to the south-west, within which stands the town, and, without doubt, this would be the site of edward's borough. no trace is left of the second borough on the other side of the river. buckingham is one of the boroughs of domesday. bedford has had a motte and a norman castle on the north side of the ouse; but this was not the site of edward's borough, which the _chronicle_ tells us was placed on the south side of that river. on the south side an ancient ditch, 10 or 12 feet broad, with some traces of an inner rampart, semicircular in plan, but with a square extension, is still visible, and fills with water at flood times.[95] this is very likely to be the ditch of edward's borough. both at bedford and buckingham the _chronicle_ states that edward spent four weeks in building the _burh_. mediæval numbers must never be taken as precise; but the disproportion between four weeks and eight days, the space often given for the building of an early norman castle, corresponds very well to the difference between the time needed to throw up the bank and stockade of a town, and that needed for the building of an earthen and wooden castle. maldon.--only one angle of the earthen bank of edward's borough remains now, but gough states that it was an oblong camp enclosing about 22 acres.[96] it had rounded corners and a very wide ditch, with a bank on both scarp and counterscarp. maldon was a borough at domesday;[97] the king had a hall there, but there was never any castle, nor is there any trace of a motte. towcester (fig. 5).--there is a motte at towcester, but no direct evidence has yet been found for the existence of a norman castle there, though leland says that he was told of "certen ruines or diches of a castelle."[98] there was a mill and an oven to which the citizens owed soke,[99] and the value of the manor, which belonged to the king, had risen very greatly since the conquest;[100] all facts which render the existence of a norman castle extremely likely. but there can be no question as to the nature of edward's work at towcester, as the _chronicle_ tells us expressly that "he wrought the burgh at towcester with a stone wall."[101] towcester lies on watling street, and is believed to have been the roman station of lactodorum. baker gives a plan of the remains existing in his time, which may either be those of the roman castrum or of edward's borough.[102] the area is stated to be about 35 acres. wigingamere.--this place is not yet identified, for the identification with wigmore in herefordshire, though accepted by many respectable writers, will not stand a moment's examination. wigmore was entirely out of edward's beat, and he had far too much on his hands in 918 to attempt a campaign in herefordshire. as wigingamere appears to have specially drawn upon itself the wrath of east anglian and essex danes, it must have lain somewhere in their neighbourhood. the _mere_ which is included in the name would seem to point to that great inland water which anciently stretched southwards from the wash into cambridgeshire. the only approach to east anglia from the south lay along a strip of open chalk land which lay between the great swamp and the dense forests which grew east of it.[103] here ran the ancient road called the icknield way. on a peninsula which now runs out into the great fens of the cam and the ouse there is still a village called wicken, 6 miles west of the roman road; and possibly, when the land surrounding this peninsula was under water, this bight may have been called wigingamere. this suggestion of course is merely tentative, but what gives it some probability is that the danish army which attacked "the borough at wigingamere" came from east anglia as well as mercia.[104] [illustration: fig. 5.--plan of towcester about 1830.] huntingdon.--the borough of huntingdon was probably first built by the danes, as it was only repaired by edward. in leland's time there were still some remains of the walls "in places." huntingdon is one of the _burgi_ of domesday. colchester.--this of course was a roman site, and edward needed only to restore the walls, as the _chronicle_ indicates. colchester was placed so as to defend the river colne, just as maldon defended the estuary of the blackwater. as the repair of colchester and the successful defence of wigingamere were followed the same year by the submission of east anglia, it seems not unlikely that edward's various forces may have made a simultaneous advance, along the coast, and along the roman road by the fen country; but this of course is the merest conjecture, as the _chronicle_ gives us no details of this very important event. cledemuthan.--this place is only mentioned in the abingdon ms. of the _chronicle_, but the year 921 is the date given for its building. this date should probably be transposed to 918, the year in which, according to florence, edward subjugated east anglia. it is well known how confused the chronology of the various versions of the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ is during the reign of edward the elder.[105] cley, in norfolk, would be etymologically deducible from clede (the _d_ being frequently dropped, especially in scandinavian districts), and the _muthan_ points to some river estuary. cley is one of the few havens on the north coast of norfolk, and its importance in former times was much greater than now, as is shown not only by the spaciousness of its early english church, but by the fact that the port has jurisdiction for 30 miles along the coast.[106] it would be highly probable that edward completed the subjugation of east anglia by planting a borough at some important point. but as the real date of the fortification of cledemuthan is uncertain, we must be content to leave this matter in abeyance.[107] stamford is another case where the _borough_ is clearly said to have been on the side which is opposite to the one where the norman castle stands. edward's borough was on the south side, the motte and other remains of the norman castle are on the north of the welland. it is remarkable that the part of stamford on the south side of the welland is still a distinct liberty; it is mentioned in domesday as the sixth ward of the borough. the line of the earthworks can still be traced in parts. the borough on the north side of the welland was probably first walled in by the danes, as it was one of the five boroughs--stamford, leicester, lincoln, nottingham, and derby--which appear to have formed an independent or semi-independent state in middle england.[108] stamford is a borough in domesday. nottingham.--the first mention of a fortress in connection with nottingham seems to suggest that it owed its origin to the danes. in 868 the danish host which had taken possession of york in the previous year "went into mercia to nottingham, and there took up their winter quarters. and burgræd king of mercia and his witan begged of ethelred, king of the west saxons, and of alfred his brother, that they would help them, that they might fight against the army. and then they went with the west saxon force into mercia as far as nottingham, and there encountered the army which was in the fortress (geweorc), and besieged them there; but there was no great battle fought, and the mercians made peace with the army."[109] nottingham became another of the danish five boroughs. the danish host on this occasion came from york, no doubt in ships down the ouse and up the trent. the site would exactly suit them, as it occupied a very strong position on st mary's hill, a height equal to that on which the castle stands, defended on the south front by precipitous cliffs, below which ran the river leen, and only a very short distance from the junction of the leen with the trent, the great waterway of middle england.[110] portions of the ancient ditch were uncovered in 1890, and its outline appears to have been roughly rectangular, like the danish camp at shoebury. the ditch was about 20 feet wide. the area enclosed was about 39 acres. this borough was captured by edward the elder in 919, when after the death of his sister ethelfleda he advanced into danish mercia, taking up the work which she had left unfinished.[111] the _chronicle_ tells us that he repaired the borough (burh), and garrisoned it with both english and danes. two years later, he evidently felt the necessity of fortifying the trent itself, for he built another borough on the south side of the river, and connected the two boroughs by a bridge, which must have included a causeway or a wooden stage across the marshes of the leen. it is not surprising that the frequent floods of the trent have carried away all trace of this second borough.[112] the important position of nottingham was maintained in subsequent times, and it was still a borough at domesday. thelwall.--according to camden, thelwall explains by its name the kind of work which was set up here, a wall composed of the trunks of trees. this was another attempt to defend the course of the mersey, which was once tidal as far as thelwall. no remains of any fortifications can now be seen at thelwall, which was not one of the boroughs which took root. but the mersey has changed its course very much at this point, even before the making of the ship canal effected a more complete alteration.[113] manchester.--the _burh_ repaired by edward the elder was no doubt the roman castrum, which was built on the triangle of land between the irwell and the medlock. large portions of the walls were still remaining in stukeley's time, about 1700, and some fragments have recently been unearthed by the manchester classical association. it was one of the smaller kind of roman stations, its area being only 5 acres. manchester is not mentioned as a borough in domesday, but the old saxon town was long known as aldportton, which literally means "the town of the old city." this is its title in mediæval deeds, and it is still preserved in _alport_ street, a street near the remains of the _castrum_.[114] the later borough of manchester, which existed at least as early as the 13th century, appears to have grown up round the norman castle, about a mile from the roman castrum.[115] bakewell.--the vagueness of the indication in the _chronicle_, "nigh to bakewell," leaves us in some doubt where we are to look for this _burh_, which florence calls an _urbs_. just outside the village of bakewell there are the remains of a motte and bailey castle (a small motte and bailey of 2 acres), which are always assumed to be the _burh_ of edward. but the enclosure is far too small for a borough, and edward's burh would certainly have enclosed the church; for though the present church contains no saxon architecture, the ancient cross in the graveyard shows that it stands on a saxon site. it is more reasonable to suppose that edward's borough, if it was at bakewell, has disappeared as completely as those of runcorn, buckingham, and thelwall, and that the motte and bailey belong to one of the many norman castles whose names never appear in history. there is no conclusive evidence for the existence of a norman castle at bakewell, but the names castle field, warden field, and court yard are at least suggestive.[116] bakewell was the seat of jurisdiction for the high peak hundred in mediæval times.[117] chapter iv danish fortifications we must now inquire into the nature of the fortifications built by the danes in england, which are frequently mentioned in the _anglo-saxon chronicle_. it has often been asserted, and with great confidence, that the danes were the authors of the moated mounds of class(_e_); those in ireland are invariably spoken of by lewis in his _topographical dictionary_ as "danish raths." this fancy seems to have gone somewhat out of fashion since mr clark's _burh_ theory occupied the field, though mr clark's view is often so loosely expressed as to lead one to think that he supposed all the northern nations to be makers of mottes; in fact, he frequently includes the anglo-saxons under the general title of "northmen"![118] we must therefore endeavour to find out what the danish fortifications actually were. the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ mentions twenty-four places where the danes either threw up fortifications (between 787 and 924) or took up quarters either for the winter, or for such a period of time that we may infer that there was some fortification to protect them. the word used for the fortification is generally _geweorc_, a work, or _fæsten_ (in two places only), which has also the general vague meaning of a _fastness_. there are ten places where these works or fastnesses are mentioned in the _chronicle_:-1. nottingham.--we have already seen that the danish host took up their winter quarters here in 868, and that there is the highest probability that the borough which edward the elder restored was first built by them. we have also seen that it was a camp of roughly rectangular form, and enclosed a very large area, necessary for great numbers.[119] 2. rochester.--this city was besieged by the danes in 885, and they fortified a camp outside. as the artificial mound called boley hill is outside the city, most topographers have jumped to the conclusion that this was the danish camp. but the character of the danish fortification is clearly indicated in the _chronicle_: "they made a work around themselves," that is, it was an enclosure.[120] they could hardly have escaped by ship, as they did, if their camp had been above the bridge, which is known to have existed in saxon times. but boley hill is above the bridge. 3. milton, in kent (middeltune).--hæsten the dane landed at the mouth of the thames with 80 ships, and wrought a _geweorc_ here in 893. two places in the neighbourhood of milton have been suggested as the site of it, a square earthwork at bayford court, near sittingbourne, and a very small square enclosure called castle rough. neither of these are large enough to have been of any use to a force which came in 80 ships.[121] steenstrup has calculated that the average number of men in a viking ship must have been from 40 to 50; hæsten therefore must have had at least 3200 men with him. it is therefore probable that the camp at milton has been swept away. 4. appledore.--a still larger danish force, which had been harrying the carlovingian empire, came in 250 ships, with their horses, in 893, and towed their ships "up the river" (which is now extinct) from lymne to appledore, where they wrought a work. there are no earthworks at appledore now, but at kenardington, 2 miles off, there are remains of "a roughly defined rectangular work, situated on the north and east of the church, on the slope of the hill towards the marsh, a very likely place for an entrenchment thrown up to defend a fleet of light-draught ships hauled up on the beach."[122] the enclosure was very large, one side which remains being 600 feet long.[123] 5. benfleet.--here hæsten wrought a work in 894; here he was defeated by alfred's forces, and some of his ships burnt. mr spurrell states that there are still some irregular elevations by the stream and about the church, which he believes to be remains of the danish camp.[124] "as the fleet of ships lay in the beamfleet, it is obvious that the camp must have partaken of the character of a fortified _hithe_, with the wall landward and the shore open to the river and the ships." he also learned on the spot that when the railway bridge across the fleet was being made, the remains of several ancient ships, charred by fire, and surrounded by numerous human skeletons, were found in the mud.[125] benfleet must have been a very large camp, as not only was the joint army of danes housed in it, that from milton and that from appledore, but they had with them their wives and children and cattle. 6. shoebury (fig. 6).--after the storming of the camp at benfleet by the saxon forces, the joint armies of the danes built another _geweorc_ at shoebury in essex. we should therefore expect a large camp here, and mr spurrell has shown that the area was formerly about a third of a square mile. about half the camp had been washed away by the sea when mr spurrell surveyed it in 1879, but enough was left to give a good idea of the whole. it was a roughly square rampart, with a ditch about 40 feet wide, the ditch having a kind of berm on the inner side. the bank also had a slight platform inside, about 3 feet above the general level.[126] as hæsten had lost his ships at benfleet, there would be no fortified hithe connected with it, and if there had been, the sea would have swept it away. the camp was abandoned almost as soon as it was made, and the danish army started on that remarkable march across england which the _saxon chronicle_ relates. they were overtaken and besieged by alfred's forces, in a _fastness_ at 7. buttington, on the severn.--it has sometimes been contended that this was the buttington near chepstow; but as the line of march of the army was "along the thames till they reached the severn, then up along the severn,"[127] it is more probable that it was buttington in montgomery, west of shrewsbury.[128] here there are remains of a strong bank with a broad deep ditch, which was evidently part of a rectangular earthwork, as it runs at right angles to offa's dyke, which forms one side of it. it now encloses both the churchyard and vicarage. whether the danes constructed this earthwork, or found it there, we are not told. 8. there appear to be no remains of the _geweorc_ on the river lea, 20 miles above london, made by the danes in 896. but 20 miles above london, on the lea, would land us at amwell, near ware. in brayley's _hertfordshire_ it is stated that at amwell, "on the hill above the church are traces of a very extensive fortification, the rampart of which is very distinguishable on the side overlooking the vale through which the river lea flows."[129] [illustration: fig. 6. shoebury, essex.] 9. bridgenorth, or quatbridge.--the winchester ms. of the _chronicle_ says the danes wrought a _geweorc_ at quatbridge, in 896, and passed the winter there. there is no such place as quatbridge now, only quatford; and seeing there were so few bridges in those days, we are disposed to accept the statement of the worcester ms., which must have been the best informed about events in the west, that bridgenorth was the site of their work, especially as the high rock at bridgenorth offers a natural fortification. the only circumstance that is in favour of quatford is that it is mentioned as a _burgus_ in domesday, which shows that it possessed fortifications of the civic kind; and we shall see later on, that such fortifications were often the work of the danes. but this burgus may more probably have been the work of roger de montgomeri, who planted a castle there in the 11th century. 10. tempsford.--here the danes wrought a work in 918.[130] there is a small oblong enclosure at tempsford, still in fair preservation, called gannock castle, which is generally supposed to be this danish work. the ramparts are about 11 or 12 feet above the bottom of the moat, which is about 20 feet wide. there is a small circular mound, about 5 feet high, on top of the rampart, which appears to be so placed as to defend the entrance. this mound is "edged all round by the root of a small bank, which may have been the base of a stockaded tower."[131] this curious little enclosure is different altogether from any of the danish works just enumerated, and it is difficult to see what purpose it could have served. the area enclosed is only half an acre, which would certainly not have accommodated the large army "from huntingdon and from the east angles," which built the advanced post at tempsford as a base for the forcible recovery of the districts which they had lost.[132] such a small enclosure as this might possibly have been a citadel, but our knowledge of danish camps does not tell us of any with citadels, and it is hardly likely that the democratic constitution of these pirate bands would have allowed of a citadel for the chief. it is far more probable that this work belongs to a later time, and that the danish camp has been swept away by the river.[133] 11. reading.--there is no "work" mentioned by the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ at this place, which the danes made their headquarters in 871, but we add it to the list because asser not only mentions it, but describes the nature of the fortification. it was a _vallum_ drawn between the rivers thames and kennet, so as to enclose a peninsula.[134] it had several entrances, as the danes "rushed out from all the gates" on the anglo-saxon attack. such a fort belongs to the simplest and easiest kind of defence, used at all times by a general who is in a hurry, and it has therefore no significance in determining the general type of danish works. besides these eleven places where _works_ are mentioned, there are thirteen places where the danes are said to have taken up their winter quarters, and where we may be certain that they were protected by some kind of fortifications. these are thanet, sheppey, thetford, york, london, torkesey, repton, cambridge, exeter, chippenham, cirencester, fulham, and mersey island. four places out of this list--york, london, exeter, and cirencester--were roman _castra_, whose walls were still available for defence. three--thanet, sheppey, and mersey--were islands, and thus naturally defended, being much more insular than they are now.[135] three--thetford, torkesey, and cambridge--appear as burgi in domesday, showing that they were fortified towns. it is highly probable that the danes threw up the first fortifications of these boroughs. there are no remains of town banks at torkesey; at cambridge the outline of the town bank can be traced in places;[136] and at thetford there was formerly an earthwork on the suffolk side of the river, which appears to have formed three sides of a square, abutting on the river, and enclosing the most ancient part of the town.[137] chippenham and repton were ancient seats of the anglo-saxon kings, and may have had fortifications, but nothing remains now. chippenham is a borough by prescription, therefore of ancient date. at fulham, on the thames, there is a quadrangular moat and bank round the bishop of london's palace, which is sometimes supposed to be the camp made by the danes in 879; but it may equally well be mediæval. there was formerly a harbour at fulham.[138] it must be confessed that this list of danish fortresses furnishes us with a very slender basis for generalisation as to the nature of danish fortifications, judging from the actual remains. all we can say is that in six cases out of twenty-four (not including tempsford or fulham) the work appears to have been rectangular. in the case of shoebury, about which we have the best evidence, the imitation of roman models seems to be clear. if we turn from remaining facts to _à priori_ likelihoods, we call to mind that the danes were a much-travelled people, had been in gaul as well as in england, and had had opportunities of observing roman fortifications, as well as much practice both in the assault and defence of fortified places. it may not be without significance that it is not until after the return of "the army" from france that we hear of their building camps at all, except in the case of reading. as far as our information goes, their camps were without citadels. what evidence we have from the other side of the channel supports the same conclusion. richer gives us an account of the storming of a fortress of the northmen at eu, by king raoul, in 925, from which it is clear that as soon as the king's soldiers had got over the vallum, they were masters of the place; there was no citadel to attack.[139] dudo speaks of the vikings "fortifying themselves, after the manner of a _castrum_, by heaped up earth-banks drawn round themselves," and it is clear from the rest of his description that the camp had no citadel.[140] in no case do we find anything to justify the theory that mottes were an accompaniment of danish camps. in five cases out of the twenty-four there are or were mottes at the places mentioned, but in all cases they belonged to norman castles. the magnificent motte called the castle hill at thetford was on the opposite side of the river to the borough, which we have seen reason to think was the site of the danish winter quarters. torkesey in leland's time had by the river side "a hille of yerth cast up," which he judged to be the donjon of some old castle, probably rightly, though we have been unable as yet to find any mention of a norman castle at torkesey; a brick castle of much more recent date is still standing near the river, and probably the motte to which leland alludes was destroyed when this was built. the motte at cambridge is placed inside the original bounds of the borough, and was part of the norman castle.[141] we have already dealt with the boley hill at rochester, and shall have more to say about it hereafter. the rock motte at nottingham was probably not cut off by a ditch from the rest of the headland until the norman castle was built. [illustration: fig. 7. willington, beds.] it seems highly probable that besides providing accommodation in their camps for very large numbers of people, the danes sometimes fortified the hithes where they drew up their ships on shore, or even constructed fortified harbours.[142] we have already quoted mr spurrell's remark on the hithe[143] at benfleet (p. 51), and there is at least one place in england which seems to prove the existence of fortified harbours. this is willington, on the river ouse, in bedfordshire, which has been carefully described by mr a. r. goddard.[144] this "camp" consists of two wards, and a wide outer enclosure (fig. 7). "but one of the most interesting features is the presence of two harbours, contained within the defences and communicating with the river." mr goddard points out that the dimensions of the smaller one are almost the same as those of the "nausts" (ship-sheds or small docks) of the vikings in iceland. he also cites from the _jomsvikinga saga_ the description of a harbour made by the viking palnatoki at jomsborg. "there he had a large and strong sea _burg_ made. he also had a harbour made within the _burg_ in which 300 long ships could lie at the same time, all being locked within the burg." the harbours at willington are large enough to accommodate between twenty-five and thirty-five ships of the danish type. unfortunately there is no historical proof that the willington works were danish, though their construction makes it very likely. nor have any works of a similar character been as yet observed in england, as far as we are aware. but if archæology and topography give a somewhat scanty answer to our question about the nature of danish fortifications, there are other fields of research, opened up of late years, from which we can glean important facts, bearing directly on the subject which we are treating. herr steenstrup's exhaustive inquiry into the danish settlement in england has shown that the way in which the danes maintained their hold on the northern and eastern shires was by planting fortified towns on which the soldiers and peasants dwelling around were dependent.[145] the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ gives us a glimpse of these arrangements when it speaks of the danes who owed obedience to bedford, derby, leicester, northampton, and cambridge.[146] it also tells us of the five boroughs, which, as we have already said, appear to have been a confederation of boroughs forming an independent danish state between the danish kingdoms of east anglia and northumbria. the same system was followed by the danes who colonised ireland. "the colony had a centre in a fortified town, or it consisted almost exclusively of dwellers in one. but round this town was a district, in which the irish inhabitants had to pay taxes to the lords of the town."[147] the irish chronicle called _the wars of the gaedhil and the gaill_ says, further, that norse soldiers were quartered in the country round these towns in the houses of the native irish, and it even says that there was hardly a house without a norseman.[148] herr steenstrup does not go so far as to assert that this system of quartering obtained in england also; but he shows that it is probable, and we may add that such a system would help to explain the speedy absorption of the danes into the anglo-saxon population, which took place in the danelaw districts.[149] the large numbers of the danish forces, and the fact that in the second period of their invasions they brought their wives and children with them, would render camps of large area necessary. these numbers alone make it ridiculous to attribute to the danes the small motte castles of class (_e_), whose average area is not more than 3 acres. finally, the danish host was not a feudal host. steenstrup asserts that the principle of the composition of the host was the voluntary association of equally powerful leaders, of whom one was chosen as head, and was implicitedly obeyed, but had only a temporary authority.[150] we should not, therefore, expect to find the danish camps provided with the citadels by which the feudal baron defended his personal safety. when rollo and his host were coming up the seine, the frankish king raoul sent messengers to ask them who they were, and what was the name of their chief. "danes," was the reply, "and we have no chief, for we are all equal."[151] that such an answer would be given by men who were following a leader so distinguished as rollo shows the spirit of independence which pervaded the danish hosts, and how little a separate fortification for the chief would comport with their methods of warfare.[152] we may conclude, then, with every appearance of certainty that the danish camps were enclosures of large area which very much resembled the larger roman _castra_, and that, like these, they frequently grew into towns. placed as they generally were on good havens, or on navigable rivers, they were most suitable places for trade; and it turned out that the danes, who were a people of great natural aptitudes, had a special aptitude for commerce.[153] dr cunningham remarks that they were the leading merchants of the country, and he attributes to them a large share in the development of town life in england.[154] the organisation of their armies was purely military, but at the same time democratic; and when it was applied to a settled life in the new country, the organisation of the town was the form which it took. the lagmen of lincoln, stamford, cambridge, chester, and york are a peculiarly scandinavian institution, which we find still existing at the time of the domesday survey.[155] thus we see that the fortifications of the danes, like those of the anglo-saxons, were the fortifications of the community. and we shall see in the next chapter that this was the general type of the fortifications which were being raised in western europe in the 9th century. chapter v the origin of private castles we have now seen that history furnishes no instance of the existence of private castles among the anglo-saxons or the danes (previous to the arrival of edward the confessor's norman friends), and we have endeavoured to show that this negative evidence is of great significance. if, assuming that we are right in accepting it as conclusive, we ask why the anglo-saxons did not build private castles, the answer is ready to hand in the researches of the late dr stubbs, the late professor maitland, dr j. h. round, and professor vinogradoff, which have thrown so much fresh light on the constitutional history of england. these writers have made it clear that whatever tendencies towards feudalism there were in england before the conquest, the system of military tenure, which is the backbone of feudalism, was introduced into england by william the conqueror.[156] "feudalism, in both tenure and government was, so far as it existed in england, brought full-grown from france," says dr stubbs; and this statement is not merely supported, but strengthened, by the work of the later writers named.[157] the institutions of the anglo-saxons, when they settled in england, were tribal; and though these institutions were in a state of decay in the 11th century, they were not completely superseded by feudal institutions till after the norman conquest. we should naturally expect, then, that the fortifications erected by the anglo-saxons would be those adapted to their originally tribal state, that is, in the words which we have so often used already, they would be those of the community and not of the individual. and as far as we can discover the character of these fortifications, we find that this was actually the case. as we have seen, we find one of the earliest kings, ida, building for the defence of himself and his followers what bede calls a city; and we find alfred and his children also building and repairing cities, at the time of the danish invasions. the same kind of thing was going on at about the same time in germany and in france. henry the fowler (919-936), that great restorer of the austrasian kingdom, planted on the frontiers which were exposed to the attacks of the danes and huns a number of walled strongholds, not only for the purpose of resisting invasion, but to afford a place of refuge to all the inhabitants of the country. he ordained that every ninth man of the peasants in the district must build for himself and his nine companions a dwelling in the "burg," and provide barns and storehouses, and that the third part of all crops must be delivered and housed in these towns.[158] in this way, says the historian giesebrecht, he sought to accustom the saxons, who had hitherto dwelt in isolated farms, or open villages, to life in towns. he ordered that all assemblies of the people should be held in towns. giesebrecht also remarks that it is not improbable that henry the fowler had the example of edward the elder of england before his eyes when he established these rows of frontier towns.[159] the same causes led, on neustrian soil, to the fortification of a number of cities, the walls of which had fallen into decay during the period of peace before the invasions of the danes. thus charles the bald commanded le mans and tours to be fortified "as a defence _for the people_ against the northmen."[160] the bishops were particularly active in thus defending the people of their dioceses. archbishop fulk rebuilt the walls of rheims, between 884 and 900;[161] his successor, hervey, fortified the town of coucy[162] (about 900); the bishop of cambray built new walls to his city in 887-911;[163] and bishop erluin fortified peronne in 1001, "as a defence against marauders, and a refuge for the husbandmen of the country."[164] but permission had probably to be asked in all these cases, as it certainly had in the last. the carlovingian sovereigns represented a well-ordered state, modelled on the pattern of the roman empire; they were jealous of any attempts at self-defence which did not proceed from the state, and thus as long as they had the power they strove to put down all associations or buildings of a military character which did not emanate from their imperial authority. the history of the 9th and 10th centuries is the history of the gradual break-up of the carlovingian empire, and the rise of feudalism on its ruins. in 877, the year of his death, charles the bald signed a decree making the counts of the provinces, who until then had been imperial officers, hereditary. he thus, as sismondi says, annihilated the remains of royal authority in the provinces.[165] the removable officers now became local sovereigns. gradually, as the carlovingian empire fell to pieces, the artificial organisation of the feudal system arose to take its place. by the end of the 10th century the victory of feudalism was complete; and the victory of feudalism was the victory of the private castle. "the very word castle," says guizot, "brings with it the idea of feudal society; we see it rising before us. it was feudalism that built these castles which once covered our soil, and whose ruins are still scattered upon it. they were the declaration of its triumph. nothing like them had existed on gallo-roman soil. before the germanic invasion, the great landed proprietors dwelt either in the cities, or in beautiful houses agreeably situated near the cities."[166] these gallo-roman villas had no fortifications;[167] nor were the roman villas in england fortified.[168] it was the business of the state to defend the community; this was the theory so long sustained by imperial rome, and which broke down so completely under the later carlovingians. in the time of charlemagne and louis le debonnaire, even the royal palaces do not appear to have been fortified. they were always spoken of as _palatia_, never as _castella_. the danes, when they took possession of the palace of nimeguen in 880, fortified it with ditches and banks.[169] charles the bald appears to have been the first to fortify the palace of compiègne.[170] although there can be no doubt that private castles had become extremely common on the mainland of western europe before the end of the 10th century, it is more difficult than is generally supposed to trace their first appearance. historians, even those of great repute, have been somewhat careless in translating the words _castrum_ or _castellum_ as _castle_ or _château_, and taking them in the sense of the feudal or private castle.[171] we have already pointed out that these words in our anglo-saxon charters mean a town or village.[172] the fact is that from roman times until toward the end of the 9th century the words _castrum_ and _castellum_ are used indifferently for a fortified city or town, or a temporary camp. the expression _civitates et castella_ is not uncommon, and might lead one to think that a distinction was drawn between large and small towns, or forts. but it is far more likely that it is a mere pleonasm, a bit of that redundancy which was always dear to the mediæval scribe who was trying to write well. for as the instances cited in the appendix will prove, we constantly find the words _castrum_ and _castellum_ used for the same town, sometimes even in the same paragraph. later, from the last quarter of the 9th century to the middle of the 12th century, these same words are used indifferently for a town or a castle, and it is impossible to tell, except by the context, whether a town or a castle is meant; and often even the context throws no light upon it. this makes it extremely difficult to say with any exactness when the private castle first arose. we seem indeed to have a fixed date in the capitulary of pistes, issued by charles the bald in 864,[173] in which he straightly ordered that all who had made castles, forts, or hedge-works without his permission should forthwith be compelled to destroy them, because through them the whole neighbourhood suffered depredation and annoyance. this edict shows, we might argue, that private castles were sufficiently numerous by the year 864 to have become a public nuisance, calling for special legislation. but the chronicles of the second half of the 9th century do not reveal any extensive prevalence of private castles. indeed, after studying all the most important chronicles of neustria and austrasia during this period, the present writer has only been able to find four instances of fortifications which have any claim at all to be considered private castles; and even this claim is doubtful.[174] when we come to the chroniclers of the middle of the 10th century we find a marked difference. it is true that the words _castrum_, _castellum_, _municipium_, _oppidum_, _munitio_, are still used quite indifferently by flodoard and other writers for one and the same thing, and that in a great many cases they obviously mean a fortified town. but there are other cases where they evidently mean a castle. and if we compare these writers with the earlier ones in the same way as we have already compared the pre-conquest portion of the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ with the chroniclers of the 11th and 12th centuries, we find the same contrast between them. in the pages of flodoard or ademar the action constantly turns on the building, besieging, and burning of castles, which by whatever name they are called, have every appearance of being private castles. in fact before we get to the end of the century, the private castle is as much the leading feature of the drama as it is in the 11th or 12th centuries. why, then, had the chroniclers no fresh word for a thing which was in its essential nature so novel? the obvious and only answer is that the private castle in its earlier stages was nothing more than an embankment with a wooden stockade thrown round some _villa_ or farm belonging to a private owner, and was therefore indistinguishable in appearance, though radically different in idea, from the fortifications which had hitherto been thrown up for the protection of the community.[175] how easily we may be mistaken in the meaning of the word _castellum_, if we interpret it according to modern ideas, may be seen by comparing the account of the bridge built by charlemagne over the elbe, in the _annales laurissenses_, with eginhards narrative of the same affair. the former states that charlemagne built a _castellum_ of wood and earth at each end of the bridge, while the latter tells us that it was a _vallum_ to protect a garrison which he placed there. this, however, was a work of public utility, and not a private castle. but scanty as the evidence is, it all leads us to infer that the first private castles were fortifications of this simple nature.[176] mazières-on-the-meuse, which was besieged for four weeks by archbishop hervey, took its name from the _macerias_ or banks which count erlebald had constructed around it. it is impossible to say whether this enclosure should be called a castle or a town, but in idea it was certainly a castle, since it was an enclosure formed for private, not for public interests. whether these first private castles were provided with towers we have no evidence either to prove or to disprove. no instance occurs from which we can conclude that they possessed any kind of citadel, before the middle of the 10th century.[177] but before the century is far advanced, we hear of towers in connection with the great towns, which, whether they were originally mural towers or not, are evidently private strongholds, and may justly be called keeps. the earliest instance known to the writer is in 924, when the tower of the _presidium_ where herbert count of vermandois had imprisoned charles the simple was burnt accidentally.[178] this tower must have been restored, as nine years later it withstood a six weeks' siege from king raoul. a possibly earlier instance is that of nantes, where bishop fulcher had made a castle in 889; for when this castle was restored by count alan barbetorte (937-943), we are told that he _restored_ the principal tower and made it into his own house.[179] count herbert built a keep in laon before 931; and this appears to have been a different tower to the one attached to the royal house which louis d'outremer had built at the gate of the city.[180] we hear also of towers at amiens (950), coucy (958), chalons (963), and rheims (988). all these towers, it will be observed, are connected with towns.[181] the first stone keep in the country for whose date we have positive evidence, is that of langeais, built by fulk nerra, count of anjou, about the year 994; its ruins still exist. but we are concerned more particularly here with the origin of the motte-and-bailey castle. the exact place or time of its first appearance is still a matter of conjecture. certainly there is not a word in the chronicles which is descriptive of this kind of castle before the beginning of the 11th century.[182] the first historical mention of a castle which is clearly of the motte-and-bailey kind is in the chronicle of st florent le vieil, where, at a date which the modern biographer of fulk nerra fixes at 1010, we learn that this same count of anjou built a castle on the western side of the hill mont-glonne, at st florent le vieil, on the loire, and threw up an _agger_ on which he built a wooden tower.[183] in this case the word _agger_ evidently means a motte. but fulk began to reign in 987; he was a great builder of castles, and was famed for his skill in military affairs.[184] one of his first castles, built between 991 and 994, was at montbazon, not far from tours. about 500 metres from the later castle of montbazon is a motte and outworks, which de salies not unreasonably supposes to be the original castle of fulk.[185] montrichard, chateaufort, chérament, montboyau, and baugé are all castles built by fulk, and all have or had mottes. montboyau is the clearest case of all, as it was demolished by fulk a few years after he built it, and has never been restored, so that the immense motte and outworks which are still to be seen remain very much in their original state, except that a modern tower has been placed on the motte, which is now called bellevue.[186] it was a tempting theory at one time to the writer to see in fulk nerra the inventor of the motte type of castle, for independently of his fame in military architecture, he is the first mediæval chieftain who is known to have employed mercenary troops.[187] now as we have already suggested in chapter i., the plan of the motte-and-bailey castle strongly suggests that there may be a connection between its adoption and the use of mercenaries. for the plan of this kind of castle seems to hint that the owner does not only mistrust his enemies, he also does not completely trust his garrison. the keep in which he and his family live is placed on the top of the motte, which is ditched round so as to separate it from the bailey; the provisions on which all are dependent are stored in the cellar of the keep, so that they are under his own hand; and the keys of the outer ward are brought to him every night, and placed under his pillow.[188] but unfortunately for this theory, there is some evidence of the raising of mottes at an earlier period in the 10th century than the accession of fulk nerra. thibault-le-tricheur, who was count of blois and chartres from 932 to 962, was also a great builder, and it is recorded of him that he built the keeps of chartres, chateaudun,[189] blois, and chinon,[190] and the castle of saumur; these must have been finished before 962. now there was anciently a motte at blois, for in the 12th century, fulk v. of anjou burnt the whole fortress, "_except the house on the motte_."[191] there was also a motte at saumur;[192] and the plan of the castle of chinon is not inconsistent with the existence of a former motte.[193] these instances seem to put back the existence of the motte castle to the middle of the 10th century. we know of no earlier claim than this, unless we were to accept the statement of lambert of ardres that sigfrid the dane, who occupied the county of guisnes about the year 928, fortified the town, and enclosed his own _dunio_ with a double ditch.[194] if this were true, we have a clear instance of a motte built in the first half of the 10th century. but lambert's work was written at the end of the 12th century, with the object of glorifying the counts of guisnes, and its editor regards the early part of it as fabulous. that sigfrid fortified the _town_ of guisnes we can easily believe, as we know the danes commonly did the like (see chapter iv.); but that he built himself a personal castle is unlikely.[195] it is the more unlikely, because the danes in normandy do not appear to have built personal castles until the feudal system was introduced there by richard sans peur. the settlement in normandy was not on feudal lines. "rollo divided out the lands among his powerful comrades, and there is scarcely any doubt that they received these lands as inheritable property, without any other pledge than to help rollo in the defence of the country."[196] "the norman constitution at rollo's death can be described thus, that the duke ruled the country as an independent prince in relation to the franks; but for its internal government he had a council at his side, whose individual members felt themselves almost as powerful as the duke himself."[197] sir francis palgrave asserts that feudalism was introduced into normandy by the duke richard sans peur, the grandson of rollo, towards the middle of the 10th century. he "enforced a most extensive conversion of allodial lands into feudal tenure," and exacted from his baronage the same feudal submission which he himself had rendered to hugh capet.[198] it is quite in accordance with this that in the narrative of dudo, who is our only authority for the history of normandy in the 10th century, there is no mention of a private castle anywhere. we are told that rollo restored the walls and towers of the _cities_ of normandy,[199] and it is clear from the context that the _castra_ of rouen, fécamp, and evreux, which are mentioned, are fortified cities, not castles. even the ducal residence at rouen is spoken of as a _palatium_ or an _aula_, not as a castle; and it does not appear to have possessed a keep until (as we are told by a later writer) the same duke richard who introduced the feudal system into normandy built one for his own residence.[200] it is possible that when the feudal oath was exacted from the more important barons, permission was given to them to build castles for themselves; thus we hear from ordericus of the castle of aquila, built in the days of duke richard; the castle of the lords of grantmesnil at norrei; the castle of belesme; all of which appear to have been private castles.[201] but there seems to have been no general building of castles until the time of william the conqueror's minority, when his rebellious subjects raised castles against him on all sides. "plura per loca aggeres erexerunt, et tutissimas sibi munitiones construxerunt."[202] it is generally, and doubtless correctly, supposed that _aggeres_ in this passage means mottes, and taking this statement along with the great number of mottes which are still to be found in normandy, it has been further assumed (and the present writer was disposed to share the idea) that this was the time of the first invention of mottes. but the facts which have been now adduced, tracing back the first known mottes to the time of thibault-le-tricheur, and the county of blois, show that the norman claim to the invention of this mode of fortification must be given up. if the normans were late in adopting feudalism, they were probably equally late in adopting private castles, and the fortifications of william i.'s time were most likely copied from castles outside the norman frontier.[203] it might be thought that the general expectation of the end of the world in the year 1000, which prevailed towards the end of the 10th century, had something to do with the spread of these wooden castles, as it might have seemed scarcely worth while to build costly structures of stone. but it is not necessary to resort to this hypothesis, because there is quite sufficient evidence to show that long before this forecast of doom was accepted, wood was a very common, if not the commonest, material used in fortification. the reader has only to open his cæsar to see how familiar wooden towers and wooden palisades were to the romans; and he has only to study carefully the chronicles of the 9th, 10th, 11th, and 12th centuries to see how all-prevalent this mode of fortification continued to be. the general adoption of the feudal system must have brought about a demand for cheap castles, which was excellently met by the motte with its wooden keep and its stockaded bailey. m. enlart has pointed out that wooden defences have one important advantage over stone ones, their greater cohesion, which enabled them to resist the blows of the battering-ram better than rubble masonry.[204] their great disadvantage was their liability to fire; but this was obviated, as in the time of the romans, by spreading wet hides over the outsides. stone castles were still built, where money and means were available, as we see from fulk nerra's keep at langeais; but the devastations of the northmen had decimated the population of gaul; labour must have been dear, and skilled masons hard to find. in these social and economic reasons we have sufficient cause for the rapid spread of wooden castles in france. the sum of the evidence which we have been reviewing is this: the earliest mottes which we know of were _probably_ built by thibault-le-tricheur about the middle of the 10th century. but in the present state of our knowledge we must leave the question of the time and place of their first origin open. the only thing about which we can be certain is that they were the product of feudalism, and cannot have arisen till it had taken root; that is to say, not earlier than the 10th century. chapter vi distribution and characteristics of motte-castles the motte-and-bailey type of castle is to be found throughout feudal europe, but is probably more prevalent in france and the british isles than anywhere else. we say _probably_, because there are as yet no statistics prepared on which to base a comparison.[205] how recent the inquiry into this subject is may be learned from the fact that krieg von hochfelden, writing in 1859, denied the existence of mottes in germany;[206] and even cohausen in 1898 threw doubt upon them,[207] although general köhler in 1887 had already declared that "the researches of recent years have shown that the motte was spread over the whole of germany, and was in use even in the 13th and 14th centuries."[208] the greater number of the castles described by piper in his work on austrian castles are on the motte-and-bailey plan, though the motte in those mountainous provinces is generally of natural rock, isolated either by nature or art. mottes were not uncommon in italy, according to muratori,[209] and are especially frequent in calabria, where we may strongly suspect that they were introduced by the norman conqueror, robert guiscard.[210] it is not improbable that the franks of the first crusade planted in palestine the type of castle to which they were accustomed at home, for several of the excellent plans in rey's _architecture des croisés_ show clearly enough the motte-and-bailey plan.[211] in most of these cases the motte was a natural rock. on the other hand, we are told by köhler that motte-castles are not found among the slavonic nations, because they never adopted the feudal system.[212] nor are there any in norway or sweden.[213] denmark has some, which are attributed by dr sophus müller to the mediæval period.[214] of course whenever a motte was thrown up, the first castle upon it must have been a wooden one. a stone keep could not be placed on loose soil.[215] the motte, therefore, must always represent the oldest castle. but there is no reason to think that the motte and its wooden keep were merely temporary expedients, intended always to be replaced as soon as possible by stone buildings. even after stone castles had been fully developed, wood continued to hold its ground as a solid building material until a very late period.[216] and mottes were used not only throughout the 11th and 12th centuries, but even as late as the 13th. king john built many castles of this type in ireland; and as late as 1242 henry iii. ordered a motte and wooden castle to be built in the island of rhé.[217] muratori gives a much later instance: in 1320 can grande caused a great motte to be built near pavia, and surrounded with a ditch and hedge, in order to build a castle on it.[218] and as will be seen in the next chapter, there is considerable evidence that many mottes in england which were set up in the reign of william i., retained their wooden towers or stockades even till as late as the reign of edward i. the motte at drogheda held out some time against cromwell, and is spoken of by him as a very strong place, having a good graft (ditch) and strongly palisaded.[219] tickhill castle in yorkshire had a palisade on the counterscarp of the ditch when it was taken by cromwell.[220] the position of these motte-castles is wholly different from that of prehistoric fortresses. they are almost invariably placed in the arable country, and as a rule not in isolated situations, but in the immediate neighbourhood of towns or villages. it is rare indeed to find a motte-castle in a wild, mountainous situation in england. the only instance which occurs to the writer is that of the motte on the top of the hereford beacon; but there is great probability that this was a post fortified by the bishop of hereford in the 13th century to protect his game from the earl of gloucester. nothing pointing to a prehistoric origin was found in this motte when it was excavated by mr hilton price,[221] though the camp in which it is placed is supposed to be prehistoric. the great majority of mottes in england are planted either on or near roman or other ancient roads, or on navigable rivers.[222] it was essential to the norman settlers that they should be near some road which would help them to visit their other estates, which william had been so careful to scatter, and would also enable them to revisit from time to time their estates in normandy.[223] the rivers of england were much fuller of water in mediæval times than they are now, and were much more extensively used for traffic; they were real waterways. when we find a motte perched on a river which is not navigable, the purpose probably was to defend some ford, or to exact tolls from passengers. thus the ferry hill (corrupted into fairy hill) at whitwood stands at the spot where the direct road from pontefract to leeds would cross the calder. it was probably not usual for the motte to be dependent on a stream or a spring for its supply of water, and this is another point in which the mediæval castle differs markedly from the prehistoric camp; wells have been found in a number of mottes which have been excavated, and it is probable that this was the general plan, though we have not sufficient statistics on this subject as yet.[224] occasionally, but very rarely, we find two mottes in the same castle. the only instances in england known to the writer are at lewes and lincoln.[225] it is not unfrequent to find a motte very near a stone castle. in this case it is either the abandoned site of the original wooden castle, or it is a siege castle raised to blockade the other one. we constantly hear of these siege castles being built in the middle ages; their purpose was not for actual attack, but to watch the besieged fort and prevent supplies from being carried in.[226] hillocks were also thrown up for the purpose of placing _balistæ_ and other siege engines upon them; but these would be much smaller than mottes, and would be placed much nearer the walls than blockade castles. the mottes of france are in all probability much more decidedly military than those of england. france was a land of private war, after the dissolution of the empire of charlemagne; and no doubt one of the reasons for the rapid spread of the motte-castle, after its invention, was due to the facilities which it offered for this terrible game. in england the reasons for the erection of mottes seem to have been manorial rather than military; that is, the norman landholder desired a safe residence for himself amidst a hostile peasantry, rather than a strong military position which could hold out against skilful and well-armed foes. attached to the castle, both in england and abroad, we frequently find an additional enclosure, much larger than the comparatively small area of the bailey proper. this was the _burgus_ or borough, which inevitably sprang up round every castle which had a lengthened existence. our older antiquaries, finding that the word _burgenses_ was commonly used in domesday in connection with a site where a castle existed, formed the mistaken idea that a _burgus_ necessarily implied a castle. but a _burgus_ was the same thing as a _burh_, that is, a _borough_ or fortified town. it may have existed long before the castle, or it may have been created after the castle was built. the latter case was very common, for the noble who built a castle would find it to his advantage to build a _burgus_ near it.[227] in exchange for the protection offered by the borough wall or bank, he could demand _gablum_ or rent from the burghers; he could compel them to grind their corn at his mill, and bake their bread at his oven; he could exact tolls on all commodities entering the borough; and if there was a market he would receive a certain percentage on all sales. the borough was therefore an important source of revenue to the baron. domesday book mentions the _new borough_ at rhuddlan, evidently built as soon as the castle had been planted on the deserted banks of the clwydd. in some cases a "new borough" is clearly a new suburb, doubtless having its own fortifications, built specially for the protection of the norman settlers in england, as at norwich and nottingham.[228] that even in the 12th century a motte was considered an essential feature of a castle is shown by neckham's treatise "de utensilibus," where he gives directions as to how a castle should be built; the motte should be placed on a site well defended by nature; it should have a stockade of squared logs round the top; the keep on the motte should be furnished with turrets and battlements, and crates of stones for missiles should be always provided, as well as a perpetual spring of water, and secret passages and posterns, by which help might reach the besieged.[229] what the outward appearance of these motte-castles was we learn from the bayeux tapestry, which gives us several instructive pictures of motte-castles existing in the 11th century at dol, rennes, dinan, and bayeux.[230] there is considerable variety in these pictures, and something no doubt must be ascribed to fancy; but all show the main features of a stockade round the top of the motte, enclosing a wooden tower, a ditch round the foot of the motte, with a bank on the counterscarp, and a stepped wooden bridge, up which horses were evidently trained to climb, leading across the moat to the stockade of the motte. in no case is the bailey distinctly depicted, but we may assume that it has been already taken, and that the horsemen are riding over it to the gate-house which (in the picture of dinan) stands at the foot of the bridge. the towers appear to be square, but in the case of rennes and bayeux, are surmounted by a cupola roof. decoration does not appear to be have been neglected, and the general appearance of the buildings, far from being of a makeshift character, must have been very picturesque. the picture of the building of the motte at hastings shows only a stockade on top of the motte; this may be because the artist intended to represent the work as incomplete. what is remarkable about this picture is that the motte appears to be formed in layers of different materials. we might ascribe this to the fancy of the embroiderer, were it not that layers of this kind have occasionally been found in mottes which have been excavated or destroyed. thus the motte at carisbrook, which was opened in 1903, was found to be composed of alternate layers of large and small chalk rubble. in some cases, layers of stones have been found; in others (as at york and burton) a motte formed of loose material has been cased in a sort of pie-crust of heavy clay. in the castle hill at hallaton in leicestershire layers of peat and hazel branches, as well as of clay and stone boulders, were found. but our information on this subject is too scanty to justify any generalisations as to the general construction of mottes. the pictures shown in the bayeux tapestry agree very well with the description given by a 12th-century writer of the castle of merchem, near dixmüde, in the life of john, bishop of terouenne, who died in 1130. "bishop john used to stay frequently at merchem when he was going round his diocese. near the churchyard was an exceedingly high fortification, which might be called a castle or _municipium_, built according to the fashion of that country by the lord of the manor many years before. for it is the custom of the nobles of that region, who spend their time for the most part in private war, in order to defend themselves from their enemies to make a hill of earth, as high as they can, and encircle it with a ditch as broad and deep as possible. they surround the upper edge of this hill with a very strong wall of hewn logs, placing towers on the circuit, according to their means. inside this wall they plant their house, or keep (arcem), which overlooks the whole thing. the entrance to this fortress is only by a bridge, which rises from the counterscarp of the ditch, supported on double or even triple columns, till it reaches the upper edge of the motte (agger)."[231] the chronicler goes on to relate how this wooden bridge broke down under the crowd of people who were following the bishop, and all fell 35 feet into the ditch, where the water was up to their knees. there is no mention of a bailey in this account, but a bailey was so absolutely necessary to a residential castle, in order to find room for the stables, lodgings, barns, smithies and other workshops, which were necessary dependencies of a feudal household, that it can seldom have been omitted, and the comparatively rare instances which we find of mottes which appear never to have had baileys were probably outposts dependent on some more important castle. lambert of ardres, the panegyrist of the counts of guisnes,[232] writing about 1194, gives us a minute and most interesting description of the wooden castle of ardres, built about the year 1117. "arnold, lord of ardres, built on the motte of ardres a wooden house, excelling all the houses of flanders of that period both in material and in carpenter's work. the first storey was on the surface of the ground, where were cellars and granaries, and great boxes, tuns, casks, and other domestic utensils. in the storey above were the dwelling and common living rooms of the residents, in which were the larders, the rooms of the bakers and butlers, and the great chamber in which the lord and his wife slept. adjoining this was a private room, the dormitory of the waiting maids and children. in the inner part of the great chamber was a certain private room, where at early dawn or in the evening or during sickness or at time of blood-letting, or for warming the maids and weaned children, they used to have a fire.... in the upper storey of the house were garret rooms, in which on the one side the sons (when they wished it) on the other side the daughters (because they were obliged) of the lord of the house used to sleep. in this storey also the watchmen and the servants appointed to keep the house took their sleep at some time or other. high up on the east side of the house, in a convenient place, was the chapel, which was made like unto the tabernacle of solomon in its ceiling and painting. there were stairs and passages from storey to storey, from the house into the kitchen, from room to room, and again from the house into the _loggia_ (logium), where they used to sit in conversation for recreation, and again from the loggia into the oratory."[233] this description proves that these wooden castles were no mere rude sheds for temporary occupation, but that they were carefully built dwellings designed for permanent residence. the description is useful for the light it throws on the stone keeps whose ruins remain to us. they probably had very similar arrangements, and though only their outside walls are now existing, they must have been divided into different rooms by wooden partitions which have now perished.[234] in this account of lambert's it is further mentioned that the kitchen was joined to the house or keep, and was a building of two floors, the lower one being occupied by live stock, while the upper one was the actual kitchen. we must remember that this account was written at the end of the 12th century. in the earlier and simpler manners of the 11th century it is probable that the cooking was more generally carried on in the open air, as it was among the anglo-saxons.[235] the danger of fire would prevent the development of chimneys in wooden castles; we have seen that there was only one in this wonderful castle of ardres. but even after stone castles became common, we have evidence that the kitchen was often an isolated building in the courtyard. one such kitchen still exists in the monastic ruins of glastonbury. the word _mota_, which was used in the 12th century for the artificial hills on which the wooden keeps of these castles were placed, comes from an old french word _motte_, meaning a clod of earth, which is still used in france for a small earthen hillock.[236] the keep itself appears to have been called a _bretasche_, though this word seems to have meant a wooden tower of any kind, and was used both for mural towers and for the movable wooden towers employed for sieges.[237] at a much later period it was given to the wooden balconies by which walls were defended, but the writer has found no instance of this use of the word before the 14th century. on the contrary, these wooden galleries for the purpose of defending the foot of the walls by throwing missiles down are called _hurdicia_ or hourdes in the documents, a word of cognate origin to our word _hoarding_.[238] the word _bretasche_ is also of teutonic origin, akin to the german _brett_, a board. the court at the base of the hillock is always called the _ballium_, _bayle_, or _bailey_, a word for which skeat suggests the latin _baculus_, a stick, as a possible though very doubtful ancestor. the wooden wall which surrounded this court was the _palum_, _pelum_, or _palitium_ of the documents, a word which mr neilson has proved to be the origin of the _peels_ so common in lowland scotland, though it has been mistakenly applied to the towers enclosed by these peels.[239] the _palitium_ was the stockade on the inner bank of the ditch which enclosed the bailey; but the outer or counterscarp bank had also its special defence, called the _hericio_, from its bristling nature (french _hérisson_, a hedgehog). there can be little doubt that it was sometimes an actual hedge of brambles, at other times of stakes intertwined with osiers or thorns.[240] thus the words most commonly used in connection with these wooden castles are chiefly french in form, but a french that is tinctured with teutonic blood. this is just what we might expect, since the first castles of feudalism arose on gallic soil (france or flanders), but on soil which was ruled by men of teutonic descent. we may regard it as fairly certain that it was in the region anciently known as neustria that the motte-castle first appeared; and as we have previously shown, there is some reason to think that the centre of that region was the place where it originated. but this must for the present remain doubtful. what we regard as certain is that it was from france, and from normandy in particular, that it was introduced into the british isles; and to those islands we must now turn. chapter vii the castles of the normans in england in this chapter we propose to give a list, in alphabetical order for convenience of reference, of the castles which are known to have existed in england in the 11th century, because they are mentioned either in domesday book, or in charters of the period, or in some contemporary chronicle.[241] we do not for a moment suppose that this catalogue of eighty-four castles is a complete list of those which were built in england in the reigns of william i. and william ii. we have little doubt that all the castles in the county towns, such as leicester, northampton, and guildford, and those which we hear of first as the seats of important nobles in the reign of henry ii., such as marlborough, groby, bungay, ongar, were castles built shortly after the conquest, nearly all of them being places which have (or had) mottes. domesday book only mentions fifty castles in england and wales,[242] but it is well known that the survey is as capricious in its mention of castles as in its mention of churches. it is possible that further research in charters which the writer has been unable to examine may furnish additional castles, but the list now given may be regarded as complete as far as materials generally accessible will allow.[243] one of the castles mentioned (richard's castle) and probably two others (hereford and ewias) existed before the conquest; they were the work of those norman friends of edward the confessor whom he endowed with lands in england. out of this list of eighty-four castles we shall find that no less than seventy-one have or had mottes. the exceptions are the tower of london, colchester, pevensey, and chepstow, where a stone keep was part of the original design, and a motte was therefore unnecessary: bamborough, peak, and tynemouth, where the site was sufficiently defended by precipices: carlisle and richmond, whose original design is unknown to us: belvoir, dover, exeter, and monmouth, which might on many grounds be counted as motte-castles, but as the evidence is not conclusive, we do not mark them as such; but even if we leave them out, with the other exceptions, we shall find that nearly 86 per cent. of our list of castles of the 11th century are of the motte-and-bailey type. about forty-three of these castles are attached to towns. of these, less than a third are placed inside the roman walls or the saxon or danish earthworks of the towns, while at least two-thirds are wholly or partly outside these enclosures.[244] this circumstance is important, because the position outside the town indicates the mistrust of an invader, not the confidence of a native prince. in the only two cases where we know anything of the position of the residence of the saxon kings we find it in the middle of the city.[245] even when the castle is inside the town walls it is almost invariably close to the walls, so that an escape into the country might always be possible.[246] of the towns or manors in which these castles were situated, domesday book gives us the value in king edward's and king william's time in sixty-two instances. in forty-five cases the value has risen; in twelve it has fallen; in five it is stationary. evidently something has caused a great increase of prosperity in these cases, and it can hardly be anything else than the impetus given to trade through the security afforded by a norman castle. our list shows that mr clark's confident statement, that the moated mounds were the centres of large and important estates in saxon times, was a dream. out of forty-one mottes in country districts, thirty-six are found in places which were quite insignificant in king edward's day, and only five can be said to occupy the centres of important saxon manors.[247] in the table in the appendix, the area occupied by the original baileys of the castles in this list has been measured accurately by a planimeter, from the 25-in. ordnance maps, in all cases in which that was possible.[248] this table proves that the early norman castles were very small in area, suitable only for the personal defence of a chieftain who had only a small force at his disposal, and absolutely unsuited for a people in the tribal state of development, like the ancient britons, or for the scheme of national defence inaugurated by alfred and edward. we may remark here that in not a single case is any masonry which is certainly early norman to be found on one of these mottes; where the date can be ascertained, the stonework is invariably later than the 11th century. abergavenny (fig. 8).--this castle, being in monmouthshire, must be included in our list. the earliest notice of it is a document stating that hamelin de ballon gave the church and chapel of the castle of abergavenny, and the land for making a _bourg_, and an oven of their own, to the abbey of st vincent at le mans.[249] the castle occupies a pointed spur at the s. end of the town, whose walls converge so as to include the castle as part of the defence. the motte has been much altered during recent years, and is crowned by a modern building; but a plan in _coxe's tour in monmouthshire_, 1800, shows it in its original round form. the bailey is roughly of a pentagonal shape, covering 1 acre, and is defended by a curtain wall with mural towers and a gatehouse. the ditch on the w. and n. is much filled in and obscured by the encroachment of the town. on the e. the ground descends in a steep scarp, which merges into those of the headland on which the motte is placed.[250] [illustration: fig. 8. arundel, sussex. abergavenny, monmouth.] arundel (fig. 8).--"the castrum of arundel," says domesday book, "paid 40_s._ in king edward's time from a certain mill, and 20_s._ from three boardlands (or feorm-lands), and 2_s._ from one pasture. now, between the town feorm and the water-gate and the ships' dues, it pays 12_l._"[251] _castrum_ in domesday nearly always means a castle; yet the description here given is certainly that of a town and not of a castle. we must therefore regard it as an instance of the fluctuating meaning which both _castrum_ and _castellum_ had in the 11th century.[252] arundel is one of the towns mentioned in the "burghal hidage."[253] but even accepting that the description in domesday refers to the town, we can have very little doubt that the original earthen castle was reared by roger de montgomeri, to whom william i. gave the rapes of arundel and chichester, and whom he afterwards made earl of shrewsbury.[254] roger had contributed sixty ships to william's fleet, and both he and his sons were highly favoured and trusted by william, until the sons forfeited that confidence. we shall see afterwards that their names are connected with several important castles of the early norman settlement. we shall see also that the rapes into which sussex was divided--chichester, arundel, bramber, lewes, pevensey, and hastings--were all furnished with norman castles, each with the characteristic motte, except pevensey, which had a stone keep. each of these castles, at the time of the survey, defended a port by which direct access could be had to normandy. it was to protect his base that william fortified these important estuaries, and committed them to the keeping of some of the most prominent of the norman leaders. the castle stands on the end of a high and narrow ridge of the south downs, above the town of arundel. it consists of an oblong ward, covering 4-1/2 acres, in the middle of which, but on the line of the west wall, is a large motte, about 70 feet high, surrounded by its own ditch. the lower and perhaps original bailey is only 2 acres in extent. round the top of the motte is a slightly oval wall, of the kind called by mr clark a shell keep. we have elsewhere expressed our doubts of the correctness of this term.[255] in all the more important castles we find that the keep on top of the motte has a small ward attached to it, and arundel is no exception to this rule; it has the remains of a tower, as well as the wall round the motte. the tower is a small one, but it is large enough for the king's chamber in times which were not extravagant in domestic architecture. it is probable that this tower, and the stone wall round the motte are the work of henry ii., as he spent nearly 340_l._ on this castle between the years 1170 and 1187. his work consisted chiefly of a wall, a king's chamber, a chapel, and a tower.[256] the wall of the motte corresponds in style to the work of the middle of his reign; it is built of flints, but cased with caen stone brought from normandy, and has norman buttresses. the original norman doorway on the south side (now walled up) has the chevron moulding, which shows that it is not earlier than the 12th century. the tower, which we may assume to be the tower of henry ii.'s records, has a round arched entrance, and contains a chapel and a chamber (now ruined) besides a well chamber. there is earlier norman work still remaining in the bailey, namely, the fine gateway, which though of plain and severe norman, is larger and loftier than the early work of that style, and of superior masonry.[257] the one pipe roll of henry i. which we possess shows that he spent 78_l._ 6_s._ 2_d._ on the castle in 1130, and possibly this refers to this gatehouse.[258] we know that henry was a great builder, but so was the former owner of this castle, robert belesme, son of roger de montgomeri. the value of the town of arundel had greatly increased since the conquest, at the time of the domesday survey.[259] bamborough, northumberland.--we first hear of this castle in the reign of rufus, when it was defended against the king by robert mowbray, the rebel earl of northumberland; but there can be little doubt that the earliest castle on this natural bastion was built in the conqueror's reign. in the 13th century certain lands were held by the tenure of supplying wood to the castle of bamborough, and it was declared that this obligation had existed ever since the time of william i.[260] william certainly found no castle there, for bamborough had fallen into utter ruin and desolation by the middle of the 11th century.[261] william's hold on northumberland was too precarious to give opportunity for so long and costly a work as the building of a stone keep. it is more probable that a strong wooden castle was the fortress of the governors of northumberland under the first norman kings, and that the present stone keep was built in henry ii.'s reign.[262] there is no motte at bamborough, nor was one needed on a site which is itself a natural motte, more precipitous and defensible than any artificial hill.[263] as the domesday survey does not extend to northumberland, we have no statement of the value of bamborough. the area of the castle is 4-3/4 acres. barnstaple, devon (fig. 9).--this castle is not mentioned in domesday, but the town belonged to judhael, one of the followers of the conqueror, whose name suggests a breton origin. william gave him large estates in devon and cornwall. a charter of judhael's to the priory which he founded at barnstaple makes mention of the castle.[264] barnstaple, at the head of the estuary of the taw, was a borough at domesday, and the castle was placed inside the town walls.[265] the motte remains in good condition; the winding walks which now lead to the top are certainly no part of the original plan, but are generally found in cases where the motte has been incorporated in a garden. there was formerly a stone keep, of which no vestige remains.[266] the castle seems to have formed the apex of a town of roughly triangular shape. the bailey can just be traced, and must have covered 1-1/3 acres. the former value of barnstaple is not given in the survey, so we cannot tell whether it had risen or not. [illustration: fig. 9. barnstaple, devon. bishop's stortford, herts. berkhampstead, herts.] belvoir, leicester.--this castle was founded by the norman robert de todeni, who died in 1088.[267] it stands on a natural hill, so steep and isolated that it might be called a natural motte. the first castle was destroyed by king john, and the modernising of the site has entirely destroyed any earthworks which may have existed on the hill. there appears to have been a shell wall, from the descriptions given by nicholls and leland.[268] it was situated in the manor of bottesdene, a manor of no great importance, but which had risen in value at the date of the survey.[269] berkeley, or ness.--the identity of berkeley castle with the ness castle of domesday may be regarded as certain. all that the survey says about it is: "in ness there are five hides belonging to berkeley, which earl william put out to make a little castle."[270] earl william is william fitzosbern, the trusty friend and counsellor of the conqueror, who had made him earl of herefordshire. he had also authority over the north and west of england during william's first absence in normandy, and part of the commission he received from william was to build castles where they were needed.[271] berkeley was a royal manor with a large number of berewicks, and the probable meaning of the passage in domesday is that earl william removed the _geldability_ of the five hides occupying the peninsula or _ness_ which stretches from berkeley to the severn, bounded on the south by the little avon, and appropriated these lands to the upkeep of a small castle. this castle can hardly have been placed anywhere but at berkeley, for there is no trace of any other castle in the district.[272] earl godwin had sometimes resided at berkeley, but probably his residence there was the monastery which by evil means had come into his hands;[273] for we never hear of any castle in connection with godwin. but a norman motte exists at berkeley, though buried in the stone shell built by henry ii. mr clark remarks: "if the masonry of berkeley castle were removed, its remains would show a mound of earth, and attached to three sides of it a platform, the whole encircled with a ditch or scarp."[274] the motte raised by earl william has, in fact, been revetted with a stone shell of the 12th century, whose bold chevron ornament over the entrance gives evidence of its epoch. what is still more remarkable is that documentary evidence exists to fix the date of this transformation. a charter of henry ii. is preserved at berkeley castle, in which he grants the manor to robert fitzhardinge, pledging himself at the same time to fortify a castle there, according to robert's wish.[275] robert's wish probably was to possess a stone keep, like those which had been rising in so many places during the 12th century. but there had been a norman lord at berkeley before fitzhardinge, roger de berkeley, whose representatives only lost the manor through having taken sides with stephen in the civil war.[276] this roger no doubt occupied the wooden castle on the motte built by william fitzosbern. henry ii.'s shell was probably the first masonry connected with the castle. this remarkable keep is nearly circular, and has three round turrets and one oblong. as the latter, thorpe's tower, was rebuilt in edward iii.'s reign, it probably took the place of a round tower. the keep is built of rubble, and its norman buttresses (it has several later ones) project about a foot. the cross loopholes in the walls are undoubtedly insertions of the time of edward iii. the buildings in the bailey are chiefly of the time of edward iii., but the bailey walls have some norman buttresses, and are probably of the same date as the keep.[277] this bailey is nearly square, and the motte, which is in one corner, encroaches upon about a quarter of it. the small size of the area which it encloses, not much more than half an acre, corresponds to the statement of domesday book that it was "a little castle." there is no trace of the usual ditch surrounding the motte, and the smallness of the bailey makes it unlikely that there ever was one. a second bailey has been added to the first,[278] and the whole is surrounded on three sides by a moat, the fourth side having formerly had a steep descent into swamps, which formed sufficient protection.[279] there is no statement in the survey of the value of ness, but the whole manor of berkeley had risen since the conquest.[280] berkhampstead, herts (fig. 9).--mr d. h. montgomerie rightly calls this a magnificent example of an earthwork fortress.[281] it is first mentioned in a charter of richard i., which recapitulates the original charter of william, son of robert, count of mortain, in which he gives the chapel of this castle to the abbey of grestein in normandy.[282] we may, therefore, with all probability look upon this as one of the castles built by the conqueror's half-brother. and this will account for the exceptional strength of the work, which comprises a motte 40 feet high, ditched round (formerly), and a bailey of 2-2/3 acres, surrounded not only with the usual ditch and banks, but with a second ditch outside the counterscarp bank, which encircles both motte and bailey. at two important points in its line, this counterscarp bank is enlarged into mounds which have evidently once carried wooden towers;[283] if this arrangement belonged to the original plan, as it most probably did, it confirms a remark which we have made elsewhere as to the early use of wooden mural towers. works in masonry were added to the motte and the bailey banks in the 12th, 13th, and 14th centuries. there are traces of a semicircular earthwork outside the second ditch on the west, which appears to have formed a barbican. but the most exceptional thing about this castle is the series of earthen platforms on the north and east, connected by a bank, and closely investing the external ditch, which were formerly supposed to form part of the castle works. mr w. st john hope has suggested the far more plausible theory that they were the siege platforms erected by louis, the dauphin of france, in 1216. we are told that his engines kept up a most destructive fire of stones.[284] the value of the manor of berkhampstead had considerably decreased, even since the count of mortain received it.[285] bishop's stortford, herts (fig. 9).--waytemore castle is the name given to the large oval motte at this place, which is evidently the site of the castle of "estorteford," given by william the conqueror to maurice, bishop of london.[286] the manor of stortford had been bought from king william by maurice's predecessor, william, who had been one of the norman favourites of edward the confessor.[287] he may have built this castle, but he cannot have built it till after the conquest, as the land did not belong to his see till then. "the castle consists of a large oval motte, 250 × 200 feet at its base, rising 40 feet above the marshes of the river stort, and crowned by a keep with walls of flint rubble, 12 feet thick. on the s. of the motte there are traces of a pentagonal bailey, covering 2-1/2 acres. it is enclosed on four sides by the narrow streams which intersect the marshes. the dry ditch on the fifth side, facing the motte, is discernible. the castle abuts on the road called the causeway, which crosses the valley; it is in a good position to command both road and river."[288] the value of the manor had gone down at domesday.[289] bourn, lincolnshire (fig. 10).--the manor of bourn or brune appears to have been much split up amongst various owners at the time of domesday. a breton named oger held the demesne.[290] a charter of picot, the sheriff of cambridgeshire, a person often mentioned in domesday book, gives the church of brune and the chapel of the castle to the priory which he had founded near the castle of cambridge--afterwards removed to barnwell.[291] bourn was the centre of a large soke in anglo-saxon times. leland mentions the "grete diches, and the dungeon hill of the ancient castel,"[292] but very little of the remains is now visible, and the motte has been almost removed. "the castle lies in flat ground, well watered by springs and streams. the motte was placed at the southern apex of a roughly oval bailey, from which it was separated by its own wet ditch, access being obtained through a gatehouse which stood on the narrow neck by which this innermost enclosure, at its n.w. end, joined the principal bailey, which, in its turn, was embraced on all sides but the s. by a second and concentric bailey, also defended by a wet ditch, which broadens out at the s.w. corner into st peter's pool. there is another enclosure beyond this which may be of later date. the inner bailey covers 3 acres. very little is now left of the motte, but a plan made in 1861 showed it to be fairly perfect,[293] and some slight remains of the gatehouse were excavated in that year. the castle is on the line of the roman road from peterborough to sleaford, and close to the roman car-dyke."[294] the value of bourn had risen at domesday. [illustration: fig. 10. bourn, lincs. bramber, sussex.] bramber, sussex (fig. 10).--of the manor of washington, in which bramber is situated, the survey says that it formerly paid geld for fifty-nine hides; and in one of these hides sits the castle of bramber.[295] it must not be imagined that the castle _occupied_ a whole hide, which according to the latest computations would average about 120 acres. it is evident that there had been some special arrangement between the king and william de braose, the norman tenant-in-chief, by which the whole geld of the manor had been remitted. the domesday scribe waxes almost pathetic over the loss to the fisc of this valuable prey. "it used to be ad firmam for 100_l._," he says. the manor of washington belonged to gurth, the brother of harold, before the conquest, but it is clear that bramber was not the _caput_ of the manor in saxon times; nor was washington the centre of a large soke. bramber castle was constructed to defend the estuary of the river, now known as the adur, one of the waterways to normandy already alluded to. the castle occupies a natural hill which forms on the top a pear-shaped area of 3 acres. towards the middle rises an artificial motte about 30 feet high; there is no sign of a special ditch around it, except that the ground sinks slightly at its base. the bailey is surrounded by a very neatly built wall of pebbles and flints, laid herring-bone-wise in places, which does not stand on an earthen bank. the absence of this bank makes it likely, though of course not certain, that this wall was the original work of de braose; the stones of which it is composed would be almost as easily obtained as the earth for a bank. on the line of the wall, just east of the entrance, stands a tall fragment of an early norman tower. the workmanship of this tower, which is also of flints laid herring-bone-wise, with quoins of ashlar, so strongly resembles that of the neighbouring church that it seems obvious that both were built at about the same time.[296] the church is dedicated to st nicholas, who was worshipped in normandy as early as 1067;[297] it was probably the normans who introduced his worship into england. both church and tower are undoubtedly early norman. the motte shows no sign of masonry. the value of the manor of washington had slightly risen since the conquest. bristol.--robert, earl of gloucester, the empress matilda's half-brother and great champion, is always credited with the building of bristol castle; but this is one of the many instances in which the man who first rebuilds a castle in stone receives the credit of being the original founder.[298] for it is certain that there was a castle at bristol long before the days of earl robert, as the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ mentions it in 1088, when it was held by geoffrey, bishop of coutances, and robert curthose against william ii.; and symeon of durham, in the same year, speaks of it as a "castrum fortissimum." bishop geoffrey held bristol at the date of the domesday survey, and he probably built the castle by william's orders.[299] it was completely destroyed in 1655 (only a few 13th century arches in a private house now remain), and no trustworthy plan has been preserved, but there is clear evidence that it was a motte-and-bailey castle of the usual norman type.[300] in stephen's reign it was described as standing on a very great _agger_.[301] an _agger_ does not necessarily mean a motte, but it is often used for one, and there is other evidence which shows that this is its meaning here. a perambulation of the bounds of bristol in 1373 shows that the south-western part of the castle ditch, which enclosed the site of the keep, was called _le mot-dich_; which should certainly be translated the ditch of the motte, and not, as seyer translates it, the moat ditch.[302] finally, the description of the castle in 1642 by major wood, says: "the castle stood upon a lofty steep mount, that was not minable, as lieutenant clifton informed me, for he said the mount whereon the castle stood was of an earthy substance for a certain depth, but below that a firm strong rock, and that he had searched purposely with an auger and found it so in all parts."[303] he goes on to describe the wall of the bailey as resting on an earthen rampart, testifying to the wooden stockade of the first castle. the great tower of earl robert appears to have been placed on the motte, which must have been of considerable size, as it held not only the keep, but a courtyard, a chapel, and the constable's house, besides several towers on its walls. the whole area of the castle was very nearly 4 acres.[304] bristol castle was no doubt originally a royal castle, though earl robert of gloucester held it in right of his wife, who had inherited it from her father, robert fitz hamon; but the crown did not abdicate its claim upon it, and after the troubles of 1174, henry ii. caused the son of earl robert to surrender the keep into his hands.[305] seyer very pertinently remarks that bristol castle "was erected with a design hostile to the town; for it occupies the peninsula between two rivers, along which was the direct and original communication between the town and the main part of gloucestershire."[306] it was outside the city, and was not under its jurisdiction till james i. granted this authority by charter.[307] the value t. r. e. is not given in domesday book. buckingham.--the only mention of this castle as existing in the 11th century is in the _gesta herewardi_,[308] an undated work which is certainly in great part a romance, but as it is written by some one who evidently had local knowledge, we may probably trust him for the existence of buckingham castle at that date; especially as buckingham was a county town, and one of the boroughs of the burghal hidage, the very place which we should expect to find occupied by a norman castle. this writer speaks of the castle as belonging to ivo de taillebois; this is not inconsistent with the fact shown by domesday book, that the borough belonged to the king. that it was a motte-and-bailey castle is indicated by speed's map of buckingham in 1611; he speaks of the "high hill," though he only indicates it slightly in his plan, with a shield-shaped bailey. brayley states that the present church is "proudly exalted on the summit of an artificial mount, anciently occupied by a castle."[309] the castle hill occupies a strong position on the neck of land made by a bend of the river; it extends nearly half-way across it, and commands both town and river. the original earthworks of the castle were destroyed and levelled for the erection of a church in 1777, but the large oval hill remains, having a flat summit about 2 acres in extent, and about 30 feet above the town below. its sides descend in steep scarps behind the houses on all sides but the north-east. there can be no doubt that the motte has been lowered, and thus enlarged, in order to build the church. the foundations of a stone castle were found in digging a cellar on the slope of the motte.[310] the value of buckingham had considerably risen at the date of domesday.[311] caerleon, monmouthshire (fig. 11).--domesday book speaks of the _castellaria_ of caerleon.[312] a _castellaria_ appears to have meant a district in which the land was held by the service of castle-guard in a neighbouring castle. the survey goes on to say that this land was waste in the time of king edward, and when william de scohies, the domesday tenant, received it; _now_ it is worth 40s. _wasta_, mr round has remarked, is one of the pitfalls of the survey. perhaps we shall not be far wrong if we say that in a general way it means that there was nobody there to pay geld. when this occurs in a town it may point to the devastations committed at the conquest; but when it occurs in the country, and when it is accompanied by so clear a statement that the land which was _wasta_ in king edward's time and at the conquest is now producing revenue, the inference would seem to be clear that the castle of caerleon was built on uninhabited land. caerleon, however, had been a great city in roman times, and had kept up its importance at least till the days of edgar, when it is twice mentioned in welsh history.[313] it must therefore have gone downhill very rapidly. giraldus mentions among the ruins of roman greatness which were to be seen in his day, a gigantic tower, and this is commonly supposed to have belonged to the castle.[314] it certainly did not, for giraldus is clearly speaking of a roman tower, and the motte of the norman castle not only has no signs of masonry, but has been thrown up over the ruins of a roman villa which had been burnt.[315] the motte and other remains of the castle are outside the roman _castrum_, between it and the river. the bailey is roughly pentagonal, and covers 4-3/4 acres. the manor of caerleon was waste t. r. e. and had risen to 40s. t. r. w.[316] [illustration: fig. 11. caerleon, monmouth. carisbrooke.] cambridge.--ordericus tells us that william built this castle on his return from his first visit to yorkshire in 1068,[317] and domesday book states that twenty-seven houses were destroyed to make room for the castle.[318] there can hardly be a clearer statement that the castle was entirely new. we have already seen that there is some probability that cambridge was first fortified by the danes; for though it has been assumed to be a roman castrum, no roman remains have ever been found there, and the names which suggest roman occupation, chesterton and grantchester, are at some distance from cambridge. the castle, according to mr st john hope's plan,[319] was placed inside this enclosure, and the destruction of the houses to make room for it is thus explained. the motte and a portion of the bank of the bailey are all that now remain of the castle, but the valuable ancient maps republished by mr hope show that the motte had its own ditch, and that the bailey was rectangular. there was formerly a round tower on the motte, which, if it had the cross-loop-holes and machicolations represented in the print published in 1575, was certainly not of norman date. the area of the bailey was 4-1/4 acres.[320] the castle was a royal one, and like many royal castles, went early to ruin. henry iv. gave the materials of the hall to the master and wardens of king's hall for building their chapel. the value of cambridge t. r. w. is not given in domesday book. canterbury.--domesday book only mentions this castle incidentally in connection with an exchange of land: "the archbishop has seven houses and the abbot of st augustine fourteen for the exchange of the castle."[321] it has been too hastily assumed that it was a pre-conquest castle which was thus exchanged for twenty-one houses; but anyone who knows the kind of relations which existed chronically between the archbishop of canterbury and the abbot of st augustine's will perceive that it was an impossibility that these two potentates should have held a castle in common. it was the land for the castle, not the castle itself, which the king got from these ecclesiastics. this is rendered clear by a passage in the chartulary of st augustine's, which tells us that the king, who was mesne lord of the city of canterbury, had lost the rent of thirty-two houses through the exchange of the castle: seven having gone to the archbishop, fourteen to the abbot, and eleven having been destroyed in making the ditch of the castle.[322] there can scarcely be any doubt that the hillock now known by the ridiculous name of dane john is the motte of this original castle of the conqueror. its proper name, the dungeon hill, which it bore till the 16th and even the 18th century,[323] shows what its origin was; it was the hill on which stood the dungeon or donjon of a norman castle.[324] the name dane john is not so much a corruption as a deliberate perversion introduced by the antiquary somner about 1640, under the idea that the danes threw up the hill--an idea for which there is not the slightest historical evidence.[325] we have seen that there is no reason to think that the danes ever constructed fortifications of this kind, and their connection with this earthwork is due to one of those guesses, too common in english archæology, which have no scientific basis whatever. somner makes the important statement that this earthwork was originally outside the city walls. his words are:- "i am persuaded (and so may easily, i think, anyone be that well observes the place) that the works both within and without the present wall of the city were not counterworks one against the other, as the vulgar opinion goes, but were sometimes all one entire plot containing about 3 acres of ground, of a triangular form (the outwork) with a mount or hill entrenched round within it; and that when first made or cast up it lay wholly without the city wall; and hath been (the hill or mount, and most part also of the outwork), for the city's more security, taken in and walled since; that side of the trench encompassing the mound now lying without and under the wall fitly meeting with the rest of the city ditch, after either side of the earthwork was cut through to make way for it, at the time of the city's inditching."[326] it is not often we are so fortunate as to have so clear a description of an earthwork which has almost entirely disappeared; but the description is confirmed by stukeley and hasted, and down to the making of the chatham and dover railway in 1860 the earthworks of the part of the bailey which was left outside the city wall were still to be seen, and were noticed by mr g. t. clark.[327] it is clear that somner's description corresponds exactly, even in the detail of size, to the type of a motte-and-bailey castle. there are certain facts, which have not been put together before, which enable us to make a very probable guess as to the date at which this ancient castle was cut through by the newer city bank. the walls of canterbury have never yet received so careful an examination as those of rochester have had from the rev. greville livett;[328] but the researches of mr pilbrow about thirty years ago showed that the original roman walls included a very small area, which would leave both the motte and the plantagenet castle outside.[329] certain entries in the _close rolls_ show that the fortification of the town of canterbury was going on in the years 1215-1225.[330] but it is too often forgotten that where a wall stands on an earthen bank it is a clear proof that before the wall was built there was a wooden stockade in its place. now the portion of the city wall which encloses the dane john stands on an earthen bank; so, indeed, does the whole wall from the northgate to the castle. it is clear that this piece of bank cannot have been made till the first norman castle, represented by the earthwork, was abandoned; and fortunately we have some evidence which suggests a date for the change. in the _pipe rolls_ of henry ii.'s reign there are yearly entries, beginning in 1168, of 5s. paid to adeliza fitzsimon "for the exchange of her land which is in the castle of canterbury." there can be little doubt that this land was purchased to build the great plantagenet castle whose splendid keep was once one of the finest in england.[331] the portion of the castle wall which can still be seen does not stand on an earthen bank, an indication (though not a proof) that the castle was on a new site. henry ii. was a great builder of stone keeps, but he seldom placed them on artificial mottes. it is no uncommon thing to find an old motte-and-bailey castle abandoned for a better or larger site close at hand.[332] the bailey of the second castle, according to hasted, extended almost to the dane john, which is about 800 feet from the present keep. the part of the older castle which lay outside the new city bank was possessed by a family of the name of chiche from the time of henry ii. to that of edward iv., while the dungeon hill itself remained royal property.[333] that the new bank was henry ii.'s work we may conjecture from the passages in the _pipe rolls_, which show that between the years 1166 and 1173 he spent about £30 in enclosing the city of canterbury and making a gate. we are therefore not without grounds for concluding that henry ii. was the first to enlarge the city by taking in the dane john, cutting through the ancient bailey, and at the same time enclosing a piece of land for a new stone castle.[334] the very small sum paid for the city gate (11s., equal to about £11 of our money) suggests that the gate put up by henry ii. was a wooden gateway in the new stockaded bank. the stone walls and towers which were afterwards placed on the bank are of much later date than his reign.[335] the dungeon hill appears to have been used for the last time as a fortification in 1643, when ordnance was placed upon it, and it was ordered to be guarded by the householders.[336] in 1790 it was converted into a pleasure-ground for the city; the wide and deep ditch which had surrounded it was filled up, and serpentine walks cut to lead up to the summit. brayley says that "the ancient and venerable character of this eminence was wholly destroyed by incongruous additions." still, enough remains to show that it was once a very fine motte, such as we might expect the conqueror to raise to hold in check one of the most important cities of his new realm. the value of canterbury had increased from 51_l._ to 54_l._ since the days of king edward.[337] carisbrooke, isle of wight (fig. 11).--there can be no doubt that this is the castle spoken of in domesday book under the manor of alwinestone. carisbrooke is in the immediate neighbourhood of alvington. the language in which the survey speaks of this manor is worthy of note. "the king holds alwinestone: donnus held it. it then paid geld as two and a half hides: now as two hides, because the castle sits in one virgate."[338] certain entries similar to this in other places seem to indicate that there was some remission of geld granted on the building of a castle;[339] but as here the king was himself the owner, the remission must have been granted to his tenants. the original castle of carisbrooke consists of a high motte, ditched round, placed at the corner of a parallelogram with rounded corners. this bailey, covering 2-3/4 acres, is surrounded by high banks, which testify to the former presence of a wooden stockade. there is another bailey on the eastern side, called the tilt-yard. the excellent little local guide-book compiled by mr stone calls this a british camp, but there is no reason to believe that it was anything else than what it appears to be--a second bailey added as the castle grew in importance. on the motte is a shell of polygonal form, of rubble masonry, but having quoins of well-dressed ashlar. it is believed to be of the time of henry i., since the author of the _gesta stephani_ states that baldwin de redvers, son of richard de redvers, to whom henry granted the lordship of the isle of wight, had a castle there splendidly built of stone, defended by a strong fortification.[340] this would indicate that, besides the stone keep, stone walls were added to the earthworks of the domesday castle. the keep is of peculiar interest, as it still retains the remains of the old arrangements in keeps of this style, though of much later date. the motte was opened in 1893, and was found to be composed of alternate layers of large and small chalk rubble.[341] little attention has hitherto been paid to the construction of these norman mottes, but other instances have been noted which show that they were often built with great care. the whole castle, including the tilt-yard, was surrounded with an elaborate polygonal fortification in elizabeth's reign, when the spanish invasion was expected. the value of the manor of alvington had increased at the time of the survey, though the number of ploughs employed had actually decreased. this increase must have been owing to the erection of the castle, which provided security for trade and agriculture. alvington was not the centre of a large soke in the confessor's time, so it is unlikely that there was any fortification there in saxon days.[342] carlisle, cumberland (fig. 12).--this castle was built by william rufus in 1092, when for the first time cumberland was brought under norman sway. the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ says, "he repaired the _burh_, and reared the castle," a passage which is sufficient of itself to show that _burh_ and castle were two quite different things. carlisle of course was a roman fortress, and needed only the repairing of its walls. the castle was a new thing, and was placed outside the city. its plan, which is roughly a triangle, with the apex formed into a small court by a ditch which (formerly) separated it from the bailey, looks very suggestive of a previous motte and bailey, such as we might expect the norman king to have thrown up. the keep is known to have been built by david, king of scotland, in stephen's reign,[343] and it is possible that he may have removed the motte. the castle appears to have had a wooden _pelum_ or _palicium_ on its outer banks as late as 1319.[344] the whole area covers 4 acres. castle acre, norfolk (fig. 12).--there can be no doubt that this castle existed in the 11th century, as william de warenne mentions it in the charter of foundation of lewes priory, one of the most interesting and human of monastic charters.[345] the earthworks still remaining of this castle are perhaps the finest castle earthworks in england; the banks enclosing the bailey are vast. the large and high motte carries a wall of flint rubble, built outside and thus revetting the earthen bank which formed its first defence. in the small court thus enclosed (about 100 feet in diameter) the foundations of an oblong keep can be discerned. a very wide ditch surrounds the motte, and below it is a horse-shoe bailey, about 2 acres in extent, stretching down to the former swamps of the river nar. on the east side of the motte is a small half-moon annexe, with its own ditch; this curious addition is to be found in several other motte castles,[346] and is believed to have been a work intended to defend the approach, of the nature of a barbican. on the west side of the motte is the village of castle acre, enclosed in an oblong earthwork with an area of 10 acres. this work now goes by the name of the barbican, but probably this name has been extended to it from a barbican covering the castle entrance (of which entrance the ruins still remain). it is most likely that this enclosure was a _burgus_ attached to the castle. mr harrod, who excavated the banks, found quantities of roman pottery, which led him to think that the work was roman; but as the pottery was all broken, it is more likely that the banks were thrown up on the site of some roman villa.[347] this earthwork has a northern entrance in masonry, evidently of 13th century date; and as the scanty masonry remaining of the castle is similar in character, it is probably all of the same date. the area covered by the motte and the two original baileys is 3-1/2 acres; that of the whole series of earthworks, 15 acres. acre was only a small manor in saxon times; its value at the time of the survey had risen from 5_l._ to 9_l._[348] [illustration: fig. 12. carlisle. castle acre, norfolk.] chepstow (estrighoel or strigul), monmouthshire.--notwithstanding the fact that there is another castle of the name of strigul about 9 miles from chepstow (known also as troggy castle), it is clear that chepstow is the castle meant by domesday, as the entry speaks of ships going up the river, a thing impossible at strigul.[349] the castle occupies a narrow ridge, well defended by the river on one side, and on the other by a valley which separates it from the town. there are four wards, and the last and smallest of all seemed to the writer, when visiting the castle, to mark the site of a lowered motte. this opinion, however, is not shared by two competent observers, mr harold sands and mr duncan montgomerie, who had much ampler opportunities for studying the remains. this ward is now a barbican, and the masonry upon it belongs clearly to the 13th century; it occupies the highest ground in the castle, and is separated from the other wards, and from the ridge beyond it, by two ditches cut across the headland. the adjoining court must have belonged to the earliest part of the castle, as it contains a very remarkable early norman building (splendidly restored in the 13th century) which is regarded by most authorities as the original hall of william fitzosbern. it must, however, have combined both hall and keep, otherwise the castle was not provided with any citadel, if there was no motte.[350] what is now the second ward has a norman postern in the south wall, and may have been the bailey to the keep. all the other masonry is of the late early english or the perpendicular period, and the entrance ward is probably an addition of the 13th century. the shape of all the baileys is roughly quadrangular, except that of the fourth, which would be semicircular but for the towers which make corners to it. the whole area of the castle is 1-2/3 acres. we are not told what the value of the manor was before william fitzosbern built his castle there, but from the absence of this mention we may infer that the site was waste. it paid 40_s._ in his time from ships' dues, 16_l._ in his son earl roger's time, and at the date of the survey it paid the king 12_l._[351] chepstow was not the centre of a large soke, and it appears to have owed all its importance to the creation of william fitzosbern's castle. chester.--the statement of ordericus, that william i. founded this castle on his return from his third visit to york, is sufficiently clear.[352] the very valuable paper of mr e. w. cox on chester castle[353] answers most of the questions which pertain to our present inquiry. the original castle of chester consisted of the motte, which still remains, though much built over, and the small ward on the edge of which it stands, a polygonal enclosure scarcely an acre in extent. on the motte the vaulted basement of a tower still remains, but the style is so obscured by whitewash and modern accretions that it is impossible to say whether the vaulting is not modern. the first buildings were certainly of wood, but mr cox regarded some of the existing masonry on the motte as belonging to the 12th century; and this would correspond with the entry in the _pipe rolls_ of 102_l._ 7_s._ 0_d._ spent on the castle by henry ii. in 1159.[354] the tower, nicknamed cæsar's tower, and frequently mistaken for the keep, is shown in mr cox's paper to be only a mural tower of the 13th century, probably built when the first ward was surrounded with walls and towers in masonry.[355] the large outer bailey was first added in the reign of henry iii.[356] it is further proved by mr cox that chester castle stood outside the walls of the roman city. the manor of gloverstone lay between it and the city, and was not under the jurisdiction of the city until quite recent times.[357] this disposes of the ball set rolling by brompton at the end of the 13th century, and sent on by most chester topographers ever since, that ethelfleda, when she restored the roman walls of chester, enlarged their circuit so as to take in the castle. we have already referred to this in chapter iii. chester, as we have seen, was originally a royal castle. and though it was naturally committed to the keeping of the norman earls of chester, and under weak kings may have been regarded by the earls as their own property, no such claim was allowed under a strong ruler. after the insurrection of the younger henry, hugh, earl of chester, forfeited his lands; henry ii. restored them to him in 1177, but was careful to keep the castle in his own hands.[358] the city of chester, domesday book tells us, had greatly gone down in value when the earl received it, probably in 1070; twenty-five houses had been destroyed. but it had already recovered its prosperity at the date of the survey; there were as many houses as before, and the ferm of the city was now let by the earl at a sum greatly exceeding the ferm paid in king edward's time.[359] this prosperity must have been due to the security provided for the trade of chester by the norman castle and norman rule. [illustration: fig. 13. clifford, hereford. clitheroe, lancs. corfe, dorset.] clifford, herefordshire (fig. 13).--it is clearly stated by domesday book that william fitzosbern built this castle on waste land.[360] at the date of the survey it was held by ralph de todeni, who had sub-let it to the sheriff. in the many castles attributed to william fitzosbern, who built them as the king's vicegerent, we may see an indication that the building of castles, even on the marches of wales, was not undertaken without royal license. in the reign of henry i. clifford castle had already passed into the hands of richard fitz pons, the ancestor of the celebrated house of clifford, and one of the _barons_ of bernard de neufmarché, the norman conqueror of brecon.[361] the castle has a large motte, roughly square in shape, which must be in part artificial.[362] attached to it on the south-west is a curious triangular ward, included in the ditch which surrounds the motte. the masonry on the motte is entirely of the "edwardian" style, when keepless castles were built; it consists of the remains of a hall, and a mural tower which is too small to be called a keep. there is also a small court, with a wall which stands on a low bank. below the motte is an irregular bailey of about 2-1/3 acres, with earthen banks which do not appear to have ever carried any masonry, though in the middle of the court there is a small mound which evidently covers the remains of buildings. the whole area of the castle, including the motte and the two baileys, is about 3-1/2 acres. the value of the manor had apparently risen from nothing to 8_l._ 5_s._ clifford was not the centre of a large soke. clitheroe, lancashire (fig. 13).--there is no express mention of this castle in domesday book, but of two places in yorkshire, barnoldswick and calton, it is said that they are in the _castellate_ of roger the poitevin.[363] a castellate implies a castle, and as there is no other castle in the craven district (to which the words of the survey relate) except skipton, which did not form part of roger's property, there is no reason to doubt that this castle was clitheroe, which for centuries was the centre of the honour of that name. the whole land between the ribble and the mersey had been given by william i. to this roger, the third son of his trusted supporter, earl roger of shrewsbury. one can understand why william gave important frontier posts to the energetic and unscrupulous young men of the house of montgomeri, one of whom was the adviser and architect of william rufus, another a notable warrior in north wales, another the conqueror of pembrokeshire. as it appears from the survey that roger's possessions stretched far beyond the ribble into yorkshire and cumberland, it seems quite possible--though here we are in the region of conjecture--that just as his father and brothers had a free hand to conquer as they listed from the north and south welsh, so roger had a similar commission for the hilly districts still unconquered in the north-west of england. but fortune did not favour the montgomeri family for long. they were exiled from england in 1102 for siding with robert curthose, and in the same year we find the castle of clitheroe in the hands of robert de lacy, lord of the great yorkshire fief of pontefract.[364] the castle of clitheroe stands on a lofty motte of natural rock.[365] there are no earthworks on the summit, but a stout wall of limestone rubble without buttresses encloses a small court, on whose south-west side stands the keep. it is just possible that the outer wall may be the original work of roger, as limestone rubble would be easier to get than earth on this rocky hill. the keep is small, rudely built of rubble, and has neither fireplace nor garde-robe, nor the slightest ornamental detail--not even a string course. but in spite of the entire absence of ornament, a decorative effect has been sought and obtained by making the quoins, voussoirs, and lintels of a dressed yellow sandstone. the care with which this has been done is inconsistent with the haste with which roger must inevitably have constructed his first fortification, if we suppose, as is probable, that he received the first grant of his northern lands on william's return in 1070 from his third visit to the north, when he made that remarkable march through lancashire to chester which is described by ordericus. it seems more likely that even if the outer wall or shell were the work of roger, he had only wooden buildings inside its circuit. dugdale attributes the building of the keep to the second robert de lacy, between 1187 and 1194, and it is probable that this date is correct.[366] the bailey of clitheroe lay considerably below the keep, and is now overbuilt with a modern house, offices, and garden. it covers one acre. a roman road up the valley of the ribble passes near the foot of the rock.[367] as the very name of clitheroe is not mentioned in domesday book, it clearly was not an important centre in saxon times. the value of blackburn hundred, in which clitheroe is situated, had fallen between the confessor's time and the time when roger received it. it is quite possible that he never lived at clitheroe, as he sub-infeoffed the manor and hundred of blackburn to roger de busli and albert greslet before 1086.[368] colchester, essex.--the remarkable keep of this castle has been the subject of antiquarian legend for many centuries, and mr clark has the merit of having proved its early norman origin, by its plan and architecture. a charter of henry i. is preserved in the cartulary of st john's abbey at colchester, which grants to eudes the dapifer "the city of colchester, and the tower and the castle, and all the fortifications of the castle, just as my father had them and my brother and myself."[369] this proves that the keep and castle were in existence in the conqueror's time; the norman character of the architecture proves that the keep was not in existence earlier. we see, then, that the reason there is no motte at colchester is that there was a stone keep built when first the castle was founded. as far as we are aware, colchester, the tower of london, and the recently discovered keep of pevensey are the only certain instances of stone keeps of the 11th century in england. that one of the most important of the conqueror's castles, second only to the tower of london, and actually exceeding it in the area it covers, should be found in colchester, is not surprising, because the eastern counties at the time of the conquest were not only the wealthiest part of the kingdom (as domesday book clearly shows[370]), but they also needed special protection from the attacks of scandinavian enemies. mr round has conjectured that the castle was built at the time of the invasion of st cnut, between 1080 and 1085.[371] the castle is built of roman stones used over again, with rows of tiles introduced between the courses with much decorative effect.[372] the original doorway was on the first floor, as in most norman keeps; but at some after time, probably in the reign of henry i.,[373] the present doorway was inserted; and most likely the handsome stairway which now leads up from this basement entrance was added, as it shows clear marks of insertion. henry ii. was working on the walls of the castle in 1182, and it may be strongly suspected that the repairs in ashlar, and the casing of the buttresses with ashlar, were his work.[374] one item in the accounts of henry ii. is £50 "for making the bailey round the castle."[375] there were two baileys to the castle of colchester--the inner one, which scarcely covered 2 acres, and the outer one, which contained about 11. the inner bailey was enclosed at first with an earthwork and stockade, the earthwork being thrown up over the remains of some roman walls, whose line it does not follow. afterwards a stone wall was built on the earthwork, the foundations of which can still be traced in the west rampart.[376] the outer bailey, which lay to the north, extended on two sides to the roman walls of the town; on the west side it had a rampart and stockade. if the £50 spent by henry ii. represents the cost of a stone wall round the inner bailey, then the _palicium_ blown down by the wind in 1219 must have been the wooden stockade on the west side of the outer bailey.[377] the question is difficult to decide, but at any rate the entry proves that as late as henry iii.'s reign, some part of the outer defences of colchester castle was still of timber. the position of colchester castle is exceptional in one respect, that the castle is almost in the middle of the town. but this very unusual position is explained by mr round's statement that the land forming the castle baileys, as well as that afterwards given to the grey friars on the east, was crown demesne before the conquest, and consequently had been cultivated land, so that we do not hear of any houses in colchester being destroyed for the site of the castle.[378] but by keeping this land as the inalienable appendage of the royal castle william secured that communication between the castle and the outside country which was so essential to the invaders. the value of the city of colchester had risen enormously at the date of the survey.[379] corfe, dorset (fig. 13).--mr eyton has shown that for the _castellum warham_ of domesday book we ought to read _corfe_, because the castle was built in the manor of kingston, four miles from wareham.[380] and this is made clear by the _testa de nevill_, which says that the church of gillingham was given to the nunnery of shaftesbury in exchange for the land on which the castle of corfe is placed.[381] because king edward the martyr was murdered at corfe, at some place where his stepmother elfrida was residing, it has been inferred that there was a saxon castle at corfe; and because there is a building with some herring-bone work among the present ruins, it has been assumed that this building is the remains of that castle or palace. but the _anglo-saxon chronicle_, the only contemporary authority for the event, says nothing of any castle at corfe, but simply tells us that edward was slain at corfe geat, a name which evidently alludes to a gap or passage through the chalk hills, such as there is at corfe.[382] nor is there any mention of corfe as a fortress in anglo-saxon times; it is not named in the _burghal hidage_, and we do not hear of any sieges of it by the danes. nor is it likely that the saxons would have had a fortress at corfe, when they had a fortified town so near as wareham.[383] kingston, the manor in which corfe is situated, was not an important place, as it had no dependent soke. the language of domesday absolutely upsets the idea of any saxon castle or palace at corfe, as it tells us that william obtained the land for his castle from the nuns of shaftesbury, and we may be quite sure they had no castle there.[384] corfe castle stands on a natural hill, which has been so scarped artificially that the highest part now forms a large motte. three wards exist--the eastern or motte ward, the western, and the southern. the two former probably formed the original castle. on the motte (which possibly is not artificial, but formed by scarping) stands the lofty keep, of splendid workmanship, probably of the time of henry i. in the ward pertaining to it are buildings of the time of john and henry iii.[385] the western ward has towers of the 13th century, but it also contains the interesting remains of an early norman building, probably a hall or chapel, built largely of herring-bone work; this is the building which has been so positively asserted to be a saxon palace. but herring-bone masonry, which used to be thought an infallible sign of saxon work, is now found to be more often norman.[386] the building is certainly an ancient one, and may possibly have been contemporary with the first norman castle; its details are unmistakably norman. but very likely it was the only norman masonry of the 11th century at corfe castle.[387] it is clear that the stone wall which at present surrounds the western bailey did not exist when the hall (or chapel) was built, as it blocks up its southern windows. probably there was a palisade at first on the edge of the scarp. palisades still formed part of the defences of the castle in the time of henry iii., when 62_l._ was paid "for making two good walls in place of the palisades at corfe between the old bailey of the said castle and the middle bailey towards the west, and between the keep of the said castle and the outer bailey towards the south."[388] this shows that the present wing-walls down from the motte were previously represented by stockades. the ditch between the keep and the southern bailey has been attributed to king john, on the strength of an entry in the _close rolls_ which orders fifteen miners and stone-masons to work on the banks of the ditch in 1214.[389] but we may be quite certain that this ditch below the motte belonged to the original plan of the castle; john's work would be either to line it with masonry, or to enlarge it. it is not without significance for the early history of the castle that durandus the _carpenter_ held the manor of mouldham near corfe, by the service of finding a carpenter to work at the keep whenever required.[390] the area of corfe castle, if we include the large southern bailey, is 3-3/4 acres; without it, 1-1/2 acres. this bailey was certainly in existence in the reign of henry iii. (as the extract from the _close rolls_ proves) before the towers of superb masonry were added to it by edward i. the value of kingston manor had considerably increased at the date of the survey. after the count of mortain forfeited his lands (in 1105), the castle of corfe was kept in the hands of the crown, and this increases the probability that the keep was built by henry i. about 400 yards s.w. of corfe castle is an earthwork which might be called a "ring and bailey." instead of the usual motte there is a circular enclosure, defended by a bank and ditch of about the same height as those of its bailey, but having in addition an interior platform or berm. this work is probably the remains of a camp thrown up by stephen during his unsuccessful siege of corfe castle in 1139. [illustration: fig. 14. dover. (from a plan in the british museum, 1756.)] dover, kent (fig. 14).--the norman historian, william of poitiers, tells us that the castrum of dover was built by harold at his own expense.[391] this comes from the celebrated story of the oath of harold to william, a story of which mr freeman says that there is no portion of our history more entangled in the mazes of contradictory and often impossible statements.[392] but let us assume the statement about the _castrum_ to be true; the question then to be answered is this: of what nature was that castrum? we never are told by english chroniclers that harold built any castles, though we do hear of his fortifying towns. the present writer would answer this question, tentatively indeed, and under correction, by the theory that the castrum constructed or repaired by harold was the present outer rampart of dover castle, which encloses an area of about 34 acres, and may have enclosed more, if it was formerly complete on the side towards the sea.[393] the evidence in support of this theory is as follows:-1. there certainly was a _burh_ on the top of the cliff at dover in saxon times, as the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ tells us that in 1048 eustace of boulogne, after coming to dover, and slaying householders there, went _up to the burh_, and slew people both within and without, but was repulsed by the burh-men.[394] there was then a burh, and valiant burh-men on the cliff at dover in edward the confessor's reign. but the whole analogy of the word burh makes it certain that by the time of edward it meant a fortified town.[395] 2. that the burh at dover was of the nature of a town, with houses in it, is confirmed by the poem of guy of amiens, who says that when king william entered the _castrum_, he ordered the english to evacuate their houses.[396] william of poitiers also states that there was an innumerable multitude of people in the castle,[397] though he may refer to a multitude gathered there for safety. 3. though the whole of the outer enceinte is generally credited to hubert de burgh in henry iii.'s reign, the truth probably is that he built the first stone walls and towers on the outer rampart; but the existence of this earthen rampart shows that there was a wooden wall upon it previously. it is not improbable that it was for the repair of this wooden wall that so much timber was sent to dover in the reigns of richard i. and john.[398] dering, who was lieutenant of the castle in 1629, records the tradition that the tower in the outer enceinte, called canons' gate, dates from saxon times (of course this could only be true of a wooden predecessor of the stone tower), and that godwin's tower, on the east side of the outer vallum, existed as a postern before the conquest.[399] nearly all the towers on this wall were supported by certain manors held on the tenure of castle-guard, and eight of them still retain the names of eight knights to whom william is said to have given lands on this tenure. mr round has shown that the _warda constabularii_ of dover castle can be traced back to the conquest, and that it is a mere legend that it was given as a fief to a fienes. he remarks that the nine wards of the castle named in the red book of the exchequer are all reproduced in the names still attached to the towers. "this coincidence of testimony leads us to believe that the names must have been attached at a very early period; and looking at the history of the families named, it cannot have been later than that of henry ii."[400] may it not have been even earlier? eight of these names are attached to towers on the outer circuit,[401] and five of them are found as landholders in kent in domesday book. 4. william of poitiers further tells us that when the duke had taken the castle, he remained there eight days, _to add the fortifications which were wanting_.[402] what was wanting to a norman eye in anglo-saxon fortifications, as far as we know them, was a citadel; and without laying too much stress on the chronicler's eight days, we may assume that the short time spent by william at dover was just enough for the construction of a motte and bailey, inside the _castrum_ of harold, but crowned by wooden buildings only. taking these things together, we venture to assume that the inner court in which the keep of dover stands, represents an original motte, or at any rate an original citadel, added to the castle by william i. whether what now remains of this motte is in part artificial, we do not pretend to say; it may be that it was formed simply by digging a deep ditch round the highest knoll of ground within the ancient ramparts.[403] anyhow, it is still in effect a motte, and a large one, containing not only the magnificent keep, but a small ward as well. that this keep was the work of henry ii. there can be no manner of doubt; the _pipe rolls_ show that he spent more than £2000 on the _turris_ or keep of dover castle between the years 1181 and 1187, and benedict of peterborough mentions the building of the keep at this date.[404] the curtain around the motte may also be reckoned to be his work originally, as the _cingulum_ is spoken of along with the _turris_ in the accounts. modern alterations have left little of norman character in this curtain which shows at a glance, and the gateways (one of which remains) belong to a later period. attached to this keep ward is another ward, whose rampart is generally attributed to saxon times. we are not in a position positively to deny that the saxons had an inner earthwork on the highest part of the ground within their _burh_. but considering that small citadels are unusual in saxon earthworks: considering also that this bailey is attached to the motte in the usual manner of a norman bailey, and that its size corresponds to the usual size of an original norman bailey in an important place, it does not seem unreasonable to suppose that this was the original bailey attached to the conqueror's motte. its shape is singular, part of it being nearly square, while at the s.e. corner a large oval loop is thrown out, so as to enclose the roman pharos and the saxon church. the outline of the bailey certainly suggests that it was built after the pharos and the church, and was built with reference primarily to the keep or motte ward. the nature of the ground, and the necessity of enclosing the church and the roman tower within the immediate bailey of the castle, which would otherwise have been commanded by them, were the other factors which decided the unusual shape of the bailey. on this earthwork the foundations of a rubble wall were formerly to be traced,[405] probably built by henry ii., as considerable sums for "the wall of the castle" are mentioned in his accounts.[406] whether there are still any remains of this curtain we are unable to say, but so many of the features of the middle ward have been swept away by modern alterations, and the difficulty of examining what remains, owing to military restrictions, is so great, that little can be said about it, and we find that most authorities observe a judicious silence on the subject. but as the carriage of stone is expressly mentioned in henry ii.'s accounts, we may with great probability assign to him the transformation of the original wooden castle of william into a castle of stone; while the transformation of the anglo-saxon borough into a stone enceinte was the work of henry iii.'s reign. we think the evidence suggests that this _burh_ or outer rampart was in existence when the conqueror came to dover, crowned in all probability with a stockade and towers of wood. it may possibly have been a british or even a roman earthwork originally (though its outline does not suggest roman work); or it may have been built by harold as a city of refuge for the inhabitants of the port.[407] the saxon church which it encloses, and which has long been attributed to the earliest days of saxon christianity, is now pronounced by the best authorities to be comparatively late in the style.[408] the size of the inner castle of dover appears to be about 6 acres, reckoning the keep ward at 2, and the bailey at about 4. the value of the town of dover had trebled at the time of the survey, in spite of the burning of the town at william's first advent.[409] [illustration: fig. 15. dudley, staffs. dunster, somerset.] dudley, staffordshire (fig. 15).--william fitz ansculf held dudley at the time of the survey, "and there is his castle."[410] mr clark appears to accept the dubious tradition of a saxon dodda, who first built this castle in the 8th century, since he speaks of dudley as "a great english residence."[411] this tradition, however, is not supported by domesday book, which shows dudley to have been only a small and unimportant manor before the conquest. the strong position of the hill was no doubt the reason why the norman placed his castle there. there is no norman masonry in the present ruins. the earliest work is that of the keep on the motte, a rectangular tower with round corner turrets, attributed by mr w. st john hope to about 1320. the first castle was demolished by henry ii. in 1175,[412] and an attempt to restore it in 1218 was stringently countermanded.[413] the case of dudley is one of those which proves that henry ii. destroyed some lawful castles in 1175 as well as the unlawful ones. in 1264 a license to restore it was granted to roger de somery, in consideration of his devotion to the king's cause in the barons' war.[414] the whole area of the castle, including the motte, but not including the works at the base of the hill on which it stands, is 1-3/4 acres. the bailey is an irregular oval, following the hill top. dudley is an instance in which the value of the manor has gone down instead of up since the erection of the castle; this may perhaps be laid to the account of the devastation caused through the staffordshire insurrection of 1069. dunster, somerset (fig. 15).--called torre in domesday book. "there william de moion has his castle."[415] the motte here appears to be a natural rock or _tor_, whose summit has been levelled and its sides scarped by art. about 80 feet below the top is a (roughly) half-moon bailey, itself a shelf on the side of the hill; there is another and much smaller shelf at the opposite end.[416] some foundations found in the s.w. corner of the upper ward appear to indicate a former stone keep.[417] dunster was only a small manor of half a hide before the conquest, but afterwards its value tripled. there was a borough as well as a castle.[418] the castle became the _caput baroniæ_ of the de moions, to whom the conqueror gave fifty-six manors in different parts of the county. there is not the slightest reason to suppose that the site was fortified before the conquest. mr clark remarks that "it is remarkable that no mouldings or fragments of norman ornament have been dug up in or about the site, although there is original norman work in the parish church." the simple explanation, probably, is that the first castle of de moion was of wood, although on a site where it would have been possible to build in stone from the first, as it does not appear that any part of the motte is artificial. the area of the bailey is 1-3/4 acres. the value of dunster had risen at the date of domesday.[419] [illustration: fig. 16. durham.] durham (fig. 16).--the castle here was first built by the conqueror, on his return from his expedition against scotland in 1072.[420] it was intended as a strong residence for the bishop, through whom william hoped to govern this turbulent part of the country. he placed it on the neck of the lofty peninsula on which the cathedral stands. the motte of the conqueror still remains, and so does the chapel[421] which he built in the bailey; probably the present court of the castle, though crowded now with buildings, represents the outline of the original bailey.[422] the present shell keep on the motte was built by bishop hatfield in edward iii.'s reign,[423] but has been extensively modernised. there can be little doubt that up to 1345 there were only wooden buildings on the motte, as the writer was informed by canon greenwell that no remains of older stone-work than the 14th century had been found there. it is so seldom that we get any contemporary description of a castle of this kind, that it seems worth while to translate the bombastic verse in which laurence, prior of durham, described that of durham in stephen's reign:[424] "not far hence [from the north road into the city] a tumulus of rising earth explains the flatness of the excavated summit, explains the narrow field on the flattened vertex, which the apex of the castle occupies with very pleasing art. on this open space the castle is seated like a queen; from its threatening height, it holds all that it sees as its own. from its gate, the stubborn wall rises with the rising mound,[425] and rising still further, makes towards the comfort (amæna) of the keep. but the keep, compacted together, rises again into thin air, strong within and without, well fitted for its work, for within the ground rises higher by three cubits than without--ground made sound by solid earth. above this, a stalwart house[426] springs yet higher than the [shell] keep, glittering with splendid beauty in every part; _four posts are plain, on which it rests, one post at each strong corner_.[427] each face is girded by a beautiful gallery, which is fixed into the warlike wall.[428] a bridge, rising from the chapel [in the bailey] gives a ready ascent to the ramparts, easy to climb; starting from them, a broad way makes the round of the top of the wall, and this is the usual way to the top of the citadel.... the bridge is divided into easy steps, no headlong drop, but an easy slope from the top to the bottom. near the [head of the] bridge, a wall descends from the citadel, turning its face westward towards the river.[429] from the river's lofty bank it turns away in a broad curve to meet the field [_i.e._, palace green]. it is no bare plot empty of buildings that this high wall surrounds with its sweep, but one containing goodly habitations.[430] there you will find two vast palaces built with porches, the skill of whose builders the building well reveals. there, too, the chapel stands out beautifully raised on six pillars, not over vast, but fair enough to view. here chambers are joined to chambers, house to house, each suited to the purpose that it serves.... there is a building in the middle of the castle which has a deep well of abundant water.... the frowning gate faces the rainy south, a gate that is strong, high-reaching, easily held by the hand of a weakling or a woman. the bridge is let down for egress,[431] and thus the way goes across the broad moat. it goes to the plain which is protected on all sides by a wall, where the youth often held their joyous games. thus the castellan, and the castle artfully placed on the high ridge, defend the northern side of the cathedral. and from this castle a strong wall goes down southwards, continued to the end of the church."[432] the original bailey of this castle covers 1 acre. ely, cambridgeshire (fig. 17).--this castle was built by william i. in 1070, when he was repressing the last struggle of the english under the heroic hereward. the monks of ely felt it a sore grievance that he placed the castle within their own bounds.[433] both this castle and the one built by william at aldreth, to defend the passage into the isle of ely, had a continuous existence, as they were both refortified by nigel, bishop of ely in stephen's reign, and ely castle was besieged and taken by stephen.[434] the earthworks of this castle still exist, to the south of the minster. there is a fine motte with an oval bailey, of which the banks and ditches are traceable in parts. the area of the bailey is 2-1/2 acres. of aldreth or aldrey there appear to be no remains. the value of the manor of ely was £33 in the confessor's reign; it fell to £20 after the devastations of the conquest, but had risen again to £30 at the time of the survey.[435] [illustration: fig. 17. ely, cambs. ewias harold, hereford. eye, suffolk.] ewias, herefordshire (fig. 17).--the brief notice of this castle in domesday book throws some light on the general theory of castle-building in england.[436] william fitzosbern, as the king's vicegerent, rebuilt this march castle, and committed it to the keeping of another norman noble, and the king confirmed the arrangement. but in theory the castle would always be the king's. this is the only case in the survey where we hear of a castle being _rebuilt_ by the normans. we naturally look to one of king edward's norman favourites as the first founder, for they alone are said by history to have built castles on the welsh marches before the conquest. dr round conjectures that ewias was the "pentecost's castle" spoken of in the (peterborough) _anglo-saxon chronicle_ in 1052.[437] no masonry is now to be seen on the motte at ewias, but mr clark states that the outline of a circular or polygonal shell keep is shown by a trench out of which the foundations have been removed. the bailey is roughly of half-moon shape and the mound oval. the whole area of the castle, including the motte and banks, is 2-1/3 acres. exeter.--this castle is not mentioned in domesday book, but ordericus tells us that william _chose_ a site for the castle within the walls, and left baldwin de molis, son of count gilbert, and other distinguished knights, to finish the work, and remain as a garrison.[438] in spite of this clear indication that the castle was a new thing, it has been obstinately held that it only occupied the site of some former castle, roman or saxon.[439] exeter, of course, was a roman castrum, and its walls had been restored by athelstan. in this case william placed his castle inside instead of outside the city walls, because, owing to the natural situation of exeter, he found in the north-west corner a site which commanded the whole city. although domesday book is silent about the castle, it tells us that forty-eight houses in exeter had been destroyed since william came to england,[440] and freeman remarks that "we may assume that these houses were destroyed to make room for the castle, though it is not expressly said that they were."[441] exeter castle stands on a natural knoll, occupying the north-west corner of the city, which has been converted into a sort of square motte by digging a great ditch round the two sides of its base towards the town.[442] that this ditch is no pre-roman work is shown by the fact that it stops short at the roman wall, and begins again on the outside of it, where, however, the greater part has been levelled to form the promenade of the _northernhay_ or north rampart of the city. on top of this hill, banks 30 feet high were thrown up, which still remain, and give to the courtyard which they enclose the appearance of a pit.[443] on top of these banks there are now stone walls; but these were certainly no part of the work of baldwin de molis, who must have placed a wooden stockade on the banks which he constructed. one piece of stonework he probably did set up, the gatehouse, which by its triangle-headed windows and its long-and-short work is almost certainly of the 11th century. it has frequently been called saxon, but more careful critics now regard it as "work that must have been done, if not by norman hands, at norman bidding and on norman design."[444] it was no uncommon thing at this early period to have gatehouses of stone to walls of earth and wood. of these gatehouses exeter is the most perfect and the most clearly stamped with antiquity. one thing we look for in vain at exeter, and that is a citadel. there is no keep, and there is no record that there ever was one, though a chapel, hall, and other houses are mentioned in ancient accounts. mr clark says that probably the normans regarded the whole court as a shell keep. it certainly was, in effect, a motte; but it was altogether exceptional among norman castles of importance if it had no bailey. and in fact a bailey is mentioned in the _pipe roll_ of 1 richard i., where there is an entry for the cost of making a gaol in the bailey of the castle.[445] now norden, who published a plan of exeter in 1619, says that the prison which formerly existed at the bottom of castle lane (on the south or city front of the present castle) was "built upon castle grounde," and he states that the buildings and gardens which have been made on this ground are intrusions on the king's rights.[446] the remarkably full account of the siege of exeter in the _gesta stephani_ speaks of an outer _promurale_ which was taken by stephen, as well as the inner bridge leading from the town to the castle, before the attack on the castle itself. unfortunately the word _promurale_ has the same uncertainty about it that attaches to so many mediæval terms, and the description given of it would apply either to the banks of a bailey, or to the _heriçon_ on the counterscarp of the ditch of the motte. we must, therefore, leave it to the reader's judgment whether the evidence given above is sufficient to establish the former existence of a bailey at exeter, and to place exeter among the castles of the motte-and-bailey type. the description of the castle given by the writer of the gesta has many points of interest.[447] he describes the castle as standing on a very high mound (_editissimo aggere_) hedged in by an insurmountable wall, which was defended by "cæsarian" towers built with the very hardest mortar. this must refer to roman towers which may have existed on the roman part of the wall. whether there was a stone wall on the other two sides, facing the city, may be doubted, as the expenditure entered to henry ii. in the _pipe rolls_ suggests that he was the first to put stone walls on the banks, and the two ancient towers which still exist appear to be of his time.[448] the chronicler goes on to say that after stephen had taken the _promurale_ and broken down the bridge, there were several days and nights of fighting before he could win the castle, which was eventually forced to surrender by the drying-up of the wells. the mining operations which he describes were no doubt undertaken with the view of shaking down the roman wall at the angle where it joins the artificial bank of baldwin de molis. possibly the chamber in the rock with the mysterious passages leading from it, which is still to be seen in the garden of miss owthwaite, at the point where the ditch ends, is the work of stephen's miners.[449] the description of his soldiers scrambling up the _agger_ on their hands and knees (_quadrupede incessu_) will be well understood by those who have seen the castle bank as it still rises from that ditch. the present ward of exeter castle, which is rudely square in plan, covers an area of 2 acres, which is as large as the whole area of many of the smaller norman castles. the castle was allowed to fall into decay as early as 1549,[450] and since then it has been devastated by the building of a sessions house and a gaol. no plan has been preserved of the former buildings in this court, though the site of the chapel is known. there is no statement in domesday book as to the value of exeter. eye, suffolk (fig. 17).--this castle was built by william malet, one of the companions of the conqueror, who is described as having been half norman and half english.[451] eye, as its name implies, seems to have been an island in a marsh in norman times, and therefore a naturally defensible situation. the references in the _pipe rolls_ to the _palicium_ and the _bretasches_ of eye castle show that the outer defences of the castle at any rate were of wood in the days of henry ii.[452] that there were works in masonry at some subsequent period is shown by a solitary vestige of a wing wall of flints which runs up the motte. a modern tower now occupies the summit. the bailey of the castle, the outline of which can still be traced, though the area is covered with buildings and gardens, was oval in shape, and covered 2 acres. the value of the manor of eye had gone up since the conquest from £15 to £21. this must have been due to the castle and to the market which robert malet or his son william established close to the castle; for the stock on the manor and the number of ploughs had actually decreased.[453] a proof that there is no deliberate register of castles in domesday book is furnished by the very careful inventory of the manor of eye, where there is no mention of a castle, though it is noticed that there are now a park and a market; and it is only in the account of the lands of the bishop of thetford, in mentioning the injury which william malet's market at eye had done to the bishop's market at hoxne, that the castle of eye is named. gloucester.--"there were sixteen houses where the castle sits, but now they are gone, and fourteen have been destroyed in the _burgus_ of the city," says domesday book.[454] gloucester was undoubtedly a roman _chester_, and roman pavements have been found there.[455] the description in the survey would lead us to think that the castle was outside the ancient walls,[456] though speed's map places it on the line of the wall of his time, which may have been a mediæval extension. the castle of gloucester is now entirely destroyed, but there is sufficient evidence to show that it was of the usual norman type. there was a motte, which was standing in 1819, and which was then called the barbican hill;[457] it appears to have been utilised as part of the works of the barbican. this motte must originally have supported a wooden keep, and henry i. must have been the builder of the stone keep which leland saw "in the middle of the area;"[458] for in 1100 henry gave lands to gloucester abbey "in exchange for the site where now the keep of gloucester stands."[459] the bailey had previously been enlarged by william rufus.[460] possibly the _framea turris_ or framework tower spoken of in henry ii.'s reign may refer to the wooden keep which had been left standing on the motte.[461] the walls of gloucester castle were frequently repaired by henry ii.,[462] but the word _murus_ by no means implies always a stone wall, and it is certain that the castle was at that time surrounded by a wooden stockade, as a writ of a much later period (1225) says that the stockade which is around our castle of gloucester has been blown down and broken by the wind, and must be repaired.[463] wooden bretasches on the walls are spoken of in the _pipe rolls_ of 1193, and even as late as 1222.[464] the value of the city of gloucester had apparently risen at the time of the survey, though the entry being largely in kind, t. r. e., it is not easy to calculate. [illustration: fig. 18. hastings, sussex. huntingdon.] hastings, sussex (fig. 18).--in this case we have positive contemporary evidence that the earthen mound of the castle was thrown up by the normans at the time of the conquest, for there is a picture in the bayeux tapestry which shows them doing it. a number of men with spades are at work raising a circular mound, on the top of which, with the usual all-inclusiveness of mediæval picturing, a stockade is already erected. a man with a pick seems to be working at the ditch. the inscription attached is: "he commands that a castle be dug at hestengaceastra."[465] there is no need to comment on the significance of this drawing and its inscription for the history of early norman castles; what is extraordinary is that it should have been entirely overlooked for so long. in no case is our information more complete than about hastings. not only does domesday book mention the _castellaria_ of hastings,[466] but the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ also tells us that william built a castle there, while the chronicle of battle abbey makes the evidence complete by telling us that "having taken possession of a suitable site, he built a _wooden castle_ there."[467] this of course means the stockade on top of the motte, with the wooden tower or towers which would certainly be added to it. wace states that this wooden castle was brought over in pieces in the ships of the count of eu.[468] the masonry now existing at the castle is probably none of it older than the reign of henry ii. at the earliest, and most of it is certainly much later.[469] the _pipe rolls_ show that henry ii. spent £235 on the castle of hastings between the years 1160 and 1181, and it is indicated that some of this money was for stone, and some was for a keep (_turrim_).[470] there is no tower large enough for a keep at hastings now, nor have any stone foundations been found on the motte, and mr harold sands, who has paid particular attention to this castle, concludes that henry ii.'s keep has been carried away by the sea, which has probably torn away at least 2 acres from the area of the castle.[471] the beautiful fragment of the chapel of st mary is probably of henry ii.'s reign; the walls and towers on the east side of the castle appear to be of the 13th century. the ditch does not run round the motte, but is cut through the peninsular rock on which the castle stands, the motte and its ward being thus isolated. the form of this bailey is now triangular, but it may have been square originally. beyond the ditch is another bailey, defended by earthen banks and by a second ditch cut through the peninsula.[472] no exact estimate can be given of the original area of the castle, as so much of the cliff has been carried away by the sea. hastings itself had been a fortified town before the norman conquest, and is one of those mentioned in the _burghal hidage_. the name hæstingaceaster, given to it in the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ (1050), is a proof that the saxons used the name _chester_ for constructions of their own, as no roman remains have been found at hastings. but the norman castle is outside the town, on a cliff which overlooks it. as in the case of the other ports of sussex, the castle was committed to an important noble, in this case the count of eu. the manor of bexley, in which hastings castle stood, had been laid waste at the conquest; at the date of the survey it was again rising in value, though it had not reached the figure of king edward's days.[473] hereford.--there can be little doubt that the castle of hereford was built by the norman ralph, earl of hereford, edward the confessor's nephew, about the year 1048.[474] it was burnt by the welsh in 1055, after which harold fortified the town with a dyke and ditch; but as mr freeman remarks, it is not said that he restored the castle.[475] the motte of earl ralph is now completely levelled, but it is mentioned several times in documents of the 12th century,[476] and is described in a survey of 1652, from which it appears that it had a stone keep tower, as well as a stone breastwork enclosing a small ward.[477] it stood outside the n.w. corner of the bailey, surrounded by its own ditch; the site is still called castle hill. if the castle was not restored before the norman conquest it was certainly restored afterwards, as in 1067 we find the "men of the castle" fighting with edric child and the welsh. the castle appears to have had stone walls by the time of henry ii., as the mention of a kiln for their repair proves.[478] but these walls had wooden towers.[479] the timber ordered in 1213 "ad hordiandum castellum nostrum de hereford"[480] refers to the wooden _alures_ or machicolations which were placed on the tops of walls for the purpose of defending the bases. though hereford was a private castle in the confessor's reign, it was claimed for the crown by archbishop hubert, the justiciary, in 1197, and continued to be a royal castle throughout the 13th century.[481] the bailey of hereford castle still exists, with its fine banks; it is kite-shaped and encloses 5-1/2 acres. the castle stood within the city walls, in the south-east angle. the value of hereford appears to have greatly increased at the date of the survey.[482] huntingdon (fig. 18).--"there were twenty houses on the site of the castle, which are now gone."[483] ordericus tells us that the castle of huntingdon was built by william on his return from his second visit to york in 1068.[484] huntingdon had been a walled town in anglo-saxon times, and was very likely first fortified by the danes, but was repaired by edward the elder. as in the case of so many other towns, the houses outside the walls had to pay geld along with those of the city, and it was some of the former which were displaced by the new norman castle. huntingdon was part of the patrimony of earl waltheof, and came to the norman, simon de senlis, through his marriage with waltheof's daughter and heiress. the line of senlis ended in another heiress, who married david, afterwards the famous king of scotland; david thus became earl of huntingdon. in the insurrection of the younger henry in 1174, william the lion, grandson of david, took sides with the young king, and consequently his castle was besieged and taken by the forces of henry ii.,[485] and the king ordered it to be destroyed. the _pipe rolls_ show that this order was carried out, as they contain a bill for "hooks for pulling down the stockade of huntingdon castle," and "for the work of the new castle at huntingdon, and for hiring carpenters, and crooks, and axes."[486] we learn from these entries that the original castle of the conquest had just been replaced by a new one, very likely a new fortification of the old mounds by william, in anticipation of the insurrection. we also learn that the new castle was a wooden one; for a castle which has to be pulled down by carpenters with hooks and axes is certainly not of stone. it does not appear that the castle was ever restored, though "the chapel of the castle" is spoken of as late as the reign of henry iii.[487] the motte of huntingdon still exists, and has not the slightest sign of masonry. the bailey is roughly square, with the usual rounded corners; the motte was inside this enclosure, but had its own ditch. the whole area was 2-1/2 acres, but another bailey was subsequently added. the value of huntingdon appears to have been stationary at the time of the survey, the loss of the twenty houses causing a diminution of revenue which must have been made up from the new feudal dues of the castle. launceston, or dunheved,[488] cornwall (fig. 19).--there, says domesday book, is the castle of the earl of mortain.[489] in another place it tells us that the earl gave two manors to the bishop of exeter "for the exchange of the castle of cornwall," another name for dunheved castle. we have already had occasion to note that the "exchange of the castle," in domesday language, is an abbreviation for the exchange of the site of the castle. the fact that the land was obtained from the church is a proof that the castle was new, for it was not the custom of saxon prelates thus to fortify themselves. the motte of launceston is a knoll of natural rock, which has been scarped and heightened by art. this motte now carries a circular keep, which cannot be earlier than the 13th century.[490] there is no early norman work whatever about the masonry of the castle, and the remarkably elaborate fortifications on the motte belong to a much later period.[491] the motte rises in one corner of a roughly rectangular bailey, which covers 3 acres. it stands outside the town walls, which still exist, and join those of the castle, as at totnes. launceston was only a small manor of ten ploughs in the time of the confessor. in spite of the building of the castle, the value of the manor had greatly gone down in william's time.[492] the ten ploughs had been reduced to five. [illustration: fig. 19. launceston, cornwall. lewes, sussex.] lewes, sussex (fig. 19).--the castle of lewes is not mentioned in its proper place in sussex by domesday book, and this is another proof that the survey contains no inventory of castles; for that the castle was existing at that date is rendered certain by the numerous allusions in the norfolk portion to "the exchange of the castle of lewes."[493] it is clear that at some period, possibly during the revolt of robert curthose in 1079, william i. gave large estates in norfolk to his trusty servant, william de warenne, in exchange for the important castle of lewes, which he may have preferred to keep in his own hands at that critical period. this bargain cannot have held long, at least as regards the castle, which continued to belong to the warenne family for many generations. we cannot even guess now how the matter was settled, but the lands in norfolk certainly remained in the hands of the warennes. lewes is one of the very few castles in england which have two mottes.[494] they were placed at each end of an oval bailey, each surrounded by its own ditch, and each projecting about three-fourths beyond the line of the bailey. on the northern motte only the foundations of a wall round the top remain; on the other, part of the wall which enclosed a small ward, and two mural towers. these towers have signs of the early perpendicular period, and are very likely of the reign of edward iii., when the castle passed into the hands of the fitz alans. the bailey, which enclosed an area of about 3 acres, is now covered with houses and gardens, but parts of the curtain wall on the s.e. and e. stand on banks, bearing witness to the original wooden fortifications. the great interest of this bailey is its ancient norman gateway. the entrance was regarded by mediæval architects as the weakest part of the fortress, and we frequently find that it was the first part to receive stone defences.[495] it is not surprising that at such an important place as lewes, which was then a port leading to normandy, and at the castle of so powerful a noble, we should find an early case of stone architecture supplementing the wooden defences. but the two artificial mottes have no masonry that can be called early norman. lewes is one of the boroughs mentioned in the _burghal hidage_, and was a _burgus_ at the time of the survey.[496] the value of the town had increased by £1, 18s. from what it had been in king edward's time. [illustration: fig. 20. lincoln.] lincoln (fig. 20).--domesday book tells us that 166 houses were destroyed to furnish the site of the castle.[497] the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ says that william built a castle here on his return from his first visit to york in 1068, and ordericus makes the same statement.[498] lincoln, like exeter, was a roman _castrum_, and the norman castle in both cases was placed in one corner of the castrum; but the old roman wall of lincoln, which stands on the natural ground, was not considered to be a sufficient defence on the two exterior sides, probably on account of its ruinous condition. it was therefore buried in a very high and steep bank, which was carried all round the new castle.[499] this circumstance seems to point to the haste with which the castle was built, lincoln being then for the first time subdued. the fact that it was inside the probably closely packed roman walls explains why so many houses were destroyed for the castle.[500] lincoln, like lewes, has two mottes: both are of about the same height, but the one in the middle of the southern line of defence is the larger and more important; it was originally surrounded with its own ditch. it is now crowned with a polygonal shell wall, which may have been built by the mother of ralph gernon, earl of chester, in the reign of henry i.[501] the tower on the other motte, at the south-east corner, has been largely rebuilt in the 14th century and added to in modern times, but its lower storey still retains work of norman character. there is good reason to suppose that this bailey was first walled with stone in richard i.'s reign, as there is an entry in the _pipe rolls_ of 1193-1194 "for the cost of fortifying the bailey, £82, 16s. 4d."[502] the present wall contains a good deal of herring-bone work, and this circumstance led mr clark, who was looking for something which he _could_ put down to william i.'s time, to believe that the walls were of that date. but the herring-bone work is all in patches, as though for repairs, and herring-bone work was used for repairs at all epochs of mediæval building. the two gateways (that is the norman portions of them) are probably of about the same date as the castle wall. the whole area is 5-3/4 acres. the total revenue which the city of lincoln paid to the king and the earl had gone up from 30_l._ t. r. e. to 100_l._ t. r. w. for the sake of those who imagine that saxon halls had anything to do with mottes, it is worth noting that the hall which was the residence of the chief landholder in lincoln before the conquest was still in existence after the building of the castle, but evidently had no connection with it.[503] [illustration: fig. 21. monmouth. montacute, somerset. morpeth, northumberland.] monmouth (fig. 21).--domesday book says that the king has four ploughs in demesne in the castle of monmouth.[504] dr round regards this as one of the cases where _castellum_ is to be interpreted as a town and not as a castle. however this may be, the existence of a norman castle at monmouth is rendered certain by a passage in the _book of llandaff_, in which it is said that this castle was built by william fitzosbern, and a short history of it is given, which brings it up to the days of william fitz baderun.[505] speed speaks of this castle as "standing mounted round in compasse, and within her walls another mount, whereon a towre of great height and strength is built."[506] this sounds like the description of a motte and bailey; but the motte cannot be traced now. it is possible that it may have been swept away to build the present barracks; the whole castle is now on a flat-topped hill. the area is 1-3/4 acres.[507] the value of the manor before the conquest is not given. montacute, somerset (fig. 21).--this is another instance of a site for a castle obtained by exchange from the church. count robert of mortain gave the manor of candel to the priory of athelney in exchange for the manor of bishopstowe, "and there is his castle, which is called montagud."[508] the english name for the village at the foot of the hill was ludgarsburh, which does not point to any fortification on the hill itself, the spot where the wonder-working crucifix of waltham was found in saxon times. robert of mortain's son william gave the castle of montacute, with its chapel, orchard, and other appurtenances, to a priory of cluniac monks which he founded close to it. the gift may have had something compulsory in it, for william of mortain was banished by henry i. in 1104 as a partisan of robert curthose. thus, as leland says, "the notable castle partly fell to ruin, and partly was taken down to make the priory, so that many years since no building of it remained; only a chapel was set upon the very top of the dungeon, and that yet standeth there."[509] there is still a high oval motte, having a ditch between its base and the bailey; the latter is semilunar in shape. the hill has been much terraced on the eastern side, but this may have been the work of the monks, for purposes of cultivation.[510] there is no masonry except a quite modern tower. according to mr clark, the motte is of natural rock. the french name of the castle was of course imported from normandy, and we generally find that an english castle with a norman-french name of this kind has a motte.[511] bishopstowe, in which the castle was placed, was not a large manor in saxon times. its value t. r. e. is not given in the survey, but we are told that it is worth 6_l._ to the earl, and 3_l._ 3_s._ to the knights who hold under him. morpeth, northumberland (fig. 21).--there is only one mention known to us of morpeth castle in the 11th century, and that is in the poem of geoffrey gaimar.[512] he says that william rufus, when marching to bamborough, to repress the rebellion of mowbray, earl of northumberland, "took the strong castle of morpeth, which was seated on a little mount," and belonged to william de morlei. thus there can be no doubt that the ha' hill, about 100 yards to the n. of the present castle, was the motte of the first castle of morpeth, though the remains of the motte, which are mentioned by hodgson, have been destroyed.[513] a natural ridge has been used to form a castle by cutting off its higher end to form a motte, and making a court on the lower part of the ridge. the great steepness of the slopes rendered ordinary ditches unnecessary, nor are there any traces now of banks or foundations. in the court some norman capitals and carved stones were found in 1830. this early castle was admirably placed for commanding the river and the bridge.[514] the present castle of morpeth was built in 1342-1349.[515] newcastle, northumberland.--the first castle here was built by robert, son of william i., on his return from his expedition to scotland in 1080.[516] it was of the usual motte-and-bailey kind, the motte standing in a small bailey which was rectilinear and roughly oblong.[517] this motte was in existence when brand wrote his _history of newcastle_, but was removed in 1811. the castle was placed outside the roman station at monkchester, and commanded a roman bridge over the tyne, "and to the north-east overlooked a ravine that under the name of the side formed for centuries a main artery of communication between england and scotland."[518] henry ii., when he built the fine keep of this castle, did not place it on the motte, but in the outer and larger ward, which was roughly triangular. the outer curtain appears to have stood on the banks of the former earthen castle, as the parliamentary survey of 1649 speaks of the castle as "bounded with strong works of stone and mud."[519] the area of the whole castle was 3 acres and 1 rood. [illustration: fig. 22. norham. nottingham.] norham, northumberland (fig. 22).--the first castle here was built by ranulf flambard, bishop of durham, in the reign of william rufus. it was built to defend northumberland against the incursions of the scots, and we are expressly told that no castle had existed there previously.[520] this first castle, which we may certainly assume to have been of earth and wood, was destroyed by the scots in 1138, and there does not seem to have been any stone castle until the time of bishop puiset or pudsey, who built the present keep by command of king henry ii.[521] mr clark tried hard to find some work of flambard's in this tower, but found it difficult, and was driven back on the rather lame assumption that "the lapse of forty [really fifty at least] years had not materially changed the style of architecture then in use."[522] in fact, the norman parts of this keep show no work so early as the 11th century, but are advanced in style, for not only was the basement vaulted, but the first floor also. the simple explanation is that flambard threw up the large square motte on which the keep now stands, and provided it with the usual wooden defences. it also had a strong tower, but almost certainly a wooden one; hence it was easily destroyed by the scots when once taken.[523] the motte was probably lowered to some extent when the stone keep was built. it stands on a high bank overlooking the tweed, and is separated from its bailey by a deep ditch. the bailey may be described as a segment of a circle; its area is about 2 acres. norwich (fig. 23).--we find from domesday book that no less than 113 houses were destroyed for the site of this castle, a certain proof that the castle was new.[524] it is highly probable that it was outside the primitive defences of the town, at any rate in part. norwich was built, partly on a peninsula formed by a double bend of the river wensum, partly in a district lying south-west of this peninsula, and defended by a ridge of rising ground running in a north-easterly direction. the castle was placed on the edge of this ridge, and all the oldest part of the town, including the most ancient churches, lies to the east of it.[525] in the conjectural map of norwich in 1100, given in woodward's _history of norwich castle_,[526] the street called burg street divides the old burg on the east from the new burg on the west; this street runs along a ridge which traverses the neck of the peninsula from south-west to north-east, and on the northern end of this ridge the castle stands.[527] there can be little doubt that this street marks the line of the _burh_ or enclosing bank by which the primitive town of norwich was defended.[528] a clear proof of this lies in the fact that the castle of norwich was anciently not in the jurisdiction of the city, but in that of the county; the citizens had no authority over the houses lying beyond the castle ditches until it was expressly granted to them by edward iii.[529] the mediæval walls of norwich, vastly extending the borders of the city, were not built till henry iii.'s reign.[530] [illustration: fig. 23. norwich. (from harrod's "gleanings among the castles and convents of norfolk," p. 133.)] the motte of norwich castle, according to recent investigations, is entirely artificial;[531] it was originally square, and had "a prodigious large and deep ditch around it."[532] the fancy of the antiquary wilkins that the motte was the centre of two concentric outworks[533] was completely disproved by mr harrod, who showed that the original castle was a motte with one of the ordinary half-moon baileys attached. another ward, called the castle meadow, was probably added at a later date. the magnificent keep which now stands on the motte is undoubtedly a work of the 12th century.[534] the castle which emma, wife of earl ralf guader, defended against the conqueror after the celebrated bride-ale of norwich was almost certainly a wooden structure. as late as the year 1172 the bailey was still defended by a wooden stockade and wooden bretasches;[535] and even in 1225 the stockade had not been replaced by a stone wall.[536] norwich was a royal castle, and consequently always in the hands of the sheriff; it was never the property of the bigods.[537] as the fable that extensive lands belonging to the monastery of ely were held on the tenure of castle guard at norwich _before the conquest_ is repeated by all the local historians,[538] it is worth while to note that the charters of henry i. setting the convent free from this service, make no allusion to any such ancient date for it,[539] and that the tenure of castle guard is completely unknown to the anglo-saxon laws. the area of the inner bailey is 3-1/4 acres, and that of the outer, 4-1/2 acres. the value of norwich had greatly risen since the conquest.[540] nottingham (fig. 22).--this important castle is not mentioned in domesday book, but the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ says that william i. built the castle at nottingham in 1067, on his way to repress the first insurrection in yorkshire. ordericus, repeating this statement, adds that he committed it to the keeping of william peverel.[541] the castle was placed on a lofty headland at some distance from the danish borough, and between the two arose the norman borough which is mentioned in domesday book as the _novus burgus_. the two upper wards of the present castle probably represent william's plan. the upper ward forms a natural motte of rock, as it is 15 feet higher than the bailey attached to it, and has been separated from it by a ditch cut across the rocky headland, which can still be traced below the modern house which now stands on the motte. such a site was not only treated as a motte, but was actually called by that name, as we read of the _mota_ of nottingham castle in the _pipe rolls_ of both john's and richard i.'s reigns. mr clark published a bird's-eye view of nottingham castle in his _mediæval military architecture_, about which he only stated that it was taken from the _illustrated london news_. it does not agree with the plan made by simpson in 1617,[542] and is therefore not quite trustworthy; the position of the keep, for example, is quite different. the keep, which hutchison in his memoirs speaks of as "the strong tower called the old tower on the top of the rock," seems clearly norman, from the buttresses. it was placed (according to simpson's plan), on the north side of the small ward which formed the top of the motte, and was enclosed in a yet older shell wall which has now disappeared. the height of this motte is indicated in the bird's-eye view by the ascending wall which leads up it from the bailey. it had its own ditch, as appears by several mentions in the accounts of "the drawbridge of the keep," and "the bridge leading up to the dongeon."[543] it is highly probable that this keep was built by king john, as in a _mise roll_ of 1212 there is a payment entered "towards making the tower which the king commanded to be built on the motte of nottingham."[544] but the first masonry in the castle was probably the work of henry ii., who spent £1737, 9s. 5d. on the castle and houses, the gaol, the king's chamber, the hall, and in raising the walls and enclosing the bailey.[545] the castle has been so devastated by the 17th century spoiler, that the work of henry and john has been almost entirely swept away, but the one round tower which still remains as part of the defences of the inner bailey, looks as though it might be of the time of henry ii. this bailey is semicircular; the whole original castle covers only 1-2/3 acres. a very much larger bailey was added afterwards, probably in john's reign.[546] probably this later bailey was at first enclosed with a bank and stockade, and this stockade may be the palitium of which there are notices in the records of henry iii. and edward i.[547] the main gateway of this bailey, which still remains, is probably of edward i. or edward ii.'s reign.[548] the castle of nottingham was the most important one in the midlands, and william of newburgh speaks of it as "so well defended by nature and art that it appears impregnable."[549] the value of the town had risen from £18 to £30 at the time of the survey.[550] [illustration: fig. 24. okehampton, devon. penwortham, lancs. pevensey, sussex.] okehampton, devon (fig. 24).--baldwin de molis, sheriff of devon, held the manor of okehampton at the time of the survey, and had a castle there.[551] on a hill in the valley of the okement river stand the remains of a castle of the motte-and-bailey pattern. on the motte, which is high and steep, are the ruins of a keep of late character, probably of the 14th century.[552] the oval bailey covers 1/2 an acre, and the whole castle is surrounded with a very deep ditch (filled up now on the east side) which is in part a natural ravine. the usual ditch between the motte and the bailey is absent here. this castle appears to have continued always in private hands, and therefore there is little to be learned about it from the public records. the value of okehampton manor had increased since the conquest from £8 to £10. as there is no _burgus_ mentioned t. r. e., but four _burgenses_ and a market t. r. w., baldwin the sheriff must have built a borough as well as a castle. otherwise it was a small manor of thirty ploughs. oswestry, shropshire.--mr eyton's identification of the domesday castle of louvre, in the manor of meresberie, shropshire, with oswestry, seems to be decisive.[553] the name is simply l'oeuvre, the work, a name very frequently given to castles in the early norman period. domesday book says that rainald de bailleul built a castle at this place.[554] he had married the widow of warin, sheriff of shropshire, who died in 1085. the castle afterwards passed into the hands of the fitz alans, great lords-marcher on the welsh border. as the welsh annals give the credit of building the castle to madoc ap meredith, into whose hands it fell during the reign of stephen, it is not impossible that some of the masonry still existing on the motte, which consists of large cobbles bedded in very thick mortar, may be his work, and probably the first stonework in the castle. a sketch made in the 18th century, however, which is the only drawing preserved of the castle, seems to show architecture of the perpendicular period.[555] but probably the keep alone was of masonry in the 12th century, as in 1166, when the castle was in royal custody, the repair of the stockade is referred to in the _pipe rolls_.[556] no plan has been preserved of oswestry castle, so that it is impossible to recover the shape or area of the bailey, which is now built over. the manor of meresberie had been unoccupied (wasta) in the days of king edward, but it yielded 40s. at the date of the survey. eyton gives reasons for thinking that the town of oswestry was founded by the normans. [illustration: fig. 25. oxford. (from "oxonia illustrata," david loggan, 1675.)] oxford (fig. 25).--this castle was built in 1071 by robert d'oilgi (or d'oilly), a norman who received large estates in oxfordshire.[557] oxford was a burgus in saxon times, and is one of those mentioned in the _burghal hidage_. domesday tells us that the king has twenty mural mansions there, which had belonged to algar, earl of mercia, and that they were called mural mansions because their owners had to repair the city wall at the king's behest, a regulation probably as old as the days of alfred. the norman castle was placed outside the town walls, but near the river, from which its trenches were fed.[558] it was without doubt a motte-and-bailey castle; the motte still remains, and the accompanying bird's-eye view by david loggan, 1675, shows that the later stone walls of the bailey stood on the earthen banks of d'oilly's castle. the site is now occupied by a gaol. on the line of the walls rises the ancient tower of st george's church, which so much resembles an early norman keep that we might think it was intended for one, if the osney chronicler had not expressly told us that the church was founded two years after the castle.[559] it is evident that the design was to make the church tower work as a mural tower, a combination of piety and worldly wisdom quite in accord with what the chronicler tells us of the character of roger d'oilly. henry ii. spent some £260 on this castle between the years 1165 and 1173, the houses in the keep, and the well being specially mentioned. we may presume that he built with stone the decagonal [shell?] keep on the motte, whose foundations were discovered at the end of the 18th century.[560] there is still in the heart of the motte a well in a very remarkable well chamber, the masonry of which may be of his time. the area of the bailey appears to have been 3 acres. the value of the city of oxford had trebled at the time of the domesday survey.[561] in the treaty between stephen and henry in 1153 the whole castle of oxford is spoken of as the "mota" of oxford.[562] peak castle, derbyshire.--the survey simply calls this castle the castle of william peverel, but tells us that two saxons had formerly held the _land_.[563] there is no motte here, but the strong position, defended on two sides by frightful precipices, rendered very little fortification necessary. it is possible that the wall on the n. and w. sides of the area may be, in part at least, the work of william peverel; the w. wall contains a great deal of herring-bone work, and the tower at the n.w. angle does not flank at all, while the other one in the n. wall only projects a few feet; the poor remains of the gatehouse also appear to be norman. it would probably be easier to build a wall than to raise an earthbank in this stony country; nevertheless, behind the modern wall which runs up from the gatehouse to the keep, something like an earthbank may be observed on the edge of the precipice, which ought to be examined before any conclusions are determined as to the first fortifications of this castle. the keep, which is of different stone to the other towers and the walls, stands on the highest ground in the area, apparently on the natural rock, which crops up in the basement. it is undoubtedly the work of henry ii., as the accounts for it remain in the _pipe rolls_, and the slight indications of style which it displays, such as the nook-shafts at the angles, correspond to the transition norman period.[564] the shape of the bailey is a quadrant; its area scarcely exceeds 1 acre. the value of the manor had risen since the conquest, and william peverel had doubled the number of ploughs in the demesne. the castle only remained in the hands of the peverels for two generations, and was then forfeited to the crown. the manor was only a small one; and the site of the castle was probably chosen for its natural advantages and for the facility of hunting in the peak forest. penwortham, lancashire (fig. 24).--"king edward held peneverdant. there are two carucates of land there, and they used to pay ten pence. now there is a castle there, and there are two ploughs in the demesne, and six burghers, and three radmen, and eight villeins, and four cowherds. amongst them all they have four ploughs. there is half a fishery there. there is wood and hawk's eyries, as in king edward's time. it is worth £3."[565] the very great rise in value in this manor shows that some great change had taken place since the norman conquest. this change was the building of a castle. the _modo_ of domesday always expresses a contrast with king edward's time, and clearly tells us here that penwortham castle was new.[566] it lay in the extensive lands between the ribble and the mersey, which were part of the conqueror's enfeoffment of roger the poitevin, third son of earl roger de montgomeri.[567] since penwortham is mentioned as demesne, and no under-tenant is spoken of, we may perhaps assume that this castle, which was the head of a barony, was built by roger himself. he did not hold it long, as he forfeited all his estates in 1102. at a later period, though we have not been able to trace when, the manor of penwortham passed into the hands of the monks of evesham, to whom the church had already been granted, at the end of the conqueror's reign.[568] probably it is because the castle thus passed into the hands of the church that it never developed into a stone castle, like clitheroe. the seat of the barony was transferred elsewhere, and probably the timbers of the castle were used in the monastic buildings of penwortham priory. the excavations which were made here in 1856 proved conclusively that there were no stone foundations on the castle hill at penwortham.[569] these excavations revealed the singular fact that the norman had thrown up his motte on the site of a british or romano-british hut, without even being aware of it, since the ruins of the hut were buried 5 feet deep and covered by a grass-grown surface, on which the norman had laid a rude pavement of boulders before piling his motte.[570] among the objects found in the excavations was a norman prick spur, a conclusive proof of the norman origin of the motte.[571] no remains appear to have been found of the norman wooden keep; but this would be accounted for by the theory suggested above. penwortham is a double motte, the artificial hill rising on the back of a natural hill, which has been isolated from its continuing ridge by an artificial ditch cut through it. the double hill rises out of a bailey court which is rudely square, but whose shape is determined by the ground, which forms a headland running out into the ribble. the whole area cannot certainly be ascertained. there was a ferry at this point in norman times.[572] the castle defends the mouth of the ribble and overlooks the town of preston. penwortham was certainly not the _caput_ of a large soke in saxon times, as it was only a berewick of blackburn, in which hundred it lay. it was the norman who first made it the seat of a barony. peterborough.--the chronicler, hugh candidus, tells us that abbot thorold, the norman abbot whom william i. appointed to the ancient minster of peterborough, built a castle close to the church, "which in these days is called mount torold."[573] this mount is still existing, but it has lost its ancient name, and is now called tout hill. it stands in the deanery garden, and has probably been largely ransacked for garden soil, as it has a decayed and shapeless look. still, it is a venerable relic of norman aggression, well authenticated. pevensey, sussex (fig. 24).--the roman castrum of pevensey (still so striking in its remains) was an inhabited town at the date of the norman conquest, and was an important port.[574] after taking possession of the castrum, william i. drew a strong bank across its eastern end, and placed a castle in the area thus isolated. this first castle was probably entirely of wood, as there was a wooden _palicium_ on the bank as late as the reign of henry ii.[575] but if a wooden keep was built at first, it was very soon superseded by one of stone.[576] the remains of this keep have recently been excavated by mr harold sands and mr montgomerie, and show it to have been a most remarkable building[577] (see chapter xii., p. 355)--in all probability one of the few 11th century keeps in england. we may perhaps attribute this distinction to the fact that no less a man than the conqueror's half-brother, the count of mortain, was made the guardian of this important port. pevensey is mentioned as a port in the _close rolls_ of henry iii.'s reign, and was one of the important waterways to the continent.[578] as has been already noted, the establishment of the castle was followed by the usual rise in the value of the _burgus_.[579] the area of the castle covers 1 acre. pontefract, yorkshire (fig. 26).--this castle is not spoken of in domesday by its french name, but there can be no doubt that it is "the castle of ilbert" which is twice mentioned and several times alluded to in the _clamores_, or disputed claims, which are enrolled at the end of the list of lands in yorkshire belonging to the tenants-in-chief.[580] the existence of ilbert's castle at pontefract in the 11th century is made certain by a charter (only an early copy of which is now extant) in the archives of the duchy of lancaster, in which william rufus at his accession regrants to ilbert de lacy "the custom of the castelry of his castle, as he had it in the conqueror's days and in those of the bishop of bayeux."[581] as mr holmes remarks, this carries us back to four years before the compilation of domesday book, since odo, bishop of bayeux, whom william had left as regent during his absence in normandy, was arrested and imprisoned in 1082.[582] pontefract is called kirkby in some of the earlier charters, and this was evidently the english (or rather the danish) name of the place. it lay within the manor of tateshall, which is supposed to be the same as tanshelf, a name still preserved in the neighbourhood of, but not exactly at, pontefract.[583] tanshelf claims to be the taddenescylf mentioned in the _anglo-saxon chronicle_, where king edgar received the submission of the yorkshire danes in 947. there is no proof that the hill at kirkby was fortified before the conquest. it was a steep headland rising out of the plain of the aire, and needing only to be scarped by art and to have a ditch cut across its neck to be almost impregnable. it lay scarcely a mile east of the roman road from doncaster to castleford and the north. [illustration: fig. 26. pontefract, yorks. preston capes, northants. quatford, salop.] it is no part of our task to trace the fortunes of this famous castle, which was considered in the middle ages to be the key of yorkshire.[584] in spite of the labels affixed to the walls we venture to assert with confidence that none of the masonry now visible belongs to the days of ilbert. the structural history of the castle was probably this: ilbert de lacy, one of the greatest of the norman tenants-in-chief in yorkshire,[585] built in this naturally defensive situation a castle of earth and wood, like other norman castles. whether he found the place already defended by earthen banks we do not attempt to decide, but analogy makes it fairly certain that the motte was his work, and was crowned by a wooden tower. this motte, which was at least partially scarped out of the soft sandstone rock, is now disguised by the remarkable keep which has been built up around it, consisting at present of two enormous round towers and the ruins of a third. as a fourth side is vacant, it may reasonably be conjectured that there was a fourth roundel.[586] if the plan was a quatrefoil it resembled that of the keep of york, which is now ascertained to belong to the reign of henry iii.; and the very little detail that is left supports the view that pontefract keep was copied from the royal experiment at york, though it differed from it in that it actually revetted the motte itself. there is no ditch now round the motte, but we venture to think that its inner ditch is indicated by the position of the postern in piper's tower, which seems to mark its outlet. it appears to have been partly filled up during the great siege of pontefract in 1648.[587] the platform which is attached to the motte on the side facing the bailey is probably an addition of the same date, intended for artillery; its retaining wall shows signs of hasty construction. a well chamber and a passage leading both to it and to a postern opening towards the outer ditch appear to have been made in the rocky base of the motte in the 13th century. the area of the inner and probably original bailey of this castle, including the motte, is 2-1/3 acres. the main guard, and another bailey covering the approach on the s. side, were probably later additions, bringing up the castle area to 7 acres. the shape of the first bailey is an irregular oval, determined by the hill on which it stands. the value of the manor of tateshall had fallen at the time of the survey from £20 to £15, an unusual circumstance in the case of a manor which had become the seat of an important castle; but the number of ploughs had decreased by half, and we may infer that tateshall had not recovered from the great devastation of yorkshire in 1068.[588] preston capes, northants (fig. 26).--that a castle of the 11th century stood here is only proved by a casual mention in the _historia fundationis_ of the cluniac priory of daventry, which tells us that this priory was first founded by hugh de leycestre, seneschal of matilda de senlis, close to his own castle of preston capes, about 1090. want of water and the proximity of the castle proving inconvenient, the priory was removed to daventry.[589] the work lies about 3 miles from the watling street. the castle stands on a spur of high land projecting northwards towards a feeder of the river nesse, about 3 miles w. of the watling street. the works consist of a motte, having a flat top 80 to 90 feet in diameter, and remains of a slight breastwork. this motte is placed on the edge of the plateau, and the ground falls steeply round its northern half. about 16 feet down this slope, a ditch with an outer bank has been dug, embracing half the mound. lower down, near the foot of the slope, is another and longer ditch and rampart. it is probable that the bailey occupied the flatter ground s.e. of the motte, but the site is occupied by a farm, and no traces are visible.[590] the value of the manor of preston capes had risen from 6s. to 40s. at the time of the survey. it was held by nigel of the count of mellent.[591] quatford, shropshire (fig. 26).--there can hardly be any doubt that the _nova domus_ at quatford mentioned in the survey was the new castle built by roger de montgomeri, earl of shrewsbury. we have already suggested that the _burgus_ which also existed there may have been his work, and not that of the danes.[592] the manor belonged to the church before the conquest.[593] the oval motte, which still remains, is described as placed on a bold rocky promontory jutting into the severn; it is not quite 30 feet high, and about 60 feet by 120 in diameter on top, and has a small bean-shaped bailey of 1 acre. it is near the church, which has norman remains.[594] robert belesme, son of earl roger, removed the castle to bridgenorth, and so the quatford castle is heard of no more.[595] the manor of quatford was paying nothing at the date of the survey. rayleigh, essex (fig. 27).--"in this manor sweyn has made his castle."[596] sweyn was the son of robert fitz-wymarc, a half english, half norman favourite of edward the confessor. robert was sheriff of essex under edward and william, and sweyn appears to have succeeded his father in this office.[597] sweyn built his castle on land which had not belonged to his father, so rayleigh cannot be the "robert's castle" of the _anglo-saxon chronicle_, to which some of the norman adventurers fled on the triumph of earl godwin.[598] there is a fine motte at rayleigh, and a semicircular bailey attached; the ditch round the whole is still well marked. there is not a vestige of masonry on the surface, but some excavations made in 1910 revealed stone foundations. the inner bailey covers 3/4 of an acre. the value of the manor had risen since the conquest, but it was only a small one, with no villages in its soke. richard's castle, herefordshire (fig. 27).--there can be little doubt that this is the castle referred to in domesday book under the name of avreton, as it is not far from overton, on the northern border of hereford.[599] richard's castle is almost certainly the castle of richard, son of scrob, one of the normans to whom edward the confessor had granted large estates, and who probably fortified himself on this site. at the time of the survey richard was dead, and the castle was held by his son osbern, and it is noted that he pays 10s., but the castle is worth 20s. to him. its value was the same as in king edward's time, a fact worth noting, as it coincides with the assumption that this was a pre-conquest castle. there is a high and steep motte at richard's castle, and a small half-moon shaped bailey.[600] there are remains of a stone wing wall running down the motte, and on the top there is a straight piece of masonry which must be part of a tower keep. the area of the inner bailey is 2/3 of an acre. avreton was not the centre of a soke, but appears to have lain in the manor of ludeford. [illustration: fig. 27. rayleigh, essex. richard's castle, hereford.] richmond, yorks (fig. 28).--as in the case of pontefract, this other great yorkshire castle is not mentioned by name in domesday book, nor is there any allusion to it except a casual mention in the _recapitulation_ that earl alan has 199 manors in his castelry, and that besides the castelry he has 43 manors.[601] the castle must have been built at the date of the survey, which was completed only a year before william i.'s death; for during william's lifetime earl alan, the first holder of the fief, gave _the chapel in the castle of richmond_ to the abbey of st mary at york, which he had founded.[602] the name, of course, is french, and it seems impossible now to discover what english manor-name it has displaced.[603] it is certainly a case in which the norman castle was not placed in the seat of the former saxon proprietor, but in the site which seemed most defensible to the norman lord. the lands of earl alan in the wapentake of gilling had belonged to the saxon earl edwin, and thus cannot have fallen to alan's share before edwin's death in 1071. the _genealogia_ published by dodsworth (from an ms. compiled in the reign of edward iii.), says that earl alan first built richmond castle near his chief manor of gilling, to defend his people against the attacks of the disinherited english and danes.[604] the passage has been enlarged by camden, who says that alan "thought himself not safe enough in gilling"; and this has been interpreted to mean that alan originally built his castle at gilling, and afterwards removed it to richmond; but the original words have no such meaning.[605] richmond castle differs from most of the castles mentioned in domesday in that it has no motte. the ground plan indeed was very like that of a motte-and-bailey castle, in that old maps show a small roundish enclosure at the apex of the large triangular bailey.[606] but a recent examination of the keep by messrs hope and brakespear has confirmed the theory first enunciated by mr loftus brock,[607] that the keep is built over the original gateway of the castle, and that the lower stage of its front wall is the ancient wall of the castle. the small ward indicated in the old maps is therefore most likely a barbican, of later date than the 12th century keep, which is probably rightly attributed by the _genealogia_ cited above to earl conan, who reigned from 1148-1171.[608] some entries in the _pipe rolls_ make it almost certain that it was finished by henry ii., who kept the castle in his own hands for some time after the death of conan.[609] there are some indications at richmond that the first castle was of stone and not of earth and wood. the walls do not stand on earthen banks; the norman curtain can still be traced on two sides of the castle, and on the west side it seems of early construction, containing a great deal of herringbone work, and might possibly be the work of earl alan. [illustration: fig. 28. richmond, yorks. rochester, kent.] the whole area of the castle is 2-1/2 acres, including the annexe known as the cockpit. this was certainly enclosed during the norman period, as it has a norman gateway in its wall. as we do not know the name of the site of richmond before the conquest, and as the name of richmond is not mentioned in domesday book, we cannot tell whether the value of the manor had risen or fallen. but no part of yorkshire was more flourishing at the time of the survey than this wapentake of gilling, which belonged to earl alan; in no district, except in the immediate neighbourhood of york, are there so many places where the value has risen. yet the greater part of it was let out to under-tenants. rochester, kent (fig. 28).--under the heading of aylsford, kent, the survey tells us that "the bishop of rochester holds as much of this land as is worth 17s. 4d. _in exchange for the land in which the castle sits_."[610] rochester was a roman _castrum_, and portions of its roman wall have recently been found.[611] the fact that various old charters speak of the _castellum_ of rochester has led some authorities to believe that there was a castle there in saxon times, but the context of these charters shows plainly that the words _castellum roffense_ were equivalent to _castrum roffense_ or _hrofesceastre_.[612] otherwise there is not a particle of evidence for the existence of a castle at rochester in pre-norman times, and the passage in domesday quoted above shows that william's castle was a new erection, built on land obtained by exchange from the church. outside the line of the roman wall, to the south of the city, and west of the south gate, there is a district called boley or bullie hill, which at one time was included in the fortifications of the present castle. it is a continuation of the ridge on which that castle stands, and has been separated from it by a ditch. this ditch once entirely surrounded it, and though it was partly filled up in the 18th century its line can still be traced. the area enclosed by this ditch was about 3 acres; the form appears to have been oblong. in the grounds of satis house, one of the villas which have been built on this site, there still remains a conical artificial mound, much reduced in size, as it has been converted into a pleasure-ground with winding walks, but the retaining walls of these walks are composed of old materials; and towards the riverside there are still vestiges of an ancient wall.[613] we venture to think that this boley hill and its motte formed the original site of the (probably) wooden castle of william the conqueror. its nature, position, and size correspond to what we have already observed as characteristic of the first castles of the conquest. it stands on land which originally belonged to the church of st andrew, as domesday book tells us william's castle did.[614] the very name may be interpreted in favour of this theory.[615] and that there was no roman or saxon fortification on the spot is proved by excavations, which have shown that both a roman and a saxon cemetery occupied portions of the area.[616] it is well known that between the years 1087 and 1089 the celebrated architect, gundulf, bishop of rochester, built a new _stone_ castle for william rufus, "in the best part of the city of rochester."[617] this castle, of course, was on the same site as the present one, though the splendid keep was not built till the next reign.[618] but if what we have maintained above be correct the castle of gundulf was built on a different site from that of the castle of william. nor are we without evidence in support of this. what remains of the original norman wall of gundulf's castle (and enough remains to show that the circuit was complete in norman times) does not stand on earthen banks; and this, though not a proof, is a strong suggestion that there was no earthen bank belonging to some previous castle when gundulf began his building.[619] but further, mr livett has shown in his paper on _mediæval rochester_[620] that in order to form a level plateau for the court of the castle the ground had to be artificially made up on the north and east sides, and in these places the wall rests on a foundation of gravel, which has been forcibly rammed to make it solid, and which goes through the artificial soil to the natural chalk below. now what can this rammed gravel mean but an expedient to avoid the danger of building in stone on freshly heaped soil? had the artificial platform been in existence ever since the conquest, it would have been solid enough to build upon without this expense. it is therefore at least probable that bishop gundulf's castle was built on an entirely new site. it seems also to be clear that the boley hill was included as an outwork in bishop gundulf's plan, for the castle ditch is cut through the roman wall near the south gate of the city.[621] mr livett remarks that king john appears to have used the hill as a point of vantage when he attacked the city in 1215, and he thinks this was probably the reason why henry iii.'s engineers enclosed it with a stone wall when they restored the walls of the city.[622] henry iii.'s wall has been traced all round the city, and at the second south gate it turns at right angles, or nearly so, so as to enclose boley hill.[623] it is probable, as mr livett suggests, that the drawbridge and _bretasche_, or wooden tower, ordered in 1226 for the southern side of rochester castle,[624] were intended to connect the boley hill court with the main castle. in 1722 the owner of the castle (which had then fallen into private hands) conveyed to one philip brooke, "that part of the castle ditch and ground, as it then lay unenclosed, on bully hill, being the whole breadth of the hill and ditch without the walls of the castle, extending from thence to the river medway."[625] the general opinion about the boley hill is that it is a danish earthwork, thrown up by the danes when they besieged the city in 885. but if our contention in chapter iv. is just, the danish fortifications were not mottes, nor anything like them; and (as has already been pointed out) the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ indicates the nature of the fortress in this case by its expression, "they made a work around themselves";[626] that is, it was a circumvallation. moreover, at rochester the danes would have had to pass under the bridge (which is known to have existed both in roman and saxon times) in order to get to the boley hill; and even if their ships were small enough to do this they would hardly have been so foolish as to leave a bridge in their possible line of retreat. it is therefore far more likely that their fastness was somewhere to the north or east of the city.[627] it is a noteworthy fact that up till very recently the boley hill had a special jurisdiction of its own, under an officer called the baron of the bully, appointed by the recorder of the city. this appears to date from a charter of edward iv. in 1460, which confirms the former liberties of the citizens of rochester, and ordains that they should keep two courts' leet and a court of pie-powder annually on the bullie hill. the anonymous historian of rochester remarks that it was thought that the baron represented the first officer under the governor of the castle before the court leet was instituted, to whose care the security of the bullie hill was entrusted.[628] this is probably much nearer the truth than the theory which would assign such thoroughly feudal courts as those of court leet and pie-powder to an imaginary community of danes residing on the boley hill. when we compare the case of the boley hill with the somewhat similar cases of chester and norwich castles we shall see that what took place in edward iv.'s reign was probably this: the separate jurisdiction which had once belonged to an abandoned castle site was transferred to the citizens of rochester, but with the usual conservatism of mediæval legislation, it was not absorbed in the jurisdiction of the city. the value of rochester at the time of the survey had risen from 100_s._ to 20_l._[629] the increase of trade, arising from the security of traffic which was provided by william's castles on this important route, no doubt accounts in great measure for this remarkable rise in value. rockingham, northants (fig. 29).--here, also, the castle was clearly new in william's reign, as the manor was uninhabited (_wasta_) until a castle was built there by his orders, in consequence of which the manor produced a small revenue at the time of the survey.[630] the motte, now in great part destroyed, was a large one, being about 80 feet in diameter at the top; attached to it is a bailey of irregular but rectilateral shape (determined by the ground) covering about 3 acres. there is another large bailey to the s. covering 4 acres, formed by cutting a ditch across the spur of the hill on which the castle stands, which is probably later. the first castle would undoubtedly be of wood, and it is probable that king john was the builder of the "exceeding fair and strong" keep which stood on the motte in leland's time,[631] as there is an entry in the _pipe roll_ of the thirteenth year of his reign for 126_l._ 18_s._ 6_d._ for the work of the new tower.[632] this keep, if mr clark is correct, was polygonal, with a timber stockade surrounding it. rockingham was only a small manor of one hide in saxon times, though its saxon owner had sac and soke. it stands in a forest district, not near any of the great ancient lines of road, and was probably built for a hunting seat. the value of the manor had risen at the time of the survey.[633] during the civil war, the motte of rockingham was fortified in an elaborate manner by the parliamentarians, part of the defences being two wooden stockades:[634] an interesting instance of the use both of mottes and of wooden fortifications in comparatively modern warfare. only the north and west sides of this mount now remain. [illustration: fig. 29. rockingham, northants.] old sarum, wilts (fig. 30).--sir richard colt hoare printed in his _ancient wiltshire_ a document purporting to be an order from alfred, "king of the english," to leofric, "earl of wiltunshire," to maintain the castle of sarum, and add another ditch to it.[635] the phraseology of the document suggests some doubts of its genuineness, and though there would be nothing improbable in the theory that alfred reared the outer bank of the fortress, recent excavations have shown that the place was occupied by the romans, and therefore make it certain that its origin was very much earlier than alfred's time. moreover, the convergence of several roman roads at this spot suggests the probability of a roman station,[636] while the form of the enclosure renders an earlier origin likely. domesday book does not speak of salisbury as a _burgus_, and when the _burgus_ of old sarum is mentioned in later documents it appears to refer to a district lying at the foot of the castle hill, and formerly enclosed with a wall.[637] nor is it one of the boroughs of the _burghal hidage_. but that sarum was an important place in saxon times is clear from the fact that there was a mint there; and there is evidence of the existence of at least four saxon churches, as well as a hospital for lepers.[638] for more exact knowledge as to the history of this ancient fortress we must wait till the excavations now going on are finished, but in the meanwhile it seems probable that the theory adopted by general pitt-rivers is correct. he regarded old sarum as a british earthwork, with an inner castle and outer barbicans added by the normans. after building this castle in the midst of it the normans appear to have considered the outer and larger fortification too valuable to be given up to the public, but retained it under the government of the castellan, and treated it as part of the castle. there is no mention of the castle of salisbury in domesday book, but the bishop is named as the owner of the manor.[639] the episcopal see of sherborne was transferred to sarum in 1076 by bishop hermann, in accordance with the policy adopted by william i. that episcopal sees should be removed from villages to towns:[640] a measure which in itself is a testimony to the importance of salisbury at that time. the first mention of the castle is in the charter of bishop osmund, 1091.[641] the bishop was allowed to lay the foundations of his new cathedral within the ancient fortress. as might be expected, friction soon arose between the castellans and the ecclesiastics; the castellans claimed the custody of the gates, and sometimes barred the canons, whose houses seem to have been outside the fortress, from access to the church. these quarrels were ended eventually by the removal of the cathedral to the new town of salisbury at the foot of the hill. [illustration: fig. 30. old sarum, wilts.] the position of the motte of old sarum is exceptional, as it stands in the centre of the outer fortress. this must be owing to the position of the ancient vallum, encircling the summit of one of those round, gradually sloping hills so common in the chalk ranges, which made it necessary to place the motte in the centre, because it was the highest part of the ground. the present excavations have shown that it is in part artificial. but though the citadel was thus exceptionally placed, the principle that communication with the outside must be maintained was carried out; the motte had its own bailey, reaching to the outer vallum. the remains of three cross banks still exist, two of which must have enclosed the _magnum ballium_ which is spoken of in the _pipe rolls_ of henry ii. probably this bailey occupied the south-eastern third of the circle, which included the main gateway and the road to the citadel. in the ditch on the north side of this enclosure, an arched passage, apparently of norman construction, was found in 1795; it was doubtless a postern or sallyport.[642] the main entrance is defended by a separate mount with its own ditch, which is conjectured to be of later date than the vallum itself. the area of the top of the motte is about 1-3/4 acres, a larger size than usual, but not larger than that of several other important castles.[643] in leland's time there was "much notable ruinous building" still remaining of this fortress, and the excavations have already revealed the lower portions of some splendid walls and gateways, and the basement of a late norman keep which presents some unusual features.[644] the earthworks, however, bear witness to a former wooden stockade both to the citadel and the outer enclosure. the top of the motte is still surrounded by high earthen banks. as that great building bishop, roger of salisbury (1099-1139), is said to have environed the castle with a new wall,[645] it would seem likely that he was the first to transform the castle from wood to stone. but in henry ii.'s reign, we find an entry in the _pipe rolls_ for materials for enclosing the great bailey. an order for the destruction of the castle had been issued by stephen,[646] but it is doubtful whether it was carried out. the sums spent by henry ii. on the castle do not amount to more than £266, 12s. 5d., but the work recently excavated which appears to be of his date is very extensive indeed. the mention of a small wooden tower in richard i.'s reign shows that some parts of the defences were still of wood at that date.[647] timber and rods for _hoarding_ the castle, that is, for the wooden machicolations placed at the tops of towers and walls, were ordered at the end of john's reign.[648] it is not known when the castle was abandoned, but the list of castellans ceases in the reign of henry vi., when it was granted to the stourton family.[649] though the earls of salisbury were generally the custodians of sarum castle, except in the time of bishop roger, it was always considered a royal castle, while the manor belonged to the bishop.[650] it is remarked in the _hundred rolls_ of henry iii., that no one holds fiefs for ward in this castle, and that nothing belonged to the castle outside the gate.[651] the value of the manor of salisbury appears to have risen very greatly since the conquest.[652] shrewsbury (fig. 31).--the passage in domesday book relating to this town has been called by mr round one of the most important in the survey, and it is of special importance for our present purpose. "the english burghers of shrewsbury say that it is very grievous to them that they have to pay all the geld which they paid in king edward's time, although the castle of the earl occupies [the site of] 51 houses, and another 50 are uninhabited."[653] it is incomprehensible how in the face of such a clear statement as this, that the new castle occupied the site of fifty-one houses, anyone should be found gravely to maintain that the motte at shrewsbury was an english work; for if the motte stood there before, what was the clearance of houses made for? the only answer could be to enlarge the bailey. but this is exactly what the norman would not wish to do; he would want only a small area for the small force at his disposal for defence. shrewsbury was certainly a borough (that is, a fortified town) in anglo-saxon times; probably it was one of the towns fortified by ethelfleda, though it is not mentioned by name in the list of those towns furnished by the _anglo-saxon chronicle_.[654] its ancient walls were certainly only of earth and wood, for a writ of 1231 says that the old stockade and the old bretasche of the old ditch of the town of shrewsbury are to be granted to the burghers for strengthening the new ditch.[655] the castle of shrewsbury was built on the neck of the peninsula on which the town stands, and on the line of the town walls. the oval motte, which still remains, stands, as usual, on the line of the castle banks, and slopes steeply down to the severn on one side. its nearness to the river made it liable to damage by floods. thus we find henry ii. spending 5_l._ on the repair of the motte,[656] and in edward i.'s reign the abbot's mill is accused of having caused damage to the extent of 60 marks to the motte. but the men of the hundred exonerate the mill, and from another passage the blame appears to lie on the fall of a great wooden tower.[657] this can hardly have been other than the wooden keep on the motte, and thus we learn the interesting fact that as late as edward i.'s reign the castle of shrewsbury had only a wooden keep. the present tower on the motte is the work of telford. [illustration: fig. 31. shrewsbury. skipsea, yorks.] the bailey of shrewsbury castle is roughly semilunar and covers nearly an acre. the walls stand on banks, which shows that the first wall was of timber. the norman entrance arch seems to render it probable that it was in henry ii.'s reign that stone walls were first substituted for a wooden stockade, and the _pipe rolls_ contain several entries of sums spent by henry on this castle.[658] but the first mention of stone in connection with the castle is in the reign of henry iii.[659] in the reign of edward i., a _jarola_ or wooden wall, which had been raised above the outer ditch in the time of the barons' war, was replaced by a stone wall.[660] this perhaps refers to the second bailey, now destroyed, which lay to the south of the castle. in the time of charles i. the castle still had a wooden palisade on the counterscarp of the ditch.[661] the two large drum towers on the walls, and the building between them, now converted into a modern house, belong to a much later period than the walls. the area of the present castle, including the motte, is 4/5 of an acre. the value of the town of shrewsbury had risen since the conquest. skipsea, yorks (fig. 31).--there is no mention of this castle in domesday book, but the chronicle of meaux abbey tells us that it was built by drogo de bevrère in the reign of william i.[662] this chronicle is not indeed contemporary, but its most recent editor regards it as based on some much earlier document. it was the key of the great manor of holderness, which the conqueror had given to drogo, but which drogo forfeited by murdering his wife, probably on this very site. the situation of skipsea is remarkable, but the original plan of kenilworth castle presented a close parallel to it. the motte, which is 46 feet high, and 1/5 of an acre in space on top, is separated from the bailey by a level space, which was formerly the mere of skipsea, mentioned in documents of the 13th century, which reckon the take of eels in this mere as a source of revenue.[663] the motte thus formed an island in the mere, but as an additional defence--perhaps when the mere began to get shallow--it was surrounded by a bank and ditch of its own. no masonry is to be seen on the motte now, except a portion of a wing wall going down it. it is connected with its bailey on the other side of the mere by a causeway which still exists. this bailey is of very unusual size, covering 8-1/4 acres; its banks still retain the name of the baile welts, and one of the entrances is called the baile gate. skipsea brough, which no doubt represents the former _burgus_ of skipsea, is outside this enclosure, and has no defences of its own remaining. a mandate of henry iii. in 1221, ordered the complete destruction of this castle,[664] and it was no doubt after this that the earls of albemarle, who had succeeded to drogo's estates, removed their _caput baroniæ_ to burstwick.[665] the value of the manor of cleeton, in which skipsea lies, had fallen at domesday.[666] stafford (fig. 32).--the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ says that ethelfleda of mercia built the _burh_ of stafford; and consequently we find that both in king edward and king william's time stafford was a burgus, or fortified town. florence of worcester, who is considered to have used a superior copy of the _chronicle_ as the foundation of his work, says that ethelfleda built an _arx_ on the north bank of the sowe in 914. _arx_, in our earlier chronicles, is often only a bombastic expression for a walled town, as, for example, when ethelwerd says that ethelfleda's body was buried in st peter's porch in the _arx_ of gloucester.[667] but the statement led many later writers, such as camden, to imagine that ethelfleda built a _tower_ in the town of stafford; and these imaginings have created such a tangled skein of mistake that we must bespeak our readers' patience while we attempt to unravel it. domesday book only mentions stafford castle under the manor of chebsey, a possession of henry de ferrers. its words are: "to this manor _belonged_ the land of stafford, in which the king commanded a castle to be built, which is now destroyed."[668] ordericus also says that the king placed a castle at stafford, on his return from his third visit to the north, in 1070.[669] now the language of domesday appears to us to say very plainly that in the manorial rearrangement which followed the conquest some land was taken out of the manor of chebsey, which lies immediately to the south of the borough of stafford, to furnish a site for a royal castle.[670] it is exactly in this position that we now find a large oblong motte, similar to the other mottes of the conquest, and having the usual bailey attached to it. it lies about a mile and a half south-west of the town, near the main road leading into shropshire. the position was an important one, as the castles of staffordshire formed a second line of defence against the north welsh, as well as a check to the great palatinate earls of shropshire.[671] the motte itself stood on high ground, commanding a view of twenty or thirty miles round, and both tutbury and caus castles could be seen from it. between it and the town lies a stretch of flat ground which has evidently been a swamp formerly, and which explains the distance of the castle from the town; while the fact that it lies to the _south_ of the sowe shows that it has no connection with ethelfleda's work. there is no dispute that this motte was the site of the later baronial castle of stafford, the castle besieged and taken in the civil war; the point we have to prove is that it was also the castle of domesday book.[672] [illustration: fig. 32. stafford. stanton holgate, salop. tamworth, staffs. tickhill, yorks.] if the first castle of stafford was of earth and wood, like most of william's castles, there would be nothing wonderful in its having many destructions and many resurrections. this castle was clearly a royal castle, from the language of domesday book. as a royal castle it would be committed to the custody of the sheriff, who appears to have been robert de stafford,[673] ancestor of the later barons of stafford, and brother of ralph de todeni, one of the great nobles of the conquest. ralph joined the party of robert curthose against henry i. in 1101, and it is conjectured that his brother robert was involved in the same rebellion, for in that year we find the castle held for the king by william pantolf, a trusty companion of the conqueror.[674] it is very unlikely that this second castle of stafford was on a different site from the one which had been destroyed; and an ingenious conjecture of mr mazzinghi's helps us to identify it with the castle on the motte. in that castle, when it again emerges into light in the reign of henry ii., we find a chapel dedicated to st nicholas, which robert de stafford gives to the abbey of stone, and the king confirms the gift.[675] the worship of st nicholas came greatly into fashion after the translation of his remains from asia minor to bari, in italy, in 1087. william pantolf visited the shrine at bari, got possession of some of the relics of st nicholas, and with great reverence deposited them in his own church of noron, in normandy.[676] it is therefore extremely probable that pantolf founded the chapel of st nicholas in stafford castle during the time that the castle was in his custody.[677] but about the situation of the chapel of st nicholas there is no doubt, as its history is traceable down to the 16th century. it stood in the bailey of the castle outside the town. this castle was therefore certainly identical with that of henry ii., and most probably with that of henry i. and william i. so far, as we have seen, stafford castle was a royal castle. it is true that in the reign of henry ii.'s predecessor, stephen, we find the castle again in the hands of a robert de stafford, who speaks of it as "castellum meum."[678] apparently the troubles of stephen's reign afforded an opportunity to the family of the first norman sheriff to get the castle again into their hands. but under the stronger rule of henry ii. the crown recovered its rights, and the gift of the chapel in the castle evidently could not be made without the consent of the king. the gaol which henry ii. caused to be made in stafford was doubtless in this castle.[679] john repaired the castle,[680] and ordered _bretasches_, or wooden towers, to be made in the forest of arundel, and sent to stafford:[681] a statement which gives us an insight into the nature of the castle in john's reign. but it was the tendency of sheriffdoms to become hereditary, as dr stubbs has pointed out,[682] and this seems to have been the case at stafford. in the reign of edward i. a local jury decided that nicholas, baron of stafford, held the castle of stafford from the king _in capite_, by the service of three and a half knights' fees;[683] and in 1348, ralph, baron of stafford, obtained a license from edward iii. "to fortify and crenellate his _manses_ of stafford and madlee with a wall of stone and lime, and to make castles thereof."[684] the indenture made with the mason a year previously is still extant, and states that the castle is to be built upon the _moële_ in the manor, whereby the motte is evidently meant.[685] besides, the deed is dated "at the chastel of stafford," showing that the new castle of stone and lime was on the site of an already existing castle. we might spin out further evidence of the identity of the site of william's castle with that of the present one, from the name of the manor of castel, which grew up around it, displacing the equally suggestive name of montville, which we find in domesday book.[686] against the existence of another castle in the town we have the absence of any such castle in william smith's plan of 1588; the silence of speed and leland, who only mention the present castle;[687] and the statement of plot, who wrote about the end of the 17th century, that "he could not hear any footsteps remaining" of a castle in stafford.[688] we may therefore safely conclude that it was only due to the fancy of some elizabethan antiquary that in an old map of that time a spot to the south-west of the town is marked with the inscription, "the old castle, built by edward the elder, and in memorie fortified with reel walls."[689] the value of stafford town had risen at the time of the survey, as the king had 7_l._ for his share, which would make the whole revenue to king and earl 10_l._ 10_s._, as against 9_l._ before the conquest. the property of the canons of stafford had risen from £1 to £3.[690] the area of the bailey is 1-3/5 acres. stamford, lincoln and northants.--this was one of the boroughs fortified by edward the elder, and consequently we find it a royal _burgus_ at the time of the survey. but edward's borough, the _chronicle_ tells us, was on the south side of the welland; the northern borough, on the other side, may have been the work of the danes, as stamford was one of the towns of the danish confederacy of the five boroughs. the norman castle and its motte are on the north side, and five _mansiones_ were destroyed for the site.[691] there is at present no appearance of masonry on the motte, which is partly cut away, and what remains of the castle wall is of the 13th century. it is therefore probable that the _turris_, or keep, which surrendered to henry ii. in 1153, was of wood.[692] henry gave the castle to richard humet, constable of normandy, in 1155.[693] it was a very exceptional thing that henry should thus alienate a royal castle, and special circumstances must have moved him to this act. the castle was destroyed in richard iii.'s time, and the materials given to the convent of the carmelite friars. it appears to have been within the town walls, with a bailey stretching down to the river; this bailey is quadrangular. an inquisition of 1341 states that "the site of the castle contains 2 acres."[694] stamford had risen enormously in value since the conquest. "in king edward's time it paid 15_l._; now, it pays for _feorm_ 50_l._, and for the whole of the king's dues it now pays 28_l._"[695] stanton, stanton long, in shropshire (fig. 32).--at the time of the survey, the norman helgot was lord of corve dale, and had his castle at stanton.[696] the castle was afterwards known as helgot's castle, corrupted into castle holdgate. the site has been much altered by the building of a farmhouse in the bailey, but the motte still exists, high and steep, with a ditch round about half its circumference; there are some traces of masonry on the top. one side of the bailey ditch is still visible, and a mural tower of edwardian style has been incorporated with the farmhouse. the exact area cannot now be calculated, but it can hardly have exceeded 2-1/2 acres. the manor of stanton was an agglomeration of four small manors which had been held by different proprietors in saxon times, so it was not the centre of a soke. the value of the manor had risen. tamworth, stafford (fig. 32).--although tamworth castle is not mentioned in domesday book, it must have been in existence in the 11th century, as a charter of the empress matilda mentions that robert le despenser, brother of urso d'abetot, had formerly held this castle;[697] now urso d'abetot was a contemporary of the conqueror, and so must his brother have been. tamworth castle stands on a motte 50 feet high, and 100 feet in diameter across the top, according to mr clark. it is an interesting instance of what is commonly called a shell keep, with a stone tower; one of the instances which suggest that the shell did not belong to a different type of castle to the tower, but was simply a ward wall, which probably at first enclosed a wooden tower. the tower and wall (or chemise) are probably late norman, but the remarkable wing wall (there is only one, instead of the usual two) which runs down the motte is entirely of herring-bone work, and _may_ be as old as henry i.'s time.[698] a bailey court, which cannot have been large, lay between the motte and the river tame, but its outline cannot now be determined, owing to the encroachments of buildings. tamworth is about a mile from the great roman road known as watling street. we have already referred to the fortification of the _burh_ here by ethelfleda;[699] probably she only restored walls or banks which had existed before round this ancient capital of mercia. the value of the manor of tamworth is not given in domesday book. tickhill, yorks (fig. 32).--the name tickhill does not occur in domesday, but it is covered by that of dadesley, the manor in which this castle was built: a name which appears to have gone out of use when the _hill_ was thrown up. there can be no doubt that it was the castle of roger de busli, one of the most richly endowed of william's tenants-in-chief, as it is mentioned as such by ordericus.[700] he calls it the castle of blythe, a name which it probably received because blythe was the most important place near, and dadesley was so insignificant. florence of worcester, when describing the same events, calls the castle tykehill. the remains furnish an excellent specimen of the earthworks of this class. the motte is 75 feet high, and its area on top about 80 feet in diameter; about a third of it is natural, the rest artificial. only a slight trace remains of the ditch separating it from the oval bailey, which covers 2 acres. the foundations of a decagonal tower, built in the reign of henry ii., are still to be seen on the top.[701] the bailey retains its banks on the scarp, surmounted now by a stone curtain, which, along with the older part of the gatehouse, is possibly of the time of henry i.[702] the outer ditch is about 30 feet broad, and is still full of water in parts. on the counterscarp a portion of the bank remains. this bank carried a wooden palisade when the castle was besieged by cromwell.[703] the site is not naturally defensible; it is about three and a half miles from the northern roman road. the value of the manor of dadesley had risen at the time of the survey.[704] the stone buildings which once stood in the bailey have been transformed into a modern house. tonbridge, kent (fig. 33).--this notable castle, the first english seat of the powerful family who afterwards took their name from clare in suffolk, is first mentioned in 1088, when it was stormed by william rufus and his english subjects, who had adopted his cause against the supporters of his brother robert.[705] the castle was one of great importance at several crises in english history; but it began as a wooden keep on a motte, and the stone shell which now crowns this motte cannot be earlier than the 12th century, and judging by its buttresses, is much later. the castle stands outside the town of tonbridge, separated from it by moats which were fed from the river. the smaller bailey of 1-1/2 acres, probably the original one, is square, with rounded corners. the palatial gatehouse, of the 13th or 14th century, is a marked feature of this castle. there appears to have been only one wing wall down the motte to the bailey, but a second one was not needed, owing to the position of the motte with regard to the river. the value of the manor of hadlow, in which tonbridge lay, was stationary at domesday.[706] it belonged to the see of canterbury, and was held by richard de bienfaite, ancestor of the house of clare, as a tenant of the see. [illustration: fig. 33. tonbridge, kent. totnes, devon.] totnes, devonshire (fig. 33).--the castle of totnes belonged to judhael, one of king william's men, who has been already mentioned under barnstaple. this castle is not noticed in domesday book, but its existence in the 11th century is made certain by a charter of judhael's giving land _below his castle_ to the benedictine priory which he had founded at totnes: a charter certainly of the conqueror's reign, as it contains a prayer for the health of king william.[707] the site was an important one; totnes had been one of the boroughs of the _burghal hidage_; it was at the head of a navigable river, and was the point where the ancient roman (?) road from devonshire to bath and the north began its course.[708] the motte of the castle is very high and precipitous, and has a shell on top, which is perfect up to the battlements, and appears to be rather late norman. this keep is entered in a very unusual way, by a flight of steps leading up from the bailey, deeply sunk in the upper part into the face of the motte, so as to form a highly defensible passage. two wing walls run down to the walls of the bailey. there is at present no ditch between the motte and the bailey. the whole area of the work is 3/4 acre. it stands in a very defensible situation on a spur of hill overlooking the town, and lies just outside the ancient walls. the value of the town of totnes had risen at domesday.[709] the tower of london.--here, as at colchester, there is no motte, because the original design was that there should be a stone keep. ordericus tells us that after the submission of london to william the conqueror he stayed for a few days in barking while certain fortifications in the city were being finished, to curb the excitability of the huge and fierce population.[710] what these fortifications were we shall never know, but we may imagine they were earthworks of the usual norman kind.[711] certainly the great keep familiarly known as the white tower was not built in a few days; it does not appear to have been even begun till some eleven years later, when gundulf, a monk celebrated for his architectural skill, was appointed to the see of rochester. gundulf was the architect of the tower,[712] and it must therefore have been built during his episcopate, which lasted from 1077-1108.[713] in 1097 we read that "many shires which owe works to london were greatly oppressed in making the wall (weall) round the tower."[714] this does not necessarily mean a stone wall, but probably it does, as gundulf's tower can hardly have been without a bank and palisade to its bailey. as the tower in its general plan represents the type of keep which was the model for all succeeding stone keeps up to the end of the 12th century, it seems appropriate here to give some description of its main features. its resemblance to the keep of colchester, which also was a work of william i.'s reign, is very striking.[715] colchester is the larger of the two, but the tower exceeds in size all other english keeps, measuring 118 × 98 feet at its base.[716] as it has been altered or added to in every century, its details are peculiarly difficult to trace, especially as the ordinary visitor is not allowed to make a thorough examination.[717] thus much, however, is certain: neither of the two present entrances on the ground floor is original; the first entrance was on the first floor, some 25 feet above the ground, at the s.w. angle of the south side, and has been transformed into a window. there was no entrance to the basement, but it was only reached by the grand staircase, which is enclosed in a round turret at the n.e. angle. there were two other stairs at the n.w. and s.w. angles, but these only began on the first floor. the basement is divided by a cross wall, which is carried up to the third storey. there are at present three storeys above the basement. the basement, which is now vaulted in brick, was not originally vaulted at all, except the south-eastern chamber, under the crypt of the chapel. the first floor, like the basement, is divided into three rooms, as, in addition to the usual cross wall, the tower has a branch cross wall to its eastern section, which is carried up to the top. this floor was formerly only lit by loopholes; clark states that there were two fireplaces in the east wall, but there is some doubt about this. the s.e. room contained the crypt of the chapel, which was vaulted. it is commonly supposed that the rooms on the first floor were occupied by the guards of the keep. in the account which we have quoted from lambert of ardres, the first floor is said to be the lord's habitation, and the upper storey that of the guards; so that there seems to have been no invariable rule.[718] no special room was allotted to the kitchen, as in time of peace at any rate, the lord of the castle and all his retainers took their meals in a great hall in the bailey of the castle.[719] the ceilings of the two larger rooms of this floor are now supported by posts, an arrangement which is probably modern, as the present posts certainly are.[720] the second floor contains the chapel, which in many keeps is merely an oratory, but is here of unusual size. its eastern end is carried out in a round apse, a feature which is also found at colchester, but is not usual in norman keeps.[721] it is a singularly fine specimen of an early norman chapel. this floor probably contained the royal apartments; it was lighted by windows, not loops. both the eastern and western rooms had fireplaces; the eastern room goes by the name of the banqueting chamber. the third storey is on a level with the triforium of the chapel.[722] this triforium is continued all round the keep as a mural passage, and it has windows only slightly smaller than those of the floor below. these mural galleries are found in most important keeps. as their windows were of larger size than the loops which lit the lower floors, it is possible that they may have been used for defence, either for throwing down missiles or for shooting with bows and arrows. but no near aim could be taken without a downward splay to the window, and the bows of the 11th and 12th centuries were incapable of a long aim. a plausible theory is that they were intended for the march of sentinels.[723] the masonry of the tower is of kentish rag, with ashlar quoins. in mediæval times it had a forebuilding, with a round stair turret, which is shown in some old views; but it may reasonably be doubted whether this was an original feature. as regards the ground plan of the castle as a whole, it is now concentric, but was not so originally. the tower was certainly placed in the s.e. angle of the roman walls of london, and very near the east wall, portions of which have been discovered.[724] the conversion of the castle into one of the concentric type was the work of later centuries, and the history of its development has still to be traced.[725] trematon, cornwall (fig. 34).--"the count [of mortain] has a castle there and a market, rendering 101 shillings."[726] two cornish castles are mentioned in domesday, and both of them are only on the borders of that wild keltic country; but while launceston is inland, trematon guards an inlet on the south coast. the position of this castle is extremely strong by nature, at the end of a high headland; on the extreme point of this promontory the motte is placed. it carries a well-preserved shell wall, which may be of norman date, from the plain round arch of the entrance.[727] it has been separated by a ditch from the bailey, but the steepness of the hill rendered it unnecessary to carry this ditch all round. the bailey, 1 acre in extent, in which a modern house is situated, still has an entrance gate of the 13th century, and part of a mediæval wall. a second bailey, now a rose-garden, has been added at a later period. in spite of the establishment of a castle and a market the value of the manor of trematon had gone down at the time of the survey, which may be accounted for by the fact that there were only ten ploughs where there ought to have been twenty-four. it was only a small manor, and no burgus is mentioned. [illustration: fig. 34. trematon, cornwall. tutbury, staffs.] tutbury, staffordshire (fig. 34).--in the magnificent earthworks of this castle, and the strength of its site, we probably see a testimony to the ability of hugh d'avranches; for we learn from ordericus that in 1070 william i. gave to henry de ferrers the castle of tutbury, which had belonged to hugh d'avranches,[728] to whom the king then gave the more dangerous but more honourable post of the earldom of chester. domesday book simply states that henry de ferrers has the castle of tutbury, and that there are forty-two men living by their merchandise alone in the borough round the castle.[729] at tutbury the keep was placed on an artificial motte, which itself stood on a hill of natural rock, defended on the n.w. side by precipices. there is no trace of any ditch between the motte and bailey. at present there is only the ruin of a comparatively modern tower on the motte, but shaw states that there was formerly a stone keep.[730] a description of elizabeth's reign says, "the castle is situated upon a round hill, and is circumvironed with a strong wall of astilar [ashlar] stone.... the king's lodging therein is fair and strong, bounded and knit to the wall. and a fair stage hall of timber, of a great length. four chambers of timber, and other houses well upholden, within the walls of the castle."[731] the king's lodging will no doubt be the closed gatehouse; the custom of erecting gatehouse palaces arose as early as the 13th century. this account shows how many of the castle buildings were still of timber in elizabeth's reign. the bailey is quadrant-shaped, and has the motte at its apex. its area is 2-1/2 acres. its most remarkable feature is that it still retains its ancient banks on the east side and part of the south, and the more recent curtain is carried on top of them. this curtain is of the same masonry as the three remaining towers, which are of excellent perpendicular work, and are generally attributed to john of gaunt, who held this castle after his marriage with blanche of lancaster. the first castle was undoubtedly of wood; it was pulled down by order of henry i. in 1175,[732] nor does there seem to have been any resurrection till the time of earl thomas of lancaster at the earliest. though tutbury was the centre of the honour of ferrers, it does not seem to have been even a manor in saxon times. the borough was probably the creation of the castellan, who also founded the priory.[733] there is no statement in the survey from which we can learn the value t. r. e., but t. r. w. it was 4_l._ 10_s._ tynemouth, northumberland.--besieged and taken by william rufus in 1095.[734] there is no motte there, and probably never was one, as the situation is defended by precipitous cliffs on all sides but one, where a deep ditch has been cut across the neck of the headland. [illustration: fig. 35. wallingford, berks.] wallingford, berkshire (fig. 35).--there is good reason to suppose that in the _vallum_ of the town of wallingford we have an interesting relic of saxon times. wallingford is one of the boroughs enumerated in the _burghal hidage_; it was undoubtedly a fortified town at the time of the conquest,[735] and is called a _burgus_ in domesday book; but there appears to be no evidence to connect it with roman times except the discovery of a number of roman coins in the town and its neighbourhood. no roman buildings or pavements have ever been found.[736] the saxon borough was built on the model of a roman _chester_: a square with rounded corners. the rampart of wallingford, which still exists in great part, is entirely of earth, and must have been crowned with a wooden wall, such as was still existing at portsmouth in leland's time.[737] the accounts of wallingford in the great survey are very full and important. "king edward had eight virgates in the borough of wallingford, and in these there were 276 haughs paying 11_l._ of rent. eight have been destroyed for the castle."[738] this norman castle was placed in the n.e. corner of the borough. at present its precincts cover 30 acres,[739] but this includes garden grounds, and no doubt represents later enclosures. no ancient plan of the castle has been preserved, but from leland's description there appear to have been three wards in his time, each defended by banks and ditches. the inner ward, which was doubtless the original one, is rudely oblong in shape; it covers 4-1/2 acres. leland says, "all the goodly buildings, with the towers and dungeon, be within the third dyke." the motte, which still exists, was on the south-eastern edge of this ward; that is, it was so placed as to overlook both the borough and the ford over the thames.[740] it was ditched around, and is said to have had a stone keep on the top; but no foundations were found when it was recently excavated. it was found to rest on a foundation of solid masonry several feet thick, sloping upwards towards the outside, so that it must have stood in a kind of stone saucer.[741] the masonry which remains in the other parts of the castle is evidently none of it of the early norman period, unless we accept a fragment of wall which contains courses of tiles. numerous buildings were added in henry iii.'s reign; the walls and battlements were repaired, and the _hurdicium_, which had been blown down by a high wind, was renewed.[742] but the motte and the high banks show clearly that the first norman castle was of wood. the value of the royal borough of wallingford had considerably risen since the conquest.[743] warwick (fig. 36).--here again we have a castle built on land which the conqueror obtained from a saxon convent, a positive proof that there was no castle there previously. only a small number of houses was destroyed for the castle,[744] and this points to the probability, which is supported by some other evidence, that the castle was built outside the town. warwick, of course, was one of the boroughs fortified by ethelfleda, and it was doubtless erected to protect the roman road from bath to lincoln, the foss way, against the danes. domesday book, after mentioning that the king's barons have 112 houses in the borough, and the abbot of coventry 36, goes on to say that these houses belong to the lands which the barons hold outside the city, and are rated there.[745] this is one of the passages from which professor maitland has concluded that the boroughs planted by ethelfleda and her brother were organised on a system of military defence, whereby the magnates in the country were bound to keep houses in the towns.[746] ordericus, after the well-known passage in which he states that the lack of castles in england was one great cause of its easy conquest by the normans, says: "the king _therefore_ founded a castle at warwick, and gave it in custody to henry, son of roger de beaumont."[747] putting these various facts together, we may fairly assert that the motte which still forms part of the castle of warwick was the work of the conqueror, and not, as mr freeman believed, "a monument of the wisdom and energy of the mighty daughter of alfred,"[748] whose energy was very much better employed in the protection of her people. dugdale, who also put the motte down to ethelfleda, was only copying rous, a very imaginative writer of the 15th century. the motte of warwick is mentioned several times in the _pipe rolls_ of henry ii.; it then carried wooden structures on its top.[749] in leland's time there were still standing on this motte the ruins of a keep, which he calls by its norman name of the dungeon. a fragment of a polygonal shell wall still remains.[750] but there is not a scrap of masonry of norman date about the castle. the motte, and the earthen bank which still runs along one side of the court, show that the first castle was a wooden one. the bailey is oblong in shape, the motte being outside it; its area is about 2-1/2 acres. the value of warwick had doubled since the conquest. [illustration: fig. 36. warwick. wigmore, hereford.] wigmore, herefordshire (fig. 36).--we have already referred to the absurdity of identifying this place with the _wigingamere_ of the _anglo-saxon chronicle_.[751] we have the strongest indication that the norman castle at wigmore was a new erection, since domesday book tells us that william fitzosbern built it on waste land called mereston.[752] this express statement disposes of the fable in the _fundationis historia_ of wigmore priory, that the castle of wigmore had belonged to edric the wild, and was rebuilt by ralph mortimer.[753] wigmore had only been a small manor of two taxable hides in saxon times. whereas it had then been unproductive, at the date of the survey there were two ploughs in the demesne, and the borough attached to the castle yielded 7_l._ here we have another instance of the planting of a borough close to a castle, and of the revenue which was thus obtained. there is a very large and high motte at wigmore castle, of oval shape, on a headland which has been cut off by a deep ditch. the earthen banks of its first fortification still remain, enclosing a small ward, but on top of them is a wall in masonry, and the ruins of a polygonal keep;[754] also the remains of two mural towers. half-way down the end of the headland, below the motte, is a small square court, which _may_ have been the original bailey; below it, again, is a larger half-moon bailey furnished with walls and towers. but the whole area covered is only 1 acre. the masonry is none of it earlier than the decorated period, except one tower in the bailey wall which may be late norman. [illustration: fig. 37. winchester. (from a plan by w. godson, 1750.)] winchester, hants.--we include winchester among the castles mentioned or alluded to in domesday book, because we think it can be proved that the _domus regis_ mentioned under alton and clere is the castle built by william outside the west gate of the city, where the present county hall is now almost the only remaining relic of any castle at all.[755] under the head of "aulton" we are told that the abbot of hyde had unjustly gotten the manor in exchange for the king's house, because by the testimony of the jurors it was already the king's house.[756] that _excambio domus regis_ should read _excambio terræ domus regis_ is clear from the corresponding entry under clere, where the words are _pro excambio terræ in qua domus regis est in civitate_.[757] the matter is put beyond a doubt by the confirmatory charter of henry i. to hyde abbey, where the king states that his father gave aulton and clere to hyde abbey _in exchange for the land on which he built his hall in the city of winchester_.[758] where, then, was this hall, which was clearly new, since fresh land was obtained for it, and which must not therefore be sought on the site of the palace of the saxon kings? the _liber winton_, a roll of henry i.'s time, says that twelve burgesses' houses had been destroyed and the land was now occupied by the king's house.[759] another passage says that a whole street _outside the west gate_ was destroyed when the king made his ditch.[760] these passages justify the conclusion of mr smirke that the king's house at winchester was neither more nor less than the castle which existed until the 17th century outside the west gate.[761] probably the reason why it is spoken of so frequently in the earliest documents as the king's house or hall, instead of the castle, is that in this important city, the ancient capital of wessex, where the king "wore his crown" once a year, william built, besides the usual wooden keep on the motte, a stone hall in the bailey, of size and dignity corresponding to the new royalty.[762] in fact, the hall so magnificently transformed by henry iii., and known to be the old hall of the castle, can be seen on careful examination to have still its original norman walls and other traces of early norman work.[763] the palace of the saxon kings stood, where we might expect to find the palace of native princes, in the middle of the city; according to milner it was on the site of the present square.[764] william may have repaired this palace, but that he constructed two royal houses, a palace and a castle, is highly improbable. the castle became the residence of the norman kings, and the saxon palace appears to have been neglected.[765] we see with what caution the conqueror placed his castle at the royal city of wessex without the walls. milner tells us that there was no access to it from the city without passing through the west gate.[766] the motte of the castle appears to have been standing in his time, as he speaks of "the artificial mount on which the keep stands."[767] it is frequently mentioned in mediæval documents as the _beumont_ or _beau mont_. it was surrounded by its own ditch.[768] the bailey, if speed's map is correct, was triangular in shape. with its ditches and banks the castle covered 6 acres, according to the commissioners who reported on it in elizabeth's reign; but the inner area cannot have been more than 4-1/2 acres. we may infer from the sums spent on this castle by henry ii., that he was the first to give it walls and towers of stone; the _pipe rolls_ show entries to the amount of 1150_l._ during the course of his reign; the work of the walls is frequently specified, and stone is mentioned. domesday book does not inform us whether the value of winchester had risen or fallen since the conquest. [illustration: fig. 38. windsor castle (from ashmole's "order of the garter.")] windsor (fig. 38).--here we have another of the interesting cases in which the geld due from the tenant of a manor is lessened on account of a castle having occupied a portion of the land.[769] the survey tells us that the castle of windsor sits in half a hide belonging to the manor of clewer, which had become william's property as part of the spoils of harold. it was _now_ held of the king by a norman tenant-in-chief, but whereas it was formerly rated as five hides it was now (that is, probably, since the castle was built) rated as four and a half hides. of course we are not to suppose that the castle occupied the whole half hide, which might be some 60 acres; but it extinguished the liability of that portion. at windsor, however, we have no occasion to press this argument as a proof that the castle was new, since it is well established that the palace of the saxon kings was at least 2 miles from the present castle and town, in the village long known as old windsor, which fell into decay as the town of windsor sprang up under the norman castle.[770] the manor of windsor was given by edward the confessor to the convent of westminster, but recovered by the conqueror.[771] but as the survey shows us, he did not build his castle in the manor of windsor, but in that of clewer. he built it for a hunting-seat,[772] and it may have been for the purpose of recovering forest rights that he resumed possession of old windsor; but he placed his castle in the situation which he thought best for defence. for even a hunting-seat in norman times was virtually a castle, as many other instances show. it is needless to state that there is no masonry at windsor of the time of the conqueror, or even of the time of his son henry i., in spite of the statement of stowe that henry "new builded the castle of windsor." this statement may perhaps be founded on a passage in the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ which says that henry held his court for the first time in the new windsor in 1110. perhaps the _chronicle_ here refers to the _borough_ of new windsor, as an entry in the _pipe roll_ of henry i. seems to show that he was the first to enclose the _burgus_ of windsor.[773] for it is probable that the first stone castle at windsor was built by henry ii., who spent £1670 on it in the course of his reign. one of his first acts after his accession was an exchange of land at windsor, which seems to have been for the purpose of a vineyard, and was possibly the origin of the second bailey.[774] at present the position of the motte is central to the rest of the castle, but this is so unusual that it suggests the idea that the upper ward is the oldest, and that the motte stood on its outer edge. henry ii. surrounded the castle with a wall, at a cost of about 128_l._[775] the other entries in the _pipe rolls_ probably refer to the first stone shell on the motte, and there is little doubt that the present round tower, though its height has been raised in modern times, and its masonry re-dressed and re-pointed so as to destroy all appearance of antiquity, is in the main of henry ii.'s building. the frequent payments for stone show the nature of henry's work. although so much masonry was put up in henry ii.'s reign, the greater part of what is now visible is not older than the time of henry iii. the lower bailey seems to have been enlarged in his reign, as the castle ditch was extended towards the town, and compensation given for houses taken down.[776] the upper (probably the original) ward is rectangular in shape, and with the motte and its ditches covers about 6-1/2 acres.[777] the state apartments, a chapel, and the hall of st george, are in the upper ward, showing that this was the site of the original hall and chapel of the castle. the charter of agreement between stephen and henry in 1153 speaks of the _motte_ of windsor as equivalent to the castle.[778] repairs of the motte are mentioned in the _pipe rolls_ of henry ii.[779] the value of the manor of clewer had fallen since the conquest; that of windsor, which was worth 15_l._ t. r. e., but after the conquest fell to 7_l._, was again worth 15_l._ at the date of the survey.[780] wisbeach, cambridgeshire.--william i. built a castle here in 1072, after suppressing the revolt of hereward, in order to hold in check the cambridgeshire fen country.[781] there is an early mention of it in the register of thorney abbey. this castle, after being several times rebuilt, is now completely destroyed, and "several rows of elegant houses built on the site." nevertheless, there still remain distinct traces of the motte-and-bailey pattern in the gardens which now occupy the site of the original castle of king william; the present crescent probably follows the line of the ditch. the meagre indications preserved in casual accounts confirm this. there was an inner castle of about 2 acres, just the area of the present garden enclosure, and an outer court, probably an addition, of some 4 acres.[782] both areas were moated. weston, a prisoner who was confined in the keep of this castle in the 17th century, has left an account of his captivity, in which he casually mentions that the keep or dungeon stood upon a high terrace, from which he could overlook the outer bailey, and was surrounded by a moat filled with water.[783] the castle is not mentioned in domesday, but as might be expected in a district which had been so ravaged by war, the value of the manor had fallen. worcester.--this borough, as we have seen, was fortified by ethelfleda and her husband ethelred in the 9th century. that the fortifications thus erected were those of a city and not of a castle is shown with sufficient clearness by the remarkable charter of this remarkable pair, in which they declare that they have built the _burh_ at worcester to shelter all the people, and the churches, and the bishop.[784] the castle is first mentioned in the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ in 1088, and it is to be noted that it is styled the king's castle. urse d'abitot, the norman sheriff of worcester, has the credit of having built the first castle, and malmesbury relates that he seized part of the monks' cemetery for the bailey.[785] the monks, however, held on to their right, and in the first year of henry iii. the bailey was restored to them by the guardians of the young king, the motte being reserved for the king's use.[786] the first wooden castle was burnt in 1113.[787] the tower or keep which succeeded it, and which was repaired by henry ii.,[788] may have been either of stone or wood; but in the order of john, that the gateway of the castle, which is of wood, is to be made of stone, we get a hint of the gradual transformation of the castle from a wooden to a stone fortress.[789] worcester castle was outside the town, from speed's map, and was near the severn. the area now called college green was no doubt the outer ward of the castle, which was restored to the convent by henry iii. the tower called edgar's tower was built by the monks as the gatehouse to their newly conceded close.[790] from the map given by green, this outer bailey appears to have been roughly square; but there was also a small oblong inner ward, retained by the king, where the gaol was afterwards built. the area of the castle is said to have been between 3 and 4 acres.[791] the motte, which is mentioned several times in mediæval documents,[792] was completely levelled in 1848; it was then found out that it had been thrown up over some previous buildings, which were believed to be roman, though this seems doubtful.[793] the value of worcester had risen since the conquest.[794] york (fig. 39).--william the conqueror built two castles at york, and the mottes of both these castles remain, one underneath clifford's tower, the keep of york castle, the other, on the south side of the ouse, still bearing the name of the baile hill, or the old baile.[795] the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ implies, though it does not directly state, that both these castles were built in 1068, on the occasion of william's first visit to york. the more detailed narrative of ordericus shows that one was built in 1068, and the other at the beginning of 1069, on william's second visit.[796] both were destroyed in september 1069, when the english and danes captured york, and both were rebuilt before christmas of the same year, when william held his triumphant christmas feast at york. this speedy erection, destruction, and re-erection is enough to prove that the castles of william in york were, like most other norman castles, hills of earth with buildings and stockades of wood, especially as we find these hills of earth still remaining on the known sites of the castles. and we may be quite sure that the norman masonry, which mr freeman pictures as so eagerly destroyed by the english, never existed.[797] but the obstinate tendency of the human mind to make things out older than they are has led to these earthen hills being assigned to britons, romans, saxons, danes, anybody rather than normans. a single passage of william of malmesbury, in which he refers to the _castrum_ which the danes had built at york in the reign of athelstan, is the sole vestige of basis for the theory that the motte of clifford's tower is of danish origin.[798] the other theories have absolutely no foundation but conjecture. if malmesbury was quoting from some older source which is now lost, it is extremely probable that the word _castrum_ which he copied, did not mean a castle in our sense of the word at all, but was a translation of the word _burh_, which almost certainly referred to a vallum or wall constructed round the danish suburb outside the walls of york. such a suburb there was, for there in 1055 stood the danish church of st olave, in which earl siward was buried, and the suburb was long known as the earlsburgh or earl's burh, probably because it contained the residence of the danish earls of northumbria.[799] this suburb was not anywhere near clifford's tower, but in quite a different part of the city. to prove that both the mottes were on entirely new sites, we have the assurance of domesday book that out of the seven _shires_ or wards into which the city was divided, one was laid waste for the castles; so that there was clearly a great destruction of houses to make room for the new castles.[800] [illustration: fig. 39. york castle and baile hill. (from a plan by p. chassereau, 1750.)] what has been assumed above receives striking confirmation from excavations made recently (1903) in the motte of clifford's tower. at the depth of 13 feet were found remains of a wooden structure, surmounted by a quantity of charred wood.[801] now the accounts of the destruction of the castles in 1069 do not tell us that they were burned, but thrown down and broken to pieces.[802] but the keep which was restored by william, and on the repair of which henry ii. spent 15_l._ in 1172,[803] was burnt down in the frightful massacre of the jews at york castle in 1190.[804] the excavations disclosed the interesting fact that this castle stood on a lower motte than the present one, and that when the burnt keep was replaced by a new one the motte was raised to its present height, "an outer crust of firmer and more clayey material being made round the older summit, and a lighter material placed inside this crater to bring it up to the necessary level." this restoration must have taken place in the third year of richard i., when 28_l._ was spent "on the work of the castle."[805] this small sum shows that the new keep also was of wood; and remains of timber work were in fact found on the top of the motte during the excavations, though unfortunately they were not sufficiently followed up to determine whether they belonged to a wooden tower or to a platform intended to consolidate the motte.[806] it is extremely likely that this third keep was blown down by the high wind of 1228, when 2s. was paid "for collecting the timber of york castle blown down by the wind."[807] in its place arose the present keep, one of the most remarkable achievements of the reign of henry iii.[808] the old ground-plan of the square norman keep was now abandoned, and replaced by a quatrefoil. the work occupied thirteen years, from the 30th to the 43rd henry iii., and the total sum expended was 1927_l._ 8_s._ 7_d._, equal to about 40,000_l._ of our money. this remarkable fact has slumbered in the unpublished _pipe rolls_ for 700 years, never having been unearthed by any of the numerous historians of york. the keep was probably the first work in stone at york castle, and for a long time it was probably the only defensive masonry. the banks certainly had only a wooden stockade in the early part of henry iii.'s reign, as timber from the forest of galtres was ordered for the repair of breaches in the _palicium_ in 1225.[809] as late as edward ii.'s reign there was a _pelum_, or stockade, round the keep, on top of a _murus_, which was undoubtedly an earthen bank.[810] at present the keep occupies the whole top of the motte except a small _chemin de ronde_, but the fact so frequently alluded to in the writs, that a stockade ran round the keep, proves that a small courtyard existed there formerly, as was usually the case with important keeps. another writ of edward ii.'s reign shows that the motte was liable to injury from the floods of the river fosse,[811] and probably its size has thus been reduced. the present bailey of york castle does not follow the lines of the original one, but is an enlargement made in 1825. a plan made in 1750, and reproduced here, shows that the motte was surrounded by its own ditch, which is now filled up, and that the bailey, around which a branch of the fosse was carried, was of the very common bean-shaped form; it was about 3 acres in extent. the motte and bailey were both considerably outside what is believed to have been the anglo-saxon rampart of york,[812] but the motte was so placed as to overlook the city. the value of the city of york, in spite of the sieges and sacks which it had undergone, and in spite of there being 540 houses "so empty that they pay nothing at all," had risen at the date of the survey from 53_l_. in king edward's time to 100_l._ in king william's.[813] this extraordinary rise in value can only be attributed to increased trade and increased exactions, the former being promoted by the greater security given to the roads by the castles, the latter due to the tolls on the high-roads and waterways, which belonged to the king, and the various "customs" belonging to the castles, which, though new, were henceforth equally part of his rights. the baile hill, york (fig. 39).--there can be no doubt whatever that this still existing motte was the site of one of william's castles at york, and it is even probable that it was the older of the two, as mr cooper conjectures from its position on the south side of the river.[814] the castle bore the name of the old baile at least as early as the 14th century, perhaps even in the 12th.[815] in 1326 a dispute arose between the citizens of york and archbishop william de melton as to which of them ought to repair the wall around the old baile. the mayor alleged that the district was under the express jurisdiction of the archbishop, exempt from that of the city; the archbishop pleaded that it stood within the ditches of the city.[816] the meaning of this dispute can only be understood in the light of facts which have recently been unearthed by the industry and observation of mr t. p. cooper, of york.[817] the old baile, like so many of william's castles, originally stood outside the ramparts of the city. the original roman walls of york (it is believed) enclosed only a small space on the eastern shore of the ouse, and before the norman conquest the city had far outgrown these bounds, and therefore had been enlarged in anglo-saxon times. it appears that the micklegate suburb was then for the first time enclosed with a wall, and as this district is spoken of in domesday book as "the shire of the archbishop," it was evidently under his jurisdiction. at a later period this wall was buried in an earthen bank, which probably carried a palisade on top, until the palisade was replaced by stone walls in the reign of henry iii.[818] the evidence of the actual remains renders it more than probable that this rampart turned towards the river at a point 500 feet short of its present angle, so that the old baile, when first built, was quite outside the city walls.[819] this is exactly how we should expect to find a castle of william the norman's in relation to one of the most turbulent cities of the realm; and, as we have seen, the other castle at york was similarly placed. by the time of archbishop melton the south-western suburb was already enclosed in the new stone walls built in the 13th century, and these walls had been carried along the west and south banks of the old baile, so as to enclose that castle within the city. this was the archbishop's pretext for trying to lay upon the citizens the duty of maintaining the old baile. but probably on account of his ancient authority in this part of the city, the cause went against him; though he stipulated that whatever he did in the way of fortification was of his own option, and was not to be accounted a precedent. a contemporary chronicler says that he enclosed the old baile first with stout planks 18 feet long, afterwards with a stone wall:[820] an interesting proof that wooden fortifications were still used in the reign of edward iii. though the base court of the old baile is now built over, its area and ditches were visible in leland's time,[821] and can still be guessed at by the indications mr cooper has noted. the area of the bailey must have been nearly 3 acres, and its shape nearly square. this measurement includes the motte, which was placed in the south-west corner on the line of the banks; it thus overlooked the river as well as the city.[822] chapter viii motte-castles in north wales motte-castles are as common in wales as they are in england, and in certain districts much more common. it is now our task to show how they got there. they were certainly not built (in the first instance at any rate) by the native inhabitants, for they do not correspond to what we know to have been the state of society in wales during the anglo-saxon period.[823] the welsh were then in the tribal condition, a condition, as we have shown, inconsistent with the existence of the private castle. the residence of the king or chieftain, as we know from the welsh laws, was a great hall, such as seems to have been the type of chieftains' residence among all the northern nations at that time. "it was adapted for the joint occupation of a number of tribesmen living together."[824] pennant describes the residence of ednowen, a welsh chieftain of the 12th century, as follows: "the remains are about 30 yards square; the entrance about 7 feet wide, with a large upright stone on each side for a doorcase; the walls were formed of large stones uncemented by any mortar; in short the structure shows the very low state of welsh architecture at this time; it may be paralleled only by the artless fabric of a cattle-house."[825] this certainly is a hall and not a castle. the so-called dimetian code indeed tells us that the king is to have a man and a horse from every hamlet, with hatchets for constructing his castles (gestyll) at the king's cost; but the venedotian code, which is the older ms., says that these hatchet-men are to form encampments (uuesten); that is, they are to cut down trees and form either stockades on banks or rude _zerebas_ for the protection of the host.[826] it is clearly laid down in the codes what buildings the king's villeins are to erect for him at his residences: a hall, buttery, kitchen, dormitory, stable, dog-house, and little house.[827] in none of these lists is anything mentioned which has the smallest resemblance to a castle, not even a tower. we can imagine that these buildings were enclosed in an earthwork or stockade, but it is not mentioned.[828] wales was never one state, except for very short periods. normally it was divided into three states, gwynedd or north wales, powys or mid-wales, and deheubarth, all almost incessantly at war with each other.[829] other subdivisions asserted themselves as opportunity offered, so that the above rough division into provinces must not be regarded as always accurate. a wales thus divided, and perpetually rent by internal conflicts, invited the aggression of the saxons, and it is probable that the complete subjugation of britain would have been accomplished by the descendants of alfred, if it had not been for the danish invasions. the position of the welsh kings after the time of athelstan seems to have been that of tributaries, who threw off their allegiance whenever it was possible to do so. but still the anglo-saxon frontier continued to advance. professor lloyd has shown, from a careful examination of domesday book, that even before the norman conquest the english held the greater part of what is now flintshire and east denbighshire, and were advancing into the vale of montgomery and the radnor district.[830] the victories of griffith ap llywelyn, an able prince who succeeded in bringing all wales under his sway, devastated these english colonies; but his defeat by earl harold in 1063 restored the english ascendancy over these regions. the unimpeachable evidence of domesday book shows that a considerable district in north wales and a portion of radnor were held respectively by earl edwin and earl harold before the norman conquest. moreover, the fact mentioned by the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ in 1065, that harold was building a hunting-seat for king edward at portskewet, _after he had subdued it_, suggests that the land between wye and usk, which domesday book reckons under gloucestershire, was a conquest of harold's.[831] the norman conqueror was not the man to slacken his hold on any territory which had been won by the saxons. but there is no succinct history of his conquests in wales; we have to make it out, in most cases, from notices that are scarcely more than allusive, and from the surer, though scanty, ground of documents. it is noteworthy that the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ is so hostile to the norman kings that it discounts their successes in wales. thus we have only the briefest notice of william i.'s invasion of south wales, which was very probably the beginning of the conquest of that region; and several expeditions of william ii. are spoken of as entirely futile, though as we are told that the existing castles were still held by the normans, or new ones were built, it is clear that this summing-up is not strictly correct.[832] our welsh authorities, the _annales cambriæ_ and the _brut y tywysogion_,[833] seem to give a fairly candid account of the period, although the dates in the _brut_ are for the most part wrong (sometimes by three years), and they hardly ever give us a view of the situation as a whole. they tell us when the welsh rushed down and burnt the castles built by the normans in the conquered districts, but do not always tell when the normans recovered and rebuilt them. fortunately we are not called upon here to trace the history of the cruel and barbarous warfare between normans and welsh. no one can turn that bloodstained page without wishing that the final conquest had come two hundred years earlier, to put an end to the tragedy of suffering which must have been so largely the portion of the dwellers in wales and the marches after the coming of the normans.[834] our business with both welsh and normans is purely archæological. we hold no brief for the normans, nor does it matter to us whether they kept their hold on wales or were driven out by the welsh; our concern is with facts, and the solid facts with which we have to deal are the castles whose remains still exist in wales, and whose significance we have to interpret. "wales was under his sway, and he built castles therein," says the _anglo-saxon chronicle_, in summing up the reign of the conqueror; a passage which is scarcely consistent with its previous almost complete silence about events in wales. there can be little doubt that william aimed at a complete conquest of wales, and that the policy he adopted was the creation of great earldoms along the welsh border, endowed with special privileges, one of which was the right of conquering whatever they could from the welsh.[835] to these earldoms he appointed some of his strongest men, men little troubled by scruples of justice or mercy, but capable leaders in war or diplomacy. it was an essential part of the plan that every conquest should be secured by the building of castles, just as had been done in england. and we have now to trace very briefly the outline of norman conquest in wales by the castles which they have left behind them. we shall confine ourselves to those castles which are mentioned in the _brut y tywysogion_, the _pipe rolls_, or other trustworthy documents between 1066 and 1216, the end of king john's reign. of many of these castles only the earthworks remain; of many others the original plan, exactly similar to that of the early castles of normandy and france, is still to be traced, though masked by the masonry of a later age. grose remarked but could not explain the fact that we continually read of the castles of the marches being burnt and utterly destroyed, and a few months later we find them again standing and in working order. this can only, but easily, be explained when we understand that they were wooden castles built on mottes, quickly restored after a complete destruction of the wooden buildings. north wales appears to have been the earliest conquest of the normans, though not the most lasting. north wales comprised the welsh kingdoms of gwynedd and powys. gwynedd covered the present shires of anglesea, carnarvon, and merioneth, and the mountainous districts round snowdon.[836] powys stretched from the estuary of the dee to the upper course of the wye, and roughly included flint, denbigh, montgomery, and radnor shires. hugh of avranches, earl of chester, was the great instrument of norman conquest in gwynedd, and in the northern part of powys, which lay so near his own dominions. he was evidently a man in whose ability william had great confidence, as he removed him from tutbury to the more difficult and dangerous position of chester, and gave his earldom palatine privileges; all the land in cheshire was held under the earl, and he was a sort of little king in his county. hugh appears to have at once commenced the conquest of north wales. as professor lloyd remarks, domesday book shows us deganwy as the most advanced norman post on the north welsh coast, while on the bristol channel they had got no further than caerleon.[837] in advancing to the valley of the clwyd and building a castle at rhuddlan, the normans were only securing the district which had already been conquered by harold in 1063, when he burnt the hall of king griffith at rhuddlan. nearly the whole of flintshire (its manors are enumerated by domesday book under cheshire) was held by earl hugh in 1086, so that he commanded the entire road from chester to rhuddlan. his powerful vassal, robert of rhuddlan, who became the terror of north wales, besides the lands which he held of earl hugh, held also directly of the king rhos and rhufeniog, districts which roughly correspond to the modern shire of denbigh, and "nort wales" which professor lloyd takes to mean the remainder of the principality of gwynedd, from which the rightful ruler, griffith ap cynan, had been driven as an exile to ireland. it does not appear that there was any fortification at rhuddlan[838] before the "castle newly erected" by earl hugh and his vassal robert. they shared between them the castle and the _new borough_ which was built near it.[839] one word about this new borough, which will apply to the other boroughs planted by norman castles. there were no towns in wales of any importance before the norman conquest, and this civilising institution of the borough is the one great set-off to the cruelty and unrighteousness of the conquest. mills, markets, and trade arose where castles were seated, and civilisation followed in their train. the castle of hugh and robert was not the magnificent building which still stands at rhuddlan, for that is entirely the work of edward i., and there is documentary evidence that edward made a purchase of new land for the site of his castle.[840] more probably robert and hugh had a wooden castle on the now reduced motte which may be seen to the south of edward's castle. in gough's time this motte was still "surrounded with a very deep ditch, including the abbey." nothing can be seen of this ditch now, except on the south side of the motte, where a deep ravine runs up from the river. as from gough's description the hillock (called tut hill)[841] was within the precincts of the priory of black friars, founded in the 13th century, it is extremely probable that edward gave the site of the old castle to the dominicans when he built his new one.[842] another of the castles of robert of rhuddlan was deganwy, or gannoc, which defended the mouth of the conway.[843] here it is said that there was an ancient seat of the kings of gwynedd.[844] the two conical hills which rise here offer an excellent site for fortification, one of them being large enough on top for a considerable camp. the norman conqueror treated them as two mottes, and connected them by walls so as to form a bailey below them. the stone fortifications are probably the remains of the castle built by the earl of chester in 1211.[845] this castle was naturally a sorely contested point, and often passed from hand to hand; but it was in english possession in the reign of henry iii. it was abandoned when edward i. built his great castle at conway. with its usual indifference, the survey mentions no castle in flintshire, but we may be sure that the castle of mold, or montalto (fig. 40), was one of the earliest by which the norman acquisitions in that region were defended,[846] though it is not mentioned in authentic history until 1147. the tradition that it was built by robert de monte alto, one of the barons of the earl of chester, is no doubt correct, though the assumption of welsh legend-makers that the _gwydd grug_, or great tumulus, from which this castle derives its welsh name, existed before the castle, may be dismissed as baseless. the motte of robert de monte alto still exists, and is uncommonly high and perfect; it has two baileys, separated by great ditches, and appears to have had a shell on top. [d. h. m.] the castle was regarded as specially strong, and its reduction by owen gwynedd in 1147 was one of the sweetest triumphs that the welsh ever won.[847] [illustration: fig. 40.--motte-castles of north wales. mold. welshpool. wrexham. mathraval.] it is clear from the _life of griffith ap cynan_[848] that the earl of chester had conquered and incastellated gwynedd before the accession of william rufus. this valuable document unfortunately gives no dates, but it mentions in particular the castle at aberlleinog,[849] one at carnarvon, one at bangor, and one in merioneth. the motte at aberlleinog, near beaumaris, still exists, and the half-moon bailey is traceable, but the curious little round towers and revetting wall in masonry on the motte were probably built to carry guns at the time of the civil war, when this castle was besieged by the royalists. at carnarvon the magnificent castle of edward i. has displaced all former erections, yet some evidence for a motte-and-bailey plan may be found in the fact that the northern portion of the castle has evidently been once separated by a ditch from the southern, and is also much higher.[850] on the hills above bangor, pennant thought he had discovered the remains of earl hugh's castle, but having carefully examined these walls, we are convinced that they never formed part of a castle at all, as they are much too thin; nor are there any vestiges of earthworks.[851] we are disposed to think that instead of at bangor, the castle of earl hugh was at aber, often spoken of as abermenai in the _chronicles_, and evidently the most important port on the straits. at aber there still remains a motte which must have belonged to an important castle, as it was afterwards one of the seats of llywelyn ap jorwerth, prince of gwynedd. the castle in merioneth cannot be certainly identified. in one of the invasions of william rufus, which both the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ and the _brut_ describe as so unsuccessful, we hear that he encamped at mur castell, a place undoubtedly the same as what is now called tomen-y-mur, a motte standing just inside a roman camp, on the roman road leading from shropshire into merioneth and carnarvon. this motte is surrounded by a ditch; there are traces of the usual earthen rampart round the top, now mutilated by landslips.[852] we may, with great probability, assume that this motte was thrown up by william rufus, and that the roman camp served as a bailey for his invading host. whether it was garrisoned for the normans we cannot say, but it evidently formed an important post on a route often followed by their invading armies, as henry i. is said to have encamped there twice.[853] it is one of the few mottes which stand in a wild and mountainous situation, and its purpose no doubt was purely military.[854] * * * * * the earls of chester did not retain the sovereignty of gwynedd; on the death of rufus, griffith ap cynan returned, and obtained possession of anglesea. he was favourably received at the court of henry i., and gradually recovered possession of the whole of gwynedd. in 1114 henry had to undertake a great expedition against him to enforce the payment of tribute;[855] from which, and from the peaceful manner in which griffith seems to have acquired his principality, we may infer that this tribute was the bargain of his possession. it very likely suited henry's policy better to have a tributary welsh prince than a too powerful earl of chester. the reigns of the three first norman kings were the time in which norman supremacy in wales made its greatest advances. with the accession of stephen and the civil war which followed it came the great opportunity for the welsh of throwing off the norman yoke. powys appears to have been the only province which remained faithful to the english allegiance, under madoc ap meredith.[856] the history of norman conquest in powys is more confused than that of gwynedd, but domesday shows us that rainald, the sheriff of shropshire, a vassal of earl roger of shrewsbury, was seated at edeyrnion and cynlle, two districts along the upper valley of the dee.[857] robert of rhuddlan held part of his grant of "nort wales," namely the hundred of arwystli, in the very centre of wales, under earl roger. professor lloyd remarks, "earl roger claimed the same authority over powys as earl hugh over gwynedd, and the theory that the princes of this region were subject to the lords of salop survived the fall of the house of montgomery."[858] we have already spoken of earl roger de montgomeri and his brood of able and unscrupulous sons.[859] the palatine earldom of shrewsbury lay along the eastern border of central powys, and must soon have proved a menace to that welsh kingdom. domesday book shows us that earl roger had already planted his castle of montgomery well within the welsh border at that date. but the ambition of earl roger and his sons stretched beyond their immediate borders. it is probable that they used the upper severn valley, which they fortified by the castle of montgomery, and possibly by the castle of welshpool, as their road into ceredigion, for we find earl roger named by the _brut_ as the builder of the castle of cilgerran,[860] and some say of cardigan also. possibly he was helping his son arnolf in the conquest of pembroke. in 1098 we find his successor, earl hugh, allied with the earl of chester in the invasion of anglesea. montgomery.--this castle is named from the ancestral seat of its founder.[861] the motte-and-bailey plan is still very apparent in the ruins, though the motte is represented by a precipitous rock, only a few feet higher than the baileys attached, and separated from them by a ditch cut through the headland. the masonry, the chief part of which is the shell wall and towers on this isolated rock, is none of it older than the reign of henry iii., when large sums were spent on this castle, and it is spoken of in a writ as "the new castle of montgomery."[862] yet even then the whole of the defences were not remade in stone, as bretasches of timber are ordered in a _mandamus_ of 1223.[863] the four wards are all roughly rectilateral. the castle was never recovered permanently by the welsh, and after the forfeiture of robert belesme, the third earl of shrewsbury, in 1101, the crown kept this important border fortress in its own hands throughout the middle ages. although montgomery castle is the only one mentioned in that region at the same date, there must have been many others, for in 1225 henry iii. ordered all who had mottes in the valley of montgomery to fortify them with good bretasches without delay;[864] and the remains of these mottes are still numerous in the valley. it is quite possible that the mottes at moat lane and llandinam were thrown up to defend the road into arwystli; but this is conjecture.[865] welshpool, _alias_ pol or pool (fig. 40), is also called the castle of trallung.--in powell's _history of wales_ (p. 137) it is stated that cadwgan ap bleddyn, when henry i. took cardigan from him, retired to powys, and began to build a castle here. powell's statements, however, have no authority when unconfirmed, and we are unable to find any confirmation of this statement in the more trustworthy version of the _brut_. and as the house of montgomeri was firmly established in the valley of montgomery as early as 1086, it seems more probable that the two motte-and-bailey castles at welshpool, lower down the severn valley, are relics of the early progress of that family, especially as one of these castles is only about a mile east of offa's dyke, the ancient border. this latter motte is partly cut into by the railway, and diminished in size, but the bailey is nearly perfect. the other one is in the park of powys castle, and is an admirable specimen of its class. the breastwork round the top of the motte remains. [h. w.] it seems probable that this was the precursor of powys castle, and was abandoned at an early period, as the newer castle was known by the name of castell coch, or the red castle, as early as 1233.[866] leland states that there were formerly two castles of two different lords marchers at welshpool;[867] possibly this throws some light on the existence of these two motte-castles. * * * * * when henry ii. came to the throne in 1154, one of the many questions which he had to settle was the welsh question. his first expedition against north wales was in 1157. here he was one day placed in grave difficulties, and fortune was only restored by his personal courage. but in spite of this we learn even from the welsh chronicler that he continued his advance to rhuddlan, and that the object of the expedition, which was the restoration of cadwalader, one of the sons of griffith ap cynan, to his lands, was accomplished. the english chronicler roger of wendover says that henry recovered all the fortresses which had been taken from his predecessors, and rebuilt basingwerk castle; and when he had reduced the welsh to submission, returned in triumph to england. the undoubted facts of the _pipe rolls_ show us that in the year 1159 henry had in his hands the castles of overton, hodesley, wrexham, dernio, ruthin, and rhuddlan, castles which would give him command of the whole of flintshire and of east denbigh and the valley of the clwyd. similarly, after the expedition of 1165, sometimes stated to have been only disastrous, we find him in possession of the castles of rhuddlan, basingwerk, prestatyn, mold, overton, and chirk;[868] so that after the battle of crogen, or chirk, he actually held the battlefield. we are thus introduced to an entirely new group of castles, rhuddlan being the only one which we have heard of before. but it is highly probable that most of these castles were originally raised by the earls of chester or shrewsbury, and were in henry's hands by escheat. *basingwerk.--the _werk_ referred to in this name has probably nothing to do with the castle, but refers to wat's dyke, which reaches the dee at this point. the abbey at this place was founded by an earl of chester,[869] which makes it probable that the castle also was originally his work, especially as wendover says that henry _rebuilt_ it. there is no trace of a castle near the abbey,[870] but less than a mile off, near holywell church, there is a headland called bryn y castell, with a small mound at the farther end, which has far more claim to be the site of basingwerk castle, especially as it is mentioned in john's reign (when it was retaken from the welsh) as the castle of haliwell.[871] overton, in east denbigh, on the middle course of the dee. in custody of roger de powys for the king in 1159-1160. as leland speaks of the ditches and hill of the castle, it was probably a motte-castle of the usual type. "one parte of the ditches and hille of the castel yet remaynith; the residew is in the botom of dee."[872] it is probably all there now, as not a vestige can be traced. [b. t. s.] dernio, or dernant.--there can be no question that dernio is edeyrnion, the valley stretching from bala lake to corwen. domesday book tells us that rainald the sheriff, a "man" of earl roger of shrewsbury, held two "fines" in wales, chenlei and dernio, that is, cynllaith and edeyrnion.[873] towards the end of the 11th century there must have been a norman castle at rug in edeyrnion, as it was to this place that the earls of chester and shrewsbury enticed griffith ap cynan, the rightful ruler of gwynedd; they then sent him prisoner to chester for twelve years.[874] very likely the castle of dernio, which henry ii. was putting into a state of defence in 1159,[875] was at rug, 1-1/2 miles from corwen, where there is still a motte in some private grounds, and there was formerly a bailey also.[876] the place was the seat of an important family in later times. at any rate, the castle was in edeyrnion, and shows that henry was holding the northern part of merionethshire. hodesley; undoubtedly "the rofts" near gresford, a motte with remains of a bailey, on a headland above the river alyn. it is in the former lordship of hoseley.[877] wrexham, the wristlesham of the _pipe rolls_ (fig. 40).--henry was paying for the custody of this castle and that of hoseley in 1160 and 1161. both castles are in the district of bromfield, which was one of the early acquisitions of the earls of chester. mr palmer remarks that this district was probably ceded to the princes of powys, in return for the help which they often rendered to the english king against other welsh princes, as it is found as part of powys at a later period.[878] there are no remains of any castle at wrexham itself, but about a mile off, in erddig park, there is a motte and bailey of considerable size (though the motte is reduced) showing that a castle of some importance once stood there. there were formerly some remains of masonry.[879] wat's dyke has been utilised to form one side of the bailey. it is probable that the importance of the two bromfield castles, wrexham and hoseley, was lost when the princes of powys built their castle on dinas bran. *ruthin.--this important castle, defending the upper valley of the clwyd, was probably in existence long before henry ii. repaired it in 1160, and may perhaps be attributed to earl hugh of chester. the plan shows distinctly that it was once a motte and bailey, though the castle is now transformed into a modern house.[880] chirk, or crogen, in the valley of the ceiriog.--henry was paying for the custody of this castle in 1164, and was provisioning it in 1167.[881] king john paid for the erection of a bretasche there, possibly after some destruction by the welsh.[882] probably the first castle of chirk did not stand in the commanding situation now occupied by the castle of edward i.'s reign, but is represented by a small motte in a garden near the ceiriog stream, and close to the church. an anglo-norman poem of the 13th century attributes the first building of this castle to william peverel, lord of whittington and ellesmere, and says he placed it "on the water of ceiriog."[883] no doubt it defended the passage of the stream, and an important road into shropshire. prestatyn.--this castle defended the coast road from chester to rhuddlan. henry ii. granted it to robert banaster for his services in 1165.[884] it was destroyed by owen gwynedd in 1167, and does not appear to have been rebuilt. a low motte with a half-moon bailey, and a larger square enclosure, still remain. [b. t. s.] * * * * * mr davis has remarked that john was more successful in extending his authority over the british isles than in anything else.[885] in 1211 he led an expedition into the heart of wales, and reduced his son-in-law llywelyn ap jorwerth to complete submission. as usual, the expedition was marked by the building or repair of castles. the earl of chester restored deganwy, which shows that the english frontier was again advanced to the conway; he also repaired the castle of holywell, which the _pipe roll_ shows to have been recovered from the welsh about this time.[886] these _rolls_ also show that in 1212-1213 john was paying for works at the castles of carreghova, ruthin, and chirk, as well as at the following castles, which have not been mentioned before. mathraval, madrael in the _pipe rolls_ (fig. 40), near meifod in montgomeryshire, defending the valley of the vyrnwy.--here was the chief royal residence of powys;[887] but the castle was built in john's reign by roger de vipont. it occupied 2-1/4 acres, and the motte is in one corner of the area, which is square,[888] and surrounded only by banks; though ruined foundations are found in parts of the castle. john himself burned the castle in 1211, when the welsh were besieging it,[889] but the _pipe roll_ (1212-1213) shows that he afterwards repaired it. [d. h. m.] egloe, or eulo, called by leland castle yollo.--on the chester and holywell road, about 8 miles from holywell. the mention in the _pipe roll_ of pikes and ammunition provided for this castle in 1212-1213 is the first ancient allusion to it with which we are acquainted. it is a motte-and-bailey castle, with additions in masonry which are probably of the reign of henry iii. the keep is of the "thimble" plan, a rare instance.[890] [b. t. s.] *yale.--the _brut_ tells us that in 1148 (read 1150) owen gwynedd built a castle in yale. powell identified this with tomen y rhodwydd, a motte and bailey on the road between llangollen and ruthin. yale, however, is the name of a district, and there can be little doubt that the castle of yale was the motte and bailey at llanarmon, which for a long period was the _caput_ of yale.[891] yale undoubtedly belonged to the normans when domesday book was compiled,[892] and it is therefore not unlikely that these earthworks were first thrown up by the earl of chester. the castle was burnt by jorwerth goch in 1158, but restored by john in 1212. one of the expenses entered for that year is "for iron mallets for breaking the rocks in the ditch of the castle of yale."[893] this ditch cut in the rock still remains, as well as some foundations on the motte,[894] which is known as tomen y vardra, or the mount of the demesne.[895] * * * * * how long the two last-mentioned groups of castles continued in anglo-norman hands we do not attempt to say. north wales, as is well known, reaped a harvest of new power and prosperity through the civil war of the end of john's reign, and the ability of llywelyn ap jorwerth. our task ends with the reign of john. we have only to remark that until the _pipe rolls_ of henry iii.'s reign have been carefully searched, it is impossible to say with certainty what castles of north wales, or if any, were still held by the english king. chapter ix motte-castles in south wales it is not possible to fix certain dates for all the norman conquests of the several provinces of south wales. these conquests proceeded from various points, under different leaders. we might have expected that the earliest advances would have been on the herefordshire border, the earldom of hereford having been given by william i. to william fitzosbern, one of his most trusted and energetic servants. ordericus tells us that fitzosbern and walter de lacy first invaded the district of brecknock, and defeated three kings of the welsh.[896] this looks as though the conquest of brecknock was then begun. but it was not completed till the reign of rufus; in 1093 bernard of neufmarché defeated and slew rhys ap tudor, king of south wales, in a battle which the welsh chronicler speaks of as the fall of the kingdom of the britons.[897] william fitzosbern died in 1071, and he had scarcely time to accomplish more than the building of the border castles of wigmore, clifford, ewias, and monmouth, and the incastellation of gwent, that is the country between the wye and the usk, which had already been conquered by harold. it seems probable that pembrokeshire was one of the earliest norman conquests in south wales, as in 1073 and 1074 the _brut_ tells of two expeditions of "the french" into dyfed, a region which included not only what we now call pembrokeshire, but also strath towy, which comprised an extensive district on both sides of the valley of the towy.[898] the _annales cambriæ_ name hugh de montgomeri, earl roger's eldest son, in connection with the second of these expeditions, seven years before the expedition of king william into wales in 1081.[899] the house of montgomeri certainly took the most conspicuous part in the conquest of dyfed and cardigan, which was completed, according to the _brut_, in 1093.[900] arnulf of montgomeri, fifth son of earl roger, was the leader of this conquest. but his father must at the same time have been operating in cardigan, as the building of the castle of cilgerran, which is on the very borders of pembroke and cardigan, is attributed to him. how far earl roger made himself master of ceredigion it is impossible to say. later writers say that he built the castle of cardigan, but we have not been able to find any early authority for this statement, which in itself is not improbable. powell's _history_ makes him do homage to william rufus for the lordship of cardigan, but here again the authority is doubtful.[901] the fact that a castle in or near aberystwyth was not built until 1109 may indicate that the conquest of northern cardigan was not completed till it became the portion of the de clares. this took place in 1109, when henry i. deposed cadwgan, a welsh prince whom he had made lord of cardigan, and gave the lordship to gilbert de clare, who immediately proceeded to build the above-mentioned castle, and to restore earl roger's castle at cilgerran (dingeraint).[902] from this time the castle and district of cardigan continued to be an appanage of the house of clare (of course with frequent interruptions from welsh invasions), and of the family of william marshall, to whom the clare lands came by marriage. the authority of these earls was suspended during the reign of henry ii., when he made rhys ap griffith, who had possessed himself of ceredigion by conquest, justiciar of south wales, but in the reigns of john and henry iii., the _close rolls_ show that cardigan castle and county were generally in the hands of the marshalls. the conquest of pembrokeshire must have been closely followed by that of what is now carmarthenshire, which was then reckoned as part of dyfed.[903] we first hear of the castle of rhyd y gors in 1094,[904] but it evidently existed earlier. this castle we believe to have been the important castle of carmarthen (see _post_). it was founded by william, son of baldwin, sheriff of devon, and cousin of the gilbert de clare who at a later period was made lord of cardigan by henry i. we thus see at what an early date this important family made its appearance in welsh history. the conquest of brecknock (brecheiniog) we have already briefly referred to. it must have begun as early as 1088, for in that year bernard de neufmarché gave to st peter's abbey at gloucester the church and manor of glasbury. the inheritance of bernard passed by marriage to the de braoses, and from them to the mortimers. it is convenient to mention in this connection the norman conquest of radnor, of which the de braoses and mortimers were the heroes. a charter of philip de braose, not later than 1096, is dated at "raddenoam."[905] even during the anarchy of stephen's reign, the mortimers were able to maintain their hold on this district, for the _brut_ relates that in 1145, hugh, son of ralph mortimer, conquered malienydd and elvael the second time.[906] these two districts properly belong to powys, though geographically in south wales. we leave to the last the conquest of glamorgan, which may possibly have been one of the earliest, but whose date is still a matter of dispute, owing to the legendary nature of the aberpergwm version of the _brut_, the only one which even alludes to this conquest. we have, however, an initial date given us in the year 1082, when the _brut y tywysogion_ tell us of the building of cardiff castle.[907] the conquest of "morgannwg," that is the country between the usk and the neath, was the most permanent of any of those accomplished by the normans in wales, but its details are the most obscure of any. the earlier version of the _brut_ takes no notice of the conquest of glamorgan; the later version which goes by the name of the _gwentian chronicle_[908] tells us that the norman robert fitz hamon, being called in to the help of one welsh prince against another, conquered glamorgan for himself, and divided it amongst his followers, who built castles in all parts of the country. the date given is 1088. it seems to be agreed by historians that while the facts of robert fitz hamon's existence and of his conquest of glamorgan are certain, the details and the list of followers given in this chronicle are quite untrustworthy.[909] the district called gower did not then form part of glamorgan, as it does now, though it is still ecclesiastically separate. if we are to believe the aberpergwm _brut_, it must have been conquered in 1094, when william de londres, one of the "knights" of robert fitz hamon, built a strong castle in cydweli (kidwelly).[910] we will now briefly notice such of the castles of these various districts as are mentioned in the sources to which we have already referred in our last chapter, taking them in the order of the modern counties in which they are found. castles of pembrokeshire. pembroke.--giraldus says that arnulf de montgomeri first built this castle of sods and wattles, a scanty and slender construction, in the reign of henry i.[911] this date, however, must certainly be wrong, for the castle sustained a siege from the welsh in 1094, and in 1098 arnulf gave the chapel of st nicholas in his castle of pembroke to the abbey of st martin at sées.[912] there is no motte at pembroke castle; the magnificent keep (clearly of the 13th century or later) stands in a small ward at the edge of a cliff,[913] separated by a former ditch from the immense encircling bailey whose walls and towers are clearly of edwardian date. the words of giraldus "a castle of wattles and turf" might lead us to think that the first castle was a motte of the usual type, but the use which he makes of the same expression in his work on ireland leads one to think that he means a less defensible fort, a mere bank and fence.[914] there is some reason, moreover, to doubt whether the present castle of pembroke stands on the same site as arnulf's, as after the banishment of the latter, gerald, the royal seneschal of pembroke "built the castle anew in the place called little cengarth."[915] but however this may be, the castle of pembroke was certainly strong enough in 1094 to resist a great insurrection of the welsh, when all the castles of south-west wales were destroyed, except pembroke and rhyd y gors. and it continued to be one of the chief strongholds of english power in south wales until edward i. completed the conquest of the country. its splendid situation on a high cliff at the mouth of an excellent harbour, to which supplies could be brought by sea, was one of the secrets of its strength. a passage cut in the rock led from the castle to a cave below opening on to the water. *newport, or trefdaeth, was the head of the barony of keymes, an independent lordship founded at the time of the first norman advance, by martin of tours.[916] there is no mention of it before 1215. the present ruined castle of newport is not earlier than the 13th century, but about 1-1/2 miles higher up the river, at llanhyfer, is a fine motte and bailey, which probably mark the site of the first castle of martin of tours.[917] wiston, _alias_ gwys or wiz.--first mentioned in 1148, when it was taken by the welsh.[918] at a later period we find it one of the castles of the earl of pembroke. there is a motte still remaining, with a shell wall on top, 6 feet thick, having a plain round arched entrance. this masonry is probably the work of william marshall, earl of pembroke, as he restored the castle in 1220 after it had been razed to the ground by llywelyn ap jorwerth.[919] the bailey is large and bean-shaped. lawhaden, or llanyhadein, or lauwadein.--first mention in 1192.[920] it afterwards became a palace of the bishops of st david's. there is no motte, though the circular outline of the platform on which the fine ruins of the castle stand, very much suggests a lowered motte. haverfordwest.--first mentioned in the _pipe roll_ of 1214-1215, when it was in the custody of the earl of pembroke. although this castle is now a gaol, and the whole site masked with gaol buildings, the motte can still be seen distinctly from one side, though the keep which stands upon it is blocked by buildings. the ditch which went round the motte can also be traced. [h. w.] narberth.--this castle is first mentioned in 1115, when it was burnt by the welsh. said to have been the castle of stephen perrot.[921] the present ruins are entirely of the 13th century, and there is no motte; but lewis states that the first castle was in another site, between the present town and templeton; about which we have no information. tenby.--first mention in 1152. an important coast station. the small and curious round keep is placed on the highest point of a small island; it is a miniature copy of the keep of pembroke, and was probably built by one of the earls marshall, not earlier than the 13th century. there is no motte, nor was one needed in such a situation. castles of cardigan. cardigan castle, or aberteifi, has been so much transformed by the incorporation of the keep into a modern house that nothing decisive can be said about its original plan, but there is nothing to foreclose the idea of a previous motte, and speed's plan of 1611 seems to show that the keep and the small ward attached to it were on a higher elevation than the bailey. that the first castle was a wooden one is rendered almost certain by the fact that rhys ap griffith, after having demolished the previous castle, rebuilt it _with stone and mortar_, in the reign of henry ii.[922] the welsh chronicler speaks of this castle as the key of all wales, an exaggeration certainly, but it was undoubtedly the most important stronghold of south ceredigion. [h. w.] cilgerran, or dingeraint (fig. 41).--this castle was certainly built by earl roger;[923] a castle of great importance, in a magnificent situation. like nearly all the castles in our welsh list, it was repeatedly taken by the welsh and retaken from them. the present masonry is of the 13th century, but the original motte-and-bailey plan is quite discernible. [h. w.] it was a connecting link between the castles of pembrokeshire and those of cardigan, and stands near a road leading directly from tenby and narberth to cardigan. aberystwyth, also lampadarn vaur, also aberrheiddiol.[924] in 1109 henry i. deposed cadwgan, a welsh prince who had purchased from the king the government of cardigan, and gave that country to gilbert, son of richard, earl of clare, who took possession, and built a castle "opposite to llanbadarn, near the mouth of the river ystwyth."[925] this was undoubtedly the precursor of the modern castle of aberystwyth, but it is doubtful whether it was on the same site; the present ruins are not opposite llanbadarn. the castle was as important for the defence of n. cardigan as cardigan castle for the south. it was taken at least seven times by the welsh, and burnt at least five times. the present ruins are not earlier than the time of edward i., and there is no motte or keep. [h. w.] *blaenporth, or castell gwythan (fig. 41).--also built by gilbert de clare, and evidently placed to defend the main road from cardigan to aberystwyth. the motte and bailey are still remarkably perfect, as shown by the 25-inch ordnance map. ystrad peithyll.--another of gilbert de clare's castles, as it was inhabited by his steward. it was burnt by the welsh in 1115,[926] and is never mentioned again, but its motte and ditch still survive, with some signs of a bailey, close to the little stream of the peithyll, near aberystwyth. [h. w.] chastell gwalter, or llanfihangel, in pengwern (fig. 41).--castle of walter de bec, probably one of the barons of gilbert de clare. first mentioned in 1137, when it was burned by the welsh.[927] there is a small but well-made motte and part of an adjoining bailey standing in a most commanding position on a high plateau. the ditch of the motte is excavated in the rock. [d. h. m.] [illustration: fig. 41.--motte-castles of south wales. cilgerran. blaenporth. chastell gwalter.] *dinerth.--also burnt in 1137; restored by roger, earl of clare, in 1159, after which it underwent many vicissitudes.[928] probably originally a castle of the clares. "in the grounds of mynachty, in the parish of llanbadarn tref eglwys, is a small hill called hero castell, probably the site of the keep of dinerth castle."[929] the o.m. shows a small motte and bailey placed between two streams. *caerwedros, or castell llwyndafydd, also burned by the welsh in 1137,[930] after which it is not mentioned again. "a very large moated tumulus, with foundations of walls on the top."[931] probably a clare castle. *humphrey's castle, now castle howel, from one of its welsh conquerors. the original name shows that it was built by a norman, and it was restored by roger, earl of clare, in 1159.[932] a moated tumulus near the river clettwr marks the site of humphrey's castle.[933] ystrad meurug, or meyric, at the head of the valley of the teifi, and commanding the pass leading over into radnorshire.--built by gilbert de clare when he reconquered cardigan, and one of his most important castles.[934] its importance is shown by the fact that it had a small stone keep, the date of which cannot now be determined, as only the foundations remain, buried under sods. there is no motte, and the bailey can only be guessed at by a portion of the ditch which still remains on the n. side, and by two platforms which appear to be artificially levelled. the castle is about three miles from the sarn helen or roman road through cardigan. *pont y stuffan, or stephen's bridge, near lampeter.--burnt by the welsh in 1138, and not again mentioned.[935] in the outskirts of the town of lampeter is--or was--a lofty moated tumulus (not shown on o.m.), and traces of a quadrangular court.[936] as it is also called castell ystuffan, it was probably built by stephen, the norman constable of cardigan. there appears to be another castle mound at lampeter itself, near the church. lampeter was an important post on the roman road up the valley of the teifi. *nant yr arian.--this castle is only mentioned once, in the partition of cardigan and pembroke which took place in 1216, during the most disastrous part of john's reign.[937] there are two "castellau" marked at nant yr arian in the n. of cardiganshire in the o.m.; neither of them look like mottes. this castle, as well as that of ystrad peithyll, seems to have been placed to defend the road from aberystwyth to llanidloes, which would be the chief highway between shropshire and ceredigion. castles of carmarthenshire. rhyd y gors, or rhyd cors.--we have no hesitation in adopting the opinion of the late mr floyd, that this is another name for the castle of carmarthen.[938] as it and pembroke were the only castles which held out during the great welsh revolt of 1096,[939] it is evident that they were the two strongest and best defended places, therefore the most important. carmarthen also was a roman city, and its walls were still standing in giraldus' time;[940] it was therefore the place where one would expect to find a norman castle. now carmarthen, along with cardiff and pembroke, continued up till the final conquest of all wales to be the most important seat of english power in south wales. moreover, rhyd y gors was a royal castle; we are expressly told that it was built by william fitz baldwin, by the command of the king of england.[941] carmarthen also was a royal castle, and the only one in south wales at that date which belonged directly to the king. it was temporarily abandoned after william fitz baldwin's death in 1096, and afterwards henry i. gave it into the custody of a welshman, who also had charge of strath towy; a passage which proves that rhyd y gors was in that district. it was restored by richard fitz baldwin in 1104,[942] and is mentioned for the last time in 1105. after that the castle of carmarthen, which has not been mentioned before, begins to appear, and its importance is clear from the continual references to it. placed as it is on a navigable river, at the entrance of the narrower part of the vale of towy, and on the roman road from brecon to st david's, its natural position must have marked it as a fit site for a royal castle. the castle is now converted into a gaol, and disfigured in the usual way; yet the ancient motte of william fitz baldwin still remains, partly inside and partly outside the walls. it is crowned with a stone revetment which colonel morgan believes to have been erected at the time of the civil war, to form a platform for guns.[943] the bailey is rectangular and covers about 2 acres. the motte is placed at one corner of it, on the line of the walls. on the outside it is now built over with poor cottages; but the site of the ditch can still be traced. *llandovery, or llanymdyfri, or the castle of cantrebohhan.--it is referred to in the _pipe rolls_ of 1159-1160 by the latter name, which is only a norman way of spelling cantref bychan, the little cantref or hundred, of which this castle was the head.[944] it was then in royal custody, and henry ii. spent nearly £60 on its works. but it had originally belonged to richard fitz pons, one of the barons of bernard de neufmarché, and the fact that he held the key of this cantref goes to prove that it was from brecknock that the normans advanced into northern carmarthenshire. the castle is first mentioned in the _brut_ in 1115, when griffith ap rhys burnt the bailey, but could not take the keep on the motte.[945] it does not appear to have been long in english hands after 1159, but its alternations were many. the 25-inch o.m. shows an oval motte, carrying some fragments of masonry, to which is attached a roughly quadrangular bailey. this was one of the many castles by which the normans held strath towy. llanstephan.[946]--this castle stands in a splendid situation at the mouth of the towy, and was doubtless built to secure a maritime base for carmarthen. the motte is of unusual size, semicircular in shape, one side being on the edge of the cliff; it measures 300 feet by 200 in the centre of the arc.[947] such a size allowed all the important parts of the castle to be built on the motte; but there was a rectangular bailey attached, which is only imperfectly shown on the o.m.; the scarp is in reality well marked on all sides, and the ditch separating it from the motte is a very deep one. [h. w.] the towers that now crown the motte are not earlier than the year 1256, when the castle was destroyed by llywelyn.[948] dinevor, or dinweiler.--most welsh writers associate dinevor with the ancient residence of the kings of south wales, but there appears to be some doubt about this, as the place is not mentioned before the 12th century.[949] anyhow the castle was certainly the work of earl gilbert, as the _brut_ itself tells us so.[950] in 1162 it was taken by rhys ap griffith, the able prince who attempted the consolidation of south wales, and who was made justiciar of that province by henry ii. it continued in welsh hands, sometimes hostile, sometimes allied, till it was finally taken by the english in 1277. the existing ruins are entirely of the 13th century, but the plan certainly suggests a previous motte and bailey, the motte having probably been lowered to form the present smaller ward, whose walls and towers appear to be of edward i.'s reign. the small bailey attached to this ward is separated from it by a ditch cut through the headland on which the castle stands. kidwelly (cydweli).--this castle, though in carmarthen, was not founded by the conquerors from brecknock, but by normans from glamorgan or gower. kidwelly was first built by william de londres, in 1094.[951] the present castle shows no trace of this early origin, but is a fine specimen of the keepless pattern introduced into england in the 13th century.[952] there is no motte. laugharne, or talycharne.--also called abercorran, being at the point where the little river corran flows into the estuary of the taff. in 1113 this castle belonged to a norman named robert courtmain.[953] the ancient features of the plan have been obliterated by transformation first into an edwardian castle, then into a modern house. there is of course no motte. [h. w.] *ystrad cyngen.--this must, we think, be the same as st clears, which stands in the cynen valley, near its junction with the taff. welsh writers identify st clears with the castle of mabudrud, the name of the _commot_ in which it stands. first mentioned in 1154.[954] there is no notice of its origin, but the fact that a cluniac priory existed in the village, which was a cell of st martin des champs at paris, points to a norman founder, and renders an 11th century date probable. it was a motte-and-bailey castle, of which the earthworks remain.[955] *newcastle emlyn.--this castle does not appear to have received the name of "the new castle of emlyn" till after edward i.'s conquest.[956] the new castle, which is quite edwardian, was probably built on a different site to the old, as "on the other side of the bridge is a considerable mount, of a military character, which must have commanded the river. it may have been the original strong post occupied by the normans."[957] in the 12th century _pipe rolls_ compensation is paid to william fitzgerald for many years "as long as rhys ap griffith holds the castle of emlyn," which points to gerald, the seneschal of pembroke, or his family, as its founders. it is on the very border of carmarthenshire and cardiganshire, defending the main road from carmarthen to cardigan. llanegwad.--this castle is only once mentioned, in the _brut_, under the year 1203, when it was taken by the welsh. a small motte, called locally pen y knap, with an earthen breastwork round the top, is still standing about a mile from the church of llanegwad, and is all that is left of this castle. the position commands a fine view over the towy valley, and it is noteworthy that it stands very near the supposed roman road from brecon to carmarthen. [h. w.] *llangadog.--this castle also does not appear till 1203; it was razed or burnt at least thrice in five years.[958] a mound of earth on the banks of the sawddwy river, near where the roman road from brecon is supposed to have reached the towy valley, is all that remains of it.[959] lewis says that it stands in a large oval entrenchment, and that the motte is of natural rock, scarped conically, and deeply moated. castles in brecknockshire. brecon, or aberhonddu, the seat of bernard de neufmarché himself.--a charter of bernard's mentions the castle.[960] it seems to have been a particularly strong place, as we do not hear of its having been burnt more than once. the newer castle of brecon is evidently of the time of edward i., but across the road the old motte of bernard is still standing, and carries the ruins of a shell wall, with a gatehouse tower.[961] a portion of the bank and ditch of the bailey remains; the whole is now in a private garden. the situation is a strong one, between the usk and the honddu. brecon of course was a burgus, and part of the bank which fortified it remains. [illustration: fig. 42.--motte-castles of south wales. builth. gemaron. payn's castle.] builth, on the upper wye, _alias_ buallt (fig. 42).--a remarkably fine motte and bailey, presenting some peculiarities of plan. it is not mentioned till 1210,[962] but it has been conjectured with great probability that it was one of the castles built by bernard de neufmarché when he conquered brecknock.[963] it was refortified by john mortimer in 1242,[964] probably in stone, as in the account of its destruction by llywelyn in 1260 it is said that "not one stone was left on another."[965] nevertheless when edward i. rebuilt it the towers on the outer wall appear to have been of wood.[966] mr clark states that there are traces of masonry foundations and small portions of a wing wall. the bailey of this castle consists of a rather narrow platform, divided into two unequal portions by a cross ditch which connects the ditch of the motte with that of the bailey. the ditch round the motte is of unusual breadth, being 120 feet broad in the widest part. the whole work is encircled by an outer ditch of varying breadth, being 100 feet wide on the weakest side of the work, and by a counterscarp bank which appears to be still perfect. the entrance is defended by four small mounds which probably cover the remains of towers.[967] the area of the two baileys together is only 1 acre. [d. h. m.] *hay, or tregelli.--the earliest mention of this castle is in a charter of henry i.[968] the present castle of hay is of late date, but leland tells us that "not far from the paroche chirch is a great round hille of yerth cast up by men's hondes."[969] it is shown on the 25-inch o.m., and so is the line of the borough walls. *talgarth.--mentioned in a charter of roger, earl of hereford, not later than 1156.[970] a 13th-century tower on a small motte is still standing, and can be seen from the railway between brecon and hereford. castles of radnorshire. *radnor, or maes hyvaidd.--though this castle is not mentioned in the _brut_ till 1196, when it was burnt by rhys ap griffith, it must have been built by the normans at a very early period. the english had penetrated into the radnor district even before the norman conquest,[971] and the normans were not slow to follow them. a charter of philip de braose is granted at "raddenoam" not later than 1096.[972] there are mottes both at old and new radnor, towns three miles distant from each other, so that it is impossible to say which was the maes hyvaidd of the _brut_. both may have been originally de braose castles, but new radnor evidently became the more important place, and has massive remains in masonry. the town was a _burgus_. *gemaron, or cwm aron (fig. 42).--near llandewi-ystrad-denny. the _brut_ mentions its repair by hugh mortimer in 1145.[973] the 6-inch o.m. shows a square central bailey of 1 acre, containing some remains of masonry, lying between an oblong motte in the s. and an outer enclosure on the n., the whole being further defended by a high counterscarp bank on the w. it commands a ford over the river aran. there is no village attached to it. *maud's castle, otherwise colwyn or clun.[974]--a ditched motte with square bailey on the left bank of the river edwy, near the village of forest colwyn. the statement that this castle was _repaired_ in 1145 shows that it must have been older than the time of maude de braose, from whom it is generally supposed to have taken its name. it was rebuilt by henry iii. in 1231.[975] *payn's castle, otherwise "the castle of elvael."--first mentioned in 1196, when it was taken by rhys ap griffith. this is also a motte-castle (and an exceptionally fine one), placed on a road leading from kington in hereford to builth. rebuilt _in stone_ by henry iii. in 1231.[976] (fig. 42.) *knighton, in welsh trefclawdd.--first mentioned in the _pipe roll_ of 1181. the motte still remains, near the church. there is another motte just outside the village, called bryn y castell. it may be a siege castle. *norton.--first mentioned in the _pipe roll_ of 1191. a motte remains close to the church, and two sides of a bailey which ran down to the norton brook. *bleddfa, the bledewach of the _pipe roll_ of 1195-1196, when £5 was given to hugh de saye _ad firmandum castellum_, an expression which may mean either building or repairing. an oval motte, and traces of a bailey, are marked in the 6-inch o.m. tynboeth, _alias_ dyneneboth, tinbech,[977] and llananno.--first mentioned in _pipe roll_ of 1196-1197. there is a fine large motte in a commanding situation, and a crescent-shaped bailey, now marked only by a scarp. there are some remains of masonry, and the castle was evidently an important one. it is first mentioned in the _pipe roll_ of 1196, and it occurs in lists of the mortimer castles in the 14th century.[978] it is not far from two fords of the river ithon. [h. w.] these four castles are not mentioned in the _brut y tywysogion_, though the _annales cambriæ_ mentions the capture of bleddfa, knighton, and norton by the welsh in 1262. they all command important roads. knighton and norton were boroughs. [illustration: fig. 43.--motte-castles of south wales. cardiff. loughor.] castles of glamorganshire. _cardiff_ (fig. 43).--the first castle of cardiff was certainly a wooden one; its lofty mound still remains. it is placed inside a roman station, and the south and west walls of the castle bailey rest on roman foundations, "but do not entirely coincide with those foundations."[979] the roman fort was probably ruinous when robert fitz hamon placed his first castle there, as on the n. and e. sides the bailey is defended by an earthbank, in which the remains of a roman wall have been found buried. the area of the roman castrum was about 8-1/4 acres, and evidently the normans found this too large, as they divided it by a cross wall, which reduces the inner fort to about 2 acres. the motte has its own ditch. the position of cardiff was a very important base, not only as a port near bristol, but as a point on the probably roman road which connected gloucester with carmarthen and beyond.[980] the lands of robert fitz hamon, in the next generation, passed into the hands of robert, the great earl of gloucester, henry i.'s illegitimate son. he was a great castle-builder, and it is probable that the first masonry of cardiff castle was his work.[981] newcastle bridgend.--this castle and the three which follow are all situated on or near the "roman" road from cardiff to st david's, of which we have already spoken. there were two castles at bridgend, the old castle and the new castle, from which the town takes its name. the site of the former is now too much cut up for any definite conclusions about it; the site of the latter has been converted into market gardens, but a motte is still standing in one corner with the ruins of a tower upon it. [h. w.] this castle is not noticed either by the _brut_ or the aberpergwm version; the earliest mention known to us is in the _pipe roll_ of 1184, at a time when the castles of the earl of gloucester were in royal custody, and this appears to have been one of them. kenfig.--this castle is close to the "roman" road. the aberpergwm _brut_ says that it was one of the castles of robert fitz hamon, and states that in 1092 it was rebuilt "stronger than ever before, for castles prior to that were built of wood." this is a good specimen of the mixture of truth and error to be found in this 16th century ms. there is little doubt that all the first castles of the normans in wales were built of wood; but it is extremely unlikely that any wooden keep was replaced by a stone one as early as 1092. the town and castle of kenfig are now almost entirely buried in sand-drifts, but the top of the motte, with some fragments of masonry upon it, is still visible. [h. w.][982] the note in the _pipe rolls_ of the repair of the _palicium_ of this castle shows that the bailey wall at any rate was still of wood in 1183. even as late as 1232 the keep was only defended by a ditch and hedge; yet it withstood an assault from llywelyn ap jorwerth.[983] the bailey is said to contain 11 acres, a most unusual size. kenfig was a borough in norman times, and it is possible that this large bailey was the original borough, afterwards enlarged in mediæval times. there is evidence that there were burgage tenements within the bailey.[984] aberavon.--the aberpergwm ms. says that fitz hamon gave aberavon to the son of the welsh traitor who had called him into glamorgan. at a later period, however, we find it in norman hands. the site of the castle has been entirely cleared away, but it had a motte, which is still remembered by the older inhabitants. [h. w.][985] it is not mentioned in the _brut_ before 1152, when it was attacked and burnt by rhys ap griffith. *neath.--the site of the first castle of neath was given by richard de granville, its owner, to the abbey of neath, which he had founded.[986] about the year 1111, according to the aberpergwm _brut_, richard returned from the holy land, bringing with him a syrian architect, well skilled in the building of monasteries, churches, and castles, and by him we may presume, a new castle was built on the other side of the river, though the present castle on that site is clearly of much later date. the monks of course destroyed all vestiges of the first (probably wooden) castle. *remmi, or remni.--of this castle there is only one solitary mention, in the _pipe roll_ of 1184. the name seems to indicate the river rhymney, which is the boundary between glamorgan and monmouth. we are unable to find any castle site so near the rhymney as ruperra, where clark mentions a fine motte.[987] but we do not venture on this identification without further information.[988] castles of gower. *swansea, or abertawy.--this was the castle of henry beaumont, the conqueror of gower. the present castle is comparatively modern. it is inside the town; but there used to be a moated mound outside the town, which was only removed in 1804. it seems probable to us that this was the original castle of beaumont.[989] that this first castle had a motte is suggested by the narrative in the _brut_ which tells how griffith ap rhys burnt the outworks in 1115, but was unable to get at the tower.[990] *loughor, or aberllychor (fig. 43).--also built by henry beaumont. the mound of the castle still remains, with a small square keep on top. there was formerly a shell wall also. the place of a bailey was supplied by a terrace 15 feet wide.[991] the four castles last mentioned are all at the mouths of rivers, as well as on an ancient (if not roman) coast road. *llandeilo talybont, or castell hu.--only mentioned once in the _brut_, under 1215, as the castle of hugh de miles. a moated mound with a square bailey and no masonry still remains.[992] it commands the river loughor, which is still navigable up to that point at high tides.[993] on the opposite side of the river is another motte and bailey, called ystum enlle. possibly there was a ford or ferry at this point, which these castles were placed to defend.[994] oystermouth, a corruption of ystum llwynarth.--first mentioned in the older _brut_ in 1215, when it was burnt by rhys grug. the later version says it was built by beaumont in 1099. the castle stands on a natural height, fortified artificially by a motte, which is of great size. there is a small bailey below to the n.e., and a curious small oval embankment thrown out in the rear of the castle towards the n.w. the architecture of this magnificent castle is all of the edwardian style, and as the castle was burnt down by rhys ap meredith in 1287, it is probable that only wooden structures stood on this site until after that date. the castle is in a fine situation overlooking the bay of swansea. [h. w.] * * * * * we have now completed our list of the norman castles built in wales which are known to history. it must not be supposed, however, that we imagine this to be a complete list of all the norman castles which were ever erected in wales. the fact that several in our catalogue are only once mentioned in the records makes it probable that there were many others which have never been mentioned at all. in this way we may account for the many mottes which remain in wales about which history is entirely silent. as there was scarcely a corner in wales into which the normans did not penetrate at some time or other, it is not surprising if we find them in districts which are generally reckoned to be entirely welsh. but there is another way of accounting for them; some of them may have been built by the welsh themselves, in imitation of the normans. as the feudal system and feudal ideas penetrated more and more into wales, and the welsh princes themselves became feudal homagers of the kings of england, it was natural that the feudal castle should also become a welsh institution, especially as it was soon found to be a great addition to the chieftain's personal strength. the following castles are stated in the _brut_ to have been built by the welsh.[995] 1113. *cymmer, in merioneth.--built by uchtred ap edwin, whose name, as we have already remarked, suggests an english descent. near cymmer abbey the motte or _tomen_ remains. *cynfael, in merioneth, near towyn.--built by cadwalader, son of griffith ap cynan, on whose behalf henry ii. undertook his first expedition into wales, and who was at that time a protégé of the anglo-normans. clark gives a plan of this motte-castle in _arch. camb._, 4th ser., vi., 66. 1148. *yale, in denbigh = llanarmon.--said to have been built by owen gwynedd, but here, as we have said, an earlier norman foundation seems probable (see p. 272). 1148. llanrhystyd, in cardigan.--also built by cadwalader, who was then establishing himself in cardigan. probably the motte and bailey called penrhos, or castell rhos, to the east of llanrhystyd village. [h. w.] 1155. aberdovey.--built by rhys ap griffith to defend cardigan against owen, prince of gwynedd. it must therefore have been on the cardigan shore of the dovey, and not at the present town of aberdovey, which is on the merioneth shore. and in fact, on the cardigan shore of the estuary, about two miles west of glandovey castle, there is a tumulus called domenlas (the green tump), which was very likely the site of this castle of rhys.[996] 1155. caereinion.--built by madoc of powys, who was then a homager of henry ii. remains of a motte near the church; the churchyard itself appears to be the former bailey. about a mile off is a british camp called pen y voel, which _may_ have been the seat of the son of cunedda, who is said to have settled here. [h. w.] *walwern, or tafolwern, near llanbrynmair, in montgomery, may have been a welsh castle. it is first mentioned in 1163, when howel ap jeuav took it from owen gwynedd, who may have been its builder. the motte is marked in the o.m. on a narrow peninsula at the junction of two streams. 1169. *abereinon, in cardigan.--built by rhys ap griffith, henry ii.'s justiciar of south wales. "a circular moated tumulus, now called cil y craig."[997] (it is marked on the 25-inch o.m.) 1177. *rhaidr gwy.--also built by rhys ap griffith, no doubt as a menace to powys, as this castle was afterwards sorely contested. it is a motte-and-bailey castle, the motte being known as tower mount.[998] * * * * * all these castles are of the motte-and-bailey type, and prove the adoption by the welsh of norman customs.[999] it will be noticed that in the first instances they were built by men who were specially under norman influences. but probably the fashion was soon more widely followed, although these are the only recorded cases. the contribution made by the castles of wales to the general theory of the origin of mottes in these islands is very important. leaving out the seven castles attributed to the welsh, we find that out of seventy-one castles built by the normans, fifty-three, or very nearly three-fourths, still have mottes; while in the remaining eighteen, either the sites have been so altered as to destroy the original plan, or there is a probability that a motte has formerly existed. chapter x motte-castles in scotland the scottish historians of the 19th century have amply recognised the anglo-norman occupation of scotland, which took place in the 11th and 12th centuries, ever since its extent and importance were demonstrated by chalmers in his _caledonia_. occupation is not too strong a word to use, although it was an occupation about which history is strangely silent, and which seems to have provoked little resistance except in the keltic parts of the country. but it meant the transformation of scotland from a tribal keltic kingdom into an organised feudal state, and in the accomplishment of this transformation the greater part of the best lands in scotland passed into the hands of english refugees or norman and flemish adventurers. the movement began in the days of malcolm canmore, when his english queen, the sainted margaret, undoubtedly favoured the reception of english refugees of noble birth, some of whom were her own relations.[1000] very soon, the english refugees were followed by norman refugees, who had either fallen under the displeasure of the king of england, like the montgomeries, or were the cadets of some norman family, wishful to carve out fresh fortunes for themselves, like the fitz alans, the ancestors of the stuarts. the immigration continued during the reign of the sons of margaret, but seems to have reached its culminating point under david i. (1124-1153). david, as burton remarks, had lived for sixteen years as an affluent anglo-norman noble, before his accession to the scottish crown, being earl of huntingdon in right of his wife, the daughter of simon de senlis, and granddaughter, through her mother, of earl waltheof. david's tastes and sympathies were norman, but it was not taste alone which impelled him to build up in scotland a monarchy of the anglo-norman feudal type. he had a distinct policy to accomplish; he wished to do for scotland what edward i. sought to do for the whole island, to unite its various nationalities under one government, and he saw that men of the anglo-norman type would be the best instruments of this policy.[1001] it mattered little to him from what nation he chose his followers, if they were men who accepted his ideas. norman, english, flemish, or norse adventurers were all received at his court, and endowed with lands in scotland, if they were men suitable for working the system which he knew to be the only one available for the accomplishment of his policy. and that system was the feudal system. he saw that feudalism meant a higher state of civilisation than the tribalism of keltic scotland, and that only by the complete organisation of feudalism could he carry out the unification of scotland, and the subjugation of the wild keltic tribes of the north and west.[1002] the policy was successful, though it was not completely carried out until alexander iii. purchased the kingdom of the isles from the king of norway in 1266. the sons of david, malcolm iv., and william the lion were strong men who doughtily continued the subjugation of the keltic parts of scotland, and distributed the lands of the conquered among their norman or normanised followers. the struggle was a severe one; again and again did the north rebel against the yoke of the house of malcolm. in moray the keltic inhabitants were actually driven out by malcolm iv., and the country colonised by normans or flemings.[1003] the same malcolm led no less than three expeditions against galloway, where in spite of extensive norse settlements on the coast, the mass of the inhabitants appear to have been keltic.[1004] we know very little about the details of this remarkable revolution, because scotland had no voice in the 12th century, none of her chroniclers being earlier than the end of the 14th century. as regards the subject which concerns this book, the building of castles, there are only one or two passages which lift the veil. a contemporary english chronicler, ailred of rievaulx, in his panegyric of david i., says that david decorated scotland with castles and cities.[1005] in like manner benedict of peterborough tells us that when william the lion was captured by henry ii.'s forces in 1174, the men of galloway took the opportunity to destroy all the castles which the king had built in their country, expelling his seneschals and guards, and killing all the english and french whom they could catch.[1006] fordun casually mentions the building of two castles in ross by william the lion; and once he gives us an anecdote which is a chance revelation of what must have been going on everywhere. a certain english knight, robert, son of godwin, whose norman name shows that he was one of the normanised english, tarried with the king's leave on an estate which king edgar had given him in lothian, _and while he was seeking to build a castle there_, he was attacked by the men of bishop ranulf of durham, who objected to a castle being built so near the english frontier.[1007] but even if historians had been entirely silent about the building of castles in scotland, we should have been certain that it must have happened, as an inevitable part of the norman settlement. robertson remarks that the scots in the time of david i. were still a pastoral and in some respects a migratory people, their magnates not residing like great feudal nobles in their own castles, but moving about from place to place, and quartering themselves upon the dependent population. there is in fact no reason for supposing that the keltic chiefs of scotland built castles, any more than those of wales or ireland.[1008] but the feudal system must very soon have covered scotland with castles. the absence of any stone castles of norman type has puzzled scottish historians, whose ideas of castles were associated with buildings in stone.[1009] in 1898 dr christison published his valuable researches into the _early fortifications of scotland_, in which for the first time an estimate was attempted of the distribution of scottish _motes_,[1010] and their norman origin almost, if not quite, suspected. his book was quickly followed by mr george neilson's noteworthy paper on the "motes in norman scotland,"[1011] in which he showed that the wooden castle is the key which unlocks the historians' puzzle, and that the motes of scotland are nothing but the evidence of the norman feudal settlement. two important points urged in mr neilson's paper are the feudal and legal connection of these motes. he has given a list of mottes which are known to have been the site of the "chief messuages" of baronies in the 13th and 14th centuries, and has collected the names of a great number which were seats of justice, or places where "saisine" of a barony was taken, not because they were moot-hills, but because the administration of justice remained fixed in the ancient site of the baron's castle. "the doctrine of the chief messuage, which became of large importance in peerage law, made it at times of moment to have on distinct record the nomination of what the chief messuage was, often for the imperative function of taking _sasine_. in many instances the _caput baroniæ_, or the court or place for the ceremonial entry to possession, is the 'moit,' the 'mothill,' the 'auld castell,' the 'auld wark,' the 'castellsteid,' the 'auld castellsteid,' the 'courthill,' or in latin _mons placiti_, _mons viridis_, or _mons castri_."[1012] in certain places where two mottes are to be found, he was able to prove that two baronies had once had their seats. another point which mr neilson worked out is the relation of bordlands to mottes. bordland or borland, though an english word, is not pre-conquest; it refers to "that species of demesne which the lord reserves for the supply of his own table." it is constantly found in the near proximity of mottes.[1013] the following is a list of thirty-eight anglo-norman or normanised adventurers settled in scotland, on whose lands mottes are to be found. the list must be regarded as a tentative one, for had all the names given by chalmers been included, it would have been more than doubled. but the difficulties of obtaining topographical information were so great that it has been judged expedient to give only the names of those families who are known to have held lands, and in most cases to have had their principal residences, in places where mottes are or formerly were existing.[1014] anstruther.--william de candela obtained the lands of anstruther, in fife, from david i. his descendants took the surname of anstruther. the "mothlaw" of anstruther is mentioned in 1590.[1015] "at the w. end of the town there is a large mound, called the chester hill, in the middle of which is a fine well." (n. s. a., 1845.) the well is an absolute proof that this was the site of a castle. avenel.--walter de avenel held abercorn castle and estate, in linlithgow, in the middle of the 12th century. the castle stood on a green mound (n. s. a.) which is clearly marked in the o.m. balliol.--the de bailleul family had their seat at barnard castle, in durham, after the conquest. they obtained lands in galloway from david i., and had strongholds at buittle, and kenmure, in kirkcudbright. at buittle the site of the castle exists, a roughly triangular bailey with a motte at one corner;[1016] and at kenmure the o.m. clearly shows a motte, as does the picture in grose's _antiquities of scotland_. the terraces probably date from the time when the modern house on top was built. barclay.--the de berkeleys sprang from the de berkeleys of england, and settled in scotland in the 12th century. walter de berkeley was chamberlain of scotland in 1165; william the lion gave him the manor of inverkeilor, in forfarshire; there he built a castle, on lunan bay. "an artificial mound on the west side of the bay, called the corbie's knowe, bears evident marks of having been a castle long previous to the erection of redcastle." (n. s. a.) the family also had lands in what is now aberdeenshire, and at towie, in the parish of auchterless, they had a castle. "close to the church of auchterless there is a small artificial eminence of an oval shape, surrounded by a ditch, which is now in many places filled up. it still retains the name of the moat head, and was formerly the seat of the baronial court." (n. s. a.; n.; c.) bruce.--the de brus held lands in north yorkshire at the time of the domesday survey. david i. gave them the barony of annan, in dumfriesshire. the original charter of this grant still exists in the british museum, witnessed by a galaxy of norman names.[1017] their chief castles were at annan and lochmaben. at annan, near the site of a later castle, there is still a motte about 50 feet high, with a vast ditch and some traces of a bailey (n.), called the moat (n. s. a.). the "terras de moit et bailyis, intra le northgate," are mentioned in 1582. south of the town of lochmaben, on the n.w. side of the loch, is a fine motte called castle hill, with some remains of masonry, which is still pointed out as the original castle of the bruces.[1018] (g.) the fine motte and bailey at moffat must also have been one of their castles, as moffat was one of their demesne lands. (fig. 44.) cathcart.--name territorial. rainald de cathcart witnesses a charter (in the paisley register) in 1179. near the old castle of cathcart, lanark, is "an eminence called court knowe." (n. s. a.) as mr neilson has shown, these court knowes and court hills are generally disused mottes. the name rainald is clearly norman. cheyne.--this family is first known in 1258, but had then been long settled in scotland, and were hereditary sheriffs of banffshire. chalmers only mentions their manor of inverugie, in aberdeenshire. behind the ruins of inverugie castle rises a round flat-topped hill, which was the castle hill or mote hill of former days. (n. s. a.) colville.--appears in scotland in the reign of malcolm iv., holding the manors of heton and oxnam, in roxburgh. about 1/4 mile from oxnam (which was a barony) is a moated mound called galla knowe. (o.m., c., and n.) hailes identified the castle in teviotdale, captured and burnt by balliol in 1333, with that of oxnam.[1019] le mote de oxnam is mentioned in 1424 (n.). [illustration: fig. 44.--scottish motte-castles. annan. moffat. duffus. liddesdale.] cumyn, or comyn.--the first of this family came to scotland as the chancellor of david i.[1020] first seated at linton roderick, in roxburghshire, where there is a rising ground, surrounded formerly by a foss, the site of the original castle; (g.) a description which seems to suggest a motte. william the lion gave the cumyns kirkintilloch in dumbarton, and we afterwards find them at dalswinton in dumfriesshire, and troqueer in kirkcudbright. at kirkintilloch the o.m. shows a square mount concentrically placed in a square enceinte. the enclosure was apparently one of the forts on the wall of agricola, but the writer on kirkintilloch in the n. s. a. suspected that it had been transformed into a castle by the cumyns. at dalswinton the o.m. shows a motte, and calls it the "site of cumyn's castle." at troqueer, "directly opposite the spot on the other side the river where cumyn's castle formerly stood is a mote of circular form and considerable height." (n. s. a.) the cumyn who held kirkintilloch in 1201, was made earl of buchan, and held the vast district of badenoch, or the great valley of the spey. the n. s. a. gives many descriptions of remains in this region which are suggestive of motte-castles; we can only name the most striking: ruthven, "a castle reared by the comyns on a green conical mound on the s. bank of the spey, thought to be partly artificial," now occupied by ruined barracks; dunmullie, in the parish of duthill, where "there can be traced vestiges of a motte surrounded by a ditch, on which, according to tradition, stood the castle of the early lords"; crimond, where cumyn had a castle, and where there is a small round hill called castle hill; and ellon, where the earl of buchan had his head court, on a small hill which has now disappeared, but which was anciently known as the moot-hill of ellon. saisin of the earldom was given on this hill in 1476. (n. s. a.) cunningham.--warnebald, who came from the north of england, was a follower of the norman, hugh de morville, who gave him the lands of cunningham, in ayrshire, from which the family name was taken. in the parish of kilmaurs, which is in the district of cunningham, there is a "mote," which may have been the castle of warnebald; at any rate the original manor place of cunningham was in this parish. it is of course possible that this motte may have been originally a de morville castle. douglas.--name territorial; progenitor was a fleming, who received lands on the douglas water, in lanark, in the middle of the 12th century. in the park of douglas, to the east of the modern castle, is a mound called boncastle, but we are unable to state certainly that it is a motte. lag castle, in the parish of dunscore, "has a moat or court hill a little to the east." (n. s. a.: shown in grose's picture.) it must have been originally douglas land, as in 1408 it was held by an armour-bearer of douglas. durand.--clearly a norman name, corrupted into durham. the family were seated at kirkpatrick durham in the 13th century. there is or was a motte at kirkpatrick.[1021] durward.--this family was descended from alan de lundin, who was dur-ward or door-keeper to the king about 1233. they possessed a wide domain in aberdeenshire, and had a castle at lumphanan, where edward i. stayed in 1296. there is a round motte in the peel bog at lumphanan, surrounded by a moat, which was fed by a sluice from the neighbouring burn. there were ruins in masonry on the top some hundred years ago. the writer of the n. s. a. account of this place, with remarkable shrewdness, conjectures that a wooden castle on this mound was the ancient residence of the durwards, superseded in the 15th century by a building of stone, and that it has nothing to do with macbeth, whose burial-place is said to be a cairn in the neighbourhood.[1022] fitz alan.--this is the well-known ancestor of the house of stuart, walter, a cadet of a great norman family in shropshire, who is said to have obtained lands in scotland in malcolm canmore's time. renfrew was one of his seats, and inverwick, in haddington, another. renfrew castle is entirely destroyed, but the description of the site, on a small hill, ditched round, called castle hill, strongly suggests a motte. the keep of inverwick stands on a natural motte of rock.[1023] dunoon was one of their castles, near to which "stood the tom-a-mhoid, or hill of the court of justice" (g.), possibly an ancient motte.[1024] dunoon castle, however, itself stands on a motte, partly artificial and partly carved out of a headland. (n.) fleming.--there were many flemings among the followers of david i., and eventually the name stuck to their descendants as a surname. baldwin the fleming obtained lands at biggar, in lanarkshire. there is a motte at the west end of the town of biggar, 36 feet high. biggar was the head of a barony. (n. s. a. and n.) colban the fleming settled at colbantown, now covington, lanarkshire, where there is a motte (n.). robert the fleming has left a well-preserved oblong motte at roberton, in lanark, which was a barony, and where the _moit_ was spoken of in 1608. (n.) graham.--came from england under david i., and received lands in lothian. a graham was lord of tarbolton, in ayrshire, in 1335, so it is possible that the motte at that place, on which stood formerly the chief messuage of the barony of tarbolton, was one of their castles (n. s. a.), but it may have been older. hamilton.--it is not certain that the hamiltons came to scotland before 1272. king robert i. gave them the barony of cadzow, lanark, which had originally been a royal seat. in hamilton park there is a mote hill, which was the site of the chief messuage of this barony (n.). it was formerly surrounded by the town of hamilton. (n. s. a.) it is of course possible that this motte may be much older than the hamiltons, as the site of an originally royal castle. hay.--first appears in the 12th century, as butler to malcolm iv. the family first settled in lothian, where they had lands at lochorworth. the borthwick family, who got this estate by marriage, obtained a license from james i. about 1430 to build a castle "on the mote of locherwart," and to this castle they gave their own name. (n. s. a.) no doubt it was the original motte of the hays. king william gave the hays the manor of errol, in perthshire, which was made into a barony. here is or was the mote of errol, "a round artificial mound about 20 feet high, and 30 feet in diameter at the top; the platform at the top surrounded with a low turf wall, and the whole enclosed with a turf wall at the base, in the form of an equilateral triangle." (n. s. a.; evidently a triangular bailey.) it is called the law knoll, and is spoken of as a _fortalicium_ in 1546. (n.) lennox.--the earls of lennox are descended from arkel, an englishman, who received from malcolm canmore lands in dumbartonshire. at catter, near the earl's castle, is a large artificial mound.[1025] lockhart.--stevenston, in ayrshire, takes its name from stephen loccard, and symington, in lanark, from his son (?), simon loccard. at stevenson there was formerly a castle, and there still (1845) is a castle hill. stevenston was given by richard morville to stephen loccard about 1170. (n. s. a.) at symington there was formerly a round mound, called law hill, at the foot of the village, but it has been levelled. (n. s. a.) logan.--a robert logan witnesses a charter of william the lion, and appears later as dominus robertus de logan. the name robert shows his norman origin. at drumore, near logan (parish of kirkmaiden, wigton), there was a castle, and there is still a court hill or mote.[1026] another mote, at myroch, in the same parish, is mentioned by mr neilson as the site of the chief messuage of the barony of logan. lovel.--settled at hawick, roxburghshire. the mote of hawick, from the picture in scott's _border antiquities_, seems to be a particularly fine one. hawick was a barony, and le moit is mentioned in 1511. (n.) lyle, or lisle.--the castle of this norman family was at duchal, renfrewshire. the plan is clearly that of a motte and bailey, but the motte is of natural rock.[1027] male, now melville.--settled in haddingtonshire under david i., and called their seat melville. melville castle is modern. they afterwards obtained by marriage lands on the bervie river, in the mearns. dr christison's map shows a motte near the mouth of the bervie. maxwell.--maccus, son of unwin[1028] (evidently of scandinavian origin), received lands on the tweed from david i., and called his seat maccusville, corrupted into maxwell. there is a motte at maxwell, near kelso. (n.) maxton, in roxburghshire, takes its name from him, and there is a motte called ringley hall, on the tweed, in this parish. (c. and n. s. a.) montalt, or mowat.--robert de montalto (mold, in flintshire) witnesses a charter of david i. the family settled in cromarty. le mote at cromarty is mentioned in 1470. (n.) montgomery.--this family is undoubtedly descended from some one of the sons of the great earl roger of shrewsbury, settled in scotland after the ruin of his family in england. robert de montgomerie received the manor of eaglesham, renfrew, from fitz alan, the high steward of scotland. the principal messuage of this manor was at polnoon, 1/2 mile s.e. of eaglesham. here sir john montgomerie built the castle of polnoon about 1388. (n. s. a.) the o.m. seems to show that the ruins of this castle stand on a motte, probably the original castle of montgomerie. morville.--hugh de morville was a northamptonshire baron, the life-long friend of david i.[1029] he founded one of the most powerful families in the south of scotland, though after three generations their lands passed to heiresses, and their chief seat is not even known by name. but mr neilson states that darnhall, in peebles, was the head of their "black barony," and that there is a motte there. as hugh de morville gave the church of borgue to dryburgh abbey about 1150, it is probable that the motte at boreland of borgue was one of his castles. the barony of beith, in ayr, given by richard de morville to the abbey of kilwinning, has also a motte, which may be reckoned to be the site of a de morville castle. largs, in ayr, belonged to the de morvilles, and has a castle hill near the village, which appears to be a motte. (g.) mowbray.--this well-known norman family also sent a branch to scotland. amongst other places, about which we have no details, they held eckford, in roxburghshire. in this parish, near the ancient mansion, is an artificial mount called haughhead kipp. (n. s. a.) this seems a possible motte, but its features are not described. murray.--freskin the fleming came to scotland under david i., and received from that king lands in moray. he built himself a castle at duffus, in elgin, which is on the motte-and-bailey plan.[1030] the stone keep now on the motte appears to be of the 14th century. freskin's posterity took the name of de moravia, or moray. (fig. 44.) oliphant, or olifard.--cambuslang, in lanark, belonged to walter olifard, justiciary of lothian in the time of alexander ii. about a mile e. of the church is a circular mound 20 feet high. it was here that the oliphants' castle of drumsagard formerly stood. (n. s. a.) drumsagard was a barony. (n.) de quincy.--obtained from william the lion the manors of travernant, in east lothian, and leuchars, in fife. near the village of leuchars is a motte with some slight remains of a stone keep, a deep well in the centre, and an entrenched bailey, known as the site of the castle of leuchars.[1031] ross.--godfrey de ros, a vassal of richard de morville, held of him the lands of stewarton, in ayr. the _caput_ of the lordship was castletown, where le mote is spoken of in 1451 (n. and c.). the de ros were also the first lords of the barony of sanquhar. a little lower down the river nith than the later castle of sanquhar is a mote called ryehill, and a place anciently manorial. (n.) somerville.--william de somerville was a norman to whom david i. gave the manor of carnwath, in lanarkshire. there is a very perfect entrenched motte at carnwath (n. s. a. and o.m.), and le moit de carnwath is mentioned in 1599. (n.) de soulis.--followed david i. from northamptonshire into scotland, and received liddesdale, in roxburghshire, from him. the motte and bailey of his original castle still remain, very near the more celebrated but much later hermitage castle.[1032] (fig. 44.) valoignes.--philip de valoignes and his son william were each successively chamberlains of scotland.[1033] one of their estates was easter kilbride, in lanarkshire, where they had a castle. in this parish is an artificial mount of earth, with an oval area on top, about 1/4 mile from the present house of torrance. (n. s. a.) vaux, or de vallibus.--settled in scotland under william the lion. held the manors of dirleton and golyn, in east lothian. dirleton has been transformed into an edwardian castle, but from the pictures it appears to stand on a natural motte of rock. but about 3 miles from dirleton the o.m. shows a large motte called castle hill, which may possibly be the original castle of the de vaux. wallace, or wallensis.--richard walensis was the first of this family, and acquired lands in ayrshire in david i.'s time. he named his seat riccardton, after himself, and the remains of his motte are still there, a small oval motte called castle hill, on which the church of riccarton now stands, but which is recognised as having been a "mote hill." (g.) to this list must be added a number of royal castles known to have been built in the 12th century, which, as they were built on mottes, must in the first instance have been wooden castles. banff.--it seems clear that banff castle had a motte, because the doggerel rhymes of arthur johnstone in 1642 say: a place was near which was a field until our ancestors did raise it to a hill; a stately castle also on it stood. the _gazetteer_ says: "the citadel occupied a mount, originally at the end though now near the middle of the town." the site is still called castle hill. (n. s. a.) crail, fife.--the o.m. does not show a motte here. the n. s. a. says "there was a royal residence here, upon an eminence overlooking the harbour." that this "eminence" was a motte seems clear from the _register of the great seal_, quoted by mr neilson, which speaks of "le moitt olim castrum" in 1573. cupar.--there seem to be two mottes here, both raised on a natural "esker"; the one formerly called the castle hill is now called the school hill, the school having been built upon it. the other and higher hill is called the moot hill, and is said to be the place where the earls of fife used to dispense justice. (n. s. a.) mr neilson states that both are mentioned in the _registrum_. dumfries.--here there were two mottes, one being now the site of a church, the other, called castle dykes, a short distance s. of the town, on the opposite side of the river. both no doubt were royal castles, and mr neilson has suggested that as an _old castlestead_ is spoken of in a charter of william the lion, it implies that a new castle had recently been built, possibly after the great destruction of the royal castles in galloway in 1174.[1034] the castle dykes appears to be the later castle, as it is spoken of in the 16th century. (n.) dunskeath, cromarty.--built by william the lion in 1179. the castle is built on a small _moat_ overhanging the sea. (g.) elgin.--built by william the lion on a small green hill called lady hill, with conical and precipitous sides. (n. s. a. and g.) forfar.--"the castle stood on a round hill to the n. of the town, and must have been surrounded by water." (n. s. a.) it was destroyed in 1307. it is called gallow hill in the o.m., and is now occupied by gasworks. forres.--the plan in chalmers' _caledonia_ clearly shows a motte, to which the town appears to have formed a bailey. inverness.--built by david i. when he annexed moray. the site is now occupied by a gaol, but the o.m. shows it to have been a motte, which is clearly depicted in old engravings. innermessan.--as the lands here appear to have been royal property as late as the time of david ii., the large round motte here may have been an early royal castle, a conjecture which finds some confirmation in the name "boreland of kingston," which pont places in the same parish. (n. s. a.) jedburgh.--probably built by david i. the site, which is still called castle hill, has been levelled and completely obliterated by the building of a gaol. yet an old plan of the town in 1762, in the possession of the late mr laidlaw of jedburgh, shows the outline of the castle to have been exactly that of a motte and bailey, though, as no hachures are given, it is not absolutely convincing. kincleven, perth.--the o.m. shows no earthworks connected with the present castle, but on the opposite side of the river it places a motte called castle hill, which may very likely be the site of the original castle. kirkcudbright.--dr christison marks a motte here, to the w. of the town. the place is called castle dykes. mr coles says it has an oblong central mound and a much larger entrenched area.[1035] lanark.--ascribed traditionally to david i. "on a small artificially shaped hill between the town and the river, at the foot of the street called castle gate, and still bearing the name of castle hill, there stood in former times beyond all doubt a royal castle." (n. s. a.) mr neilson says, "it certainly bears out its reputation as an artificial mound." rosemarkie, cromarty.--was made a royal burgh by alexander ii., so the castle must have been originally royal. "immediately above the town is a mound of nearly circular form, and level on the top, which seems to be artificial, and has always been called the court hill." (n. s. a.) even if we had no other evidence that motte-castles were of norman construction, this list would be very significant. but taken in connection with the evidence for the norman origin of the english, welsh, and irish mottes, it supplies ample proof that in scotland, as elsewhere, the norman and feudal settlement had its material guarantees in the castles which were planted all over the land, and that these castles were the simple structures of earth and wood, whose earthen remains have been the cause of so much mystification. chapter xi motte-castles in ireland in the year 1169, when the first norman invaders landed in ireland, the private castle had been in existence in england for more than a hundred years, and had it been suited to the social organisation of the irish people, there had been plenty of time for its introduction into ireland. nor are we in a position to deny that some chieftain with a leaning towards foreign fashions _may_ have built for himself a castle in the anglo-norman style; all we can say is that there is not the slightest evidence of such a thing.[1036] we have two contemporary accounts of the norman settlement in ireland, the one given by giraldus in his _expugnatio hibernica_, and the anglo-norman poem, edited by mr goddard h. orpen, under the title of the "song of dermot and the earl."[1037] now giraldus expressly tells us that the irish did not use castles, but preferred to take refuge in their forests and bogs.[1038] the statement is a remarkable one, since ireland abounds with defensive works of a very ancient character; are we to suppose that these were only used in the prehistoric period? but if castles of the norman kind had been in general use in ireland in the 12th century, we should certainly hear of their having been a serious hindrance to the invaders. the history of the invasion, however, completely confirms the statement of giraldus; we never once hear of the irish defending themselves in a castle. when they do stand a siege, it is in a walled town, and a town which has been walled, not by themselves, but by the danes, to whom giraldus expressly attributes these walls. moreover, the repeated insistence of giraldus on the necessity of systematic incastellation of the whole country[1039] is proof enough that no such incastellation existed. it is true that in some of the earliest irish literature we hear of the _dun_, _lis_, or _rath_ (the words are interchangeable), which encircled the chieftain's house. many descriptions of royal abodes in irish poems are evidently purely fanciful, but underneath the poetical adornments we can discern the features of the great wooden hall which appears to have been the residence of the tribal chieftain, whether keltic, norse, or saxon, throughout the whole north of europe in early times.[1040] the thousands of earthen rings, generally called _raths_, which are still scattered over ireland, are believed to be the enclosures of these kings' or chieftains' homesteads. were they intended for serious military defence? we are not in a position to answer this question categorically, but the plans of a number of them which we have examined do not suggest anything but a very slight fortification, sufficient to keep off wolves. at all events we never hear of these raths or duns standing a siege; the conquering raider comes, sees, and burns.[1041] we are therefore justified in concluding that they did not at all correspond to what we mean by a private castle. and most certainly the motte-castle, with its very small citadel, and its limited accommodation for the flocks and herds of a tribe, was utterly unsuited to the requirements of the tribal system. a good deal of light is thrown on the way in which irish chieftains regarded private castles at the time of the invasion by the well-known story of one who refused a castle offered him by the invaders, saying that he preferred a castle of bones to a castle of stones. whether legendary or not, it represents the natural feeling of a man who had been accustomed to sleep trustfully in the midst of men of his own blood, tied to him by the bonds of the clan. the clan system in ireland undoubtedly led to great misery through the absence of a central authority to check the raids of one clan upon another; but though we occasionally hear of a chieftain being murdered "by his own," we have no reason to think that clan loyalty was not sufficient, as a rule, for the internal safety of the community. so that a popular chieftain might well refuse a fortification which had every mark of a hateful and suspicious invader.[1042] unfortunately there is--or has been until quite recently--a strong prejudice in the minds of irish antiquaries that works of the motte-and-bailey kind belong to the prehistoric age of ireland. irish scholars indeed admit that the word _mota_ is not found in any irish ms. which dates from before the norman invasion of ireland.[1043] we must therefore bear in mind that when they tell us that such and such an ancient book mentions the "mote" at naas or elsewhere, what they mean is that it mentions a _dun_, or _rath_, or _longport_, which they imagine to be the same as a motte. but this is begging the whole question. there is not the slightest proof that any of these words meant a motte. _dun_ is often taken to mean a hill (perhaps from its resemblance to anglo-saxon _dun_), but keltic scholars are now agreed that it is cognate with the german _zaun_ and anglo-saxon _tun_, meaning a fenced enclosure.[1044] it may be applied to a fort on a hill, but it may equally well be applied to a fort on the flat. _rath_ is translated _fossa_ in the _book of armagh_; jocelin of furness equates it with _murus_.[1045] the rath of armagh was evidently a very large enclosure in 1166, containing several streets, houses, and churches, so it was certainly not a motte.[1046] it is of course not impossible that the normans may sometimes have occupied an ancient fortified site, but we may be sure from the considerations already urged that the fortifications which they erected were of a wholly different character to the previous ones, even if they utilised a portion for their bailey. it is of course difficult to decide in some cases (both in ireland and elsewhere) whether a mound which stands alone without a bailey is a sepulchral tumulus or a motte. there are some mottes in england and scotland which have no baileys attached to them, and do not appear ever to have had any. in ireland, the country of magnificent sepulchral tumuli, it is not wonderful that the barrow and the motte have become confused in popular language. it would appear, too, that there exist in ireland several instances of artificial tumuli which were used for the inauguration of irish chieftains, and these have occasionally been mistaken for mottes.[1047] as mr orpen has shown, there are generally indications in the unsuitability of the sites, in the absence of real fortification, or in the presence of sepulchral signs, to show that these tumuli did not belong to the motte class. magh adair, for example, which has been adduced as a motte outside the norman boundary, is shown by mr orpen to be of quite a different character. at many sites in ireland where the normans are known to have built castles at an early period of the invasion there are no mottes to be seen now. it is probable that where the norman conquerors had both money and time at their disposal they built stone keeps from the first, and that the motte-castles, with their wooden towers or _bretasches_, were built in the times of stress, or were the residences of the less wealthy under-tenants. but we know from documents that even in john's reign the important royal castle of roscrea was built with a motte and bretasche,[1048] which proves that this type of castle was still so much esteemed that we may feel reasonably certain that when giraldus speaks of "slender defences of turf and stakes" he does not mean motte-castles, but mere embankments and palisades.[1049] but there is another reason for the absence of mottes from some of the early norman castle sites. those who have examined the castles of wales know that it is rare to find a motte in a castle which has undergone the complete metamorphoses of the edwardian[1050] period. these new castles had no keeps, and necessitated an entire change of plan, which led either to the destruction of the motte or the building of an entirely new castle on a different site. the removal of a motte is only a question of spade labour, and many sites in england can be pointed out where mottes are known to have existed formerly, but where now not a vestige is left.[1051] there are many other cases where the edwardian castle shows not a trace of any former earthworks, but where a motte and bailey a little distance off probably represents the original wooden castle.[1052] the passion for identifying existing earthworks with sites mentioned in ancient irish history or legend has been a most serious hindrance to the progress of real archæological knowledge in ireland. it is not until one begins to look into this matter that one finds out what giddy guesswork most of these identifications of irish place-names really are. o'donovan was undoubtedly a great irish scholar, and his editions of the _book of rights_ and the _annals of the four masters_ are of the highest importance. the topographical notes to these works are generally accepted as final. but let us see what his method was in this part of his labours. in the _book of rights_, he says very naïvely, about a place called ladhrann or ardladhrann, "i cannot find any place in wexford according with the notices of this place except ardamine, on the sea-coast, where there is a remarkable _moat_."[1053] no modern philologist, we think, would admit that ardamine could be descended from ardladhrann. in the same way o'donovan guessed treada-na-righ, "the triple-fossed fort of the kings," to be the motte of kilfinnane, near kilmallock. but this was a pure guess, as he had previously guessed it to be "one of the forts called dun-g-claire." to the antiquaries of that day one earthwork seemed as good as another, and differences of type were not considered important.[1054] * * * * * the following list of early norman castles in ireland was first published in the _antiquary_ for 1906. it is an attempt to form a complete list from contemporary historians only, that is, from giraldus cambrensis and the "song of dermot," and from the documents published in sweetman's _calendar_, of the norman castles built in ireland, up to the end of john's reign.[1055] since then, the task has been taken up on a far more philosophical plan by mr goddard h. orpen, whose exceptional knowledge of the history of the invasion and the families of the conquerors has enabled him to trace their settlements in ireland as they have never been traced before.[1056] nevertheless, it still seems worth while to republish this list, as though within a limited compass, consistent with the writer's limited knowledge, it furnishes an adequate test of the correctness of the norman theory, on a perfectly sound basis. the list has now the advantage of being corrected from mr orpen's papers, and of being enlarged by identifications which he has been able to make.[1057] *antrim[1058] (_cal._, i., 88).--a royal castle in 1251. present castle modern; close to it is a large motte, marked in 25-inch o.m. aq'i (_cal._, i., 13).--unidentified; perhaps an _alias_ for one of the limerick castles, as it was certainly in the county of limerick. ardfinnan, tipperary (_gir._, v., 386).--built in 1185, immediately after john's coming to ireland. no motte; castle is late edwardian and partly converted into a modern house; one round tower has ogee windows. [b. t. s.] ardmayle, or armolen, tipperary (_cal._, i., 81).--a castle of theobald walter. a motte with half-moon bailey, and earthen wing walls running up its sides, exactly as stone walls do in later norman castles. ruins of a perpendicular mansion close to it, and also a square tower with ogee windows. [b. t. s.] fig. 45. ardnurcher, or horseleap, king's co. (_song of dermot_ and _cal._, i., 145).--a castle of meiler fitz henry's, built in 1192.[1059] an oblong motte with one certain bailey, and perhaps a second. no masonry but the remains of a wall or bridge across the fosse. [b. t. s.] ardree, kildare (_gir._, v., 356, and _song_).--the castle built by hugh de lacy for thomas the fleming in 1182, was at ardri, on the barrow. there is an artificial mound at ardree, turned into a graveyard, and near it a levelled platform above the river, on which stands ardree house.[1060] on the west bank of the barrow, opposite ardree, is a low circular motte with ditch and bank, but no bailey. a piece of norman pottery with green glaze was found by mr stallybrass, one foot below the surface in the counterscarp bank. mr orpen thinks this motte may have been the castle of robert de bigarz, also mentioned by giraldus as near ardree, on the opposite side of the barrow. askeaton, or hinneskesti, limerick.--built in 1199, probably by hamo de valoignes.[1061] an excellent instance of a motte-and-bailey castle, where the motte is of natural rock. the splendid keep and hall are of the 15th century, but there are two older towers, which might date from 1199. this natural motte has been identified with the ancient irish fort of gephthine (askeaton = eas gephthine), mentioned in the _book of rights_. but this work does not mention any _fort_ at gephthine, only the place, in a list which is clearly one of lands (perhaps mensal lands), not of forts, as it contains many names of plains, and of tribes, as well as the three isles of arran.[1062] *askelon, or escluen (_cal._, i., 91).--castle _restored to_ richard de burgh in 1215; the site is placed by mr orpen at carrigogunell, which is in the parish of kilkeedy, limerick.[1063] carrigogunell has the ruins of a castle on a natural motte of rock. *athlone, roscommon (_cal._, i., 80).--built in 1210 by the justiciar, john de gray. the keep is placed on a lofty motte, which has been revetted with masonry. turlough o'connor built a _caislen_ at athlone in 1129, but it was not even on the site of the norman castle, for which john obtained land from the church, as already stated. baginbun (_gir._, i., 13; _song_, 1406).--mr orpen has proved that this was the spot where raymond le gros landed and entrenched himself for four months.[1064] it is a headland on the sea-coast, and headland castles seldom have mottes, as they were not needed on a promontory washed on three sides by the sea. moreover, baginbun was of the nature of a temporary fort rather than a residential castle, and it is to be noted that giraldus calls it "a poor sort of a castle of stakes and sods." still, the small inner area, ditched off with a double ditch, and the large area, also ditched, roughly correspond to the motte-and-bailey plan. [b. t. s.] balimore eustace, kildare (_cal._, i., 28).--a castle of the archbishop of dublin. a motte, with a remarkable platform attached to one side (_cf._ wigmore castle). no bailey now; no stone castle. [b. t. s.] caherconlish (karkinlis, kakaulis, _cal._, i., 81).--castle of theobald fitz walter. there is nothing left above ground but a chimney of late date. a few yards from it is a hillock, which has very much the appearance of a mutilated motte. [e. s. a.] mr orpen, however, thinks that theobald's castle may have been at knockatancashlane, "the hill of the old castle," a townland a little to the north of caherconlish.[1065] carbury, kildare.--the _song_ says meiler fitz henry first got carbury, so the castle was probably his. it is a motte with two baileys, one of imperfect outline, the other a curious little half-circle. a 15th-century castle is built against the side of the motte. [b. t. s.] carlingford, louth (_cal._, i., 95).--apparently a royal castle (_cal._, i., 156), first mentioned in 1215. it stands on a rock, which might possibly have been a former motte. there certainly has been a former castle, for the present ruin is edwardian in plan and in every detail. [e. s. a.] carrick, wexford (_gir._, v., 245).--this again seems to be one of the temporary forts built by the first invaders (in this case fitz stephen), in a strong natural situation, and giraldus applies to it the same contemptuous language as to baginbun. there is no motte, but an oval area of 45 yards by 25 is ditched and banked; a modern imitation of a round tower stands within the enclosure. [b. t. s.] carrickfergus, antrim (_cal._, i., 107).--this was probably one of the castles built by john de courcy, the conqueror of ulster. the gatehouse and mural towers are late, but the keep may well be of de courcy's time, and furnishes an excellent instance of a castle on the keep-and-bailey plan, built by the normans in stone from the beginning. [e. s. a.] castletown delvin, westmeath (_gir._, v., 356).--castle of gilbert de nungent. a motte, with a garden at base, which may have been the bailey; near it the stone castle, a keep with round towers at the angles, probably not as early as john's reign. [b. t. s.] clonard, meath (_gir._, v., 356).--built by hugh de lacy about 1182. a motte, with broad ditch and curious little oblong bailey; no remains in masonry. [b. t. s.] clonmacnoise, king's co. (_cal._, i., 94).--first contemporary mention 1215; the _annals of loch cè_ say it was built in 1214 "by the foreigners." a royal castle. a large motte with bailey attached; the wing walls of the bailey run up the motte. the importance of the castle is shown by the fact that a stone keep was added not very long after it was built. [b. t. s.] *collacht (_gir._, v., 355).--castle of john of hereford. collacht appears to be a scribal error for tullaght, now tullow, carlow.[1066] the site of the castle is marked on the 6-inch o.m.; it has been visited by mr g. h. orpen, who found very clear indications of a motte and bailey. (see appendix l.) crometh (_cal._, i., 91).--castle of maurice fitzgerald. supposed to be croom, limerick, though the identification is by no means certain.[1067] there are the ruins of an edwardian castle at croom; no motte. [e. s. a.] downpatrick, down (_gir._, v., 345).--the traveller approaching downpatrick sees a number of small hills which no doubt have once been islands rising out of the swamps of the quoyle. on one of these hills stands the town and its cathedral; on another, to the east, but separated from the town by a very steep descent and a brook, stands a motte and bailey of the usual norman type. it occupies the whole summit of the small hill, so that the banks of the bailey are at a great height above the outer ditch, which is carried round the base of the hill (compare skipsea). the motte, which is not a very large one, has had an earthen breastwork round the top, now much broken away. its ditch falls into the ditch of the bailey, but at a higher level. the bailey is semilunar, extending round about three-quarters of the circumference of the motte. there is not the slightest sign of masonry. as the size of this work has been greatly exaggerated, it is as well to say that when measured on the 25-inch o.m. with a planimeter, its area proves to be 3.9 acres; the area of the motte and its ditch .9, leaving 3 acres for the bailey. [e. s. a.] fig. 45. this thoroughly norman-french castle, which was formerly called a danish fort, has lately been baptised as rathceltchair, and supposed to be the work of a mythical hero of the 1st century a.d. mr orpen, however, has disposed of this fancy by showing that the name rathceltchair belonged in pre-norman times to the enclosure of the ancient church and monastery which stood on the _other_ hill.[1068] we may therefore unhesitatingly ascribe this motte-castle to john de courcy, who first put up a slender fortification within the town walls to defend himself against temporary attack,[1069] but afterwards built a regular castle, for which this island offered a most favourable site.[1070] a stone castle was built inside the town at a later period; it is now entirely destroyed. drogheda, louth (_cal._, i., 93).--first mention 1203, but mr orpen thinks it probable that it was one of the castles built by hugh de lacy, who died in 1186. a high motte, with a round and a square bailey, just outside the town walls;[1071] called the mill mount in the time of cromwell, who occupied it; he mentions that it had a good ditch, strongly palisadoed.[1072] no stone castle, though much of the bailey wall remains; a late martello tower on top of motte. [b. t. s.] fig. 45. [illustration: fig. 45.--irish motte-castles. ardmayle. downpatrick. drogheda. castlenock.] duleek, meath (the castrum duvelescense of _giraldus_, v., 313).--probably first built by hugh de lacy; restored by raymond le gros in 1173. the motte is destroyed, but an old weaver living in the village in 1906 says that it existed in the time of his father, who used to roll stones down it in his youth. it was in the angle between two streams, and there is still a slight trace of it. no stone castle. [b. t. s.] dunamase, queen's co. (dumath, _cal._, i., 100).--first mentioned in 1215 as a castle of william marshall's, which makes it not unlikely that it was originally built by strongbow. the plan of this castle is the motte-and-bailey plan, but the place of the motte is taken by a natural rock, isolated by a ditch. there are three baileys, descending the hill. the stone keep on the summit is of the 15th or 16th century. [b. t. s.] dungarvan, waterford (_cal._, i., 89).--granted to thomas fitz antony in 1215. to the west of the town is a motte called gallowshill; it has no bailey, but some trace of a circumvallation. the castle east of the river is not earlier than the 14th or 15th century. [b. t. s.] *durrow, king's co. (_gir._, v., 387).--a castle of hugh de lacy's; he was murdered while he was building it, because he had chosen the enclosure of the church for his bailey.[1073] a plan in _journ. r. s. a. i._, xxix., 227, shows clearly the motte and bailey, though the writer mistakes for separate mounds what are clearly broken portions of the vallum. it is possible that the bailey may have followed the line of the ancient _rath_ of the church, but it would almost certainly be a much stronger affair. *favorie = fore, westmeath.--i owe this identification to mr orpen. as hugh de lacy founded or endowed the monastery at fore,[1074] this was probably one of his castles, but the first mention is in 1215 (_cal._, i., 95). mr westropp mentions the oval motte of fore with its bailey in his list of "complex motes."[1075] ferns, wexford (_gir._, v., 326).--a castle was built by walter the german _near_ ferns. ferns is spoken of as a city in the time of king dermot. there is no motte at ferns; the stone castle has a keep, which is certainly not earlier than the time of henry iii. [b. t. s.] *fotheret onolan, castle of raymond le gros (_gir._, v., 355).--mr orpen identifies this with castlemore, near tullow, co. carlow. there is an oval motte, and a rectangular bailey with indications of masonry.[1076] galtrim, meath.--identified by mr orpen with the castle of hugh de hose, or hussey, mentioned in the "song of dermot." destroyed in 1176; no stone castle. an oval motte; bailey indistinctly traceable. [b. t. s.] geashill, king's co. (_cal._, i., 30).--mentioned in 1203 as a castle of william, earl marshall. there are remains of a motte, on which stands a 14th-century keep; but the whole site has been so pulled about in making a modern house, drive, and gardens, that nothing more can be made of the plan. the motte, however, is plain, though mutilated. [e. s. a.] granard, longford (_cal._, i., 95).--built by richard tuit in 1199.[1077] a magnificent motte, with a very wide ditch, and a small fan-shaped bailey. foundations of a shell wall round the top of the motte, and of a small round tower in the centre. [b. t. s.] *hincheleder, or inchelefyre (_cal._, i, 95).--said by butler (_notices of trim castle_, 12) to be inchleffer, meath, a castle of hugh de lacy. no further information. john de clahull's castle.--mr orpen believes this to be killeshin, queen's co., as it corresponds to the description in the _song_, "entre eboy et lethelyn." there is a motte there, and traditions of a town. *karakitel, or carrickittle, limerick (_cal._, i., 14).--castle of william de naas in 1199. there was a remarkable natural motte of rock here, with the foundations of a castle upon it, now destroyed.[1078] *killamlun (_cal._, i., 53).--identified by mr orpen with killallon, meath, where there is a large motte. there is a stone passage into this motte, but no evidence has been brought forward to prove that it is of the same nature as the prehistoric _souterrains_ so common in ireland.[1079] in england there is a remarkable instance at oxford of a well-chamber built inside a motte. killare, westmeath (_gir._, v., 356).--a castle of hugh de lacy, built in 1184;[1080] burnt in 1187. a good motte, with ditch and well-preserved bank on counterscarp; no bailey. no stone castle. [b. t. s.] kilbixie, westmeath.--identified by mr orpen with kelbery, given to geoffrey de constantin (_song_, 3154); the castle is mentioned in a charter of walter de lacy, as well as in the _annals of loch cè_, which state that it was built in 1192. a motte, with a broad ditch, and no bailey; but on the w. side the counterscarp bank of the ditch widens out into a sort of narrow half-moon terrace. this peculiarity may be noted in several other irish castles. foundations of an oblong shell on top of motte, and of a small square tower in the centre of this ward. [b. t. s.] *kilfeakle, tipperary (_cal._, i., 29).--a castle of william de burgh. built in 1193.[1081] a motte and bailey; trace of a stone wing wall down the motte.[1082] *kilmehal (_cal._, i., 44).--mr orpen regards the identification of this castle with kilmallock as extremely doubtful. *kilmore (_cal._, i., 95).--restored to walter de lacy in 1215. identified with kilmore, near lough oughter, cavan.[1083] mr westropp mentions the motte at this place, which is outside the anglo-norman area. the castle was wrecked in 1225 or 1226, and no more is heard of it. the anglo-norman advance in this direction failed. *kilsantan, londonderry (_cal._, i., 70).--built by john de courcy in 1197.[1084] now called kilsandal, or mount sandal, a large motte on the bann, not far from coleraine. the castle of coleraine, inside the town, was built in 1214, apparently of stone,[1085] and probably superseded the castle of kilsandal. kiltinan, tipperary (_cal._, i., 94).--castle of philip of worcester in 1215. no motte; a headland castle overhanging a river valley. the castle has not only undergone a late edwardian transformation, but has been cut up to make a modern mansion and farm buildings. no fosses or earthworks remain. [e. s. a.] knock, or castleknock, dublin (_cal._, i., 81).--castle of hugh tyrrel. an oval motte, walled round the top, carrying on its edge a smaller motte (with traces of a ditch) on which stand the ruins of an octagonal keep. no other bailey; ditch and bank double for more than half the circumference. [b. t. s.] fig. 45. *knockgraffan, tipperary (_cal._, i., 27).--castle of william de braose in 1202. one of the finest mottes to be seen anywhere. built in 1192, at the same time as the castle of kilfeakle.[1086] the motte is 55 feet high, has a wide ditch and high counterscarp bank, which is also carried round the ditch of the "hatchet-shaped" bailey, in proper norman fashion. "there are indications of a rectangular stone building on the flat summit of the mote, and there are extensive stone foundations in the bailey."[1087] *lagelachon (_cal._, i., 95).--probably loughan or castlekieran, in which parish is the great motte of derver.[1088] lea, queen's co. (_cal._, i., 30).--castle of william, earl marshall, in 1203. a motte with two baileys; motte entirely occupied, and partly mutilated by a 13th-century keep, with two large roundels. [b. t. s.] leighlin, carlow.--mr orpen has shown that the fine motte of ballyknockan answers to the description given by giraldus of the site of the castle of lechlin built by hugh de lacy.[1089] there is a trace of a possible bailey. the stone castle called black castle at leighlin bridge is of very late date. those who believe that we have authentic history of ireland in the 3rd century b.c. will be able to believe with dr joyce that the description of the annalists identifies this motte with the site of the ancient palace of dinn righ, burnt by the chieftain maen at that date! [b. t. s.] lismore, waterford (_gir._, i., 386).--about a quarter of a mile from lismore, above a ford of the river, is an excellent specimen of a norman motte and bailey, called the round hill. the name of the prehistoric fort of dunsginne has lately been applied to it, but purely by guesswork.[1090] the _song_ says that henry ii. intended to build a castle at lismore, and that it knows not why he put it off. possibly he may have placed these earthworks here, and never added the wooden castle, or else this is the site of the castle which was built by his son john in 1185. the castle inside the town is certainly later than the time of john, as although much modernised it is clearly edwardian in plan. the norman fragments incorporated in the walls probably belonged to the abbey of st carthagh, on the site of which the town castle is said to have been built. the so-called king john's tower is only a mural tower, not a keep. [b. t. s.] *louth, or luveth (_cal._, i., 30).--a royal castle in 1204, but it must have been in existence as early as 1196, when the town and castle of louth were burnt by niall macmahon.[1091] this was probably the "fairy mount" at louth, of which a plan is given in wright's _louthiana_. this plan shows "the old town trench," starting from opposite sides of the motte, so that the castle stood on the line of the town banks. the motte was ditched and banked round, but the plan does not show any bailey or any entrance. *loske (cal., i., 30).--mr orpen has pointed out to the writer that this cannot be lusk, which was a castle of the archbishop of dublin, while loske belonged to theobald walter, and is not yet identified. *loxhindy (_cal._, i., 95).--mr orpen identifies this name with loughsendy, or ballymore loughsendy, westmeath, where there is a motte.[1092] naas, kildare (_gir._, v., 100).--the _dun_ of naas is mentioned in the _book of rights_, p. 251, and in the _tripartite life of st patrick_. by the _dindsenchas_ it is attributed to the legendary princess tuiltinn in 277 a.d. on this "evidence" the motte at naas has been classed as prehistoric. but as we have seen, a _dun_ does not mean a motte, or even a hill, but an enclosure. naas was part of the share which fell to the famous anglo-norman leader, maurice fitzgerald, and the earthworks are quite of the norman pattern;[1093] a good motte, ditched and banked, with trace of a small bailey attached. the terrace round the flank of the motte may be no older than the modern buildings on the summit.[1094] [b. t. s.] navan, meath.--the _song_ says navan was given to jocelin de nangle, and it is known that the castle of the nangles was at navan. a lofty motte, with a very small semilunar platform below, formed by broadening out a part of the counterscarp bank of the ditch. (compare kilbixie.) [b. t. s.] nobber, meath (_cal._, i., 104).--a castle of hugh de lacy. a motte, with traces of a breastwork round the top, and wing banks running down to what remains of the bailey on the s. two curious little terraces on the n. side of the motte. no masonry. [b. t. s.] rath' (_cal._, i., 95).--this castle, evidently one of the most important in ulster, but hitherto unidentified, has been shown by mr orpen to be the famous castle of dundrum, down.[1095] this castle is situated on a natural motte of rock, no doubt scarped by art, with a deep ditch cut through the rock, and a bailey attached. the top of the motte contains a small ward fortified in stone, and a round keep. it is very doubtful whether this keep is as old as the time of john de courcy, to whom the castle is popularly attributed; for the round keep without buttresses hardly appears in england before the reign of henry iii. [e. s. a.] rathwire, meath.--rathwire was the portion of robert de lacy (_song_, 3150), and a castle was built here by hugh de lacy.[1096] there is a motte and bailey, with considerable remains of foundations in the bailey, and one wing bank going up the motte. [b. t. s.] *ratouth, meath, now ratoath (_cal._, i., 110).--a castle of hugh de lacy. there is "a conspicuous mount" near the church, about which there is a legend that malachy, first king of all ireland, held a convention of states (lewis). it is marked in the map. *rokerel (_cal._, i., 81).--unidentified. roscrea, tipperary (_cal._, i., 81).--a motte and bretasche were built here in king john's reign, as is recorded in an inquisition of 29 henry iii. (_cal._, i., 412). there is no motte now at roscrea, but an edwardian castle with mural towers and no keep; a 14th-century gatehouse tower. here we have a proved instance of a motte completely swept away by an edwardian transformation.[1097] [e. s. a.] skreen, meath.--giraldus mentions the castle of adam de futepoi, and as skreen was his barony, his castle must have been at skreen. in the grounds of the modern castellated house at skreen there is a motte, 11 feet high (probably lowered), with a terrace round its flank; some slight traces of a bailey. [b. t. s.] slane, meath.--the _song_ relates the erection of a motte by richard the fleming: "un mot fist cil jeter pur ses enemis grever."[1098] it also tells of its destruction by the irish, but does not give its name, which is supplied by the _annals of ulster_. probably richard the fleming restored his motte after its destruction, for there is still a motte on the hill of slane, with a large annular bailey,[1099] quite large enough for the "100 foreigners, besides women and children and horses," who were in it when it was taken. the motte has still a slight breastwork round the top. the modern castle of the marquis of conyngham, below, incorporates half a round tower of 13th-century work, belonging no doubt to the stone castle which succeeded the motte.[1100] [b. t. s.] thurles, tipperary (dorles, _cal._, i., 81).--a castle of theobald walter. thurles castle has a late keep with trefoil windows, and according to grose was built by the earl of ormond in 1328. from information on the spot it appears that there used to be a motte in the gardens behind the castle; mentioned also by lewis. [b. t. s.] tibraghny, or tipperaghny, kilkenny (_gir._, i., 386; _cal._, i., 19).--granted to william de burgh in 1200; built by john in 1185.[1101] a motte, with ditch and bank, and some trace of a half-moon bailey to the north. about 200 yards away is the stone castle, a late keep with ogee windows. [b. t. s.] timahoe, queen's co. (_gir._, i., 356).--built by hugh de lacy for meiler fitz henry. a motte, called the rath of ballynaclogh, half a mile west of the village. the bailey, the banks and ditches of which seem remarkably well preserved, is almost circular, but the motte is placed at its edge, not concentrically. there are wing-banks running up the motte. near it are the ruins of a stone castle built in elizabeth's reign (grose). [b. t. s.] trim, meath.--the _song_ tells of the erection of this castle by hugh de lacy, and how in his absence the _meysun_ (the keep--doubtless wooden) was burnt by the irish, and the _mot_ levelled with the ground. this express evidence that the first castle at trim had a motte is of great value, because there is no motte there now. the castle was restored by raymond le gros,[1102] but so quickly that the present remarkable keep can hardly have been built at that date.[1103] [b. t. s.] *tristerdermot (_gir._, v., 356).--castle of walter de riddlesford. tristerdermot is now castledermot; there used to be a _rath_ of some kind here close to the town. but mr orpen inclines to believe that the castle giraldus alludes to was at kilkea, another manor of de riddlesford's, where there is a motte, near the modern castle. "in the early english versions of the _expugnatio_ kilcae is put instead of tristerdermot as the place where walter de riddlesford's castle was built."[1104] *typermesan (_cal._, i., 110).--mr orpen writes that this name occurs again in a list of churches in the deanery of fore, which includes all the parish names in the half barony of fore, except oldcastle and killeagh. he suspects that typermesan is now known as oldcastle, "where there is a remarkably well-preserved motte and raised bailey."[1105] waterford (_cal._, i., 89).--we are not told whether strongbow built a castle here when he took the town from the ostmen in 1170. the castle is not mentioned till 1215, when it was granted by john to thomas fitz-antony. waterford was a walled town in 1170, and had a tower called reginald's tower, which seems to have been the residence of the two danish chieftains, as they were taken prisoners there. here too, henry ii. imprisoned fitz stephen.[1106] it is possible that this tower, as mr orpen supposes,[1107] may have been considered as the castle of waterford. but the existing "ring tower" on the line of the walls, which is sometimes called reginald's tower, is certainly a round mural tower of the 13th century; there are others of similar masonry on the walls. [b. t. s.] *wexford (_gir._, v., 314).--probably built by maurice prendergast; first mentioned when taken from his sons in 1176. mr orpen writes: "the site of wexford castle is an artificial mound. two of the scarped sides still remain, and the other two are built up above streets. when recently laying some drainpipes, the workmen came upon no rock, but only made earth." wicklow (_gir._, i., 298).--existing when henry ii. left ireland in 1173; he gave it to strongbow. the black castle at wicklow is a headland castle; it preserves the motte-and-bailey plan, though there is no motte, as there is a small triangular inner ward (about thirty paces each side) several feet higher than the outer bailey, from which it is separated by a very deep ditch cut through the rock. [b. t. s.] we have here a list of seventy-two castles mentioned in the contemporary history of the norman invasion. if the list is reduced by omitting aq'i, kilmehal, loske, rokerel, and incheleder, which are not yet identified, and five castles of which the identification may be considered doubtful, caherconlish, croom, clahull's castle, lagelachan, and typermesan, sixty-two castles are left, and out of these sixty-two, fifty-two have or had mottes.[1108] in five cases the place of the motte is taken by a natural rock, helped by art; but as the idea and plan are the same it is legitimately classed as the same type. this list might easily have been enlarged by the addition of many castles mentioned in the various irish annals as having been built by the normans. but this would have involved the identification of a number of difficult names, a labour to which the writer's limited knowledge of irish topography was not equal. the greater number of these sites have now been identified by mr orpen, and to his papers, so frequently cited above, we must refer the reader who wishes to study the fullest form of the argument sketched in these pages. one can easily sympathise with the feelings of those who, having always looked upon these mottes as monuments of ancient ireland, are loath to part with them to the norman robber. many of us have had similar feelings about the mottes of england, some of which we had been taught to regard as the work of that heroic pair, edward the elder and ethelfleda. but these feelings evaporated when we came to realise that it would have been highly unpatriotic in these founders of the british empire to have built little castles for their own personal safety, instead of building cities which were "to shelter all the folk," in the words of ethelfleda's charter to worcester. in like manner, wretched as were the intertribal wars of ireland, it would have been a disgrace to the irish chieftains if they had consulted solely their own defence by building these little strongholds for their personal use. the irish motte-castles furnish us with interesting proof that this type of castle was commonly used, not only as late as the reign of henry ii., but also in the reigns of his sons, richard i. and john;[1109] that is to say, at a time when castle-building in stone was receiving remarkable developments at the hands of richard i. and philip augustus of france. this, however, need not surprise us, since we know that as late as 1242, henry iii. was building a motte and wooden castle in the isle of rhé, at the mouth of the garonne.[1110] but those who imagine that the normans built stone castles everywhere in england, wales, and ireland, will have to reconsider their views. _note._--mr orpen's work on _ireland under the normans_ did not appear until too late for use in this chapter. the reader is referred to it for a more careful tracing of the history and archæology of the norman settlements in ireland. chapter xii stone castles of the norman period it may be a surprise to some of our readers to learn how very few stone castles there are in england which can certainly be ascribed to the first period of the norman conquest, that is to the 11th century. when we have named the tower of london, colchester, the recently excavated foundations of the remarkable keep at pevensey, and perhaps the ruined keep of bramber, we have completed the list, as far as our present knowledge goes, though possibly future excavations may add a few others.[1111] it is obvious that so small a number of instances furnishes a very slender basis for generalisations as to the characteristics of early norman keeps, if we ask in what respect they differed from those of the 12th century. but it is the object of this chapter to suggest research, rather than to lay down conclusions. the four early instances mentioned should be compared with the earliest keeps of france, the country where the pattern was developed. this has not yet been done in any serious way, nor does the present writer pretend to the knowledge which would be necessary for such a comparison.[1112] but data exist, which, if they were used in the right way, would greatly add to our knowledge. in the first place, we have a list of the castles built by fulk nerra, count of anjou, at the end of the 10th and the beginning of the 11th century, during his life-long struggle with the counts of blois for the possession of touraine. this list may be regarded as authentic, as it is given by his grandson, fulk rechin, in the remarkable historical fragment which he has bequeathed to us.[1113] the list is as follows:--_in touraine_: langeais, chaumont-sur-loire, montrésor, st maure. _in poitou_: mirabeau (n.w. of poitiers), montcontour, faye-la-vineuse, musterolum (montreuil-bonnin), passavent, maulevrier. _in anjou_: baugé, chateau-gontier, durtal. "et multa alia," adds fulk's grandson. nine of these others are mentioned by the chroniclers: montbazon, semblançay, montboyau, st florent-le-vieil, chateaufort near langeais, chérament, montrevault, montfaucon, and mateflon. many of these were undoubtedly wooden castles, with wooden keeps on mottes.[1114] in many other cases the ancient fabric has been replaced by a building of the renaissance period. whether any remains of stone donjons built by fulk nerra exist at any of these places except at langeais, the writer has been unable to find out; probably langeais is the only one; but french archæologists are agreed that the ruined tower which stands on the ridge above the 15th-century castle of langeais is the work of this count,[1115] a venerable fragment of a 10th-century keep.[1116] unfortunately only two sides of this tower and the foundations of the other sides remain. the walls are only 3 feet 6 inches thick, contrasting strikingly with the castles of the 12th and 13th centuries, where the usual thickness is 10 feet, which is often exceeded. this points to a date before any great improvement had taken place in assaulting-machinery. the masonry is what french architects call _petit appareil_, very small stones, but regularly coursed. there is no herring-bone work. the buttresses, of which there are five on the front, certainly suggest a later date, from the size of the ashlar with which they are faced, and from their considerable projection (3 feet on the entrance wall, 2 on the front). there is no sign of a forebuilding. there are only two storeys above the basement. the floors have been supported on ledges, not on vaults. the doorway, a plain round arch, with bar-holes, is on the first floor;[1117] it is now only a few feet above the ground, but probably the basement has been partially filled up with rubbish. the first storey is quite windowless in the walls which remain. there are no fireplaces nor any loopholes in these two fragments. in the second storey there are three rather small windows and one very large one;[1118] they are round arched, have no splay, and their voussoirs are of narrow stones alternated with tiles. in these details they resemble the early romanesque, which in england we call anglo-saxon. the tower of london and colchester keep are some seventy or eighty years later than that of langeais, and if we attempt to compare them, we must bear in mind that langeais was the work of a noble who was always in the throes of an acute struggle with a powerful rival, whereas the tower and colchester castle were built by a king who had reached a position of power and wealth beyond that of any neighbouring sovereign.[1119] langeais is but a small affair compared with these other two keeps. the larger area,[1120] thicker walls, the angle towers with their provision of stairways, the splayed windows [of colchester], the fireplaces, the chapels with round apses, the mural gallery [of the tower] cannot be definitely pronounced to be instances of development unless we have other instances than langeais to compare with them. de caumont mentions chateau du pin (calvados), lithaire (manche), beaugency-sur-loire, nogent-le-rotrou (eure et loire), tour de l'islot (seine et oise), st suzanne (mayenne), and tour de broue (charente inf.), as instances of keeps of the 11th century.[1121] these should be carefully examined by the student of castle architecture, and de caumont's statements as to their date should be verified. not having had the opportunity of doing this, we will only ask what features the keeps of langeais, london, and colchester have in common, which may serve as marks of an earlier date than the 12th century.[1122] the square or oblong form and the entrance on the first floor are common to all three, but also to the keeps of the first three-quarters of the 12th century. the absence of a forebuilding is probably an early sign,[1123] and so is the extensive use of tiles.[1124] the chapel with a round apse which projects externally only occurs in the keeps of london and colchester, and in the ruins of pevensey keep.[1125] the absence of a plinth is believed by enlart to be an early token.[1126] but colchester has a plinth and so has the tower. it is, however, very possible that in both cases the plinth is a later addition; at colchester it is of different stone to the rest of the building, and may belong to the repairs of henry ii., who was working on this castle in 1169; while the tower has undergone so many alterations in the course of its eight hundred years of existence that it is difficult to say whether the rudimentary plinth which it still possesses is original or not. wide-jointed masonry is generally recognised by architectural students as a mark of the early norman style. even this is a test which may sometimes deceive; certain kinds of ashlar are very liable to weather at the edges, and when the wall has been pointed at a comparatively recent period, a false appearance of wide joints is produced. moreover, there are instances of wide-jointed masonry throughout the 12th century. the use of rubble instead of ashlar is common at all dates, and depends no doubt on local conditions, the local provision of stone, or the affluence or poverty of the castle-builder. we are probably justified in laying down as a general rule that the dimensions of the ashlar stones increase as the middle ages advance. there is a gradual transition from the _petit appareil_ of fulk nerra's castle to the large blocks of well-set stone which were used in the 15th century.[1127] but this law is liable to many exceptions, and cannot be relied upon as a test of date unless other signs are present. the tower of london is built of kentish rag; colchester keep of small cement stones (septaria), which whether they are re-used roman stones or not, resemble very much in size the masonry of langeais. it is of course unnecessary to say to anyone who is in the least acquainted with norman architecture that all norman walls of ashlar are of the core-and-facing kind, an internal and an external shell of ashlar, filled up with rubble; a technique which was inherited from roman times in gaul, but which was not followed by the anglo-saxons.[1128] the presence or absence of fireplaces and chimneys is not a test of date. colchester is certainly an early keep,[1129] but it is well provided with fireplaces which appear to be original. these fireplaces have not proper chimneys, but only holes in the wall a little above the fireplace. but this rudimentary form of chimney is found as late as henry ii.'s keep at orford, and there is said to be documentary mention of a proper chimney as early as 816 in the monastery of st gall.[1130] the entire absence of fireplaces is no proof of early date, for in henry ii.'s keep at the peak in derbyshire, the walls of which are almost perfect (except for their ashlar coats) there are no fireplaces at all, nor are there any in the 13th-century keep of pembroke. it is possible that in these cases a free standing fireplace in the middle of the room, with a chimney carried up to the roof, was used. such a fireplace is described by the poet, chrestien of troyes, but no example is known to exist.[1131] but apart from details, if we look at the general plan of these four early stone castles, we shall see that it is exactly similar. it is the keep-and-bailey plan, the plan which prevailed from the 10th to the 13th century, and was not even superseded by the introduction of the keepless castle in the latter century.[1132] the motte-and-bailey type was of course only another version of the keep-and-bailey. in this primitive type of castle the all-important thing was the keep or donjon.[1133] besides the donjon there was little else but a rampart and ditch. "until the middle of the 12th century, and in the simpler examples of the epochs which followed, the donjon may be said to constitute in itself the whole castle."[1134] piper states that up to the time of the crusades german castles do not seem to have been furnished with mural towers.[1135] köhler, whose work treats of french and english castles as well as german, says that mural towers did not become general till the second half of the 12th century.[1136] nevertheless, as it is highly probable that the baileys of castles were defended at first with only wooden ramparts on earthen banks, even when the donjon was of stone, it is not unlikely that mural towers of wood may have existed at an earlier period than these writers suppose. it is, however, in favour of the general absence of mural towers that the word _turris_, even in 12th-century records, invariably means the _keep_, as though no other towers existed.[1137] that the baileys of some of the most important castles in england had only these wooden and earthen defences, even as late as the 13th century, can be amply proved from the _close rolls_.[1138] colchester castle had only a timber wall on the banks of its bailey as late as 1215, and in 1219 this _palicium_ was blown down and an order issued for its reconstruction.[1139] the arrangements in the stone donjons were probably the same as those we have already described when writing of the wooden ones.[1140] the basement was the storehouse for provisions,[1141] the first floor was generally the guardhouse, the second the habitation, of the lord and lady. where there were three or four storeys, the arrangements varied, and the finest rooms are often found on the third floor. an oratory was probably an invariable feature, though it cannot always be detected in ruined keeps. one of mr clark's most pronounced mistakes was his idea that these keeps were merely towers of refuge used only in time of war.[1142] history abounds with evidence that they were the permanent residences of the nobles of the 11th and 12th centuries. the cooking, as a rule, was carried on in a separate building, of which there are remains in some places.[1143] occasionally we find a variant of the keep-and-bailey type, which we may call the gatehouse keep. the most remarkable instance of this kind in england is exeter, which appears never to have had any keep but the primitive gatehouse, undoubtedly the work of baldwin de moeles, the first builder of the castle. in normandy, de caumont gives several instances of gatehouse keeps. plessis-grimoult (which has been visited by the writer) has a fragment of a gatehouse tower, but has also a mural tower on the line of the walls; as the castle was ruined and abandoned in 1047, these remains must be of early date.[1144] the gatehouse keep is probably an economical device for combining a citadel with the defence of the weakest part of the castle. we must pass on to the keeps of henry i.[1145] there is only one in england which authentic history gives to his time, that of rochester.[1146] but the chronicler robert de torigny[1147] has fortunately given us a list of the keeps and castles built by henry in normandy, and though many of these are now destroyed, and others in ruins, a certain number are left, which, taken along with rochester, may give us an idea of the type of keep built in henry i.'s time. the keeps attributed by robert to henry i. are arques, gisors, falaise, argentan, exmes, domfront, ambrières, vire, waure, vernon, evreux, alençon, st jean, and coutances. how many of these survive we cannot positively say;[1148] we can only speak of those we have seen (falaise, domfront, and gisors),[1149] and of arques, described by m. deville in his _histoire du chateau d'arques_, by m. viollet le duc in his treatise on donjons,[1150] and by mr g. t. clark.[1151] speaking under correction, as a prolonged study of the keeps in normandy was impossible to the writer, we should say that there is no very striking difference to be observed between the keeps of henry i. and those built by his father. the development of the forebuilding seems to be the most important change, if indeed we are justified in assuming that the 11th-century keeps never had it; its remains can be seen at arques, falaise,[1152] domfront, and rochester. at arques and falaise the doorway is on the second floor, which is an innovation, a new attempt to solve the difficulty of defending the entrance. the first floor at arques could only be entered by a trap from the second floor; at falaise there is a stone stair from one to the other. rochester is entered from the first floor. the basement storeys of arques, falaise, and domfront are quite unlit; at the tower the basement has had a number of loopholes, and the angular heads of those which remain suggest that they are at least copied from original lights. the main floors in henry i.'s keeps are always of wood, but this was not because vaulting was then unknown, because the crypt, sub-crypt, and chapel of the tower are vaulted, not to speak of many early churches.[1153] the four keeps mentioned have all three storeys, thus not exceeding colchester in height;[1154] the tower has now four storeys, but a good authority has remarked that the fourth storey has not improbably been made by dividing the third. no marked advance is observable in the masonry of these keeps. arques is built of _petit appareil_; falaise of small stones in herring-bone work; domfront of very small stones rudely coursed; rochester of kentish rag mixed with flint rubble. both falaise and domfront have plinths of superior masonry, but there is always the possibility that these plinths are later additions. the voussoirs of the arches at falaise, domfront, and rochester are larger than the rag or tile voussoirs which are used at colchester, the tower, and langeais. at rochester and arques provision is made for carrying the water-supply from the well in the basement to the upper floors, a provision of which there is no trace in the older keeps.[1155] as robert de monte says that henry i. built many castles in england as well as in normandy, we naturally ask what other english keeps besides rochester may be assigned to him. it appears to the writer that corfe and norwich keeps may very likely be his. both were royal castles in his time, and both were originally wooden castles on mottes.[1156] both these castles have forebuildings, and neither of them have floors supported on vaults.[1157] corfe has very superior masonry, of larger stones than those used in the keeps known to be henry i.'s, but wide-jointed. at norwich only a very small piece of the original ashlar is left. corfe is extremely severe in all its details, but quite corresponds to work of henry i.'s reign.[1158] norwich has a great deal of decoration, more advanced in style than that to be seen at falaise, but still consistent with the first half of the 12th century. neither keep has the least sign of transition norman, such as we seldom fail to find in the keeps of henry ii. moreover, neither of them figure in the _pipe rolls_ of henry ii., except for repairs; and as stephen in his harassed reign can hardly have had any money for building stone keeps, we may with some confidence ascribe these two keeps to henry i. a few words should be given to the castle of gisors, which contains in itself an epitome of castle history. the first castle, built by william rufus in 1096, was undoubtedly a wooden castle on a motte, with a stockaded bailey below it; certain portions of the present bailey walls rest on earthen banks, which probably belonged to the original castle, and show what a much smaller affair it was than the present one. henry i., robert de monte tells us, strengthened this castle with a keep. probably this was the shell wall which now crowns the motte; the smallness of the masonry (stones about 5 inches high, rudely dressed and coursed) and the slight projection of the buttresses (9 inches) agree with much of the work of his time. there would be a wooden tower inside.[1159] the chemise or shell wall is pierced by loopholes, a very unusual arrangement; they are round arched, and of very rude voussoirs.[1160] inside this shell there is a decagonal tower, called the tower of thomas à becket, which is almost certainly the work of henry ii.,[1161] as its name would indicate; the chapel of st thomas is close to it. a stair turret of the 15th century has been added to this keep; its original entrance was, as usual, a door on the first floor, but a basement entrance was built afterwards, probably in the 13th century. philip augustus, after he had taken this castle from john, added to it one of the round keeps which had then become the fashion, and subsequent enlargements of the bailey converted it into a "concentric" castle, of which the motte now forms the centre. there is one keep which is known to be of the reign of stephen, though not built by him, that of carlisle, built by david, king of scotland, in 1136,[1162] a time when he thought his hold on the four northern counties of england was secure, little reckoning on the true character of his great-nephew, henry, son of matilda. there is no advance to be seen in this keep on those of henry i., except that the walls are faced with ashlar. the vaulting of the basement is pronounced by mr clark to be very evidently a late insertion.[1163] with the reign of henry ii. a new era opens as regards the documentary history of our ancient castles, because the _pipe rolls_ of that king's reign have most fortunately been preserved.[1164] these contain the sheriff's accounts for money spent on the building or repair of the king's castles, and are simply invaluable for the history of castle architecture. the following is a list of the keeps which the _pipe rolls_ show to have been built or finished by henry ii.:- scarborough, built between 1157 and 1174. tower windsor, " " 1161 " 1177. shell wall orford, " " 1165 " 1172. tower bridgenorth, " " 1166 " 1173. tower newcastle, " " 1167 " 1177. tower bowes, " " 1171 " 1187. tower richmond, " " 1171 " 1174. tower chilham, " " 1171 " 1173. tower peak, " " 1172 " 1176. tower canterbury, " " 1172 " 1174. tower arundel, " " 1176 " 1182. shell wall tickhill, " " 1178 " 1181. tower the dates given here must be taken as only roughly accurate, as owing to the meagreness of the entries in the _pipe rolls_, it is not always certain whether the expenses were for the great tower or for other buildings. the list by no means includes all the work which henry ii. did on his english castles, for he was a great builder; but a good deal of his work seems to have been the substitution of stone walls with mural towers, for wooden stockades, and our list comprises all the cases in which it is clear that the keep was the work of this king.[1165] we confine our attention to the keeps, because though mural towers of stone began to be added to the walls of baileys during henry ii.'s reign (a detail which must have greatly altered the general appearance of castles), it is certain that the keep was still the most important part, and the residence of the king or noble whenever he visited the castle. seven out of the ten tower keeps are built on precisely the same plan as those of henry i. the chief advance is in the masonry. all the tower keeps of henry ii., except dover, chilham, and canterbury, are or have been cased with good ashlar, of stones somewhat larger in size than those used by henry i. the same may be said of the shell walls (namely, windsor and arundel); it is interesting to note that henry ii. still used this elementary form of citadel, which consisted merely of a wall round the top of a motte, with wooden buildings inside.[1166] in three cases out of the ten tower keeps, newcastle, bowes, and richmond, the basement storey is vaulted, which does not occur in the older keeps.[1167] yet such important castles as scarborough, dover, and canterbury are without this provision against fire. none of these keeps appear to have more than three storeys above the basement.[1168] none of the entrances to the keeps (except tickhill) have any portcullis grooves,[1169] nor any special contrivances for defence, except at canterbury, where the entrance (on the first floor) takes two turns at right angles before reaching the hall to which it leads.[1170] there are nearly always in the keeps of henry ii. some signs of transition norman in the details, such as the nook shafts at the angles of the towers of scarborough and the peak, certain arches at canterbury, the transition capitals used at newcastle, and the filleted string round the outside of bowes. but we have yet to speak of three keeps of henry ii.'s reign which are on a different plan to all the others, and which point to coming changes--chilham, orford, and tickhill.[1171] chilham is an octagonal tower of three storeys, with a square annexe on one side, which appears to be original. orford is polygonal outside, round inside. orford indeed is one of the most extraordinary keeps to be seen anywhere, and we must regard it as an experiment, and an experiment which appears never to have been repeated.[1172] instead of the usual norman buttresses, this polygonal keep has three buttress towers, placed between every four of the outer faces, 22 feet wide, and 12 feet in projection.[1173] tickhill, however, the last keep he built, is decagonal. the object of the polygonal tower was to deflect the missiles thrown from siege engines, and the round tower was evidently considered an improvement on the polygonal for this purpose, as it subsequently supplanted the polygonal type. it is therefore rather remarkable that henry ii. built both these keeps in the second decade of his reign, and afterwards went on building square keeps like his predecessors. we have seen, however, that he built at least one polygonal tower in normandy, that of gisors. we must bear in mind that the norman and angevine frontier was the theatre of the continuous struggle of henry ii. with the french kings, louis vii. and philip augustus, and that it is here that we must expect the greatest developments in military architecture. speaking generally, we may say that just as there was comparatively little change in armour during the 12th century until the end of henry ii.'s reign, so there was comparatively little change in military architecture during the same period. but great changes took place towards the end of the 12th century. one of these changes was a great improvement in missile engines; the trébuchet was one of the most important of these. it could throw much heavier stones than the largest catapult, and could take a more accurate aim.[1174] these new engines were useful for defence as well as attack, and this affected the architecture of castles, because flat roofs covered with lead, on which machines could be placed, were now substituted for the former sloping roofs.[1175] there are several payments for lead for roofing castles in the _pipe rolls_ of henry ii., the earliest being in 1166. in the reigns of john and henry iii. the mention of lead for roofing becomes much more frequent.[1176] hitherto, in the defence of keeps, reliance had mainly been placed upon their passive strength, though not so entirely as has been commonly assumed, since it was always the practice to shoot with arrows from the battlements round the roof of the tower. but not only was the fighting strength of the keep increased by the trébuchet, but the introduction of the crossbow gave it a defensive arm of the greatest importance. the crossbow had been known to the romans, and was used in the early part of the 12th century, but it was forbidden by the second lateran council in 1139 as a weapon hateful to god.[1177] this prohibition seems actually to have been effective, as william the breton says expressly that the crossbow was unknown to the french before the wars of richard i. and philip augustus.[1178] richard learned the use of it in the third crusade.[1179] but to use the crossbow in the defence of buildings it was necessary to construct special loopholes for shooting, splayed downwards externally, so that it was possible to aim from them. up till this time the loopholes of castles had been purely for light and not for shooting; anyone may see that it is impossible to take aim through an immensely thick wall unless there is a downward splay to increase the field of vision. william the breton tells us that richard built windows for crossbows to his towers, and this is the first mention we have of them.[1180] from this time defensive loopholes become common in castles, and take various fanciful forms, as well as the commoner ones of the circle, square, or triangle at the base of the loop. the _cross loophole_, which does not appear till the latter quarter of the 13th century, is explained by viollet le duc as an ingenious way of allowing three or four archers to fire in a volley.[1181] but up to the present time very little study has been given to this subject, and we must be content to leave the question for future observation to settle.[1182] the crossbowmen not only required splayed loopholes, but also niches, large enough to accommodate at least three men, so that a continuous discharge of darts (quarrells) might be kept up. any defensive loop which really means work will have a niche like this behind it. these niches had the defect of seriously weakening the wall. another innovation introduced by richard i. was that of stone machicolations, or _hurdicia_.[1183] whether wooden galleries round the tops of walls, with holes for dropping down stones, boiling-water, or pitch on the heads of the besiegers had not been used from the earliest times, is regarded by köhler as extremely doubtful.[1184] they were certainly used by the romans, and may even be seen clearly figured on the assyrian monuments. in the bayeux tapestry, the picture of bayeux castle shows the stockade on top of the motte crested with something extremely like hurdicia. yet the writer has found no authentic mention of them before the end of the 12th century.[1185] the stone machicolations built by richard round his keep of chateau gaillard are of an unusual type, which was only rarely imitated.[1186] but from this time wooden hurdicia became universal, to judge from the numerous orders for timber for _hoarding_ castles and town walls in the _close rolls_ of the first half of the 13th century. towards the middle of the 13th century stone brackets for the support of wooden hurdicia began to be used; they may still be seen in the great keep of coucy, which was begun in 1230. but machicolations entirely of stone, supported on double or triple rows of brackets, do not become common till the 14th century.[1187] the greatest architectural change witnessed at the end of the 12th century was the victory of the round keep over the square. round towers were built by the romans as mural towers, but the universal type of mediæval keep appears to have been the square or oblong, until towards the end of the 12th century.[1188] the polygonal keep was probably a transitional form; we have seen that henry ii.'s polygonal keep at orford was begun as early as 1165. many experiments seem to have been made at the end of the 12th century, such as the addition of a stone prow to the weakest side of a keep, to enable it better to resist showers of missiles. richard i.'s keep at chateau gaillard is a round keep with a solid prow of this kind. five-sided keeps are said to be not uncommon on the left bank of the rhine and in nassau; this type was simply the addition of a prow to a square keep. the only english instance known to the writer is that of mitford, northumberland, but this is merely a five-sided keep, the prow is not solid, as at chateau gaillard. the castle of étampes, whose plan is a quatrefoil, is assigned by french archæologists to this period of experiment.[1189] but the round keep was eventually the type preferred. philip ii. thought it necessary to add a round keep to the castle of gisors, after he had taken it from john, and he adopted the round keep for all his new castles, of which the louvre was one.[1190] along with the round keep, ground entrances became common.[1191] viollet le duc states that when the french soldiers broke into the inner ward at chateau gaillard the defenders had no time to escape into the keep by the narrow stair which led to the first floor, and consequently this proud tower was surrendered without a blow; and that this event so impressed on philip's mind the danger of difficult entrances that he abandoned the old fashion. this may be true, but it is a pure guess of le duc's, as there is nothing whatever to justify it in william the breton's circumstantial narrative. it is, however, certain that philip adopted the ground entrance to all his keeps. in england we find ground entrances to many round keeps of the 13th century, as at pembroke; but the older fashion was sometimes retained; conisburgh, one of the finest keeps in england, has its entrance on the first floor.[1192] after the introduction of the trébuchet, we might expect that the walls of keeps would be made very much thicker, and such seems to have been the case in france,[1193] but we do not find that it was the rule in england.[1194] the lower storeys were now generally instead of occasionally vaulted. in the course of the 13th century it became common to vault all the storeys. but in spite of the military advantages of the round keep, in its avoidance of angles favourable to the battering-ram, and its deflection of missiles, the square keep continued to be built in various parts of both france and england till quite late in the middle ages.[1195] on the scottish border, square towers of the ancient type, with quite norman decorations, were built as late as the 15th century.[1196] the advantage of the square tower was that it was more roomy inside, and was therefore preferred when the tower was intended for habitation. we come now to the greatest of all the changes introduced in the 13th century: the keepless castle, in which the keep is done away with altogether, and the castle consists of a square or oblong court surrounded by a strong wall with massive towers at the angles, and in large castles, in the curtain also.[1197] usually this inner quadrangle is encircled with an outer quadrangle of walls and towers, so that this type of castle is frequently called the _concentric_. but the castles of the keepless kind are not invariably concentric; those built by edward i. at conway, carnarvon, and flint are not so.[1198] instead of a dark and comfortless keep, the royal or noble owner is provided in this type of castle with a palatial house. in england this house is frequently attached to the gateway, forming what we may call a gatehouse palace; good examples may be seen at beaumaris, harlech, and tonbridge.[1199] the gateway itself is always defended by a pair of massive towers. edward i. is generally credited with the introduction of this type of castle into england, but until the _pipe rolls_ of henry iii.'s reign have been carefully examined, we cannot be certain that it was not introduced earlier. it was certainly known in germany fifty years before edward's accession to the throne, and in france as early as 1231.[1200] it is always supposed that this type of castle was introduced by the crusaders from syria. but when did it make its first appearance in syria? this is a point which, we venture to think, has not been yet sufficiently investigated. we do not believe that it can have existed in syria at the time of the third crusade, otherwise richard i., who is universally acknowledged to have been a first-class military architect, would have brought the idea home with him.[1201] yet his favourite castle of chateau gaillard, built in accordance with the latest military science, is in the main a castle of the keep-and-bailey type, and has even a reminiscence of the motte, in the scarped rock on which the keep and inner ward are placed. the new type of keepless castle never entirely displaced the old keep-and-bailey type. we have already seen that keeps of the old sort continued to be built till the end of the middle ages. hawarden castle has a good example of a 14th-century round keep; warkworth a most remarkable specimen of the 15th, the plan being a square tower with polygonal turrets set on each face.[1202] in france and germany also the old type appears to have persisted.[1203] we have already trespassed beyond the limits of our subject; but as we offer this chapter more as a programme of work than as a categorical outline, we trust it may not be without use to the student who may feel disposed to take up this much-neglected subject. a few words must yet be said about the state of the law relating to castles. nothing explicit has come down to us on this subject from the 11th century in england, but it is clear that the feudal system which william introduced, and which required that all lands should revert to the king on the death of the holder, forbade the building of any castle without the king's license, and, further, allowed only a life tenure in each case. the council of lillebonne in 1080 had laid it down in express terms that no one should build a castle in normandy without the permission of the duke;[1204] and william, after his great victory over his revolted barons, had enforced the right of garrisoning their castles. he was not able to do this in england, while he must have desired to check the building of private castles as far as possible. on the other hand, he had to face the dilemma that no norman land-holder would be safe in his usurped estates without the shelter of a castle. in this situation we have the elements of the civil strife which burst forth in stephen's reign, and which was ended by what we may call the anti-castle policy of henry ii.[1205] the rights secured by this able king were often recklessly sold by his successors, but in the reign of henry iii. it was evidently illegal even to fortify an ordinary house with a ditch and stockade without royal permission.[1206] * * * * * feudalism was an inevitable phase in the evolution of the western nations, and it ought neither to be idealised nor execrated. after the break-up of the tribal system the nations of europe sought refuge in the forms of imperialism which were devised by charlemagne, and even the small and distant island of england strove to move in the same direction. but the times were not ripe for centralisation on so great a scale, and when the system of the carlovingian empire gave way under the inrush of northmen and huns, european society would have fallen into ruin had it not been for the institutions of feudalism. these offered, in place of the old blood bond of the tribe, a social compact which, though itself artificial, was so admirably adapted to the general need that it was speedily adopted by all the progressive nations of europe. the great merit of feudalism was that it replaced the collective responsibility of the tribe by the individual responsibility of the man to his lord, and of the lord to his man. in an age when the decay of mutual trust was the worst evil of society it laid stress on individual loyalty, and insisted that personal honour should consist in the fulfilment of obligations. being a system so wholly personal, its usefulness depended largely on the nature of the person in power, and it was therefore liable to great abuses. but it is probable that feudalism worked better on the whole in england than in any other part of western europe. the worst evils of french feudalism never appeared in this country, except during the short and disastrous reign of stephen. the strong kings of the norman and plantagenet houses held in check the turbulence of the barons; and private war was never allowed to become here, as it was on the continent, a standing evil. to follow out this subject would lead us beyond the limits of this book, but it is interesting to remember that not only the picturesque ruins of our castles, but also the neglected green hillocks of which we have treated in this work, while they point to the skilful machinery by which the norman conquest was riveted on the land, bear witness also to something still more important. they tell of a period of discipline and education through which the english people passed, when in spite of much oppression and sometimes even cruelty, seeds of many noble and useful things were sown, from which succeeding generations have garnered the enduring fruit. appendices appendix a primitive folk-moots the popular meetings of the anglo-saxons, those of the hundred and the shire, were held in the open air. since many of those who attended them had to travel far, some sign was necessary to mark out the place of meeting, and some striking feature, such as a hillock, or a particular tree, or an ancient barrow, was chosen. thus we have the shire oak, near leeds, which gives its name to the wapentake of skyrack; and in a charter of edgar we find the _mot-beorh_ mentioned, and translated _congressionis collem_ = the meeting barrow. (_m. a._, ii., 324.) it does not appear that a hillock was an essential feature of these meeting-places, though this is popularly supposed to be the case, because the "thing-wall" in iceland and the "tynwald" in the isle of man have hillocks from which laws were proclaimed. the thingwall, or field of meeting in iceland had a natural rock just above it, isolated by a stream, and though proclamations were made from this rock, deliberations took place on the level. (gomme's _primitive folk-moots_, 31.) the tynwald hill, in the isle of man, which is also still used for the proclamation of new laws, was probably an ancient barrow, as there are other barrows in the immediate neighbourhood. (kermode and herdman, _illustrated notes on manx antiquities_, pp. 23 and 61.) at thingwall, near liverpool, and thingwall in wirral, both probably norse settlements, there is no hillock. in scotland, the use of a former motte as a meeting-place for the baronial court appears to have been much more common than in england. mr george neilson's explanation of this fact is referred to in chapter x., p. 307. appendix b watling street and the danelagh it has been pointed out by schmid (_gesetze der angelsachsen_, xxxviii.) that the document called _alfred and guthrum's peace_ cannot belong to the year of guthrum's baptism at wedmore; and mr j. r. green (_conquest of england_, p. 151) goes further, and doubts whether the boundaries laid down in this deed refer to anything except to the east anglian kingdom of guthrum. but mr green gives no adequate reason for rejecting the generally accepted conclusion that the watling street was the boundary between english and danish mercia, which is borne out by the following facts: (1) the danish confederacy of the five boroughs, lincoln, stamford, leicester, nottingham, and derby, pretty well covers the part of mercia north of watling street, especially when chester is added, as it sometimes is, to the list; (2) the division into wapentakes instead of hundreds, now believed to be of danish origin, is found in lincolnshire, notts, derbyshire, rutland, leicestershire, and northamptonshire. staffordshire, it is true, is not divided into wapentakes, but it was apparently won by conquest when ethelfleda fortified the town. chester was occupied by her husband in 908. watling street furnishes such a well-defined line that it was natural to fix upon it as a frontier. appendix c the military origin of alfred's boroughs keutgen (_untersuchungen über den ursprung der deutschen stadtverfassung_, 1895) appears to have been the first to notice the military origin of the old saxon boroughs; and professor maitland saw the applicability of the theory to the boroughs of alfred and edward the elder. (_domesday book and beyond._) the _anglo-saxon chronicle_, in 894, speaks of "the men whose duty it was to defend the towns"; this proves that alfred had made some special arrangement for the defence of the towns; and this arrangement must have been something quite apart from the ordinary service of the _fyrd_ or militia, which was only due for a short time. it must have been something permanent, with an adequate economic basis, such as we have in henry the fowler's plan. appendix d the words "castrum" and "castellum" if we take the chroniclers of the reign of charlemagne and his successors in the 9th century, we find the word _castrum_ constantly used for places such as avignon, dijon, macon, rheims, chalons, cologne, andernach, bonn, coblenz, etc., all of which are known to have been roman _castra_, when there can be no doubt that the _city_ is meant. take, for instance, the _annales mettenses_ (pertz, i., 326), 737: karl martel hears that the saracens have taken "castrum munitissimum avinionem" (avignon); he marches against them, and "_predictam urbem_ obsidione circumdat." but these cities are not only called _castra_, they are also called _castella_. thus the chronicle ascribed to hincmar calls macon both _castrum_ and _castellum_ in the same breath. (_migne_, 125, 1298.) the fortifications built by charlemagne against the saxons are called _castra_, _castella_, and _civitates_. (_chron. moissiacense_, pertz, i., 308. _ann. einhardi_, ibid., 196, 204.) the camps of the northmen, which as we have seen, were of great size, are also called not only _castra_, but _civitates_, _castella_, _munitiones_, _oppida_. (_annales fuldenses_, pertz, i., 397.) the camp built by charles the bald at pistes in 868 is called a _castellum_, though it was evidently an enclosure of great size, as he measured out quarters in it for his nobles, and formed an elaborate scheme for its maintenance. (hincmar, _migne_, 125, 1242, 1244.) coming to the 10th century, the following passage from flodoard will show the vagueness of the words in common use for fortifications: "heribertus ansellum bosonis subditum, qui prædictum custodiebat _castrum_ (vitry), cum ipso _castello_ recipit, et codiacum s. remigii _municipium_ illi cum alia terra concedit. nec longum, bosonis fideles _oppidanorum_ proditione victoriacum (vitry) recipiunt, et mosonum fraude pervadunt. at heribertus, a quibusdam mosomensibus evocatus, supervenit insperatus, et entrans _oppidum_, porta latenter a _civibus_ aperta, milites bosonis, qui ad custodiam loci residebant, ibidem omnes capit." (_migne_, 135, 297.) here it is clear that _castrum_, _castellum_, _municipium_, and _oppidum_ all mean the same thing, and the one word _civibus_ betrays that it is a _city_ which is meant. undoubtedly the chronicler thinks it elegant to change his words as often as he can. _munitio_ is another word frequently used; in classical latin it means a bulwark, a wall or bank; in the chroniclers of the 10th century it is used indifferently for a town or castle, though certain passages, such as "subversis multarum munitionibus urbium" (flodoard, i., vi.), show that the right sense is not far from the mind of the writer. the numerous passages in which we are told of monasteries being enclosed with walls and converted into _castella_, show that the _enclosure_ is the chief idea which the chroniclers associate with this word. the citations made above are not exceptional, but typical, and could be paralleled by countless others. since the above was written, i have read keutgen's _untersuchungen über den ursprung der deutschen stadtverfassung_. he remarks that the latin words for a town (in the 10th and 11th century writers) are _urbs_, _castellum_, _civitas_, sometimes _arx_; for a village, _villa_, _oppidum_, _vicus_. this absolutely agrees with what i have observed in these writers, except that i have certainly found _oppidum_ used for a town, as in the passage from flodoard cited above. appendix e the burghal hidage the _burghal hidage_ has been printed by birch, _cartularium_, iii., 671. the manuscript is very corrupt, and several of the places cannot be identified. those which can be identified are: hastings, lewes, burpham (near arundel), chichester, porchester, southampton, winchester, wilton, tisbury, shaftesbury, twineham, wareham, bridport, exeter, halwell, lidford, pilton, barnstaple, watchet, axbridge, lyng (near athelney), langport, bath, malmesbury, cricklade, oxford, wallingford, buckingham, eashing (near guildford), and southwark. the list thus seems to give an outline of alfred's kingdom as it was at his death, or at the beginning of the reign of his son. dr liebermann refers it to the latter date. (_leges anglorum_, 9.) appendix f thelwall a writer in the _manchester guardian_ a few years ago suggested a new solution of the name thelwall. he believes that the thelwall raised by edward was a boundary wall of timber, stretching from thelwall to runcorn. the mersey, he argues, above thelwall formerly broadened out into a series of swamps which would effectually defend the frontier towards the east. but westward from thelwall there were no such obstacles, and it is assumed that edward made a timber wall from thelwall to ethelfleda's fortress at runcorn. some support to this hypothesis is given in the names of places between thelwall and runcorn: stockton, walton (twice), stockham, walford, wallmore, and wall-hes. further, when the bed of the mersey was delved for the ship canal, discovery was made of "a remarkable series of submerged piles, 9 feet long, arranged in two parallel ranks which were 30 feet apart. the intervals between the piles varied, but seem to have averaged 5 to 6 feet. between the ranks were diagonal rows of upright stakes, each stake about 5 feet long, extending from either rank chevron-wise to the middle and there overlapping, so that the ground-plan of them makes a kind of herring-bone pattern. by this plan, anyone passing through would have to make a zigzag course. in some places sticks and sedges were found interwoven horizontally with the stakes, a condition of things which probably obtained throughout the whole series. the tops of the tallest piles were 10 feet below the present surface of the ground, which fact goes far toward precluding the possibility that this elaborate work may have been a fish-weir. the disposition of the stakes points to a military origin. so arranged, the advantage they offered to defending forces was enormous." i think it worth while to reproduce this account, especially because of the place-names, but those who are learned in the construction of fish-weirs may perhaps think that the description will apply to a work of that kind. appendix g the word "bretasche" this word, which also appears as bretagium, britagium, or bristega, evidently means a tower, as is clear from the following passages: order from king john to erect a _mota et bretagium_ at roscrea, in ireland (sweetman's _calendar_, i., 412); order by henry iii. to the dwellers in the valley of montgomery "quod sine dilatione motas suas bonis bretaschiis firmari faciant" (_close rolls_, ii., 42); order that the timber and bretasche of nafferton castle be carried to newcastle, and the bretasche to be placed at the gate of the drawbridge _in place of the little tower_ which fell through defect in its foundations (_close rolls_, i., 549b). the word is also expressly defined by william the breton as a wooden castle: "circuibat castrum ex omni parte, et fabricavit brestachias duplices per septem loca, _castella videlicet lignea_ munitissima." (bouquet, xvii., 78.) see also wright, "illustrations of domestic architecture," _arch. journ._, i., 212 and 301. in these papers it is clear that "breteske" means a tower, as there are several pictures of it. at a later period it seems to have been used for a wooden balcony made for the purpose of shooting, in the same sense as the word "hurdicium"; but i have not met with any instance of this before the 14th century. appendix h the words "hurdicium" and "hordiari" these words refer to the wooden galleries carried round the tops of walls, to enable the defenders to throw down big stones or other missiles on those who were attempting to attack the foot of the walls. "hurdicia quæ muros tutos reddebant." (_philippidos_, vii., 201; bouquet, xvii.) the word "alures" is sometimes used in the same sense. see a mandamus of henry iii., cited by turner, _history of domestic architecture_, i., 198: "to make on the same tower [of london] on the south side, at the top, deep alures of good and strong timber, entirely and well covered with lead, through which people can look even to the foot of the tower, and better defend it, if need may be." the alures of the castle of norwich are spoken of as early as 1187, but this mention, and one of the alures round the castle of winchester in 1193, are the only ones i find in the 12th century in england. appendix i "hericio, ericio, herito, herisson" this is derived from the french word _hérisson_, a hedgehog, and should mean something bristling, perhaps with thorns or osiers. several passages show that it was a defence on the counterscarp of the ditch, and it may sometimes have been a hedge. cohausen, _befestigungen der vorzeit_, shows that hedges were frequently used in early fortifications (pp. 8-13). the following passages seem to show clearly that it was on the counterscarp of the ditch: "[montreuil] il a bien clos, esforce e ferme de pel e _hericon_." (wace, 107.) "reparato exterioris ardensis munitionis valli fossato et amplificato, et sepibus et ericiis consepto et constipato." (lambert of ardres, 623, _circa_ 1117.) the french poem of jordan fantosme, describing the siege of wark by the scots in 1174, says the scots attacked and carried the _hericon_, and got into the ditch, but they could not take the bayle, _i.e._, they could not get over the palicium. appendix k the castle of yale in the year 1693, the antiquary edward llwyd was sitting on the motte of tomen y rhoddwy engaged in making a very bad plan of the castle [published in _arch. camb._, n.s., ii., 57]. his guide told him that he had heard his grandfather say that two earls used to live there. llwyd called the guide an ignorant fellow. modern traditions are generally the work of some antiquary who has succeeded in planting his theories locally; but here we have a tradition of much earlier date than the time when antiquaries began to sow tares, and such traditions have usually a shred of truth in them. is it possible that this castle of tomen y rhoddwy and the neighbouring one of llanarmon were built by the earls of chester and shrewsbury, who certainly went on expeditions together against wales, and appear to have divided their conquests? it is to be noted that the township is called _bodigre yr yarll_, the township of the earls. appendix l the castle of tullow or "collacht," p. 335 this information is kindly supplied by mr goddard h. orpen, who writes to me: "i visited tullow lately, and asked myself where would a norman erect a mote, and i had no difficulty in answering: on the high ground near where the protestant church stands. when i got up there the first thing that i noticed was that the church stood on a platform of earth 10 to 14 feet higher than the road, and that this platform was held in position by a strong retaining wall, well battered towards the bottom on one side. i then found on enquiry that the hill on which it stood and the place to the n.w. of it was called the 'castle hill.' on going round to the n.w. of the church i found a horseshoe-shaped space, scarped all round to a height of 6 to 10 feet, and rising to about 16 feet above the adjoining fields. there is no doubt that this was the site of the castle, and that it was artificially raised. to my mind there was further little doubt that it represented an earlier mote. in a field adjoining on the w. i could detect a platform of about 50 to 70 paces, with traces of a fosse round the three outer sides.... this was certainly the castellum de tulach mentioned in the deeds concerning raymond le gros' grant to the abbey of st thomas.--_dublin reg. st thomas_, pp. 111, 113." appendix m the castle of slane mr westropp says that the "great earthworks and fosses" on the hill of slane are mentioned in the "life of st patrick" (_journ. r. s. a. i._, 1904, p. 313). what the _life_ really says is: "they came to ferta fer fiecc," which is translated "the graves of fiacc's men"; and the notes of muirchu maccu-machtheni add, "which, as fables say, were dug by the slaves of feccol ferchertni, one of the nine wizards" (_tripartite life_, p. 278). it does not mention any fort, or even a hill, and though ferta fer fiecc is identified with slane, there is nothing to show what part of slane it was. appendix n the word "donjon" professor skeat and _the new english dictionary_ derive this word from the low latin, _dominionem_, acc. of _dominio_, lordship. leland frequently speaks of the keep as the dungeon, which of course is the same word. its modern use for a subterranean prison seems to have arisen when the keeps were abandoned for more spacious and comfortable habitations by the noble owners, and were chiefly used as prisons. the word _dunio_, which, as we have seen, lambert of ardres used for a motte, probably comes from a different root, cognate with the anglo-saxon _dun_, a hill, and used in flanders for the numerous sandhills of that coast. appendix o the arrangements in early keeps we get a glimpse of these in a story given in the "gesta ambasiensium dominorum," d'archery, _spicilegium_, 278. sulpicius the treasurer of the abbey of st martin at tours, an important personage, built a stone keep at amboise in 1015 (_chron. turonense magnum_), in place of the "wooden house" which his brother had held. in the time of fulk rechin (1066-1106), this keep was in the hands of the adherents of the counts of blois. hugh, son of sulpicius, with two other men, hid themselves by night in the basement, which was used as a storehouse; it must therefore have had an entrance from outside. with the help of ropes, they climbed up a sewer into the bedchamber, which was above the cellar, and evidently had no stair communicating with the cellar. here they found the lady of the house and two maids sleeping, and a watchman who was also asleep. while one of the men held these in terror with a drawn sword, the other two climbed up a ladder and through a trap-door up to the roof of the tower, where they unfurled the banner of hugh. here we see a very simple keep, which has only one storey above the basement; this may have been divided into two or more apartments, but it was thought a fitting residence for a lady of rank. it had no stairs, but all the communications were by trap-doors and ladders. we may be quite sure that the people of rank of the 11th and 12th centuries were content with much rougher accommodation than mr clark imagined. even richard i.'s much admired keep of chateau gaillard appears to have had no communication but ladders between the floors. appendix p keeps as residences the description of a keep which we have already given from lambert of ardres (chap. vi.) is sufficient to prove that even wooden keeps in the 12th century were used as permanent residences, and this is confirmed by many scattered notices in the various chronicles of france and england. it was not till late in the 13th century that the desire for more comfortable rooms led to the building of chambers in the courtyard. appendix q castles built by henry i. the castles, which according to robert de monte, henry i. built altogether [_ex integro_] were drincourt, chateauneuf-sur-epte, verneuil, nonancourt, bonmoulins, colmemont, pontorson, st denis-en-lyons, and vaudreuil. many of these may have been wooden castles; chateauneuf-sur-epte almost certainly was; it has now a _round_ donjon on a motte. the "tour grise" at verneuil is certainly not the work of henry i., but belongs to the 13th century. appendix r the so-called shell keep we have three accounts of motte-castles from the 12th century: that of alexander neckham, in the treatise _de utensilibus_; that of laurence of durham, cited in chapter vii., p. 147; and the well-known description of the castle of marchem, also cited in chapter vi., p. 88. all these three describe the top of the motte as surrounded by a wall (of course of wood), within which is built a wooden tower. the account of marchem says that it was built in the middle of the area. this supports the conjecture in the text. mr h. e. malden has shown (_surrey archæolog. collections_, xvi., 28) that the keep of guildford is of later date than the stone wall round the top of the motte. remove this tower, and there would be what is commonly called a shell keep. it would appear, therefore, that it was a common practice to change the bank or stockade round the top of the motte into a stone wall (no doubt as a defence against fire), leaving the keep inside still of wood. four of the pictures from the bayeux tapestry (see frontispiece) all give the idea of a wooden tower inside a stockade on a motte. appendix s professor lloyd's "history of wales" i regret that this valuable work did not appear until too late for me to make use of it in my chapter on welsh castles. it is worth while to note the following points in which professor lloyd's conclusions differ from or confirm those which i have been led to adopt. aberystwyth and aberrheiddiol.--"after the destruction of the last aberystwyth castle of the older situation in 1143, the chief stronghold of the district was moved to the mouth of the rheiddiol, a position which it ever afterwards retained, though people still insisted on calling it aberystwyth" (514). "the original castle of aberystwyth crowned the slight eminence at the back of the farm of tan y castell, which lies in the ystwyth valley 1-1/2 miles s. of the town. there is the further evidence of the name, and the earthworks still visible on the summit" (426, _note_). carreghova.--i ought perhaps to have included this castle in my list, though on the actual map its site is within the english border; but as there are absolutely no remains of it [d. h. m.] it does not affect the question i am discussing. cardigan and cilgerran.--"dingeraint cannot be cilgerran, because cilgerran is derived from _cerran_, with the feminine inflection, not from _geraint_; nor is cilgerran 'close to the fall of the teifi into the sea,' as the chronicler says dingeraint was. the castle built by earl roger was probably cardigan" (401). professor lloyd afterwards identifies cilgerran with the castle of emlyn (661). this seems to me questionable, as the "new castle of emlyn," first mentioned in edward i.'s reign, presupposes an older castle, and as i have stated, a mound answering to the older castle still exists not far from the stone castle. carmarthen.--professor lloyd thinks this castle stood at the present farm of rhyd y gors, about a mile below the town; but i see no reason to alter the conclusion to which i was led by mr floyd's paper, that the rhyd y gors of the castle was a ford at carmarthen itself. the fact that henry i. founded a cell to battle abbey at carmarthen (431) seems to me an additional piece of evidence that the castle was there; castle and abbey nearly always went together. dinweiler.--professor lloyd assumes dinweiler to be the same as the castle in mabudryd built by earl gilbert, and to be situated at or near pencader (501). it should be noted, however, that dinweiler reads dinefor in ms. b. of the _brut_, in 1158. i am in error in supposing st clair to be the castle of mabudryd (following a writer in _archæologia cambrensis_), as st clair is not in that commote. professor lloyd's map of the _cantrefs_ and _commotes_ differs widely from that of previous writers. llangadoc.--"luchewein" should not be identified with this castle; professor lloyd thinks it may refer to a castle at llwch owain, a lake in the parish of llanarthney, where there is an entrenchment known as castell y garreg. maud's castle.--camden identified "matildis castrum" with colewent or colwyn, but professor lloyd is of opinion that "a careful collation of the english and welsh authorities for the events of the years 1198 and 1231 will make it clear that payne's castle and maud's castle are the same." this of course does not affect what is said about colwyn castle in the text. montgomery.--professor lloyd deems that the emphasis laid (especially in the _charter rolls_, i., 101) on the fact that the building of henry iii.'s reign was new montgomery, leaves no doubt that the former town and castle stood elsewhere, probably at hên domen. this, if true, would greatly strengthen my case, as hên domen is an admirable motte and bailey. schedule of english castles known to date from the eleventh century[1207] in towns name of whole area of enceinte no. castle. type.[1208] or bailey. value. 1. arundel m. and b., o. whole area 4-1/2 acres risen. 2. bamborough k. and b. whole area 4-3/4 acres ... 3. barnstaple m. and b. bailey 1-1/3 acres not given t. r. e. 4. bristol m. and b., o. whole area nearly 4 acres not given t. r. e. 5. buckingham m. and b. ? risen. 6. caerleon m. and b., o. bailey 4-3/4 acres risen. 7. cambridge m. and b. bailey 4-1/4 acres not given t. r. w. 8. canterbury m. and b., o. whole area 3 acres risen. (dungeon hill) 9. carlisle k. and b., o. whole area 4 acres ... 10. chester m. and b., o. first ward 3/4 acre risen. 11. colchester k. and b. {inner ward and keep} risen. {about 2 acres } 12. dover k. and b. {inner castle } risen. {about 6 acres} 13. durham m. and b., o. bailey 1 acre ... 14. ely m. and b., o. bailey 2-1/2 acres fallen, but rising. 15. exeter b. only now 2 acres ... 16. gloucester m. and b., o. ? risen. 17. hastings m. and b., o. ? fallen, but rising. 18. hereford m. and b. bailey 5-1/2 acres risen. 19. huntingdon m. and b., o. inner bailey 2-1/2 acres stationary. 20. lewes m. and b. bailey 3 acres risen. 21. lincoln m. and b. bailey 5-3/4 acres risen. 22. monmouth k. and b. bailey 1-3/4 acres not given t. r. e. 23. newcastle m. and b., o. whole area 3 acres 1 rood ... 24. norwich m. and b., o. inner bailey 3-1/4 acres risen. 25. nottingham m. and b., o. bailey 1-2/3 acres risen. 26. oxford m. and b., o. bailey 3 acres risen. 27. pevensey k. and b. bailey 1 acre risen. 28. quatford {m. and b., } {probably o.} bailey 1 acre ... 29. rochester m. and b., o. whole area about 3 acres risen. (boley hill) 30. old sarum. m. and b. inner ward 1-3/4 acres risen. 31. shrewsbury m. and b., o. bailey 4/5 of an acre risen. 32. stafford m. and b., o. bailey 1-3/5 acres risen. 33. stamford m. and b. bailey 1-3/4 acres risen. 34. tamworth {m. and b., } bailey 1 acre not given. {probably o.} 35. totnes m. and b., o. bailey 3/4 of an acre risen. 36. tower of k. and b. originally? not given. london 37. wallingford m. and b. bailey 4-1/2 acres risen. 38. warwick m. and b., o. bailey 2-1/2 acres risen. 39. winchester m. and b., o. whole area 4-1/2 acres not given. 40. worcester m. and b., o. whole area between 3 and 4 acres risen. 41. york m. and b., o. whole area formerly about 3 acres risen. 42. the baile m. and b., o. whole area 2-3/4 acres ... hill, york in manors head of whole area no. name of district of enceinte castle. type. t. r. e. or bailey. value. 43. abergavenny m. and b. ? bailey 1 acre. ... 44. belvoir m. and b.? no ? risen. 45. berkeley m. and b yes " 1-1/2 acres risen. or ness 46. berkhampstead m. and b yes " 3 acres fallen. 47. bishop's m. and b no " 2-1/2 acres fallen. stortford 48. bourn m. and b. yes " 3 acres risen. 49. bramber m. and b. no " 3 acres risen. 50. carisbrooke m. and b. no " 2-3/4 acres risen. 51. castle acre m. and b. no " 2 acres risen. 52. chepstow k. and b. no whole area 1-2/3 acres risen. 53. clifford m. and b. no bailey 2-1/3 acres risen. 54. clitheroe m. and b. no " 1 acre fallen. 55. corfe m. and b. no " 1-1/2 acres risen. 56. dudley m. and b. no " 1-3/4 acres fallen. 57. dunster m. and b. no " 1-3/4 acres risen. 58. ewias m. and b. ? " 2-1/3 acres not given t. r. e. 59. eye m. and b. no " 2 acres risen. 60. launceston m. and b. no " 3 acres fallen. 61. montacute m. and b. no ? not given t. r. e. 62. morpeth m. and b. ? ? ... 63. norham m. and b. ? bailey 2 acres ... 64. okehampton m. and b. no " 1/2 an acre risen. 65. oswestry m. and b. no ? risen. 66. peak castle k. and b. no " 1 acre risen. 67. penwortham m. and b. no ? risen. 68. peterborough motte only ? ? ... now 69. pontefract m. and b. probably " 2-1/3 acres fallen. 70. preston capes m. and b. no ... risen. 71. rayleigh m. and b. yes bailey 3/4 acre risen. 72. richard's m. and b. no " 2/3 acre stationary. castle 73. richmond k. and b. no " 2-1/2 acres ... 74. rockingham m. and b. no first bailey 3 acres risen. 75. skipsea m. and b. no bailey 8-1/4 acres fallen. 76. stanton m. and b. no ? risen. holgate 77. tickhill m. and b. no " 2 acres risen. 78. tonbridge m. and b. no " 1-1/2 acres stationary. 79. trematon m. and b. no " 1 acre fallen. 80. tutbury m. and b. no " 2-1/2 acres not given t. r. e. 81. tynemouth ? ? ? ... 82. wigmore m. and b. no " 1 acre risen. 83. windsor m. and b. no upper bailey fallen, 6-1/2 acres but rising. 84. wisbeach m. and b. no whole area 4 acres fallen. it has been thought best to tabulate the _chief_ defensible area of each castle. the total area, including ditches and scarps, is liable to great variation owing to the nature of the ground. index aber, 261 aberavon, 296 abercorn, 308 aberdovey, 300 abereinon, 301 abergavenny, 97 aberlleinog, 261 aberystwyth, 281, 393 aggeres, 77, 111 aldreth, 150 alfred, king, 13, 14, 15 amwell, 52 annan, 309 anstruther family, 308 antrim, 331 appledore, 50 aq'i, 331 aquila, castle of, 77 ardfinnan, 331 ardmayle, 331 ardnurcher, 331 ardree, 331 ardres, 75, =89= area of norman castles, 97 arques, 361 arundel, 98 arx, 211, 384 ashlar masonry, 356 askeaton, 332 askelon, 332 athelney, 14 athlone, 333 auchterless, 309 avenel family, 308 baginbun, 333 bailey, ballium, 4, 5, 92, 207 bakewell, 47 balimore eustace, 333 balliol family, 308 ballyknockan, 341 ballynaclogh, 346 bamborough, 11, 100, 355, 357 banff, 319 barclay, 309 barnstaple, 102 barnwell, 376 baronies, 307 basements of keeps, 359, 362 basingwerk, 267 bastille, the, 376 bayeux tapestry, 87, 158, 393 bayford court, 49 bedford, 40 beith, 317 belesme, roger, 100, 191; castle, 77 belvoir, 102 benfleet, 50 bensington, 28 berkeley, 103, 367 berkhampstead, 105 bernard de neufmarché, 273, 276 bervie river, 316 biggar, 313 bishop's stortford, 107 blaenporth, 282 bleddfa, 293 blois, 75 blythe, 219 boley hill, 49, 196, 199, 200 bordlands, 307 borgue, 317 boroughs, 21, 258, 382 boulogne, 376 _n._ 1 bourn, 107 bowes, 366 bramber, 109 braose, de, 109, 276, 292 brecknock, 276, 290 bremesbyrig, 32 bretasche, 91, 386 bridgenorth, 33, 52 bristol, 23, 110 bromborough, 32 bruce family, 309 brut y tywysogion, 254 buckingham, 25, 40 burghal hidage, 28, 98, 160, =385= burgh castle, 44 _n._ 1. burgus, 85 burh, 17-19, 123; clark's theory of, 20-29 buttington, 51 cadwalader, 266 cadzow, 314 caen keep, 361 caereinion, 300 caerleon, 113 caerphilly, 376 _n._ 1 caerwedros, 283 caherconlish, 333 cambridge, 55, 57, =115= camps, of refuge, 29; prehistoric, 6; of danes, 61 canterbury, 116 carbury, 333 cardiff, 294 cardigan, 274, 275; castle, =280= carisbrook, 121 carlingford, 334 carlisle, 25, =128=, 365 carlovingian empire, 66 carmarthen, =275=, 394 carnarvon, =261=, 375 carnwath, 318 carreghova, 271, 394 carrick, 334 carrickfergus, 334 carrickittle, 339 carrigogunell, 332 castel, the word, 24, 98 castellum, castrum, 25, 67, 169, 383 castles, private, ch. v.; product of feudalism, 66; in normandy, 76, 77; wooden, 78; stone, ch. xii.; sites given to church, 259 _n._ 2. castle acre, =124= castledermot, 347 castle guard, 175 castleknock, 341 castlemore, 338 castle rough, 49 castle rushen, 377 _n._ 1 castletown delvin, 334 cathcart family, 310 catter, 315 ceredigion, 274, 275 chapels in castles, 355 chartres keep, 74 chastell gwalter, 282 chateaudun keep, 75 chateau gaillard, 372, 376, 391 chepstow, 125 chester, 31, =126=, 367 chevron moulding, 100 cheyne family, 310 chilham, 368 chimneys, 357 chinon, 75 chippenham, 55 chirk, 269 christison, dr, 8, 31, 304, 306 cilgerran, =281=, 394 citadels, 6, 54, 56 clare, house of, 275, 281 clark, g. t., 2, 8, 19, 26, 48 clears, st, =288=, 394 cledemuthan, 43 clifford, 128 clitheroe, 129 clonard, 334 clonmacnoise, 335 colchester, 41, =132=, 223, 354, 355 collacht, 335 colville family, 310 comyn family, 310 concentric castles, 375 cooking in castles, 359 corfe, =135=, 363 coucy, 65, 372 courcy, john de, 336 court hills, 310, 391 covington, 313 crail, 319 crimond, 311 crogen, battle of, 266 cromarty, 316 crometh, 335 cromwell, 220, 336 croom, 335 crossbow, the 370 cunningham family, 311 cupar, 320 cymmer, 299 cynewulf, murder of, 13 cynfael, 300 cyricbyrig, 37 dalswinton, 311 dane john, 116, 118, 121 danes in ireland, 60 dangio, 75 danish raths, 48; camps, 61; colonies, 59, 60 darnhall, 317 david i. of scotland, 123, 163, =303= deganwy, 259, 270 dernio, 267 derver, 341 dinan, 87 dinerth, 282 dinevor, =287=, 394 dinweiler, 394 dirleton, 319 domfront keep, 361 donjons, 358, 390 douglas family, 312 dover, =138=; church, 144; pharos, 143 downpatrick, 335 drogheda, 336 drumore, 315 drumsagard, 317 duchal, 315 dudley, 144 dudo of st quentin, 76 duffus, 317 duleek, 337 dumfries, 320 dun, the word, 326 dunamase, 337 dungarvan, 337 dunio, 75 dunmullie, 311 dunoon, 313 dunskeath, 320 dunster, 145 durand, 312 durham, 146 durward, 312 dyfed, 274 earthworks, committee, 2 eddisbury, 35 edward, 14-16, 45, 65, 127 edward the martyr, 135 edwardian castles, 328, 345 egloe, eulo, 271 elgin, 320 ellon, 311 ely, 149 entrances to keeps, 355, 361, 373 errol, 314 escluen, 332 étampes castle, 373 ethelfleda, 14, 15, 16, 20, 21, 45, 232, 342 eu, 56 eustace of boulogne, 139 ewias, 150 exeter, 151; siege of, 154 eye, 155 falaise, 361-363 favorie, 338 ferns, 338 feudalism, 63, 66, 378, 379; in normandy, 76; in wales, 299, 378; in scotland, 303 fireplaces, 357 fitz alans, 179, 313 fitzhardinge, robert, 104 fitzosbern, william, 103, 126, 128, 150, 273 five boroughs, the 44, 59 flambard, ranulf, 172 fleming family, 313 flint, 375 folk-moots, 381 fore, 338 forebuildings, 355, 361 forfar, 320 forres, 321 fortifications, anglo-saxon, 29, 64; danish, 55, 61; wooden, 78 fotheret onolan, 338 french earthworks, 7 fulham, 55 fulk nerra, 73, 74, 352 gaimar, geoffrey, 171 gallo-roman villas, 67 galtrim, 338 gatehouse keeps, 359 gatehouse palace, 375 geashill, 338 gemaron, 292 gephthine, 332 gilling, 193, 194 gisors, 364 glamorgan, 276 gloucester, 156 godwin, earl, 22, 24, 103 gomme, g. l., 8 gould, i. c, 2 gower, 277, 297 graham family, 314 granard, 338 greenwell, canon, 2 guildford, 393 guisnes, 75, 76 gundulf, bishop, 197, 198, 222 guy of amiens, 139 gwyddgrug, 260 gwynedd, 256-262 hæsten the dane, 49, 50 hall, the anglo-saxon, 17, 24, 168 hallaton castle hill, 88 hamilton family, 314 harold, earl and king, 138, 161, 257 hastings, 87, =158= haughead kipp, 317 haverfordwest, 280 hawarden, 377 hawick, 315 hay, 291 hay family, 314 hên domen, 395 henry i., castles of, 360-364, 392 henry ii., castles of, 365-369 henry the fowler, 64 hericio, 388 hermitage castle, 318 herring-bone work, 136, 168, 218 hincheleder, 339 hithes, 57 hodesley, hoseley, 268 holywell, 267, 270 hubert de burgh, 140 hugh of avranches, 256, 257 humphrey's castle, 283 huntingdon, 42, =162= hurdicia, 91, 372, =387= ida, king, 11 inchelefyre, 339 innermessan, 321 inverness, 321 inverugie, 310 inverwick, 313 irish chiefs, 325, 342 jedburgh, 321 john, bishop of terouenne, 88 john, king, 137, 270, 370 _n._ 1 jomsborg, 59 karakitel, 339 keepless castles, 328, 374 keep and bailey, 357 keeps, arrangements in, 359, 391; polygonal, 368; prows to, 373; residences, 392; round, 368, 373 keeps of henry i., 360, 363, 392 keeps of henry ii., 366 keeps of william i., 351, 354 kelts of scotland, 304 kenardington, 50 kenfig, 295 kenmure, 308 kidwelly, 288 kilbixie, 339 kilbride, 318 kilfeakle, 340 kilfinnane, 329 kilkea, 347 killamlun, 339 killare, 339 kilmaurs, 311 kilmehal, 340 kilmore, 340 kilsantan, 340 kiltinan, 340 kincleven, 321 kirkcudbright, 321 kirkintilloch, 311 kirkpatrick durham, 312 kitchens in castles, 90 knighton, 293 knock, 341 knockgraffan, 341 lacy, ilbert de, 187, 188; hugh de, 337 lag castle, 312 lagelachon, 341 lagmen, 62 lambert of ardres, 75, 89 lanark, 321 langeais keep, 72, 353 laon, 72 largs, 317 laugharne, 288 launceston, 164 laurence of durham, 147 law about castles, 377 lawhaden, 279 lea castle, 341 lea river, 15, 52 lead roofs, 369 leighlin, 341 lennox, 315 leuchars, 318 lewes, 165 lincoln, 167 linton roderick, 310 lismore, 342 llanarmon, 272 llandeilo talybont, 298 llandovery, 286 llanegwad, 289 llangadog, 289, 394 llanrhystyd, 300 llanstephan, 286 lloyd, professor, 253, 393 lochmaben, 309 lochorworth, 314 lockhart family, 315 logan family, 315 london fortified, 14 loopholes, 362, 370, 371; cross loopholes, 371 lords-marchers, 255 loske, 343 loughor, 298 louth, 342 louvre, the, 373 lovel family, 315 loxhindy, 343 ludgarsburh, 170 lumphanan, 312 lyle or lisle family, 315 lympne, 15 mabudryd, 394 machicolations, 372 magh adair, 327 maitland, professor, 27 maldon, 41 manchester, 46 manors, saxon, and mottes, 96 mans, le, keep of, 361 masonry, 356, 362, 367 mathraval, 271 maud's castle, 293, 394 maxton, 316 maxwell family, 316 melton, archbishop, 248 melville family, 315 mercenaries, 7, 74 _n._ 1 merchem castle, 88 mersey island, 54 military service, 64 milton, 49 missile engines, 369 mitford, 373 moffat, 309 mold, 260 monmouth, 168 montacute, 169 montalt, 316 montgomeri, roger de, 53, 98, =130=, 191, 263; hugh de, 274; arnolf, 274, 278; castle, =264=, 395 montgomerie family, scotland, 316 moot-hills, 8, 9, 381 moray, colonisation of, 304 morpeth, 171 mortain, count of, 106, 138, 164, 169, 186 mortimers, 276 morville family, 316 mottes, described, 4, 5; the word, 9 _n._ 1; distribution, 80-82; situation, 83-96; in france, 85; in wales, 301; in scotland, 322; in ireland, 348; history, 72, 74 mowbray, earl robert, 101 mowbray family, 317 müller, dr sophus, 6 mural towers, 358 murray family, 317 naas, 343 nantes castle, 71 nant yr arian, 284 narberth, 280 navan, 344 neath, 296 neckham, "de utensilibus," 86 neilson, mr george, 8, =306= neu leiningen, 376 _n._ 1 newcastle, 171 newcastle bridgend, 295 newcastle emlyn, 289 new grange, 10 newport, 279 nicetus, his castrum, 67 nicholas, st, 110, 213 nobber, 344 normandy, 22, 76, 77 norman favourites, 23 norman walls, 356 normans, 7 norrei castle, 77 northmen, camps of, 61, 383 norton, 293 norwich, =173=, 363 nottingham, 44, 49, 57, =176= o'donovan, 329 offa's dyke, 52 okehampton, 178 oldcastle, 347 old sarum, 202 oliphant family, 317 orford, 246 _n._ oswestry, 179 overton (denbigh), 267; (hereford), 192 owen gwynedd, 260, 270 oxford, 180 oxnam, 310 oystermouth, 298 pantolf, william, 213 parliamentary fortifications, 202 payn's castle, =293=, 395 peak, 182 pembroke, 278 pentecost's castle, 24, 150 penwortham, 183 peterborough, 185 pevensey, 99, 186 pistes, capitulary of, 68, 72 pitt-rivers, general, 2 plinths, 355 polnoon, 316 pontefract, 187; siege of, 189 pont y stuffan, 283 powys, 263-266 prestatyn, 270 preston capes, 190 pretorium, 72 prisons in castles, 359 private castles, 21, 68 pudsey, bishop, 173 quatbridge, 58 quatford, 191 quincy, de, family, 318 radnor, 292 rainald the sheriff, 263 rapes of sussex, 299 rathceltchair, 336 raths in ireland, 325, 327 rathwire, 344 ratouth, 344 rayleigh, 191 reading, 54 redcastle, lunan bay, 309 reginald's tower, 347, 348 remni, 297 renfrew, 313 retford, 55 rhaidr gwy, 301 rhé island, motte on, 350 rhuddlan, 257, 259 rhyd y gors, 275, 284 rhys ap griffith, 275, 287 riccarton, 319 richard sans peur, 76 richard i., 370-372 richard's castle, 192 richmond, 193 robert curthose, 110 robert de monte, 360 robert, earl of gloucester, 110, 295 robert fitz hamon, 277 robert of rhuddlan, 257 roberton, 314 rochester, 25, 49, 195 rockingham, 201 roger the poitevin, 129, 183, 184 rokerel, 345 rollo, 76 roscrea, 345 rosemarkie, 322 ross, 318 rouen, 77 runcorn, 38 ruthin, 269 ruthven, 311 sanquhar, 318 sarn helen, 283 saumur castle, 75 saxon fortifications, chapters ii., iii., 29 saxon royal seats, 151 _n._ 2, 235 scergeat, 33 sepulchral hillocks, 9; in ireland, 327 shaftesbury, 15 shell keep, 99 sheppey isle, 54 shoebury, 51 shrewsbury, 207 siege castles, 85 siegfried the dane, 75 siward, earl, 22 skipsea, 209 skreen, 345 slane, 345 somerville family, 318 somner, antiquary, 117 soulis family, 318 stafford, 34, =211= stamford, 44, =216= stanton, 217 stevenston, 315 stewarton, 318 swansea, 297 symington, 315 table of boroughs, 26 talgarth, 292 tamworth, 34, =218= tarbolton, 314 tateshall, 187 tempsford, 53 tenby, 280 terraces to mottes, 102 thanet, 54 thelwall, 46, 385 thetford, 55, 56 thibault-le-tricheur, 74 thingwall, 381 thorne, 368 _n._ 3 thurles, 346 tibraghny, 346 tickhill, 219 tiles, use of, 255 timahoe, 346 tom-a-mhoid, 313 tomen y mur, 262 tomen y rhoddwy, 271, 272, 388 tonbridge, 220 toot hill, 259 topcliffe, 5 _n._ torkesey, 55, 56 totnes, 221 towcester, 41 tower of london, 221, 354, 355 towers to castles, 71 towns, fortification of, 65 trade, 30 trébuchet, 369 trematon, 226 tribalism, 64 trim, 346, 377 tristerdermot, 347 tullow, 335, 389 tutbury, 227 tynboeth, 293 tynemouth, 228 tynwald hill, 381 typermesan, 347 valoignes family, 318 value of manors and towns, 96 vaulting, 362, 365, 367, 374 vaux family, 319 viking crews, 90 viollet le duc, 368 _n._ 1 vire, keep, 361 voussoirs, 362 wales, chapters viii., ix.; wales and saxons, 253; wales and normans, 254 wallace family, 319 wallingford, 28, =228= walwern, 301 wareham, 25, 28 warenne, wm., 124, 165 wark, 366, 367, 368 _n._ 2, 388 warkworth, 377 warwick, 36, =230= wasta, 114 waterford, 347 water-supply, 362-363 watling street, 16, 32, 382 waytemore castle, 107 weardbyrig, 36 welsh halls, 251 welshpool, 265 wessex, 13 wexford, 348 wicklow, 348 wigingamere, 41 wigmore, 232 william i., 22, 77 william the lion, 163, 305 willington, 57 winchester, 233 winding walks on mottes, 102, 121 windsor, 236; borough, 238 wisbeach, 239 wiston, 279 witham, 39 wolvesey castle, 235 _n._ 4 wooden fortifications, 78, 208, 228, 250, 306, 358, 359 worcester, 115, 23, 31, =240=; charter, 21 wrexham castle, 268 yale castle, 271, 300 year 1000, 78 york, 13, =242= york, baile hill, 248 ystrad cyngen, 288 ystrad meurig, 283 ystrad peithyll, 282 printed by oliver and boyd, edinburgh footnotes: [1] mr w. h. st john hope arrived independently at similar conclusions. [2] in the paper on earthworks in the second volume of the _victoria county history of yorkshire_, this subdivision of the promiscuous class x., is used. [3] since the above was written, mr hadrian allcroft's work on _earthwork of england_ has furnished an admirable text-book of this subject. [4] see frontispiece. [5] see fig. 1. [6] for instance, at berkeley, ewias harold, yelden, and tomen y roddwy. [7] as at rayleigh and downpatrick. [8] in some of these castles there is no gap in the bailey banks for an entrance. they must have been entered by a movable wooden stair, such as horses can be taught to climb. see the plan of topcliffe castle, yorks (fig. 1). [9] _vor oldtid_, p. 629. [10] _entwickelung des kriegswesens_, iii., 379. [11] see chapter vii. [12] _primitive folkmoots._ see appendix a. [13] _early fortifications in scotland_, p. 13. he adds an instance showing that moot hill is sometimes a mistake for moot hall. [14] _scottish review_, vol. xxxii. [15] some writers give the name of moot-hill to places in yorkshire and elsewhere where the older ordnance maps give moat-hill. _moat_ in this connection is the same as _motte_, the scotch and irish _mote_, i.e., the hillock of a castle, derived from the norman-french word _motte_. as this word is by far the most convenient name to give to these hillocks, being the only specific name which they have ever had, we shall henceforth use it in these pages. we prefer it to _mote_, which is the anglicised form of the word, because of its confusion with _moat_, a ditch. some writers advocate the word _mount_, but this appears to us too vague. as the word _motte_ is french in origin, it appropriately describes a thing which was very un-english when first introduced here. [16] at york, a prehistoric crouching skeleton was found by messrs benson and platnauer when excavating the castle hill in 1903, 4 feet 6 inches below the level of the ground. the motte at york appears to have been raised after the destruction of the first castle, but whether the first hillock belonged to the ancient burial is not decided by the account, "notes on clifford's tower," by the above authors. _trans. york. philosoph. soc._, 1902. another instance is recorded in the _revue archæologique_, to which we have unfortunately lost the reference. [17] from the report of a competent witness, mr basil stallybrass. [18] earle, _two saxon chronicles parallel_, introd., xxiii. [19] nennius says that ida "_unxit_ (read cinxit) dynguayrdi guerth-berneich"=a strength or fort of bernicia. _mon. hist. brit._, 75. elsewhere he calls bamborough dinguo aroy. it is quite possible that there might have been a keltic _din_ in a place so well fitted for one as bamborough. [20] bede, h. e., iii., 16. [21] see bede, as above, and symeon, ii., 45 (r.s.). [22] we infer this from the strong defences of what is now the middle ward. [23] the fact, however, that the _trinoda necessitas_, the duty of landholders to contribute to the repair of boroughs and bridges, and to serve in the fyrd, is occasionally mentioned in charters earlier than the danish wars, shows that there were town walls to be kept up even at that date. see baldwin brown, _the arts in early england_, i., 82. [24] see wright, _history of domestic manners_, p. 13. [25] the danish fortress of nottingham is mentioned by the _chronicle_ in 868, but we are speaking now of purely anglo-saxon fortresses. [26] asser, ch. 91, stevenson's edition. [27] "that same year king alfred repaired london; and all the english submitted to him, except those who were under the bondage of the danish men; and then he committed the city (_burh_) to the keeping of ethelred the ealdorman." _a.-s. c._, 886. the word used for london is _londonburh_. asser says: "londoniam civitatem honorifice restauravit et habitabilem fecit," p. 489. [28] birch's _cartularium_, ii., 220, 221. [29] _anglo-saxon chronicle_, 878, 893, 896. according to henry of huntingdon, the work on the lea was the splitting of that river into two channels; but i am informed that no trace of such a division remains. [30] _gesta pontificum_, 186. see appendix c. [31] birch's _cartularium_, ii., 222; kemble's _codex diplomaticus_, v., 142. [32] he signs a charter in 889 as "subregulus et patricius merciorum," kemble's _codex diplomaticus_. see freeman, _n. c._, i., 564; and plummer, _a.-s. c._, i., 118. [33] the dates in this chapter are taken from florence of worcester, who is generally believed to have used a more correct copy of the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ than those which have come down to us. [34] see appendix b. [35] _a.-s. c._, 910, 911. [36] _new english dictionary_, borough. [37] _anglo-saxon chronicle_, 942. the anglo-saxon chronicle has three words for fortifications, _burh_, _faesten_, and _geweorc_. burh is always used for those of edward and ethelfleda, faesten (fastness) or geweorc (work) for those of the danes. [38] see the illustrations in wright, _history of domestic manners_. [39] _bury_ is formed from _byrig_, the dative of _burh_. [40] professor maitland observed: "to say nothing of hamlets, we have full 250 parishes whose names end in burgh, bury, or borough, and in many cases we see no sign in them of an ancient camp or of an exceptionally dense population." _domesday book and beyond_, 184. [41] schmid, _gesetze der angelsachsen_, pp. 176, 214, 372. it is not absolutely certain that the _burh_ in these three cases does not mean a town. [42] schmid, 138. professor maitland says: "in athelstan's day it seems to be supposed by the legislator that a _moot_ will usually be held in a _burh_. if a man neglect three summonses to a moot, the oldest men of the _burh_ are to ride to his place and seize his goods." _domesday book and beyond_, 185. "all my reeves," are mentioned in the preface to _athelstan's laws_, schmid, 126. [43] schmid, 138. "butan porte" is the saxon expression, _port_ being another word for town; see schmid, 643. [44] schmid, edgar iii., 5; ethelred ii., 6. [45] edgar iv., 2. [46] the writer was first led to doubt the correctness of the late mr g. t. clark's theory of burhs by examining the a.-s. illustrated mss. in the british museum. on p. 29 of the ms. of _prudentius_ (cleopatra, c. viii.), there is an excellent drawing of a four-sided enclosure, with towers at the angles, and battlemented walls of masonry. the title of the picture is "virtutes urbem ingrediuntur," and _urbem_ is rendered in the a.-s. gloss as _burh_. see fig. 2. [47] florence translates _burh_ as _urbs_ nineteen times, as _arx_ four times, as _murum_ once, as _munitio_ once, as _civitas_ once. [48] published in 1884, but comprising a number of papers read to various archæological societies through many previous years, during which mr clark's reputation as an archæologist appears to have been made. [49] "eallum thæm folc to gebeorge." birch's _cartularium_, ii., 222. [50] professor maitland has claimed that the origin of the boroughs was largely military, the duty of maintaining the walls of the county borough being incumbent on the magnates of the shire. _domesday book and beyond_, 189. see appendix c. [51] parker's _domestic architecture in england from richard ii. to henry viii._, part ii., 256. [52] _a.-s. c._, 1048. [53] _william of jumièges_, vii.-xvii. [54] _a.-s. c._ (peterborough), 1048. [55] _a.-s. c._, 1052 (worcester). this castle is generally supposed to be richard's castle, herefordshire, built by richard scrob; but i see no reason why it should not be hereford, as the norman ralph, king edward's nephew, was earl of hereford. we shall return to these castles later. [56] mr freeman says: "in the eleventh century, the word _castel_ was introduced into our language to mark something which was evidently quite distinct from the familiar _burh_ of ancient times.... ordericus speaks of the thing and its name as something distinctly french: "munitiones quas galli castella nuncupant." the castles which were now introduced into england seem to have been new inventions in normandy itself. william of jumièges distinctly makes the building of castles to have been one of the main signs and causes of the general disorder of the days of william's minority, and he seems to speak of the practice as something new." _n. c._, ii., 606. it is surprising that after so clear a statement as this, mr freeman should have fallen under the influence of mr clark's _burh_ theory, and should completely have confused castles and boroughs. [57] _codex diplomaticus_, i., 138. [58] _history of rochester_, 1772, p. 21. [59] stevenson's edition of _asser_, 331. see appendix d. [60] _asser_, c. xlix. [61] worcester, chester, tamworth, stafford, warwick, hertford, buckingham, bedford, maldon, huntingdon, colchester, stamford, and nottingham. [62] _domesday book and beyond_, 216. [63] buckingham is the only place which is included in both lists. see appendix e. [64] _domesday book and beyond_, 188. see appendix e. southwark, one of the names, which is not called a borough in domesday, retains its name of _the borough_ to the present day. [65] no roman remains have been found in either place. [66] _beauties of england and wales_, oxfordshire. [67] see skeat's _dictionary_, "timber." [68] excavation has recently shown that many of the great hill-forts were permanently inhabited, and it is now considered improbable that they were originally built as camps of refuge. it seems more likely that this use, of which there are undoubted instances in historic times (see cæsar, _bello gallico_, vi., 10, and v., 21), belonged to a more advanced stage of development, when population had moved down into the lower and cultivatable lands, but still used their old forts in cases of emergency. [69] _ante_, p. 21. [70] haverfield, in v. c. h. worcester, _romano-british worcester_, i. [71] _early fortifications in scotland_, p. 105. [72] gairdner and mullinger, _introduction to the study of english history_, 268. [73] the tower called cæsar's tower is really a mural tower of the 13th century. e. w. cox, "chester castle," in _chester hist. and archæol. soc._, v., 239. [74] cox, as above. see also shrubsole, "the age of the city walls of chester," _arch. journ._, xliv., 1887. the present wall, which includes the castle, is an extension probably not earlier than james i.'s reign. [75] the charter is given in ormerod's _history of cheshire_, ii., 405. [76] _journ. of brit. arch. ass._, 1875, p. 153. [77] _itin._, ii., 2. [78] "arcem quam in occidentali sabrinæ fluminis plaga, in loco qui bricge dicitur lingua saxonica, ægelfleda merciorum domina quondam construxerat, fratre suo edwardo seniore regnante, comes rodbertus contra regem henricum, muro lato et alto, summoque restaurare coepit." 1101. [79] a good deal has been made of the name oldbury, as pointing to the _old burh_; but oldbury is the name of the manor, not of the hillock, which bears the singular name of pampudding hill. tradition says that the parliamentary forces used it for their guns in 1646. eyton's _shropshire_, i., 132. [80] "bricge cum exercitu pene totius angliæ obsedit, machinas quoque ibi construere et castellum firmare præcepit." _florence_, 1102. [81] florence in fact says _urbem restauravit_. [82] d. b., i., 246. [83] these buildings formed part of a hunting lodge built in the reign of edward iii., called the chamber in the forest. see ormerod's _cheshire_, ii., 3. when visiting eddisbury several years ago, the writer noticed several perpendicular buttresses in these ruins. [84] d. b., i., 238a, 1. [85] "abbas de couentreu habet 36 masuras, et 4 sunt wastæ propter situm castelli.... hae masurae pertinent ad terras quas ipsi barones tenent extra burgum, et ibi appreciatae sunt." d. b., i., 238. [86] _domesday book and beyond_, p. 189. see appendix d. [87] dugdale's _warwickshire_, 1st edition, pp. 50 and 75. the derivation of kirby from cyricbyrig is not according to etymological rules, but there can be no doubt about it as a fact; for in domesday it is stated that _chircheberie_ was held by geoffrey de wirche, and that the monks of st nicholas [at angers] had two carucates in the manor. in the charter in which geoffrey de wirche makes this gift chircheberie is called kirkeberia [_m. a._, vi., 996], but in the subsequent charter of roger de mowbray, confirming the gift, it is called kirkeby. [88] _britannia_, ii., 375. [89] _numismatic chronicle_, 3rd s., xiii., 220. [90] fowler's _history of runcorn_ gives a plan of this fort, and there is another in hanshall's _history of cheshire_, p. 418 (1817). a very different one is given in beaumont's _history of halton_. [91] beaumont's _records of the honour of halton_. in 1368, john hank received the surrender of a house near to the castle in runcorn. [92] _mediæval military architecture_, ii., 120. [93] _essex naturalist_, january 1887. [94] danbury camp, which has also been surveyed by mr spurrell (_essex naturalist_, 1890), is precisely similar in plan to witham, but nothing is known of its history. [95] see _victoria history of bedfordshire_, i., 281. [96] morant's _history of essex_, i. three sides of the rampart were visible in his time. [97] d. b., ii., 5. [98] _itin._, i., 12. [99] baker's _history of northampton_, ii., 321. [100] d. b., i., 219b. [101] _a.-s. c._, 921. "wrohte tha burg æt tofeceastre mid stan wealle." florence says 918. [102] baker, _history of northants_, ii., 318. see also haverfield, _v. c. h._, northants, i., 184. [103] atkinson's _cambridge described_, p. 1. [104] there is, however, this difficulty, that cambridge was still occupied by a danish force when wigingamere was built. it submitted to edward in 918. [105] see mr plummer's discussion of these variations in his edition of the _chronicle_, ii., 116. [106] lewis, _topographical dictionary of england_. mr rye remarks:--"the silting up of the harbour has ruined a port which once promised to be of as great importance as norwich." _history of norfolk_, p. 228. [107] it is really wonderful that the identification of cledemuthan with the mouth of the cleddy in pembrokeshire could ever have been accepted by any sober historian. that edward, whose whole time was fully occupied with his conquests from the danish settlers, could have suddenly transported his forces into one of the remotest corners of wales, would have been a feat worthy of the coming days of air-ships. william of worcester has preserved a tradition that edward repaired burgh, "quae olim saxonice dicebatur burgh-chester," but he confuses it with norwich. _itinerarium_, 337. is it possible that we ought to look for cledemuthan at burgh castle, at the mouth of the waveney? it would be quite in accordance with edward's actions elsewhere to restore an old roman _castrum_. [108] leland says: "there were 7 principall towers or wards in the waulles of staunford, to eche of which were certeyne freeholders in the towne allottid to wache and ward in tyme of neadde." _itinerarium_, vii., 11. [109] _a.-s. c._, 868. [110] shipman's _old town wall of nottingham_, pp. 73-75. the evidence for a roman origin of the borough is altogether too slight, as, except some doubtful earthenware bottles, no roman remains have been found at nottingham. [111] _a.-s. c._, 921. _florence of worcester_, 919. [112] i am indebted for much of the information given here to the local antiquarian knowledge of mr harold sands, f.s.a. he states that the old borough was 1400 yards from the trent at its nearest point, and that the highest ground on the south side of the trent is marked by the trent bridge cricket ground, the last spot to become flooded. here, therefore, was the probable site of edward's second borough. [113] see appendix f. [114] whitaker's _history of manchester_, i., 43. [115] _trans. of lanc. and chesh. hist. and ant. soc._, v., 246. [116] "castle" in combination with some other word is often given to works of roman or british origin, because its original meaning was a fortified enclosure; but the name castle hill is extremely common for mottes. [117] we may remark here that it is not surprising that there should be a number of motte castles which are never mentioned in history, especially as it is certain that all the "adulterine" castles, which were raised without royal permission in the rebellions of stephen's and other reigns, were very short-lived. [118] _mediæval military architecture_, i., 18. see mr round's remarks on mr clark's vagueness in his "castles of the conquest," _archæologia_, 1902. [119] the _a.-s. c._ speaks of this danish host as "a great heathen army." 866. [120] "worhton other fæsten ymb hie selfe." the same language is frequently used in the continental accounts of the danish fortresses: "munientes se per gyrum avulsæ terræ aggere," _dudo_, 155 (duchesne): "se ex illis (sepibus et parietibus) _circumdando_ munierant." _it._, p. 81. [121] the earthworks at bayford court must belong to the mediæval castle which existed there. see _beauties of england and wales, kent_, p. 698. castle rough is less than an acre in area. [122] mr harold sands, _some kentish castles_, p. 10. [123] see the plan in _victoria history of kent_, paper on earthworks by the late mr i. c. gould. hasted states that there was a small circular mount there as well as an embankment, and that there are other remains in the marsh below, which seem to have been connected with the former by a narrow ridge or causeway, _kent_, iii., 117. the causeway led to a similar mount in the marsh below, but mr gould inclined to think the mounts and causeway later, and possibly part of a dam for "inning" the marsh. _v. c. h._, p. 397. [124] "hæsten's camps at shoebury and benfleet," _essex naturalist_, iv., 153. [125] the _chronicle_ says that the ships of hæsten were either broken to pieces, or burnt, or taken to london or rochester. 894. [126] _essex naturalist_, as above, p. 151. these berms certainly suggest roman influence. [127] _a.-s. c._, 894. [128] _montgomery collections_, xxxi., 337; dymond, _on the site of buttington_. see also steenstrup, _normannerne_, ii., 80. [129] _beauties of england and wales_, vii., 246. there is nothing left either at great or little amwell now but fragments of what are supposed to be homestead moats. _royal commission on historical monuments_, pp. 95, 142, herts. vol. [130] florence's date. [131] _victoria history of bedfordshire_, i., 282, from which this description is taken. [132] the _chronicle_ speaks of _tempsford_ as a _burh_, so it must have been a large enclosure. [133] mr clark actually speaks of a subsequent norman castle at tempsford (_m. m. a._, i., 78), but we have been unable to find any confirmation of this. faint traces of larger works in the fields below were formerly visible. _v. c. h. bedfordshire_. [134] stephenson's _asser_, p. 27. [135] there are no remains of earthworks in thanet or sheppey, except a place called cheeseman's camp, near minster in thanet, which the late mr gould regarded as of the "homestead-moat type." _v. c. h. kent_, i., 433. nor are there any earthworks on mersey island mentioned by mr gould in his paper on essex earthworks in the _v. c. h._ [136] stukeley, who saw this earthwork when it was in a much more perfect state, says that it contained 30 acres. see mr hope's paper in _camb. antiq. soc._, vol. xi. [137] blomefield's _norfolk_, ii., pp. 7, 8, 27. his description is very confused. [138] see erlingssen's _ruins of the saga time, viking club_, p. 337. [139] richerii, _historiarum libri quatuor_, edition guadet, p. 67. [140] "in modo castri, munientes se per girum avulsæ terræ aggere." _dudo_, 155 (edition duchesne). [141] "the castle end of cambridge was called the borough within the memory of persons now living." atkinson's _cambridge described_ (1897), p. 9. [142] steenstrup says that the northmen built themselves shipyards all round europe, especially on the islands where they had their winter settlements. _normannerne_, i., 354. [143] a.-s., _hyth_, a shore, a landing-place. [144] _victoria county history of beds._, i., 282. [145] steenstrup's _normannerne_, vol. iv.; _danelag_, p. 40. [146] _a.-s. c._, 914-921. [147] steenstrup, _danelag_, p. 41. [148] _ibid._, pp. 22, 23. [149] such quartering must have been confined to the unmarried danes, but there must have been plenty of unmarried men in the piratical host, even at the period when it became customary to bring wives and children with the army. [150] _normannerne_, i., 282. [151] _dudo_, 76 (duchesne). [152] herr steenstrup shows that so far from the settlement of the danes in normandy being on feudal lines, they only reluctantly accepted the feudal yoke, and not till the next century. _normannerne_, i., 305, 310. it is not till the 11th century that feudal castles become general in normandy. [153] the danes in normandy soon made rouen a great centre of trade. _normannerne_, i., 190. [154] cunningham's _growth of english industry_, i., 92. [155] see vinogradoff, _english society in the 11th century_, pp. 5, 11, 478. [156] see stubbs, _constitutional history_, i., 251; maitland's _domesday book and beyond_, p. 157; round's _feudal england_, p. 261; vinogradoff's _english society in the 11th century_, p. 41. [157] professor maitland wrote: "the definitely feudal idea that military service is the tenant's return for the gift of land did not exist [before the norman conquest], though a state of things had been evolved which for many practical purposes was indistinguishable from the system of knight's fees." _domesday book and beyond_, p. 157. dr round holds that "the military service of the anglo-norman tenant-in-chief was in no way derived or developed from that of the anglo-saxons, but was arbitrarily fixed by the king, from whom he received his fief." _feudal england_, p. 261. similarly, professor vinogradoff states that "the law of military fees is in substance french law brought over to england by the [norman] conquerors." _english society in the 11th century_, p. 41. [158] giesebrecht, _geschichte der kaiserzeit_, i., 224. the word _burg_, which giesebrecht uses for these strongholds, means a castle in modern german; but its ancient meaning was a town (see hilprecht's _german dictionary_), and it corresponded exactly to the anglo-saxon _burh_. it was used in this sense at least as late as the end of the 12th century; see, _e.g._, lamprecht's _alexanderlied_, passim. it is clear by the context that giesebrecht employs it in its ancient sense. [159] _ibid._, 222. henry's son otto married a daughter of edward the elder. henry received the nickname of townfounder (städtegründer). [160] "carolus civitates transsequanas ab incolis firmari rogavit, cinomannis scilicet et turonis, ut præsidio contra nortmannos _populis_ esse possent." _annales bertinianorum_, migne, pat., 125, 53. [161] flodoard, _hist. ecc. remensis_, iv., viii. [162] modern historians generally say that he built the _castle_ of coucy; but from flodoard's account it seems very doubtful whether anything but the town is meant. _annales_, iv., xiii. his words are: "munitionem quoque apud codiciacum tuto loco constituit atque firmavit." _munitio_ properly means a bulwark or wall. [163] _gesta episcop. cameracensium_, pertz, vii., 424. [164] _chron. camarense et atrebatorum_, bouquet, x., 196. [165] sismondi, _histoire des français_, ii., 172. [166] guizot, _histoire de la civilisation en france_, iii., 311. [167] enlart, _manuel d'archæologie française_, ii., 494. [168] see dr haverfield's articles in the _victoria county histories_, passim. the late j. h. burton justly wrote: "we have nothing from the romans answering to the feudal stronghold or castle, no vestige of a place where a great man lived apart with his family and his servants, ruling over dependants and fortifying himself against enemies." _history of scotland_, i., 385. [169] _annals of fulda_, 394, pertz, i. [170] _cap. regum francor._, ii., 360. [171] thus de caumont unfortunately spoke of the fortress built by nicetus, bishop of treves, in the 6th century, as a _château_ (_abécédaire_, ii., 382); but venantius fortunatus, in his descriptive poem, tells us that it was a vast enclosure with no less than thirty towers, built by the good pastor for the protection of his flock. it even contained fields and vineyards, and altogether was as different from a private castle as anything can well be. similarly the _castrum_ of merliac, spoken of by enlart (_architecture militaire_, p. 492) as a "veritable château," is described as containing cultivated lands and sheets of water! (cited from gregory of tours, _hist. francorum_, liii., 13.) de caumont himself says: "les grandes exploitations rurales que possédaient les rois de france et les principaux du royaume du v^ième au x^ième siècle ne furent pas des forteresses et ne doivent point être confondues avec les chateaux." _abécédaire_, ii., 62. [172] see appendix d. [173] "volumus et expresse mandamus, ut quicunque istis temporibus castella et firmitates et haias sine nostro verbo fecerint, kalendis augusti omnes tales firmitates disfactas habeant; quia vicini et circummanentes exinde multas depredationes et impedimenta sustinent." _capitularia regum francorum_, boretius, ii., 328. [174] these instances are as follows:--868, a certain acfrid shut himself up in a _casa firmissima_ in the _villa_ of bellus pauliacus on the loire, and it was burnt over his head (_annales bertinianorum_, pp. migne, 125, 1237); 878, the sons of goisfrid attack the _castellum_ and lands of the son of odo (_ibid._, p. 1286); 879, louis the germanic besieges some men of hugh, son of lothaire, _in quodam castello juxta viridunum_: he takes and destroys the castellum (_annals of fulda_, pertz, i., 393); 906, gerard and matfrid fortify themselves in a certain _castrum_, in a private war (_regino_, pertz, i., 611). sismondi states that the great nobles wrested from louis-le-bégue (877-879) the right of building private castles. so far, we have been unable to find any original authority for this statement. [175] see guizot, _histoire de la civilisation_, iii., 309. "on voit les _villæ_ s'entourer peu à peu de fossés, de remparts de terre, de quelques apparences de fortifications." [176] we hear of monasteries being fortified in this way; in 869 charles the bald drew a bank of wood and stone round the monastery of st denis; "castellum in gyro ipsius monasterii ex ligno et lapide conficere coepit." _ann. bertinian_, migne, pp. 125, 1244. in 889 the bishop of nantes made a _castrum_ of his church by enclosing it with a wall, and this wall appears to have had a tower. _chron. namnetense_, p. 45, in _lobineau's bretagne_, vol. ii. in 924 archbishop hervey made a _castellum_ of the monastery of st remi by enclosing it with a wall. _flodoard_, p. 294 (migne). but the fortification of monasteries was a very different thing from the fortification of private castles. [177] in 951 duke conrad, being angry with certain men of lorraine, threw down the _towers_ of some of them; these may have been the keeps of private castles. flodoard, _annales_, p. 477. [178] _presidium_ is one of those vague words which chroniclers love to use; it means a defence of any kind, and may be a town, a castle, or a garrison. the town in which this turris stood appears by the context to have been chateau thierry. _cf._ flodoard, _annales_, pp. 924, with 933. [179] "castrum muro factum circa eam [ecclesiam]." _chron. namnetense_, p. 45. "precepit [alanus] eis terrarium magnum in circuitu ecclesiæ facere, sicut murus prioris castri steterat, quo facto turrem principalem _reficiens_, in ea domum suam constitit." _ibid._ [180] flodoard, _annales_, pp. 931 and 949. this tower was heightened by charles, the last of the carlovingians, and furnished with a ditch and bank, in 988. [181] it is often supposed that these towers were derived from the _pretoria_, or general's quarters in the roman _castra_. it is far more probable that they were derived from mural towers. the pretorium was not originally fortified, and it was placed in the centre of the roman camp. but one great object of the feudal keep was to have communication with the open country. the keep of laon was certainly on the line of the walls, as bishop ascelin escaped from it down a rope in 989, and got away on a horse which was waiting for him. palgrave, _england and normandy_, ii., 880. [182] the word _motte_ or _mota_ does not occur in any contemporary chronicle, as far as is known to the writer, before the 12th century; nor is the word _dangio_ to be found in any writer earlier than ordericus. but the _thing_ certainly existed earlier. [183] [fulk and his son geoffrey] "in occidentali parte montis castellum determinaverunt.... aggerem quoque in prospectu monasterii cum turre lignea erexerunt." _chron. st florentii_, in lobineau's _bretagne_, ii., 87. some remains of this motte are still visible. de salies, _foulques nerra_, p. 263. [184] "elegantissimus in rebus bellicis" is the quaint language of the angevin chronicler, 176. [185] see de salies, _histoire de foulques nerra_, which indirectly throws considerable light on the archæological question. [186] salies, _histoire de foulques nerra_, p. 170. m. enlart, in his _manuel d'archæologie française_, ii., 495, has been misled about this castle by the _chronicon andegavense_, which says: "odo.... fulconem expugnare speravit, et totis nisibus adorsus est. annoque presenti (1025) montis budelli castellum, quod circiter annos decem retro abhinc contra civitatem turonicam firmaverat fulco, obsedit, et turrim ligneam miræ altitudinis super domgionem ipsius castri erexit." bouquet, x., 176. m. enlart takes this to be the first recorded instance of a motte. but the passage is evidently corrupt, as the other accounts of this affair show that count odo's wooden tower was a siege engine, employed to attack fulk's castle, and afterwards burnt by the besieged. see the _gesta ambasiens. dom._, _ibid._, p. 257, and the _chron. st florentii_. probably we should read _contra_ domgionem instead of _super_. the _chronicon andegavense_ was written in the reign of henry ii. [187] when fulk invaded bretagne in or about 992, he collected an army "tam de suis quam conductitiis." _richerius_, edition guadet. the editor remarks that this is perhaps the first example of the use of mercenaries since the time of the romans (ii., 266). spannagel, citing peter damian, says that mercenaries were already common at the end of the 10th century. _zur geschichte des deutschen heerwesens_, pp. 72, 73. [188] this was always the custom in mediæval castles. see cohausen, _befestigungen der vorzeit_, p. 282. [189] "qui vivens turres altas construxit et ædes, unam carnotum, sed apud dunense reatum." _chron. st florentii._ [190] _chron. namnetense_, lobineau, ii., 47. [191] _gesta ambasiensium dominorum_, in _spicilegium_, p. 273. [192] _guide joanne_, p. 234. [193] the furthest point of the headland on which the castle is placed is a small circular court, with a fosse on all sides but the precipices. from personal visitation. [194] _dunio_ is subsequently explained by lambert as _motte_: "motam altissimam sive dunionem eminentem in munitionis signum firmavit." _lamberti ardensis_, p. 613. it is the same word as the saxon _dun_, a hill (preserved in our south downs), and has no connection with the irish and gaelic _dun_, which is cognate with the german _zaun_, a hedge, a.-s. _tun_, and means a hedged or fortified place. the form _dange_ appears in northern france, and this seems to be the origin of the word _domgio_ or _dangio_ which we find in the chroniclers, the modern form of which is _donjon_. if we accept this etymology, we must believe that the word _dunio_ or _domgio_ was originally applied to the hill, and not to the tower on the hill, to which it was afterwards transferred. it is against this view that ordericus, writing some fifty years before lambert, uses the form _dangio_ in the sense of a tower. professor skeat and the _new english dictionary_ derive the word _donjon_ or _dungeon_ from low lat. _domnionem_, acc. of _domnio_, thus connecting it with _dominus_, as the seignorial residence. [195] ducange conjectured that the motte-castle took its origin in flanders, but it was probably the passage cited above from lambert which led him to this conclusion. see art. "mota" in ducange's _glossarium_. [196] steenstrup, _normannerne_, i., 297. [197] _ibid._, i., 301. [198] _england and normandy_, ii., 535. [199] "muros et propugnacula civitatum refecit et augmentavit." _dudo_, p. 85 (duchesne's edition). [200] "henricus rex circa turrem rothomagi, _quam ædificavit primus richardus dux normannorum in palatium sibi_, murum altum et latum cum propugnaculis ædificat." _robert of toringy_, r.s., p. 106. [201] _ordericus_, ii., 15, 17, 46 (edition prévost). [202] _william of jumièges_, anno 1035. mr freeman remarks that the language of william would lead us to suppose that the practice of castle-building was new. [203] there are some facts which render it probable that the earliest castles built in normandy were without mottes, and were simple enclosures like those we have described already. thus the castle of the great family of montgomeri is an enclosure of this simple kind. domfront, built by william talvas in duke robert's time, has no motte. on the other hand, ivry, built by the countess albereda in duke richard i.'s days, "on the top of a hill overlooking the town" (william of jumièges), may possibly have been a motte; and there is a motte at norrei, which we have just mentioned as an early norman castle. [204] _manuel d'archæologie française_, p. 457. [205] this want will be supplied, as regards england, by the completion of the _victoria county histories_, and as regards france, by the _societé préhistorique_, which is now undertaking a catalogue of all the earthworks of france. the late m. mortillet, in an article in the _revue mensuelle de l'école d'anthropologie_, viii., 1895, published two lists, one of actual mottes in france, the other of place-names in which the word motte is incorporated. unfortunately the first list is extremely defective, and the second, as it only relates to the name, is not a safe guide to the proportional numbers of the thing. all that the lists prove is that mottes are to be found in all parts of france, and that place-names into which the word _motte_ enters seem to be more abundant in central france than anywhere else. it is possible that a careful examination of local chroniclers may lead to the discovery of some earlier motte-builder than thibault-le-tricheur. we should probably know more about thibault's castles were it not that the pays chartrain, as palgrave says, is almost destitute of chroniclers. [206] cited at length by de caumont, _bulletin monumental_, ix., 246. von hochfelden considered that the origin of feudal fortresses in germany hardly goes back to the 10th century; only great dukes and counts then thought of fortifying their manors; those of the small nobility date at earliest from the end of the 12th century. [207] _die befestigungen der vorzeit_, p. 28. [208] _entwickelung des kriegswesens_, iii., 370. [209] _antiquitates italicæ_, ii., 504. he says they are many times mentioned both in charters and chronicles in italy. [210] we hear of robert guiscard building a wooden castle on a hill at rocca di st martino in 1047. amari, _storia dei musulmani di sicilia_, i., 43. several place-names in italy and sicily are compounded with _motta_, as the motta sant'anastasia in sicily. see amari, _ibid._, p. 220. [211] especially montfort and blanchegarde. but there is a wide field for further research both in palestine and sicily. [212] "bei den sclaven haben die chateaux-à-motte keinen eingang gefunden, weil ihnen das lehnswesen fremd geblieben ist." iii., 338. [213] professor montelius informed the writer that they are quite unknown in norway or sweden; and dr christison obtained an assurance to the same effect from herr hildebrand. [214] "these are small well-defended places, the stronghold of the individual, built for a great man and his followers, and answering to mediæval conditions, to a more or less developed feudal system." _vor oldtid_, p. 642. [215] i am informed by a skilled engineer that even in the wet climate of england it would take about ten years for the soil to settle sufficiently to bear a stone building. [216] köhler says: "by far the greater part of the castles of the teutonic knights in prussia, until the middle of the fourteenth century, were of wood and earth." _die entwickelung des kriegswesen_, iii., 376. [217] _cal. of patent rolls_, 1232-1247, p. 340. mandate to provost of oléron to let frank de brene have tools to make a new motte in the isle of rhé. later the masters and crews of the king's galleys are ordered to help in building the motte and the wooden castle. p. 343. [218] _antiquitates italicæ_, ii., 504. can grande's motte at padua. anno 1320. "dominus alternerius [podesta of padua] ... cum maxima quantitate peditum et balistariorum civitatis paduæ, iverunt die predicto summo mane per viam pontis corvi versus quamdam motam magnam, quam faciebat facere dominus canis, cum multis fossis et tajatis ad claudendum paduanos, ne exirent per illam partem, et volendo ibidem super illam motam ædificare castrum. tunc prædictus potestas cum aliis nominatis splanare incoeperunt, et difecerunt dictam motam cum tajatis et fossa magna." we may remark here that as early as the 17th century the learned muratori protested against the equation of _mota_ and _fossatum_, and laughed at spelman for making this translation of _mota_ in his _glossary_. _antiquitates italicæ_, ii., 504. [219] cited by westropp, _journal of r.s.a., ireland_, 1904. [220] vicars' _parliamentary chronicle_, cited by hunter, _south yorks_, ii., 235. [221] "camps on the malvern hills," _journ. anthrop. inst._, x., 319. [222] m. de salies has traced in detail the connection between fulk nerra's castles and the roman roads of anjou and touraine. [223] see some excellent remarks on this subject in mr w. st john hope's paper on "english fortresses" in _arch. journ._, lx., 72-90. [224] only a very small number of mottes have as yet been excavated. wells were found at almondbury, berkeley, berkhampstead, carisbrook, conisborough, kenilworth, northallerton, norwich, pontefract, oxford, tunbridge, worcester, and york. at caus, there is a well in the ditch between the motte and the bailey. frequently there is a second well in the bailey. [225] the writer at one time thought that the ruins at the east end of the castle of pontefract concealed a second motte, but wishes now to recant this opinion. _eng. hist. review_, xix., 419. [226] thus henry i. erected a siege castle to watch bridgenorth (probably pampudding hill), and then went off to besiege another castle. mr orpen kindly informs me that the camp from which philip augustus besieged château gaillard contains a motte. outside pickering, corfe, and exeter there are earthworks which have probably been siege castles. [227] henry ii. built a castle and very fine borough (burgum pergrande) at beauvoir in maine. _robert of torigny_, r.s., p. 243. minute regulations concerning the founding of the borough of overton are given in _close rolls_, edward i. (1288-1296), p. 285. [228] see round, _studies in domesday_, pp. 125, 126. [229] neckham, "de utensilibus," in wright's _volume of vocabularies_, pp. 103, 104. unfortunately this work of neckham's was not written to explain the construction of motte castles, but to furnish his pupils with the latin names of familiar things; a good deal of it is very obscure now. [230] see frontispiece. [231] _acta sanctorum_, 27th january, bolland, iii., 414. this biography was written only nine months after bishop john's death, by an intimate friend, john de collemedio. [232] guisnes is now in picardy, but in the 12th century it was in flanders, which was a fief of the empire. [233] this description is from the _historia ardensium_ of walter de clusa, which is interpolated in the work of lambert, bouquet, pp. 13, 624. [234] yet in some of the later keeps, such as conisburgh, where we find only one window to a storey, the room must have been undivided. [235] see wright, _history of domestic manners_, p. 26. [236] according to littré, the original derivation of the word _motte_ is unknown. i have not found any instance of the word _mota_ in chronicles earlier than the 12th century, but the reason appears to be that _mota_ or motte was a folk's word, and appeared undignified to an ambitious writer. thus the author of the _gesta consulum andegavensium_ says that geoffrey martel, count of anjou, gave to a certain fulcoius the fortified house which is still called by the vulgar mota fulcoii. d'achery, _spicilegium_, p. 257. [237] see appendix g. [238] see appendix h. [239] _peel, its meaning and derivation_, by george neilson. [240] see appendix i. cohausen has some useful remarks on the use of hedges in fortification. _befestigungen der vorzeit_, pp. 8-13. a quickset hedge had the advantage of resisting fire. the word _sepes_, which properly means a hedge, is often applied to the palitium. [241] this list or _catalogue raisonné_ was originally published in the _english historical review_ for 1904 (vol. xix.). it is now reproduced with such corrections as were necessary, and with the addition of five more castles, as well as of details about thirty-four castles for which there was not space in the _review_. the welsh castles are omitted from this list, as they will be given in a separate chapter. [242] the list is brought up to fifty by interpreting the _regis domus_ of winchester to be winchester castle; the reasons for this will be given later. the number would be increased to fifty-two if we counted ferle and bourne in sussex as castles, as mr freeman does in his _norman conquest_, v., 808. but the language of domesday seems only to mean that the lands of these manors were held of hastings castle by the service of castle-guard. see d. b., i., pp. 21 and 206. [243] the total number would be eighty-six if burton and aldreth were included. burton castle is mentioned in domesday, but there is no further trace of its existence. the castle of alrehede or aldreth in the island of ely is stated by the _liber eliensis_ to have been built by the conqueror, but no remains of any kind appear to exist now. both these castles are therefore omitted from the list. [244] exact numbers cannot be given, because in some cases the bounds of the ancient borough are doubtful, as at quatford. [245] at winchester and exeter. for winchester, see milner, _history of winchester_, ii., 194; for exeter, shorrt's _sylva antiqua iscana_, p. 7. [246] colchester is the only exception to this rule, as the castle there is in the middle of the town; but even this is only an apparent exception, as the second bailey extended to the town wall on the north, and had been royal demesne land even before the conquest. see round's _colchester castle_, ch. vii. [247] these five are berkeley, berkhampstead, bourn, pontefract, rayleigh. [248] i am indebted for these measurements to mr d. h. montgomerie. [249] notification in round's _calendar of documents preserved in france_, p. 367. mr round dates the notification 1087-1100. [250] description furnished by mr d. h. montgomerie, f.s.a. [251] "castrum harundel t. r. e. reddebat de quodam molino 40 solidos, et de 3 conviviis 20 solidos, et de uno pasticio 20 solidos. modo inter burgum et portum aquæ et consuetudinem navium reddit 12 libras, et tamen valet 13. de his habet s. nicolaus 24 solidos. ibi una piscaria de 5 solidos et unum molinum reddens 10 modia frumenti, et 10 modia grossæ annonæ. insuper 4 modia. hoc appreciatum est 12 libras. robertus filius tetbaldi habet 2 hagas de 2 solidis, et de hominibus extraniis habet suum theloneum." several other _hagæ_ and _burgenses_ are then enumerated. (d. b., i., 23a, 1.) [252] see mr round's remarks on the words in his _geoffrey de mandeville_, appendix o. the above was written before the appearance of mr round's paper on "the castles of the conquest" (_archæologia_, lviii.), in which he rejects the idea that _castrum harundel_ means the castle. [253] see _ante_, p. 28. [254] florence of worcester mentions the castle of arundel as belonging to roger de montgomeri in 1088. [255] see appendix r. [256] the expenses entered in the _pipe rolls_ (1170-1187) are for the works of the castle, the chamber and wall of the castle, the _houses_ of the castle (an expression which generally refers to the keep), and for flooring the tower (turris) and making a garden. _turris_ is the usual word for a keep, and is never applied to a mere mural tower. [257] this gateway is masked by a work of the 13th century, which serves as a sort of barbican. [258] in operibus castelli de arundel 22_l._ 7_s._ 8_d._ et debet 55_l._ 18_s._ 6_d._ _pipe roll_, 31, henry i., p. 42. [259] d. b., i., 23a, 1. [260] _testa de nevill_, i., iii., 236, cited by c. bates, in a very valuable paper on bamborough castle, in _archæologia æliana_, vol. xiv., "border holds." mr bates gives other evidence to the same effect. the early existence of the castle is also proved by the fact that gospatric, whom william had made earl of northumberland, after his raid on cumberland in 1070, brought his booty to the _firmissimam munitionem_ of bamborough. symeon of durham, 1070. [261] _vita s. oswaldi_, ch. xlviii., in rolls edition of symeon. [262] this was the opinion of the late mr cadwalader bates, who thought that the smallness of the sums entered for bamborough in henry ii.'s reign might be accounted for by the labour and materials having been furnished by the crown tenants. _border strongholds_, p. 236. [263] bamborough rock has every appearance of having been once an island. as late as 1547 the tide came right up to the rock on the east side; the sea is now separated from the castle by extensive sandhills. [264] _m. a._, v., 197. [265] _domesday_ mentions the destruction of twenty-three houses at barnstaple, which may have been due partly or wholly to the building of the castle. i., 100. [266] from a lecture by mr j. r. chanter. [267] the _fundatio_ of belvoir priory says that robert founded the church of st mary, _juxta castellum suum_, _m. a._, iii., 288. as robert's coffin was actually found in the priory in 1726, with an inscription calling him robert de todnei _le fundeur_, the statement is probably more trustworthy than documents of this class generally are. [268] nicholls, _history of leicester_, i., 110. [269] d. b., i., 233b. [270] "in ness sunt 5 hidæ pertinentes ad berchelai, quas comes willielmus misit extra ad faciendum unum castellulum." d. b., i., 163a, 2. [271] "castella per loca firmari præcepit." _flor. wig._, 1067. see freeman, _n. c._, iv., 72. domesday tells us that fitzosbern built ness, clifford, chepstow, and wigmore, and rebuilt ewias. [272] robert fitzhardinge, in his charter to st austin's abbey at bristol, says that king henry [ii.] gave him the manor of berchall, and all bercheleiernesse. _mon. ang._, vi., 365. [273] it is not necessary to discuss the authenticity of the story preserved by walter map; it is enough that gytha, the wife of godwin, held in horror the means by which her husband got possession of berkeley nunnery. d. b., i., 164. [274] _mediæval military architecture_, i., 236. [275] the gift of the manor was made before henry became king, and was confirmed by charter on the death of stephen in 1154. fitzhardinge was an englishman, son of an alderman of bristol, who had greatly helped henry in his wars against stephen. see fosbroke's _history of gloucester_. [276] he held berkeley under the crown at the time of the survey. d. b., i., 163a. [277] from information received from mr duncan montgomerie. [278] fosbroke's _history of gloucester_ attributes this bailey to maurice, son of robert fitzhardinge. one of the most interesting features in this highly interesting castle is the wooden pentice leading from the main stairway of the keep to the chamber called edward ii.'s. though a late addition, it is a good instance of the way in which masonry was eked out by timber in mediæval times. [279] clark, _m. m. a._, i., 229. [280] d. b., i., 163. [281] _victoria county history of herts_, from which the description of these earthworks is entirely taken. [282] _mon. ang._, vii., 1090. [283] they were excavated by mr montgomerie in 1905, and no trace of masonry was found. [284] roger of wendover, 1216. [285] d. b., i., 163. [286] the charter, which is in both anglo-saxon and latin, is given in dugdale's _history of st paul's_, 304. [287] see _freeman_, ii., 356; and d. b., i., 134a. [288] from report by mr d. h. montgomerie. [289] _waytemore_ has sometimes been identified with the puzzling wiggingamere, but in defiance of phonology. [290] d. b., i., 351b. [291] _m. a._, vi., 86. [292] _itin._, i., 27. [293] _associated archæological societies_, vi., ix. [294] report by mr d. h. montgomerie. [295] ipse willielmus tenet wasingetune. guerd comes tenuit t. r. e. tunc se defendebat pro 59 hidis. modo non dat geldum. in una ex his hidis sedet castellum brembre. d. b., i., 28a, 1. [296] we often find that the architecture of the nearest church throws light on the date of the castle. a norman seldom built or restored his castle without doing something for the church at the same time. [297] see ordericus, ii., 178. [298] the _chronica de fundatoribus of tewkesbury abbey_ seems to be the origin of the tradition that earl robert was the builder of bristol castle. there can be no doubt that his work was in stone, as the same authority states that he gave every tenth stone to the chapel of our lady in st james' priory. _m. a._, ii., 120. according to leland, the keep was built of caen stone. _itin._, vii., 90. robert of gloucester calls it the flower of all the towers in england. [299] we have no historical account of the norman conquest of bristol, and the city is only mentioned in the most cursory manner in d. b. [300] seyer (_memoirs of bristol_, i.) was convinced that the plan published by barrett, and attributed to the monk rowlie, was a forgery; his own plan, as he candidly admits, was largely drawn from imagination. [301] castellum plurimo aggere exaltatum. _gesta stephani_, 37. [302] seyer, i., 391, and ii., 82. [303] quoted by seyer, ii., 301, from _prynne's catal._, p. 11. [304] calculated from the measurements given by william of worcester. _itin._, p. 260. william probably alludes to the motte when he speaks of the "mayng round" of the castle. [305] _benedict of peterborough_, i., 92. [306] _hist. of bristol_, i., 373. [307] _ibid._, vol. ii. [308] _de gestis herewardi saxonis_, wright's edition. see freeman, n. c., iv., 804. [309] _beauties of england and wales_, buckingham, p. 282. [310] camden's _britannia_, i., 315. [311] d. b., i., 143. [312] "willielmus de scohies tenet 8 carucatas terræ in castellaria de carliun, et turstinus tenet de eo. ibi habet in dominio unam carucam, et tres walenses lege walensi viventes, cum 3 carucis, et 2 bordarios cum dimidio carucæ, et reddunt 4 sextares mellis. ibi 2 servi et una ancilla. hæc terra wasta erat t. r. e., et quando willelmus recepit. modo valet 40 solidos." d. b., i., 185b, 1. [313] the _gwentian chronicle_, cambrian archæological association, a.d. 962, 967. it is not absolutely impossible that these passages refer to chester. caerleon appears to have been seized by the welsh very soon after the death of william i. [314] _itin. camb._, p. 55. [315] loftus brock, in _journ. brit. arch. ass._, xlix. j. e. lee, in _arch. camb._, iv., 73. [316] d. b., i., 185b. [317] [rex] "in reversione sua lincolniæ, huntendonæ et grontebrugæ castra locavit." _ord. vit._, p. 189. [318] d. b., i., 189. [319] a similar plan was made independently by the late professor babington. some traces of the original earthwork of the city are still to be seen. see mr hope's paper on _the norman origin of cambridge castle_, cambridge antiquarian soc., vol. xi.; and babington's _ancient cambridgeshire_, in the same society's _octavo publications_, no. iii., 1853. [320] w. h. st john hope, as above, p. 342. [321] "archiepiscopus habet ex eis [burgensibus] 7 et abbas s. augustini 14 pro excambio castelli." d. b., i. a, 2. [322] "et undecim sunt perditi infra fossatum castelli"; cited by larking, _domesday of kent_, app. xxiv. domesday says, "sunt vastatæ xi. in fossa _civitatis_." there can be no doubt that the chartulary gives the correct account. [323] the hill is called the dungan, dangon, or dungeon hill in many old local deeds. see "canterbury in olden times,"_arch. journ._, 1856. stukeley and grose both call it the dungeon hill. [324] see appendix n. [325] somner's _antiquities of canterbury_, p. 144. published in 1640. [326] _antiquities of canterbury_, p. 75. [327] mr clark thought there was another motte in the earthworks outside the walls, though he expresses himself doubtfully: "i rather think they [the mounds outside the city ditch] or one of them, looked rather like a moated mound, but i could not feel sure of it." _arch. cantiana_, xv., 344. gostling (_a walk about canterbury_, 1825) says there were _two_, which is perhaps explained by a passage in brayley's _kent_ (1808), in which he describes the external fortification as "a lesser mount, now divided into two parts, with a ditch and embankment." p. 893. stukeley's description (circa 1700) is as follows: "within the walls is a very high mount, called dungeon hill; a ditch and high bank enclose the area before it; it seems to have been part of the old castle. opposite to it without the walls is a hill, seeming to have been raised by the danes when they besieged the city. the top of the dungeon hill is equal to the top of the castle." _itin. curiosum_, i., 122. it is of course not impossible that there may have been two mottes to this castle, as at lewes and lincoln, but such instances are rare, and it seems more likely that a portion of the bailey bank which happened to be in better preservation and consequently higher was mistaken for another mount. mr clark committed this very error at tadcaster, and the other writers we have quoted were quite untrained as observers of earthen castles. at any rate there can be no doubt that the dane john is the original chief citadel of this castle, as the statements of somner, stukeley, and we may add, leland, are explicit. the most ancient maps of canterbury, hoefnagel's (1570), smith's (_description of england_, 1588), and grose's (1785), all show the dungeon hill within the walls, but take no notice of the outwork outside. [328] _archæologia cantiana_, xxxiii., 152. [329] _ibid._, xxi. [330] _close rolls_, i., 234b, ii., 7b, 89. [331] now, to the disgrace of the city of canterbury, converted into gasworks. [332] for instance, at middleham, rochester, rhuddlan, and morpeth. [333] _beauties of england and wales, kent_, p. 893. [334] the passages from the _pipe roll_ bearing on this subject (which have not been noticed by any previous historian of canterbury) are as follows:- 1166-7. in operatione civitatis cantuar. claudendæ £5 19 6 " ad claudendam civitatem cantuar. 20 0 0 1167-8. pro claudenda civitate cantuar. 5 1 1 1168-9. in terris datis adelizæ filie simonis 15 solidos de tribus annis pro escambio terræ suæ quæ est in castello de cantuar. 0 15 0 1172-3. in operatione turris ejusdem civitatis 10 0 0 " in operatione predicte turris 53 6 8 " summa denariorum quos vicecomes misit in operatione turris 73 1 4 1173-4. in operatione turris et castelli chant. 24 6 0 " in operatione turris cantuar. 5 11 7 1174-5. et in warnisione ejusdem turris 5 8 0 the latter extract, which refers to the provisioning of the keep, seems to show that it was then finished. the sums put down to the castle, amounting to about £4000 of our money, are not sufficient to defray the cost of so fine a keep. but the entries in the _pipe rolls_ relate only to the sheriff's accounts, and it is probable that the cost of the keep was largely paid out of the revenues of the archbishopric, which henry seized into his own hands during the becket quarrel. [335] the portion of the wall of canterbury, which rests on an earthen bank, extends from northgate to the castle, and is roughly semicircular in plan. in the middle of it was st george's gate, which was anciently called _newingate_ (gostling, p. 53) and may possibly have been henry ii.'s new gate. the part enclosing the dungeon hill is angular, and appeared to mr clark, as well as to somner and hasted, to have been brought out at this angle in order to enclose the hill. [336] _arch. journ._, 1856. [337] d. b., i., 2a, 1. [338] "isdem rex tenet alwinestone. donnus tenuit. tunc pro duabus hidis et dimidia. modo pro duabus hidis, quia castellum sedet in una virgata." d. b., i., 2a, 1. [339] see below, under windsor. [340] "in hac [insula] castellum habebat ornatissimum lapidum ædificio constructum, validissimo munimine firmatum." _gesta stephani_, r. s., p. 28. [341] stone's _official guide to the castle of carisbrooke_, p. 39. [342] mr w. h. stevenson, in his edition of _asser_, pp. 173, 174, shows that the name carisbrooke cannot possibly be derived from wihtgares-burh, as has been sometimes supposed, as the older forms prove it to have come from _brook_, not _burh_. the lines of the present castle banks, if produced, would not correspond with those of the tilt-yard, which is proof that the norman castle was not formed by cutting an older fortification in two. [343] bower's _scotochronicon_, v., xlii. cited by mr neilson, _notes and queries_, viii., 321. see also palgrave, _documents and records_, i., 103. [344] _cal. of close rolls_, edward ii., iii., 161. [345] _mon. ang._, v., 12. "castelli nostri de acra." [346] as at burton, mexborough, lilbourne, and castle colwyn. [347] harrod's _gleanings among the castles and convents of norfolk_. see also _arch. journ._, xlvi., 441. [348] d. b., ii., 160b. [349] "castellum de estrighoiel fecit willelmus comes, et ejus tempore reddebat 40 solidos, tantum de navibus in silvam euntibus." d. b., i., 162. tanner has shown that while chepstow was an alien priory of cormeille, in normandy, it is never spoken of by that name in the charters of cormeille, but is always called strigulia. _notitia monastica_, monmouthshire. see also marsh's _annals of chepstow castle_. [350] i must confess that in spite of very strong opposing opinions, i see no reason why this building should not be classed as a keep. it is of course a gross error to call martin's tower the keep; it is only a mural tower. [351] d. b., 162, 1a. [352] "cestriæ munitionem condidit." p. 199 (prévost's edition). [353] _chester historical and archæological society_, v., 239. [354] _pipe rolls_, ii., 7. ranulph, earl of chester, died in 1153, and the castle would then escheat into the king's hands. [355] this work seems to have been completed in the reign of edward ii., who spent £253 on the houses, towers, walls, and gates. _cal. of close rolls_, edward ii., ii., 294. [356] _close rolls_, 35, henry iii., cited by ormerod, _history of cheshire_, i., 358. [357] see mr cox's paper, as above, and shrubsole, _chester hist. and arch. soc._, v., 175, and iii., new series, p. 71. [358] _benedict of peterborough_, i., 135, r. s. [359] d. b., i., 262b. [360] "willelmus comes fecit illud [castellum] in wasta terra quam tenebat bruning t. r. e." d. b., i., 183a, 2. [361] "ancient charters," _pipe roll society_, vol. x., charter xiii., and mr round's note, p. 25. [362] it is extraordinary that mr clark, in his description of this castle, does not mention the motte, except by saying that the outer ward is 60 or 70 feet lower than the inner. _m. m. a._, i., 395. [363] this passage occurs in a sort of appendix to domesday book, which is said to be in a later hand, of the 12th century. (skaife, _yorks. arch. journ._, part lv., p. 299.) it cannot, however, be very late in the 12th century, as it speaks of roger's holdings in craven in the present tense. [364] see farrer's _lancashire pipe rolls_, p. 385. the castle is not actually mentioned, but "le baille" (the bailey) is spoken of. mr farrer also prints an abstract of a charter of henry i. (1102): "per quam concessit eidem roberto [de laci] boelandam [bowland] quam tenuit de rogero comite pictavensi, ut extunc eam de eodem rege teneat." p. 382. [365] in an inquisition of henry de laci (+ 1311) it is said that "castelli mote et fossæ valent nihil." (whitaker's _history of whalley_, p. 280.) this is probably an instance of the word _motte_ being applied to a natural rock which served that purpose. see another instance under nottingham, _post_, p. 176. [366] dugdale's _baronage_, i., p. 99. dugdale's authority appears to have been the "historia laceiorum," a very untrustworthy document, but which may have preserved a genuine tradition in this instance. the loopholes in the basement of the keep, with the large recesses, appear to have been intended for crossbows, and the crossbow was not reintroduced into england till the reign of richard i. [367] _victoria history of lancashire_, ii., 523. [368] see farrer, _lancashire pipe rolls_, i., 260. [369] printed by mr round in _essex arch. society's transactions_, vii., part ii. the charter is dated 1101. [370] see maitland, _domesday book and beyond_, p. 22. [371] _history of colchester castle_, p. 141. [372] it has been much debated whether these tiles are roman or norman; the conclusion seems to be that they are mixed. see round's _history of colchester_, p. 78. [373] the single _pipe roll_ of henry i. shows that he spent £33, 15s. on repairs of the castle and borough in 1130. [374] in operatione unius rogi (a kiln), £13, 18s. in reparatione muri castelli, £16, 3s. 2d. the projection of the buttresses (averaging 1 ft. 3 ins.) is about the same as that found in castles of henry i. or henry ii.'s time. [375] ad faciendum ballium circa castellum, £50. _pipe rolls_, xix., 13. this is followed by another entry of £18, 13s. 7d. "in operatione castelli," which may refer to the same work. [376] round's _history of colchester_. [377] _close rolls_, i., 389. mandamus to the bishop of london to choose two lawful and discreet men of colchester, "et per visum eorum erigi faceatis palicium castri nostri colecestrie, quod nuper prostratum fuit per tempestatem." [378] round's _history of colchester_, pp. 135, 136. [379] tota civitas ex omnibus debitis reddebat t. r. e., £15, 5s. 4d., in unoquoque anno. modo reddit £160. d. b., ii., 107. [380] eyton, _key to domesday_, p. 43. this passage was kindly pointed out to me by dr round. the castle is not mentioned in domesday under wareham, but under kingston. "de manerio chingestone habet rex unam hidam, in qua fecit castellum warham, et pro ea dedit s. mariæ [of shaftesbury] ecclesiam de gelingeham cum appendiciis suis." d. b., i., 78b, 2. [381] "advocatio ecclesie de gillingeham data fuit abbati [_sic_] de s. edwardo in escambium pro terra ubi castellum de corf positum est." _testa de nevill_, 164b. [382] it is by no means certain that corfe was the scene of edward's murder, as we learn from a charter of cnut (_mon. ang._, iii., 55) that there was a corfe geat not far from portisham, probably the place now called coryates. [383] called by asser a _castellum_; but it has already been pointed out that _castellum_ in early writers means a walled town and not a castle. (see p. 25.) wareham is a town fortified by an earthen vallum and ditch, and is one of the boroughs of the _burghal hidage_. (see ch. ii, p. 28.) a norman castle was built there after the conquest, and its motte still remains. d. b. says seventy-three houses were utterly destroyed from the time of hugh the sheriff. i., 75. [384] edred granted "to the religious woman, elfthryth," supposed to be the abbess of shaftesbury, "pars telluris purbeckinga," which would include corfe. _mon. ang._, ii., 478. [385] both these kings spent large sums on corfe castle. see the citations from the _pipe rolls_ in hutchins' _dorset_, vol. i., and in mr bond's _history of corfe castle_. [386] see professor baldwin brown's paper in the _journal of the institute of british architects_, third series, ii., 488, and mr micklethwaite's in _arch. journ._, liii., 338; also professor baldwin brown's remarks on corfe castle in _the arts in early england_, ii., 71. [387] there are other instances in which the chapel is the oldest piece of mason-work about the castle, as, for example, at pontefract. [388] cited in hutchins' _dorset_, i., 488, from the _close rolls_. [389] _close rolls_, i., 178b. [390] hutchins' _dorset_, i., 488. [391] castrum doveram, studio atque sumptu suo communitum. p. 108. eadmer makes harold promise to william "castellum dofris cum puteo aquæ ad opus meum te _facturum_." _hist. novorum_, i., d. the castle is not mentioned in domesday book. [392] _norman conquest_, iii., 217. [393] in 1580 an earthquake threw down a portion of the cliff on which the castle stands, and part of the walls. statham's _history of dover_, p. 287. [394] "wendon him tha up to thære burge-weard, and ofslogen ægther ge withinnan ge withutan, ma thanne 20 manna." another ms. adds "tha burh-menn ofslogen 19 men on othre healfe, and ma gewundode, and eustatius atbærst mid feawum mannum." [395] see _ante_, pp. 17-19. [396] his description is worth quoting: est ibi mons altus, strictum mare, litus opacum, hinc hostes citius anglica regna petunt; sed castrum doveræ, pendens a vertice montis, hostes rejiciens, littora tuta facit. clavibus acceptis, rex intrans moenia castri præcepit angligenis evacuare domos; hos introduxit per quos sibi regna subegit, unumquemque suum misit ad hospitium. "carmen de bello hastingensi," in _monumenta britannica_, p. 603. [397] william's description is also of great interest: "deinde dux contendit doueram, ubi multus populus congregatus erat, pro inexpugnabile, ut sibi videtur, munitione; quia id castellum situm est in rupe mari contigua, quæ naturaliter acuta undique ad hoc ferramentis elaborate incisa, in speciem muri directissima altitudine, quantum sagittæ jactus permetiri potest, consurgit, quo in latere unda marina alluitur." p. 140. [398] the following entries in the _pipe rolls_ refer to this:- 1194-5. three hundred planks of oak for the works of the castle £2 0 0 1196-7. repair of the wall of the castle 76 3 0 1208-9. timber for walling the castles of dover and rochester, also rods and [wooden] hurdles and other needful things 76 13 4 1210-11. payment for the carpenters working the timber 24 9 5 1212-13. for the carriage of timber and other things 48 16 7 1214-15. for the carriage of timber for the castle works 2 0 0 1214-15. for timber and brushwood for the works, and for cutting down wood to make hurdles, and sending them sum not given, but £100 entered same year for the works of the castle. there is no mention of stone for the castle during these two reigns, but after the death of john we find that works are going on at dover for which kilns are required. (_close rolls_, i., 352, 1218.) this entry is followed by a very large expenditure on dover castle (amounting to at least £6000), sufficient to cover the cost of a stone wall and towers round the outer circuit. the orders of planks for joists must be for the towers, and the large quantities of lead, for roofing them. the order for timber "ad palum et alia facienda" in 1225 _may_ refer to a stockade on the advanced work called the spur, which is said to be hubert's work. (_close rolls_, ii., 14.) [399] cited by statham, _history of dover_, pp. 265, 313. [400] _commune of london_, pp. 278-81. [401] the ninth name, maminot, is attached to three towers on the curtain of the keep ward. [402] "recepto castro, quæ minus erant per dies octo addidit firmamenta." p. 140. [403] lyon says: "the keep [hill] was formed of chalk dug out of the interior hill." cited by statham, p. 245. [404] "per præceptum regis facta est apud doveram turris fortissima." ii. 8, r. s., anno 1187. the _historia fundationis_ of st martin's abbey says that henry ii. built the high tower in the castle, and enclosed the donjon with new walls: "fit le haut tour en le chastel, et enclost le dongon de nouelx murs." _m. a._, iv., 533. [405] puckle's _church and fortress of dover castle_, p. 57. [406] _pipe rolls_, 1178-80. "in operatione muri circa castellum de doura, £165, 13s. 4d. the same, £94, 7s. 1d." [407] mr statham thinks the port of dover, though a roman station, was unwalled till the 13th century, and gives evidence. _history of dover_, p. 56. [408] see professor baldwin brown, "statistics of saxon churches" in the _builder_, 20th october 1900; and in _the arts in early england_, ii., 338. [409] d. b., i., 1. [410] "istedem willelmus tenet dudelei, et ibi est castellum ejus. t. r. e. valebat 4 libras, modo 3 libras." d. b., i., 177. [411] _m. m. a._, i., 24. [412] "circa dies istos castellum de huntinduna, de waletuna, de legecestria, et grobi, de stutesbers [tutbury], de dudeleia, de tresc, et alia plura pariter corruerunt, in ultionem injuriarum quas domini castellorum regi patri frequenter intulerunt." _diceto_, i., 404, r. s. [413] _close rolls_, i., 380. [414] parker's _history of domestic architecture_, licenses to crenellate, 13th century, part ii., p. 402. godwin, "notice of the castle at dudley," _arch. journ._, xv., 47. [415] d. b., i., 95b. [416] narrow terraces of this kind are found in several mottes, such as mere, in wilts. they are probably natural, and may have been utilised as part of the plan. the more regular terraces winding round the motte are generally found where the motte has become part of a pleasure-ground in later times. [417] this is the only case in which i have had to trust to mr clark for the description of a castle. _m. m. a._, ii., 24. [418] mentioned in _close rolls_, i., 518a. [419] d. b., i., 95b. [420] symeon of durham, 1072. "eodem tempore, scilicet quo rex reversus de scotia fuerat, in dunelmo castellum _condidit_, ubi se cum suis episcopus tute ab incursantibus habere potuisset." [421] this chapel is an instance of the honour so frequently done to the chapel, which was in many cases built of stone when the rest of the castle was only of timber, and was always the part most lavishly decorated. [422] the bailey was twice enlarged by bishops flambard and pudsey. [423] surtees, durham, iv., 33. [424] surtees society, xx., 11-13. [425] evidently the southern wing wall up the motte; but we need not suppose _murus_ to mean a stone wall. [426] _domus_, a word always used for a _habitation_ in mediæval documents, and often applied to a tower, which it evidently means here. [427] this is the only indication which lawrence gives that the keep was of wood. [428] "cingitur et pulchra paries sibi quilibet ala, omnis et in muro desinit ala fero." the translation is conjectural, but _gallery_ seems to make the best sense, and the allusion probably is to the wooden galleries, or _hourdes_, which defended the walls. [429] evidently the northern wing wall. [430] this is the bailey; the two vast palaces must mean the hall and the lodgings of the men-at-arms, who did not share the bishop's dwelling in the keep. these were probably all of wood, as the buildings of durham castle were burnt at the beginning of pudsey's episcopate (1153) and restored by him. surtees society, ix., 12. [431] "hujus in egressu pons sternitur." this seems a probable allusion to a drawbridge, but if so, it is an early one. [432] this describes the addition to the bailey made by flambard. the part of the peninsula to the s. of the church was afterwards walled in by pudsey, and called the south bailey. [433] _liber eliensis_, ii., 245 (anglia christiana). the part cited was written early in the 12th century: see preface. [434] stowe's _annals_, 145, 1. [435] d. b., ii., 192. [436] "alured de merleberge tenet castellum de ewias de willelmo rege. ipse rex enim concessit ei terras quas willelmus comes ei dederat, qui hoc castellum refirmaverat, hoc est, 5 carucatas terræ ibidem.... hoc castellum valet 10_l_." d. b., i., 186a. as there is no statement of the value in king edward's day, we cannot tell whether it had risen or fallen. [437] _feudal england_, p. 324. the present writer was led independently to the same conclusion. pentecost was the nickname of osbern, son of richard scrob, one of edward's norman favourites, to whom he had given estates in herefordshire. osbern fled to scotland in 1052, but he seems to have returned, and was still holding lands in "the castelry of ewias" at the time of the survey, though his nephew alured held the castle. see freeman, _n. c._, ii., 345, and _florence of worcester_, 1052. [438] "locum vero intra moenia ad extruendum castellum delegit, ibique baldwinum de molis, filium gisleberti comitis, aliosque milites præcipuos reliquit, qui necessarium opus conficerent, præsidioque manerunt." ordericus, ii., 181. [439] exeter is one of the few cities where a tradition has been preserved of the site of the saxon royal residence, which places it in what is now paul street, far away from the present castle. shorrt's _sylva antiqua iscana_, p. 7. [440] "in hac civitate vastatæ sunt 48 domi postquam rex venit in angliam." d. b., i., 100. [441] _norman conquest_, iv., 162. [442] the outer ditch may have been of roman origin, but in that case it must have been carried all round the city, and we are unable to find whether this was the case or not. the banks on the north and east sides must also have been of roman origin, and if we rightly understand the statements of local antiquaries, the roman city wall stood upon them, and has actually been found _in situ_, cased with mediæval rubble. _report of devon association_, 1895. [443] this resemblance to a pit may be seen in every motte which still retains its ancient earthen breast-work, as at castle levington, burton in lonsdale, and castlehaugh, gisburne. perhaps this is the reason that we so frequently read in the _pipe rolls_ of "the houses _in_ the motte" (domos in mota) instead of _on_ the motte. devizes castle is another and still more striking instance. [444] professor baldwin brown, _the arts in early england_, ii., 82. [445] "in custamento gaiole in ballia castelli, £16, 15s. 8d." [446] cited by dr oliver, "the castle of exeter," in _arch. journ._, vii., 128. [447] the whole of this passage is worth quoting: "castellum in ea situm, editissimo aggere sublatum, muro inexpugnabile obseptum, turribus cæsarianis inseissili calce confectis firmatum. agmine peditum instructissime armato exterius promurale, quod ad castellum muniendum aggere cumulatissimo in altum sustollebatur, expulsis constanter hostibus suscepit, pontemque interiorem, quo ad urbem de castello incessus protendebatur, viriliter infregit, lignorumque ingentia artificia, quibus de muro pugnare intentibus resisteretur, mire et artificiose exaltavit. die etiam et noctu graviter et intente obsidionem clausis inferre; nunc cum armatis aggerem incessu quadrupede conscendentibus rixam pugnacem secum committere; nunc cum innumeris fundatoribus, qui e diverso conducti fuerunt, intolerabile eos lapidum grandine infestare; aliquando autem ascitis eis, qui massæ subterranæ cautius norunt venus incidere, ad murum diruendum viscera terræ scutari præcipere: nonnunquam etiam machinas diversi generis, alias in altum sublatis, alias humo tenus depressas, istas ad inspiciendam quidnam rerum in castello gereretur, illas ad murum quassandum vel obruendum aptare." _gesta stephani_, r. s., 23. [448] _pipe rolls_, 1169-1186. [449] the difficulty about this, however, is that passages branch off from the central cave in every direction. [450] oliver's _history of exeter_, p. 186. [451] [willelmus malet] fecit suum castellum ad eiam. d. b., ii., 379. for malet, see freeman, _n. c._, 466, note 4. [452] "in operatione castelli de eya et reparatione veterarum bretascharum et 2 novarum bretascharum et fossatorum et pro carriagio et petra et aliis minutis operationibus 20_l._ 18_s._ 4_d._" _pipe rolls_, xix., 19 henry ii. the small quantity of stone referred to here can only be for some auxiliary work. the _bretasches_ in this case will be mural towers of wood. "in emendatione palicii et 1 exclusæ vivarii et domorum castelli 20_s._" 28 henry ii. [453] d. b., ii., 319, 320. [454] d. b., i., 162. "sedecim domus erant ubi sedet castellum, quæ modo desunt, et in burgo civitatis sunt wastatæ 14 domus." [455] rudge, _history of gloucester_, p. 7. haverfield, _romanisation of britain_, p. 204. [456] it is, however, possible that by the _burgus_ may be meant a later quarter which had been added to the city. [457] fosbroke's _history of gloucester_, pp. 125, 126. stukeley, writing in 1721, says: "there is a large old gatehouse standing, and near it the castle, with a very high artificial mount or keep nigh the river." _itin. cur._, i., 69. [458] "of al partes of yt the hy tower _in media area_ is most strongest and auncient." leland, _itin._, iii., 64. [459] "in excambium pro placea ubi nunc turris stat gloucestriæ, ubi quondam fuit ortus monachorum." _mon. ang._, i., 544. the document is not earlier than henry ii.'s reign. [460] round, _studies in domesday_, p. 123. [461] "in operatione frame turris de glouec, 20_l._" _pipe rolls_, i., 27. in the single _pipe roll_ of henry i. there is an entry "in operationibus turris de glouec," 7_l._ 6_s._ 2_d._, which _may_ be one of a series of sums spent on the new stone keep. [462] _pipe rolls_, 1177, 1180, 1181, 1184. [463] _close rolls_, ii., 88b. [464] "in reparatione murorum et bretaschiarum," 20_l_. 7_s._ 11_d._ _pipe rolls_, 1193. [465] "jussit ut foderetur castellum ad hestengaceastra." [466] d. b., i., 18a, 2. "rex willelmus dedit comiti [of eu] castellariam de hastinges." [467] "dux ibidem [at pevensey] non diu moratus, haud longe situm, qui hastinges vocatur, cum suis adiit portum, ibique opportunum nactus locum, ligneum agiliter castellum statuens, provide munivit." _chron. monast. de bello_, p. 3, ed. 1846. there is also the evidence of ordericus, who says that humphrey de tilleul received the custody of hastings castle "from the first day it was built." iv., 4. [468] par conseil firent esgarder boen lieu a fort chastel fermer. donc ont des nes mairrien iete, a la terre l'ont traine, que le quens d'ou i out porte trestot percie e tot dole. les cheuilles totes dolees orent en granz bariz portees. ainz que il fust avespre en ont un chastelet ferme; environ firent une fosse, si i ont fait grant fermete.--andresen's edition, p. 289. [469] the north curtain is of ruder work than the other masonry. [470] in attractu petre et calcis ad faciendam turrim de hasting 6_l._ idem 13_l._ 12_s._ vol. xviii., p. 130. the work must have been extensive, as it is spoken of as "operatio castelli novi hasting." 1181-1182. though the sum given is not sufficient for a great stone keep, it may have been supplemented from other sources. [471] see mr sands' paper on hasting's castle, in _trans. of the south-eastern union of scientific societies_, 1908. [472] this bailey has been supposed to be a british or roman earthwork, but no evidence has been brought forward to prove it, except the fact that discoveries made in one of the banks point to a flint workshop on the site. [473] totum manerium valebat t. r. e. 20 libras, et postea wastum fuit. modo 18 libras 10 solidos. d. b., i., 18a, 2. since the above was written, mr chas. dawson's large and important work on hastings castle has appeared, and to this the reader is referred for many important particulars, especially the passages from the _pipe rolls_, i., 56, and the repeated destructions by the sea, ii., 498-9. the reproduction of herbert's plan of 1824 (ii., 512) seems to show more than one bailey outside the inner ward. the evidence for a great outer ditch, enclosing all these works, and supposed to be prehistoric, is given on p. 515, vol. ii. [474] see _anglo-saxon chronicle_, 1048 (peterborough) and 1052 (worcester), and compare with _florence of worcester_. [475] _n. c._, ii., 394. [476] _pipe rolls_, 11 henry ii., p. 100, and 15 henry ii., p. 140. stephen granted to miles of gloucester "motam hereford cum toto castello." charter cited by mr round, _geoffrey de mandeville_, appendix o, p. 329. [477] cited by grose, _antiquities_, ii., 18. stukeley saw the motte, and mentions the well in it lined with stone. _itin. curiosum_, i., 71. see also duncombe's _history of hereford_, i., 229. [478] in custamento prosternandi partem muri castri nostri de hereford, et preparatione rogi ad reficiendum predictum murum, 26s. 6d. _pipe rolls_, 1181-1182. [479] in operatione 5 bretaschiarum in castro de hereford, £15, 3s. 9d. _pipe rolls_, 1173-1174. [480] _close rolls_, i., 134a. [481] hubertus cantuariensis archiepiscopus et totius angliæ summus justiciarius, fuit in gwalia apud hereford, et recepit in manu sua castellum de hereford, et castellum de briges, et castellum de ludelaue, expulsis inde custodibus qui ea diu custodierant, et tradidit ea aliis custodibus, custodienda ad opus regis. _roger of howden_, iv., 35, r. s. [482] d. b., i., 179. [483] "in loco castri fuerunt 20 mansiones, quæ modo absunt." d. b., i., 203. [484] _ordericus_, ii., 185. [485] _benedict of peterborough_, i., 70. the justiciar, richard de lucy, threw up a siege castle against it. [486] "pro uncis ad prosternandum palicium de hunted, 7_s._ 8_d._ in operatione novi castelli de hunted, et pro locandis carpentariis et pro croccis et securibus et aliis minutis rebus, 21_l._" _pipe rolls_, 20 henry ii., pp. 50, 63. it is clear that the _operatio_ was in this case one of pulling down. giraldus (_vita galfredi_, iv., 368, r. s.) and _diceto_ (i., 404, r. s.), both say the castle was destroyed. [487] _mon. ang._, vi., 80. [488] leland tells us that launceston was anciently called dunheved. _itin._, vii., 122. [489] "ibi est castrum comitis." d. b., i., 121b. "hæc duo maneria [hawstone et botintone] dedit episcopo comes moriton pro excambio castelli de cornualia." d. b., i., 101b, 2. [490] there are no entries for launceston except repairs in the reigns of henry ii. and his sons. [491] murray's _guide to cornwall_, p. 203. [492] "olim 20_l._; modo valet 4_l._" d. b., i., 121b. [493] d. b., ii., 157, 163, 172. the first entry relating to this transaction says: "hoc totum est pro escangio de 2 maneriis delaquis." the second says: "pertinent ad castellum delaquis." it is clear that lewes is meant, as one paragraph is headed "de escangio lewes." i have been unable to find any explanation of this exchange in any of the norfolk topographers, or in any of the writers on domesday book. [494] lincoln is the only other instance known to the writer. deganwy has two natural mottes. it is possible that two mottes indicate a double ownership of a castle, a thing of which there are instances, as at rhuddlan. [495] exeter and tickhill are instances of early norman gateways, and at ongar and pleshy there are fragments of early gateways, though there are no walls on the banks. we have already seen that arundel had a gateway which cannot be later than henry i.'s time. [496] d. b., i., 26a, 1. [497] "de predictis wastis mansionibus propter castellum destructi fuerunt 166." d. b., i., 336b, 2. [498] "in reversione sua lincoliæ, huntendonæ, et grontebrugæ castra locavit." ordericus, 185 (prévost). [499] at present the bank is wanting on a portion of the south side, between the two mottes. [500] mr clark gravely argues that the houses were inside what he believes to have been the saxon castle. there is not a vestige of historical evidence for the existence of any castle in lincoln in the saxon period. [501] stephen gave ralph the castle and city of lincoln, and gave him leave to fortify one of the towers in lincoln castle, and have command of it until the king should deliver to him the castle of tickhill; then the king was to have the city and castle of lincoln again, excepting the earl's own tower, which his mother had fortified. his mother was lucy, daughter of ivo taillebois; and as the principal tower was known as the luce tower, the masonry may have been her work. in that case the norman work on the smaller motte may be due to ralph gernon, and may possibly be the _nova turris_ which was repaired in john's reign. _pipe roll_, 2 john. stephen's charter is in farrer's _lancashire pipe rolls_. [502] "in custamento firmandi ballium castelli lincoll." _pipe roll_, 5 richard i. in an excavation made for repairs in modern times it was found that this wall rested on a timber frame-work, a device to avoid settling, the wall being of great height and thickness. wilson, lincoln castle, _proc. arch. inst._, 1848. [503] d. b., i. 336b, 2: "tochi filius outi habuit in civitate 30 mansiones præter suam hallam, et duas ecclesias et dimidiam, et suam hallam habuit quietam ab omni consuetudine.... hanc aulam tenuit goisfredus alselin et suus nepos radulfus. remigius episcopus tenet supradictas 30 mansiones ita quod goisfredus nihil inde habet." [504] "in castello monemouth habet rex in dominio 4 carucas. willelmus filius baderon custodit eas. quod rex habet in hoc castello valet c solidos." d. b., 180b. [505] _liber landavensis_, evans' edition, pp. 277-278. see also round's _calendar of documents preserved in france_, p. 406. [506] _theatre of britain_, p. 107. [507] speed's map shows the curtain wall surrounding the top of the hill and also a large round tower towards the n.e. part, but not standing on any "other mount." the square keep is not indicated separately. it must be remembered that speed's details are not always accurate or complete. [508] "ipse comes tenet in dominio bishopstowe, et ibi est castellum ejus quod vocatur montagud. hoc manerium geldabat t. r. e. pro 9 hidas, et erat de abbatia de adelingi, et pro eo dedit comes eidem ecclesiæ manerium quod candel vocatur." d. b., i., 93a, 1. [509] _itin._, ii., 92. [510] from a description communicated by mr basil stallybrass. the motte is shown in a drawing in stukeley's _itinerarium curiosum_. the "immense romano-british camp" of which mr clark speaks (_m. m. a._, i., 73) is nearly a mile west. [511] mountjoy, monthalt (mold), beaumont, beaudesert, egremont, are instances in point. [512] _gaimar_, 214, wright's edition. gaimar wrote in the first half of the 12th century; wright states that his work is mainly copied from the _anglo-saxon chronicle_, but its chief value lies in the old historical traditions of the north and east of england which he has preserved. [513] hodgson's _history of northumberland_, part ii., ii., 384, 389. [514] this account is taken from a description kindly furnished by mr d. h. montgomerie. [515] bates' _border holds_, p. 11. [516] _simeon of durham_, 1080. "castellum novum super flumen tyne condidit." [517] see the map in an important paper on newcastle by longstaffe, _arch. æliana_, iv., 45. [518] _guide to the castle of newcastle_, published by society of antiquaries of newcastle, 1901. [519] longstaffe, as above. [520] "condidit castellum in excelso preruptæ rupis super twedam flumen, ut inde latronum incursus inhiberet, et scottorum irruptiones. ibi enim utpote in confinia regni anglorum et scottorum creber prædantibus ante patebat excursus, _nullo enim quo hujusmodi impetus repelleretur præsidio locato_." _symeon of durham_, r. s., i., 140. [521] "castellum di northam, quod munitionibus infirmum reperit, turre validissima forte reddidit." _geoffrey of coldingham_, 12 (surtees society). symeon says it was built "precepto regis." the keep was extensively altered in the decorated period. [522] _m. m. a._, ii., 331. [523] _richard of hexham_, 319 (twysden). [524] "in illa terra de quâ herold habebat socam sunt 15 burgenses et 17 mansuræ vastæ, quæ sunt in occupatione castelli; et in burgo 190 mansuræ vacuæ in hoc quod erat in soca regis et comitis, et 81 in occupatione castelli." d. b., ii., 116. this shows that the castle and its ditches occupied ground partly within and partly without the ancient _burh_. [525] harrod's _gleanings among castles_, p. 142. [526] the authorities from which this map is compiled are not given. [527] the "new borough" at norwich was the quarter inhabited by the normans. d. b., ii., 118. "franci de norwich: in novo burgo 36 burgenses et 6 anglici." mr hudson says that mancroft leet corresponds to the new burgh added to norwich at the conquest. see his map in _arch. journ._, xlvi. [528] norwich was not a roman town; see haverfield, _vict. hist. of norfolk_, i., 320. but the roman road from caistor passed exactly underneath the castle motte. _brit. arch. assoc. journ._, xlvi., rev. h. dukinfield astley. [529] harrod's _gleanings among castles_, p. 137. [530] _mon. ang._, iv., 13. in 37 henry iii. the monks of norwich priory received "licentiam includendi eandem villam cum fossis," and by doing this they enclosed the lands of other fees. [531] _arch. journ._, xlvi., 445. [532] kirkpatrick's _notes of norwich castle_, written about 1725. he states that the angles of the motte had been spoilt, and much of it fallen away. [533] _archæologia_, vol. xii. [534] mr hartshorne thought it was built between 1120 and 1125. _arch. journ._, xlvi., 260. it is certainly not as late as henry ii.'s reign, or the accounts for it would appear in the _pipe rolls_. [535] _pipe rolls_, 19 henry ii., p. 117. in reparatione pontis lapidei et palicii et 3 bretascharum in eodem castello, 20_l._ 4_s._ 8_d._ [536] _close rolls_, ii., 22. order that the palicium of norwich castle, which has fallen down and is threatened with ruin, be repaired. [537] kirkpatrick, _notes on norwich castle_. [538] except kirkpatrick, who shows a judicious scepticism on the subject. _ibid._, p. 248. [539] _mon. ang._, i., 482. [540] d. b., ii., 117. [541] ordericus, ii., 184. [542] published in a paper on nottingham castle by mr emanuel green, in _arch. journ._ for december 1901. [543] see mr green's paper, as above, p. 388. [544] "apud rokingham liberavimus philippo marco ad faciendam turrim quam dominus rex precepit fieri in mota de notingham 100 marcas quas burgenses de notingham et willelmus fil. baldwini dederunt domino regi pro benevolencia sua habenda." in cole's _documents illustrative of english history_, 235. there is some reason to think that john instead of building the cylindrical keeps which were then coming into fashion, reverted to the square form generally followed by his father. [545] _pipe rolls_, 1170-1186. the _pipe roll_ of 6 richard i. mentions the making of "1 posterne in mota," which may be the secret passage in the rock. [546] this is rendered probable by a writ of henry iii.'s reign, ordering that half a mark is to be paid annually to isolde de gray for the land which she had lost in king john's time "_per incrementum forinseci ballii castri de notinge_." _close rolls_, i., 508. [547] _close rolls_, i., 548b. "videat quid et quantum mæremii opus fuerit ad barbecanas et palitia ipsius castri reparanda" (1223). _close rolls_, i., 531b. timber ordered for the repair of the bridges, bretasches, and _palicium gardini_ (1223). _cal. of close rolls_, 1286, p. 390: constable is to have timber to repair the weir of the mill, and the _palings of the court_ of the castle. nottingham was one of eight castles in which john had baths put up. _rot. misæ._, 7 john. [548] the murage of the town of nottingham was assigned "to the repair of the outer bailey of the castle there" in 1288. _patent rolls_, edward i., i., 308. [549] chapter xlii. [550] d. b., i., 280. [551] "ipse baldwinus vicecomes tenet de rege ochementone, et ibi sedet castellum." d. b., i., 105b, 2. [552] the late mr worth thought the lower part of the keep was early norman. he was perhaps misled by the round arched loops in the basement. but round arches are by no means conclusive evidence in themselves of norman date, and the size of these windows, as well as the absence of buttresses, and the presence of pointed arches, are quite incompatible with the early norman period. the whole architecture of the castle agrees with a 14th century date, to which the chapel undoubtedly belongs. [553] eyton, _antiquities of shropshire_, vol. vii. [554] "ibi fecit rainaldus castellum luure." d. b., i., 253b. rainald was an under-tenant of roger, earl of shrewsbury. [555] this sketch is reproduced in mr parry-jones' _story of oswestry castle_. leland says, "extat turris in castro nomine madoci." _itin._, v., 38. [556] "in operatione palicii de blancmuster 2_l._ 6_s._ 8_d._" xii., 124. oswestry was known as blancmoustier or album monasterium in norman times. [557] _abingdon chronicle_ and _osney chronicle_, which, though both of the 13th century, were no doubt compiled from earlier sources. [558] _osney chronicle_, 1071. [559] see ingram's _memorials of oxford_ for an account of the very interesting crypt of this church, p. 8. the battlement storey of the tower is comparatively late. [560] mackenzie, _castles of england_, i., 160. [561] d. b., p. 154. [562] rymer's _foedera_, vol. i. [563] "terram castelli pechefers tenuerunt gerneburn et hunding." d. b., i., 276a, 2. [564] there are similar nook-shafts to henry ii.'s keep at scarborough, and to castle rising. mr hartshorne (_arch. journ._, v., 207) thought that there had been an earlier stone keep at peak castle, because some moulded stones are used in the walls, and because there is some herring-bone work in the basement. but this herring-bone work only occurs in a revetment wall to the rock in the cellar; and the moulded stones may be quite modern insertions for repairs, and may have come from the oratory in the n.e. angle, or from some of the ruined windows and doorways. the sums entered to this castle between the years 1172 and 1176 are less than half the cost of scarborough keep, and do not appear adequate, though the keep was a small one. but there is some reason to think that the cost of castles was occasionally defrayed in part from sources not entered in the _pipe rolls_. [565] rex e. tenuit peneverdant. ibi 2 carucatæ terræ et reddebant 10 denarios. modo est ibi castellum.... valent 3 libras. d. b., i., 270. [566] we need not resort to any fanciful british origins of the name peneverdant, as it is clearly the effort of a norman scribe to write down the unpronounceable english name penwortham. [567] see _ante_, under clitheroe. [568] mr halton's book (_documents relating to the priory of penwortham_) throws no light on this point. [569] _transactions of the historic society of lancashire and cheshire_, vol. ix., 1856-1857, paper on "the castle hill of penwortham," by the rev. w. thornber; hardwick's _history of preston_, pp. 103-11. [570] in a paper published in the _trans. soc. ant. scot_, for 1900, on "anglo-saxon burhs and early norman castles," the present writer was misled into the statement that this hut was the remains of the cellar of the norman _bretasche_. a subsequent study of mr hardwick's more lucid account of the excavations showed that this was an error. there were two pavements of boulders, one on the natural surface of the hill, on which the hut had been built, the other 5 feet above it, and 12 feet below the present surface. the hut appeared to have been circular, with wattled walls and a thatched roof. several objects were found in its remains, and were pronounced to be roman or romano-british. the upper pavement would probably be the flooring of a norman keep. [571] mr roach smith pronounced this spur to be norman. as its evidence is so important, it is to be regretted that its position was not more accurately observed. it was found in the lowest stratum of the remains, but mr hardwick says: "as it was not observed until thrown to the surface, a possibility remained that it might have fallen from the level of the upper boulder pavement, 5 feet higher." we may regard this possibility as a certainty, if the lower hut was really british. [572] mr willoughby gardner says the castle commands a ford, to which the ancient sunk road leads. _victoria hist. of lancashire_, vol. ii. [573] hugh candidus, _coenob. burg. historia_, in sparke's _scriptores_, p. 63. this passage was kindly pointed out to me by mr round. hugh lived in henry iii.'s reign, but he must have had the more ancient records of the monastery at his disposal. [574] domesday book mentions that the value of the burgus had greatly risen. it was one of the _burhs_ mentioned in the _burghal hidage_. [575] _pipe roll_, 1187-1188. william of jumièges says, "statim firmissimo vallo castrum condidit, probisque militibus commisit." vii., 34. wace professes to give the account of an eye-witness, who saw the timber for the castle landed from the ships, and the ditch dug. but wace was not a contemporary, and as he has made the mistake of making william land at pevensey instead of hastings, his evidence is questionable. _roman de rou_, p. 293 (andresen's edition). [576] the ruins of this keep, until 1908, were buried under so large a mound of earth and rubbish that mr g. t. clark mistook it for a motte, and the present writer was equally misled. it ought to be stated, before the date of this keep is finally settled, that the _gesta stephani_ speaks of this castle as "editissimo aggere sublatum." p. 106. [577] _ibid._ [578] _close rolls_, i., 631a. [579] d. b., i., 20b. [580] d. b., i., 373b. [581] cited in holmes' _history of pontefract_, p. 62. [582] another charter, which is a confirmation by the second ilbert de lacy of the ecclesiastical gifts of ilbert i. and robert his son, states that the chapel of st clement in the castle of pontefract was founded by ilbert i. in the reign of william ii. _mon. ang._, v., 128. [583] it is not necessary to discuss the meaning of the name pontefract, since for whatever reason it was given, it was clearly bestowed by the norman settlers. [584] "castrum de pontefracto est quasi clavis in comitatu ebor." letter of ralph neville to henry iii., _foedera_, i., 429, cited by holmes, _pontefract_, 194. [585] the conqueror had given him more than 200 manors in yorkshire. _yorks. arch. journ._, xiv., 17. [586] four roundels are shown in the plate given in fox's _history of pontefract_, "from a drawing in the possession of the society of antiquaries." but the drawing is so incorrect in some points that it can hardly be relied upon for others. there were only three roundels in leland's time. [587] drake's account of the siege says that there was a hollow place between piper's tower and the round tower all the way down to the well; the gentlemen and soldiers all fell to carrying earth and rubbish, and so filled up the place in a little space. quoted in holmes' _manual of pontefract castle_. [588] in the _english historical review_ for july 1904, where this paper first appeared, the writer spoke of _two_ mottes at pontefract, having been led to this view by the great height of the east end of the bailey, where the ruins of john of gaunt's work are found. this view is now withdrawn, in deference to the conclusions of mr d. h. montgomerie, f.s.a., who has carefully examined the spot. [589] _mon. ang._, iv., 178. [590] from a description by mr d. h. montgomerie. [591] d. b., i., 224. [592] see chapter iv. [593] domesday book says: "ipse comes (roger) tenet ardinton. sancta milburga tenuit t. r. e. ibi molinum et nova domus et burgus quatford dictus, nil reddentes." i., 254. [594] g. t. clark, in _arch. cambrensis_, 1874, p. 264. [595] _ord. vit._, iv., 32. [596] "in hoc manerio fecit suenus suum castellum." d. b., ii., 33b. [597] freeman, _n. c._, ii., 329, and iv., appendix h. [598] mr round has suggested that this castle was at canfield in essex, where there is a motte and bailey. [599] "isdem osbernus habet 23 homines in castello avreton et reddit 10 solidos. valet ei castellum hoc 20 solidos." d. b., i., 186b. [600] mr clark's plan is strangely incorrect, as he altogether omits the bailey. compare the plan in mr round's castles of the conquest, _archæologia_, vol. lviii., and mr montgomerie's plan here, fig. 27. [601] "comes alanus habet in sua castellata 199 maneria.... præter castellariam habet 43 maneria." d. b., i., 381a, 2. [602] this is stated in a charter of henry ii., which carefully recapitulates the gifts of the different benefactors to st mary's. _mon. ang._, iii., 548. it is curious that the charter of william ii., the first part of which is an inspeximus of a charter of william i., does not mention this chapel in the castle. [603] mr skaife, the editor of the _yorkshire domesday_, thinks that it was at hinderlag, but gives no reasons. hinderlag, at the time of the survey, was in the hands of an under-tenant. _yorks. arch. journ._, lii., 527, 530. [604] "hic alanus primo incepit facere castrum et munitionem juxta manerium suum capitale de gilling, pro tuitione suorum contra infestationes anglorum tunc ubique exhæredatorum, similiter et danorum, et nominavit dictum castrum richmond suo ydiomate gallico, quod sonat latine divitem montem, in editiori et fortiori loco sui territorii situatum." _mon. ang._, v., 574. [605] there are no remains of fortification at gilling, but about a mile and a half away there used to be an oval earthwork, now levelled, called castle hill, of which a plan is given in m'laughlan's paper, _arch. journ._, vol. vi. it had no motte. mr clark says, "the mound at gilling has not long been levelled." _m. m. a._, i., 23. it probably never existed except in his imagination. [606] see clarkson's _history of richmond_. [607] _journal of brit. arch. ass._, lxiii., 179. [608] these are the dates given in morice's _bretagne_. [609] henry spent 51_l._ 11_s._ 3_d._ in 1171 on "operationes domorum et turris," and 30_l._ 6_s._ in 1174 on "operationes castelli et domorum." [610] "episcopus de rouecestre, pro excambio terræ in qua castellum sedet, tantum de hac terra tenet quod 17 sol. et 4 den. valet." d. b., i., 2b. [611] see mr george payne's paper on _roman rochester_, in _arch. cantiana_, vol. xxi. mr hope tells me that parts of all the four sides are left. [612] thus egbert of kent, in 765, gives "terram intra castelli moenia supra-nominati, id est hrofescestri, unum viculum cum duobus jugeribus," _kemble_, i., 138; and offa speaks of the "episcopum castelli quod nominatur hrofescester," earle, _land charters_, p. 60. [613] see an extremely valuable paper on _mediæval rochester_ by the rev. greville m. livett, _arch. cantiana_, vol. xxi. [614] see the charter of coenulf, king of mercia, giving to bishop beornmod three ploughlands on the southern shore of the city of rochester, from the highway on the east to the medway on the west. _textus roffensis_, p. 96. [615] the name boley may possibly represent the norman-french _beaulieu_, a favourite norman name for a castle or residence. professor hales suggested that boley hill was derived from bailey hill (cited in mr gomme's paper on boley hill, _arch. cantiana_, vol. xvii.). the oldest form of the name is bullie hill, as in edward iv.'s charter, cited below, p. 200. [616] roman urns and lachrymatories were found in the boley hill when it was partially levelled in the 18th century to fill up the castle ditch. _history of rochester_, p. 281. at the part now called watt's avenue, mr george payne found "the fag-end of an anglo-saxon cemetery." _arch. cantiana_, vol. xxi. [617] "in pulchriore parte civitatis hrouecestre." _textus roffensis_, p. 145. mr freeman and others have noticed that the special mention of a _stone_ castle makes it probable that the first castle was of wood. mr round remarks that the building of rochester castle is fixed, by the conjunction of william ii. and lanfranc in its history, to some date between september 1087 and march 1089. _geoffrey de mandeville_, p. 339. probably, therefore, it was this new castle which bishop odo held against rufus in 1088. ordericus says that "cum quingentis militibus intra rofensem urbem se conclusit." p. 272. [618] it is now attributed to archbishop william of corbeuil, to whom henry i. gave the custody of the castle in the twenty-seventh year of his reign, with permission to make within it a defence or keep, such as he might please. _continuator of florence_, 1126. gervase of canterbury also says "idem episcopus turrim egregiam ædificavit." both passages are cited by hartshorne, _arch. journ._, xx., 211. gundulf's castle cost 60_l._ and can scarcely have been more than an enclosing wall with perhaps one mural tower. see mr round, _geoffrey de mandeville_, 340, and mr livett's paper, cited above. [619] two common friends of rufus and gundulf advised the king that in return for the grant of the manor of hedenham and the remission of certain moneys, "episcopus gundulfus, quia in opere cæmentario plurimum sciens et efficax erat, castrum sibi hrofense _lapideum_ de suo construeret." _textus roffensis_, p. 146. there was therefore an exchange of land in this affair also. [620] _arch. cantiana_, vol. xxi. [621] _arch. cantiana_, vol. xxi., p. 49. [622] there are several entries in the _close rolls_ relating to this wall of henry iii. in the year 1225. [623] mr beale poste says that this ancient wall was met with some years since in digging the foundations of the rev. mr conway's house, standing parallel to the present brick walls and about 2 feet within them. "ancient rochester as a roman station," _arch. cantiana_, ii., 71. the continuator of gervase of canterbury tells us (ii., 235) that at the siege of rochester in 1265, simon de montfort captured the outer castle up to the keep (forinsecum castellum usque ad turrim), and mr livett thinks this outer castle must have been the boley hill. [624] _close rolls_, ii., 98b. [625] hasted's _kent_, iv., 163. [626] "ymb sætan tha ceastre and worhton other fæsten ymb hie selfe." see _ante_, p. 49, _note 120_. [627] mr hope suggests the east side, as the north was a marsh. [628] _history of rochester_ (published by fisher, 1772), p. 285. [629] d. b., i., 56. [630] "wasta erat quando rex w. iussit ibi castellum fieri. modo valet 36 solidos." d. b., i., 220. [631] "i markid that there is stronge tower in the area of the castelle, and from it over the dungeon dike is a drawbridge to the dungeon toure." _itin._, i., 14. [632] "in operatione nove turris et nove camere in cast. 126_l._ 18_s._ 6_d._" [633] d. b., i., 120. [634] see the plan reproduced in wise's _rockingham castle and the watsons_, p. 66. [635] vol. i., p. 224: cited by mr irving in his valuable paper on old sarum in _arch. journ._, xv., 1859. sir richard made a vague reference to an ms. in the cottonian and bodleian libraries, for which mr irving says he has searched in vain. [636] general pitt-rivers in his address to the salisbury meeting of the archæological institute in 1887, says that traces of these roads may still be seen. he adds that old sarum does not resemble the generality of ancient british fortifications, in that the rampart is of the same height all round, instead of being lower where the ground is steeper; this led him to think that the original fortress had been modernised in later times. sir richard colt hoare noticed that the ramparts of sarum were twice as high as those of the fine prehistoric camps with which he was acquainted. _ancient wiltshire_, p. 226. [637] benson and hatcher's _old and new sarum_, p. 604. [638] _cf._ benson and hatcher, 63, with _beauties of england and wales_, xv., 78. [639] d. b., i., 66. "idem episcopus tenet sarisberie." part of the land which had been held under the bishop was now held by edward the sheriff, the ancestor of the earls of salisbury. this in itself is a proof that the castle was new. see freeman, _n. c._, iv., 797. [640] this policy had been dictated by an oecumenical council. [641] he gives to the canons of the church two hides in the manor, "et ante portam castelli seriberiensis terram ex utraque parte viæ in ortorum domorumque canonicorum necessitate." _m. a._, vi., 1294. [642] _gentleman's magazine_, 1795. [643] the area of the outer camp is 29-1/2 acres. [644] it is unlikely that this is the _turris_ mentioned in the solitary _pipe roll_ of henry i. "in unum ostium faciendum ad cellarium turris sarum, 20s." this entry is of great interest, as entrances from the outside to the basement of keeps were exceptional in the 12th century; but the basement entrance of colchester keep has every appearance of having been added by henry i. [645] william of malmesbury, _hist. nov._, ii., 91. [646] in 1152; the writ is given by benson and hatcher, p. 32. [647] "in operatione unius bretesche in eodem castro 50s." _pipe rolls_, 1193-4. [648] "virgam et mairemium ad hordiandum castrum." _close rolls_, i., 198b (1215). [649] benson and hatcher, p. 704. [650] "dicunt quod castrum cum burgo veteris sarum et dominicus burgus domini regis pertinent ad coronam cum advocatione cujusdam ecclesiæ quæ modo vacat." _hundred rolls_, edward i., cited by benson and hatcher, p. 802. [651] cited by benson and hatcher, p. 802. [652] d. b., 66a, 1. the value t. r. e. is not, however, very distinctly stated. [653] "dicunt angligenses burgenses de sciropesberie multum grave sibi esse quod ipsi reddunt totum geldum sicut reddebant t. r. e. quamvis castellum comitis occupaverit 51 masuras et aliæ 50 masuræ sunt wastæ." d. b., i., 252. [654] some writers, such as mr kerslake and mr c. s. taylor, have supposed sceargate to mean shrewsbury. [655] mandatum est vicecomiti salopie quod veterem palum et veterem bretaschiam de vetere fossato ville salopie faciat habere probos homines ville salopie ad novum fossatum ejusdem ville, quod fieri fecerant, efforciandum et emendendum. _close rolls_, 1231, p. 508. the honest men of the city are also to have "palum et closturam" from the king's wood of lichewood "ad hirucones circa villam salopie faciendas ad ipsam villam claudendam." _ibid._ _hirucones_ are the same as _heritones_ or _hericias_, a defence of stakes on the counterscarp of the ditch. [656] "in op. castelli de salop^be in mota 5_l._" _pipe rolls_, 19 henry ii., p. 108. [657] "dampnum mote castri salopp' ad valenciam 60 marcarum, sed non recolligunt totum evenisse propter molendinum abbatis salopp', quia 30 annis elapsis mota castri fuit fere deteriorata sicut nunc est." _hundred rolls_, ii., 80. "dicunt quod unus magnus turris ligneus (_sic_) qui ædificatur in castro salopp' corruit in terram tempore domini uriani de s. petro tunc vicecomitis, et meremium ejus turris tempore suo et temporibus aliorum vicecomitum postea ita consumitur et destruitur quod nihil de illo remansit, in magnum damnum domini regis et deteriorationem eiusdem castri." _ibid._, p. 105. [658] _pipe rolls_, 11 henry ii., p. 89; 12 henry ii., p. 59; 14 henry ii., p. 93; 15 henry ii., p. 108; 20 henry ii., p. 108. [659] payment to those who dig stone for the castle of shrewsbury, _close rolls_, i., 622b. this is in 1224. there is also a payment of 50_l._ for works at the castle in 1223. _ibid._, 533b. [660] _hundred rolls_, ii., 80. a _jarola_ or garuillum is a stockade; apparently derived from a gallic word for _oak_, and may thus correspond to an oak paling. see ducange. [661] owen and blakeway's _history of shrewsbury_, i., 450. [662] _chronicon de melsa_, r. s. see preface, p. lxxii. [663] _yorks inquisitions_ (yorks rec. ser.), i., 83. [664] _rot. lit. claus._, i., 474b. [665] poulson's _history of holderness_, i., 457. [666] d. b., i., 323b. [667] ethelwerd, anno 910. [668] "ipse henricus tenet cebbeseio. ad hoc manerium pertinuit terra de stadford, in qua rex precepit fieri castellum, quod modo est destructum." d. b., i., 249a. [669] "apud estafort alteram [munitionem] locavit." _ord. vit._, p. 199. [670] it should be said that mr eyton interprets the passage differently, and takes it to mean that the castle was built on land in the borough of stafford belonging to the manor of chebsey. but he himself says that "the site of stafford castle, within the liberties, though not within the borough of stafford, would suggest a royal foundation"; and he believes this castle (the one on the motte) to have been the one garrisoned by henry i. and made a residence by henry ii. _domesday studies_, p. 21. [671] _salt. arch. soc. trans._, vol. viii., "the manor of castre or stafford," by mr mazzinghi, a paper abounding in valuable information, to which the present writer is greatly indebted. [672] in the addenda to mr eyton's _domesday of staffordshire_ (p. 135) the learned editor says there are two stafford castles mentioned in domesday, in two different hundreds. we have carefully searched through the whole stafford account, and except at burton and tutbury, there is no other castle mentioned in staffordshire but this one at chebsey. [673] dugdale conjectures that robert was sheriff of staffordshire. he had large estates round the town of stafford. eyton, _staffordshire_, p. 61. [674] mazzinghi, _salt arch. soc. trans._, viii., 6; eyton, _domesday studies_, p. 20. [675] _monasticon_, vi., 223: "ecclesiam s. nicholai in castello de stafford." [676] ordericus, vii., 12. see also vii., 13, p. 220 (ed. prévost). [677] mazzinghi, _salt arch. soc. trans._, viii., 22. [678] in a charter to stone abbey, _salt collections_, vol. ii. that the castle he speaks of was the one outside the town is proved by his references to land "extra burgum." [679] the _pipe roll_ contains several entries relating to this gaol at stafford. it is clear from several of the documents given by mr mazzinghi that the king's gaol of stafford and the king's gaol of the castle of stafford are equivalent expressions. [680] _pipe rolls_, 2 john. [681] _close rolls_, i., 69. [682] _constitutional history_, i., 272. [683] cited in _salt arch. soc. trans._, vi., pt. i., 258. [684] _patent rolls_, 22 edward iii., cited by mazzinghi, p. 80. [685] _salt arch. soc. trans._, viii., 122. it was undoubtedly at this time that the oblong stone keep on the motte, which is described in an escheat of henry viii.'s reign, was built. [686] _salt arch. coll._, viii., 14. [687] speed's _theatre of britain_; leland, _itin._, vii., 26. [688] the stafford escheat of henry viii.'s reign, which describes the town, also makes no mention of any castle in the town. mazzinghi, p. 105. [689] _salt arch. trans._, viii., 231. the mistake may possibly have arisen from the fact that a fine castellated gateway, shown in w. smith's map (_description of england_), stood on the south-west wall of the town, close to the spot where speed's map marks a castle hill. [690] there must be some error in the first statement of the stafford revenue in domesday, which says that the king and earl have 7_l._ between them, as it is contradicted by the later statement. d. b., i., 246a and 247b, 2. [691] there were 141 _mansiones_, t. r. e., "et modo totidem sunt præter 5 quæ propter operationem castelli sunt wastæ." from a passage in the _domesday of nottingham_ it would seem that a _mansio_ was a group of houses. [692] _gervase of canterbury_, i., 156, r. s. [693] peck's _antiquarian annals of stamford_; he gives the charter, p. 17. [694] cited in nevinson's "notes on the history of stamford," _journ. brit. arch. ass._, xxxv. [695] "t. r. e. dabat stanford 15_l._; modo dat ad firmam 50_l._ de omni consuetudine regis modo dat 28_l._" [696] "ibi habet helgot castellum, et 2 carucas in dominio, et 4 servos, et 3 villanos, et 3 bordarios, et 1 francigenam cum 3-1/2 carucis. ibi ecclesia et presbyter. t. r. e. valebat 18 solidos; modo 25 solidos. wastam invenit." d. b., i., 258b. there are some fragments of norman work in the church, which is chiefly early english, doubtless of the same date as the mural tower of the castle. [697] stapleton's introduction to _rot. scac. normanniæ_, vol. ii. [698] it used to be supposed that herring-bone work was a saxon sign, and this furnished an additional claim to the saxon origin of this castle; but it is now known that herring-bone work only occurs in the later saxon work, and is far more common in norman. see _note_, p. 136. [699] see _ante_, p. 34. [700] ordericus, xi., ch. iii. [701] there are three entries for the works of the _turris_ at tickhill in the _pipe rolls_ of 1178 and 1179, amounting to £123, 12s. 5d. [702] _pipe roll_, 31 henry i., 33, 36. expenses for work at the wall of the castle are mentioned. ordericus says that robert belesme fortified the castle of blythe at the time of his rebellion in 1101, but he also says that it had belonged to roger de busli. _hist. ecc._, iv., 33; xi., 3. [703] vicar's _parliamentary chronicle_, quoted by hunter, _south yorks_, ii., 235. [704] d. b., i., 319a. [705] _a.-s. c._ in _anno_. [706] d. b., i., 76. [707] _m. a._, iv., 630. [708] leland is responsible for this last statement. [709] d. b., i., 108b. [710] "egressus lundoniæ rex _dies aliquot_ in propinquo loco bercingio morabatur, dum firmamenta quædam in urbe contra mobilitatem ingentis et feri populi perficerentur." p. 165. ordericus is quoting from william of poitiers. there was formerly a roman camp at barking, and the motte which william hastily threw up on its rampart to defend his sojourn still remains. see _victoria history of essex_. [711] mr harold sands suggests to me that the first fortification may simply have been a bank and palisade across the angle of the roman wall, with perhaps a wooden keep, and that the great fire in london in 1077 determined william to build a stone keep. [712] hearne's _textus roffensis_, 212. "idem gundulfus, ex precepto regis willielmi magni, præesset operi magnæ turris londoniæ." [713] the building of stone keeps was generally spread over several years, as we learn from the _pipe rolls_. richard i. built his celebrated keep of chateau gaillard in one year, but he himself regarded this as an architectural feat. "estne bella, filia mea de uno anno," he said in delight. [714] _a.-s. c._ in _anno_. [715] round's _history of colchester_, ch. iv. [716] the keep of norwich castle measures 100 × 95 feet; middleham, 100 × 80; dover, 95 × 90. these are the largest existing keeps in england, next to the tower and colchester. the destroyed keep of duffield measured 99 × 93 feet; that of bristol is believed to have been 110 × 95. [717] the reader will find little help for the structural history of the tower in most of the works which call themselves histories of the tower of london. the plan of these works generally is to skim over the structural history as quickly as possible, perhaps with the help of a few passages from clark, and to get on to the history of the prisoners in the tower. for the description in the text, the writer is greatly indebted to mr harold sands, f.s.a., who has made a careful study of the tower, and whose monograph upon it, it is hoped, will shortly appear. [718] _ante_, p. 89. [719] many of the larger keeps contain rooms quite spacious enough to have served as banqueting halls, and it is a point of some difficulty whether they were built to be used as such. but as late as the 14th century, piers ploughman rebukes the new custom which was growing up of the noble and his family taking their meals in private, and leaving the hall to their retainers. every castle seems to have had a hall in the bailey. [720] mr sands says the main floors are not of too great a span to carry any ordinary weight. [721] the keep of pevensey castle, the basement of which has been recently uncovered, has no less than four apsidal projections, one of which rests on the solid base of a roman mural tower. but this keep is quite an exceptional building. see _excavations at pevensey_, second report, by h. sands. [722] mr sands has conjectured that the third floor may be an addition, and that the second storey was originally open up to the roof and not communicating with the mural passage except by stairs. this was actually the case at bamborough keep, and at newcastle and rochester the mural gallery opens into the upper part of the second storey by inner windows. [723] until the end of the 12th century the roofs of keeps were gabled and not flat, but probably there was usually a parapet walk for sentinels or archers. [724] parts of these walls, running n. and s. have been found very near the e. side of the tower. no trace of the roman wall has been found s. of the tower, but in lower thames street lines have been found which, if produced, would lead straight to the s. wall of the inner bailey. communicated by mr harold sands. [725] i have to thank mr harold sands for kindly revising this account of the tower. [726] "ibi habet comes unum castrum et mercatum, reddentes 101s." d. b., i., 122. [727] it must be remembered that round arches, in castle architecture, are by no means a certain sign of date. of course the first castle on this motte must have been of wood. [728] _ord. vit._, ii., 222 (prévost). [729] "henricus de ferrers habet castellum de toteberie. in burgo circa castellum sunt 42 homines de mercato suo tantum viventes." d. b., i., 248b. [730] shaw's _history of staffordshire_, i., 49. [731] quoted in _beauties of england and wales_, staffordshire, p. 1129. [732] _diceto_, i., 384. the castle was then besieged on henry's behalf by the vassal prince of south wales, the lord rhys. [733] the foundation charter is in _mon. ang._, iii., 393. [734] _a.-s. c._ [735] william of poitiers calls it an _oppidum_, p. 141. [736] hedges, _history of wallingford_. [737] "the towne of portsmuth is murid from the est tower a forowgh lenght with a mudde waulle armid with tymbre." _itin._, iii., 113. [738] "in burgo de walingeford habuit rex edwardus 8 virgatas terræ; et in his erant 276 hagæ reddentes 11 libras de gablo.... pro castello sunt 8 destructæ." d. b., i., 56. if we divide these 276 _haughs_ by the 114 acres enclosed by the town rampart, we get an average of about 1 rood 26 perches for each haugh; multiply this by 8 (the number destroyed for the castle) and we get an area of 3 acres, which is about the average area of an early norman castle. [739] hedges, _history of wallingford_, i., 139. [740] camden speaks of the motte as being in the middle of the castle, but this is a mistake. [741] such is the account in hedges' _history of wallingford_, p. 139, but it sounds odd. it is to be inferred from the same source that the fragment of a round building which stands on the top of the motte must be modern; it is thick enough to be ancient. [742] _close rolls_, i., anno 1223. [743] d. b., i., 56. [744] "abbas de couentreu habet 36 masuras, et 4 sunt wastæ propter situm castelli." d. b., i., 238a. [745] "hæ masuræ pertinent ad terras quas ipsi barones tenent extra burgum, et ibi appreciatæ sunt." d. b., i., 238. [746] maitland, _domesday book and beyond_, p. 189. [747] ordericus, p. 184. "rex _itaque_ castellum apud guarevicum condidit, et henrico rogerii de bello monte filio ad servandum tradidit." mr freeman remarks that no authentic records connect thurkil of warwick with warwick castle. _n. c._, iv., 781. [748] _n. c._, iv., 190. [749] in operatione unius domus in mota de warwick et unius bretaschie 5_l._ 7_s._ 11_d._ _pipe rolls_, 20 henry ii. as _domus_ is a word very commonly used for a keep, it is probable this expenditure refers to a wooden keep. [750] from information received from mr harold sands. there appears to be no foundation whatever for the curious ground plan given by parker. [751] see _ante_, p. 42. [752] "willelmus comes fecit illud castellum in wasta terra quæ vocatur mereston." d. b., i., 183. [753] _mon. ang._, vi., 349. [754] this keep rests on a broad extension of the earthen rampart, similar to what is still to be seen in the mottes of devizes, burton-in-lonsdale, and william hill, middleham. [755] ordericus says: "intra moenia guentæ, opibus et munimine nobilis urbis et mari contiguæ, validam arcem construxit, ibique willelmum osberni filium in exercitu suo precipuum reliquit." ii., 166. the _intra moenia_ is not to be taken literally, any more than the _mari contiguæ_. it is strange that mr freeman should have mistaken guenta for norwich, since under 1067 ordericus translates the winchester of the a.-s. c. by guenta. [756] "de isto manerio testatur comitatus quod injuste accepit [abbas] pro excambio domus regis, quia domus erat regis." d. b., i., 43a, 1. [757] _ibid._, i., 43a, 2. [758] "sicut rex willielmus pater meus ei dedit in excambium pro terra illa in qua ædificavit aulam suam in urbe winton." _mon. ang._, ii., 444. [759] "pars erat in dominio et pars de dominio abbatis; hoc totum est post occupatum in domo regis." p. 534. this passage throws light on the fraud of the abbot of hyde, referred to above. [760] "extra portam de vuest ... ibi juxta fuit quidam vicus; fuit diffactus quando rex fecit facere suum fossatum." p. 535. [761] _arch. inst._, winchester volume, p. 51. [762] it should also be said that the word _domus_ is frequently used for a keep in chronicles and ancient documents of the 11th and 12th centuries. [763] the line of the more ancient roof gable can be traced in the north wall, and there is a vestige of a norman doorway in the east wall. [764] _history of winchester_, ii., 210. [765] henry of blois, bishop of winchester and brother of king stephen, pulled down the royal palace close to the cathedral, which presumably was the old saxon palace, and used the materials to build wolvesey castle. see malmesbury, "de vitis sex episcoporum," _anglia sacra_, ii., 421. he could hardly have dared to do this if the palace had still been used by the norman kings. [766] _history of winchester_, ii., 210. see fig. 37. [767] _ibid._, p. 195. it is difficult, now that the area has been levelled, to say exactly where this motte stood. woodward says that the keep stood in the n.e. corner; but he probably alludes to a mural tower whose foundations can still be seen, near the county hall. _history of hampshire_, i., 295-304. [768] turner, _history of domestic architecture_. he cites from the _liberate roll_, 35 henry ii., an order for the repair of the ditch between the great tower and the bailey. [769] "radulfus filius seifrid tenet de rege clivor. heraldus comes tenuit. tunc se defendebat pro 5 hidis, modo pro 4-1/2 hidis, et castellum de windesores est in dimidia hida." d. b., i., 62b. the _abingdon history_ also mentions the foundation of windsor castle and gives some interesting details about castle guard. "tunc walingaforde et oxenforde et wildesore, cæterisque locis, castella pro regno servando compacta. unde huic abbatiæ militum excubias apud ipsum wildesore oppidum habendas regis imperio jussum." ii., 3, r. s. [770] _leland_, iv., 1, 37. see also tighe's _annals of windsor_, pp. 1-6. until recently there was a farmhouse surrounded by a moat at old windsor, which was _believed_ to mark the site of edward's _regia domus_. [771] edward's grant of windsor to westminster is in _cod. dip._, iv., 227. domesday does not mention the rights of the church, but says the manor of windsor was held of the crown t. r. e. and t. r. w. camden gives william's charter of exchange with the convent of westminster. _britannia_, i., 151. [772] this is stated in the charter given by camden. [773] in 1 virgata terræ quam willelmus fil. walteri habet in escambio pro terra sua quæ capta est ad burgum. p. 721. [774] the _red book of the exchequer_, which contains an abstract of the missing _pipe roll_ of 1 henry ii., has an entry of 12_s._ paid to richard de clifwar for the exchange of his land, and regular payments are made later. there was another enlargement of the bailey in henry iii.'s reign, but the second bailey was then existing. see _close rolls_, i., 531b. [775] "in operatione muri circa castellum 11_l._ 10_s._ 4_d._ summa denariorum quos idem ricardus [de luci] misit in operatione predicta de ballia 128_l._ 9_s._" _pipe roll_, 20 henry ii., p. 116. [776] tighe's _annals of windsor_, p. 21. [777] there is a singular entry in the _pipe roll_ of 7 richard i., "pro fossato prosternando quod fuit inter motam et domos regis," clearly the ditch between the motte and the bailey. mr hope informs me that this can only refer to the northern part of the ditch, as the eastern portion was only filled up in 1824. mr hope thinks that the castle area has always included the lower bailey. i regret that mr hope's history of windsor castle did not appear in time to be used in this work. [778] _foedera_, vol. i. [779] _pipe rolls_, 30 henry ii. [780] d. b., i., 62b, 2; 56b, 2. [781] roger of wendover, in _anno_. [782] walter and cradock's _history of wisbeach_, pp. 270-278. [783] morris' _troubles of our catholic forefathers_, p. 223. this keep was one built by bishop morton in 1471. [784] birch's _cartularium_, ii., 222. [785] ursus erat vicecomes wigorniæ a rege constitutus, qui in ipsis poene faucis monachorum castellum construxit, adeo ut fossatum coemiterii partem decideret. _gesta pontif._, p. 253. [786] "castrum wigorniæ nobis redditum est, tanquam jus noster, usquam motam turris." _annales de wigornia_, r. s., p. 407. "rex johanni marescallo salutem: mandamus vobis quod sine dilatione faciatis habere venerabili patri nostro domino wigorniensi episcopo ballium castri nostri wigorniæ, quod est jus ecclesiæ suæ; retenta ad opus nostrum mota ejusdem castri." _patent rolls_, 1 henry iii., p. 46. [787] _annales de wigornia_, p. 375. [788] "in reparatione turris wigorniæ 8_l._" _red book of exchequer_, ii., 656. [789] "precipimus tibi quod per visum liberorum et legalium hominum facias parari portam castri wigorniæ, quæ nunc est lignea, lapideam, et bonam et pulchram." _rot. de liberate_, p. 93, 1204. [790] green's _history of worcester_, i., 19. [791] allies' _antiquities of worcestershire_, p. 15. his words strictly apply to "the lofty mound called the keep, with its ditches, etc.," but probably the whole area was not more than 4 acres. [792] see the documents cited by mr round in his _geoffrey de mandeville_, appendix o, and the _pipe rolls_ of 1173. "in reparatione mote et gaiole de wirecestra, £35, 13s. 8d." [793] _gentleman's magazine_, i., 36, 1834. see haverfield, "romano-british worcester," _victoria county history of worcestershire_, vol. i. [794] d. b., i., 172. [795] it is needless to remark that _baile_ is the norman word for an enclosure or courtyard; low latin _ballia_; sometimes believed to be derived from _baculus_, a stick. [796] ordericus, ii., 188 (edition prévost). [797] _norman conquest_, iv., 270. mr freeman has worked out the course of events connected with the building and destruction of the castles with his usual lucidity. but he never grasped the real significance of mottes, though he emphatically maintained that the native english did not build castles. [798] "ethelstanus castrum quod olim dani in eboraco obfirmaverant ad solum diruit, ne esset quo se tutari perfidia posset." _gesta regum_, ii., 134. [799] widdrington, _analecta eboracensia_, p. 120. it was this suburb which alan, earl of richmond gave to the abbey of st mary at york, which he had founded. "ecclesiam sancti olavii in quâ capud abbatiæ in honorem sanctæ mariæ melius constitutum est, et _burgum in quo ecclesia sita est_." _mon. ang._, iii., 547. for the addition of new boroughs to old ones see _ante_, p. 174, under norwich. although athelstan destroyed the fortifications of this borough, they were evidently renewed when the danish earls took up their residence there, for when earl alan persuaded the monks from whitby to settle there one inducement which he offered was the fortification of the site, "loci munitionem." _mon. ang._, iii., 545. [800] in eboraco civitate t. r. e. præter scyram archiepiscopi fuerunt 6 scyræ; una ex his est wasta in castellis. d. b., i., 298. [801] _notes on clifford's tower_, by george benson and h. platnauer, published by the york philosophical society. [802] "thone castel tobræcon and towurpan." _a.-s. c._ see freeman, _n. c._, iv., 270. [803] "in operatione turris de euerwick, 15_l._ 7_s._ 3_d._" _pipe roll_, 19 henry ii., vol. xix., 2. we assume that william's second keep lasted till henry ii.'s reign. [804] _benedict of peterborough_, ii., 107. [805] "in operatione castri 28_l._ 13_s._ 9_d._" _pipe roll_, 3 richard i. under the year 1193, after relating the tragedy of the jews at york castle, hoveden says: "deinde idem cancellarius [william de longchamp] tradidit osberto de lunchamp, fratri suo, comitatum eboracensem in custodia, et precepit firmari castellum in veteri castellario quod rex willelmus rufus ibi construxerat." iii., 34, r. s. the expression _vetus castellarium_ would lead us to think of the old baile, which certainly had this name from an early period; and hoveden, being a yorkshireman as well as a very accurate writer, was probably aware of the difference between the two castles. but if he meant the old baile, then both the castles were restored at about the same time. "rufus" must be a slip, unless there was some rebuilding in rufus' reign of which we do not know. [806] messrs benson and platnauer are of the former opinion. "the existence of a second layer of timber seems to show that the fortification destroyed was rebuilt in wood." _notes on clifford's tower_, p. 2. [807] "pro mairemio castri ebor. prostrato per ventum colligendo, 2_s._" _pipe roll_, 19 henry iii. it is, of course, a conjecture that this accident happened to the keep; but the keep would be the part most exposed to the wind, and the _scattering_ of the timber, so that it had to be collected, is just what would happen if a timber structure were blown off a motte. [808] as the writer was the first to publish this statement, it will be well to give the evidence on which it rests. the keep of york is clearly early english in style, and of an early phase of the style. it is, however, evident to every one who has carefully compared our dated keeps, that castle architecture always lags behind church architecture in style-development, and must be judged by different standards. we should therefore be prepared to find this and most other keeps to be of later date than their architecture would suggest. moreover, the expenditure entered to york castle in the reigns of henry ii., richard i., and john, is quite insufficient to cover the cost of a stone keep. the _pipe rolls_ of henry iii.'s reign decide the matter, as they show the sums which he expended annually on this castle. it is true they never mention the _turris_, but always the _castrum_; we must also admit that the _turris_ and _castrum_ are often distinguished in the writs, even as late as edward iii.'s reign. (_close rolls_, 1334.) on the other hand extensive acquaintance with the _pipe rolls_ proves that though the mediæval scribe may have an occasional fit of accuracy, he is generally very loose in his use of words, and his distinctions must never be pressed. take, for instance, the case of orford, where the word used in the _pipe rolls_ is always _castellum_, but it certainly refers to the keep, as there are no other buildings at orford. other instances might be given in which the word _castellum_ clearly applies to the keep. it should be mentioned that in 1204 john gave an order for stone for the castle (_close rolls_, i., 4b), but the amounts on the bill for it in the _pipe rolls_ show that it was not used for any extensive building operations. [809] "mandatum est galterio de cumpton forestario de gauteris quod ad pontem et domos castri eboraci et breccas palicii ejusdem castri reparandos et emendandos vicecomitem eboraci mæremium habere faciat in foresta de gauteris per visum, etc." _close rolls_, ii., 61b. [810] order to expend up to 6 marks in repairing the wooden peel about the keep of york castle, which peel is now fallen down. _cal. of close rolls,_ 17 edward ii., 25. [811] _cal. of close rolls_, 1313-1318, 262. _mota_ is wrongly translated _moat_. [812] see mr cooper's _york: the story of its walls and castles_. during messrs benson and platnauer's excavations, a prehistoric crouching burial was found in the ground below the motte, 4 feet 6 inches under the present level. this raises the question whether william utilised an existing prehistoric barrow for the nucleus of his motte. [813] d. b., i., 298a. [814] _york: the story of its walls and castles_, by t. p. cooper, p. 222. [815] see the passage from hoveden already quoted, _ante_, p. 245. [816] drake's _eboracum_, app. xliv. [817] see mr cooper's _york: the story of its walls and castles_, which contains a mass of new material from documentary sources, and sheds quite unexpected light on the history of the york fortifications. i am indebted to mr cooper's courtesy for some of the extracts cited above relating to york castle. [818] cooper's _york_, chapters ii. and iv. 100_l_. was spent by the sheriff in fortifying the walls of york in the sixth year of henry iii. after this there are repeated grants for murage in the same and the following reign. there are some early english buttresses in the walls, but the majority are later. no part of the walls contains norman work. [819] the details of this evidence, which consist mainly in (1) a structural difference in the extended rampart; (2) a subsidence in the ground marking the old line of the city ditch, will be found in mr cooper's work, p. 224. [820] "locum in eboraco qui dicitur vetus ballium, primo spissis et longis 18 pedum tabulis, secundo lapideo muro fortiter includebat." t. stubbs, in raine's _historians of the church of york_, ii., 417, r. s. [821] "the plotte of this castelle is now caullid the olde baile, and the area and diches of it do manifestley appere." _itin._, i., 60. [822] see the plan in mr cooper's _york_, p. 217. [823] "in the wales of the laws, the social system is tribal." owen edwards, _wales_, p. 39. [824] vinogradoff, _growth of the manor_, pp. 15-16. [825] pennant's _tour in wales_, rhys' edition, ii., 234. [826] _ancient laws and institutes of wales_, pp. 238, 94. the ms. of the _leges wallicæ_ is not earlier than the 13th century. the other editions of the laws are even later. see wade evans, _welsh mediæval law_, for the most recent criticism of the laws of howel dda. [827] the _leges wallicæ_ say: "villani regis debent facere novem domos ad opus regis; scilicet, aulam, cameram, coquinam, penu (capellam), stabulum, kynorty (stabulum canum), horreum, odyn (siccarium) et latrinam." p. 791. [828] the word din or dinas, so often used for a fort in wales, is cognate with the german _zaun_, anglo-saxon _tun_, and means a fenced place. neither it nor the irish form dun have any connection with the anglo-saxon _dun_, a hill. see j. e. lloyd, _welsh place-names_, "y cymmrodor," xi., 24. [829] it is doubtful whether deheubarth ever included the small independent states of gwent, brecknock, and glamorgan. [830] "wales and the coming of the normans," _cymmrodorion trans._, 1899. [831] there is an earthwork near portskewet, a semicircular cliff camp with three ramparts and two ditches. it is scarcely likely that this can be harold's work, as roman bricks are said to have been found there. willet's _monmouthshire_, p. 244. athelstan had made the wye the frontier of wales. _malmesbury_, ii., 134. [832] see _a.-s. c._, anno 1097, and compare the entry for 1096 with the account in the _brut_ for 1093, which shows that the norman castles had been restored, after being for the most part demolished by the welsh. [833] the _brut y tywysogion_, or _story of the princes_, exists in no ms. older than the 14th century. it and the _annales cambriæ_ have been disgracefully edited for the _rolls_ series, and the topographical student will find no help from these editions. see mr phillimore's criticism of them, in _y cymmrodor,_ vol. xi. the aberpergwm ms. of the _brut_, known also as the _gwentian chronicle_, has been printed in the _archæologia cambrensis_ for 1864; it contains a great deal of additional information, but as mr phillimore observes, so much of it is forgery that none of it can be trusted when unsupported. [834] the barbarity on both sides was frightful, but in the case of the welsh, it was often their own countrymen, and even near relations, who were the victims. and so little patriotism existed then in wales that the normans could always find allies amongst some of the welsh chieftains. patriotism, however, is a virtue of more recent growth than the 11th century. [835] there is, however, no contemporary evidence for the existence of the marcher lordships before the end of the 12th century. see duckett "on the marches of wales," _arch. camb._, 1881. [836] the districts of cyfeiliog and arwystli, in the centre of wales, were also reckoned in gwynedd. [837] "wales and the coming of the normans," _cymmrodorion trans._, 1899. [838] in the descriptions of castles in this chapter, those which have not been specially visited for this work are marked with an asterisk. those which have been visited by others than the writer are marked with initials: d. h. m. being mr d. h. montgomerie, f.s.a.; b. t. s., mr basil t. stallybrass; and h. w., the rev. herbert white, m.a. this plan will be followed in the three succeeding chapters. [839] "hugo comes tenet de rege roelent (rhuddlan). ibi t. r. e. jacebat englefield, et tota erat wasta. edwinus comes tenebat. quando hugo comes recipit similiter erat wasta. modo habet in dominio medietatem castelli quod roelent vocatur, et caput est hujus terræ.... robertus de roelent tenet de hugone comite medietatem ejusdem castelli et burgi, in quo habet ipse robertus 10 burgenses et medietatem ecclesiæ. ibi est novus burgus et in eo 10 burgenses.... in ipso manerio est factum noviter castellum similiter roeland appellatum." d. b., i., 269a, 1. [840] ayloffe's _rotuli walliæ_, p. 75. "de providendo indempnitati magistri ricardi bernard, personæ ecclesiæ de rothelan', in recompensionem terræ suæ occupatæ ad placeam castri de rothelan' elargandam." [841] tut or toot hill means "look-out" hill; the name is not unfrequently given to abandoned mottes. the word is still used locally. _cf._ christison, _early fortifications in scotland_, p. 16. [842] such presentations of abandoned castle sites, and of old wooden castles, to the church, were not uncommon. we have seen how the site of montacute castle was given to the cluniac monks (_ante_, p. 170). thicket priory, in yorkshire, occupied the site of the castle of wheldrake; and william de albini gave the site and materials of the old castle of buckenham, in norfolk, to the new castle which he founded there. the materials, but not the site, of the wooden castle of montferrand were given in stephen's reign to meaux abbey, and served to build some of the monastic offices. _chron. de melsa_, i., 106. [843] "fines suos dilatavit, et in monte dagannoth, qui mari contiguus est, fortissimum castellum condidit." _ordericus_, iii., 284 (edition prévost). the verb _condere_ is never used except for a new foundation. [844] the _brut_ says that in the year 823 the saxons destroyed the _castle_ of deganwy. this is one of the only two instances in which the word _castell_ is used in this welsh chronicle before the coming of the normans. as the ms. is not earlier than the 14th century it would be idle to claim this as a proof of the existence of a castle at this period. _castell_, in welsh, is believed to have come straight from the latin, and was applied to any kind of fortress. lloyd, _welsh place-names_, "y cymmrodor," xi., 28. [845] the "new castle of aberconwy" mentioned by the _brut_ in 1211, undoubtedly means this new stone castle built by the earl at deganwy, as the castle of conway did not then exist. [846] see pennant, ii., 151; and _arch. camb._, 1891, p. 321. [847] _brut of tywysogion_, 1145. [848] published with a latin translation in _arch. camb._, 1866. "he built castles in various places, after the manner of the french, in order that he might better hold the country." [849] the _brut_ also mentions the castle of aberlleinog, and says it was built in 1096; _rebuilt_ would have been more correct, as the "life of griffith ap cynan" shows that it was built by the earl of chester, and burnt by griffith, before the expedition of 1096 (really 1098), when hugh, earl of shrewsbury, met with his death on the shore near this castle, from an arrow shot by king magnus barefoot, who came to the help of the welsh. [850] mr hartshorne in his paper on carnarvon castle (_arch. journ._, vii.) cites a document stating that a wall 18 perches long had been begun _round the moat_ [possibly _motam_; original not given]. he also cites from the _pipe rolls_ an item for wages to _carriers of earth dug out of the castle_. [851] this ruined wall runs in a straight line through the wood on the ridge to the east of the town; at one place it turns at right angles; at the back of the golf pavilion is a portion still erect, showing that it was a dry built wall of very ordinary character. [852] roman masonry has been exposed in the bank of the station. [853] _life of griffith ap cynan_; brut, 1111. [854] _arch. camb._, iv., series 296 and 911. [855] the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ dates this expedition in 1114, and says that henry caused castles to be built in wales. the _brut_ mentions the large tribute, 1111. [856] _brut_, 1149. madoc ap meredith, with the assistance of ranulf, earl of chester, prepared to rise against owen gwynedd, son of griffith ap cynan. [857] d. b., i., 255a. professor lloyd says, "maelor saesneg, cydewain, ceri, and arwystli came under norman authority, and paid renders of money or kine in token of subjection." "wales and the coming of the normans," _cymmrodor. trans._, 1899. [858] _ibid._ [859] see page 130. [860] _brut_, under 1107. the castle is called dingeraint by this chronicler. [861] "ipse comes construxit castrum muntgumeri vocatum." d. b., i., 254. [862] _montgomery collections_, x., 56. [863] _close rolls_, i., 558b. [864] "firmiter precipimus omnibus illis qui motas habent in valle de muntgumeri quod sine dilatione motas suas bonis bretaschiis firmari faciant ad securitatem et defensionem suam et partium illarum." _close rolls_, ii., 42. [865] mr davies pryce has suggested that the hen domen, a very perfect motte and bailey within a mile of the present castle of montgomery was the original castle of montgomery, and that the one built by henry iii. was on a new site. this of course is quite possible, but i do not see that there is sufficient evidence for it. see _eng. hist. rev._, xx., 709. [866] _brut y tywysogion._ [867] _itin._, vii., 16. [868] _pipe rolls_, 1158-1164. it should be noted that the _brut_ does not claim the battle of crogen as a welsh victory. [869] lyttleton's _history of henry ii._ [870] pennant thought he saw vestiges of a castle "in the foundations of a wall opposite the ruins" [of the abbey]; but his accuracy is not unimpeachable. [871] _pipe rolls_, 1211-1213. "for the money expended in rescuing the castles of haliwell and madrael, £100." [872] _itin._, p. 67. toulmin smith's edition of welsh portion. [873] d. b., i., 255a. [874] life of griffith. [875] _pipe roll_, 1159-1160. £4, 3s. 4d. paid to roger de powys "ad custodiam castelli de dernio"; "in munitione turris de dermant £6, 4s. 0d." it cannot be doubted that these two names mean the same place. [876] _arch. camb._, iv., 1887. [877] at the time of the survey the manor of gresford (gretford) was divided between hugh, osbern, and rainald. osbern had 6-1/2 hides and a mill grinding the corn of _his court_ (curiæ suæ). this probably is a reference to this castle. d. b., i., 268. it was waste t. r. e. but is now worth £3, 5s. 0d. [878] "on the town of holt," by a. n. palmer, _arch. camb._, 1907. [879] _beauties of england and wales, north wales_, p. 589. i am glad to find that mr palmer, in the new edition of his _ancient tenures of land in the marches of wales_, confirms the identifications which i have made of these two last castles, pp. 108, 116, 118. [880] _arch. camb._, 5th ser., iv., 352. camden's statement that this castle was founded in edward i.'s reign shows that he was unacquainted with the _pipe rolls_. [881] _pipe rolls_, 1164-1165, and 1167-1168. [882] _pipe rolls_, 1212-1213. [883] "sur l'ewe de keyroc," _history of fulk fitz warine_, edited by t. wright for warton club. [884] _victoria county history of lancashire_, i., 369. [885] _england under the normans and angevins._ [886] "ad recutienda castella de haliwell et madrael £100." _pipe rolls_, 1212-1213. [887] wade evans, _welsh mediæval law_, vol. xii. [888] it has in fact every appearance of a roman camp. [889] _brut_, 1211. [890] the castle of hawarden, which is only about 2-1/4 miles from that of euloe, is not mentioned in any records before 1215; but it is believed to have been a castle of the norman lords of mold. it also is on a motte. [891] i am indebted for this identification to the kindness of mr a. n. palmer of wrexham. [892] d. b., i., 254. the manor is called gal. it had been waste t. r. e., but was now worth 40s. [893] _pipe roll_ (unpublished), 1212-1213. [894] whereas there is no rock in the ditch of the neighbouring motte of tomen y rhodwydd. pennant (and others following him) most inaccurately describe tomen y rhodwydd as _two_ artificial mounts, whereas there is only one, with the usual embanked court. see appendix k. [895] "the maer dref [which vardra represents] may be described as the home farm of the chieftain." rhys and brynmor jones, _the welsh people_, p. 401. [896] ordericus, ii., 218, 219 (edition prévost). [897] _brut y tywysogion_, 1091. [898] _brut_, 1071. "the french ravage ceredigion (cardigan) and dyfed"; 1072, "the french devastated ceredigion a second time." [899] _a.-s. c._, 1081. "this year the king led an army into wales, and there he set free many hundred persons"--doubtless, as mr freeman remarks, captives taken previously by the welsh. the _brut_ treats this expedition as merely a pilgrimage to st david's! [900] "then the french came into dyfed and ceredigion, _which they have still retained_, and fortified the castles, and seized upon all the land of the britons." _brut_, 1091 = 1093. [901] powell's _history of wales_ professes to be founded on that of caradoc, a welsh monk of the 12th century; but it is impossible to say how much of it is caradoc, and how much powell, or wynne, his augmentor. [902] _brut_, 1107. [903] "in the brut, ystrad towy does not only mean the vale of towy, but a very large district, embracing most of carmarthenshire and part of glamorganshire." _welsh historical documents_, by egerton phillimore, in _cymmrodor_, vol. xi. [904] _brut_, 1092. [905] lloyd, "wales and the coming of the normans," _cymmrodor. trans._, 1899: refers to marchegay, _chartes du prieurie de monmouth_. [906] _brut_, 1143. [907] the date given is 1080, but as the dates in the brut at this period are uniformly two years too early, we alter them accordingly throughout this chapter. [908] now more often called the aberpergwm brut, from the place where the ms. is preserved. [909] see freeman, _norman conquest_, v., 820; william rufus, ii., 79; and prof. tout, in y cymmerodor, ix., 208. for this reason we do not use the list of castles given in this chronicle, but confine ourselves to those mentioned in the more trustworthy _brut y tywysogion_. [910] the same ms. says, under the year 1099, "harry beaumont came to gower, against the sons of caradog ap jestin, and won many of their lands, and built the castle of abertawy (swansea) and the castle of aberllychor (loughor), and the castle of llanrhidian (weobley), and the castle of penrhys (penrice), and established himself there, and brought saxons from somerset there, where they obtained lands; and the greatest usurpation of all the frenchmen was his in gower." [911] "primus hoc castrum arnulphus de mongumeri sub anglorum rege henrico primo ex virgis et cespite, tenue satis et exile construxit." _itin. cambriæ_, r. s., 89. [912] quoted from duchesne in _mon. ang._, vol. vi. [913] see mr cobbe's paper on pembroke castle in _arch. camb._, 1883, where reasons are given for thinking that the present ward was originally, and even up to 1300, the whole castle. [914] a motte-castle of earth and wood was certainly not regarded as "a weak and slender defence" in the time of giraldus. [915] _brut y tywysogion_, 1095. [916] bridgeman's _hist. of south wales_, 17. [917] _arch. camb._, 3rd ser., v., a paper on newport castle, in which the writer says that there are _two_ mottes at llanhyfer, the larger one ditched round. the ordnance map only shows one. [918] _brut y tywysogion_, 1146. [919] _patent rolls of henry iii._, 255; _foedera_, i., 161. [920] _brut y tywysogion_, 1192. [921] bridgeman says that narberth was given to stephen perrot by arnulf de montgomeri, but gives no authority for this statement. [922] _brut_, 1171. [923] _ibid._, 1107. "earl gilbert built a castle at dingeraint, where earl roger had before founded a castle." [924] the castle of aberrheiddiol is probably the name of the present castle of aberystwyth when it was first built, as lewis morris says that the river rheiddiol formerly entered the sea near that point. quoted by meyrick, _history of cardigan_, p. 488. [925] _brut_, 1107. [926] _brut_, 1113. [927] _ibid._, 1135. [928] _ibid._, 1135, 1157, 1199, 1203, 1207. [929] meyrick's _hist. of cardigan_, p. 293. dinerth is not the same as llanrhystyd, though lewis (_top. dict. wales_) says it is; the two places have separate mention in _brut_, 1157. mr clark mentions the motte. _m. m. a._, i., 115. [930] _brut_, 1135. [931] meyrick's _hist. of cardigan_, p. 232. [932] _brut_, 1157. [933] _beauties of england and wales_, cardigan, p. 502. [934] _brut_, under 1113. [935] in the _rolls_ edition of the _brut_ this castle is called llanstephan, but the context makes it probable that lampeter is meant; the _annales cambriæ_ say "the castle of stephen." [936] _beauties of england and wales_, p. 492. [937] _brut_, 1216. [938] _arch. journ._, xxviii., 293. [939] _brut_, 1094. [940] _desc. camb._, i., 10. [941] _brut_, 1094. [942] _ibid._, p. 110. there is a farmhouse called rhyd y gors about a mile lower down than carmarthen, and on the opposite side are some embankments; but i am assured by mr spurrell of carmarthen that these are only river-embankments. rhyd y gors means the ford of the bog; there is no ford at this spot, but there was one at carmarthen. [943] see _arch. camb._, 1907, pp. 237-8. [944] see round's _ancient charters_, p. 9, _pipe roll_ series, vol. x. [945] _brut_, 1113. [946] the first mention of the castle of llanstephan is in the _brut_, 1147, if, as has been assumed above, the mention in 1136 refers to stephen's castle at lampeter, as the _annales cambriæ_ say. [947] the motte of conisburgh in yorkshire is a very similar case known to the writer; it measures 280 × 150 feet. such very large mottes could rarely be artificial, but were formed by entrenching and scarping a natural hill. [948] _brut_, 1256. see _arch. camb._, 1907, p. 214, for col. morgan's remarks on this castle. [949] the name _gueith tineuur_ is found in the _book of llandaff_, p. 78 (life of st dubricius), but it seems doubtful whether this should be taken to prove the existence of some "work" at dinevor in the 6th century. see wade-evans, _welsh mediæval law_, p. 337-8. [950] _brut_, 1145. "cadell ap griffith took the castle of dinweiler, which had been erected by earl gilbert." [951] _gwentian chronicle._ [952] the statement of donovan (_excursions through south wales_), that the castle stands on an artificial mount is quite incorrect. [953] the _rolls_ edition of the _brut_ gives the corrupt reading aber cavwy for the castle of "robert the crook-handed," but a variant ms. gives aber korram, and it is clear from the _gwentian chronicle_ and powell (p. 145) that abercorran is meant. [954] _brut_, 1152. [955] see paper by mr d. c. evans, _arch. camb._, 1907, p. 224. [956] the first mention known to the writer is in 1285. [957] _arch. camb._, 3rd ser., v., 346. [958] _annales cambriæ_, 1205; _brut_, 1207, 1208. the _annales_ call it the castle of luchewein. [959] _beauties of england and wales_, "caermarthen," pp. 192, 309. [960] _mon. ang._, iii., 244. [961] this motte is mentioned in a charter of roger, earl of hereford, bernard's grandson, in which he confirms to the monks of st john "molendinum meum situm super hodeni sub pede mote castelli." _arch. camb._, 1883, p. 144. [962] the dates in the _brut_ are now one year too early. under 1209 it says, "gelart seneschal of gloucester fortified (cadarnhaaod) the castle of builth." we can never be certain whether the word which is translated _fortified_, whether from the welsh or from the latin _firmare_, means built originally or rebuilt. [963] _beauties of england and wales_, "brecknockshire," p. 153. [964] _brut_, in _anno_. the mortimers were the heirs of the de braoses and the neufmarchés. [965] _annales cambriæ_, 1260. this may, however, be merely a figure of speech. [966] order to cause roger mortimer, so soon as the castle of built shall be closed with a wall, whereby it will be necessary to remove the bretasches, to have the best bretasche of the king's gift. _cal. of close rolls_, ed. i., i., 527. [967] see clark, _m. m. a._, i., 307. [968] round, _ancient charters_, no. 6. [969] _itin._, v., 74. [970] _arch. camb._, n. s., v., 23-28. [971] "wales and the coming of the normans," by professor lloyd, in _cymmrodorion transactions_, 1899. [972] marchegay, _chartes du prieurie de monmouth_, cited by professor lloyd, as above. [973] _brut_, 1143. [974] not to be confounded with the castle of clun in shropshire. [975] _annales cambriæ_ and _annales de margam._ see plan in _arch. camb._, 4th ser., vi., 251. [976] _annales cambriæ._ [977] really ty-yn-yr bwlch, the house in the pass. not to be confounded with tenby in pembrokeshire. [978] _cal. of close rolls_, ed. ii., iii., 415, 643. [979] see "cardiff castle: its roman origin," by john ward, _archæologia_, lvii., 335. [980] see "cardiff castle: its roman origin," by john ward, _archæologia_, lvii., 335. [981] mr clark thought the shell wall on the motte was norman, and the tower perp. but the wall of the shell has some undoubtedly perp. windows. the _gwentian chronicle_ says that robert of gloucester surrounded the _town_ of cardiff with a wall, anno 1111. [982] see gray's _buried city of kenfig_, where there are interesting photographs. the remains appear to be those of a shell. [983] _annales de margam_, 1232. [984] gray's _buried city of kenfig_, pp. 59, 150. [985] this information is confirmed by mr tennant, town clerk of aberavon. [986] see francis' _neath and its abbey_, where the charter of de granville is given. it is only preserved in an inspeximus of 1468. [987] _m. m. a._, i., 112. [988] ruperra is not quite one mile from the river rhymney. there is another site which may possibly be that of castle remni: castleton, which is nearly 2 miles from the river, but is on the main road from cardiff to newport. "it was formerly a place of strength and was probably built or occupied by the normans for the purpose of retaining their conquest of wentlwg. the only remains are a barrow in the garden of mr philipps, which is supposed to have been the site of the citadel, and a stone barn, once a chapel." coxe's _monmouthshire_, i., 63. [989] it is right to say that colonel morgan in his admirable _survey of east gower_ (a model of what an antiquarian survey ought to be) does not connect this mound with the old castle which is mentioned, as well as the new castle, in cromwell's survey of gower. but even the old castle seems to have been edwardian (see the plan, p. 85), so it is quite possible there were three successive castles in swansea. [990] _brut_, 1113. [991] morgan's _survey of east gower_, p. 24. [992] colonel morgan's _survey of east gower_. [993] lewis's _topographical dictionary_. [994] the passage of the river lune in lancashire is similarly defended by the mottes of melling and arkholme. [995] the dates given are those of the _brut_, and probably two years too early. [996] meyrick's _history of cardigan_, p. 146. [997] meyrick's _history of cardigan_, p. 146. [998] lewis's _topographical dictionary_. [999] we do not include the castles which the welsh _re_built. thus in 1194 we are told that rhys built the castle of kidwelly, which he certainly only rebuilt. [1000] malcolm canmore himself had passed nearly fourteen years in england. fordun, iv., 45. [1001] burton remarks: "to the lowland scot, as well as to the saxon, the norman was what a clever man, highly educated and trained in the great world of politics, is to the same man who has spent his days in a village." _history of scotland_, i., 353. [1002] dr round has brought to light the significant fact that king david took his chancellor straight from the english chancery, where he had been a clerk. this first chancellor of scotland was the founder of the great comyn family. _the ancestor_, 10, 108. [1003] fordun, _annalia_, vol. iv. [1004] it is tempting to connect the extraordinary preponderance of mottes, as shown by dr christison's map, in the shires which made up ancient galloway (wigton, kirkcudbright, and dumfries) with the savage resistance offered by galloway, which may have made it necessary for all the norman under-tenants to fortify themselves, each in his own motte-castle. it is wiser, however, to delay such speculations until we have the more exact information as to the number of mottes in scotland, which it is hoped will be furnished when the royal commission on historical monuments has finished its work. but this work will not be complete unless special attention is paid to the earthworks which now form part of stone castles, and which are too often overlooked, even by antiquaries. the _new statistical account_ certainly raises the suspicion that there are many more mottes north of the forth than are recognised in the map alluded to. in one district we are told that "almost every farm had its _knap_." "forfarshire," p. 326. [1005] cited by fordun, v., 43. [1006] benedict of peterborough, i., 68, r. s. [1007] fordun, v., 26. bower in one of his interpolations to fordun's annals, tells how a highlander named gillescop burnt certain wooden castles (_quasdam munitiones ligneas_) in moray. skene's fordun, ii., 435. [1008] that fordun should speak of the _castra_ and _municipia_ of macduff is not surprising, seeing that he wrote in the 14th century, when a noble without a castle was a thing unthinkable. [1009] burton actually thought that the normans built no castles in scotland in the 12th century. messrs macgibbon and ross remark that there is not one example of civil or military architecture of the 12th century, while there are so many fine specimens of ecclesiastical. _castellated architecture of scotland_, i., 63. it is just to add that when speaking of the castles of william the lion, they say: "it is highly probable that these and other castles of the 13th century were of the primeval kind, consisting of palisaded earthen mounds and ditches." _ibid._, iii. 6. [1010] _mote_ is the word used in scotland, as in the north of england, pembrokeshire, and ireland, for the norman _motte_. as the word is still a living word in scotland, its original sense has been partly lost, and it seems to be now applied to some defensive works which are not mottes at all. but the true motes of scotland entirely resemble the mottes of france and england. [1011] _scottish review_, xxxii., 232. [1012] _scottish review_, xxxii., 232. [1013] _ibid._, p. 236. [1014] this list is mainly compiled from chalmers' _caledonia_, vol. i., book iv., ch. i. the letter c. refers to dr christison's _early fortifications in scotland_; n., to mr neilson's paper in the _scottish review_, 1898; o.m., to the 25-inch ordnance map; g., to the _gazetteer of scotland_. it is a matter of great regret to the writer that she has been unable to do any personal visitation of the scottish castles, except in the cases of roxburgh and jedburgh. it is therefore impossible to be absolutely certain that all the hillocks mentioned in this list are true mottes, or whether all of them still exist. [1015] _registrum magni sigilli_, quoted by christison, p. 19. [1016] a plan is given by mr coles in "the motes, forts, and doons of kirkcudbright." soc. _ant. scot._, 1891-1892. [1017] m'ferlie, _lands and their owners in galloway_, ii., 47. [1018] this description, taken from the _gazetteer_, seems clear, but mr neilson tells me the site is more probably woody castle, which is styled a manor in the 15th century. the n. s. a. says: "there is the site of an ancient castle close to the town, on a mound of considerable height, called the castle hill, which is surrounded by a deep moat." "dumfries," p. 383. [1019] _annals_, ii., 196, cited in douglas's _history of the border counties_, 173. [1020] round, in _the ancestor_, 10, 108. [1021] dr christison distinctly marks one on his map, but mr coles says there is no trace of one, though the name marl mount is preserved. _soc. ant. scot._, 1892, p. 108. [1022] see the aberdeen volume, p. 1092. [1023] see grose's picture, which is confirmed by dr ross. [1024] the name tom-a-mhoid is derived by some writers from the gaelic _tom_, a tumulus (welsh tomen) and _moid_, a meeting. is there such a word for a meeting in gaelic? if there is, it must be derived from anglo-saxon _mot_ or _gemot_. but there is no need to go to gaelic for this word, as it is clear from the _registrum magni sigilli_ that _moit_ was a common version of _mote_, and meant a castle hill, the _mota_ or _mons castri_, as it is often called. [1025] chalmers, _caledonia_, iii., 864. sir archibald lawrie, however, regards it as doubtful whether arkel was the ancestor of the earls of lennox. _early scottish charters_, p. 327. [1026] m'ferlie, _lands and their owners in galloway_, ii., 140-141. [1027] see plan in macgibbon and ross, _castellated architecture_, iv., 341. [1028] the name maccus is undoubtedly the same as magnus, a latin adjective much affected as a proper name by the norwegians of the 11th and 12th centuries. [1029] lawrie, _early scottish charters_, p. 273. [1030] macgibbon and ross, i., 279. [1031] _proceedings of soc. ant. scotland_, xxxi., and n. s. a. [1032] see armstrong's _history of liddesdale_, cited by macgibbon and ross, i., 523. [1033] round, _the ancestor_, no. 11, 130. [1034] _benedict of peterborough_, i., 67. see mr neilson's papers in the _dumfries standard_, june 28, 1899. mr neilson remarks: "it may well be that the original castle of dumfries was one of malcolm iv.'s forts, and that the mote of troqueer, at the other side of a ford of the river, was the first little strength of the series by which the norman grip of the province was sought to be maintained." [1035] "mottes, forts, and doons of kirkcudbright," _soc. ant. scot._, xxv., 1890. [1036] the _annals of the four masters_ mention the building of three castles (caisteol) in connaught in 1125, and the _annals of ulster_ say that tirlagh o'connor built a castle (caislen) at athlone in 1129. what the nature of these castles was it is now impossible to say, but there are no mottes at the three places mentioned in connaught (dunlo, galway, and coloony). the _caislen_ at athlone was not recognised by the normans as a castle of their sort, as john built his castle on a new site, on land obtained from the church. _sweetman's cal._, p. 80. [1037] the meagre entries in the various _irish annals_ may often come from contemporary sources, but as none of their mss. are older than the 14th century, they do not stand on the same level as the two authorities above mentioned. [1038] "hibernicus enim populus castella non curat; silvis namque pro castris, paludibus utitur pro fossatis." _top. hib._, 182, r. s., vol. v. in the same passage he speaks of the "fossa infinita, alta nimis, rotunda quoque, et pleraque triplicia; castella etiam murata, et adhuc integra, vacua tarnen et deserta," which he ascribes to the northmen. this passage has been gravely adduced as an argument in favour of the prehistoric existence of mottes! as though a round _ditch_ necessarily implied a round _hill_ within it! giraldus was probably alluding to the round embankments or _raths_, of which such immense numbers are still to be found in ireland. by the "walled castles" he probably meant the stone enclosures or _cashels_ which are also so numerous in ireland. in the time of giraldus the word _castellum_, though it had become the proper word for a private castle, had not quite lost its original sense of a fortified enclosure of any kind, as we know from the phrases "the castle and tower" or "the castle and motte" not infrequent in documents of the 12th century (see round's _geoffrey de mandeville_, appendix o, p. 328). we may add that giraldus' attribution of these prehistoric remains to thorgils, the norwegian, only shows that their origin was unknown in his day. [1039] see _expug. hib._, 383, 397, 398. [1040] i am informed that the "crith gablach," which gives a minute description of one of these halls, is a very late document, and by no means to be trusted. [1041] _vide_ the _irish annals_, passim. [1042] there is another story, preserved in _hanmer's chronicle_, that the irish chief mac mahon levelled two castles given to him by john de courcy, saying he had promised to hold not stones but land. [1043] joyce's _irish names of places_, p. 290. [1044] see j. e. lloyd, _cymmrodor_, xi., 24; skeat's _english dictionary_, "town." in the "dindsenchas of erin," edited by o'beirne crowe, _journ. r. s. a. i._, 1872-1873, phrases occur, such as "the _dun_ was open," "she went back into the dun," which show clearly that the _dun_ was an enclosure. in several passages _dun_ and _cathair_ are interchanged. [1045] joyce, _irish names of places_, p. 273. [1046] _annals of the four masters_, 1166. [1047] see orpen, "motes and norman castles in ireland," in _journ. r. s. a. i._, xxxvii., 143-147. [1048] sweetman's _calendar of documents_ relating to ireland, i., 412. [1049] that a motte-castle of earth and wood seemed to giraldus quite an adequate castle is proved by the fact that numbers of the castles which he mentions have never had any stone defences. it may be a mere coincidence, but it is worth noting, that there are no mottes now at any of the places which giraldus mentions as _exilia municipia_, pembroke, dundunnolf, down city, and carrick. [1050] this word must not be understood to mean that this new type of castle was edward's invention, nor even that he was the first to introduce it into europe from palestine; it was used by the hohenstauffen emperors as early as 1224. see köhler, _entwickelung des kriegswesen_, iii., 475. [1051] newcastle, worcester, gloucester, and bristol are instances. [1052] rhuddlan is an instance of this. [1053] _book of rights_, p. 203. [1054] it must be admitted that in the most recent and most learned edition of the _anglo-saxon chronicle_ the topographical identifications are quite on a level with o'donovan's. [1055] the _annals_ have not been used, partly because in their present form they are not contemporary, and partly because the difficulties of identifying many of the castles they mention appeared insuperable. [1056] see especially two papers on "motes and norman castles in ireland," in _english historical review_, vol. xxii., pp. 228, 240. mr orpen has further enriched this subject by a number of papers in the _journ. r. s. a. i._, to which reference will be made subsequently. [1057] the only castles still unidentified are aq'i, kilmehal, rokerel, and inchleder. [1058] it should be stated that the great majority of the castles in this list have been visited for the writer by mr basil t. stallybrass, who has a large acquaintance with english earthworks, as well as a competent knowledge of the history of architecture. the rest have been visited by the writer herself, except in a few cases where the information given in lewis's _topographical dictionary_ or other sources was sufficient. the castles personally visited are initialled. [1059] _annals of loch cè_. [1060] orpen, _eng. hist. rev._, xxii., 249. [1061] orpen, _eng. hist. rev._, xxii., 450, citing from ms. _annals of innisfallen_. [1062] the poetical list enumerates the places which were "of the right of cashel in its power." the prose version, which may be assumed to be later, is entitled "do phortaibh righ caisil," which o'donovan translates "of the seats of the king of cashel." but can one small king have had sixty-one different abodes? professor bury says "the _book of rights_ still awaits a critical investigation." _life of st patrick_, p. 69. [1063] _ibid._, p. 449. see westropp, trans. r. i. a., xxvi. (c), p. 146. mr orpen informs me that the _black book of limerick_ contains a charter of william de burgo which mentions "ecclesia de escluana alias kilkyde." no. cxxxv. [1064] _journ. r. s. a. i._, 1898, 155; and 1904, 354. [1065] _eng. hist. rev._, xxii., 452. [1066] butler's _notices of the castle of trim_, p. 13. [1067] _eng. hist. rev._, xxii., 458. [1068] _eng. hist. rev._, xxii., 441. [1069] "exile municipium," _giraldus_, 345. see _eng. hist. rev._, xx., 717. [1070] _annals of ulster_, 1177. [1071] see orpen, "motes and castles in county louth," _journ. r. s. a. i._, xxxviii., 249. the town walls are later than the castle, and were built up to it. [1072] cited by westropp, _journ. r. s. a. i._, 1904, paper on "irish motes and early norman castles." [1073] _annals of ulster_, 1186. [1074] round, _cal. of doc._ preserved in france, i., 105, 107. [1075] "on the ancient forts of ireland," _trans. r. i. a._, 1902. [1076] orpen, "the castle of raymond le gros at fodredunolan," _journ. r. s. a. i._, 1906. [1077] _annals of innisfallen._ [1078] orpen, _eng. hist. rev._, xxii., 449. [1079] "on some caves in the slieve na cailliagh district," by e. c. rotheram, _proc. r. i. a._, 3rd ser., vol. iii. mr rotheram remarks that the passages in the motte of killallon, and that of moat near oldcastle, seem as if they were not built by the same people as those who constructed the passages at slieve na cailliagh. [1080] _annals of ulster_. [1081] _annals of loch cè_. [1082] orpen, _eng. hist. rev._, xxii., 448. [1083] _ibid._, p. 242. [1084] _annals of ulster_. see orpen, _eng. hist. rev._, xxii., 443. [1085] _annals of ulster_. [1086] _annals of the four masters_, vol. iii. see orpen, _journ. r. s. a. i._, vol. xxxix., 1909. [1087] orpen, _eng. hist. rev._, xxii., 448. a place called graffan is mentioned in the _book of rights_, and on the strength of this mere mention it has been argued that the motte is a prehistoric work. _trans. r. i. a._, vol. xxxi., 1902. [1088] mr orpen. [1089] giraldus' words are: "castrum lechliniæ, super nobilem beruæ fluvium, a latere ossiriæ, trans odronam in loco natura munito." v., 352. see _eng. hist. rev._, xxii., 245. [1090] see orpen, _eng. hist. rev._, xxii., 456, and _journ. r. s. a. i._, xxxvii., 140. [1091] orpen, "motes and norman castles in county louth," _journ. r. s. a. i._, xxxviii., 241, from which paper the notice above is largely taken. [1092] _eng. hist. rev._, xxii., 242. [1093] the castle is casually mentioned by giraldus, v., 100, and the date of its erection is not given. [1094] as far as the writer's experience goes, terraces are only found on mottes which have at some time been incorporated in private gardens or grounds. [1095] _journ. r. s. a. i._, vol. xxxix., 1909. [1096] piers, _collect. de rebus hib._, cited by orpen. [1097] mr orpen says: "the castle was 'constructed anew' in the sixth and seventh years of edward i., when £700 was expended." _irish pipe rolls_, 8 edward i., cited in _eng. hist. rev._, xxii., 454. [1098] line 3178. [1099] the annular bailey, with the motte in the centre, is a most unusual arrangement, and certainly suggests the idea that the motte was placed in an existing irish rath. [1100] see appendix m. [1101] _annals of loch cè_. [1102] _giraldus_, v., 313. [1103] this keep has a square turret on each of its faces instead of at the angles. a similar plan is found at warkworth, and castle rushen, isle of man. [1104] orpen, _eng. hist. rev._, xxii., 248. [1105] figured in _the tomb of ollamh fodhla_, by e. a. conwell, 1873. [1106] _gir._, i., 255, 277. [1107] _eng. hist. rev._, xxii., 457. [1108] in five cases the mottes are now destroyed. [1109] the dates of the building of numbers of these castles are given in the _annals of ulster_ and the _annals of loch cè_. [1110] _cal. of pat. rolls_, 1232-1247. [1111] the tower at malling was supposed to be an early norman keep by mr g. t. clark (_m. m. a._, ii., 251), but it has recently been shown that it is purely an ecclesiastical building. [1112] the only stone castles of early date in france which the writer has been able to visit are those of langeais, plessis grimoult, breteuil, and le mans. the two latter are too ruinous to furnish data. [1113] given in d'achery's _spicilegium_, iii., 232. [1114] this can be positively stated of baugé, montrichard, montboyau, st florent-le-vieil, chateaufort, and chérament. m. de salies thinks the motte of bazonneau, about 500 metres from the ruins of the castle of montbazon, is the original castle of fulk nerra. _histoire de fulk nerra_, 57. about the other castles the writer has not been able to obtain any information. [1115] see halphen, _comté d'anjou au xiième siècle_, 153. [1116] the building of langeais was begun in 994. _chron. st florent_, and _richerius_, 274. [1117] it somewhat shakes one's confidence in de caumont's accuracy that in the sketch which he gives of this keep (_abécédaire_, ii., 409) he altogether omits this doorway. [1118] measurements were impossible without a ladder. [1119] it is well known that william the conqueror left large treasures at his death. [1120] the keep of colchester is immensely larger than any keep in existence. mr round thinks it was probably built to defend the eastern counties against danish invasions. _hist. of colchester castle_, p. 32. its immense size seems to show that it was intended for a large garrison. [1121] _cours d'antiquités monumentales_, v., 152, and _abécédaire_, ii., 413-431. de caumont says of the keep of colchester, "il me parait d'une antiquité moins certaine que celui de guildford, et on pourrait le croire du douzième siècle" (p. 205), a remark which considerably shakes one's confidence in his architectural judgment. [1122] as only the foundations of pevensey are left, it gives little help in determining the character of early keeps. it had no basement entrance, and the forebuilding is evidently later than the keep. [1123] the tower had once a forebuilding, which is clearly shown in hollar's etching of 1646, and other ancient drawings. mr harold sands, who has made a special study of the tower, believes it to have been a late 12th-century addition. [1124] tiles are not used in the tower, but some of the older arches of the arcade on the top floor have voussoirs of rag, evidently continuing the tradition of tiles. most of the arches at colchester are headed with tiles. [1125] the room supposed to be the chapel in bamborough keep has a round apse, but with no external projection, being formed in the thickness of the wall. the keep of pevensey has three extraordinary apse-like projections of solid masonry attached to its foundations. see mr harold sands' _report of excavations at pevensey_. [1126] "in the course of the 12th century, the base of the walls was thickened into a plinth, in order better to resist the battering ram." (_manuel d'archæologie française_, ii., 463.) the keep of pevensey has a battering plinth which is clearly original, and which throws doubt either on this theory of the plinth, or on the age of the building. [1127] it is well known that blocks of huge size are employed in anglo-saxon architecture, but generally only as quoins or first courses. see baldwin brown, _the arts in early england_, ii., 326. [1128] baldwin brown, "statistics of saxon churches," _builder_, sept. 1900. [1129] mr round gives ground for thinking that this keep was built between 1080 and 1085. _colchester castle_, p. 32. [1130] piper's _burgenkunde_, p. 85. [1131] schulz, _das hofische leben zur zeit der minnesinger_, i., 59. grose writes of bamborough castle: "the only fireplace in it was a grate in the middle of a large room, where some stones in the middle of the floor are burned red." he gives no authority. _antiquities of england and wales_, iv., 57. [1132] "the type of castle created in the 10th century persisted till the renascence." enlart, _manuel d'archæologie_, ii., 516. [1133] see appendix n. [1134] enlart, _manuel d'archæologie_, ii., 516. "jusqu'au milieu du xii^ième siècle, et dans les exemples les plus simples des époques qui suivent, le donjon est bien près de constituer à lui seul tout le château." [1135] _abriss der burgenkunde_, 50-60. [1136] _entwickelung des kriegswesen_, iii., 352 and 428. no continental writers are entirely to be trusted about english castles; they generally get their information from clark, and it is generally wrong. [1137] this of course explains why the castle of london is always called _the tower_; it was originally the only tower in the fortress. [1138] the _close rolls_ mention _palicia_ or stockades at the castles of norwich, york, devizes, oxford, sarum, fotheringay, hereford, mountsorel, and dover. [1139] _close rolls_, i., 195a and 389. [1140] see chapter vi., p. 89, and appendix o. [1141] piper states that the evidence of remains proves that the lower storey was a prison. but these remains probably belong to a later date, when the donjon had been abandoned as a residence, and was becoming the _dungeon_ to which prisoners were committed. the top storey of the keep was often used in early times as a prison for important offenders, such as conan of rouen, william, the brother of duke richard ii., and ranulf flambard. [1142] see appendix p. [1143] at conisburgh and orford castles there are ovens on the roofs, showing that the cooking was carried on there; these are keeps of henry ii.'s time. [1144] de caumont says these remains are on a motte, a strange statement, as they are only a foot or two above the surrounding level. [1145] no stone castles in england are known to have been built by william rufus; he built carlisle castle, but probably only in wood. as we have seen, several welsh castles were built in his time, but all in earth and timber. [1146] built by archbishop william of corbeuil. _gervase of canterbury_, r. s., ii., 382. [1147] robert de torigny, also called robert de monte, was abbot of mont st michael during the lifetime of henry ii., and was a favoured courtier whose means of obtaining information were specially good. french writers are in the habit of discounting his statements, because they do not recognise the almost universal precedence of a wooden castle to the stone building, which when it is recognised, completely alters the perspective of castle dates. see appendix q. [1148] the keep of caen, which was square, was demolished in 1793. de caumont, _cours d'antiquités_, v., 231. the keep of alençon is also destroyed. there are fragments of castles at argentan, exmes, and st jean-le-thomas. the keep of vernon or vernonnet is embedded in a factory. _guide joanne_, p. 6. [1149] the writer has also visited vire and le mans, but even if the walls of the keep of vire, of which only two sides remain, were the work of henry i., the details, such as the corbelled lintel, the window benches, and the loop in the basement for a crossbow, point to a later period. at le mans, to the north of the cathedral, is a fragment of an ancient tower, built of the rudest rubble, with small quoins of ashlar; this may be the keep built by william i., which wace says was of stone and lime (p. 234, andresen's edition). it is difficult to examine, being built up with cottages. domfront, like langeais, is only a fragment, consisting of two walls and some foundations. [1150] _dictionnaire de l'architecture._ [1151] _m. m. a._, i., 186. [1152] in speaking of falaise, of course we only mean the great square keep, and not the little donjon attached to it at a later period, nor the fine round keep added by talbot in the 15th century. [1153] small spaces, such as the chapel, passages, and mural chambers, are vaulted in most keeps. [1154] colchester keep has only two storeys now, but mr round argues that it must have had three, as a stairway leads upward from the second floor, in the n.w. tower, and some fragments of window cases remain as evidence. _colchester castle_, p. 92. [1155] the tower and colchester keep both have wells, which are seldom wanting in any keep. there was no appearance of a well at langeais, but excavation might possibly reveal one. [1156] the first castle at corfe was built by william's half-brother, robert, count of mortain. the keep of corfe is sometimes attributed to him, but when we compare its masonry with that of the early hall or chapel in the middle bailey, we shall see that this date is most unlikely. norwich was always a royal castle. [1157] part of the basement of norwich keep has pillars, from which it has been assumed that it was vaulted; but no trace of vaulting is to be seen. [1158] the only decoration at corfe keep is in the oratory, which being at a vast height in one of the ruined walls is inaccessible to the ordinary visitor. corfe was so much pulled about by sir christopher hatton in elizabeth's reign, and is now so ruinous, that many features are obscure. norwich has suffered greatly from restorations, and from re-casing. [1159] in 1184 henry ii. paid "for re-roofing the tower of gisors." _rotuli scacc. normanniæ_, i., 72. [1160] it should be remembered that rude work is not invariably a sign of age; it may only show haste, or poverty of resources. it should also be mentioned that in the _exchequer rolls of normandy_ there is an entry of £650 in 1184 for several works at gisors, including "the wall round the motte" (murum circa motam). possibly this may refer to a wall round the foot of the motte, which seems still to exist. the shell wall of gisors should be compared with that of lincoln, which is probably of the first half of the 12th century. [1161] no decagonal tower of henry i.'s work is known to exist; all his tower keeps are square. [1162] bower, _scotichronicon_, v., 42. this passage was first pointed out by mr george neilson in _notes and queries_, 8th ser., viii., 321. the keep of carlisle has been so much pulled about as to obscure most of its features. the present entrance to the basement is not original. [1163] _m. m. a._, i., 353. [1164] unfortunately the greater part of these valuable _rolls_ is still unpublished. the pipe roll society is issuing a volume every year, and this year (1910) has reached the 28th henry ii. [1165] the keeps of richmond and bowes were only finished by henry ii.; richmond was begun by earl conan, who died in 1170, when henry appears to have taken up the work. bowes was another of earl conan's castles. tickhill is now destroyed to the foundations, but it is clear that it was a tower. the writer has examined all the keeps mentioned in this list. it will be noticed that most of the towers took many years to build. [1166] henry built one shell keep of rubble and rag, that of berkeley castle, which is not mentioned in the _pipe rolls_, having been built before his accession. it is noteworthy that he did not build it for himself, but for his ally, robert fitz hardinge. [1167] the basement storey of chester keep (the only part which now remains) is also vaulted, but this can scarcely be henry's work, for though he spent £102 on this castle in 1159, it must have been begun by ranulf, earl of chester, in stephen's reign. moreover, it is doubtful whether the vaulting, which is covered by whitewash, is really ancient. [1168] leland says of wark, "the dongeon is made of foure howses hight," but probably he included the basement. [1169] the earliest instance of a portcullis groove with which the writer is acquainted is in the basement entrance of colchester. it is obvious to anyone who carefully examines this entrance and the great stair to the left of it that they are additions of a later time than william's work. the details seem to point to henry i.'s reign. the keep of rochester has also a portcullis groove which seems to be a later addition. [1170] king, paper on canterbury castle in _archæologia_, vi., 298. we have not observed in any english keeps (except in this single instance) any of the elaborate plans to entrap the enemy which m. viollet le duc describes in his article on donjons. he was an imaginative writer, and many of his statements should not be accepted without reserve. [1171] wark was also an octagonal keep, but there is considerable doubt whether this octagonal building was the work of henry ii., as lord dacre wrote to wolsey in 1519 concerning wark that "the dongeon is clerely finished," and mentions that all the storeys but one were vaulted with stone. this makes it almost certain that the castle of wark was entirely rebuilt at this time, after having been demolished by the scots in 1460. it is now an utter ruin, and even the foundations of the keep are buried. [1172] at thorne, near doncaster, where the great earls warenne had a castle, there are the foundations, on a motte, of a keep which seems to resemble that of orford; it ought to be thoroughly excavated. [1173] these measurements are from grose, _antiquities_, v., 74. [1174] see payne gallwey, _the crossbow_, 309; köhler, _kriegswesen_, iii., 192. the trébuchet is first mentioned at the siege of piacenza in 1199. [1175] as far as we can tell, the tops of keeps having generally been ruined or altered, the common arrangement was either a simple gable, or two gables resting on a cross wall, such as all the larger keeps possessed. [1176] another consequence of the introduction of an engine of longer range was the widening of castle ditches. we frequently find works on ditches mentioned in john's accounts. [1177] payne gallwey, _the crossbow_, p. 3. we find it used by louis vi. of france, before 1137. suger's _gesta ludovici_, 10 (ed. molinier). ten balistarii are mentioned in domesday book, but they may have been engineers of the great balista, a siege machine. there is no representation of a crossbow in the bayeux tapestry. there are entries in the _pipe rolls_ of 6, 8, and 9 henry ii. of payments for arbelast, but these also may refer to the great balista. [1178] _guill. brit. armorici philippides_, bouquet xvii., line 315. [1179] the bow brought by richard from palestine is believed to have been an improved form of crossbow, made of horn and yew, "light, elastic, and far more powerful than a bow of solid wood." payne gallwey, _the crossbow_. [1180] "fenestris arcubalistaribus," bouquet xvii., 75. the writer has never found a single defensive loophole in any of the keeps of henry i. or henry ii. köhler remarks that the loopholes up to this period do not seem to be intended for shooting (_entwickelung des kriegswesen_, iii., 409), and clark has some similar observations. [1181] _dictionnaire de l'architecture_, art. "meurtrière." [1182] meyrick in his _ancient armour_ quotes a charter of 1239, in which the french king grants a castle to the count de montfort on condition "quod non possumus habere in eodem archeriam nec arbalisteriam," which meyrick audaciously translates "any perpendicular loophole for archers, nor any cruciform loophole for crossbowmen." the quotation is unfortunately given by sir r. payne gallwey without the latin original. it is at any rate probable that the cruciform loophole was for _archers_; it does not appear till the time of the long-bow, which was improved and developed by edward i., who made it the most formidable weapon of english warfare. [1183] see appendix h. [1184] _entwickelung des kriegswesen_, iii., 417. [1185] in 1186, the duke of burgundy caused the towers and walls of his castle of chatillon to be "hoarded" (hordiari). this duke had been a companion of richard's on the third crusade. william le breton, _philippides_, line 600. richard's _hurdicia_ at chateau gaillard were two years earlier. [1186] see dieulafoy, _le chateau gaillard et l'architecture militaire au treizième siècle_, p. 13. [1187] the best french and german authorities are agreed about this. the holes in which the wooden beams supporting the hurdicia were placed may still be seen in many english castles, and so may the remains of the stone brackets. they would be good indications of date, were it not that hurdicia could so easily be added to a much older building. [1188] köhler gives the reign of frederic barbarossa (1155-1191) as the time of the first appearance of the round keep in germany. [1189] in spite of this, i cannot feel satisfied that the keep of étampes is of so early a date. the decorative features appear early, but the second and third storeys are both vaulted, which is a late sign. the keep called clifford's tower at york, built by henry iii. 1245 to 1259, is on the same plan as étampes. [1190] this keep has been long destroyed. [1191] ground entrances occur in several much earlier keeps, as at colchester (almost certainly an addition of henry i.'s time), bamborough (probably henry ii.'s reign), and richmond, where earl conan seems to have used a former entrance gateway to make the basement entrance of his keep. see milward, _arch. journ._, vol. v. [1192] built by earl hamelin, half-brother of henry ii., who died in 1201. [1193] viollet le duc, art. "donjon." [1194] the walls of the tower are from 12 to 15 feet thick at the base; those of norwich 13; the four walls of dover respectively, 17, 18, 19, and 21 feet; carlisle, 15 feet on two sides. (clark.) william of worcester tells us that bristol keep was 25 feet thick at the base! _itin._, p. 260. [1195] see enlart, _manuel d'archæologie française_, ii., 526. [1196] macgibbon and ross, _castellated architecture of scotland_, p. 159. [1197] this type of castle was probably borrowed from the fortifications of greek cities, which the crusaders had observed in the east. [1198] conway and carnarvon consist of two adjoining courts, without any external enclosure but a moat. flint has a great tower outside the quadrangle, which is sometimes mistakenly called a keep, but its internal arrangements show that it was not so, and it is doubtful whether it was ever roofed over. it was simply a tower to protect the entrance, taking the place of the 13th-century barbican. [1199] köhler states that the gatehouse palace is peculiar to england: "only at perpignan is there anything like it." _entwickelung des kriegswesen_, iii., 480. [1200] köhler mentions the castle of neu leiningen as the first example in germany, built in 1224. _kriegswesen_, iii., 475. frederic ii.'s castles were of this type. the castle of boulogne, finished in 1231, is one of the oldest examples of the keepless type in france. enlart, _archæologie française_, ii., 534. the bastille of paris was a castle of this kind. according to hartshorne, barnwell castle, in northants, is of the keepless kind, and as the _hundred rolls_ state that it was built in 1264, we seem to have here a positive instance of a keepless castle in henry iii.'s reign. _arch. inst. newcastle_, vol. 1852. and it appears to be certain that gilbert de clare, earl of gloucester, built the keepless castle of caerphilly before edward came to the throne. see little's _mediæval wales_, p. 87. [1201] french archæologists are enthusiastic over the keep of chateau gaillard, the scientific construction of the towers of the curtain, the avoidance of "dead angles," the continuous flanking, etc. see viollet le duc, art. "chateau," and dieulafoy, _le chateau gaillard_. [1202] this type is extremely rare: trim, in ireland, and castle rushen, in the isle of man, are the only other instances known to the writer. trim is a square tower with square turrets in the middle of each face; castle rushen is on the same plan, but the central part appears to have been an open court. [1203] enlart, _archæologie française_, ii., 516. [1204] martène's _thesaurus anecdotorum_, iv., 118. "nulli licuit in normannia fossatum facere in planam terram, nisi tale quod de fundo potuisset terram jactare superius sine scabello. et ibi nulli licuit facere palicium, nisi in una regula; et id sine propugnaculis et alatoriis. et in rupe et in insula nulli licuit facere fortitudinem, et nulli licuit in normannia castellum facere." [1205] the document which calls itself _leges henrici primi_, x., 1, declares the "castellatio trium scannorum" to be a right of the king. _scannorum_ is clearly _scamnorum_, banks. it is noteworthy that a motte-and-bailey castle is actually a fortification with three banks: one round the top of the motte, one round the edge of the bailey, one on the counterscarp of the ditch. [1206] see the case of benhall, _close rolls_, ii., 52b (1225). [1207] aldreth and burton are omitted from this list. [1208] m. and b. stand for motte and bailey; k. and b. for keep and bailey; o. for outside the town. transcriber's note: every effort has been made to replicate this text as faithfully as possible. the errata listed at the beginning of the book have been fixed, and some minor corrections of spelling and punctuation have been made. italic text has been marked with _underscores_. bold text has been marked with =equals signs=. letters preceded by a ^caret appeared as superscripts to the end of the word. oe ligatures have been expanded. public domain works at mcmaster university's archive for the history of economic thought.) feudal england historical studies on the eleventh and twelfth centuries by j. h. round first published 1895 _second impression 1909_ _third impression 1909_ preface the present work is the outcome of a wish expressed to me from more than one quarter that i would reprint in a collected form, for the convenience of historical students, some more results of my researches in the history of the eleventh and twelfth centuries. but to these i have added, especially on domesday, so much which has not yet seen the light, that the greater portion of the work is new, while the rest has been in part re-written. the object i have set before myself throughout is either to add to or correct our existing knowledge of facts. and for this i have gone in the main to records, whether in manuscript or in print. it is my hope that the papers in this volume may further illustrate the value of such evidence as supplementing and checking the chroniclers for what is still, in many respects, an obscure period of our history. as a foreign scholar has felicitously observed: je lis avec plaisir le chroniqueur qui nous raconte les événements de son époque. les détails anecdotiques, les traits piquants dont son [oe]uvre est parsémée font mes délices. mais comment saurai-je s'il dit la vérité si les pages qu'il me présente ne sont pas un roman de pure imagination? dans les chartes, au contraire, tout est authentique, certain, précis, indubitable. leur témoignage est contradictoirement établi, sous le contrôle de la partie adverse, avec l'approbation et la reconaissance de l'autorité souveraine, en présence d'une imposante assemblée de notables qui apposent leur signature. c'est la plus pure de toutes les sources où il soit possible de puiser un renseignement historique.[1] an instance in point will be found in the paper on 'richard the first's change of seal'. a collective title for a series of studies covering the period 1050-1200, is not by any means easy to find. but dealing as they do so largely with the origins of 'feudal england', i have ventured to give them this title, which may serve, i hope, to emphasize my point that the feudal element introduced at the conquest had a greater influence on our national institutions than recent historians admit.[2] even domesday book has its place in the study of feudalism, rearranging, as it does, the hundred and the vill under fiefs and 'manors'. to those in search of new light on our early mediaeval history, i commend the first portion of this work, as setting forth, for their careful consideration, views as evolutionary on the domesday hide and the whole system of land assessment as on the actual introduction of the feudal system into england. although i have here brought into conjunction my discovery that the assessment of knight-service was based on a five-knights unit, irrespective of area or value, and my theory that the original assessment of land was based on a five-hides unit, not calculated on area or value, yet the two, one need hardly add, are, of course, unconnected. the one was an anglo-saxon system, and, as i maintain, of early date; the other was of norman introduction, and of independent origin. my theories were formed at different times, as the result of wholly separate investigations. that of the five-hides unit was arrived at several years ago, but was kept back in the hope that i might light on some really satisfactory explanation of the phenomena presented. the solution i now propound can only be deemed tentative. i would hope, however, that the theories i advance may stimulate others to approach the subject, and, above all, that they may indicate to local students, in the future, the lines on which they should work and the absolute need of their assistance. perhaps the most important conclusion to which my researches point is that domesday reveals the existence of two separate systems in england, co-extensive with two nationalities, the original _five hides_ of the 'anglo-saxon' in the south, and the later _six carucates_ of the 'danish' invaders in the north.[3] no one, i may add, is better qualified to carry further these inquiries than prof maitland, whose brilliant pen has illumined for us the origins of english law. himself engaged on the study of domesday, he kindly offered to withhold his conclusions until my work should have appeared.[4] among the fresh points here discussed in connection with domesday book will be found the composition of the juries by whom the returns were made, the origin and true character of the _inquisitio eliensis_, and the marked difference of the two volumes compiled from the domesday returns. of the six early surveys dealt with in conjunction with domesday, i would call attention to that of leicestershire as having, it would seem, till now remained absolutely unknown. it has long been a wish of mine to deal with these surveys,[5] not only as belonging to a period for which we have no records, but also as illustrating domesday book. in 'the knights of peterborough' will be found some facts relating to hereward 'the wake', which seem to have eluded mr freeman's investigations, and even those of mr tout. in case it should suggest itself that these papers, and some in the other portion of the work dwell at undue length on unimportant points, i would observe that apart from the fact that even small points acquire a relative importance from our scanty knowledge of the time, there are cases in which their careful investigation may lead to unforeseen results. at the last anniversary of the royal society, lord kelvin quoted these words from his own presidential address in 1871: accurate and minute measurement seems to the non-scientific imagination a less lofty and dignified work than looking for something new. but nearly all the grandest discoveries of science have been but the rewards of accurate measurement and patient, long continued labour in the minute sifting of numerical results. the same principle applies to the study of institutional history. whether we are dealing with military service, with the land, with finance, or with the king's court, 'the minute sifting' of facts and figures is the only sure method by which we can extend knowledge. to those who know how few are the original authorities for the period, and how diligently these have been explored and their information exhausted, the wonder will be not so much that there is little, as that there was anything at all yet left to discover. * * * * * in a work dealing with the history of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, a writer must inevitably find himself at times dealing with the same subjects as the late professor freeman. without in any way disparaging the genius of that eminent man, one may deem it a duty to correct the errors into which he fell, and conscientiously to combat, as an obstinate and mischievous superstition, the conviction of his pre-eminent accuracy and authority on matters of fact. it would be far pleasanter to dwell only on his merits; but when one finds that, in spite of the proofs i have been producing for years, mr herbert fisher, representing the oxford school of history, can still declare mr freeman to have reached 'the highest standard of scholarly exactitude',[6] it is evident that the works of the regius professor are still surrounded by a false glamour, and that one must further expose his grave liability to error. i cannot suppose that any competent scholar who may carefully peruse this work will in future venture to deny that, in spite of his many and his splendid gifts, mr freeman was as liable as any of us to error, or that however laudable his intentions, he was capable of precisely the same inaccuracy and occasionally of the same confusion as he denounced so bitterly in others. it is, indeed, my contention, as i have already explained,[7] that to these denunciations of the errors of others is largely due the conviction of mr freeman's supreme accuracy. the question raised may seem to affect the whole method of history, for if, as has been said, it is the argument of the scientific historian that we ought to prefer accuracy of fact to charm of presentment and to literary style, the proof that his method fails to save him from erring like any 'literary' historian strikes at the root of his whole contention. yet it is not the scientific method, but its prophet himself that was at fault. although i am here only concerned with inaccuracy in matters of fact, i would guard myself against the retort that, at least, mr freeman's errors are of little consequence as compared with that obliquity of vision which led mr froude, at all hazards, to vindicate henry the eighth. without insisting on an absolute parallel, i trace a resemblance even here. just as his bias against the roman church led mr froude to vindicate henry in order to justify the breach with rome, so mr freeman's passion for democracy made him an advocate on behalf of harold, as 'one whose claim was not drawn only from the winding-sheet of his fathers'. i have elsewhere maintained, as to harold's election 'by the free choice of a free people', that mr freeman's undoubted perversion of the case at this 'the central point' of his history, gravely impairs his narrative of the conquest, because its success, and even its undertaking, can actually be traced to that election.[8] unless we realize its disastrous effect on the situation both at home and abroad, we cannot rightly understand the triumph of the duke's enterprise. it had been my hope, in the present work, to have avoided acute controversy, but the attitude adopted, unfortunately, by the late professor's champions has rendered that course impossible. one can but rejoice that his accuracy should find strenuous defenders, as it removes the reluctance one would otherwise feel in continuing to criticize it now. a case is doubly proved when proved in the teeth of opposition. but one expects that opposition to be fair, and the line my opponents have taken throughout cannot, by any stretch of courtesy, be so described. my difficulty, indeed, in dealing with their arguments on the battle of hastings, is that they do not affect or even touch my case. in spite of their persistent efforts to obscure a plain issue, there is not, and there cannot be, any 'controversy' as to mr freeman and the 'palisade'. for, while fully recognizing that the _onus probandi_ lay on those who assert its existence, he failed, on his own showing, to produce any proof of it whatever.[9] mr archer has ended,[10] as he began,[11] by deliberately ignoring mr freeman's words,[12] on which my case avowedly rests, and without suppressing which he could not even enter the field. this, indeed, i have explained so often, that i need not again have disposed of his arguments had not mr gardiner, in the exercise of his editorial discretion, allowed him to make certain statements,[13] and refused me the right of exposing them. a typical example will be found on p. 273.[14] it is not only demonstrable error that justifies critical treatment; no less dangerous, if not more so, is that subtle commixture of guess-work and fact, which leaves us in doubt as to what is proved and what is merely hypothesis. in his lecture on 'the nature of historical evidence', the late professor himself well brought out the point: many people seem to think that a position is proved if it can not be disproved.... very few see with sir george lewis--though sir george lewis perhaps carried his own doctrine a little too far--that in a great many cases we ought to be satisfied with a negative result, that we must often put up with knowing that a thing did not happen in a particular way, or did not happen at all, without being furnished with any counter-statement to put in the place of that which we reject.[15] the question is whether a statement can be proved, not whether it can be disproved. cases in point will be found on pp. 291, 298, 331-3. it may, in view of certain comments, be desirable, perhaps, to explain that the study on the origin of knight-service appeared in mr freeman's lifetime,[16] and that my open criticism of his work began so far back as 1882. it will be seen, therefore, that i challenged its accuracy when he was himself able to reply. to those who may hold that in these studies excessive attention is bestowed on anglo-norman genealogy, i commend the words, not of a genealogist, but of the historian kemble: it is indispensable to a clear view of the constitutional law and governmental institutions of this country, that we should not lose sight of the distribution of landed estates among the great families, and that the rise and fall of these houses should be carefully traced and steadily borne in mind.... amidst all the tumult and confusions of civil and foreign wars; throughout religious and political revolutions; from the days of arminius to those of harald; from the days of harald to our own; the successions of the landowners and the relations arising out of these successions, are the running comment upon the events in our national history: they are at once the causes and the criteria of facts, and upon them has depended the development and settlement of principles, in laws which still survive, in institutions which we cling to with reverence, in feelings which make up the complex of our national character.[17] the paper on 'walter tirel and his wife' may serve to show that in this department there is still needed much labour before we can hope for a perfect record of the great houses of the conquest. * * * * * i have to thank mr murray for his kind permission to make use of two of the articles i have contributed to the _quarterly review_. some of the studies have previously appeared in the _english historical review_, and these are now republished with messrs longmans' consent. lastly, i would take the opportunity afforded by this preface of acknowledging the encouragement my researches have derived from the approval not only of our supreme authority--i mean the bishop of oxford--but also of that eminent scholar, dr liebermann, whose name one is proud to associate with a work on mediaeval history. j. h. round [_note_: i have not thought it needful to include in the index names of persons or places only introduced incidentally in illustration of arguments. the prefix 'fitz', as in _geoffrey de mandeville_, has been retained as a useful convention, whatever the actual name may have been.] [footnote 1: _table chronologique des chartes et diplômes imprimés concernant l'histoire de la belgique._ par alphonse wauters, vol. i, p. xxxi.] [footnote 2: see pp. 198, 208, 404-5.] [footnote 3: see p. 430.] [footnote 4: prof maitland informs me that since the appearance of his _select pleas in manorial courts_, he has discovered the earlier occurrence of the word 'leet' (see p. 90).] [footnote 5: see _domesday studies_.] [footnote 6: _fortnightly review_, december 1894, pp. 804-5.] [footnote 7: _quarterly review_, july 1892.] [footnote 8: see _quarterly review_ as above. ] [footnote 9: see pp. 263-9.] [footnote 10: _english historical review_, july 1894.] [footnote 11: _contemporary review_, march 1893, pp. 335-55.] [footnote 12: _norman conquest_ (2nd ed.), iii, 763-4.] [footnote 13: _english historical review_, as above.] [footnote 14: i have, therefore, been obliged to refer in some detail to these statements, while for those i have already disposed of i have given the references to the _q.r._ and _e.h.r._] [footnote 15: _methods of historical study_, p. 141.] [footnote 16: _english historical review_, july 1891-january 1892.] [footnote 17: _the names, surnames, and nicknames of the anglo-saxons._ read at winchester, september 11, 1845.] contents foreword _page_ 7 preface 9 part i. territorial studies domesday book 17 nature of the _inquisitio com. cant._, 19--criticism of the domesday text, 26--'soca' and 'theinland', 35--the domesday 'caruca', 40--the domesday hide, 41--the five-hide unit, 47--the six-carucate unit, 66--the leicestershire 'hida', 76--the lancashire 'hida', 79--the yorkshire unit, 79--general conclusions, 82--the east anglian 'leet', 88--the words _solinum_ and _solanda_, 91--the 'firma unius noctis', 96--'wara', 100--the domesday 'juratores', 102--the _inquisitio eliensis_, 106--the ely return, 114--first mention of domesday book, 120 the northamptonshire geld-roll 124 the knights of peterborough 131 the worcestershire survey (hen. i) 140 the lindsey survey (1115-18) 149 the leicestershire survey (1124-29) 160 the northamptonshire survey (hen. i-hen. ii) 175 the introduction of knight service into england 182 the _cartae_ of 1166, 189--the 'servitium debitum', 197--scutage, aid, and 'donum', 209--the total number of knights due, 228--the normal knight's fee, 231--the early evidence, 232--the worcester relief, 241 part ii. historical studies normans under edward the confessor 247 mr freeman and the battle of hastings 258 the name of 'senlac', 259--the palisade, 264--mr freeman's authorities for it, 265--my argument against it, 269--the shield-wall, 273--the disposition of the english, 277--the norman advance, 284--the fosse disaster, 288--the great feigned flight, 292--the relief of arques, 294--summary, 297--conclusion, 302 master wace 306 wace's meaning, 306--wace's authority, 309--wace and his sources, 313 note on the pseudo-ingulf 321 regenbald, priest and chancellor 323 the conqueror at exeter 330 the alleged destruction of leicester (1068) 347 ely and her despoilers (1072-75) 349 the lords of ardres 351 early irish trade with chester and rouen 353 walter tirel and his wife 355 waldric, warrior and chancellor 364 a charter of henry i (1123) 366 the origin of the nevilles 370 the alleged invasion of england in 1147 373 the alleged debate on danegeld (1163) 377 a glimpse of the young king's court (1170) 381 the first known fine (1175) 385 the montmorency imposture 392 the oxford debate on foreign service (1197) 398 richard the first's change of seal (1198) 406 communal house demolition 416 the cinque ports charters 424 addenda 430 index 434 part i territorial studies domesday book the true key to the domesday survey, and to the system of land assessment it records, is found in the _inquisitio comitatus cantabrigiensis_. although the document so styled is one of cardinal importance, it has, from accident, been known to few, and has consequently never succeeded in obtaining the attention and scientific treatment it deserved. the merit of its identification belongs to mr philip carteret webb, who published in 1756 a paper originally read before the society of antiquaries, entitled, _a short account of danegeld, with some further particulars relating to william the conqueror's survey_. it is difficult to speak too highly of this production, remembering the date at which it was composed. many years were yet to elapse before the printing of domesday was even begun, and historical evidences were largely inaccessible as compared with the condition of things today. yet the ability shown by mr webb in this careful and conscientious piece of work is well seen in his interesting discovery, which he announced in these words: in searching for the _liber eliensis_, i have had the good fortune to discover in the cotton library a ms. copy of the inquisition of the jury, containing their survey for most of the hundreds in cambridgeshire. this ms. is written on vellum in double columns and on both sides of the page. it is bound up with the _liber eliensis_, and begins at p. 76_a_ and ends at p. 113. it is written in a very fair but ancient character, not coeval with the survey, but of about the time of henry ii. it was given by mr arthur agard to sir robert cotton, and is marked tiberius a. vi 4. your lordship and the society will be of opinion that this is a discovery of importance, and what had escaped the observation of sir h. spelman, mr selden, and other antiquarians. a part of this valuable morsel of antiquity is already transcribed, and in a few weeks i hope to be able to communicate the whole of it to the society (p. 26). mr webb's discovery was known to kelham, and duly referred to by him in his _domesday book illustrated_ (1788). it was also known to sir francis palgrave, strong in his acquaintance with manuscript authorities, who alluded (1832) to the fact that 'fragments of the original inquisitions have been preserved',[1] and described the ms. tib. a. vi, of which 'the first portion consists of the _inquisitio eliensis_, extending, as above mentioned, into five counties; it is followed by the inedited _inquisitio_', etc.[2] it is, however, undoubtedly ignored in ellis's _introduction to domesday book_ (1833), and 'even the indefatigable sir thomas duffus hardy', writes mr birch,[3] 'has omitted all notice of this manuscript in his _descriptive catalogue of manuscripts relating to the history of great britain and ireland_, vol. ii. (1865)'. this, however, is not strictly the case, for in his notice of the domesday mss. he observes in a footnote: the cottonian ms. [tib. a. vi] has also a second and unique portion of this survey, which was not printed in the edition published by the record commission in 1816. it commences 'in grantebriggesira, in staplehouhund', and ends imperfectly 'et vicecomiti regis v. auras'. these words prove that sir thomas had inspected the ms., which duly begins and ends with the words here given. it is certain, however, that mr freeman, most ardent of domesday students, knew nothing of this precious evidence, and remained therefore virtually unacquainted with the _modus operandi_ of the great survey. the pages, we shall find, of the _inquisitio_ afford information that no one would have welcomed more eagerly than himself. perhaps, therefore, it is not surprising that mr n. e. s. a. hamilton, when editing this document for the royal society of literature (1876), should have supposed that it had been overlooked till then, or that he was 'the first to bring its importance to light' (p. vi). it is, however, much to be regretted that mr de gray birch should have strenuously insisted that webb (whose paper he actually names) and kelham 'appear to have been strangely ignorant of the true and important nature of this manuscript',[4] and should have repeated this assertion[5] after i had shown at the domesday commemoration (1886) that the honour of the discovery really belonged to mr p. c. webb. one may claim that webb should have his due, while gladly expressing gratitude to mr hamilton for his noble edition of the _inquisitio_, which has conferred on domesday students an inestimable boon.[6] the printing of the document in record type, the collation throughout with domesday book, and the appending of the _inquisitio eliensis_, edited from three different texts, represent an extraordinary amount of minute and wearisome labour. the result is a volume as helpful as it is indispensable to the scholar. i propose in this paper to take up anew the subject, at the point where mr hamilton has left it, to submit the text to scientific criticism, to assign it its weight in the scale of authority, and to explain its glossarial and its illustrative value for the construction and the contents of domesday book. i. nature of the 'inq. com. cant.' exact definition is needful at the outset in dealing with this document. the _inquisitio comitatus cantabrigiensis_, which is entered on fos. 76-113 of tib. a. vi, must be carefully distinguished from the _inquisitio eliensis_ on fos. 38-68. mr hamilton doubted whether any one before him 'had distinguished between' the two, but this, we have seen, was a mistake. the distinction however is all-important, the two documents differing altogether in character. one would not think it necessary to distinguish them also from the so-called _liber eliensis_ (which is not a survey at all) had not mr eyton inadvertently stated that our document has been printed under the title of _liber eliensis_.[7] the _inquisitio comitatus cantabrigiensis_ (hereafter styled 'the i.c.c.') deals with the county of cambridge alone, but, in that county, with the lands of all holders. the _inquisitio eliensis_ (which i propose to style 'the i.e.') deals with several counties, but, in these counties, with the lands of the abbey alone. the latter was duly printed, with domesday book, by the record commission; the former remained in manuscript till printed by mr hamilton. mr hamilton describes his record at the outset as 'the original return made by the _juratores_ of the county of cambridge in obedience to the conqueror's mandate, from which the exchequer domesday for that county was afterwards compiled by the king's secretaries', and as 'the original source from which the exchequer domesday for that county was derived'. mr birch here again repeats the words, insisting 'that we have in this very precious cottonian ms. _the original source_ from which the exchequer domesday of cambridgeshire was compiled'.[8] such a description is most unfortunate being not only inaccurate but misleading. all that we are entitled to predicate of the document is that it is _apparently a copy_ of the original returns from which domesday book was compiled. for 'the original source' of both we must look to the now missing returns of the jurors, the primary authority from which domesday book and the _inquisitio com. cant._ are independently derived. this distinction is all-important, reducing, as it does, the _inquisitio_ from the rank of an 'original' to that of a secondary authority on the same level with domesday book.[9] mr hamilton, like mr webb before him, assigned the handwriting of the _inquisitio_ to about the close of the twelfth century. the copy of the returns which it contains, therefore, was made about a century later than the returns themselves. the problem then that we have to solve is this: 'is the i.c.c. an actual transcript of these original returns, and if so, is it faithful?' i will not, like mr hamilton, assume an affirmative, but will attempt an impartial inquiry. the two paths which we must follow in turn to arrive at a just conclusion are (1) the construction of the i.c.c., (2) collation with the _inq. eliensis_. for i hope to show that the latter record must have been derived from the same source as the _inq. com. cant._ following the first of these paths, we note at once that while _domesday book_ arranges the manors according to fiefs, the _inq. com. cant._, on the contrary, arranges them by hundreds and townships. its system is regular and simple. for every hundred it first enumerates the principal jurors who made the return, and then gives the return itself, arranged according to townships (_villæ_). these townships are thus the units of which the manors they contain are merely the component fractions. this is precisely what we should expect to find in the original returns, but it only creates a presumption; it does not afford a proof. for instance, it might be reasonably urged that these copies may have omitted certain items in the returns, just as domesday book omitted others. to reply to this objection, we must turn to the second path; that is to say, we must collate the _inquisitio eliensis_ with the _inq. com. cant._ i shall prove below that the latter cannot have been taken from the former, which only covers a portion of its field, and that, on the other hand, the former cannot have been taken from the latter, because the _inquisitio eliensis_ is accurate in places where the _inq. com. cant._ is in error. consequently they must both have been derived independently from some third document. this being so, if we should find that their versions agree closely, we may fairly infer that each is intended to be a faithful reproduction of the above 'third document'. in other words, if neither version omits items which are given in the other, we are entitled to assume that the copy is in each case exhaustive, for two scribes working independently are not likely to have systematically omitted the same items from the document before them. what then was the 'third document' from which they both copied? obviously it was either the original returns of the domesday jurors, or a copy (exhaustive or not) of these returns. now we cannot suppose that two scribes, working, as i have said, independently, would both have worked, not from the original returns themselves, but from a copy, and that the same copy of these returns--a copy, moreover, of the existence of which we have no evidence whatever. moreover, in this hypothetical copy, there would, we may safely assert, have been some clerical errors. these would have duly re-appeared in both the _inquisitiones_, and collation with domesday book would enable us to detect them. yet in no single instance, though each of them contains errors, have i found a clerical error common to both. we are thus driven to the conclusion that in both these _inquisitiones_ we have copies of the actual returns made by the domesday jurors. one of the postulates in the above argument is that the _inq. com. cant._ and the _inq. eliensis_ 'agree closely' in their versions. here is an instance in illustration:[10] _i.c.c._ _i.e._ meldeburna pro x. sol[idis] se meldeburne pro x. hidis se defendebat t.r.e. et modo pro defendebat in tempore r. æd. et viii. et de his x. hidis tenet modo pro viii. et de his x. predictus abbas ii. hidas et hun[dredis] tenet abbas de eli i^{am.} virgam. v. carrucis est ii. hidas et i. v[irgam]. ibi terra. una carruca et dimidia, v. carucis ibi est terra. i. et una hida et una virga in caruca et dimidia, et i. hida dominio, et dimidia carruca et dimidia, in dominio, et potest fieri. iii. carucæ dimidia caruca potest fieri. villanis. vi. villani, ix. iii. carucæ hominibus. vi. bordarii, iii. cotarii, villani, ix. bordarii, iii. dimidium molendinum de iii. cotarii. pratum v. carucis. solidis, et viii. denariis. i. molendinum de ii. solidis pratum v. carrucis. pastura ad et viii. denariis. pastura ad pecora villæ, ccc. oves iii. pecora villæ. oves ccc., iii^{es.} minus, xxxiiii. porci. inter minus, et xxxiiii. porci. inter totum valet c. sol., et quando totum valet v. lib. quando recepit totidem. t.r.e. vi. lib. recepit v. lib. t.r.e. vi. hæc terra jacet et jacuit in lib. hæc terra jacet et jacuit ecclesia sancte ædel. de eli in in ecclesia sancte ædel' dominio. ely in dominio. et de his x. hidis tenet wido de in eadem villa habet guido de reb' curt de rege, &ca., &ca. raimbecurt de rege, &ca., &ca. these extracts are typical and instructive. they leave, in the first place, no doubt upon the mind that both are versions of the same original. this, which proves my postulate, will be shown below to possess a further and important bearing. but while these versions closely agree, we notice (1) independent blunders, (2) slight variants in diction. as to blunders, we see that the i.c.c. has 'sol[idis]' where the i.e. has the correct 'hidis', while, conversely, the i.e. reads 'hun[dredis]' where the i.c.c. has, rightly, 'hidis'. again the i.c.c. allots to demesne an assessment of a hide and a virgate, but i.e. a hide and a half (_i.e._ two virgates). collation with domesday book confirms the former version. conversely, the i.c.c. assigns to the mill the value of three shillings and eightpence, but the i.e. of two shillings and eightpence. collation with domesday book confirms the latter. turning now to the variants, we may express them more clearly thus: _i.c.c._ _i.e._ t.r.e. = in tempore r. æd. predictus abbas = abbas de eli. villanis = hominibus. dimidium molendinum = i. molendinum. c. sol. = v. lib. totidem = v. lib. de his x. hidis tenet = in eadem villa habet. these prove that verbal accuracy was not aimed at by the transcribers. the same freedom from its trammels is seen in the transposition of the 'mill' and 'meadow' passages, and, indeed, in the highly abbreviated form of the i.e. entries (in which a single letter, mostly, does duty for a word), which shows that the original version must have been either extended in the i.c.c., or (more probably) abbreviated in the i.e. we are now in a position to advance to the criticism of the text of the _inq. com. cant._, and to inquire how far it can be trusted as a reproduction of the original returns. in other words, are its contents more or less trustworthy than those of domesday book? it might, no doubt, be fairly presumed that a simple transcript of the original returns was less likely to contain error than such a compilation as domesday book, in which their contents were (1) rearranged on a different system, (2) epitomized and partly omitted, (3) altered in wording. mr hamilton, indeed, who was naturally tempted to make the most of his ms., appears to have jumped at this conclusion; for he speaks in his preface (p. xii) of its 'superior exactness', and gives us no hint of omissions or of blunders. there are, however, plenty of both, as will be seen from the lists below, which do not profess to be exhaustive. but we will first examine the instances adduced by mr hamilton. out of ten examples in proof of its value, five are cases in which 'the want of precision in domesday' leaves the identity of the tenant-in-chief 'undefined'. it is difficult to comment on these statements, because in all five cases the name is as carefully recorded in domesday as in the i.c.c. mr hamilton's error can only, it will be found, have arisen from comparing the i.c.c. not with domesday book, but with the extracts therefrom printed in his work, which, being torn from their place, do not, of course, contain the tenant's full name, which in domesday itself is given at the head of the list from which they are taken. moreover, as it happens, this test demonstrates not the inferiority, but (in one instance at least) the superiority of domesday, the i.c.c. (fo. 97, col. 2) reading 'hanc terram tenuit comes alanus' [_sic_], where domesday has (rightly) 'hanc terram tenuit algar comes'. the former must have wrongly extended the abbreviated original entry.[11] another of mr hamilton's examples is this: 'hæc terra fuit et est de dominio æcclesiæ' (domesday) is abbreviated from a long account of the holdings of harduuinus de scalariis and turcus homo abbatis de rameseio in the cotton ms. but, on referring to the passage in question, we find that the domesday passage: 'hæc terra fuit et est de dominio æcclesiæ' has nothing to do with that 'long account', but corresponds to the simple formula in the i.c.c., 'hanc terram tenuerunt monache de cet'ero t.r.e. et modo tenent'. the example which follows it is this: at pp. 38, 39 we see a curious alteration in the value of the land, which had risen from xv. lib. 'quando recepit' and t.r.e. to xvii. lib. at the time the return was made, and dropped again to xvi. lib. in the domesday survey. this strange comment implies the supposition that the i.c.c. records an earlier survey than domesday book, whereas, of course, they are derived from the same returns, so that the discrepancy of xvi. and xvii. is merely a clerical error. one more instance, the 'curious reading' _harlestone_ in the i.c.c., is shown below to be merely an error in that ms. such are eight of the examples adduced by mr hamilton. the remaining two merely illustrate not the superior accuracy, but the greater elaboration of the i.c.c. it has been absolutely necessary to dispose of these examples, in order to show that a critical estimate of the value of the i.c.c. has yet to be made. taking the omissions in the ms. first, we find some really bad ones. on fo. 79a (2), collation with domesday gives this result: _i.c.c._ (p. 12)[12] _d.b._ (i. 196a) ii. hidas et dimidiam et x. acras tenuerunt ii. hidas et dimidiam tenuerunt. [..................... et x. acras. nec isti potuerunt ................................. recedere absque licentia ................................. abbatis. et xix. sochemanni, ................................. homines regis e., tenuerunt ....]. non potuerunt recedere ii. hidas. non potuerunt sine licentia. recedere absque licentia. a similar 'run on' omission is found on fo. 109a (1): _i.c.c._ (p. 79) _d.b._ (i. 200a, 193a) tenet radulfus de bans de [widone tenet radulfus de widone iii^{ciam.} de] rembercurt terciam partem partem i. virgatæ [terra est i. unius virge. i. bovi ibi est bovi], et ibi est bos. valet et terra, et est bos [.............. valuit ii. sol., et vendere potuit, ................................. et iiii^{tam.} partem unius avere ................................. vicecomiti invenit. ................................. ................................. in oreuuelle tenet eadem ................................. æcclesia iiii^{tam.} partem unius .......................] valet et virgatæ. terra est dimidio bovi valuit semper xii. den.[13] et valet xii. den. another instance of 'running on' occurs on fo. 105a (1), where 'xviii. cotarii' (p. 67) is proved by domesday to stand for 'xviii. [bordarii x.] cotarii'. again on fo. 79b (2) we have this: _i.c.c._ (p. 14) _d.b._ (i. 195b 1) eadiua unam hidam habuit et tenuit eddeua i. hidam et i. unam virgam [.................. virgatam et wluui homo ejus ....] socham huius habuit ædiua i. hidam et i. virgatam. socam t.r.e.[14] ejus habuit eddeua. so, too, on fo. 100b(1): _i.c.c._ (p. 52) _d.b._ (i. 190a) xi. carruce villanis xv. [villani, xv. villani et xv. bordarii xv. bordarii, xi. servi. unum mol' cum xi. carucis. ibi xi. servi, de xvi. denariis, et alii duo mol' et i. molinus de xvi. denariis de xxxii. denariis. pratum] xvi. et alii duo molini xxxii. carrucis. denariis. pratum xvi. carucis. the importance of such an omission as this lies in the proof of unintelligent clerkship and want of revision which so unmeaning an entry as 'xv. xvi. carrucis' supplies. omissions of another character are not infrequent. on fo. 95b (1) an entire holding of a virgate (held by a sokeman of earl alan) is omitted (p. 34). another sokeman of earl alan (p. 32) has his holding (1/4 virgate) omitted on the same folio (95a, 1), so is an entire holding of hardwin's (p. 36) on fo. 96a (2). a demesne plough ('i. caruca') of hugh de port (p. 8) is omitted (78a, 1), and so are the ploughs ('et iiii. villanis') of aubrey's villeins (p. 9) a few lines lower down. on fo. 90a (1) the words 'ibi est terra' are wanting (p. 15),[15] and so are 'non potuit' on fo. 100 (a) 1.[16] the word 'recedere' is left out on fo. 103b (2),[17] and 'soca' just before (103 (b) 1).[18] 'odo' is similarly wanting on fo. 90a (1).[19] the note also on the abbot of ely's sokeman at lollesworth (p. 95), is wholly omitted (fo. 113, b, 2), though found both in domesday book and in the _inquisitio eliensis_.[20] turning now to the clerical blunders, we find an abundant crop. we may express them conveniently in tabular form: folio page 76 (_a_) 2. 'auenam lvii. nummos,' _for_ 'aueram (ve)l viii. denarios' (d.b.) 2 76 (_b_) 1. 'hominis' _for_ 'ho(mo)' 3 77 (_a_) 2. 'in dominio et iii. villani', _for_ 'una caruca in dominio et iii. villanis' 7 _ibid._ 'mille de anguillis dimidium de piscina', _for_ 'i. millen' et dimidium anguill'' (d.b.) 7 78 (_b_) 2. 'iiii. in dominio carucæ et iiii. hidæ in dominio', _for_ 'iiii. carucæ et iiii. hidæ in dominio' 11 79 (_a_) 1. 'cuius honor erat', _for_ 'cuius ho(mo) erat' 12 79 (_b_) 2. 'iiii. bobus', _for_ 'iiii. bord(arii)' 14 91 (_b_) 2. 'valent iii.', _for_ 'valent iii. den.' 21 92 (_b_) 2. 'xliii. car(ucis) ibi e(st) terra', _for_ 'xl. acras terræ' 25 95 (_a_) 2. 'has v. h(idas) tenet', _for_ 'de his v. h(idis) tenet' 33 95 (_b_) 1. 'et pro iiii. virgis', _for_ 'et pro iii. virgis' 34 95 (_b_) 2. 'unam virgam minus', _for_ 'dimi' virg' minus' (d.b.) 35 96 (_b_) 1. 'dimidiam virgam', _for_ 'i. virg'' (d.b.) 38 97 (_b_) 1. 'clintona', _for_ 'iclintona' 41 97 (_b_) 2. 'unam hidam', _for_ 'dimidiam hidam' (d.b.) 42 100 (_a_) 1. 'terra est vi. carucis', _for_ 'terra est v. carucis'[21] 50 100 (_a_) 2. 'ii. h(idas) et dimidiam virgam', _for_ 'ii. hidas et i. virgam et dimidiam'[22] (d.b.) 50 100 (_b_) 2. 'vii. sochemanni', _for_ 'iii. soch[emanni]'[23] 52 101 (_a_) 2. 'homities', _for_ 'homines' 54 101 (_b_) 2. 'tenet pic' vicecomes quendam ortum de rege ii. hide', _for_ 'tenet pic' vicecomes de rege ii. hidas'[24] 55 102 (_a_) 1. 'ii. boves', _for_ 'ii. bord(arii)' 56 104 (_b_) 1. 'iiii. hidas et i. virgam', _for_ 'iii. hidas et i. virgam' (d.b.) 65 105 (_b_) 2. _bis_ 'rahamnes', _for_ 'kahannes' 60 106 (_a_) 1. 'pro vi. hidis' (_bis_), _for_ 'pro vii. hidis' 70 109 (_b_) 2. 'fulcuinus tenet de comite alano iii. cottarios', _for_ 'fulcuinus tenet de comite alano. iii. cottarii' 82 110 (_a_) 1. 'ely tenuit ii. h(idas)', _for_ 'ely tenuit i. h(idam)' (i.e.) 83 110 (_b_) 1. 'viiii. h(idis)', _for_ 'viii. h(idis)' 84 111 (_a_) 2. 'liii. carrucis est ibi terra', _for_ 'iiii. car' est ibi terra' 87 besides these, ralf 'de bans' is often entered as ralf 'de scannis'. again, we find such blunders as this: _i.c.c._ _d.b._ hugo de portu tenet sneileuuelle. ipse hugo tenet _de feudo pro v. hidis se defendebat t.r.e. episcopi baiocensis_ snellewelle. et modo facit _de feudo episcopi pro v. hidis se defend[ebat] baiocensis_ (p. 3). semper. tenuit turbertus i. hidam sub tenuit turbern i. hidam de abbate. abbate de eli. _et in morte_ ita non poterat separare ab æcclesia quod non potuit dare neque extra firmam monachorum t.r.e. separare ab ecclesia extra _nec in die mortis ejus_. dominicam firmam monachorum t.r.e. (p. 63). abuerunt de soca s. ædel' ii. habuerunt ii. hidas et dimidiam hidas et dimidiam virgam _de ely_ vir[gatam] de soca s. ædeldride t.r.e. (p. 65). _de ely_. in all these three cases the italicized words are misplaced, and in all three the explanation is the same, the scribe having first omitted them, and then inserted them later out of place. having now criticized the text of the i.c.c., and shown that it presents no small traces of unintelligent clerkship, if not of actual ignorance of the terms and _formulæ_ of domesday, i turn to the text of domesday book, to test it by comparison with that of the i.c.c. ii. criticism of the domesday text among the omissions are, on i, 195 (_b_) 1, 'item et reddebat viii. den. vel aueram si rex in vicecomitatu venit' (p. 5). at kirtling (p. 11), 'et v^{ta.} caruca potest fieri [in dominio]' is omitted (i. 202 _a_). so is (p. 25) a potential demesne plough of john fitz waleran (i. 201 _b_). the countess judith's sokemen at carlton (pp. 20, 21) have their values omitted[25] (i. 202, _a_, 2). 'habuerunt dimidiam hidam, et,' is omitted (p. 28) in the entry of two sokemen of godwine (201, _b_, 2). on i. 196 (_a_) 1, 'terra est i. bovi' is wanting (p. 79). more important, however, are the omissions of whole entries. these are by no means difficult to account for, the process of extracting from the original returns, the various entries relating to each particular fief being one which was almost certain to result in such omissions.[26] moreover, two entries were occasionally thrown into one, a dangerous plan for the clerks themselves, and one which may sometimes lead us to think that an entry is omitted when it is duly to be found under another head. lastly, the compilers of domesday book had no such invaluable check for their work as was afforded in the original by entering first the assessment of the whole township, and then that of each of its component manors separately. but of this more below.[27] the only wonder is that the omissions are, after all, so few. perhaps even of these some may be only apparent. hardwin's half-hide in _burwell_ (p. 6) is wanting; so is aubrey's half-virgate in _badburgham_, according to mr hamilton (p. 36), but the oversight is his. a virgate held in trumpington by a burgess of cambridge (p. 51) would seem to be not forthcoming, but its position was somewhat anomalous.[28] guy de rembercurt held a hide and a virgate in _haslingefield_ (p. 73), though we cannot find it in domesday; and in _witewelle_ (outwell) two hides which were held by robert, a tenant of hardwin (p. 81), are similarly omitted, according to mr hamilton but will be found under 'wateuuelle' (198, _b_, 2). there are cases in which the i.c.c. corrects d.b., cases in which d.b. corrects the i.c.c., and cases in which the i.c.c. corrects itself. there are also several cases of discrepancy between the two, in which we cannot positively pronounce which, if either, is right. a singular instance of both being wrong is found in the case of soham. the assessment of this township was actually eleven hides, its four component holdings being severally assessed at nine and a half hides less six acres, half a hide, one hide, and six acres. the i.c.c. at first gives the total assessment as eleven hides and a half, while d.b. erroneously assesses the first of the four holdings at six hides and forty acres in one place, and nine hides and a half in the other, both figures being wrong. a most remarkable case of yet another kind is found in _scelford_ (shelford). here the entry in i.c.c. agrees exactly with the duplicate entries found in d.b. yet they both make nonsense.[29] but on turning to the _inquisitio eliensis_ we obtain the correct version. as this is a very important and probably unique instance, the entries are here given in parallel columns: _inq. eliensis._ _inq. com. cant._ _d.b._ i. 198 _d.b._ i. 198 (_a_) 2. (_a_) 2. i. hidam et dim. tenuerunt vii. tenuerunt vii. tenuerunt vii. et vi. acras quas [_sic_] [_sic_] [_sic_] tenuerunt vi. sochemanni sochemanni sochemanni sochemanni de i. hidam et i. hidam et i. hidam et socha abbatis dim. et vi. dim. et vi. dim. et vi. ely, de quibus acras de soca acras de soca acras de soca non potuerunt abbatis de ely. abbatis. non[30] abbatis de ely. dare nec non potuerunt potuerunt non potuerunt recedere nisi recedere sed recedere cum recedere cum iii^{cs.} virgas soca remanebat terra, sed soca terra, sed soca absque ejus abbati. remanebat remanebat licentia. æcclesia de ely. æcclesiæ ely. et si alias vendidissent tres virgas, predictus abbas semper socham habuit t.r.e. here the _inquisitio eliensis_ version shows us that the estate had two divisions held by different tenures. three virgates the sokemen were not free to sell; the other three they might sell, but if they did, 'predictus abbas semper socham habuit'.[31] the two divisions of the estate are confused in the other versions. but all three of these correspond so exactly that we are driven to assign the error to the original returns themselves. in that case the compiler (or compilers) of the i.e. will have corrected the original return from his own knowledge of the facts, which knowledge, i shall show, he certainly possessed. this brings us to the _errors_ of domesday. for comparison's sake, i here tabulate them like those of the i.c.c.: folio page i. 189 (_b_) 2. 'mancipium', _for_ 'inuuardum' (i.c.c.) 4 i. 195 (_b_) 1. 'terra est ii. carucis et ibi est', _for_ 'terra est i. carucæ et ibi est' 15 i. 199 (_b_) 1. 'xxx. acras', _for_ 'xx. acras' (i.c.c.) 15 i. 196 (_a_) 2. 'iiii. villani ... habent iii. carucas', _for_ 'iiii. villani ... habent iiii. carucas' 21 i. 199 (_b_) 1. 'de hac terra tenet', _for_ 'adhuc in eadem villa tenet' (?)[32] 29 i. 198 (_a_) 1. 'tenet harduuinus i. virgatam' _for_ 'tenet hardeuuinus dim. virgatam' (i.c.c.) 38 i. 194 (_b_) 1. 'ii. hidas et i. virg. terræ', _for_ 'ii. hidas et una virg. et dimidiam' (i.c.c.) 64 i. 199 (_b_) 2. 'xvi. sochemanni', _for_ 'xv sochemanni' 65 i. 198 (_b_) 1. 'tenet durand ... i. hidam et i. virg.', _for_ 'tenet durand i. hidam et dim. virg.' 67 i. 200 (_a_) 1. 'in dominio ii. hidæ et dim', _for_ 'in dominio ii. hidæ et dim. virg.'[33] 67 i. 200 (_b_) 2. 'tenet radulf de picot iii. virg.', _for_ 'tenet radulf de picot i. virg.' 80 i. 196 (_b_) 2. 'tenet robertus vii. hidas et ii. virg. et dim.', _for_ 'tenet robertus vii. hidas et i. virg. et dim.' 74 i. 200 (_a_) 1. 'vii. homines algari comitis', _for_ 'vi. homines algari comitis' 84 comparing the omissions and errors, as a whole, in these two versions of the original returns, it may be said that the comparison is in favour of the domesday book text, although, from the process of its compilation, it was far the most exposed to error. no one who has not analysed and collated such texts for himself can realize the extreme difficulty of avoiding occasional error. the abbreviations and the _formulæ_ employed in these surveys are so many pitfalls for the transcriber, and the use of roman numerals is almost fatal to accuracy. the insertion or omission of an 'x' or an 'i' was probably the cause of half the errors of which the domesday scribes were guilty. remembering that they had, in mr eyton's words,[34] to perform 'a task, not of mere manual labour and imitative accuracy, but a task requiring intellect--intellect, clear, well-balanced, apprehensive, comprehensive, and trained withal', we can really only wonder that they performed it so well as they did. still, the fact remains that on a few pages of domesday we have been able to detect a considerable number of inaccuracies and omissions. the sacrosanct status of the great survey is thus gravely modified. i desire to lay stress on this fact, which is worthy of the labour it has cost to establish. for two important conclusions follow. firstly, it is neither safe nor legitimate to make general inferences from a single entry in domesday. all conclusions as to the interpretation of its _formulae_ should be based on _data_ sufficiently numerous to exclude the influence of error. secondly, if we find that a rule of interpretation can be established in an overwhelming majority of the cases examined, we are justified, conversely, in claiming that the apparent exceptions may be due to errors in the text. the first of these conclusions has a special bearing on the theories propounded by mr pell with so much ingenuity and learning.[35] i have shown, in an essay criticizing these theories,[36] that the case of clifton, to which mr pell attached so much importance,[37] is nothing, in all probability, but one of domesday's blunders, of which i gave, in that essay, other instances. so, too, in the case of his own manor of wilburton, mr pell accepted without question the reading '_six_ ploughlands', as representing the 'primary return',[38] although that reading is only found in the most corrupt of the three versions of the _inquisitio eliensis_, while the two better versions (b and c texts) agree with domesday book, and with the abbreviated return at the end of the a text itself (tib. a. vi fo. 67, _b_, 1), in giving the ploughlands as _seven_. really it is nothing but waste of time to argue from a reading which is only found in one out of five mss., and that one the most corrupt. this brings me to the existence and the value of duplicate entries in domesday. mr hamilton describes as 'a curious reading' the words in the i.c.c., 'sed soca remanebat _harlestone_'. now it so happens that in this case we have five separate versions of the original entry: one in the i.c.c., one in the i.e., and three in domesday book. here they are side by side: _i.c.c._ _i.e._ _d.b._ _d.b._ _d.b._ (p. 46) (p. 106) (i. 200, (_ibid._, (i. 191, _a_, 2) in margin) _a_, 2) et potuit potuit recedere vendere potuit recedere recedere cum terra potuit, recedere sine quo voluit cum terra sua sua potuit, sed soca licentia ejus, sed soca absque ejus sed soca abbati sed soca remanebat licentia, remansit remansit. remansit harlestone. sed semper æcclesiæ. abbati. remansit socha ejus in ecclesia sancte ædel' ut hund testantur. the value of such collation as this ought to be self-evident. it is not only that we thus find four out of five mss. to be against the reading '_harlestone_' (which, indeed, to any one familiar with the survey is obviously a clerical error), but that here and elsewhere we are thus afforded what might almost be termed a bilingual inscription. we learn, for instance, that the domesday scribe deemed it quite immaterial whether he wrote 'recedere cum terra ejus', or 'vendere' or 'recedere sine licentia'. consequently, these phrases were all identical in meaning.[39] considerable light is thrown by the i.c.c. on the origin of these little known duplicate entries in domesday. in every instance of their occurrence within the limits of its province they are due to a conflict of title recorded in the original return. they appear further to be confined to the estates of two landowners, picot, the sheriff, and hardwin d'eschalers, the titles of both being frequently contested by the injured abbot of ely. why the third local offender, guy de raimbercurt, does not similarly appear, it is difficult to say. he was the smallest offender of the three, and picot the worst; but it is hardwin's name which occurs most frequently in these duplicate entries.[40] the principle which guided the domesday scribes cannot be certainly decided, for they duplicated entries in the original return which (according to the i.c.c.) varied greatly in their statements of tenure. thus, to take the first three: _i.c.c._ _d.b._ fo. 79 (_b_) 1, 'tenet harduuinus {i. 190 (_b_) 2, 'tenet harduinus descalariis'.[41] { _sub abbate_'. {i. 199 (_a_) 2, 'tenet harduinus'. fo. 90 (_b_) 2, 'tenet harduuinus {i. 190 (_b_) 1, 'tenet harduinus _de abbate_'. { de escalers _de abbate_'. {i. 199 (_a_) 2, 'tenet harduinus'. fo. 92 (_a_) 2, 'tenet harduuinus {i. 199 (_b_) 2, 'tenet harduinus _de rege_'. { _de abbate_'. {i. 199 (a) 2, 'tenet harduinus'. here, whether the original return states hardwin to hold (1) of the abbot, (2) of the king, or (3) of neither, the scribes, in each of the three cases, enter the estates (_a_) under the abbot's land, as held of the abbot, (_b_) under hardwin's land, as held _in capite_. and it is singular that in all these three cases the entry of the estate under the abbot's land is the fuller of the two.[42] on the whole it would appear that the domesday scribes did not consistently carry out a system of duplicate entry, though, on the other hand, these entries were by no means due to mere clerical inadvertence, but were prompted by a doubt as to the title, which led to the precaution of entering them under the names of both the claimants. but the chief point of interest in these same entries is that they give us, when we add the versions of the i.c.c. and the i.e., four parallel texts. at some of the results of their collation we will now glance. _i.c.c._ _i.e._ _d.b._ _d.b._ (fo. 92, (p. 107) (i. 190, (i. 199, _b_, 2) _b_, 2) _a_, 2) hanc terram hanc terram hanc terram hanc terram tenuerunt iii. tenuerunt iii. tenuerunt iii. tenuerunt iii. sochemanni sochemanni sochemanni sochemanni. homines sub predicto homines _vendere_ abbatis de ely. abbate ely. abbatis de ely. non potuerunt. non potuerunt non potuerunt non potuerunt _recedere absque _vendere terram _dare nec licentia ejus_. suam sine vendere absque eius licentia_. ejus licentia terram suam_. _i.c.c._ _i.e._ _d.b._ _d.b._ (fo. 79, (p. 102) (i. 190, (i. 199, _b_, 1) _b_, 2) _a_, 2) iiii. sochemanni hanc terram hanc terram hanc terram tenuerunt hanc tenuerunt iiii. tenuerunt iiii. tenuerunt iiii. terram t.r.e. et sochemanni sochemanni, sochemanni non potuerunt t.r.e. de nec potuerunt abbatis de ely. _recedere sine abbate ely. _recedere sine non potuerunt licentia non potuerunt licentia _vendere_. abbatis de ely_. _recedere vel abbatis_. vendere sine licentia abbatis ely_. these extracts illustrate the use of the terms _dare, vendere, recedere_, etc. they are supplemented by those given below: _i.c.c._ _d.b._ _i.e._ (76, _a_, 1) (i. 196, _b_, 1) potuit dare sine terram suam tamen licentia domini sui dare et vendere terram suam. potuit. (76, _b_, 2) (i. 199, _a_, 2) (p. 101) absque eius licentia sine ejus licentia potuerunt dare vel dare terram suam poterant recedere vendere terram suam. potuerunt, sed socham et terram suam dare saca remansit abbati. eorum habuit vel vendere, sed archiepiscopus. soca remansit archiepiscopo. (76, _b_, 2) (i. 196, _b_, 1) potuit dare cui potuit absque[43] voluit. ejus licentia recedere. (77, _b_, 2) (i. 195, _b_, 1) potuerunt recedere potuerunt recedere cum terra ad quem sine licentia dominum voluerunt. eorum. (78, _a_, 1) (i. 190, _b_, 1) potuerunt recedere dare et vendere cum terra sua absque potuerunt. licentia domini sui. (90, _a_, 2) (i. 190, _b_, 2)\ (p. 102) non potuerunt non potuerunt | non potuerunt recedere recedere sine recedere sine | vel vendere absque licentia abbatis. ejus licentia. | eius licentia. } (i. 200, _a_, 2) | non potuerunt | vendere sine | ejus licentia. / (105, _a_, 2) (i. 200, _a_, 1) (p. 109) potuerunt dare et terras suas vendere potuerunt dare vel vendere sine soca. potuerunt. soca de vendere cui voluerunt, viii. sochemannis sed saca eorum remansit remansit in abbatia eidem abbati. de ely. (113, _b_, 1) (201, _a_, 1) (p. 112) potuerunt recedere terram suam vendere potuerunt dare preter sine soca. potuerunt. soca licentiam abbatis vero remansit et sine soca. abbati. no one can glance at these passages without perceiving that _dare_, _vendere_, and _recedere_ are all interchangeably used, and that even any two of them (whether they have the conjunction 'et' or the disjunction 'vel' between them) are identical with any one. it would be possible to collect almost any number of instances in point. further, the insertion or omission of the phrase 'sine' (or 'absque') 'ejus licentia' is immaterial, it being understood where not expressed. so too with the words 'cui voluit'. in short, like the translators to whom we owe the authorized version, the domesday scribes appear to have revelled in the use of synonym and paraphrase.[44] our own conceptions of the sacredness of a text and of the need for verbal accuracy were evidently foreign to their minds. glancing for a moment at another county, we have in the survey of leicestershire a remarkable instance of a whole fief being entered twice over. it is that of robert hostiarius: robertus hostiarius tenet de robertus filus w. hostiari, rege ii. car. terræ in howes. tenet de rege in howes ii. terra est iii. carucis. in cari terræ. ibi habet i. car. dominio est i. caruca et iii. in dominio et iii. serv[os] et servi, et viii. villani cum viii. villani cum i. bordario i. bordario habent ii. car.... habentes ii. car.... idem [turstinus] tenet de r. idem turstinus tenet de roberto iiij. car. terræ in in clachestone iiii. car. terræ clachestone. terra est ii. et tetbald[us] ii. car. terræ. caruca. has habent ibi iii. ibi est in dominio i. caruca et sochemanni cum ii. villanis iii. sochemanni et v. villani et ii. bordariis. ibi viii. et iiii. [_sic_] bordarii cum acræ prati. valuit et valet iii. carucis et i. servo. ibi x. solidos. xiii. acræ prati. valuit et valet totum xx. solidos. has tetbald[us] tenet de roberto terras tenuerunt t.r.e. outi et ii. car. terræ in clachestone. arnui cum saca et soca. in dominio est i. caruca cum i. servo et iii. villani cum i. bordario habent i. car. ibi vi. acræ prati. valuit et valet x. solidos. here the last two entries (both relating to claxton) have been boldly thrown into one in the second version, which also (though omitting the number of ploughlands) gives additional information in the name of robert's father, and in those of his predecessors t.r.e. this is thus an excellent illustration of the liberty allowed themselves by the compilers of domesday. an instance on a smaller scale is found in the survey of cambridgeshire, where we read on opposite pages: in witelesfeld hund'. in witelesf' h'd. in histetone jacet wara in histetune jac' wara de i. hida et dimidia de de hida et dimidia de m. cestreforde et est in cestres' man. et est exsesse appreciata, hanc appreciata in exexe. terram tenuit algarus algar comes tenuit comes (i. 189 _b_). (i. 190). the second entry has been deleted as a duplicate, but it serves to show us that the scribes, even when free from error, were no mere copyists.[45] iii. 'soca' and 'theinland' the extracts i have given above establish beyond a doubt the existence among the 'sochemanni' of two kinds of tenure. we have (1) those who were free to part with (_vendere_) and leave (_recedere_) their land, (2) those who were not, i.e. who could not do so without the abbot's licence. this distinction is reproduced in two terms which i will now examine. in the _inquisitio eliensis_ and the documents connected with it there is much mention of the 'thegnlands' of the abbey. these lands are specially distinguished from 'sokeland' (_terra de soca_). both, of course, are distinct from the 'dominium'. thus in one of the conqueror's writs we read: restituantur ecclesiæ terræ que in _dominio_ suo erant die obitus æduardi.... qui autem tenent _theinlandes_ que procul dubio debent teneri de ecclesia faciant concordiam cum abbate quam meliorem poterint,... hoc quoque de tenentibus _socam_ et _sacam_ fiat.[46] now this distinction between 'thegnland' and 'sokeland' will be found to fit in exactly with the difference in tenure we have examined above. here is an instance from the 'breve abbatis' in the record of guy de raimbercurt's aggressions: in melreda ii. hidas et dim. virg. in meldeburne ii. hidas et dim.[47] et dim. virg. hoc est iiii. hidas et iii. virg. ex his sunt i. virg. et dim. _thainlande_ et iiii. hidas et dim.[48] _de soca_. on reference to the two manors in question, there is, at first sight, nothing in the i.c.c., the i.e., or domesday to distinguish the 'thegnland' from the 'sokeland'. of the first holding we read that it had been held t.r.e. by 10 _sochemanni_ 'de soca s. edelride'; of the second, that it was held by 'viii. _sochemanni_ ... homines abbatis de ely'. but closer examination of the i.c.c. reveals, in the former case, this distinction: de his ii. hidis et dimidia virga tenuit i. istorum _unam virgam et dimidiam_. non potuit dare nec vendere absque licentia abbatis. sed alii novem potuerunt recedere et vendere cui voluerunt.[49] here then we identify the virgate and a half of 'theinland'--though held by a _sochemannus_--and this same distinction of tenure proves to be the key throughout. thus, for instance, in the same document 'herchenger pistor' is recorded to have seized 'in hardwic i. hidam _thainlande_ et dim. hidam et vi. acras _de soca_' (p. 177). reference to the i.c.c., d.b., and the i.e. reveals that the former holding had belonged to 'v. sochemanni homines abbatis de ely', and that 'isti non potuerunt dare neque vendere alicui extra ecclesiam s. edeldride ely'.[50] but the latter holding had belonged to a _sochemannus_, of whom it is said--'homo abbatis de ely fuit: potuit recedere, sed socam ejus abbas habuit'.[51] this enables us to understand the distinctions found in the summaries appended to the cambridgeshire portion of the i.e., and recorded in the _breve abbatis_. indeed they confirm the above distinction, for the formula they apply to holders 'de soca abbatie ely' is: 'illi qui hanc terram tenuerunt de soca t.r.e. vendere potuerunt, sed saca et soca et commendatio et servitium semper remanebat ecclesia de ely.' these terms are valuable for their definition of rights. over the holder of land 'de soco' the lord had (1) 'saca et soca', (2) 'commendatio et (3) servitium'. if the land was thegnland then the abbot received 'omnem consuetudinem' as well.[52] we will first deal with the latter class, those from whom the abbot received 'consuetudo', and then those who held 'de soca'. for contemporary (indeed, slightly earlier) evidence, we must turn to the ely _placitum_ of 1072-75.[53] the special value which this _placitum_ possesses is found in its record of the services due from _sochemanni_, and even from freemen. it thus helps to interpret the bald figures of domesday, to which it is actually anterior. the first two instances it affords are these: in breuessan tenet isdem w. terram elfrici supradicte consuetudinis. in brucge tenet ipse w. terram etfled ejusdem modi. the _consuetudo_ referred to was this: ita proprie sunt abbati ut quotienscunque preceperit prepositus monasterii ire et omnem rei emendationem persolvere. et si quid de suo voluerint venundare, a preposito prius licentiam debent accipere. the corresponding entries in the i.e. run thus: 'in brugge una libera femina commend' s. ædel. de lxxx. ac. pro manerio. in beuresham ten[uit] ælfricus i. liber homo commed' s. ædel.[54] lx. acras pro manerio' (p. 165). thus we obtain direct evidence of the services due from commended freemen owing 'consuetudines'. turning now to those of _sochemanni_, we have this important passage: willelmus de warena tenet quadraginta quinque socamans in predicta felteuuella qui quotiens abbas preceperit in anno arabunt suam terram, colligent et purgabunt segetes, adducent et mittent in horrea, portabunt victum monachorum ad monasterium, et quotiens eorum equos voluerit, et ubicunque sibi placuerit, totiens habebit, et ubicunque forsfecerint abbas forsfacturam habebit, et de illis similiter qui in eorum terram forsfecerint. item willelmus de uuarenna tenet triginta tres socamans, istius consuetudinis in nortuuolda. item w. tenet quinque socamans istius modi in muddaforda. supradictus walterus et cum eo durandus, homines hugonis de monte forti, tenent xxvi. socamans supradicte consuetudinis in maraham. collating as before from the i.e. the relative entries, we find they run thus: felteuuelle ... huic manerio adjacebant t.r.e. xxxiiii. homines cum omni consuetudine, et alii vii. erant liberi homines,[55] qui poterant vendere terras, sed soca et commendatio remansit s. ædel. (p. 132). in felteuuella tenet w. de uuarenna xli. sochemannos ... super hos omnes habebat s. ædel. socam et commendationem et omnem consuetudinem. illorum vii. liberi erant cum terris suis, sed soca et commendatio remanebat s. ædel. (p. 139). iiii. sochemanni adjacent [_sic_] huic manerio [felteuuella] t.r.e. et modo habet eos w. de warenna (p. 138). nortuualde ... huic manerio adjacebant t.r.e. xxx. sochemanni cum omni consuetudine. et alii iiii. liberi homines qui poterant vendere terras, sed saca et commendatio remanebat s. ædel. (p. 132). in nortuualde s. ædel. xxxiiii. sochem [annos] ... s. ædel. [habuit] socam et commendationem et omnem consuetudinem de illis xxx. tantum; et iiii. erant liberi homines, socam et sacam et commendationem [super hos] s. ædel. habebat[56] (p. 139). mundeforde ... huic manerio adjacebant t.r.e. septem sochemanni cum omni consuetudine (p. 132). in mundeforde s. ædel. vii. sochemannos cum omni consuetudine (p. 139). huic manerio [mareham] t.r.e. adjacebant viginti vii. sochemanni cum omni consuetudine, sed postquam rex w. advenit, habuit eos hugo de munfort preter unum (p. 130). [terre hugo de munford.] in mareham xxvi. sochemanni quos tenet [_sic_] s. ædel. t.r.e.[57] ... hanc terram receperunt[58] pro escangio, et mensurata est in brevi s. ædel. (p. 137). here then we identify these four cases: feltwell, with its 41 _sochemanni_ (more accurately described as 34 s. and 7 _liberi homines_) attached to one manor and four to another--45 in all; northwold, with its 33 or 34;[59] muddiford with 5 or 7;[60] and marham with its 26. the three former manors lay in the hundred of grimeshoe, the fourth northwards, towards the wash. just to the south of the three manors, over the borders of suffolk, lay brandon, where lisois de moustiers had usurped the rights of ely over six _sochemanni_. in lakincgeheda et in brandona vi. sochemanni s. ædel. ita quod non potuerunt vendere terras liberati liseie antecessori eudo[nis] dapif[eri] ... post eum tenuit eos eudo et tenet cum saca et soca (p. 142). the record of the _placitum_, drawn up during the tenure of lisois, shows us their limited services: 'isti solummodo arabant et c'terent [_sic_] messes ejusdem loci quotienscunque abbas præceperit.' the difference between these services and the others we have seen recorded is considerable. yet another group of sokemen on suffolk manors rendered these services: ita proprie sunt abbati ut quotienscunque ipse præceperit in anno arabunt suam terram, purgabunt et colligent segetes, portabunt victum monachorum ad monasterium, equos eorum in suis necessitatibus habebit [abbas], et ubicunque deliquerint emendationem habebit semper et de omnibus illis qui in terris eorum deliquerint. this is practically the same definition as we had for the other group, and suggests that it was of wide prevalence. a notable contrast is afforded by the entry: 'in villa que vocatur blot tenet ipse r. iiii. homines qui tantum debent servire abbati cum propriis equis in omnibus necessitatibus suis.' we have now examined the _consuetudines_ due from those 'qui vendere non potuerunt', and may turn to the rights exercised over the other class. excluding 'servitium' (which is usually omitted as subordinate or comprised in the others), these are: (1) 'commendatio' (2) 'saca et soca'. the distinction between the two meets us throughout the survey of the eastern counties. a man might be 'commended' to one lord while another held his _soca_. thus we read of eadwine, a 'man' of the abbot of ely: 'potuit dare absque eius licentia, sed socam comes algarus habuit.'[61] that is to say, he was 'commended to the abbot of ely', but earl ælfgar had the right of 'sac and soc' over him.[62] so too in the case of three 'liberi homines', commended to the abbot in norfolk. he had no right over them, but such as commendation conferred 'non habebat nisi commendationem', while their 'soca' belonged to the king's manor of keninghall.[63] conversely, the abbot of ely had the 'soca' of a 'man' of earl waltheof,[64] and a 'man' of john, waleran's nephew.[65] 'commendatio', of course, took precedence as a right. thus we read of the above three 'liberi homines'--'hos liberos homines tenet [tenuit] ratfridus, postea w. de scodies, et abbas saisivit eos propter commendationem suam' (p. 133). in the above extracts we saw 'liberi homines qui vendere poterant' distinguished from 'sochemanni', who could not sell. but we also saw that the two classes were not always carefully distinguished. we find, moreover, that the 'liberi homines' were themselves, sometimes, 'not free to sell'. thus 'tenuit anant unus liber homo sub s. ædel. t.r.e. pro manerio ii. carucatas terræ sed non potuit vendere' (p. 142). some light may be thrown on this by the case of the estate held by godmund, an abbot's brother: totam terram quam tenebat gudmundus in dominio, id est nectuna, sic tenebat t.r.e. de s. ædel. quod nullo modo poterat vendere, nec dare; sed post mortem suam debebat manerium redire in dominio ecclesiæ; quia tali pacto tenuit gudmundus de abbate (p. 144). with this we may compare these entries: in cloptuna ... ædmundus commendatus s. ædel. unam carucatam ... quam non potuit vendere nec dare (p. 150). in brandestuna ædmundus presbyter terram quam accepit cum femina sua dedit s. ædel. concedente femina t.r.e. ea conventione quod non posset eam dare nec vendere. similiter de clopetona' (p. 152). in these cases the holder had only a life interest. exactly parallel with the second is the case of 'eadward', citizen of london, who gave lands to st. paul's, reserving a life interest for himself and his wife--'et mortua illa sanctus paulus hereditare debuit'.[66] the above commendation of edmund the priest ought to be compared with that of 'unus liber homo s. ædel. commendatus _ita quod_ non poterat vendere terram suam sine licentia abbatis', and of 'i. liber homo s. ædel. commendatus _ita quod_ non poterat vendere terram suam extra ecclesiam (sed sacam et socam habuit stigandus in hersham)'.[67] thus both those who were free to sell and those who were not, might belong to the class of 'liberi homines'. the essential distinction was one, not of status, but of tenure. iv. the domesday caruca yet more definite and striking, however, is the information on the domesday _caruca_ afforded by collating d.b. with the i.c.c. i referred at the domesday commemoration (1886) to the problem raised by the _caruca_,[68] and recorded my belief that in _domesday_ the word must always mean a plough team of _eight_ oxen. the eight oxen, as mr seebohm has shown, are the key to the whole system of the carucate and the bovate. in domesday, as i argued, the _formula_ employed involves of necessity the conclusion that the _caruca_ was a fixed quantity. such entries, moreover, as 'terra i. bovi', 'terra ad iii. boves', etc., can only be explained on the hypothesis that the relation of the _bos_ to the _caruca_ was constant. but as the question is one of undoubted perplexity, and as some, like mr pell, have strenuously denied that the number of oxen in the domesday _caruca_ was fixed,[69] the evidence given below is as welcome as it is conclusive: _i.c.c._ _d.b._ fo. 96 (_a_) 2: 'dimidiæ caruce i. 202 (_a_) 2: 'terra est. est ibi terra.' iiii. bobus.' fo. 103 (_a_) 2: 'iiii. bobus i. 190 (_a_) 1: 'terra est est terra ibi.' dimidiæ carucæ.' fo. 103 (_b_) 2: 'dimidiæ caruce i. 196 (_b_) 2: 'terra est est ibi [terra].' iiii. bobus.' fo. 112 (_b_) 1: 'iiii. bobus i. 201 (_a_) 1: 'terra est est ibi terra.' dimidiæ caruce.' fo. 112 (_b_) 2: 'iiii. bobus i. 202 (_b_) 1: 'terra est est ibi terra. iiii. bobus, et et ibi sunt. pratum ibi sunt, et dimidiae caruce.' pratum ipsis bobus.' it is absolutely certain from these entries that the scribes must have deemed it quite immaterial whether they wrote 'dimidia caruca' or 'iiii. boves'; as immaterial as it would be to us whether we wrote 'half a sovereign' or 'ten shillings'. it is, consequently, as absolutely certain that the domesday _caruca_ was composed of eight oxen as that our own sovereign is composed of twenty shillings. and from this conclusion there is no escape.[70] another point in connection with the _caruca_ on which the i.c.c. gives us the light we need is this: _i.c.c._ _d.b._ fo. 102 (_a_) 2: 'ii. carrucis i. 200 (_b_) 1: 'terra est iii. ibi est terra. non sunt carruce carucis. sed non sunt ibi nisi nisi sex boves.' boves. here the domesday text is utterly misleading as it stands. but the i.c.c., by supplying the omitted 'sex', gives us at once the right sense. v. the domesday hide similar to its evidence on the domesday 'plough' is that which the i.c.c. affords as to the hide and virgate. in my criticism of mr pell's learned paper, i strenuously opposed his view that the _hida_ of domesday was composed of a variable number of virgates, and i insisted on the fact that the domesday 'virgate' was essentially and always the _quarter_ of the geldable 'hide'.[71] the following parallel passages will amply prove the fact: _i.c.c._ _d.b._ fo. 102 (_a_) 1: i. hidam et i. hidam et iii. virgatas terræ.- dimidiam et unam virgam. i. 194 (_a_) 2. fo. 102 (_a_) 1: dimidiam ii. virg' et dimidiam--i. 194 hidam et dimidiam virg'. (_a_) 2. fo. 103 (_a_) 1: dimidiam ii.^{as} virg' et dimidiam--i. 198 hidam et dimidiam virg'. (_a_) 2. fo. 103 (_b_) 1: i. hida et i. hida et ii. virg' et dimidiam- dimidia et dimidia virg'. i. 190 (_a_) 2. fo. 103 (_b_) 2: i. hida et i. hida et iii. virg'--i. 198 dimidia et i. virg'. (_b_) 1. fo. 106 (_b_) 2: iiii. hidæ iv. hidæ et iii. virg'--i. 200 et dimidia et una virg'. (_b_) 1. fo. 112 (_a_) 2: xi. hidæ i. x. hidæ et iii. virg--i. 192 virg' minus. (_b_) 1. these are only some of the passages of _direct_ glossarial value.[72] indirectly, that is to say by analysis of the township assessments, we obtain the same result throughout the survey _passim_.[73] here, again, we are able to assert that two virgates must have been to the scribes as obviously equivalent to half a hide as ten shillings with us are equivalent to half a sovereign. for here, again, the point is that these scribes had no knowledge of the varying circumstances of each locality. they had nothing to guide them but the return itself, so that the rule, in domesday, of 'four virgates to a hide' must have been of universal application. but not only were there thus, in domesday, four virgates to a hide; there were also in the domesday virgate thirty domesday acres. mr eyton, though perhaps unrivalled in the study he has bestowed on the subject, believed that there were only twelve such acres, of which, therefore, forty-eight composed the domesday hide.[74] it is, perhaps, the most important information to be derived from the i.c.c. that _a hundred and twenty_ domesday acres composed the domesday hide.[75] we have the following direct statements: _i.c.c._ _d.b._ fo. 105 (_b_) 2: 'una virg' i. 202 (_b_) 1: 'in dominio et x. acre in dominio'. dimidia hida xx. acras minus.' fo. iii. (_a_) 1: 'tenet i. 193 (_b_) 1: 'tenet comes rogerus comes xx. acras.' ii. partes unius virg'.' if 20 acres were identical with two-thirds of a virgate, there must, in a whole virgate, have been 30 acres; and if a virgate, _plus_ 10 acres, was equivalent to half a hide minus 20 acres, we have again a virgate of thirty, and a hide of 120 acres. but the conclusion i uphold will be found to rest on no isolated facts. it is based on a careful analysis of the _inquisitio_ throughout. here are some striking examples: fo. 92 (_b_) 1. 'belesham pro x. hidis se defendit.' _h._ _v._ _a._ abbot of ely 9 0 0 hardwin 80 'almar' 40 - - - 10 0 0 fo. 99 (_b_) 1: 'tenet hardeuuinus de scal' vi. hidas et i. virgam et vii. acras de rege.' _h._ _v._ _a._ ely abbey 2-1/2 0 9 \ 7 sokemen 1-1/2 0 6 } 3 sokemen 1/2 0 0 } t.r.e. 'alsi' 1/2 0 0 } 2 sokemen 1 7 } 5 sokemen 3-1/2 0 / ---- ---- --- 6 1 7 fo. 79 (a) 2: 'suafham pro x. hidis se defendit.' _h._ _v._ _ a._ hugh de bolebec 7-1/2 0 10 geoffrey 1 3 0 aubrey de ver 1/2 0 20 ---- - - 10 0 0 fo. 90 (_a_) 'choeie et stoua pro x. hidis se defenderunt.' _h._ _v._ _a._ odo 1 0 0 reginald 1/2 0 20[76] picot (1) 3 3 0 picot (2) 4-1/2 0 10 ---- - ---- 10 0 0 fo. 96 (_a_) 2: 'pampeswrda pro v. hidis et xxii. acris se defendit.' _h._ _v._ _a._ abbot of ely 2 3-1/2 0 two knights 1 0 22 ralf 'de scannis' 3 0 hardwin 10 picot 5 hardwin 1/2[77] 0 a priest 1/2 0 ---- ---- ---- 5 0 22 fo. 107 (_a_) 2: 'barentona pro x. hidis se defendit.' _h._ _v._ _a._ robert gernon 7 1-1/2[78] 0 chatteris abbey 2 0 0 ralf 20 walter fitz aubrey 40 picot 1/2 0 ---- ---- --- 10 0 0 fo. 108 (_a_) 2: 'oreuuella pro iiii. hidis se defendit.' _h._ _v._ _a._ earl roger 1 1-1/3 0 durand 3-1/3 0 'sigar' 1-1/3 0 picot 3-1/4 5 walter fitz aubrey 1 0 robert 1 0 ralf 'de bans' 1/3 0[79] chatteris abbey 1/4 0[79] -- ----- -- 4 0 0 this last example is, perhaps, the most remarkable of all, in the accuracy with which the virgates and their fractions, by the help of the five acres, combine to give us the required total. but, it may be asked, how far does the _inquisitio_, as a whole, confirm this conclusion? in order to reply to this inquiry, i have analysed every one of the manors it contains. the result of that analysis has been that of the ninety-four townships which the fragment includes (not counting 'matingeleia', of which the account is imperfect) there are only fifteen cases in which my calculation does not hold good, that is to say, in which the constituents as given do not equal the total assessment when we add them up on the above hypothesis of thirty acres to the virgate, and four virgates to the hide. this number, however, would be considerably larger if we had to work only from d.b., or only from the i.c.c. but as each of these, in several cases, corrects the errors of the other, the total of apparent exceptions is thus reduced. hence i contend that if we could only get a really perfect return, the remaining apparent exceptions would largely disappear. in some of these exceptions the discrepancy is trifling. thus, at triplow, we have 2 acres in excess of the 8 hide assessment--a discrepancy of 1/480. at 'burch and weslai' we have a deficit of 5 acres on 10 hides, that is 1/240. at 'scelforda' the figures of d.b. give us an excess of 7 acres on the 20 hide assessment, that is 7/2400. the i.c.c. figures make the excess to be 12 acres. another class of exceptions is accounted for by the tendency of both texts, as we have seen, to enter a virgate too much or too little, and to confuse virgates with their fractions. thus at 'litlingetona' our figures give us a virgate in excess of the assessment, while at 'bercheham'[80] and again at 'witlesforde' we have a virgate short of the amount. at 'herlestona' we have, similarly, half a virgate too much, and 'kingestona' half a virgate (15 acres) too little. lastly, at 'wicheham', the aggregate of the figures is a quarter of a virgate short of the amount. a third class of these exceptions is due to the frequent omission in the i.c.c. of estates belonging to the king. thus at wilbraham it records an assessment of 10 hides represented only by two estates of four hides apiece. but on turning to domesday (i. 189 _b_) we read: 'wilborham dominica villa regis est. ibi ii. hidæ.' the missing factor is thus supplied, and the apparent discrepancy disposed of. so, too, at 'haslingefelda' (haslingfield), where the i.c.c. accounts only for twelve hides and three virgates out of an assessment of twenty hides. domesday here, again, supplies the missing factor in a royal manor of seven hides and a virgate. we thus obtain, instead of an exception, a fresh illustration of our rule. _haslingfield_ _h._ _v._ _a._ rex 7 1 picot 4 3 count alan 1 1/2 the same 1/2 geoffrey de mandeville 5 guy de raimberccurt 1 1 3 count alan 12 --- ---- --- 20 0 0 domesday omits altogether, so far as i can find, the holding of guy, an omission which would upset the whole calculation. but, in the case of isleham, the apparent exception is due to the i.c.c., not to domesday book. its assessment, in that document, is given as four hides. but the aggregate of its manors, as there recorded, gives us an assessment of three hides _plus_ eighty acres. here any one who was rash enough to argue from a single instance (as mr eyton and mr pell were too apt to do) might jump at the conclusion that the hide must here have been of eighty acres. yet domesday enables us to collect all the constituents of the 'vill', among them the king's estate, here again omitted. the real figures, therefore, were these: _h._ _v._ _a._ _d.b._ the king 6 0 40 i. 189 _b._ bishop of rochester 1-1/2 0 20 i. 190 _b._ hugh de port 1-1/2 0 20 i. 199 _a._ earl alan 40 i. 195 _b._ ---- -- --- 10 0 0 isleham, then, was a normal ten-hide township, and confirms, instead of rebutting, the rule that the geldable hide contained 120 acres.[81] the remaining exceptions are 'somm[er]tona' partly explained by the omission of _terra regis_, 'bathburgeham' (babraham) with 21 acres short of an assessment of 7 hides, and carlton, which fitly closes the list of these exceptions. for here, on an assessment of 10 hides, we have, according to the i.c.c., 27 acres short, but, according to d.b., 53-1/2 (27 + 20 + 6-1/2). a demonstrable blunder in domesday book and a discrepancy between it and the i.c.c. are responsible, together, for the difference.[82] thus we see how wide a margin should be allowed, in these calculations, for textual error. it is necessary to remember that there were three processes, in each one of which error might arise: i. in the actual survey and its returns, 'by reason of the insignificance of some estates, or by reason of forgetfulness, or inaccuracy, or confusion, or doubt on the part of local jurors and witnesses, or of the clerks who indited their statements'.[83] ii. in the collection and transmission of the returns, by the loss of a 'leaflet or rotulet of the commissioners' work'.[84] iii. in the transcription of the returns into d.b., or into the i.c.c., _plus_, in the case of the former, the rearrangement and abridgment of the materials. we may now quit this part of our subject, claiming to have settled, by the aid of the i.c.c., a problem which has puzzled generations of antiquaries, namely: 'what was the domesday hide?'[85] we have shown that it denoted a measure of assessment composed of four (geld) virgates or a hundred and twenty (geld) acres. what relation, if any, it bore to _area_ and to _value_ is a question wholly distinct, on which the next portion of this essay may throw quite a new light. vi. the five-hide unit it is one of the distinctive and valuable features of the _inq. com. cant._ that it gives us the total assessment for each vill of which it treats before recording the several manors of which that vill is composed, the aggregate assessments of which manors make up the total assessment for the vill. in this feature we have something which domesday does not contain, and which (independently of its checking value),[86] gives us at once those vill assessments which we could only extract from the domesday entries by great labour and with much uncertainty. let us see then if these vill assessments lead us to any new conclusions on the whole assessment system. the first point that we notice is this. the _five-hide unit_ is brought into startling prominence. no careful student, one would suppose, of domesday, can have failed to be struck by the singular number of manors in the hidated portion of the realm, which are assessed in terms of the five-hide unit, that is to say, which are entered as of five hides or some multiple of five hides. this is specially the case with towns, and some years ago, in one of my earliest essays, i called attention to the fact, and explained its bearing in connection with the unit of military service.[87] yet no one, it would seem, has been struck by the fact, or has seen that there must be some significance in this singular preponderance of five-hide manors. now what the _inquisitio_ here does for us is to show us that this preponderance is infinitely greater than we should gather from the pages of domesday, and that when the scattered manors are pieced together in their vills, the aggregate of their assessments generally amounts either to five hides or to a multiple of the five-hide unit. thus the rural townships are brought into line with towns, and we learn that in both the assessment was based on the _five-hide unit_. let us now take a typical hundred and test this theory in practice: hundred of staines (_inq. com. cant._, pp. 11-17) _vill._ _hides_ _ploughlands_ _valets_ (t.r.e.) bottisham 10 20 £16 0 0 swaffham (1) 10 16 11 10 0 swaffham (2) 10 13-1/4 12 10 0 wilbraham 10 17 20 0 0 stow-cum-quy 10 11 14 10 0 - ----- ----------- 50 77-1/4 £74 10 0 here we have five vills varying in area from eleven ploughlands to twenty, and in value t.r.e., from £11 10s to £20, all assessed alike at ten hides each. what is the meaning of it? simply that assessment bore no ratio to area or to value in a vill, and still less in a manor. assessment was not objective, but subjective; it was not fixed relatively to area or to value, but to the five-hide unit. the aim of the assessors was clearly to arrange the assessment in sums of five hides, ten hides, etc. take now the next hundred in the _inq. com. cant._: hundred of radfield (_inq. com. cant._, pp. 17-25) _hides_ _ploughlands_ _valets_ (t.r.e.) dullingham 10 16 £19 5 0 stetchworth 10 13-1/4 12 15 0 borough green and westley 10 17 17 1 4 carlton 10 19-1/2 18 10 0 weston 10 19-1/4 13 15 0 wratting 10 15-3/4 8 8 0 balsham 10 20 12 13 4 - ------ ------------ 70 120-3/4 £102 7 8 here again we have seven vills varying in area from thirteen and a quarter ploughlands to twenty, and in value from £8 8s to £19 5s, all uniformly assessed at ten hides each. the thing speaks for itself. had the hidation in these two hundreds been dependent on area or value, the assessments would have varied infinitely. as it is, there is for each vill but one and the same assessment. note further that the i.c.c. enables us to localize holdings the locality of which is unnamed in domesday: also, that it shows us how certain vills were combined for the purpose of assessment. thus borough green and westley are treated in domesday as distinct, but here we find that they were assessed together as a ten-hide block. by this means we are enabled to see how the five-hide system could be traced further still if we had in other districts the same means of learning how two or three vills were thus grouped together. we may now take a step in advance, and pass to the hundred of whittlesford. hundred of whittlesford (_inq. com. cant._, pp. 38-43) _hides_ _ploughlands_ _valets_ (t.r.e.) whittlesford 12 } 20 11 } 20 £15 2 0 } £34 2 0 sawston 8 } 9 } 19 0 0 } hinxton 20 16 20 10 0 icklington 20 24-1/2 24 5 0 duxford 20 20-1/4 27 5 0 - ----- -------- 80 80-3/4 £106 2 0 here we are left to discover for ourselves that whittlesford and sawston were grouped together to form a twenty-hide block. and on turning from the above figures to the map we find the discovery verified, these two vills jointly occupying the northern portion of the hundred. thus, this hundred, instead of being divided like its two predecessors into ten-hide blocks, was assessed in four blocks of twenty hides each, each of them representing one of those quarters so dear to the anglo-saxon mind (_virgata_, etc.), and lying respectively in the north, south, east and west of the district. proceeding on the lines of this discovery, we come to the hundred of wetherley, which carries us a step further. hundred of wetherley (_inq. com. cant._, pp. 68-83) _hides_ _ploughlands_ comberton 6} 7 } barton 7} 20 12 } 32 grantchester 7} 13 } haslingfield 20 22[88] harlton 5} 7 } barrington 10} 20 15-3/8 } 27-7/8 shepreth 5} 5-1/2 } ordwell 4} 5-5/16} wratworth 4} 5-3/8 } whitwell 4} 20 5 } 29-3/16 wimpole 4} 5 } arrington 4} 8-1/2 } - ------- 80 111-1/16 it is important to observe that, though the grouping is my own, the _order_ of the vills is exactly that which is given in the _inq. com. cant._, and by that order the grouping is confirmed. note also how, without such grouping, we should have but a chaos of vills, whereas, by its aid, from this chaos is evolved perfect symmetry. lastly, glance at the four 'quarters' and see how variously they are subdivided. advancing still on the same lines, we approach the very remarkable case of the adjoining hundred of long stow. now it is necessary to explain at the outset that, the _inq. com. cant._ being here imperfect, it only gives us the first two of the above 'quarters', its evidence ending with bourne. but, by good fortune, it is possible to reconstruct from domesday alone the remaining half of the hundred, and thus to obtain the most valuable example of the system we are engaged in tracing that we have yet met with. the grouping i have adopted is based on the figures, but in some cases it is obvious from the map: eltisley and croxton, for instance, which form a ten-hide block, occupy a projecting portion of the county all to themselves, while caxton adjoins them. hundred of longstow (_inq. com. cant._, pp. 83-89) _hides_ _ploughlands_ eversden 8-1/3} 13-3/8 } kingston 8-1/3} 25 8-9/16 } 38-1/16 toft and hardwick 8-1/3} 16-1/8 } grandsen 5 } 25 9 } bourne 20 } [23 } 32-1/2 gamlingay 20} } hatley 4-1/4} 5} 25 [unnamed] 3/4} } croxton 7 } } eltisley 3 } 10} } caxton 10} 25 } caldecot 1-3/4} } long stow 3-1/4} 5} ------- 100 several points are here noticeable. observe, in the first place, how the twenty-five hide 'quarter' which heads the list is divided into three _equal_ blocks of 8-1/3 hides each, just as we found in wetherley hundred that one of the twenty-hide 'quarters' was divided into five _equal_ blocks of four hides each. in these cases the same principle of simple equal division was applied to the quarter hundred as we saw applied to the whole hundred in the first two cases we studied--the hundreds of staines and of radfield. notice next how the two vills of toft and hardwick, which are separately surveyed in domesday under their respective names, are found from the _inq. com. cant._ to have combined (under the name of 'toft') in a block of 8-1/3 hides. lastly, it should not be overlooked that the 3/4 hide not localized in domesday fits in exactly with hatley to complete its five hides. the chase now becomes exciting: it can no longer be doubted that we are well on the track of a vast system of artificial hidation, of which the very existence has been hitherto unsuspected. let us see what further light can be thrown by research on its nature. on looking back at the evidence i have collected, one is struck, surely, by the thought that the system of assessment seems to work, not as is supposed, _up from_, but _down to_ the manor. can it be possible that what was really assessed was not the manor, nor even the vill, but the hundred as a whole? this view is so revolutionary, so subversive of all that has ever been written on the subject, that it cannot be answered off-hand. we will therefore begin by examining the case of the hundred of erningford, which introduces us to a further phenomenon, the _reduction_ of assessment. hundred of erningford (_inq. com. cant._, pp. 51-68) _hides_ _ploughlands_ t.r.e. t.r.w. morden (1) 10 8 20 tadlow 5 4 10-1/2 morden (2) 5 4 10-3/4 clopton 5 4 7 hatley 5 4 7 croydon 10 8 11-1/2 wendy 5 4 6-3/4 shingay 5 4 6 litlington 5 4 11 abington 5 4 3-3/4 bassingburne 10 8 22 whaddon 10 8 14-3/4 meldreth 10 8 20-1/2 melbourne 10 8 19-1/2 -- - ------ 100 80 171 here we have, as in the last instance, a hundred of exactly a hundred hides (assessment). but we are confronted with a new problem, that of reduction. before we form any conclusions, it is important to explain that this problem can only be studied by the aid of the _inq. com. cant._, for the evidence both of domesday and of the _inq. el._ is distinctly misleading. reduction of assessment is only recorded in these two documents when the manor is identical with the vill. in cases where the vill contains two or more manors, the vill is not entered as a whole, and consequently the reduction on the assessment of that vill as a whole is not entered at all. after this explanation i pass to the case of the above hundred, in which the evidence on the reduction is fortunately perfect. the first point to be noticed is that in four out of the five hundreds that we have as yet examined, there is not a single instance of reduction, whereas here, on the contrary, the assessment is reduced in every vill throughout the hundred. that is to say, the reduction is _conterminous with the hundred_. cross its border into the hundred of wetherley, or of triplow, and in neither district will you find a trace of reduction. observe next that the reduction is _uniform_ throughout the whole, being 20 per cent in every instance. now what is the inevitable conclusion from the _data_ thus afforded? obviously that the reduction was made on the assessment of the hundred _as a whole_, and that this reduction was distributed among its several vills _pro rata_.[89] further research confirms the conclusion that these reductions were systematically made on _hundreds_, not on vills. there is a well defined belt, or rather crescent, of hundreds, in all of which the assessment is reduced. they follow one another on the map in this order: erningford, long stow, papworth, north stow, staplehow, and cheveley. within this crescent there lies a compact block of hundreds, in no one of which has a single assessment been reduced. they are triplow, wetherley (? cambridge[90]), flendish, staines, radfield, chilford and whittlesford. beyond the crescent there lie 'the two hundreds of ely', in which, so far as our evidence goes, there would seem to have been similarly no reduction. as the two horns of the crescent, so to speak, are the hundreds of erningford and cheveley, we will now glance at the latter, and compare the evidence of the two. hundred of cheveley (_inq. com. cant._, pp. 9-11) _hides_ t.r.e. t.r.w. _ploughlands_ silverley 6-1/2} 4} 8} ashley 3-1/2} 10 2} 6 4} 12 saxon street 5 3 7[93] ditton 5 3[92] (or 4) 10 ditton 10 1 16 kirtling 10 6 21 cheveley 10[91] - 50 as a preliminary point, attention may be called to the fact that the grouping of ashley and silverley, although they are surveyed separately in the _inq. com. cant._, is justified by their forming, as 'ashley-cum-silverley' a single parish. so too, saxon street may be safely combined with ditton, in which it is actually situate. we thus have a hundred of fifty hides divided into five blocks of ten hides each, and thus presenting a precise parallel to the hundred of staines, the first that we examined. and now for the reductions. as the vill of cheveley, unluckily, is nowhere surveyed as a whole, we have in its case no evidence. but of the five remaining vills above (counting ashley-cum-silverley as one), four we see had had their assessments reduced on a _uniform_ scale, just as in the hundred of long stow. now this is a singular circumstance, and it leads me to this conclusion. i believe that, precisely as in the latter case, the assessment of the hundred _as a whole_ was reduced by twenty hides. this was equivalent to 40 per cent, which was accordingly knocked off from the assessment of each of its constituent vills. one of the dittons is clearly an exception, having nine hides, not four, thus knocked off. i would suggest, as the reason for this exception, that ditton having now become a 'dominica villa regis' (_inq. com. cant._, p. 10), was specially favoured by having a five-hide unit further knocked off its assessment, just as in the case of chippenham (_ibid._, p. 2).[94] it has been my object in the above argument to recall attention to the corporate character, the _solidarité_ of the hundred. this character, of which the traces are preserved in its collective responsibility, even now, for damages caused by riot, strongly favours the view which i am here bringing forward, that it was the hundred itself which was assessed for geld, and which was held responsible for its payment. although this view is absolutely novel, and indeed destructive of the accepted belief, it is in complete harmony with the general principle enunciated by dr stubbs, and is a further proof of the confirmation which his views often obtain from research and discovery. treating of 'the hundred as an area for rating', he writes thus: there can be no doubt that the organization of the hundred had a fiscal importance, not merely as furnishing the profits of fines and the produce of demesne or folkland, but as forming a rateable division of the county.[95] now there are several circumstances which undoubtedly point to my own conclusion. we know from the _inq. com. cant._, that the domesday commissioners held their inquiry in the court of each hundred, and had for jurors the men of that hundred. now if the hundred, as i suggest, was assessed for geld as a whole, its representatives would be clearly the parties most interested in seeing that each vill or manor was debited with its correct share of the general liability. again we know from the _inquisitio geldi_ that the geld was collected and paid through the machinery of the hundred; and its collectors, in devonshire, are 'hundremanni'. the hundred, in fact, was the unit for the purpose.[96] further, we have testimony to the same effect in the survey of east anglia. but as that survey stands by itself, it must have separate treatment.[97] i need not further discuss the collective liability of the hundred, having already shown in my 'danegeld' paper how many allusions to it are to be found in domesday in the case of urban 'hundreds'.[98] it is only necessary here to add, as a corollary of this conclusion, that the assessment of a single manor could not be reduced by the crown without the amount of that reduction falling upon the rest of the hundred. either therefore, that amount must have been allowed ('computatum') to the local collector as were _terræ datæ_ to the sheriff, or (which came to the same thing) the assessment on the hundred must have been reduced _pro tanto_. i now proceed to apply my theory that the hundreds themselves were first assessed, and that such assessments were multiples of the five-hide unit. we are enabled from the _inq. com. cant._, to determine the assessments of eleven hundreds.[99] nine out of these eleven hundreds prove to have been assessed as follows: _hides_ erningford 100 long stow 100 triplow 90 staplehow 90[100] whittlesford 80 wetherley 80 radfield 70 cheveley 50 staines 50 this list speaks for itself, but it may be as well to point out how convenient for the treasury was this system. at the normal danegeld rate of two shillings on the hide, an assessment of fifty hides would represent £5, one hundred hides £10, and so on. can we discover in other counties traces of this same system? let us first take the adjacent county of bedfordshire. i am anxious to explain that for the means of utilizing the bedfordshire evidence i am entirely indebted to the _digest of the domesday of bedfordshire_ by the late rev. william airy (edited by his son, the rev. b. r. airy[101]). it was, most happily, pointed out to the author by the rev. joseph hunter 'that what we want is not translations but analyses of the surveys of the several counties' (p. viii). to this most true remark we owe it that mr airy resolved to give us a 'digest' instead of that usual 'extension and translation', which is perfectly useless to the domesday student. it is easy to take from the record itself such an instance as these beauchamp manors entered in succession (213): willington 10 hides, stotford 15; 'houstone' 5, hawnes 5, 'salchou' 5, aspley 10, salford 5; but it is only mr airy's work that enables us to reconstruct the townships, and to show how fractions--apparently meaningless--fit in, exactly as in cambridgeshire, with one another. his work is all the more valuable from the fact that he had no theory to prove, and did not even add together the factors he had ascertained. his figures therefore are absolutely free from the suspicion that always attaches to those adduced to prove a case. _risely_ _tempsford_ _wymington_ _h._ _v._ _h._ _ v._ _h._ _v._ 7 0 1 1-3/4 0 3 1 0 1 1 3 0 1/2 0 4 1 4 0 1/2 0 2 0 1/2 0 1 0 1 1/4 0 3 1 0 ----------- ----------- ----------- 10 0 10 0 10 0 _cople_ _eversholt_ _clophill_ _h._ _v._ _h._ _v._ _h._ _v._ 4 0 2 0 5 0 5 3 7-1/2 0 4 0 0 1 1/2 0 1 0 ----------- ----------- ----------- 10 0 10 0 10 0 _northill_ _portsgrove_ _chicksand_ _h._ _v._ _h._ _v._ _h._ _v._ 1-1/2 0 1 0 1/2 0 1-1/2 0 7-1/2 0 3-1/2 0 1/2 0 1 0 3 0 6-1/2 0 1/2 0 1 0 ----------- ----------- ----------- 10 0 10 0 10 0 _eyeworth_ _holwell_ _odell_ _h._ _v._ _h._ _v._ _h._ _ v._ 9 0 3-1/2 0 4-1/2 1/3 1 0 6-1/2 0 5 1-2/3 ----------- ----------- ----------- 10 0 10 0 10 0 _pavenham_ _houghton conquest_ _dean_ _h._ _v._ _h._ _v._ _h._ _v._ 2-1/2 0 5 0 4 0 5 0 1/2 0 2 1/2 2-1/2 0 4-1/2 0 2 7-1/4 0 1/2 ------------ ------------ ------------ 10 0 10 0 10 0-1/4 of these fifteen ten-hide townships, the last is selected as an instance of those slight discrepancies which creep in so easily and which account for many apparent exceptions to the rule. passing to other multiples of the five-hide unit we have: _oakley_ _thurleigh_ _blunham_ _h._ _v._ _h._ _v._ _h._ _v._ 4 0 0 1 4 1 1 0 1/2 0 0 1 1/2 0 1/2 0 0 1 10 0 3 0 1/2 0 ------------ ------------ ------------ 5 0 5 0 15 0 _marston_ _roxton_ _dunton_ _h._ _v._ _h._ _v._ _h._ _v._ { 2 (less 1/2 virg.) 1 1 { 8 1 10{ 8 (plus 1/2 virg.) 0 4 10{ 1 3 { 1 1 1 { 5 0 { 1/2 7-1/2 1 10{ 4-1/2 0 5{ 3 8 3 { 1/2 0 { 1/2 ------------ ------------ -------------- 15 0 20 0 20 0 i now give three illustrations of slight discrepancies: _streatley_ _sutton_ _eaton socon_ _h._ _v._ _h._ _v._ _h._ _v._ 1 0 { 0 3 20 0 4 1 { 1 0 6 3 4-1/3 0 5{ 1-1/2 0 0 1-1/2 0 2/3 { 1/2 0 0 1/2 0 2/3 { 0 3-1/2 9 1 { 0 1-1/2 0 5-1/2 2 0 2 1/2 0 3 0 1 1/2 0 0 1-1/2 1 0 ------------ ------------ ------------ 9 3-2/3 9 0-1/2 40 1 in the first case there is a deficiency of 1/120, and in the second of 7/80, while in the third we find an excess of 1/160. no one can doubt that these were really ten-hide, ten-hide, and forty-hide townships. we have to allow, in the first place, for trivial slips, and in the second for possible errors in the baffling work of identification at the present day. one can hardly doubt that if a student with the requisite local knowledge set himself to reconstruct, according to hundreds, the bedfordshire domesday, he would find, as in cambridgeshire, that even where a township was not assessed in terms of the five-hide unit, it was combined in an adjacent one in such an assessment. we will now cross the border into huntingdonshire, and enter the great hundred of hurstingston. this, which may be described as a _double_ hundred, was assessed, domesday implies, at 200 hides. quartering this total, on the cambridgeshire system, we obtain fifty hides, and this quarter was the assessment allotted to the borough of huntingdon.[102] the total assessment of the hundred was thus accounted for: _hides_ huntingdon 50 st. ives (slepe) 20 hartford 15 spaldwick 15 stukeley 10 abbots ripton 10 upwood 10 warboys 10 calne 6 } bluntisham 6-1/2 } 20-1/2[103] somersham 8 } wistow[104] 9 holywell 9 houghton 7 wyton 7 broughton 4 catworth 4[105] ------- 200-1/2 passing on into northamptonshire, we come to that most curious document, which i shall discuss below (_see_ p. 124), and which was printed by ellis (_introduction to domesday_, i. 187 _et seq._). ellis, however, can scarcely have read his own document, for he speaks of it as a list 'in which every hundred is made to consist of a _hundred hides_'.[106] this extraordinary assertion has completely misled dr stubbs, who writes: the document given by ellis as showing that the hundreds of northampton each contained a hundred hides seems to be a mere attempt of an early scribe to force them into symmetry.[107] it is greatly to be wished that some one with the requisite local knowledge should take this list in hand and work out its details thoroughly. in capable hands it should prove a record of the highest interest. for the present i will only point out that its contents are in complete harmony with the results that i obtained on the hundred in cambridgeshire; for it gives us hundreds assessed at 150 (four), 100 (nine), 90 (two), 80 (four), 60 (one), and 40 (one) hides, with a small minority of odd numbers. this list throws further light on the institution of the hundred by its recognition of 'double' and 'half' hundreds. note also in this connection the preference for 100-hide and fifty-hide assessments, which here amount to thirteen out of the twenty instances above, and in cambridgeshire to four out of nine. these signs of an endeavour to force such assessments into terms of a fifty-hide unit will be dealt with below.[108] in hertfordshire, as indeed in other counties, there is great need for that local research which alone can identify and group the domesday holdings. so far as single vills are concerned, bengeo affords a good illustration of the way in which scattered fractions work out in combination. _h._ _v._ count alan 0 1 hugh de beauchamp 6 0 geoffrey de mandeville 3 1 { 5 1 { 6-1/2 0 geoffrey de bech { 1 1-1/2 { 0 5-1/2 { 0 3-1/2 peter de valognes 0 1/2 ---------------- 25 0 if we now push on to worcestershire, we find a striking case in the hundred (or rather the triple hundred[109]) of oswaldslow. its assessment was 300 hides;[110] and i am able to assert that of these we can account for 299, and that it contained manors of 50, 40, 35, 25 (two), and 15 hides.[111] we have also, in this county, the case of the hundred of fishborough, made up to 100 hides, and remarkable for including in this total the fifteen hides at which worcester itself was assessed. the special value of this and of the huntingdon instances lies in its placing the assessments of a borough on all fours with the assessment of a rural manor, as a mere factor in the assessment of a rural hundred. by thus combining town and country it shows us that the assessments of both were part of the same general system. this is a point of great importance. this case of the hundred of fishborough is, however, peculiar. the entry, which was prominently quoted by ellis (who failed to see its true significance), is this: in fisseberge hundred habet æcclesia de euesham lxv. hidæ. ex his xii. hidæ sunt liberæ. in illo hundredo jacent xx. hidæ de dodentreu. et xv. hidæ de wircecestre perficiunt hundred.[112] now this entry is purely incidental, and its real meaning is this. in the true hundred of fishborough (adjoining evesham on the east), evesham abbey held sixty-five hides (assessed value), of which twelve were exempted from payment of geld, a statement which can be absolutely verified from the details given. to this aggregate was added the fifteen hides of worcester (though in another part of the county), together with twenty hides of the distant _hundred_ of doddentree. a total of 100 hides was that arrived at. now the hundred of doddentree had itself made up to about 120 hides,[113] by the addition of eighteen hides, which belonged to hertford as to 'firma'.[114] a reduction, therefore, of twenty hides suggests a complicated process of levelling the local hundreds, which may remind us how large a margin must be allowed for these arrangements. before leaving worcestershire, attention should be called to the great manor of pershore, which westminster abbey held for 200 hides, and to the 100 hides connected therewith under the heading 'terra sanctæ mariæ de persore'. in somerset we find some good instances, with the help of mr eyton's analyses. hundred of crewkerne merriott (5 + 7) 12} seaborough (1-1/2 + 1-1/2) 3} 15 hinton st. george 13} in crewkerne 12} 25 - 40 hundred of whitstone east pennard (19 + 1) 20 baltonsborough 5 doulting (14 + 3-1/4 + 2-3/4) 20 batcombe (10-1/4 + 2 + 7-3/4) 20 ditcheat (5 + 5-1/2 + 6-1/2 + 5-1/2 + 1 + 7) 30-1/2 pilton (6-1/2 + 3 + 5 + 5 + 2) 21-1/2 stoke st. michael 3 --- 120 there are also abundant cases of _manors_ which work out similarly such as walton and its group (4-1/2 + 5 + 3 + 2 + 3 + 2-1/2 = 20), butleigh (7-1/2 + 8 + 2 + 1/2 + 2 = 20). again, in the hundred of frome we find eight manors (camerton, englishcombe, charterhouse hinton, norton st philip, corston, beckington, cloford, and laverton), assessed at ten hides each, in addition to divided manors, such as road (9 + 1), and tiverton (7-1/2 + 2-1/2).[115] we will now pass to devon and examine the assessments of its hundreds. of these thirty-one are entered in the _inquisitio geldi_. now, as four virgates went to the hide, such assessments as 25-3/4, 9-1/4 hides, show us that the simple doctrine of probability is in favour of only one hundred in every twenty proving to be assessed in multiples of the five-hide unit. yet we find that those so assessed form an absolute majority of the whole. when classified, they run thus--50 (four), 40 (one), 30 (two), 25 (four), 20 (five): total, 16 hundreds. it will at once be observed that these assessments are, as nearly as possible, on one half the scale of those we met with in cambridgeshire and northamptonshire. but this must be taken in conjunction with the fact that the devon and cornwall assessments are altogether peculiar. 'in devon and cornwall, where the scope of the gheld-hide was enormous, it was necessary to introduce another quantity, intermediate between the virgate and the acre. this was the ferndel or ferdingdel, to wit, the fourth part of the next superior denomination, the fourth part of the virgate.'[116] one might at first sight be tempted to suggest that the hide was in these two counties a term of higher denomination when we find manor after manor assessed at a fraction of a hide, while in cornwall the 'acra terræ' was clearly a peculiar measure.[117] yet in some manors adjacent to exeter or to the neighbouring coast the assessment is much less abnormally low, though even there moderate. there is much scope, here also, for intelligent local research, although we may conclude, from the evidence of the pipe rolls, that the hide represented the same unit here as elsewhere, as it would seem did the devonshire hundred, in spite of its singularly low average assessment. indeed, it represented a larger, not a smaller, area than usual. i shall deal with this phenomenon below, and endeavour to explain its significance. for the present it is only necessary to insist on the evidence that the hundreds afford of assessment on the five-hide system. indeed, though i definitely advance the suggestion that the assessment was, in the first instance, laid upon the hundred itself, and that the subsequent assessment of its vills and manors was arrived at by division and subdivision, the truth or falsehood of this theory in no way affects the indisputable phenomenon of the five-hide unit. on the prominence of that unit i take my stand as absolute proof that the hide assessment was fixed _independently of area or value_, and that, consequently, all the attempts that have been made by ingenious men to discover and establish the relation which that assessment bore to area, whether in vill or manor, have proved not only contradictory among themselves, but, as was inevitable, vain. the late mr eyton did much to destroy the old belief held by kemble and other well-known writers that the domesday hide was an areal measure and to substitute the sounder view that it was used as a term of assessment, and mr chester waters, in his _survey of lindsey_ (1883), claimed that the 'key to the puzzle' had been thus finally discovered. canon taylor, on the other hand, at the domesday commemoration (1886), claimed that if his own most ingenious theory of the relation of the geld-carucate to area could be more generally extended, 'many volumes of domesday exposition, including, among others, mr eyton's _key to domesday_, may be finally consigned _al limbo dei bambini_'.[118] mr pell's theories--the inclusion of which at enormous length in _domesday studies_[119] cannot be too deeply regretted--require a passing notice. according to him, the domesday hide was virtually an areal term; but the interests of truth and of historical research require, as to his confident calculations, very plain speaking. although i devoted to the investigation of mr pell's theories a deplorable amount of time and labour,[120] i would rather state the inevitable conclusion in the words of that sound scholar, mr w. h. stevenson: all the fanciful calculations that mr pell has based upon this assumption, including his delicious 'ready reckoner', may be safely left to slumber in oblivion by the domesday student who does not wish to waste his time. the only abiding principle underlying mr pell's calculations is that the figures in domesday, or wherever found, have to produce a certain total that mr pell has already fixed upon. to do this, virgates may mean hides, carucates may mean virgates, and, in short, anything may mean anything else.[121] although mr eyton also indulged in 'fanciful calculations', and committed the fatal error of combining facts and fancies, he was at least on the right track in discarding the notion that the domesday hide denoted a fixed area, and in treating it as a term of assessment. at the same time, the acceptance of my theory that this assessment was not determined by the real value of the manor or vill, but was unconnected with it, would be, of course, destructive of all his calculations. the five-hide unit which lies at the root of my theory is found ever to the front, turn where we will. in oxon[122] we find entered in succession the bishop of lincoln's manors 90, 60, 40, 50, 50 hides, while if we work through the southern extremity of the county (lying south of ewelme), following the bend of the thames, we find the assessments are as follows: preston crowmarsh, 5; crowmarsh gifford, 10; newnham murren, 10; mongewell, 10; ipsden, 5; north and south stoke, 20-1/4; checkenden, 5; goring, 20; gethampton, 6-1/2; whitchurch, 10; mapledurham, 10; caversham, 20; dunsden, 20; bolney (8) and lashbrook (12) 20; harpsden, 5; rotherfield, 10; badgemoor, 5; bix 5. so too on the western border we have in succession churchill, 20; kingham, 10; foxcote (1) and tilbury (14), 15; lyneham, 10; fyfield, 5; tainton, 10; upton, 5; burford (8) and widford (2), 10; westwell, 5.[123] berkshire undoubtedly offers a fruitful sphere of study. on the one hand, we have so large a proportion of manors assessed at 5, 10, 15, 20 hides, and so forth as to strike the reader at once without special research; on the other, we find these archaic assessments reduced under the conqueror in the most sweeping manner, and the old system thus effaced. fortunately for us in this case its existence is recorded in the domesday entries of the previous assessments. what is here, as elsewhere, wanted is a thorough local analysis of the hidage, hundred by hundred. for no county is such an analysis more urgently needed. in bucks the primate's three manors are of 40, 5, 30 hides, while nine manors of walter giffard follow one another with these assessments: 20, 10, 10, 20, 3-1/2, 10, 5, 5, 10; and in gloucestershire we are met on every side by manors of 5, 10, 15, 20 hides, and so on. in surrey, the primate's six manors are assessed at 30, 20, 80, 5, 20, 14 hides. as a proof that this feature is in no way of my own creation, i will take the wiltshire manors selected by mr pell for his tables. seven out of the eleven selected by him are five-hide assessments, being 5, 10, 20, 40, 20, 5, 10. the marvel is that any one can have failed to observe the general occurrence of the fact. in middlesex the five-hide unit is peculiarly prominent. we have only to glance at the pages of domesday to be struck by such assessments as harrow (100 hides), fulham (50 hides[124]), isleworth (70 hides), harmondsworth (30 hides), while on folios 129b-130, we have seven manors in succession of which the assessments are 15, 35, 30, 30, 7-1/2, 15, 10, representing 3, 7, 6, 6, 1-1/2, 3, 2, multiples of the five-hide unit. but, here again, conspicuous as is this unit even in the case of manors, its prevalence would be still more apparent, if we could reconstruct the vills. thus, for instance, in the hundred of spelthorne we find these assessments: _hides_ _folio_ staines 19 128 'in speletorne hundred' 1 128_b_ 'hatone' 1-1/2 129 haneworde 5 129 'leleham' 2 129 'exeforde' 1 129 'bedefunt' 2 129 felteham 12 129 stanwelle 15 130 'bedefunde' 10 130 'west bedefunde' 8 130 'haitone' 1-5/6[125] 130 'leleham' 8 130_b_ 'in hundredo de spelethorne' 2/3[126] 130_b_ 'cerdentone' 5 130_b_ 'exeforde' is ashford, which 'appears from a very early period till after the dissolution of the monasteries to have been an appendage of stains'.[127] thus we obtain an assessment of 20 hides for staines _cum_ ashford. so too we have at once for laleham an assessment of ten hides, while that of east and west bedfont was, we see, twenty hides. the most striking case, however, is that of hatton; for, if we add to its two named manors the nameless estates in the above list, the four fit in like a puzzle, giving us an aggregate assessment of exactly five hides. the hundred, therefore, was assessed thus: _hides_ stains with ashford 20 stanwell 15 west bedfont 10 east bedfont 10 laleham 10 feltham 12 hanworth 5 charlton 5 hatton, etc. 5 let us now connect the territorial with the institutional unit. dealing in my 'danegeld' essay with the evident assessment of towns in terms of the five-hide unit, i traced it to the fact that 'five hides were the unit of assessment for the purpose of military service'.[128] the evidence i have adduced in the present paper carries further its significance; but we must not allow its financial to obscure its military importance. i appealed, at that time, to the exeter instance: quando expeditio ibat per terram aut per mare serviebat hæc civitas quantum v. hidæ terræ; and to the service of malmesbury: quando rex ibat in expeditione vel terra vel mari habebat de hoc burgo aut xx. solidos ad pascendos suos buzecarlos aut unum hominem ducebat secum pro honore v. hidarum.[129] of course this brings us to the notoriously difficult question of the thegn and his qualification. with this i am only concerned here so far as it illustrates the prevalence of a five-hide unit. mr little, who holds that maurer, followed by dr stubbs, has gone too far, and that 'there is no proof of any general law or widely prevalent custom which conferred on the owner of five hides pure and simple the title, duties, and rights of a thegn',[130] sets forth his view thus: what then is the meaning of the frequent recurrence in the laws of possession of five hides of land as the distinctive mark of a particular rank? an explanation may be hazarded: at the end of the seventh century it was the normal and traditional holding of a royal _thegn_.... it is not too much to infer from the parallelism of the two wergelds, that five hides formed also the regular endowment of a saxon king's thegn.[131] dr stubbs' views will be found in his _constitutional history_ (1874), i. 155-6, 190-2, and those of gneist in his _constitutional history_ (1886), i. 13, 90, 94. the latter writer follows schmidt rather than maurer, but sums up his position in the words: 'since under ælfred and his successors every estate of five hides is reckoned in the militia system as one heavy-armed man, the rank of a thane becomes the right (as such) of a possessor of five hides.' lastly, it is an interesting and curious fact that we owe to the five-hide unit such place-names as fivehead, somerset; fifehead, dorset; fifield, oxon; fifield and fyfield, wilts; fyfield, hants; and fyfield, essex--all of them in domesday 'fifhide' or 'fifehide'--as well as fyfield, berks, which occurs in domesday as 'fivehide'. philologists will note the corruption and its bearing on the original pronunciation. to the probable antiquity and origin of the five-hide system i must recur, after glancing at the evidence for the northern and eastern districts of england. vii. the six-carucate unit the subject that i now approach is one of the highest interest. i propose to adduce for my theory convincing corroborative evidence by showing that the part which is played in the hidated district of england by the five-hide unit is played in the danish districts by a unit of six carucates. in other words, where we look in the former for 'v. hidæ', we must learn to look in the latter for 'vi. carucatæ terræ'. one must dissociate at the outset this six-carucate unit from the 'long hundred', or _angelicus numerus_, with which mr pell confused it. in mr stevenson's instructive article on 'the long hundred and its use in england',[132] he has clearly explained that this reckoning only applied to a whole hundred, which, if a 'long' hundred, was really 120. any lesser number was reckoned in our usual manner. this is seen at once in the test passage at lincoln (d.b., i. 336_a_), where 1,150 houses are reckoned as 'novies centum et lxx.', because 'hic numerus anglice computatur, id est centum pro cxx'.[133] the persistence, in lincolnshire, of the long hundred is well shown in the _inquisitiones post mortem_ on robert de ros, 1311, among those printed by mr vincent.[134] we there read of 'c. acre terra arrabilis per majorem centenam que valent per annum lx. s. prec' acre vj. den.', at wyville and hungerton (on the border of leicestershire); while at claxby and normanby (in the north of the county) we have 'cc. acras per minorem centenam et valent c. s. prec' acre vj. d.' again, at gedney (in the south-east), we have 'cc. acre terre arrabilis per majus centum et valent per annum xxiiij. li'. prec' acre ij. s. et iiij^{xx.} acre prati et valet per annum viij. li., prec' acre ij. s. et cxiij. acre pasture per majus centum et valent per annum ix. li. xix. s. vi. d. prec' acre xviij. d.' on the same property there were due 'ccciiij^{xx.} opera autumpnalia cum falcis, et valent xxxvj. s. viij. d., prec' operis j. den.', so that these also were reckoned by the long hundred. mr stevenson was not aware of this evidence, but admitted that as the domesday passage refers to 'such a danish stronghold as lincolnshire, it is not free from the suspicion of danish influence'. his own evidence from a sixteenth-century rental[135] is subject to a similar criticism. for the general use, therefore, of the 'long hundred' in england he is compelled to rely on the _dialogus de scaccario_ and howden's description of the new survey of 1198, the 'hide or ploughland' being described in both cases as of a hundred acres, where the 'hundred' must have meant 120. but i venture to think that the use of this reckoning for the ploughland, or archaic 'hide', does not establish its general employment. in domesday, certainly, it is only at lincoln that we find it actually recognized, houses being reckoned everywhere else on the usual system. i think, therefore, that we fairly may hold the _anglicus numerus_, or long hundred, to have specially prevailed in the 'danish' districts, which were also assessed, we shall find, in sums of six and twelve. but what was the boundary of this danish district? it was not the border between mercia and wessex, for mercia was itself divided between the 'six' and the 'five' systems.[136] of the two adjacent mercian shires, for instance, of leicester and warwick (afterwards united under one sheriff), we find the latter decimal and the former duodecimal. the military service of warwick and leicester was arranged on the same method, yet leicester sent _twelve_ 'burgesses' to the fyrd where warwick sent _ten_. but, it may be urged, the two shires were divided by the watling street, the boundary (under the peace of wedmore) of danelaw. was then the danelaw the district within which the systems prevailed? no, for the danelaw, under this treaty, included all cambridgeshire and other hidated districts. the answer, therefore, which i propound is this: the district in which men measured by carucates, and counted by twelves and sixes, was not the district which the danes _conquered_, but the district which the danes _settled_, the district of 'the five boroughs'. dependent on these 'five boroughs' were the four shires of leicester, derby, nottingham, and lincoln. for two of the boroughs, lincoln and stamford, both belonged to this last shire, which was, indeed, the stronghold of the system.[137] between stamford and cambridge we have the same contrast as between warwick and leicester, for while cambridge was divided into _ten_ wards ('custodiæ'), stamford was divided into _six_. lincolnshire, as i have said, was the stronghold of the system, and it is in lincoln itself that we find domesday alluding _eo nomine_ to the _anglicus numerus_, the practice of counting 120 as 100. now in the peculiar district of which i am treating there occurs an important formula which covers lincolnshire, yorkshire, derbyshire, and notts. domesday has nothing like it for the other parts of england. here are the three passages in which we find it recorded: lincolnshire yorkshire derby and notts pax manu regis vel pax data manu regis in snotingehamscyre sigillo ejus data, vel sigillo ejus, et in derbin scyre si fuerit infracta, si fuerit infracta, pax regis manu vel emendatur per regi solummodo sigillo data, si xviii. hundrez. emendatur per xii. fuerit infracta, unumquidque hundret hundrez, unumquidque emendatur per xviii. solvit viii. libras. hundret viii. libras. hundrez, unumquidque duodecim hundrez pax a comite data et hundret viii. libras. emendant regi et vi. infracta a quolibet hujus emendationis comiti.--i. 336_b._ ipsi comiti per vi. habet rex ii. partes, hundrez emendatur, comes terciam. id est unumquidque viii. xii. hundred emendant libras--i. 298_b._ regi et vi. comiti--i. 280_b._ for comparison with these three passages we may turn to the charter of immunities confirmed to york cathedral by henry i, stephen, and henry ii. we there read: si quis enim quemlibet cujuscumque facinoris aut flagitii reum et convictum infra atrium ecclesiæ caperet et retineret, universali judicio vi. _hundreth_ emendabit; si vero infra ecclesiam xii. _hundreth_ infra chorum xviii. ... _in hundreth_ viii. _libræ continentur_.[138] as there were _twelve_ carucates in the 'hundred', so it paid _twelve_ marcs, which, if we can trust the above explanation, themselves came to be termed a 'hundred'. moreover, the 'hundreds' themselves were grouped in multiples of _six_. so too the yorkshire thegn who held _six_ manors or less paid three marcs to the sheriff; if he held more than six, _twelve_ marcs to the king (_domesday_, i. 289_b_). it is a special feature of the 'danish' district that each territorial 'hundred' contained twelve 'carucatæ terræ'. this point is all-important. just as a 'hundred' to an anglo-saxon suggested one hundred 'hides', so to the danes of this district it suggested twelve 'carucates'. nay, to the men of lincolnshire there could be no more question that twelve carucates made a 'hundred' than there could be now, among ourselves that twelve pence make a shilling. if we turn to the lindsey survey,[139] a generation later than domesday, we obtain proof to that effect. we find that survey, in three instances, adding up all the estates of a tenant within a wapentake, and giving us the result in 'hundreds' and 'carucates'. here are the actual figures: _car._ _bov._ _car._ _bov._ _car._ _bov._ 2 4 12 0 12 0 2 0 10 0 11 4 2 4 10 6 3 0 11 0 8 0 1 0 5 0 6 0 2 0 11 0 1 4 3 0 8 6 0 4 3 4 1 0 0 6 2 0 1 6 ------- ------- --------- h. 3 6 6[140] h. 4 0 6[141] h. 3 5 4[142] now we must observe that these 'hundreds' are not _districts_ with 'a local habitation and a name'; they are merely sums of twelve carucates produced by compound addition. we further find, at the head of the survey of each wapentake, a note that it is reckoned to contain so many 'hundreds', with the explanation, in some instances that in each 'hundred' were 'xii. carucatæ terræ'.[143] but even here the real unit is shown to be 'six carucates', for several wapentakes contain an odd 'half-hundred', while in that of horncastle this is actually entered as 'six carucates'. here are the nineteen wapentakes, with the number of hundreds assigned to each, and the number of 'carucatæ terræ' that such hundreds would imply: west trithing _wapentake_ _hundreds_ _car. terr._ manley []-1/2 aslacoe 7-1/2 90 lawress 12 144 corringham 5 60 axholme 4 48 well 7 84 north trithing walshcroft 8 96 haverstoe 7-1/2 90 bradley 3-1/2[144] [and 3 bov.] 42-3/8 ludborough 3 36 yarborough 14 168 bolingbroke 8 96 gartree 6 72 south trithing candleshoe 10 120 calceworth 10 120 wraghoe 9 108 hill 6 72 lothesk 10 120 horncastle 6-1/2 78 all the above, it will be seen, are multiples of the six-carucate unit. that the aggregate of recorded 'carucatæ terræ' appears to differ, though slightly, from the totals here given only shows how vain is the argument that, because the recorded aggregates of hundreds may often be uneven figures, there could therefore have been no system at work such as i contend there was. clerical error and special alterations have both to be allowed for. it has never, so far as i know, been pointed out that these lindsey trithings were so arranged as to contain an approximately equal number of 'hundreds'. so far as it is possible now to reckon them, the south trithing contained 51-1/2, the north trithing 51-1/2, and the west trithing 49-1/2. fifty 'hundreds' would represent 600 _carucatæ_; and it is, to say the least, a singular coincidence that, in the archaic territorial list that has hitherto baffled investigation, the north gyrwa, south gyrwa, and spalda are reckoned each at 600 hides.[145] i shall now give some instances of lindsey townships assessed on the basis of the six-carucate unit: _car._ _bov._ willoughton 3 5-1/2 " 2 2-1/2 ------------- 6 0 faldingworth 2 4 " 1 0 " 2 4 ------------ 6 0 reepham 0 4 " 0 6 " 4 6 ------------ 6 0 thoresway 0 2 " 5 6 ------------ 6 0 benniworth 2 4 " 3 4 ------------ 6 0 thorganby 1 7 " 0 5 " 1 6 " 0 6 " 1 0 ------------ 6 0 beelsby 4 4 " 1 0 " 0 4 ------------ 6 0 riby 1 4 " 4 4 ------------ 6 0 rigsby 3 6 " 2 2 ------------ 6 0 south kelsey 4 4 thornton le moor 1 4 ------------ 6 0 these instances will illustrate the value of the lindsey survey in enabling us to group the fractional assessments which appear in domesday book. here are some other varieties: _car._ _bov._ dunholm 5 3 " 2 5 " 2 0 " 2 0 ------------ 12 0 glentham 3 0 " 0 10 glentham and caenby 7 6 ------------ 12 0 scotton 0 4 " 0 4 " 2 0 " 6 0 ------------ 9 0 irby-on-humber 1 4 " 1 0 " 0 4 ------------ 3 0 somerby 2 4 " 0 6 ------------ 3 0 barrow-on-humber 11 0 " 1 0 ------------ 12 0 ------------ south elkington 4 0 " 8 0 ------------ 12 0 winteringham 11 0 " 1 0 ------------ 12 0 nun ormsby 2 2 " 4 4 " 2 2 ------------ 9 0 croxby 0 3 " 0 5 " 1 0 " 1 0 ------------ 3 0 worlaby 2 2 " 0 6 ------------ 3 0 lastly, to complete the parallel with the leicestershire hundreds _infra_, we may take this case (_cf._ p. 65, note 122): claxby and well 14 claxby 10 - 24 precisely the same system prevailed in holland as in lindsey, for the 'testa de nevill' preserves for us the constituents of a holland wapentake, that of 'elhou': pinchbeck 12 spalding 12 weston 6 moulton 6 whaplode and holbeach 18 fleet 6 gedney 8} 12 lutton 4} sutton 9-3/4} 12 tydd 2-1/4} --- 84 the lindsey survey would describe such a wapentake as containing 'seven hundreds'. crossing the border from lincolnshire into rutland (_i.e._ the rutland of domesday), we find the same system at work that meets us in the lindsey survey. we read: in alfnodestou wapent' sunt ii. hundrez. in unoquoque [sunt] xii. carucatæ ad geldum.... in martinesleie wap' est i. hundret, in quo xii. carucatæ ad geldum.--_d.b._, i. 293_b._ on analysing the contents of these wapentakes, we find this statement fully borne out, the former containing twenty-four, and the latter twelve, 'carucatæ terræ'. these are carefully contrasted throughout with the 'terra carucæ' or areal measure.[146] in yorkshire, notts and derby, we have less direct evidence. sawley, in derbyshire, has indeed been alleged to be entered in domesday as a hundred of twelve carucates, but domesday does not justify this assertion being made.[147] i would rather trust to the notable formula, which, as i explained at the outset, is common to these counties for proof that they also were arranged in 'hundreds' of twelve carucates. the prevalence, however, of assessment by sixes, threes, and twelves, meets us on every side, as does, in hidated districts, the assessments by fives and tens. at the outset, for instance, of the survey of yorkshire we have the district 'gelding' with the city assessed at eighty-four (12×7) carucates (which would be described in lincolnshire as seven 'hundreds'). we have two lists of the details, which are given here.[148] _car. terræ_ _car. terræ_ archbishop 6 archbishop 6 osboldeuuic 6 osboldeuuic 6 stocthun 6 stochetun 6 sa'bura 3 sa'bure 3 heuuarde 6 heuuorde 6 ditto 3 fuleford 10 fuleforde 10 round the city 3 round the city 3 cliftune 18 cliftune 18 roudclif 3 roudeclif 3 ouertun 5 ouertune 5 sceltun 9 scheltune 9 mortun 3 mortune 3 wichistun 1 wichintun 3 --- --- '84' '84' these lists have a value independent of their illustration of the arrangement in threes and sixes. they show how domesday breaks down, when it supplies a check upon its own evidence, by failing to make its details agree with its total; and they further show by the discrepancy between them how easily error may arise, and how rash it must be to argue from a single case.[149] yorkshire presents other traces, in its hundreds, of the same system. thus the townships in the hundred of 'toreshou' follow one another in this order: 18, 18, 20, 6, 18, 8, 12, 12 (8+4), 6, 18, 8, 18, etc. (_infra_, p. 80). but my strong evidence is found in an invaluable survey of leicestershire, unknown till now to historians,[150] which does for the carucated districts just what the _inq. com. cant._ does for the hidated ones. here we find the townships grouped in small blocks of from six to twenty-four 'carucatæ terræ', as a rule with almost monotonous regularity. and these blocks are further combined in small local hundreds, of which the very existence is unknown to historians and antiquaries,[151] and which are usually multiples, like the lincolnshire wapentake, of the six-carucate unit. it will be remembered that in the case of cambridgeshire, i selected for my first two examples a hundred of 50 hides, composed of 5 vills assessed at 10 hides each, and a hundred of 70 hides, composed of 7 vills, assessed at 10 hides each. in leicestershire, precisely in the same manner, i shall begin with the simplest forms and select hundreds of 36 and 48 carucates, composed of vills uniformly assessed at 12 carucates each. hundred of scalford scalford 12 (11-1/2 + 1/2) goadby 12 (6 + 6) knipton 12 (8-3/4 + 3-1/4) --- 36 hundred of kibworth kibworth (beauchamp) 12 kibworth (harcourt) 12 'bocton' 12 carlton 12 (10 + 1-1/4 + 3/4) --- 48 from these we may advance to other combinations: hundred of harby harby and plungar 18 stathern 18 --- 36 hundred of tong tong 12 kegworth 15} 18 worthington 3} 'dominicum' 12 --- 42 hundred of langton langton (1) } { 14-1/2 (11-1/4 + 3-1/4) thorp (langton) } 24 { 3-3/4 langton (2) } { 5-3/4 tur langton } { 12 shangton } 24 { 12 (10 + 2) --- 48 with these types as clues we are in a position to assert that where the total assessment of a hundred varies but slightly from a multiple of six, there must have been some slight error in one of the figures. thus hundreds of 35-1/2, 34-13/16 carucates, etc., may be safely assumed to have been hundreds of 36 carucates; those of 41, 43-7/8, etc., would be of 42 carucates; those of 48-7/8, 50, etc., would be of 48 carucates. these slight discrepancies, precisely as in lincolnshire, are accounted for by vills of 6 or 12 carucates, being entered as of 5-7/8, 5-13/16, 6-3/4, or 11-7/8, 13, etc. thus: hundred of eastwell _vills_ _carucates_ eastwell 12 (2 + 6 + 4) eaton 12-1/4 (3-1/4 + 9/16 + 8-7/16) branston 12 (7-1/2 + 4-1/2) ------ 36-1/4 the most usual leicestershire hundreds are those of 36, 42, and 48 carucates, which, be it observed, would be described in the language of the lindsey survey as 'wapentakes' of 3, 3-1/2, and 4 'hundreds' respectively. the name may be different: the thing is the same.[152] it will have been seen by this survey that the 'vills', single or grouped, were assessed precisely as in cambridgeshire, save that there the assessment was reckoned in fives and tens, while here it was in sixes and twelves. viii. the leicestershire 'hida' the case of leicestershire introduces us to a very curious point. leicestershire is not one of those counties to which the singular formula that i discussed above refers. this suggests that it was not arranged in 'hundreds' of twelve carucates. the above survey confirms this, for it shows us hundreds resembling in character those found in the hidated districts. but although the twelve-carucate unit of the 'hundred' is not found in leicestershire, we do find in it a group-unit, and that unit is the _hida_. just as we have seen the hundred used in two wholly different senses, so also was the 'hida'. the quite peculiar way in which 'hida' occurs in leicestershire (which was not a hidated but carucated district) completely baffled mr eyton, and was misunderstood by mr pell.[153] both writers failed to observe not only that the use of 'hida' is here of a peculiar character, but also that the normal 'hida' of domesday (from which they could not emancipate themselves) would be quite out of place in this carucated district. the first point to grasp is that this leicestershire 'hida' was a term which, locally i mean, explained itself. it is used at least a dozen times in the survey of leicestershire without any mention of its contents. those contents must have been, therefore, familiar and fixed. but what were those contents? three incidental notices enable us to determine them: 231 (_a_), 2: 'ibi est i. hida et iiii^{ta.} pars i. hidæ. ibi sunt xxii. car' terræ et dimidia.' 236 (_a_), 1: 'ii. partes unius hidæ, id est xii. car' terræ.' 237 (_a_), 2: 'ii. partes unius hidæ, id est xii. car' terræ.' just as the 'hundred' of lincolnshire was a sum of twelve carucates, so the 'hide' of leicestershire was a sum of _eighteen carucates_.[154] working in the light of this discovery (for as such i claim it), we find that the other 'hides', thus interpreted, give us an aggregate of 'carucates' obviously suitable to the recorded ploughlands.[155] it may, however, be fairly asked why domesday should speak in one place of half a 'hide', and in another of nine 'carucates'; in one place of a hide and a third, and in another of twenty-four carucates. the answer is that the singular love of variety which distinguishes domesday in cambridgeshire (as we saw) is at work here also. for instance, two equal estates are thus described: 'willelmus iiii. car' terræ et dimidiam et iii. bovatas, et rogerus iiii. car' terræ et vii. bovatas' (fo. 234_a_). the same instinct which led the scribe to enter these seven bovates as half a carucate _plus_ three bovates, led him also to enter ten and a half carucates as half a hide _plus_ a carucate and a half (fo. 237_a_). but to the rule i have established there is a single exception. we read of 'medeltone' in this shire: 'ibi sunt vii. hidæ et una carucata terræ et una bovata. in unaquaque hida sunt xiiii. carucatæ terræ et dimidia' (fo. 235_b_). the actual formula employed is unique for the shire, and the figures are specially given as an exception. but, with singular perversity, domesday students have always been inclined to pitch upon the exceptions as representing the rule, forgetting that it was precisely in exceptional cases that figures had to be given. in normal cases they would have been superfluous. several years have elapsed since i wrote the above explanation, but i have decided to publish it exactly as it originally stood. in the meanwhile, however, mr stevenson has dealt with the subject in an article on 'the hundreds of domesday: the hundred of land' (1890).[156] he has advanced the ingenious theory that the leicestershire 'hida' was only a clerical error for h[undred], and that it was really that 'hundred' of _twelve_ carucates which we meet with in the lindsey survey. to prove this, he reads an entry on 236_a_, 1, as 'ogerus brito tenet in cilebe de rege ii. partes unius hidæ, id est xii. car[ucatæ] terræ', and claims that this gloss defines the 'hida' as a 'hundred' of twelve carucates. i confess that to me such a rendering is in the highest degree non-natural. if we speak of 'two-thirds of a yard, that is twenty-four inches', we should clearly imply that the yard itself was thirty-six inches, not twenty-four. similarly, i claim to render the 'gloss' as implying that the 'hida' itself contained eighteen carucatæ, not twelve.[157] if i am right, mr stevenson's suggestion that this 'hida' was really a 'hundred' also falls to the ground. after careful study of the domesday survey of leicestershire, i definitely hold that in that county 'carucata terræ' was the geld-carucate and 'terra _x_ car[ucis]' the actual ploughlands.[158] now there are only three instances in which the survey records the assessment both in terms of the 'hida' and in 'carucatæ terræ', and in all three the figures support my own theory. the abbot of coventry's burbage estate (231_a_, 2), where a 'hide' and a quarter equates 22-1/2 'carucatæ terræ', is a test-case, and mr stevenson there takes refuge in a suggested 'beneficial hidation'. the exact formula, no doubt, is peculiar, but reference to the text shows that 's[un]t' has been interpolated between 'ibi' and 'xxii.' i suspect that the scribe had written 'ibi' (from the force of habit) when he ought to have written 'id est'. i close this portion of my essay by applying my own theory to the case of 'erendesbi' (arnesby). the relative entries are: 'episcopus constantiensis tenet in erendesber iii^{as.} car[ucatas] terræ et dim. et unam bovatam (231).' 'w[illelmus] pevrel tenet dim. hidam et iii. bovatas terræ in erendesbi (235).' put into figures they work out: _car._ _bov._ bishop of coutances 2-1/2 1 william peverel 9 3 ----------- 12 0 so that arnesby was a typical vill assessed at twelve carucates.[159] ix. the lancashire 'hida' there is one other case of a peculiar 'hide' in domesday. this is that which is found in the land 'between ribble and mersey', that district of which the description offers so many peculiarities. we find it divided into six hundreds, and of the 'hides' in the first, that of (west) derby, we read: 'in unaquaque hida sunt vi. carucatæ terræ' (i. 269_b_). whether or not that explanation applies, as is believed, to the whole district, we have here again a 'danish' place-name brought into direct relation with the six-carucate unit. on the opposite bank of the mersey lay the wirral peninsula, in which this system of assessment cannot be traced. mr green alluded to the danish 'byes' as found, by exception, 'about wirral in cheshire',[160] and held that norsemen from the isle of man had founded 'the little group of northern villages which we find in the cheshire peninsula of the wirral'.[161] i cannot find them myself. in his 'notes on the domesday survey, so far as it relates to the hundred of wirral'[162] (1893), mr fergusson irvine, in a paper which shows, though somewhat discursive, how much can only be done by intelligent local research, has collated all the domesday entries. 'raby' is the one place i can there find in the peninsula with the 'bye' termination; while out of fifty-one entries twenty refer to places with the english termination 'tone', and the anglo-saxon test-words 'ham' and 'ford' are found in four others. there were, doubtless, norse elements in the peninsula, but they were not strong enough to change the place-names or divide the land on their own system. in the same way, chester had its 'lawmen', though it was not one of the five boroughs, nor is what i have termed the scandinavian formula applied to cheshire in domesday. so, too, there were lawmen at cambridge, and their heriot included eight pounds,[163] which occur in the above formula as the twelve marcs of the danish 'hundred'. yet the whole system of cambridgeshire was non-danish. it was only, in short, where the northern invaders had settled down as a people that they were strong enough to divide the land anew and organize the whole assessment on their own system. x. the yorkshire unit we have seen that the unit of assessment for the carucated districts of england was 'vi. carucatæ terræ', just as five hides was the old unit in the south. we have also seen that the former reckoning extended over those districts which the danish immigrants had settled. there remains the question whether the danes had merely substituted six for five in the pre-existing arrangement, or had made a wholly new one for themselves based on actual area. it is _primâ facie_ not probable that they can have adopted the latter course, for the uniformity of their assessment proves its artificial character. yet, in his remarkable paper on 'the ploughland and the plough',[164] canon taylor has arrived at the conclusion that: the geldable carucate of domesday does not signify what the carucate usually signifies in other early documents. the 'carucata ad geldum' is not as commonly stated by domesday commentators, the quantity of land ploughed in each year by one plough, but it is the quantity tilled in one year _in one arable field_ by one plough.[165] this 'novel and important proposition', as its author truly described it, was probably the most notable contribution to our knowledge that the domesday commemoration produced. the canon's theory, which (so far as his own east riding is concerned) he certainly seems to have established, is, at first sight, fatal to mine. but, on the other hand, my own theory can be proved no less clearly for leicestershire, where the 'carucata terræ' and the ploughs are often connected in about the same ratio as in yorkshire.[166] this leads us to inquire whether, even in the east riding (where his theory works best), we may not find traces of that assessment by the six-carucate unit which i advocate myself. such traces in yorkshire we have already seen,[167] but there is other and stronger evidence. if we take the modern wapentake of dickering (the first on canon taylor's list) and examine its three domesday hundreds of turbar, hunton, and burton, we obtain these results:[168] turbar hundred hundemanebi 24 ricstorp, mustone, scloftone, and neuton 18 flotemanebi 6 muston and neuton 6 fordun and ledemare 6 burton, fulcheton, and chelc 30 chelc (2), ergone, bringeham, estolf, fodstone, and chemelinge 19 nadfartone 23-3/4 pochetorp 6 helmeswelle and gartune 44 hunton hundred flaneburg and siwardbi 24-1/2 marton 9 bredinton 18 hilgertorp 6 wivlestorp and basingebi 12 frestintorp 9 } eleburne 1/2 } 29-1/2 eston 6 } bovintorp 14 } gerendele 12 ricton, benton and spetton 24 bocheton 12 fleuston 14 } stactone 6 } 27 foxhole 7 } burton hundred burton 12 grenzmore (4+2) 6 arpen (4+8) 12 chillon (30+11+7) 48 roreston (9+3) 12 logetorp (1-1/2+5-1/2) 7 } thirnon 7 } ascheltorp (4+2) 6 } 36 torp 3 } cherendebi 13 } caretorp (5+4+3) 12 rodestain (8+8+8) 24 twenc 17-1/4 suauetorp 9 fornetorp (4+14) 18 butruid 12 langetou (9+6) 15 } buitorp 5 } bruneton 3 } 42 galmeton 8 } binneton 6 } widlaueston 5 the evidence of this last hundred is so overwhelming that it cannot be gainsaid.[169] i claim, therefore, that my theory holds good even in canon taylor's stronghold, but i do so without venturing to dispute the accuracy of his own. how far they can be reconciled i leave to others to decide. there are certain difficulties, however, which his brilliant suggestion must raise. it is the essence of his theory that in a two-field manor the ploughland of 160 acres (half fallow) was assessed at _one_ 'carucata terræ', while in the three-field manor the ploughland of 180 acres (a third fallow) was assessed at _two_. this would be an obvious and gross injustice. again, remembering that, according to the canon, the proportion of 'carucatæ' to ploughlands should be either 2 to 1 or 1 to 1, what are we to make of such figures as these, taken at a venture from a page of the leicestershire survey (232_a_, 1): _carucatæ_ _ploughlands_ _carucata_ _ploughlands_ 1 2 12 8 1 1/2 11-1/8 7 2 1 9 4 5-5/8 4 7 6 2 1 6 5 2-5/8 4 2 4 1 1 10 7 6 4 9 6 8-7/8 6 5/8 1/2 1/2 1/2 6 4 (thrice) 28 22 4-7/8 3 it is certainly difficult to discover any regular or consistent assessment in a system where the ploughland was represented by anything from 1/2 _carucata_ to 2-1/4 _carucatæ_. there is, however, in so many cases an approximation to an assessment of three _carucatæ_ for two ploughlands, that there seems to have been some underlying idea, if we could only trace it out. but for this there is needed a special investigation of all the carucated counties, a work of great labour and requiring local co-operation. if we could have tables for each county, arranged hundred by hundred and vill by vill, showing in parallel columns the ploughland and the _carucatæ ad geldum_, we could then, and only then, venture to speak positively. till that is accomplished we are not in a position to explain how a system of assessment, based on actual area, could result in aggregate assessments uniformly expressed in terms of the six-carucate unit. xi. general conclusions in seeking a clue to the origin of that artificial assessment, of which the traces, whether more or less apparent, linger on the pages of domesday, i propose to exclude the carucated district, because we require, as i have said, more complete evidence as to the system pursued within it, and because, being associated with the settlement of the danes it represents a later introduction, while the very name 'carucate', as i observed in _domesday studies_, has, unlike the mysterious 'hide', an obvious connection with the ploughland. confining ourselves to the district assessed in terms of the 'hide', we seek to learn the origin of the system by which, as i contend, it was divided for the purpose of taxation into blocks, each of which was expressed in terms of the five-hide unit. now if we follow the clue afforded by the cambridgeshire evidence, and hold that the assessment was originally laid not on the manor, nor even on the vill, but on the hundred as a whole,[170] it might be suggested that the hundred itself subdivided the amount among its constituent elements. in practice, indeed, from the nature of the case, this principle must have prevailed in every _town_ assessed at a hundred or half-hundred, for where an urban community was assessed in 'hides' the burgesses must, as in later days, have settled among themselves the proportion to be borne by individuals or individual properties. if, then, they were able to do this, and if, as i hold, town and country were assessed on the same principle, as part of the same system, what was to prevent their neighbours, in the court of the rural hundred, similarly distributing among its constituents their respective shares of the common burden? we might even be tempted to go far further than this, and to carry our discoveries to a logical conclusion. if, as is asserted, direct taxation ('geld') began in england with the need for raising money to buy off the danes, let us ask ourselves how the witan would proceed when confronted with a demand, let us say, for £10,000. as there had been hitherto, _ex hypothesi_, no direct taxation, there would be no statistical information at their disposal, enabling them to raise by a direct levy the sum required. their only possible resource, we might hold, would be to apportionate it in round sums among the contributory shires. proceeding on precisely the same lines, the county court, in its turn, would distribute the _quota_ of the shire among its constituent hundreds, and the hundred court would then assign to each vill its share. as the vills were represented in the hundred court, and the hundreds in the shire court, the just apportionment of the shire's _quota_ would be thus practically secured. the arrangement would, moreover, be as satisfactory to the witan as it was fair to the contributors _inter se_; for, by this gradation of responsibility, the payment of the whole was absolutely secured. this explanation is very tempting, and, indeed, such a system of apportioning liability is to be traced from time immemorial in the indian village community.[171] moreover, if the ratio of 'hides' to ploughlands were found to vary to any marked extent, according to county, the hypothesis that the quota, in the first instance, was laid upon each county would duly explain the ratio assessment being higher or lower in one county than in another. but such an hypothesis would imply that this assessment dated only from the days of æthelred, or _circ._ 1000. now the five-hide unit, on the contrary, was undoubtedly an old institution. church lordships, the easiest to trace, appear to have retained their hidation unchanged from early times, and the 'possessio decem familiarum' of bede seems to carry the decimal system back to very early days. mr seebohm, indeed--though, like others, he had failed to discover the existence of the five-hide system--saw in this 'possessio' of bede a connecting link with the roman _decuria_, just as he saw in the roman _jugatio_ the possible origin of english hidation. and we must, of course, trace its artificial arrangement (1) either to the romans, (2) or to the britons--assuming them to have had the same system as existed in wales for the food-rents, (3) or to the english invaders. arrested at this point by the difficulty of assigning to the system i have described its real origin, i dropped these studies for some years in the hope that there might come from some quarter fresh light upon the problem. as i cannot, however, for lack of evidence, propound a solution capable of proof, i will content myself with indicating the line of research that offers, i venture to think, the most likelihood of success. the proportionate sums contributed by the several counties to the danegeld present a fruitful field of inquiry, but one, it would seem, as yet unworked. mr eyton, it is true, observed that 'in devon and cornwall the scope of the gheld-hide was enormous',[172] that is, in other words, the assessment was strangely low, but it did not occur to him to seek the cause of the phenomenon he observed. if, as was the case, west wales was assessed on quite a different scale to the counties adjoining it on the east, it may suggest a conclusion no less important than that, when the latter were originally assessed, west wales was not yet a portion of the english realm. but, before concluding that the hide assessment is proved to be as ancient as this, we must see whether it is possible to detect any principle at work in the total assessments of the several counties, any relation between their area and the sums they contributed to the geld as entered in the pipe roll of 1130, our first evidence on the subject. for such an enquiry it is especially needful to insist on breadth of treatment. in the first place, the modern area of the counties may vary more or less from the original extent;[173] in the second we have no proof that the assessment had always been the same, though the tendency in early days, no doubt, was to stereotype such figures. we must not, therefore attempt close or detailed investigation but if, on a review of the whole evidence, we detect certain broad features, uneffaced by the hand of time, we may fairly claim that we have in these the traces of a principle at work, the witness to a state of things prevailing in the distant past. on comparing the contributions to a 'geld' at two shillings on the hide with the (modern) area of counties, we find that a rate of about a pound for every seven square miles prevailed widely enough to be almost described as normal. the three eastern counties work out thus: square miles (at 1/7) actual sum £ £ s d norfolk 2,119 302-5/7 330 3 2 suffolk 1,475 210-5/7 235 0 8 essex 1,542 220-2/7 236 8 0 in all three cases the proportion to the square mile is between a sixth and a seventh of a pound. in cambridgeshire it is just under, in sussex, just over, a seventh: square miles (at 1/7) actual sum £ £ s d cambridgeshire 820 117-1/7 114 15 0 sussex 1,458 208-2/7 209 18 6 most remarkable, however, is this midland group: square miles (at 1/7) actual sum £ £ s d leicestershire 700 100 100 0 0 warwickshire 885 126-3/7 128 12 6 worcestershire 738 105-3/7 101 5 7 gloucestershire 1,224 174-6/7 179 11 8 somerset 1,640 234-2/7 227 10 4 it is remarkable, not only for this agreement _inter se_, but also for the sharp contrast it presents to the groups of counties, lying respectively to the south-east and the north-west of it. the former approximates a rate twice as high, namely, _two_-sevenths of a pound to the square mile: square miles (at 2/7) actual sum £ £ s d buckinghamshire 745 212-3/7 204 14 7 oxfordshire 756 216 239 9 3 berkshire 722 206-2/7 200 1 3 wiltshire 1,354 386-6/7 388 13 0 taking this group as a whole, it paid £1,032 18s 1d, a curiously close approximation to the £1,021-4/7 which my suggested rate of 2/7 would give. middlesex was so exceptional a county, that one hardly likes to include it, but there also the rate was a little over two-sevenths. on the other hand, the counties to the north-west of what i have termed the midland group are assessed at a rate singularly low. nottingham and derby, with a joint area of 1,855 miles, contributed only £108 8s 6d, representing one-seventeenth;[174] while staffordshire, with its 1,169 miles, is found paying £44 0s 11d, a rate scarcely more than one twenty-seventh. passing to the opposite corner of the realm, we have kent, always a wealthy county, assessed at the phenomenally low rate of about one-fifteenth (£105 2s 10d, as against 1,555 miles), rather less than half that of essex to its north, and sussex to its west. it would seem impossible to resist the conclusion that in these widely differing rates we have traces of a polity as yet divided, of those independent kingdoms from which had been formed the realm. kent, for instance, which had so steadily maintained, first, its independent existence, and then its local institutions, had succeeded in preserving an assessment that its neighbours had cause to envy. in the west, cornwall similarly enjoyed a low, indeed a nominal assessment while that of devon, though higher than this, was so significantly lower than those of somerset and dorset[175] as to remind us that here, in part at least, the 'welsh' long held their own. if the incidence of geld were shown by shading a map of england, on the plan so successfully adopted in mr seebohm's great work, it would show that the heavily assessed counties were those which formed the nucleus of the old west-saxon realm.[176] all round this nucleus the map would shade off sharply, another sudden change marking the danish counties on the north, the jutish kingdom on the east, and the british district in the south-west. it is, perhaps, worthy of remark that shropshire was assessed twice as heavily as the adjoining county of stafford, possibly because part of it was added, at a very early period, to the kingdom of the west saxons. if mr eyton was right in his reckoning that kesteven was assessed twice as heavily as lindsey, and lindsey, in turn, twice as heavily as holland, it would illustrate the survival of local distinctions even within the compass of a modern county, as well as the 'shading off' tendency of which i have already spoken. the point i have here endeavoured to bring out is that if the system of artificial assessment were of roman or british origin, we should expect to find it fairly uniform over the whole country, whereas we find, on the contrary, the very widest discrepancies. it might be urged, perhaps, that these were due to the differing conditions of particular counties, to their more or less partial reclamation, for instance, of the date when they were assessed. but this would not account for the grouping i have traced, and would imply that each county ought to differ indefinitely. nor would it explain the case of kent, where a county that must have been foremost in early development and prosperity enjoyed a phenomenally low assessment. another objection that may be raised to my hypothesis is that the hundred, as an area for police and rating, was a comparatively late institution, and that if the artificial system of assessment were as ancient as i suggest, it could not have operated, as we saw, in cambridgeshire, it did operate, through the 'hundred'. it is, however, admitted that the _thing_ represented by the 'hundred' was, whatever its original name, of immemorial antiquity, as the intermediate division between the vill and the shire or kingdom. approaching the subject from the legal standpoint, professor maitland has pointed out that the hundred having a proper court, which the vill had not, was the older institution of the two, and has skilfully seized on the differentiation of villages originally possessing one name in common as a hint that some such subdivision may have been going on more widely than is known. it seems to me to be at least possible that the district originally representing a hundred, and named, as we are learning, in most cases from the primitive meeting-place of its settlers, was reckoned as so many multiples of five or ten hides, and that this aggregate was subsequently distributed by its community among themselves.[177] if it be not presumption to touch on the controversies as to the hundred,[178] i would suggest that while agreeing with dr stubbs, that the name of 'hundred' may be traced to the ordinance of edgar[179]--which did not, however, create the district itself--i cannot reconcile it with the view to which he leans in his _constitutional history_, that 'under the name of geographical hundreds we have the variously sized _pagi_ or districts in which the hundred warriors settled'; and that we should 'recognize in the name the vestige of the primitive settlement, and in the district itself an earlier or a later subdivision of the kingdom to which it belonged'.[180] for my part, i have never been able to understand the anxiety to identify the district known, in later days, as a 'hundred' with an original hundred warriors, families, or hides. the significant remark on the 'centeni' by tacitus, that 'quod primo numerus fuit, jam nomen et honor est', would surely lead us to expect that by the time of the migration the 'hundred' had become, like the 'hide' of domesday, a term even more at variance with fact. indeed, in his masterly 'introductory sketch', dr stubbs observed that the 'superior divisions' made by the 'new-comers' would 'have that indefiniteness which even in the days of tacitus belonged to the hundreds, the _centeni_ of the germans', and that their 'system' would be 'transported whole, at the point of development which it has reached at home'.[181] the suggestion i have made as to the origin of the five-hide system is tentative only, and must remain so until we have at our disposal for the whole hidated region that complete and trustworthy analysis of assessment, on the need of which i again insist, at the risk of wearisome iteration. xii. the east anglian 'leet' in norfolk and suffolk we find domesday recording assessed values not, as everywhere else, at the outset of an entry, but at its close; not in terms of hides and carucates, but in terms of shillings and pence. instead of saying that a manor paid on so many 'hidæ' or 'carucatæ terræ', domesday, in the case of these counties, normally employs the phrase: '_x_ denarii de gelto'. its meaning is that to every _pound_ paid by the hundred as geld the manor contributed _x_ pence.[182] thus, in the case of a hundred assessed at a hundred hides, the formula for a five-hide manor would be here 'xii. denarii de gelto', instead of the usual 'defendit se pro v. hidis', or some such phrase as that. there is an exact parallel to this method of recording assessed values in the case of fractions of knights' fees where portions of land are entered as paying so much 'when the scutage is forty shillings', instead of being assessed in terms of the knight's fee.[183] this system would seem, however, to have been understood imperfectly if at all. i may, therefore, point out that its nature is clear from the case of the suffolk hundred of thingoe. the case of this hundred is singularly instructive. we find its twenty 'vills' grouped in _blocks_, precisely as in the cambridgeshire hundreds, and these blocks are all _equal units of assessment_, like the ten-hide groups of the hidated districts. but in this case we can go further still, for we are not dependent on domesday alone. the portion of a special survey executed about a century later (_circ._ 1185) for abbot sampson of st edmund's, which relates to its hundred, is fortunately preserved, and gives us the name of the twelve 'leets' into which this hundred was divided.[184] here are the divisions recorded in it, with the domesday assessment (in pence) of each vill placed against its name. £ s d { barrow 7 i.{ flemington 6 { lackford 6 ----- 19 0 1 7 ii. risby 20 0 1 8 { saxham (_a_) 7 iii.{ saxham(_b_) 7 { westley 6-1/2 ----- 20-1/2 0 1 8-1/2 iv.{ hengrave 10 { fornham 10 ----- 20 0 1 8 { ickworth 7-1/2 v.{ chevington 6-1/2 { hargrave 7 ----- 21 0 1 9 { brockley 7 vi.{ rede 7 { manston 6 ----- 20 0 1 8 vii. whepstead 20 0 1 8 viii.{ hawstead 13-1/2 { newton 6-1/2 ----- 20 0 1 8 ix. horningsheath 20 0 1 8 x., xi., xii. sudbury 60 0 5 0 --------- £1 0 0-1/2 the two records--domesday and the inquest--thus confirm one another, and their concurrent testimony establishes the fact not only that the suffolk hundred was divided into blocks of equal assessment, but that these blocks were known by the name of 'leets'. now professor maitland, in his dissertation on the 'history of the word leet',[185] pronounces this 'the earliest occurrence of the word' that he has seen. but i can carry it back to domesday itself. though not entered in the _index rerum_, we find it in such instances as these: 'h[undredum] de grenehou de xiv. letis' (ii. 119_b_). 'hund[redum] et dim[idium] de clakelosa de x. leitis' (ii. 212_b_). i think it probable that in these cases the entry happened to stand first on the original return for the hundred, and so--as in the i.e., where it is derived from the original returns--the general heading crept in. though professor maitland has to leave the origin of the word unexplained, it seems to me impossible to overlook the analogy between the danish _lægd_, described by dr skeat as a division of the country (in denmark) for military conscription,[186] and the east anglian _leet_, a division of the country (as we have seen) for purposes of taxation. sudbury, it will be observed, was _a quarter_ of the hundred of thingoe,[187] just as huntingdon was a quarter of a hundred,[188] and wisbech a quarter of a hundred.[189] having thus obtained from the hundred of thingoe the clue to this peculiar system, we can advance to more difficult types. the hundred of thedwastre, for instance, was divided not into twelve blocks, each paying twenty pence in the pound, but into nine blocks, each paying twenty-seven. this assessment allowed a margin of 3d for every pound (i.e. £1 0s 3d); but in the case of thedwastre the total excess was only 1-1/2d on the pound (i.e. £1 0s 1-1/2d). i group the vills _tentatively_, thus: _d_ i. barton 27 ii. {fornham 6-1/2} 26-1/2 {rougham 20 } {peckenham 13-1/2} iii. {bradfield 5 } 26-1/2 {fornham st genevieve 8 } iv. {thurston 16 } 27 {woolpit 11 } v. {rushbrook 7 } 27 {ratlesden 20 } {hessett 18 } vi. {felsham 5 } 28 {bradfield 5 } {gedding 5 } vii. {whelnetham 10 } 26 {drinkston 11 } {ampton 7 } viii. {tostock 10-1/2} 27-1/2 {staningfield 10 } ix. {tinworth 14 } 26 {livermere 12 } ------- 241-1/2 (£1 0s 1-1/2d) the same unit of 27 (x9)--or, which comes to the same thing, 13-1/2 (x18)--was adopted in risbridge hundred. in this case no less than five manors are assessed at the same unit--13-1/2d. so, again, in the hundred of blackbourn the units are 34-1/2d and 17-1/4d, one manor being assessed at the former, and five at the latter sum. such is the key to the peculiar system of east anglian assessment. it is to be noted that 'twenty shillings'[190] represents ten hides at two shillings on the hide (the normal danegeld rate), and thus suggests that in norfolk, as in cambridgeshire, the hundreds were normally assessed in multiples of ten hides. the point, however, that i want to bring out is that the hundred, not the manor, nor even the vill, is here treated as 'the fiscal unit for the collection of danegeld'.[191] xiii. the words 'solinum' and 'solanda'[192] several years ago i arrived at the conclusion that the identity of these two words was an unsupported conjecture. so long as it remained a conjecture only, its correction was not urgent; but since then, as is so often the case, the result of leaving it unassailed has been that arguments are based upon it. there appeared in the _english historical review_ for july 1892 a paper by mr seebohm, in which that distinguished scholar took the identity for granted, as his no less distinguished opponent, professor vinogradoff, has done in his masterly work on _villainage in england_. i believe the alleged identity was first asserted by archdeacon hale, who wrote in his _domesday of st. paul's_ (1858), p. xiv: the word _solanda_, or, as it is written at p. 142, _scolanda_, is so evidently a latinized form of the anglo-saxon _sulung_, or ploughland, and approaches so near to the kentish _solinus_, that we need scarcely hesitate to consider them identical. let us start from the facts. in the domesday of kent we find the form _solin_, or its latin equivalent _solinum_, used for the unit of assessment, like the hide and the carucate in other counties. in the kent monastic surveys it is found as _sullung_ or _suolinga_. but when we turn to the domesday of st. paul's, we find--first, that instead of being universal, as in kent, it occurs only in three cases; secondly, that the form is _solande_, _solanda_, _scholanda_, _scolanda_, or even (we shall see) _scotlande_; thirdly, that it is not employed as a unit of assessment at all. the three places where the term occurs in the domesday of st. paul's are drayton and sutton in middlesex, and tillingham in essex. hale would seem to have arrived at no clear idea of what the word meant. at p. xiv he wrote that 'a _solanda_ consisted of two hides, but probably in this case the hide was not of the ordinary dimension'. at p. lxxviii he inferred, from a reference to 'la scoland' in a survey of drayton, that '"ploughed land" would seem to be opposed to "scoland"'. at p. cx he was led by the important passage--'de hydis hiis decem, due fuerunt in dominio, una in scolanda, et vii. assisæ'--to suggest that it 'appears to denote some difference in the tenure'. this last conjecture seems the most probable. if we take the case of sutton and chiswick, we read in the survey of 1222: juratores dicunt quod manerium istud defendit se versus regem pro tribus hidis preter solandam de chesewich que per se habet duas hidas, et sunt geldabiles cum hidis de sutton. hale (p. 119) believed that this _solande de chesewich_ was no other than the _scotlande thesaurarii_ of 1181, namely the prebend of chiswick. the above passage should further be compared with the survey of caddington (1222): dicunt juratores quod manerium istud defendit se versus regem pro x. hidis ... preter duas prebendas quæ sunt in eadem parochia. the formula is the same in both cases, and a _solanda_ was clearly land held on some special terms, and was not a measure or unit of assessment at all. indeed hale himself admitted that it could not be identified with one or with two hides. fortunately i have discovered an occurrence of the word _solanda_ which conclusively proves that it meant an estate, such as a prebend, and was not a unit of measurement. we have, in 1183, a 'grant by william de belmes, canon of st. paul's, to the chapter of that church, of the church of st. pancras, situate in his _solanda_ near london' (i.e. his prebend of st. pancras), etc.[193] this solves the mystery. the three _solandæ_ at tillingham were no other than the three prebends--ealdland, weldland, and reculverland--which that parish actually contained.[194] hale, however, misled mr seebohm, who in his great work on the _english village community_ (p. 54), wrote of tillingham: there was further in this manor a _double hide_, called a _solanda_, presumably of 240 acres. this double hide, called a _solanda_, is also mentioned in a manor in middlesex [sutton], and in another in surrey [drayton][195]; and the term _solanda_ is probably the same as the well-known '_sollung_' or '_solin_' of kent, meaning a 'ploughland'. proceeding further (p. 395), mr seebohm wrote: generally in kent, and sometimes in sussex, berks and essex, we found, in addition to, or instead of, the hide or carucate, or 'terra unius aratri', _solins_, _sullungs_, or _swullungs_, the land pertaining to a '_suhl_', the anglo-saxon word for plough. unfortunately no reference is given for the cases of sussex and berks, and i know of none myself. turning now to the learned work of professor vinogradoff, we find him equally misled: of the _sulung_ i have spoken already. it is a full ploughland, and 200 acres are commonly reckoned to belong to it. the name is sometimes found out of kent, in essex for instance. in tillingham, a manor of st. paul's, of london, we come across six hides 'trium solandarum'. the most probable explanation seems to be that the hide or unit of assessment is contrasted with the _solanda_ or _sulland_[196] (sulung), that is with the actual ploughland, and two hides are reckoned as a single _solanda_ (p. 255). lastly, we come to mr seebohm's reply to professor vinogradoff (_ante_, pp. 444-465). here the identity is again assumed: along with parts of essex, the kentish records differ in phraseology from those of the rest of england. their _sullungs_ of 240 acres occur also in the manors of essex belonging to st. paul's, and the custom of gavelkind and succession of the youngest child mark it off as exceptional. mr vinogradoff ... shows that in the kentish district, and in essex, where the _sullung_ or _solanda_ takes the place of the hide, and where gavelkind prevailed, the unity of the hides and virgates was preserved only for the purposes of taxation and the services; whilst in reality the holdings clustered under the nominal unit were many and irregular. i yield to no one in admiration for mr seebohm's work, but the question raised is so important that accuracy as to the fact is here essential. (1) _sullung_ is nowhere found in essex, but only _solanda_; (2) _solanda_ does not occur 'in the manors' referred to, but at tillingham alone; (3) in essex it nowhere 'takes the places of the hide', as it does in kent; (4) the essex instance adduced by professor vinogradoff is taken from a manor where _solanda_ does not occur. two issues--quite distinct--are involved. in the first place, mr seebohm contends that professor vinogradoff must not argue from 'the custom of kent' to the rest of england, because (_inter alia_) kent, unlike the rest of england, was divided into _sulungs_, which points to some difference in its organization.[197] this contention is sound, and is actually strengthened if we reject the identity of _sulung_ and _solanda_. but, in the second place, he endeavours to explain away the essex case of subdivision at eadwulfsness, to which the professor appeals, by connecting it with the kentish system through the term _solanda_. this, as i have shown above, is based on a misreading of the evidence, and is contrary to the facts of the case. let us then look more closely at the essex instance of subdivision. it is taken from one manor alone, the great 'soke' of eadwulfsness, in the north-east corner of the county. this 'soke' comprised the townships of thorpe 'le soken', kirby 'le soken', and walton 'le soken' (better known as walton-on-the-naze). such names proclaim the danish origin of the community, and it is noteworthy that the 'hidarii', on whom the argument turns, are found only at thorpe and kirby, the very two townships which bear danish names. this circumstance points to quite another track. that the system in this little corner of essex was wholly peculiar had been pointed out by hale, and it might perhaps have originated in the superimposition of hides on a previous system, instead of in the breaking up of the hide and virgate system. but this is only a conjecture. the two facts on which i would lay stress are that at thorpe, according to hale, 'the holders of the nine hides (in 1279) possessed also among them seventy-two messuages', which, by its proportion of eight to the hide, favours mr seebohm's views; and that the holdings of the 'hidarii' were rigidly formed on the decimal system (such as 60, 30, 15, 7-1/2 acres, or 40, 20, 10, 5 acres),[198] unlike the holdings of an odd number of acres on the kentish manors of st. augustine's. the reason for the essex system was clearly the necessity of keeping the holdings in a fixed relation to the hide, that their proportion of the hide's service might be easily determined. these two points have, perhaps, i think, been overlooked by both of the eminent scholars in their controversy. before leaving the subject of the _sulung_, one should mention perhaps that it was divided (as mr seebohm has explained) into four quarters known as _juga_, just as the hide was divided into four virgates. mr seebohm bases this statement on anglo-saxon evidence,[199] but it is abundantly confirmed by domesday, where we read of eastwell (in kent): 'pro uno solin se defendit. tria juga sunt infra divisionem hugonis, et quartum jugum est extra' (i. 13). so far all is clear; but professor vinogradoff, on the contrary, asserts that 'the yokes (_juga_) of battle abbey (in kent) are not virgates, but carucates, full ploughlands' (p. 225). this assertion is based on a very natural misapprehension. in the battle manor of wye (kent) we find that the _jugum_ itself was divided into four quarters, called 'virgates' which were each, consequently, the sixteenth, not, as in the hidated district, the fourth of a ploughland. professor vinogradoff, naturally assuming that the 'virgate' meant the same here as elsewhere, inferred that four 'virgates' (that is, a _jugum_) must constitute a full ploughland. but this change of denotation goes further still. the battle cartulary records yet another 'virgate', namely, the fourth (not of a ploughland, but) of an acre! this led me, on its publication, to wonder whether we have here the clue to the origin of the somewhat mysterious term 'virgate'. starting from the acre, we should have in the _virgata_ (rood) its quarter, with a name derived from the _virga_ (rod) which formed its base in mensuration. the sense of 'quarter' once established, it might be transferred to the quarter of a _jugum_, or the quarter of a hide. this is a suggestion which, of course, i advance with all diffidence, but which would solve an otherwise insoluble problem. the relation of the bovate to the carucate, and of the _jugum_ to the _sulung_, are both so obviously based upon the unit of the plough-team that they raise no difficulty. but the term 'virgate' does not, like them, speak for itself. if we might take it to denote merely a 'quarter' of the hide, it would become a term of relation only, leaving the 'hide' as the original unit. should this suggestion meet with acceptance, it might obviously lead to rather important results. mr elton, in his well-known _tenures of kent_, attaches considerable importance to a list, 'de suylingis comitatus kanciæ et qui eas tenent', in the cottonian ms., claud. c. iv, which he placed little subsequent to domesday. having transcribed it for collation with the survey, i came to the conclusion that it was not sufficiently trustworthy for publication, for the names, in my opinion, involve some anachronism. the feature of the list is that it shows us as tenants-in-chief, the leading tenants of bishop odo; and the change of most interest to genealogists is the succession of patrick 'de caurcio' to the holding of ernulf de hesdin. xiv. the 'firma unius noctis' the curious and evidently archaic institution of the _firma unius noctis_ was clearly connected with the problem of hidation. in somerset the formula for a manor contributing to this _firma_ was: nunquam geldavit nec scitur quot hidæ sint ibi (i. 85). in dorset it ran: nescitur quot hidæ sint ibi quia non geldabat t.r.e. (i. 75). in wiltshire we read: nunquam geldavit nec hidata fuit, _or_ nunquam geldavit: ideo nescitur quot hidæ sint ibi.[200] in all these entries the 'hide' is recognized as merely a measure of assessment quite independent of area. hampshire affords us, in a group of manors, a peculiarly good instance in point. of basingstoke, kingsclere, and 'esseborne', we read: rex tenet in dominio _basingestoches_. regale manerium fuit semper. numquam geldum dedit, nec hida ibi distributa fuit.... _clere_ tenet rex in dominio. de firma regis edwardi fuit, et pertinet ad firmam diei de basingestoches. numerum hidarum nescierunt.... _esseborne_ tenet rex in dominio. de firma regis edwardi fuit. numerum hidarum non habent.... hæc tria maneria, basingestoches, clere, esseborne, reddunt firmam unius diei (39). other manors are found about the county displaying the same peculiarity. ipse rex tenet _bertune_. de firmâ regis e. fuit, et dimidiam diem firmæ reddidit in omnibus rebus.... nunquam in hid(is) numeratum fuit.... numerum hidarum non dixerunt. ipse rex tenet _edlinges_ in dominio. hoc manerium reddidit dimidiam diem firmæ tempore regis e. numerum hidarum nesciunt (38). manors, such as andover, not hidated, clearly belonged to the same system, though neither their value nor their render is given. thus, then, within the limits of wessex, in the four adjacent counties of dorset, somerset, wiltshire, and hants, we find surviving, at the time of the conquest, an archaic but uniform system of provision for the needs of the crown by the assignment of certain estates or groups of estates, the render of which was expressed in terms of the 'firma noctis' or 'firma diei', and which, unlike the country around them, had never been assessed in 'hides'. mr seebohm hints slightly at this _firma_ system,[201] but only speaks of it as existing in dorset. nor does he allude to the significant fact of such manors having never been hidated. it would lead us far afield to speculate on the origin of this system, or to trace its possible connection with the welsh _gwestva_.[202] nor can we here concern ourselves with the few scattered traces of it that we meet with elsewhere in domesday. its existence in four adjacent counties, with non-hidation as a common feature, is the point i wish to emphasize. the system of grouping townships in the west for the payment of a food-rent (_firma unius noctis_) was exactly parallel to the grouping in the east for the payment, not of rent but of 'geld'. we can best trace this parallel in somerset, because the _firma unius noctis_ of the days before the conquest had been there commuted for a money payment at the time of domesday. turning to the cambridgeshire hundred of long stow, we find one of its 'blocks' (of twenty-five hides) divided into three equal parts, while another is divided into three parts, of which one is half the size of the two others. and so in somerset we have frome and bedminster combined in one group for the payment of this _firma_, and the two perrotts similarly combined with curry. frome and bedminster are each assigned the same payment, but in the other group the contribution of one is half that of the two others. here are the somerset groups of demesne, each charged with the render of a _firma unius noctis_. _commutation_ £ s d somerton (with borough of langport) 79 10 7 } chedder (with borough of axbridge) 21 0 2-1/2} 100 10 9-1/2 north petherton 42 8 4 } south petherton 42 8 4 } 106 0 10 curry rivell 21 4 2 } williton } carhampton } 105 17 4-1/2 cannington } frome 53 0 5 } bruton 53 0 5 } 106 0 10 milborne port (with ilchester) 79 10 7 [bedminster[203] 21 0 2-1/2] of these two last, milborne port is entered as having paid three-quarters of a _firma noctis_ under the confessor, while bedminster--though in the midst of this group of _firma_ manors--is alone in having no render t.r.e. assigned to it. one is tempted to look on the two as originally combined in one _firma_ (like somerton and chedder), save that the whole width of the county divides them, while in the other cases the constituents are grouped geographically. the wiltshire manors, each of which rendered a _firma unius noctis_, were: _ploughlands_ _valets_ calne 29 bedwin 79 amesbury 40 warminster 40 chippenham 100 £110 'theodulveshide' 40 £100 from the figures given for somerset and wilts, it may fairly be concluded that, in this district, the value of the 'firma' was about £105. in somerset, however, there was clearly a special sum, £106 0s 10d, on which calculations were based. an examination of mr eyton's statements on the _firma unius noctis_ in somerset and dorset would prove a peculiarly conclusive test of his whole system. in the case of somerset one need not dwell on his giving its amount for the williton group as £105 16s 6-1/2d, when the sum named is £105 17s 4-1/2d, although absolute accuracy is, in these matters, essential. we will pass at once to the bottom of the page (ii. 2), and collate his rendering of domesday with the original: 't.r.e. reddebat dimidiam 'reddebat t.r.e. dimidiam firmam noctis et quadrantem' noctis firmam et unum quadrantem' (domesday). (eyton). domesday gives the payment (in a characteristic phrase), as _three-quarters_ [a half and a quarter] of a _firma noctis_. mr eyton first interpolates a 'unum', and then overlooks the 'quadrantem', with the result that he represents the due t.r.e. as a _firma dimidiæ noctis_ (i. 77). so far, this is only a matter of error _per se_. but domesday records the commutation of the due t.r.w. at £79 10s 7d. this proves to be _three-quarters_ of the commutation, in two other cases, for a whole _firma noctis_ (£106 0s 10d). mr eyton, however, imagining the due to have been only _half a firma_ set himself to account for its commutation at so high a figure (i. 77-8). this he found no difficulty in doing. he explained that 'this was not a mere commutation', but 'was doubtless a change which took into consideration the extra means and enhanced value of meleborne'. the probability is, then, that what we have called the _enhanced ferm_, was enhanced by something less than the gross profits we have instanced; that is, that a part of those profits, say the burgage rents, or some of them, had contributed to the _dimidia firma noctis_ before the commutation. all these ready assumptions, we must remember, are introduced to account for a discrepancy which does not exist. great masses of mr eyton's work consist of similar guesses and assumptions. now, if these were kept scrupulously apart from the facts, they would not much matter; but they are so inextricably confused with the real facts of domesday that, virtually, one can never be sure if one is dealing with facts or fancies. and far more startling than the case of somerset is that of dorset, the 'key to domesday'. mr eyton here held that dorchester, bridport, and wareham paid a full _firma unius noctis_ each, the total amount being reckoned by him at the astounding figure of £312 (p. 70)! exeter, which affords a good comparison, paid only £18 (as render), though the king had 285 houses there: the three dorset towns in which, says mr eyton, the crown had 323 houses, paid in all, according to him, £312. the mere comparison of these figures is sufficient. but further, mr eyton observes (p. 93), that in 1156 'fordington, dorchester, and bridport' were granted by henry ii to his uncle, 'as representing royal demesne to the annual value of £60'. this is an instructive commentary on his view that dorchester and bridport alone rendered £208 per annum. our doubts being thus aroused, we turn to domesday and find that it does not speak of any of these towns as paying that preposterous _firma_. the right formula for that would be 'reddit firmam unius noctis' (p. 84). instead of that, we only have 'exceptis consuetudinibus quæ pertinent ad firmam unius noctis' (p. 70). the explanation is quite simple. just as in somerset, mr eyton admits, langport and ilchester, although boroughs, were 'interned' in groups of royal demesne, paying the _firma unius noctis_, so in dorset the boroughs were 'interned' in groups of royal demesne. indeed one of these groups was headed by dorchester, and is styled by mr eyton the 'dorchester group'. but he boldly assumed that 'dorchester' must have two different meanings: [a] we assume about 100 acres to have belonged to the domesday burgh, and perhaps 882 acres to represent land, subinfeuded at domesday, and annexed to dorchester hundred. [b] it follows that we assume about 429 acres, [to be that] ... which here figures [fo. 75] under the name dorchester. it is not too much to say that any one, who refers to pp. 70-3, 78-101 of the _key to domesday_, will find that the singular misconception as to the dorset boroughs makes havoc of the whole calculation. but here again the point to be insisted on is not the mere mistake _per se_, but the elaborate assumptions based upon it and permeating the whole work.[204] apart from the manors grouped for a _firma unius noctis_, if we take the comital manors (_mansiones de comitatu_) of somerset, which were in the king's hands in 1086, we find their rentals given on quite a different principle to those of the manors in private hands. (1) they are entered as renders ('reddit'), not as values ('valet'). (2) the sums rendered are 'de albo argento'. (3) in at least ten out of the fifteen cases, they are multiples of the strange unit £1 3s. as this fact seems to have escaped mr eyton's notice, i append a list of these manors, showing the multiples of this unit that their renders represent: _£_ _s_ _d_ crewkerne 46 0 0 40 congresbury 28 15 0 25 old cleeve 23 0 0 20 north curry 23 0 0 20 henstridge 23 0 0 20 camel 23 0 0 20 dulverton 11 10 0 10 creech st michael 9 4 0 8 langford 4 12 0 4 capton[205] 2 6 0 2 whatever this strange unit represented, it formed the basis in these manors of a reckoning wholly independent of the 'hides' or ploughlands of the manor, and as clearly artificial as the system of hidation i have made it my business to explain. xv. 'wara' the meaning of 'wara' is made indisputable by the i.c.c. when land was an appurtenance, _quoad_ ownership, of a manor in one township, but was assessed in another in which it actually lay, the land was said to be in the former, but its 'wara' in the latter. as this 'wara' was an integral part of the total assessment of the township, it had to be recorded, under its township, in the i.c.c. here are the three examples in point: [histon.] de his xx. hidis jacet warra de una hida et dimidia in hestitone de manerio cestreford. hanc terram tenuit comes alanus [_sic_] et est appretiata in essexia (p. 40). [shelford.] de his xx. hidis tenet petrus valonensis iii. hidas de firma regis in neueport.... hæc terra est berewica in neueport, sed wara jacet in grantebrigge syra (p. 49). [trumpington.] de his vii. hidis [tenet] unus burgensis de grenteburga i. virgam. et warra jacet in trompintona, et terra in grantebrigga (p. 51). to these i may add a fourth instance, although in this case the name _wara_ does not occur: [bathburgam.] de his vii. hidis tenet picotus in manu regis dimidiam hidam et dimidiam virgam. hæc terra jacet in cestreforda et ibi est appretiata xxx. sol. in essexia (p. 36). the lands at histon and 'bathburgam' were mere outlying portions of the royal manor of chesterford in essex, and those at shelford were a 'berewick' of the royal manor of newport, also in essex. but they were all _assessed_ in cambridgeshire, where they actually lay. so also we read under berkshire (61_b_): 'hæc terra jacet et appreciata est in gratentun quod est in oxenefordscire, et tamen dat scotum in berchesire'. again (203_b_) we read under pertenhall: 'hec terra sita est in bedefordsire, set geldum et servitium reddit in hontedunscyre'. a good instance of the same arrangement in another part of england is found in those worcestershire manors which were annexed as estates to hereford, but which were assessed in those worcestershire hundreds where they actually lay (see p. 61). a similar expression is applied to the possession of 'soca'. thus under shelford we read: de hac terra adhuc tenuerunt iii. sochemanni dimidiam hidam sub gurdo comite. non potuerunt recedere sine licentia comitis gurdi. et soca jacebat in witlesforda (p. 48). here the land was in shelford, but the jurisdiction (soca) was attached to earl gyrth's manor of whittlesford. prof vinogradoff has dealt with 'the word _wara_' in his _villainage in england_ (i. 241-4), and asserts that the 'origin and use of the term is of considerable importance'. but he does not allude to the above evidence, and i cannot follow him in his argument. while rightly disregarding mr pell's fanciful derivation from 'warectum', he asserts that: we often find the expression 'ad inwaram' in domesday, and it corresponds to the plain 'ad gildam [_sic_] regis'. if a manor is said to contain seven hides _ad inwaram_, it is meant that it pays to the king for seven hides.... the burton cartulary, the earliest survey after domesday, employed the word 'wara' in the same sense. one cannot disprove the first proposition without reading through all domesday for this purpose. i can only say that i do not remember ever meeting in domesday book with such an expression. the solitary instance of its use known to me is in the _liber niger_ of peterborough (p. 159), where we read: 'in estona sunt iii. hidæ ad in waram'; and there the relevant entry in domesday has no such expression. of the statement as to the burton cartulary, one can positively say it is an error. its 'waræ' have quite another meaning and are spoken of as virgates would elsewhere be. collation with what i have termed the northamptonshire geld-roll renders it clear that 'wara', in domesday, represents the old english word for 'defence', in the sense of assessment, the 'defendit se' formula of the great survey leading even to the phrase of 'defensio x. acrarum', for assessment to danegeld, which is found in the first volume of fines published by the pipe-roll society. xvi. the domesday 'juratores' i now approach the subject of the domesday _juratores_. the lists of these in the i.e. and in the i.c.c. afford priceless information. the latter gives us the names for all but three of the cambridgeshire hundreds, the former for all cambridgeshire (one hundred excepted) and for three hertfordshire hundreds as well. the opening paragraph of the i.e. tells us 'quomodo barones regis inquisierunt, videlicet per sacramentum vicecomitis scire et omnium baronum et eorum francigenarum et tocius centuriatus presbyteri prepositi vi. villani [_sic_] uniuscuiusque ville'.[206] careful reading of this phrase will show that the 'barones regis' must have been the domesday commissioners. the difficulty is caused by the statement as to the oaths of the sheriff, the tenants-in-chief (_barones_), and their foreign (? military) under-tenants (_francigenæ_). the lists of _juratores_ contain the names of many _francigenæ_ in their respective hundreds, but, so far as i can find, of no tenants-in-chief. the sheriff, of course, stands apart. his name indeed in the i.c.c. is appended to the list of jurors for the first hundred on the list, but is not found in the i.e. moreover, it should be noted that the above formula speaks of all the tenants-in-chief, but only of a single hundred court. two hypotheses suggest themselves. the one, that the sheriff and _barones_ of the county made a circuit of the hundreds, and then handed in, on their oaths, to the commissioners a return for the whole county; the other, that the circuit was made by the commissioners themselves, attended by the sheriff and _barones_. in the former case it is obvious that the commissioners would fail to obtain at first hand that direct local information which it was their object to elicit: and further, when we find the sheriff and _barones_ charged with wrongdoing in these very returns, it is, to say the least, improbable that they were their own accusers, especially in the case of such a sheriff as picot, at once dreaded and unscrupulous. it seems, therefore, the best conclusion that the domesday commissioners themselves attended every hundred court, and heard the evidence, sometimes conflicting, of 'french' and 'english'.[207] the _order_ in which the hundreds occur must not be passed over, because their sequence distinctly suggests a regular circuit of the country. here is the sequence given in our three authorities: the i.c.c., the i.e., and the list of jurors prefixed to the latter: staplehow staplehow staplehow cheveley cheveley cheveley staines staines staines radfield flammenditch erningford flammenditch childeford triplow childerford radfield radfield whittlesford ([208]) flammenditch triplow triplow whittlesford erningford erningford weatherley weatherley weatherley stow stow stow papworth papworth papworth northstow northstow northstow chesterton chesterton ely ely on comparing the first two of these lists it will be found that (except in the case of three contiguous hundreds, which does not affect the argument) the hundreds are taken in a certain sequence, which is seen, on reference to the valuable map prefixed to mr hamilton's book, to represent a circuit of the southern portion of the county from north-east to north-west, followed by an inquest on the district to its north, the 'two hundreds' of ely. the third list, on the other hand, misplaces the hundreds of triplow and erningford altogether, and wholly omits that of childeford. the transposition and omission are both notable evidence that the b and c texts, as i shall urge, were derived from some common original which contained these defects. the essential point, however, is that a circuit was made of the county whether merely by the sheriff, or, as seems most probable, by the domesday commissioners themselves--the 'barones regis' of the record--who must have attended the several hundred-courts in succession. but when we speak of the hundred-court it is necessary to explain at once that the body which gave evidence for the domesday inquest was of a special and most interesting character. it combined the old _centuriatus_--deputations of the priest, reeve, and six villeins from each township (_villa_)--with the new settlers in the hundred, the _francigenæ_. a careful investigation of the lists will prove that half the _juratores_ were selected from the former and half from the latter. this fact, which would seem to have been hitherto overlooked, throws a flood of light on the compilation of the survey, and admirably illustrates the king's policy of combining the old with the new, and fusing his subjects, their rights and institutions, into one harmonious whole. conquerors and conquered were alike bound by their common sworn verdicts.[209] we have the lists, in all, for eighteen hundreds, fifteen in cambridgeshire and three in herts, of which two were 'double'. there were, practically, for each hundred exactly eight _juratores_, half of them 'french' and half 'english'. but the two 'double' hundreds had sixteen each, half of them 'french' and half 'english'. although it is recorded that 'alii omnes franci et angli de hoc hundredo juraverunt', it is obvious that the eight men always specially mentioned were, in a special degree, responsible for the verdict. their position is illustrated, i think, by the record of a cambridgeshire _placitum_ found in the rochester chronicles. this is the famous suit of bishop gundulf against picot the sheriff in the county court of cambridgeshire,[210] which affords a valuable instance of a jury being elected to confirm by their oaths the (unsworn) verdict of the whole court: cum illis (i.e. omnes illius comitatus homines) baiocensis episcopus, qui placito præerat, non bene crederet; præcepit ut, si verum esse quod dicebant scirent, ex seipsis duodecim eligerent, qui quod omnes dixerant jure jurando confirmarent. now we read of this jury: hi autem fuerunt edwardus de cipenham, heruldus et leofwine saca de exninge, eadric de giselham, wlfwine de landwade, ordmer de berlincham, et alii sex de melioribus comitatus. investigation shows that the names mentioned are local. the land in dispute was a holding in isleham in the hundred of staplehoe. one juror, eadric, came from isleham itself, two from exning, one from chippenham, one from landwade, while the sixth, ordmer, was an under-tenant of count alan, in the manor from which he took his name (badlingham), and was a domesday juror for the hundred. these six, then, were clearly natives chosen for their local knowledge. the other six, chosen 'de melioribus comitatus', were probably, as at the domesday inquest, normans (_franci_). thus the double character of the jury would be here too preserved, and the principle of testimony from personal knowledge upheld. so again in the dorset suit of st. stephen's, caen (1122),[211] the men of seven hundreds are convened, but the suit is to be decided 'in affirmatione virorum de quatuor partibus vicinitatis illius villæ'.[212] accordingly, 'sexdecim homines, tres videlicet de brideport, et tres de bridetona, et decem de vicinis, juraverunt se veram affirmationem facturos de inquisitione terræ illius'. the names of the jurors are carefully given: 'nomina vero illorum qui juraverunt, hæc sunt'. again in the same abbey's suit for lands in london, 'per commune consilium de hustingo, secundum præceptum regis, elegerunt quatuordecim viros de civibus civitatis londoniæ qui juraverunt'. and in this case also we read: 'hæc sunt nomina illorum qui juraverunt.... et hæc sunt nomina eorum in quorum præsentia juraverunt.'[213] this corresponds, it will be seen, exactly with the writ to which the _inquisitio eliensis_ was, i hold, the return: 'inquire ... qui eas (terras) juraverunt et qui jurationem audierunt' (_infra_, p. 114). enough has now been said to show that the names of the domesday jurors recorded for each hundred represent a jury of eight, elected to swear on behalf of the whole hundred, and composed of four foreigners and four englishmen, in accordance with the principle that the conflicting interests ought to be equally represented.[214] we may take, as a typical set of _juratores_, those for the hundred of erningford, the survey of which, in mr hamilton's book, occupies pp. 51-68. i give them in their order: [_francigenæ_] [_angli_] walterus monachus colsuenus hunfridus de anseuilla ailmarus eius filius hugo petuuolt turolfus ricardus de morduna alfuuinus odesune all four _francigenæ_ can be identified in the hundred. walter held a hide and a quarter in 'hatelai' from the wife of ralf tailbois; humfrey, a hide and a quarter in 'hatelai', from eudo dapifer;[215] hugh, a hide and a half in 'melrede', from hardwin de scalers; and richard, three virgates in 'mordune', from geoffrey de mandeville. of the _angli_, colsuenus was clearly count alan's under-tenant at three townships within the hundred, holding in all two hides; 'ailmarus', his son, was, just possibly, the 'almarus de bronna', who was a tenant of count alan in two adjacent townships, holding two hides and three-eighths; 'turolfus' and 'alfuuinus' cannot be identified, and were probably lower in the social scale. it will be observed that colsweyn belongs to a special class, the english under-tenants. he is thus distinct at once from the _francigenæ_, and from the villeins of the township. he and his peers, however, are classed with the latter as jurors, because they are both of english nationality. in the great majority of cases the english _juratores_ cannot be identified as under-tenants, and may therefore be presumed to have belonged to the township deputations. xvii. the 'inquisitio eliensis' the record known by this name has long been familiar to domesday students, but no one, so far as i know, has ever approached the questions: why was it compiled? when was it compiled? from what sources was it compiled? these three questions i shall now endeavour to answer. first printed by the record commission in their 'additamenta' volume of domesday (1816), its editor, sir henry ellis, selected for his text the most familiar, but, as i shall show, the worst of its three transcripts (cott. ms., tib. a. vi), though he knew of what i believe to be the best, the trin. coll. ms., o. 2, 1, which seems to be the one styled by him 68 b 2.[216] in his introduction he thus described it: the _inquisitio eliensis_ is a document of the same kind with the exeter domesday; relating to the property of the monastery of ely recorded afterwards in the two volumes of the domesday survey (p. xiv). from this it would seem that ellis believed the _inquisitio_, at any rate, to be previous to domesday book, but he practically left its origin altogether in doubt. sixty years later (1876) the _inquisitio_ was published anew, but without any further solution of the points in question being offered.[217] for this edition three mss. were collated, with praiseworthy and infinite pains, by mr n. e. s. a. hamilton. taking for his text, like ellis, the cottonian ms. tib. a. vi, which he distinguished as a, he gave in footnotes the variants found in the mss. at trinity college, cambridge, viz.: o. 2, 41 (which he termed b), and o. 2, 1 (which he distinguished as c). in mr hamilton's opinion (p. xiv) the 'c' text 'appears to have been derived from the "b" ms. rather than the cottonian' ('a'). from this opinion, it will be seen, i differ wholly. a careful analysis of the three texts has satisfied me beyond question that while c is the most accurate in detail, it is marred by a peculiar tendency to omission on the part of its scribe. this, indeed, is its distinctive feature. now b cannot be derived from c, because it supplies the latter's omissions. on the other hand, c cannot be derived from b, because it corrects, throughout, b's inaccuracies. consequently they are independent. more difficult to determine is the genesis of a, the worst of the three texts; but as it virtually reproduces all the inaccuracies found in b (besides containing many fresh ones), without correcting any, it can only be inferred that b was its source. thus we have on the one hand c, and, on the other b (with its offspring a), derived independently from some common source. and this conclusion agrees well with the fact that a long catalogue of lands abstracted from the house of ely is found in c, but not in a or b,[218] and with the circumstance that the famous rubric ('hic subscribitur inquisitio'), which heads the inquisition in a and b, is placed by c at the end of the lists of jurors.[219] starting from this conclusion, let us now proceed to ask, what was the document from which b and c copied independently? clearly, it was not domesday book, for outside the eastern counties they record the returns in full, like the _inq. com. cant._ itself. were they then taken from the original returns, or at least from the copy of those returns in the _inq. com. cant._? this point can only be determined by close analysis of the variants; if we find b and c containing occasionally the same errors and peculiarities, although copied independently, it follows that the document from which they both copied must have contained those same errors and peculiarities. let us take the case of papworth. the right reading, as given both in domesday and the _inq. com. cant._, i have placed on the left, and the wrong reading, in b and c, on the right: [tenet abbas] ii. hidas et iii. [tenet abbas] ii. hidas et dim. virgas et dim. [virgam]. virgam et[220] iii. virgas. i. hida et i. virga et dimidia i. hida et dimidia virga et una [virga] in dominio. virga[221] in dominio. here are some further illustrations of errors in the i.e.: _d.b. and i.c.c._ _i.e._ viii. hidas et dimidiam et viii. hidis et dimidia et dimidia dimidiam virgam.... in dominio virga ... iii. hidæ et dimidia iii. hidæ et dimidia (p. 18). _et dimidia virga_ in dominio (p. 104). ii. carruce in dominio. et iiii^{or.} carruce ... in tercia potest fieri (p. 21). dominio. i. hida _et dimidia_ et xii. i. hida et xii. acræ in dominio acræ in dominio (p. 87). (p. 110). tenet radulfus de picot (p. 85). rod[bertus] tenet de vicecomite (p. 110). johannes filius _waleranni_ johannem filium (p. 27). _walteri_ (p. 103). again, the clause 'tost[222] pro viii. hidis et xl. acris', which ought to head the hardwick entries, is wrongly appended in the i.e. (p. 110) to a kingston entry with which it had nothing to do. so too, 'hoc manerium pro x. hidis se defendit [_sic_] t.r.e. et modo pro viii. hidis', which belongs to whaddon, is erroneously thrown back by the i.e. (p. 107), into trumpington, a manor in another hundred. it is singular also that all the mss. of the i.e. read 'iii. cotarii' (p. 101), where d.b. and the i.c.c. have 'iii. bordarii' (p. 3), and 'x. cotarii' (p. 101), where they have 'x. bordarii' (p. 6): conversely, the former, in one place, read 'xv. bordarii' (p. 107), where the latter have 'xv. cotarii' (p. 63). in comparing the text of the i.e. with that of the i.c.c., we shall find most striking and instructive variants in the lists of _juratores_ for the several hundreds. take, for instance, the lists for the hundreds of cheveley and staines, which follow one another in both mss. _i.c.c._ _i.e._ caueleie cauelai[223] ric[ardus] ric[ardus] _prefectus huius hundreti_. euerard[us] filius brientii æduuard[us] _homo alb[er]ici de uer_ radulfus de hotot radulfus de hotot will[elmu]s de mara will[elmu]s de mara stanhardus de seuerlei standard[224] de seuerlaio frauuin[us] de curtelinga frawinus[225] de quetelinge[226] carolus de cauelei _brunesune_ carlo de cauelaio[227] vlmar[us] homo wigoni _et wlmar' homo wighen[228] o[mne]s alii franci et angli juraverunt_ the second name on these lists can be conclusively tested. for the relative entry in the i.c.c. is 'esselei tenet euerard[us][229] filius brientii de alberico'. this proves that the i.c.c. is right in reading 'euerard[us]', while the i.e. is right in adding 'homo alb[er]ici de uer'. these are the lists for staines hundred. _i.c.c._ _i.e._ stane stanas harold[us] alerann[us] roger[us] rogger[us] _homo walt[er]i giffardi_[230] aleranus _francigena_ ric[ardus] fareman ric[ardus] _p[ræ]fectus hui[us] hundreti_ farmannus huscarl de suafham[231] huscarlo de suafham[231] leofuuin[us] _de bodischesham_ leofuuin[us] harald _homo hard[uuini] de scalariis_ alric[us] de wilburgeham _et_ aluric[us] de wiburgeham _et _omnes franci et angli_. alii omnes franci et angli de hoc hundreto_. in these two lists the points to strike us are that harold is placed first on one list and seventh on another; aleran third on one list and first on another; and 'fareman' distinguished more clearly in the i.e. than in the i.c.c. as a separate individual. if we now collect from the other hundreds some instances of instructive variants, we shall obtain important evidence. _i.c.c._ _i.e._ rob[ertus] de fordham rob[er]tus _angli[cus]_ de fordham picotus vicecomes [omitted][232] walterus monac[us] walt[erus][233] gerardus lotaringus _de girardus lotherensis _herveus de salsintona_ salsitona_ pagan[us] homo hardeuuini paganus _dapifer_ hard' rad[ulfus] de _scannis_ radulfus de _bans_[234] fulco _waruhel_ fulcheus _homo vicecomitis_ rumold[us] _de cotis_ rumold _homo comitis eustachio_ will[elmu]s will[elmus] _homo picoti vice comitis_ wlwi _de doesse_ wlwi de _etelaie_ godlid de _stantona_ godliue _i.c.c._ _i.e._ flamencdic flammingedich robert[us] de hintona rodb[er]t[us] de histona fulcard[us] _de dittona_ osmundus parvus osmund[us] parvulus fulcold _homo abbatis de ely_ baldeuuinus _cum barba_ baldeuuinus _cocus_ æduuin[us] presbyter æduuinus presbyter ulfric[us] de teuersham wlfuric de teuersham silac[us] _eiusdem villæ_ syla godwun[us] _nabesone_ goduuine _de fulburne_ it is impossible to examine the italicized variations in these parallel texts without coming to the conclusion that they must have been independently derived from some common original, an original containing more detail than either of them. on the other hand, the comparatively close agreement between the texts of the actual returns in the i.c.c. and the i.e. leads one to infer that these were copied with far more exactitude than the comparatively unimportant surnames of the jurors. for us the value of these variations in the jurors' lists lies in the evidence afforded to the origin of the existing mss. the object of this careful scrutiny has been to prove that as certain errors and peculiarities are found in two independent mss., they must have existed in the original document from which both were copied, and which was neither the i.c.c. transcripts nor the original domesday returns. what then was this document? it was, and can only have been, the true _inquisitio eliensis_, the date and origin of which i shall discuss below. further, i should imagine this document to have probably been a roll or rolls, which--on its contents being subsequently transcribed into a book for convenience--was allowed, precisely as happened to the domesday rolls themselves, to disappear. in perfect accordance with this view we find the whole contents of the _inquisitio_ arranged for a special purpose, and no mere transcript of the domesday returns. thus, after abstracting all the entries relating to the cambridgeshire estates, and subjoining a list of houses held in cambridge itself, it proceeds to add up all the items independently, and record their total values to the abbey. this analysis is carried out for several counties (pp. 121-4), and is, of course, peculiar to the _inquisitio_, although inserted between the abstracts of the domesday returns for cambridgeshire and herts. so too the breviate or short abstract of the estates (pp. 168-173), which was part of the original document--for it is found in all the derived mss.--must have been specially compiled for it, and so also was the _nomina villarum_ (pp. 174-83). another peculiarity of the _inquisitio_ is the care with which it records the names of sokemen on the abbey estates when omitted in the i.c.c. and d.b. this may lead us to ask whether its compilers supplied these names from their personal knowledge. we might think not, for in some cases they are recorded by the d.b. and the i.c.c., while in one (p. 106) the i.e. actually omits the name, reading only 'quidam sochemanus', where the other two documents (p. 46) supply his name ('fridebertus'). from this we might infer that the names were probably recorded in the original returns, but deemed of too slight importance to be always copied by the transcriber. yet the balance of evidence leads me to believe that the i.e. did supply names from independent knowledge. with the values, however, the case is clearer. the i.e. contains special and exclusive information on the value of socman-holdings, and must, i think, have derived it from some other source than the original domesday returns. here are some instances in point. _i.c.c._ _i.e._ iii. sochemanni fuerunt ... in erningetone fuit quidam secundus homo abbatis de ely sochemannus, _ædwardus_, et tenuit ii.[235] hidas ... habuit i. hidam. homo abbatis potuerunt eli fuit in obitu regis ædwardi, recedere (p. 83). sed terram suam vendere potuit; sed soca semper s. ædeldrede remansit (p. 110). x. sochemanni ... et i. istorum in ouro fuit quidam sochemannus homo abbatis de ely fuit. _nomine standardus_, qui dimidiam dimidiam hidam habuit. non hidam habuit sub abbate ely. non potuit dare neque vendere, et potuit ire ab eo nec separare ab ii. istorum, homines predicti ecclesia _et valet viginti abbatis, iii. virgas habuerunt, solidos_. et modo habet vendere potuerunt; soca remansit hardwinus. et alii ii. sochemanni abbati (p. 91). iii. virgatas habuerunt. potuerunt dare vel vendere sine soca cui voluerunt et modo tenet hardwinus. _et valet_ xv. _solidos_ (p. 112). et x^{us} [sochemannus] homo quidam sochemannus sub abbate abbatis de ely fuit. i. hidam et eli i. hidam et dim. tenuit dim. habuit. et omnes isti t.r.e. potuit dare sine licentiam recedere potuerunt; et vendere [_sic_] eius, sine socha. et modo terram suam cui voluerunt picot vicecomes tenet eam sub (p. 95). abbate ely. _valet_ x. _sol_. (p. 113). this last passage, of itself, is full of instruction. firstly, the i.e. alone gives the value of the holding. secondly, the i.e. preserves the 'sine socha' which qualifies the holder's right. now d.b. gives the last clause as: hi omnes terras suas vendere potuerunt. soca tantum hominis abbatis de ely remansit æcclesiæ. this qualification corresponds with the 'sine socha' of the i.e., and is, we should observe, wholly omitted in the i.c.c. thirdly, the three versions of the original return employ three different words to express the same one--'recedere', 'vendere', 'dare'. fourthly, the superiority of the c text of the i.e. over b (which makes two blunders in this passage) and of b over its offspring a (which adds a third) is here well illustrated. fifthly, the phrase 'picot vicecomes tenet eam sub abbate ely' differs notably from domesday, which assigns the estate to picot unreservedly, and still more from the i.c.c. which reads 'tenet robertus de picoto vicecomite in feudo regis'. the next example is taken from the township immediately preceding. _i.c.c._ _i.e._ v. istorum (sochemannorum) fuerunt quinque sochemani homines abbatis de ely fuerunt. et t.r.e. unus istorum _sugga unus istorum i. virg. et dim. habuit. nomine_ habuit una virg. et non potuit recedere. et alii iiii. dim. sub abbate ely. habuerunt v. hidas et i. virg. non potuit recedere. potuerunt recedere sine soca (p. 95). _et valet_ x. _sol._ et alii iiii^{or} sochemani v. hidas et i. virg. tenuerunt de abbate eli. potuerunt dare preter licentiam abbatis et sine socha et modo tenet eam picot vicecomes de abbate ely _et valet_ iii. _lib._ (p. 112). i have said that in all these cases it might perhaps be held that the additional details found in the i.e. were not due to special information possessed by its compilers, but were derived from the original returns, though omitted by their other transcribers. it is possible, however, to put the matter to the test. if, anticipating for a moment, we find that we have, for the eastern counties, in domesday the actual materials from which the compilers of the i.e. worked, we can assert that any additional details must have been supplied from their own knowledge. an excellent instance in point is afforded by tuddenham, in suffolk: _d.b._ _i.e._ in tudenham geroldus i. lib' in tudenham i. li. homo ælfric' hominem ... comend' saxæ de commend' s. ædel' xii. ac' et iii. abbate t.r.e. xii. ac' pro man', b. et i. c. et iii. ac' prati et iii. bord' semp' i. car. ii. ac' val. viginti iii. s. prati ... val. iii. sol.; et in eadem ii. liberi homines comend' in eadem i. l. ho' hedric'[236] i. sancte æ. et alter comend' commend' s. ædel' viii. ac' et val' heroldi x. ac', et dim. car. et xx. den. hoc tenet r. de raimes val. ii. sol. hoc tenet geroldus (p. 151). de r. [de raimes] (ii. 423_b_). one knows not, truly, which blunder is the worst, that of the domesday scribe, who has converted a probable 's. æ',[237] i.e. ely abbey, into 'saxæ', or that of the compiler of the i.e., who, by interpolating the word 'viginti', has converted three shillings into three-and-twenty. but the point is that the latter could name the abbot's sokeman (nameless in domesday) and could supply his acreage and the value of his holding. the actual details seem to have been: acres pence abbot's sokeman 8 20 harold's sokeman 2 4 -------------- 10 24 domesday records the totals only. enough has now been said of the twelfth century transcripts in which alone are preserved to us the contents of the _inquisitio_. we have seen that they point to the existence of some common original, which, while closely parallel with domesday, as a record of the abbey's possessions, contained certain special features and additional information. why, when, and from what sources that original was compiled, i shall now endeavour to explain. xviii. the ely return the theory i propound for the origin of the so-called _inquisitio eliensis_ is that it was the actual return ordered by that writ of the conqueror,[238] of which a copy is given in all three mss. (a, b, c) and which is printed in mr hamilton's book, on p. xxi (no. viii). i give the wording of the writ, followed by the heading to the _inquisitio_ with which it should be closely compared. willelmus rex anglorum lanfranco archiepiscopo salutem.... inquire per episcopum constantiensem et per episcopum walchelinum et per ceteros qui terras sanctæ ædeldrede scribi et jurari fecerunt, quomodo jurate fuerunt et qui eas juraverunt, et qui jurationem audierunt, et qui sunt terre, et quante, et quot, et quomodo vocate [et] qui eas tenent. his distincte notatis et scriptis fac ut cite inde rei veritatem per tuum breve sciam. et cum eo veniat legatus abbatis. return hic subscribitur inquisicio terrarum, quomodo barones regis inquisierunt,[239] videlicet per sacramentum vicecomitis scire et omnium baronum et eorum francigenarum, et tocius centuriatus, presbiteri, prepositi, vi. villani [_sic_] uniuscujusque ville; deinde quomodo vocatur mansio, quis tenuit eam tempore r.e., quis modo tenet, quot hide, quot carruce[240] in dominio, quot hominum, quot villani, quot cotarii, quot servi, quot liberi homines, quot sochemanni, quantum silve, quantum prati, quot[241] pascuorum, quot molendina, quot piscine, quantum est additum vel ablatum, quantum valebat totum simul,[242] et quantum modo, quantum quisque liber homo vel sochemannus habuit vel habet. hoc totum tripliciter, scilicet tempore regis æduardi, et quando rex willelmus dedit et qualiter modo sit, et si potest plus haberi quam habeatur. isti homines juraverunt, etc., etc. especially important is the fact that the return contains the jurors' names, in accordance with the express injunction to that effect in the conqueror's writ. now if this theory meet with acceptance, and the writ be taken to refer, as i suggest, to the domesday inquest itself, it follows that the bishop of coutances and bishop walchelin were the heads of the domesday commission for this district. this, of course, has been hitherto unknown; but it adds to the presumption in favour of the facts that bishop walchelin is not mentioned in any of the ely writs as taking part in the _placita_ concerning the abbey's lands, and that, therefore, the only inquest in which he could have been concerned was the domesday inquest itself. it should be added, however, that these two bishops may have been, respectively, the heads of two distinct commissions for adjoining groups of counties. the heading to the _inquisitio eliensis_ is so well known, and has been so often quoted by historians, that it is a gain to fix its _status_, the more so as it has been loosely described as the 'official' instructions for the survey itself. we may also determine the date of the writ as the very close of the conqueror's reign. for it must have been issued between william's departure from england, _circ._ september 1086, and his death (september 1087). and now, how was the return compiled? it deals, we find, with six counties, arranged in this order: cambridgeshire, herts, essex, norfolk, suffolk, and hunts. for _cambridgeshire_ it copies, clearly, from the original returns. for herts it must have done so also, because it gives full details, which are not found in domesday book. this conclusion is confirmed by the fact that, for these two counties, it gives the jurors' names (for the hundreds dealt with), which it could only have obtained from those original returns. for _essex_, _norfolk_, and _suffolk_, on the contrary, it simply gives the same version as the second volume of domesday book, and omits accordingly the jurors' names. the case of the four manors in _hunts_ i leave in doubt, because the version in the _inquisitio_ (pp. 166-7) has more details than that of domesday, though the latter is here exceptionally full, and because it places first the manor which comes fourth in domesday (i. 204). the additional details (as to live-stock) are such as we might expect to be derived from the additional returns; but the names of the witnesses for the hundred are not recorded, a fact to be taken in conjunction with the belated entry of these huntingdonshire manors not following, as they should, those in cambridgeshire and herts. in addition to the _inquisitio_ itself, as printed by the record commission, there is a record, or collection of records, which follows it in all three mss., and which is printed in mr hamilton's book (pp. 168-89). although its character is not there described, it can be determined. for in the _inquisitio_ there are three references to the 'breve abbatis de ely' (pp. 123-4), all three of which can be identified in the above record (pp. 175-7). it is noteworthy that the record in question is only complete in c, which confirms my view that b and its offspring a were independent of c. though the word _breve_ in domesday book normally means the king's writ, there are passages which seem to have been overlooked, and in which it bears another and very suggestive meaning. one of them is found at the end of the survey of worcestershire and was foolishly supposed by the compilers of the index volume (pp. 250, 315) to relate to lands held by 'eddeva' and entered immediately before it. the passage is an independent note, running thus: in esch hund' jacent x. hidæ in fecheham et iii. hidæ in holewei et scriptæ sunt in _brevi de hereford_. in dodintret hund' jacent xiii. hidæ de mertelai et v. hidæ de suchelei quæ hic placitant et geldant, et ad hereford reddunt firmam suam, et sunt scriptæ in _breve regis_ (i. 178). all four places are found on fo. 180_b_, 'feccheham' and 'haloede' [_sic_][243] together (under 'naisse' hundred[244]) as paying a joint ferm--'merlie' (martley) under 'dodintret' hundred and suchelie (suckley), now in herefordshire, as 'in wirecestrescire' (cf. i. 172). it is clear then that domesday here uses 'breve' of a return, not of a writ, and i venture to think the word may refer to the abbreviated entries made in domesday book itself as distinct from those _in extenso_ found in the original returns.[245] this usage is found in both volumes. we read of land at marham, norfolk, held by hugh de montfort; 'est mensurata in brevi sanctæ adeldret' (ii. 238), where the reference is to the 'terra sanctæ adeldredræ' (ii. 212), and of hurstington hundred, hunts, 'villani et sochemanni geldant secundum hidas in brevi scriptas' (i. 203). the reference, in both cases, is to the text itself. the former of these two phrases is repeated in the _inquisitio eliensis_,[246] a fact of some importance if, as i venture to think, it is there meaningless. the point is worth labouring. we see that the phrase cannot have occurred in the original returns, where all the entries relating to marham would have come together. but if it was only applicable to domesday book itself--where the fiefs were separated--then must the i.e. have copied from domesday book. this, indeed, is the point to which i am working. for essex, norfolk, and suffolk, i believe, the compilers of the _inquisitio_ (1086-7) must have worked from the second volume of domesday as we have it now. we see it _firstly_, in the order of the counties; _secondly_, in the absence of the jurors' names; _thirdly_, in the system of entering the lands. with a fourth and minute test i have dealt just above. but to make this clearer, we must briefly analyse the return. the cambridgeshire portion extends from p. 101 to p. 120. it extracts from the original returns, hundred by hundred, all that relates to the abbey of ely. following this is a note of its possessions in the borough of cambridge[247] (pp. 120-1), and then summaries of the abbey's estates, in _dominium_ and _thainland_ and _socha_, in all six counties, and of the lands held by picot the sheriff, hardwin d'eschalers and guy de raimbercurt, to which it laid claim as its own (pp. 121-4). then we resume with hertfordshire, the extracts from the original returns (pp. 124, 125). both the cambridgeshire and hertfordshire portions close with the words, 'de toto quod habemus', etc., referring to the totals worked out by the abbey from the entries in the original returns. with essex, we enter at once on a different system. this portion, which extends from p. 125 to p. 130 (line 8), is arranged not by hundreds but by fiefs. it first gives the lands actually held by the abbey (as coming first in domesday), and then those of which laymen were in possession. to the latter section are prefixed the words: 'has terras calumpniatur abbas de ely secundum breve regis'. from essex we pass to norfolk, the entries for which, commencing on p. 130 with the words 'in teodforda', end on p. 141 at 'rogerus filius rainardi'. these again are divided into two portions, namely, the lands credited to the abbey in domesday (pp. 130-6), and those which it claimed but which domesday enters under other owners (pp. 137-41). between the two comes the total value of the former portion and a list of the norfolk churches held by the abbey. last of the eastern counties is suffolk, which begins on p. 141 at 'in tedeuuartstreu hund.', and ends on p. 166. this also is in two portions, but the order seems to be reversed, the alleged aggressions on the abbey's lands coming first and its uncontested possessions last. the latter portion begins on p. 153, where the b text inserts the word 'sudfulc'. the following parallel passages are of interest as showing how closely the i.e. followed d.b. even when recording a judicial decision. _d.b._ _i.e._ in dermodesduna tenuerunt xxv. in dermodesduna tenuerunt xxv. liberi homines i car. terræ ex lib. homines i car. terre ex quibus habuit sca. al. commend. quibus habuit s. ædel. sacam et et socam t.r.e. tunc vi. car. socam et commend. t.r.e. tunc modo ii., et iii. acre prati, vi. car. modo ii., et iii. acre et val. xx. sol. prati, et val. xx. rogerus bigot[us] tenet de abbate, sol. r. bigot tenet de abbate quia abbas eam derationavit super quia abbas eam dirationavit eum coram episcopo de sancto super eum coram episcopo laudo, sed prius tamen tenebat de constantiensi. sed prius rege (ii. 383). tamen tenuit de rege (p. 157). the one variation, the bishop's style, has a curious parallel in domesday book (i. 165), where under the rubric 'terra episcopi constantiensis' we read 'episcopus de sancto laudo tenet', etc. we may take it then that the compilers of the _inquisitio eliensis_ worked for cambridge and herts from the original returns, but, for the eastern counties, from the second volume of domesday. what are the corollaries of this conclusion? they used, for some reason or other, the second volume of domesday, but not the first--if, indeed, it then existed. speaking for myself, i have always felt not a little uneasy as to the accepted date for the completion of domesday book.[248] mr eyton went so far as to write: imperial orders have gone forth that the coming codex, the domesday that is to outlive centuries, is to be completed before easter (april 5th, in that year [1086]), when king william himself expects to receive it in his court and palace of winchester (_notes on domesday_, 15). and he explicitly stated that: on any hypothesis as to the time taken by the different processes which resulted in domesday book, the whole, that is the survey, the transcription, and the codification, were completed in less than eight months, and three of the eight were winter months. no such miracle of clerkly and executive capacity has been worked in england since.[249] but was it worked then? all that the chronicle says of the king is that the '_gewrita_ wæran gebroht to him', a phrase which does not imply more than the original returns themselves. of course, the chief authority quoted is the colophon to the second volume: anno millesimo octogesimo sexto ab incarnatione domini vicesimo vero regni willelmi facta est ipsa descriptio non solum per hos tres comitatus sed etiam per alios. it seems to have been somewhat hastily concluded that because the survey ('descriptio angliæ') took place in 1086, domesday book (which styles itself _liber de wintonia_), was completed in that year. the phrase 'per hos tres comitatus' proves, surely, that 'descriptio' refers to the survey, not to the book.[250] i have never seen any attempt at a real explanation of the great difference both in scope and in excellence between the two volumes, or indeed any reason given why the eastern counties should have had a volume to themselves. for a full appreciation of the contrast presented by the two volumes, the originals ought to be examined. such differences as that the leaves of one are half as large again as those of other, and that the former is drawn up in double, but the latter in single column, dwarf the comparatively minor contrasts of material and of handwriting. so, too, the fullness of the details in the second volume may obscure the fact of its workmanship being greatly inferior to that of the first. of its blunders i need only give one startling instance. the opening words of the suffolk survey, written in bold lettering, are 'terra regis de regione' (281_b_). i have no hesitation in saying that the last words should be 'de _regno_'. indeed, the second formula is found on 289_b_, as 'terra regis de regno', while on 119_b_ under 'terra regis', we read 'hoc manerium fuit de regno'. so also in the exon domesday 'terra regis' figures as 'dominicatus regis ad regnum pertinens'.[251] the muddled order of the tenants-in-chief for norfolk and for suffolk--where laymen precede the church[252]--is another proof of inferiority, but only minute investigation could show the hurry or ignorance of the scribes. now, all this might, i think, be explained if we took the so-called second volume to be really a first attempt at the codification of the returns. its unsatisfactory character must have demonstrated the need for a better system, which, indeed, its unwieldy proportions must have rendered imperative. so drastic and so successful, on this hypothesis, was the reform, that while these three counties had needed a volume of 450 folios, the rest of england that was surveyed--some thirty counties--was compressed into a single volume of 382 folios, and on a system which rendered consultation easier and more rapid. in every respect the first volume is a wonderful improvement on the second, but the authorities may have shrunk from ordering the latter to have been compiled _de novo_, when the work, though unsatisfactory, had once been done. this, it must of course be remembered, is all hypothesis, a hypothesis suggested by the facts. if it were proved that at the time when the ely return was made, the 'second' volume had been compiled, and the 'first' had not, i should have established my case. but it might be urged that the 'first' volume did exist at the time, and that the ely scribes used the returns instead, because they contained fuller information. to this i reply, so far as the details of the estates are concerned, that neither the terms of the writ nor the heading of the _inquisitio_ involved the inclusion of such details as domesday book omitted. if the scribes inserted them, it must have been merely because they inserted everything they found in the records from which they copied. it might still be urged that they went to the returns for the names of the _juratores_; but why, if so, did they not do so for the three eastern counties? it certainly seems to me to be the most satisfactory explanation that the materials supplied for compiling this return, as being the recognized official records, were the so-called 'second' volume of domesday, and (for the rest) the original returns. xix. first mention of domesday book no one nowadays should require to be told that the pseudo-ingulf's dealings with domesday are devoid of all authority. some, however, may still believe in the tale found in that 'continuatio' of his chronicle which is fathered on peter of blois. it is there that ellis found (putting ingulf aside) the only case of an appeal to its witness before the reign of john.[253] with the 'continuatio' i shall deal below,[254] but i would observe, while on the subject, that the 'pseudo-ingulf' (charters and all) was, i believe, largely concocted by the help of hints gathered from domesday book. the absence of any authoritative mention, in its early days, of our great record gives a special importance to an entry in the _chronicle of abingdon_ (ii. 115-6), where we read that abbot faritius was impleaded by certain men: sed is abbas in castello wincestre coram episcopis rogero saresberiensi, et roberto lincolniensi, et ricardo londoniensi, et multis regis baronibus, ratiocinando ostendit declamationem eorum injustam esse. quare, justiciarorum regis judicio obtinuit ut illud manerium, etc. ... sed quia rex tunc in normanniâ erat, regina, quæ tunc præsens erat, taliter hoc sigillo suo confirmavit. then follows the queen's writ, announcing the decision of the plea held in the royal 'curia', together with the names of the 'barons' present. these names enable us to determine a certain limit for the date of the plea. 'thurstinus capellamus', for instance, implies that it was previous to his obtaining the see of york in 1114, while the presence of richard, bishop of london, places it subsequent to july 26, 1108. it must, therefore, have been held during the king's absence between july 1108 and the end of may 1109; or in his later absence from august 1111 to the summer of 1113. the action of the queen in presiding over this _placitum_ illustrates a recognized practice, of which we have an instance in domesday itself (i. 238_b_), where it is stated that bishop wulfstan, 'terram deplacitasse coram regina mathilde in presentia iiii^{or.} vicecomitatuum'. the queen's description of the _curia regis_ as 'curia domini mei et mea' should be compared with the phrase employed by the queen of henry ii, who, similarly acting in her husband's absence, speaks of the great justiciar as 'justicia regis et mea'. but the essential portion of the passage before us is this: sciatis quod faritius abbas de abendona in curia domini mei et mea, apud wintoniam in thesauro ... _per librum de thesauro_, diratiocinavit quod, etc. the court was held 'in castello wincestre', says the narrative, 'apud wintoniam in thesauro', says the record. both are right, for the royal treasury was in winchester castle.[255] but what was the 'liber de thesauro'? i contend that it was domesday book, and can have been nothing else. for, passing now to the _dialogus de scaccario_ (_circa_ 1177), we there read in reply to an inquiry as to the nature of domesday book (which 'in thesauro servatur et inde non recedit'): '_liber ille_ de quo quæris sigilli regii comes est individuus _in thesauro_' (i. xv.). the connection of the book with the treasury is brought out strongly in the _dialogus_, and leads to the presumption, as mr hall perceived, that the treasury being originally at winchester, the book was there also--as indeed we see it was under henry i.[256] on the date of its removal to westminster, there has been much discussion between my friend mr hall and myself.[257] mr hall relies mainly on the _dialogus de scaccario_, and on the inferences he draws from it, for the early removal of domesday to westminster, and the establishment there of the royal treasury. for myself, i claim for the winchester treasury greater importance and continuity than he is willing to admit. the leading records, of course, were stored there as well as treasure. we find william rufus speaking of 'meis brevibus ... qui sunt in thesauro mea wyntoniæ';[258] and we read that, on his father's death, 'pergens apud wincestre thesaurum patris sui ... divisit: erant autem in thesauro illo lx. m[ille] libræ argenti excepto auro et gemmis et vasis et palliis.'[259] heming's cartulary describes the domesday returns as stored 'in thesauro regali', and henry of huntingdon states that 'inter thesauros reposita usque hodie servantur'.[260] now, as the treasury was in winchester castle at the time of the above suit, and as it had been in 1100[261] and 1087, so it was still at the accession of stephen in 1135, and at the triumph of matilda in 1141. this is absolutely certain from the chronicles, nor do they ever mention any other treasury. moreover, the contents of this treasury in 1135--'erant et vasa tam aurea quam argentea'--correspond with those described by the _dialogus_ forty years later: 'vasa diversi generis aurea et argentea'. lastly, there is a piece of evidence which has not yet been adduced, namely, that in his _expugnatio hibernica_ (1188), giraldus, speaking of that ring and letters which john of salisbury declared had been brought by him from the pope, and were 'still stored in the royal treasury', writes of annulum aureum in investituræ signum ... qui statim simul cum privilegio _in archivis wintoniae_ repositus fuerat. giraldus certainly must have looked on the royal treasury at winchester as the only recognized repository for all such objects as these. mr hall, indeed, has gradually modified his original position that 'ingulphus saw the domesday register, as it now exists, at westminster', and that it was sent there for good from winchester 'early in the reign of henry i',[262] but he still places the establishment of 'the' treasury at westminster, in my opinion, too early. it is the gradual decay of winchester as the capital and seat of administration that makes it difficult to say positively when or how the national records, domesday books among them, were transferred to westminster. we have seen at least that, in its early days, the 'liber de wintonia', as it styles itself, had its home within the walls of the royal castle of winchester; and i cannot but think, now as at first, that it began by visiting westminster for exchequer sessions only.[263] in any case, we have seen its witness appealed to on a far earlier occasion than had hitherto been known. in my paper on 'an early reference to domesday',[264] i quoted an even earlier mention of the 'descriptio angliæ', but here again the reference seems to make rather to the domesday survey itself than to domesday book, the 'liber de thesauro'. as an appendix to this paper, i give the pedigree of the domesday mss. according to the views i have expressed.[265] original returns ________________________|_________________________ | | | | domesday domesday 'inquisitio 'inquisitio[266] book, vol. ii book, vol. i eliensis', comitatus | _quoad_ camb. cantabrigiensis' | and herts (tib. a. vi.) | | | | 'inquisitio ______|________ eliensis', | | _quoad_ essex, c text b text norfolk, suffolk | ______|______ a text | | (printed by c text b text ellis) | a text (printed by ellis) [footnote 1: _english commonwealth_, ii, ccccxliv.] [footnote 2: _ibid._] [footnote 3: _domesday book_, p. 42.] [footnote 4: _athenæum_, 1885, i, 472, 566-7; _domesday book_, 1887, p. 44.] [footnote 5: _domesday studies_ (1891), ii, 488.] [footnote 6: _inquisitio comitatus cantabrigiensis._ cura n. e. s. a. hamilton, 1876.] [footnote 7: _notes on domesday_ (1877), reprinted 1880, p. 15.] [footnote 8: the italics are his own, _domesday book_, p. 42. cf. _domesday studies_, ii, 486-7.] [footnote 9: it is not even _proved_ that the i.c.c. is copied from the original returns themselves. there is the possibility of a ms. between the two. see _addenda_.] [footnote 10: these extracts are _extended_ and _punctuated_ to facilitate the comparison. important extensions are placed within square brackets.] [footnote 11: curiously enough, the cases in which the i.c.c. does really supplement the domesday version, that is, in the names of the holders t.r.e. and of the under-tenants t.r.w., were left unnoticed by mr hamilton.] [footnote 12: the references to pages are to those of mr hamilton's edition. the portions within the square brackets are the passages omitted.] [footnote 13: in this instance the omission is so gross that it attracted mr hamilton's notice. he admits in a footnote that his ms. 'confounds two separate entries'. it would, however, be more correct to say that the ms. here omits a portion of each. it is easy to see how the scribe erroneously 'ran on' from the first portion of one entry to the second portion of another. this entry has a further value, for while d.b. convicts the i.c.c. of omitting the words 'de widone', it is itself convicted, by collation, of omitting the entry, 'terra est i. bovi'.] [footnote 14: the i.c.c. here wholly omits one of the three holdings t.r.e. 'the three hides and a virgate', at which the estate was assessed, were thus composed: (1) three virgates held by huscarl, (2) a hide and a virgate held by eadgyth, (3) a hide and a virgate held by wulfwine, her man. it is this last holding which is omitted. note here that the domesday 'hide' is composed as ever (_pace_ mr pell) of four virgates.] [footnote 15: 'i. caruce [ibi terra] et est caruca.'] [footnote 16: 'ita quod [non potuit] dare vel vendere' (p. 50).] [footnote 17: 'potuerunt [recedere] qua parte voluerunt'--p. 62 (mr hamilton noticed this omission).] [footnote 18: 'sed [soca] eius remansit ædiue' (p. 61).] [footnote 19: 'tenet [odo] de comite alano' (p. 15).] [footnote 20: 'soca tantum hominis abbatis de ely remansit æcclesiæ' (d.b.); 'sine socha' (i.e.).] [footnote 21: the latter is the reading of d.b., and is the right one because confirmed by i.e.] [footnote 22: this, like the similar cases where d.b. is given as the authority for the second reading, is proved arithmetically (_vide infra_).] [footnote 23: the i.c.c. enumerates only _three_, which is the number given in d.b.] [footnote 24: the words 'quendam ortum' had occurred just before, and are here wrongly repeated.] [footnote 25: 'inter totum valent et valuerunt xii. den.' this was _exclusive_ of the value of the manor, which by the way the i.c.c. gives as sixteen pounds and d.b. at six pounds, one of those cases of discrepancy which have to be left in doubt, though d.b. is probably right.] [footnote 26: mr eyton, in his _notes on domesday_ (p. 16), called attention to this. 'the result,' he wrote (of the lincolnshire domesday), 'as to arrangement, is in certain instances just what might have been expected from some haste of process.... the hurried clerks were perpetually overlooking entries which they ought to have seen.'] [footnote 27: mr eyton (_ibid._, pp. 17, 18), while ignoring this valuable and most important feature, notes the employment of a similar device in domesday book itself in the case of yorkshire. 'against such errors and redundancies a very simple but effective precaution seems to have been adopted by some clerk or clerks employed on the yorkshire notes. before transcription was commenced an index was made of the loose notes of that county. this index gave the contents of each wapentac or liberty in abstract under the appropriate title; then the measure in carucates and bovates of each item of estate; and lastly (interlined) some hint or indication to whose honour or fief each item belonged. this most clerkly device will have saved the subsequent transcribers much trouble of roll-searching and a world of confusion in their actual work.'] [footnote 28: 'warra jacet in trompintona, et terra in grantebrigga.'] [footnote 29: to say that the sokeman 'non potuerunt recedere _sed_ soca remanebat abbati', is nonsense, because if they were not able 'recedere', the question of 'soca' could not arise. the formula 'sed soca', etc., is only used in cases where there _was_ a right 'recedere'.] [footnote 30: in this case the 'n[on]' has been added by interlineation.] [footnote 31: the meaning, i think, is clear, though badly expressed, 'alias' being, seemingly, put for 'illas'.] [footnote 32: this error arose thus: the original return (_see_ i.c.c.) ran: 'de his v. hidis' (i.e. in 'campes') tenet normannus de alberico dimidiam hidam.' the domesday scribe read this hurriedly as implying that norman's half hide was part of aubrey's estate here (two and a half hides), whereas it was reckoned and entered as a _separate_ estate.] [footnote 33: proved by collation with i.c.c. and i.e., which agree with each other.] [footnote 34: _notes on domesday_, p. 16.] [footnote 35: _domesday studies_, pp. 227-363, 561-619.] [footnote 36: 'domesday measures of land' (_archæological review_, september 1889; iv, 130).] [footnote 37: _domesday studies_, 188, 354.] [footnote 38: 'vi. carucis ibi est terra'. see _addenda_.] [footnote 39: compare the equivalent tenure recognized in william of poitier's charter to bayonne: 'le _voisin_ qui voulait abandonner la cité sans esprit de retour avait le droit de vendre librement tout ce qu'il possédait maisons, prairies, vergers, moulins.'] [footnote 40: we have three separate statements (of which more anon) of the aggressions of these three men on the abbey's lands. taking the one printed on pp. 175-7 of mr hamilton's book, we find that of the twelve estates grasped by hardwin, all but one or two can be identified as the subject of duplicate entries in domesday. (a disputed hide and a half in 'melrede', though not mentioned in this list, is also entered in duplicate.) but neither of the estates seized by guy de raimbercurt is so entered in domesday. the first two of those which picot is accused of abstracting are entered in duplicate, but not the following ones. there is one instance of a duplicate entry of another character, relating to half a virgate (d.b., i, 199, _b_, 2, gives it erroneously as half a hide, but d.b., i, 190, _a_, 1, rightly as half a virgate), which picot, as sheriff had regained for the king against the 'invading' aubrey.] [footnote 41: the i.e. adds 'sub abbate ely' in each case, but is, from its nature, here open to suspicion.] [footnote 42: this is not always the case. at whaddon, for instance, the entry under hardwin's land is the fuller. it is noteworthy also that in this case the _later_ entry (i. 198, _b_, 1) is referred to ('hæc terra appreciata est cum terra hardwini') in the _earlier_ one (i. 191, _a_, 2).] [footnote 43: this same change of phrase is repeated four times on two pages (pp. 4, 5).] [footnote 44: so, for instance: 'de appulatione navis' (i.c.c.) = 'de theloneo retis' (d.b.). 'ferarum siluaticarum' (i.c.c.) = 'bestiarum siluaticarum' (d.b.). 'silua ad sepes refici.' (i.c.c.) = 'nemus ad claud. sepes' (d.b.).] [footnote 45: compare the i.c.c. version on p. 100, _infra._] [footnote 46: _inq. com. cant._, pp. xviii, xix.] [footnote 47: 'et dimidiam' [hidam] is omitted in b, and (oddly enough) in domesday itself.] [footnote 48: all three mss. err here, as the reading should clearly be 'dim. _virg._'] [footnote 49: b. 65. this distinction between the one and the nine, but not the size of the holding, is preserved in d.b.; while the i.e., though preserving it, gives the numbers as two and eight.] [footnote 50: this is the i.e. and d.b. version. for 'extra ecclesiam', the i.c.c. substitutes 'sine ejus [abbatis] licentia'.] [footnote 51: 'soca _remansit abbati_' is the d.b. and i.e. version. it should be noted that the i.e. and _breve abbatis_ give 'herchenger pistor' as the despoiler, while the i.c.c. and d.b. record him only as a 'miles' of picot the sheriff. this is a case which certainly suggests special local knowledge in the compiler of the former documents, who also gives the sokeman's name--siward.] [footnote 52: thus 'in branmmeswelle ... lxx. liberi homines unde abbas habuit sacam et socam et commendatio _et omnes consuetudines_ ... in eadem villa iiii. liberi homines[*] unde abbas habuit sacam et socam et commendationem' (p. 161).] [footnote *: 'commend' abbati' (d.b., ii 387 _b_).] [footnote 53: _inq. com. cant._, 192-5. see paper on it, _infra_.] [footnote 54: 'in soca et commendatione abbatis de eli' (d.b., ii. 441).] [footnote 55: 'soca et commendatione tantum' (d.b.).] [footnote 56: 'iiii. liberi homines soca et commendatione tantum' (d.b.).] [footnote 57: 't.r.e. ad socham' (d.b.).] [footnote 58: 'recep'' (d.b., ii. 238).] [footnote 59: the _breve abbatis_ records 34.] [footnote 60: _ibid._, 7.] [footnote 61: i.c.c., fo. 110 (_b_) 1. cf. d.b., i. 199 (_a_) 2, and i.e., p. 110.] [footnote 62: 'socam comes algarus habuit' = 'soca remansit comiti algaro'. see, for instance, the similar case in which a 'man' of earl waltheof 'terram suam dare vel vendere potuit, sed abbas de rameseia socam habuit' (i.c.c., fo. 122, _b_, 2), where d.b. has: 'dare potuit, sed soca remansit abbati de ramesy' (i. 202, _b_, 1).] [footnote 63: 'et in eadem villa iii. liberi homines ... de quibus abbas non habebat nisi commendationem: soca in kanincghala regis.'] [footnote 64: 'hanc terram tenuit godmundus homo comitis waltevi; soca vero remansit abbati ely' (p. 115).] [footnote 65: 'unum liberum hominem unde abbas habet sacam et socam tantum' (p. 140).] [footnote 66: _domesday studies_, p. 556.] [footnote 67: _inq. el._, pp. 140, 141.] [footnote 68: _domesday studies_, p. 209.] [footnote 69: _domesday studies_, p. 187.] [footnote 70: it is essential to bear in mind that the domesday scribes had nothing to guide them but the bare words of the return, so that if they thus equated these expressions, they can only have done so because the rule was of universal application.] [footnote 71: _archæological review_, vol. i, p. 286.] [footnote 72: compare also the exon. domesday, where 'stoches', which is entered 'pro. ii. virgatis et dim.' appears in d.b. as 'dim. hida et dim. virga'.] [footnote 73: see below, and _ante_, p. 17, note.] [footnote 74: _key to domesday_, p. 14.] [footnote 75: it is to this evidence that i made allusion in _domesday studies_ (p. 225). similar evidence as to the domesday carucate is found in the _inq. el._ (ed. hamilton, pp. 156, 178) where 'lx. acre' equate 'dim. c[arucata]'.] [footnote 76: d.b. erroneously reads 'xxx.' (30) by the insertion of an 'x' too many. the i.c.c. correctly reads 'xx.' (20), its accuracy here being proved by the above arithmetic. thus the i.c.c. corrects a reading which (1) would, but for it, appear fatal to the belief that 30 acres = a virgate; (2) would upset the above arithmetic. this ought to be clearly grasped, because it well illustrates the element of clerical error, and shows how apparent discrepancies in our rule may be due to a faulty text alone.] [footnote 77: here, as in the preceding instance, domesday is in error, reading 'one virgate' ('i virgata') where the i.c.c. correctly gives us half a virgate ('dimidiam virgam'). the remarks in the preceding note apply equally here.] [footnote 78: here, again, domesday is in error, reading _two_ and a half virgates, where the i.c.c. has _one_ and a half.] [footnote 79: these two entries are by a blunder in the i.c.c. (see above, p. 23) erroneously rolled into one (of 1/3 virgate). in this case it is domesday book which corrects the i.c.c, and preserves for us the right version.] [footnote 80: the i.c.c, which is very corrupt in its account of this township, gives us a deficiency of 1 hide 0-1/2 virgates.] [footnote 81: the apparent exception was caused by the _inq. com. cant._ reading 'pro iiii. hidis', and omitting the words 'xl. acras minus', the true assessment of the manor, when the king's estate was excluded, being 'three hides _less forty acres_'.] [footnote 82: the _blunder_ consists in treating 6-1/2 (geld) acres as part of the countess judith's estate, whereas they had been reckoned separately; the _discrepancy_ is due to d.b. reading 'ii. acras', where the i.c.c. has 'xxii. acras'.] [footnote 83: eyton's _notes on domesday_, p. 12.] [footnote 84: _ibid._, p. 13.] [footnote 85: dr stubbs' remarks 'on the vexed question of the extent of the hide' will be found in a note to his _const. hist._, vol. i (1874), p. 74. mr eyton (_key to domesday_, p. 14) asserted that the _domesday_ hide contained 48 geld-acres. prof earle in his _land charters and saxonic documents_ (1888) reviews the question of the hide, but leaves it undetermined (pp. lii-liii, 457-461).] [footnote 86: see above, p. 27.] [footnote 87: _antiquary_, june 1882, p. 242. see also _domesday studies_, vol. i, p. 119.] [footnote 88: the i.c.c. _omits_ the king's manor (7-1/4 hides, 8 ploughlands).] [footnote 89: i do not here discuss the cause of the reduction. indeed, this would be hard to discover; for the original assessment was distinctly low, whether we compare it with the aggregate of ploughlands or of valuation. it is true that the total of _valets_ which had been £235 0s 4d t.r.e., and was £203 8s 4d at the time of the survey, had fallen so low as £161 18s 4d, when the grantees received their lands, but, even at the lowest figure, the assessment was still moderate.] [footnote 90: 'burgum de grentebrige pro uno hundredo se defendebat.'--_d.b._, i. 189.] [footnote 91: this figure is arrived at by adding to the 'hida et dimidia et xx. acræ' of domesday, and the _inq. com. cant._ the 'viii. hidæ et xl. acræ', which the latter omits, but which domesday records. the sum is exactly ten hides.] [footnote 92: domesday reads 'iii.', and _inq. com. cant._ 'iiii.'] [footnote 93: i.c.c. reads 'x.'] [footnote 94: 'per concessionem ejusdem regis' (domesday). compare also the five hides knocked off the assessment of alveston by henry i, and another ten hides off that of hampton (_domesday studies_, pp. 99, 103).] [footnote 95: _const. hist._, i, 105.] [footnote 96: see below, p. 87.] [footnote 97: see also _domesday studies_, i, 117.] [footnote 98: _domesday studies_, i, 122-30.] [footnote 99: the fragments of the hundred of papworth and north stow, which it contains, are too small to enable us to speak with certainty.] [footnote 100: correcting the _inq. com. cant._ by adding from domesday the royal manors in isleham and fordham.] [footnote 101: bedford, 1881.] [footnote 102: 'huntedun burg defendebat se ad geldum regis pro quarta parte de hyrstingestan hundred pro l. hidis.'--_domesday_, i, 203.] [footnote 103: adjoining manors held by the abbot of ely.] [footnote 104: i have not attempted to group these six manors, as we have not sufficient information to warrant it. they would, however, form two groups of twenty hides each, or one of twenty-five and another of fifteen.] [footnote 105: there are five entries relating to catworth (fos. 205_b_, 206, 206_b_, 217_b_), which, by the addition of 11 hides (1 + 1 + 3 + 2 + 3 + 1), would bring up its assessment to 15; but as they are all credited in domesday to other hundreds, and as there are _two_ catworths surveyed, i have adhered to the above figure.] [footnote 106: _introduction to domesday_, i, 134. the italics are his own.] [footnote 107: _const. hist._, i, 99.] [footnote 108: this point brings further into line the towns and the rural hundreds, through the 100-hide and the 50-hide assessments of the former. (_see_ my 'danegeld' essay in _domesday studies_.)] [footnote 109: edgar spoke of it as three hundreds.] [footnote 110: 'unum hundret quod vocatur oswaldeslaw in quo jacent ccc. hidæ.'--_d.b._, i., 172_b._] [footnote 111: it also contained one 23-hide and two 24-hide manors, which were once perhaps, of 25 hides. the church of worcester, also possessed, outside this hundred, manors (_inter alia_) of 20, 15, 10, and 5 hides. (_see_ below, p. 143.)] [footnote 112: d.b., i. 175_b._] [footnote 113: i make the aggregate 118-1/2 hides.] [footnote 114: 'quæ hic [dodintret hundred] placitant et geldant et ad hereford reddunt firmam suam.' it would have been said in cambridgeshire that their 'wara' was in doddentree hundred.] [footnote 115: eyton's _somerset survey_, ii, 25.] [footnote 116: eyton's _dorset domesday_, p. 14.] [footnote 117: i drew attention in the _archæological review_ (vol. 1) to a cornish survey of 21 ed. i. (_testa de nevill_, p. 204), in which every cornish acre contains a cornish carucate.] [footnote 118: _domesday studies_, p. 172.] [footnote 119: 'a new view of the geldable unit of assessment of domesday.' _ibid_., pp. 227-363, 561-619.] [footnote 120: _archæological review_, i, 285-95; iv, 130-40, 391.] [footnote 121: _ibid._, iv, 325.] [footnote 122: a curious hint of the grouping of vills is afforded in oxfordshire by adderbury and bloxham. domesday first gives us an assessment of 34-1/2 hides in the two, and then 15-1/2 hides in adderbury, making in all, for the two, 50 hides, the same as banbury.] [footnote 123: this evidence is rendered available by the useful _notes on the oxfordshire domesday_, published by the clarendon press in 1892.] [footnote 124: 40 + 5 + 5.] [footnote 125: 'unam hidam et iii^{es.} virgatas et iii^{ciam.} partem de i. virgata.'] [footnote 126: 'dimidiam hidam et iii^{ciam.} partem dimidiæ hidæ.'] [footnote 127: lysons. so also domesday: '_soco vero jacebat in stains_'.] [footnote 128: _domesday studies_, i. 120. see also _supra_, p. 45, and the case of northampton, _infra_.] [footnote 129: _domesday_, i. 64_b._] [footnote 130: _english historical review_, 1889, iv. 729.] [footnote 131: _english historical review_, 1889, iv. 728-9.] [footnote 132: _archæological review_, iv. 313-27.] [footnote 133: mr stevenson, perhaps, is rather too severe on canon taylor's 'carucate' remarks in the _new english dictionary_. strictly, no doubt, the canon was mistaken, with mr pell, in reckoning 120 as 144 'by the english number'; but the evidence in his paper on 'the plough and the ploughland' seems to establish a practice of counting by twelve instead of ten.] [footnote 134: _genealogist_, n.s., vi. 160-1.] [footnote 135: _archæological review_, iv. 322.] [footnote 136: on this point one may compare with profit 'the making of the danelaw' (858-78), by the late mr green (_conquest of england_, pp. 114-29), who had devoted to this subject much attention. he discusses the limits of eastern mercia, the district of the five boroughs, in the light of local nomenclature (_ibid._, pp. 121-2), and includes within it, on this ground, northamptonshire, while observing that the country about buckingham, which formed the southern border of the 'five boroughs', has no 'byes'. my own evidence is wholly distinct from that of local nomenclature, and defines more sharply the district settled and reorganized by the danes. the hidation of northamptonshire is peculiar, a unit of four (reminding one of the mercian shilling) coming into prominence. still, it was not carucated, but retained its assessment in hides.] [footnote 137: stamford is assigned to lincolnshire by domesday, but is now in rutland. the 'rutland' of domesday (the northern portion of the county as at present constituted) was included, we shall find, in the carucated district by which it was surrounded on the north.] [footnote 138: reg. mag. alb. at york, pars. ii. 1. quoted by canon raine, in his edition of john of hexham (who applies these _formulæ_ to hexham itself), p. 61.] [footnote 139: _vide infra_, p. 149, _et seq._] [footnote 140: 'suma iii. hundr' et vi. car. et vi. bov.'] [footnote 141: 'suma iiii. hundr' et x. car.' (a wrong total).] [footnote 142: 'summa iii. hundr' et v. car. et iiii. bov.'] [footnote 143: see also on these hundreds mr stevenson's remarks in _english historical review_, v. 96, which have appeared since i made these researches.] [footnote 144: this appears to be a clerical error. the actual figures represent 'hundreds'.] [footnote 145: the northern division by threes and sixes is responsible, of course, for the six 'sheaddings' of the isle of man. on their connection with the 'scypfylleth' of three hundreds see vigfusson in _english historical review_, ii. 500.] [footnote 146: the aggregate of these _areal_ measures does not bear out the statement of domesday regarding them, the former wapentake containing eighty-four ploughlands, where domesday allows it only forty-eight.] [footnote 147: the entry is far more suggestive of the 'hundreds' (_vide infra_) in leicestershire, on the border of which sawley stood. this remark applies also to the entry (i. 291_b_) that leake (notts) 'jacet in pluntree hund'.] [footnote 148: see d.b., i. fos. 298, 298_b_, and fo. 379.] [footnote 149: as mr pell did in the case of clifton.] [footnote 150: _vide infra_, p. 160.] [footnote 151: 'there is no trace of any,' writes canon taylor (_domesday studies_, i. 74).] [footnote 152: as with _maenols_ and _trevs_ in north and south wales.] [footnote 153: mr pell tried to explain it by assuming that the leicestershire _carucates_ were really small virgates of the _hida_ in question!] [footnote 154: this at once shows the absurdity of taking these eighteen carucates to be eighteen 'virgates' of a normal hide, and of all the reasoning based thereupon.] [footnote 155: see more below on this point.] [footnote 156: _english historical review_, v. 95.] [footnote 157: mr stevenson, moreover, should surely, to obtain the meaning he wants, have extended _car_ as 'car[ucatarum]'.] [footnote 158: i also hold the formula 't.r.e. erant ibi _x_ car[ucæ]' to refer to ploughs, not ploughlands.] [footnote 159: note that the assessment of 2-5/8 carucates represented 2-1/2 ploughlands, and that of 9-3/8 carucates only 7 ploughlands. no relation, therefore, can be traced here.] [footnote 160: _conquest of england_, p. 121 note.] [footnote 161: _ibid._, p. 276.] [footnote 162: _chester archæological journal_, vol. v.] [footnote 163: 'de harieta lagemanorum habuit isdem picot viii. lib,' etc. (i. 189).] [footnote 164: _domesday studies_, i. 143-86.] [footnote 165: _ibid._, 157.] [footnote 166: according to canon taylor's ingenious theory, the ratio should be 1 to 1 (for two-field manors), or 2 to 1 for three-field manors. but in leicestershire there is a remarkable prevalence of the 3 to 2 ratio, which his theory can, at best, only explain as exceptional.] [footnote 167: _supra_, p. 74.] [footnote 168: the figures are taken from the 'index' to the hundreds at the close of the first volume of domesday book, and the names are arranged in the same order as they are there found.] [footnote 169: there is plenty of similar evidence elsewhere in the shire. thus we find the craven manors assessed at 6, 6, 6, 3, 3, 4, 6, 10, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3 carucates. these assessments would give us 24 (6 + 6 + 6 + 3 + 3) + 24 (4 + 6 + 10 + 2 + 2) + 18 (3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3) + 11 (2 + 3 + 3 + 3).] [footnote 170: _supra_, pp. 51, 62.] [footnote 171: compare the 'reparto de la contribucion', found in the spanish village communities, the members of which apportioned the assessment among themselves.] [footnote 172: _key to domesday_: dorset, p. 14.] [footnote 173: the anomalous position of rutland also was, of course, a disturbing element.] [footnote 174: this low assessment is equally obvious in that of the several manors.] [footnote 175: probably 1/27, as against about 1/6 for somerset and dorset jointly.] [footnote 176: see mr green's maps in his work, _the making of england_, and mr freeman's map of 'britain in 597', in vol. i. of his _norman conquest_. the figures for hampshire, unfortunately, are wanting in the roll of 1156, as in that of 1130.] [footnote 177: even if such assessment were not required, at first, for financial reasons, it might be necessary for such obligations as eventually formed the 'trinoda necessitas'.] [footnote 178: see stubbs, _select charters_, pp. 67-9, and _const. hist._, i. 96-9.] [footnote 179: select charters, p. 67.] [footnote 180: vol. i., pp. 98, 99. cf. _select charters_, p. 67: 'it is sometimes stated that the hundred is a primitive subdivision consisting of a hundred hides of land, or apportioned to a hundred families, the great objection to which theory is the impossibility of reconciling the historical hundreds with any such computation.'] [footnote 181: _select charters_, p. 6.] [footnote 182: thus, the first entry for east anglia (ii. 109_b_) has 'de xx. solidis reddit xvi. d. in gelto.'] [footnote 183: compare also the very curious system of 'purses' adopted by the cinque ports. the 'purse' was £4 7s, and to every 'purse' sandwich, for instance, paid twenty shillings, while, whenever it paid twenty such shillings, its four 'members' were assessed to pay three and fourpence apiece towards it.] [footnote 184: 'in hundredo de tinghowe sunt xx. villæ ex quibus constituuntur ix. lete, quas sic distinguimus.' gage's _suffolk_, p. xii.] [footnote 185: _select pleas in manorial courts_ (selden society), i., lxiii.--lxxvi.] [footnote 186: _ibid._, p. lxxvi.] [footnote 187: 'de gelto v. sol'' (d.b., ii. 286_b_). sudbury was an outlying portion of the hundred of thingoe, in which is situated bury st edmunds, of which we read (d.b., ii. 372): 'quando in hundredo solvitur ad geldum i. libra, tunc inde exeunt lx. d. _ad victum monachorum_.' this substitution, apparently, of sudbury (as three leets) for bury st edmunds (of which the monks received the geld) deserves investigation.] [footnote 188: see p. 58.] [footnote 189: 'wisbeche, quæ est quarta pars centuriatus insulæ' (_liber eliensis_ p. 192).] [footnote 190: 'in sparle et in pagrave, xviii. d. quando hundret scotabat xx. solidos et in acra vi. d. et in pichensam xii. d. quicunque ibi teneat' (ii. 119_b_). see also note 182.] [footnote 191: see _domesday studies_, p. 117.] [footnote 192: reprinted from the _english historical review_, october 1892.] [footnote 193: ninth report on historical mss., app. i, 38.] [footnote 194: _domesday of st. paul's_, p. iv.] [footnote 195: this is a slip. drayton was in middlesex, and the words (which mr seebohm quotes) are 'cum _una_ hida de solande'.] [footnote 196: i know of no authority for this form.] [footnote 197: the '_lathes_' of kent of course point in the same direction.] [footnote 198: professor vinogradoff states, on the contrary, that 'all are irregular in their formation'.] [footnote 199: _english village community_, pp. 54, 139, 396.] [footnote 200: the phrase 'quot hidæ _sint_ ibi' is of importance because such _formulae_ as 't.r.e. geldabat pro ii. hidis, sed tamen _sunt_ ibi xii. hidæ', have sometimes been understood to imply two geldable, but twelve arable hides, whereas both figures refer to assessment only.] [footnote 201: _english village community_, 212 note.] [footnote 202: we might also compare the _droit de gîte_ on the other side of the channel.] [footnote 203: i am indebted for these identifications to mr eyton's work.] [footnote 204: it is a further and fundamental error that mr eyton speaks of the _firma unius noctis_ as 'borough taxation', whereas it was essentially of the nature of rent, not taxes.] [footnote 205: i am indebted for these identifications to mr eyton's work.] [footnote 206: we should perhaps read this as explaining the composition of the centuriatus, viz.: 'the priests, the reeves, and six villeins from each vill'.] [footnote 207: of this conflict there is a good instance, almost at the outset of the cambridgeshire survey (p. 3): 'hanc terram posuit orgarus in vadimonio ... ut homines goisfridi dicunt. sed homines de hundredo neque breve aliquid neque legat' r.e. inde viderunt, neque testimonium perhibent.'] [footnote 208: whittlesford omitted, because in this hundred no lands were held or claimed by the abbey.] [footnote 209: compare wilkins, 125 (quoted by palgrave, _english commonwealth_, i. 464) on english and 'welsh' in devon: 'disputes arising between the plaintiffs and defendants of the two nations were to be decided by a court of twelve "lawmen"--six english and six welsh--the representatives of the respective communities. and it may be observed that the principle which suggested this dimidiated tribunal was generally adopted in our border law.'] [footnote 210: wharton's _anglia sacra_, i. 339.] [footnote 211: palgrave's _commonwealth_, ii. 183.] [footnote 212: this seems of great importance as a very early instance of the _quatuor villatæ_ system, on which see gross's 'the early history and influence of the office of coroner' (_political science quarterly_, vol. vii, no. 4), where the researches of prof maitland and others are summarized.] [footnote 213: only four, however, of the fourteen actually swore: 'reliquos vero decem quietavit willelmus abbas, qui parati erant jurare'.] [footnote 214: the number eight perhaps, is unusual for the jury of a hundred but we have an instance in 1222, of a 'jurata per octo legales cives lincolniæ et præterea per octo legales homines de visneto lincolnie' (_bracton's note-book_, ii. 121); and see addenda.] [footnote 215: his surname is there omitted, but his identity is proved by humphrey 'de anslevilla' occurring elsewhere as an under-tenant of eudo.] [footnote 216: so i conclude from his _introduction to domesday_, i. 22, note 2.] [footnote 217: _inquisitio comitatus cantabrigiensis_, pp. 97 _et seq._] [footnote 218: ed. hamilton, pp. 184-9.] [footnote 219: _ibid._, pp. 97, 101.] [footnote 220: c omits 'et'.] [footnote 221: here the scribe of c, puzzled by the evident corruption of the text from which he copied, read 'inv[enit]'.] [footnote 222: 'toft' (rightly) in c.] [footnote 223: chauelæi, c.] [footnote 224: stanhard[us], b, c.] [footnote 225: frauuis, c.] [footnote 226: chertelinge, c.] [footnote 227: cheleia, c.] [footnote 228: wigeni, c. this was 'wigonus de mara' (i.c.c.) or 'wighen' (d.b.) count alan's under-tenant at ditton.] [footnote 229: eurard[us] in d.b.] [footnote 230: 'juraverunt homines scilicet alerann[us], rogger[us] homo walteri giffardi' omitted in c.] [footnote 231: a sokeman of the abbot of ely at suafham.] [footnote 232: staplehoe hundred.] [footnote 233: this is a noticeable case because 'mo' has been interlined in b text of i.e., and because this man can be identified in i.c.c. and d.b. as an under-tenant in the hundred.] [footnote 234: the i.e. version ('bans') is the right one.] [footnote 235: rectius 'i. hidam'.] [footnote 236: c text.] [footnote 237: commend' 's. ae.' is found on 386_b_, _ad pedem_.] [footnote 238: from internal evidence i hold this writ to have been sent from over sea. it cannot have been issued by william rufus, for the bishop of coutances rebelled against him in 1088, and william rufus did not go abroad till later in his reign.] [footnote 239: this is usually quoted 'inquirunt', which is the wrong reading.] [footnote 240: the right reading.] [footnote 241: quantum in c text.] [footnote 242: the text here seems to be corrupt, c reading 'tunc' for 'simul'. as the 'tunc' and 'modo' formula is represented in the next clause, it seems more probable that 'simul' is the right reading, and refers to the totals entered in the _inquisitio_. in that case the words 'et quantum modo' are an interpolation.] [footnote 243: hallow near worcester.] [footnote 244: note, ash--'esch'--'naisse'.] [footnote 245: compare the heading of the 'breve abbatis': 'hic imbreviatur quot carucas', etc., etc. the returns of the norman barons in 1172 were styled 'breves'.] [footnote 246: ed. hamilton, p. 137.] [footnote 247: this also seems to have been taken from the detailed original returns.] [footnote 248: so far back as 1887 i raised this question, writing: 'indeed, heretical though the view may be, i see no _proof_ whatever that domesday book was itself compiled in 1086' (_antiquary_, xvi. 8).] [footnote 249: _domesday studies_, pp. 526, 626.] [footnote 250: the most erroneous date that has been suggested for domesday is the year 1080. ellis wrote, referring to webb's 'short account', that 'the red book of the exchequer seems to have been erroneously quoted as fixing the time of entrance upon it as 1080' (i. 3). mr ewald,[*] following in his footsteps, has repeated his statement (under 'domesday book'), in the _encyclopædia britannica_; and, lastly, mr de gray birch asserts on his authority that 'this valuable manuscript' is not responsible for that date (_domesday book_, p. 71). all these writers are mistaken. the _diologus de scaccario_, indeed, does not mention a year, but swereford's famous introduction, in the red book of the exchequer, does give us, by an astounding blunder, the fourteenth year of the conqueror (1079-80) as the date of domesday (see below, p. 210).] [footnote *: author of _our public records_.] [footnote 251: i am not sure that even the 'pertin[ent] ad rege[m]' of the 'first' volume (100_b_) is not a mistake for 'regnum'.] [footnote 252: on fo. 17 is a curious deleted list of church fiefs in essex, which has no business there.] [footnote 253: _introduction to domesday_, i. 354.] [footnote 254: _vide infra_, p. 154.] [footnote 255: henry, says orderic, in 1100, 'concito cursu ad _arcem guentoniæ, ubi regalis thesaurus continebatur_, festinavit'.] [footnote 256: this account of the winchester placitum is taken from my second article on 'the custody of domesday book' (_antiquary_, xvi. 9-10).] [footnote 257: _academy_, november 13, 1886; _domesday studies_, p. 537 note; and mr hall's _antiquities of the exchequer_, chap. i.] [footnote 258: _mon. ang._, iii. 86.] [footnote 259: _hen. hunt._, 211; richard of hexham says of henry i's charter of liberties that 'in ærari suo apud wintoniam [eam] conservari præcepit' (p. 142).] [footnote 260: _domesday studies_, 546-7.] [footnote 261: _supra_, note 255.] [footnote 262: _athenæum_, november 27, 1886.] [footnote 263: see also _domesday studies_, 547 note^{2}.] [footnote 264: _domesday studies_, 539 _et seq._] [footnote 265: it will be observed that i do not touch the _liber exoniensis_.] [footnote 266: possibly at second-hand, see p. 20 note (footnote 9, above), and addenda.] the northamptonshire geld-roll this remarkable document was printed by sir henry ellis (1833) in his _general introduction to domesday_ (i. 184-7) from the fine peterborough cartulary belonging to the society of antiquaries (ms. 60). i shall not, therefore, reprint it here, but will give the opening entry as a specimen of its style: this is unto suttunes (sutton) hundred, that is an hundred hides. so it was in king edward's day. and thereof is 'gewered' one and twenty hides and two-thirds of a hide, and [there are] forty hides inland and ten hides [of] the king's ferm land, and eight and twenty hides and the third of a hide waste. we have seen (_supra_, p. 59) that ellis not only erred, but even led dr stubbs into error, as to the character of the 'hundreds' enumerated in this document. except for that, i cannot find any real notice taken of it, although it has been in print over sixty years. it appears to be not even mentioned in mr stuart moore's volume on _northamptonshire in domesday_; and no one, it seems, has cared to inquire to what date it belongs, or what it really is.[1] now, although written in old english, it is well subsequent to the conquest, for it mentions _inter alia_ 'rodbertes wif heorles', who, we shall find, was maud, wife of the count of mortain. it also mentions william and richard engaine, northamptonshire tenants in domesday. on the other hand, it cannot be later than 1075, for it speaks of lands held by 'the lady, the king's wife'; and this was edith, edward's widow, whose northamptonshire lands passed to king william at her death in 1075. of the very few names mentioned, one may surprise and the other puzzle us. the former is that of 'the scot king', holding land even then in a shire where his successors were to hold it so largely: the other is 'osmund, the king's writer', in whom one is grievously tempted to detect the future chancellor, saint and bishop. but, apart from his identity, his peculiar style, exactly equating, as it does, the latin 'clericus regis', emboldens me to make the hazardous suggestion that we possibly have in this document an english rendering of a latin original, executed in the peterborough _scriptorium_. for what was the purpose of the document? it may be pronounced without hesitation to be no other than a geld-roll, recording, it would seem, a levy of danegeld hitherto unknown.[2] there are three features which it has in common with the rolls of 1084: it is drawn up hundred by hundred; it records the exemption of demesne; and it specifies those lands that had failed to pay their quota.[3] its salient feature is one that, at first sight, might seem to impugn its authenticity. this is the almost incredible amount of land lying 'waste'. if we confine our attention to the land liable to geld represented by the first and fourth columns in my analysis below, we see that by far the larger proportion of it is entered as 'waste': yet this witness to a terrible devastation is the best proof of its authenticity; for it sets before us the fruits of those ravages in the autumn of 1065, which are thus described by mr freeman, paraphrasing the english chronicle: morkere's northern followers dealt with the country about northampton as if it had been the country of an enemy. they slew men, burned corn and houses, carried off cattle, and at last led captive several hundred prisoners, seemingly as slaves. the blow was so severe that it was remembered even when one would have thought that that and all other lesser wrongs would have been forgotten in the general overthrow of england. northamptonshire and the shires near to it were for many winters the worse. mr freeman, had he read it, would have eagerly welcomed our record's striking testimony to the truth of the chronicle's words. the devastation that our roll records had been well repaired at the time of domesday; but we obtain a glimpse of it in the rockingham entry: 'wasta erat quando rex w. jussit ibi castellum fieri. modo valet xxvi. sol.' (i. 220). but it is not only that the entries of 'waste' on our roll are thus explained: they further prove it to be, as i have urged, a 'danegeld' roll. for, when we compare it with the pipe-roll of 2 henry ii (1156), we find the latter similarly allowing for the non-receipt of geld from land 'in waste'; and it is specially noteworthy that the portion thus 'waste' is in every case, as on our roll, entered after the others. the fact that the geld was remitted on land that had been made 'waste' is now established by collation of these two records. incidentally, it may be pointed out that as our document bears witness to the devastation of northamptonshire in 1065, so the first surviving roll of henry ii illustrates the local range of devastation under stephen. in kent, which had been throughout under the royal rule, the waste was infinitesimal; in yorkshire it was slight; but in the midlands, which had long been the battle-ground of rival feudal magnates, it was so extensive that, as here in northamptonshire after the conquest, there was more land exempted as 'waste' than there was capable of paying. before leaving this subject i briefly compare the cases of northamptonshire and of east sussex. in the former, we have seen, it is only our document that preserves for us evidence of the ravages in 1065; domesday does not record them, because they had then (1086) been repaired. but in east sussex, the entries are fuller; and as was observed by mr hayley, an intelligent local antiquary: it is the method of domesday book, after reciting the particulars relating to each manor, to set down the valuation thereof, at three several periods, to wit, the time of king edward the confessor, afterwards _when the new tenant entered upon it_, and again at the time when the survey was made. now it is to be observed in perusing the account of the rape of hastings in that book, that in several of the manors therein _at the second of these periods_, it is recorded of them that they were waste, and from this circumstance it may upon good ground be concluded what parts of that rape were marched over by, and suffered from the ravages of the two armies of the conqueror and king harold; and indeed, the situations of those manors is such as evidently shows their _then_ devastated state to be owing to that cause.[4] mr freeman's treatment of this theory was highly characteristic. in the appendix he devoted to the subject[5] he first contemptuously observed of the allusion to harold's army: this notion would hardly have needed any answer except from the sort of sanction given to it by the two writers who quote mr hayley. i do not believe that any army of any age ever passed through a district without doing some damage, but to suppose that harold systematically harried his own kingdom does seem to me the height of absurdity. and he, further, indignantly denied that such a king as harold was 'likely to mark his course by systematic harrying'. now, mr hayley had never charged him with 'systematic harrying'; he had merely traced with much ingenuity, the approach of his army to senlac by the damage, mr freeman admits, its passage, when assembled, must have caused. the fact is that mr hayley had, and mr freeman had not, read his domesday 'with common care'.[6] the latter started from the hasty assertion that: the lasting nature of the destruction wrought at this time is shown by the large number of places round about hastings which _are returned in domesday_ as 'waste'. hence he argued, harold, even had he been 'swegen himself'- could not have done the sort of lasting damage which is implied in the lands being returned as 'waste' _twenty years after_. the ravaging must have been something thorough and systematic, like the ravaging of northumberland a few years later. the whole argument rests on a careless reading of domesday. it was on passages such as these that mr hayley had relied: totum manerium t.r.e. valebat xx. lib. et _post vasta fuit_. modo xviii. lib. et x. sol. totum manerium t.r.e. valebat xiiii. lib. _postea vastatum fuit._ modo xxii. lib. totum manerium t.r.e. valebat cxiiii. sol. modo vii. lib. _vastatum fuit._[7] thus, so far from being returned in 1086 as 'waste', these manors, we see, had already recovered from their devastation at the conquest, and had even, in some cases, increased their value. and so mr freeman's argument falls to the ground. but as he was eager to vindicate harold from a quite imaginary charge, i will try to clear william from mr freeman's very real one. having wrongly concluded that the ravages were 'lasting', and must therefore have been 'systematic', mr freeman wrote: there can be little doubt but that william's ravages were not only done systematically, but were done with a fixed and politic purpose (p. 413) ... there can be little doubt that they were systematic ravages done with the settled object of bringing harold to a battle (p. 741). possibly the writer had in his mind the harrying of the lands of the athenians, as described in the pages of thucydides: but how can it have been politic for william, not only to provoke harold, but to outrage the english people? it was harold with whom his quarrel lay; and as to those he hoped to make his future subjects, to ravage their lands wilfully and wantonly was scarcely the way to commend himself to their favour: it would rather impel them, in dread of his ways, to resist his dominion to the death. but if william's policy be matter of question, domesday at least is matter of fact; and mr freeman's followers cannot be surprised at the opposition he provoked, when we find him thus ridiculing a student for a charge he never made, and proved to have himself erred from his careless reading of domesday. i now append an analysis of the roll, showing the proportion of land 'gewered',[8] of 'inland', of _terra regis_, of land which had not paid (in square brackets), and of 'waste'. the totals in square brackets are those given in the document; the others are those actually accounted for. inland terra waste total regis sutton 21-2/3 40 10 28-1/3 100 [100] warden 17-3/4 40 41-1/4 99 [100] cleyley 18 40 42 100 [100] gravesend 18-1/2 35 5 41-1/2 100 [100] 'eadbolds stow' 23-1/2 45 5 26-1/2 100 [100] 'ailwardsley' 16-1/2 40 [6-1/2] 37 100 [100] foxley 16 30 21 33 100 [100] wyceste 19[9] 40 20 21 100 [100] huxlow 8 15 39 62 [62] willybrook 7 11 31 13 62 [62] upton green 50 27 [3-1/2]29-1/2[10] 110 [109] neuesland [80-1/2][11] 59 [8] 12-1/2 [160] navisford 15 14 33 62 [62] polebrook 10 20 32 62 [62] newbottlegrove 44-7/8 72 33-1/8 150 [150] gilsborough 16 68 66 150 [150] spelho 20-1/2 [borough 25] [16] 28-1/2 90 [90] wiceslea w. 10 40 30 80 [80] wiceslea e. 15 34 31 80 [80] 'stotfald' 9-1/8 40 50-1/8 99-1/4 [100] stoke 18 [10] 12 [40] higham 49-1/2 44 56 149-1/2 [150] 'malesley' 12 30 8 30 80 [80] corby 8-1/2 12-1/4 12-1/4 [?4] 10-3/4 47-3/4 [47] rothwell 10 20 7-1/2 [7-1/2] 45[12] [60] 'andwertheshoe' [?26][13] 25 39 [90] ordlingbury 29-1/2 24-1/2 21 80 [80] 'wimersley' 41 60 49 150 [150] the persons mentioned as not having paid can in most cases be identified. thus 'robert the earl's wife' is one of those in rothwell hundred, whose land was 'unwered'. this was clearly maud, wife of count robert of mortain, who had been given lands by her father, roger of montgomery, at harrington in this hundred. domesday, it is true, where it figures as 'arintone', knows it only as 'terra æcclesiæ de grestain' (222 _b_); but a charter of richard i (_per inspeximus_) confirms to the abbey 'ex dono matildis comitisse moreton ... xxxii. hidas terre quas dederat ei pater suus rogerus de montegomerico, scilicet apud haxintonam [_sic_] viii. hidas, etc.'[14] as the lands had first been given to roger, then by him to his daughter, and, finally, by her to the abbey, i cannot think our document earlier, at any rate, than 1068. edith, whose name proves it not to be later than 1075, is entered as 'the lady, the king's wife', holding eight hides in neuesland hundred, and again as a holder in rothwell hundred, under the name of 'the king's wife'. both entries, doubtless, refer to her wide-spreading manor of 'tingdene' (i. 222), parts of which lay in both the above hundreds. of the other holders we may notice 'urs' (? urse d'abetot), and 'witeget the priest'; but these are quite eclipsed by richard and william engaine, of whom the former occurs twice and the latter thrice on the roll. in spelho hundred 'richard' seems to be credited with ten hides at 'habintune' on which 'nan peni' had been paid. in domesday his holding at abintone is given as _four_ hides (i. 229). in the same hundred, william's land at 'multune' is in default. moulton is not entered under his fief in domesday, but under that of robert de buci we find a 'william' holding of him a hide and a virgate and a half in moulton. this was william engaine, as was the 'william' of our roll; and in the hen. i-hen. ii survey,[15] we find land in moulton entered as of engaine's fee. still more interesting is it to note that so late as 25 ed. i. more than two centuries after domesday, john engayne is found holding half a fee in moulton of ralf basset, and basset of the king _in capite_. for, as our leicestershire survey shows,[16] the domesday fief of robert de buci had passed to basset, of whose heir, therefore, engayne held, as his ancestor had held of robert de buci, in the days of william the conqueror. it is particularly instructive to follow out the northamptonshire fief of william engaine. in domesday (i. 229) he is entered only as 'willelmus' holding 3-1/2 hides in pytchley (_piteslea_), and laxton (_lastone_), worth at that time, £3 10s. 'vitalis' engaine was his heir in 1130, for the pipe-roll of 31 hen. i (p. 82) records his discharge of a debt to the crown 'ut rehabeat terram suam de laxetona'. and this is confirmed by the survey of 1125 in the _liber niger_ of peterborough, where we read under 'pihtesle' (p. 162): 'et vitalis reddit iii. solidos pro i. virga', this being the 'i. virga' assigned to him in the list of peterborough knights (_ibid._, p. 169). the 'rotulus de dominabus' (1185) shows us the 'piteslea' estate in the hands of margaret engaine, makes it worth £6, and mentions that her heir was richard engaine (p. 14). the 'testa de nevill' (p. 37) enters richard 'de angayne' as holding five carucates of land in 'pettesle' and 'laxeton' worth £6 a year. it tells us, further, that he held them by serjeanty--'et est venator leporum, et facit servitium'. from the nature of this return i assign it to the inquest of 1198, in which case it is of some value, as identifying five carucates under the new assessment with the 3-1/2 hides recorded in domesday.[17] fulc de lisures, on the other hand--the heir of the richard engaine of domesday--returned himself in 1166, as the king's forester in fee and attending the king's person, with his horn hanging from his neck.[18] the association of pytchley with hunting is carried back even further still. for richard and william engaine had for their predecessor in title, ælfwine the huntsman ('venator'), who owned their lands when king edward sat upon the throne. among the lands deducted we observe in spelho hundred 'fif and xx. hida byrigland'. this represents the assessment in hides of the borough of northampton, and, so far as i know, is the only mention of that assessment to be found. in my paper on 'danegeld and the finance of domesday', i pointed out that bridport and malmesbury were assessed at five hides each, dorchester, wareham, and hertford at ten hides, worcester at fifteen, bath and shaftesbury at twenty, etc.[19] northampton (we now see) was assessed in the same manner, and chester and huntingdon at no less than fifty hides each. thus they admirably illustrate assessment in terms of the five-hide unit. we find this primitive system obsolete in 1130, when a borough gave an 'auxilium' where its county paid danegeld. but our roll implies that, here at least, it was already obsolete in the early days of the conquest; for the twenty-five hides of 'byrigland' are, for the payment of 'geld', deducted from the hundred. from the date i have assigned to this document (_ante_-1075), it may fairly claim to represent our earliest financial record. its illustrative value for danegeld and the hundred, and consequently for domesday book, will be obvious to every student. [footnote 1: i have found, since this was written, that it was printed by mr t. o. cockayne in his little-known _shrine_ (pp. 205-8), and pronounced by him (in error) to be 'evidently' of the date 1109-18.] [footnote 2: i opposed in 1886 (_domesday studies_, pp. 86, 87) the accepted view that no danegeld was levied by the conqueror till the winter of 1083-4 and discussed (_ibid._, 88-92) the _inquisitio geldi_, which, as mr eyton showed (_key to domesday_), belongs to that date. it has been persistently confused with the exon domesday (being bound up with it), as by mr jones, in his wiltshire domesday (pp. xxxvii., 153 _et seq._), and professor freeman (_quart. review_, july 1892, p. 22).] [footnote 3: it was connected, i find, by mr cockayne with military service, not with _danegeld_.] [footnote 4: quoted in ellis's _introduction to domesday_, i. 315-6.] [footnote 5: _norm. conq._, iii, 741-2.] [footnote 6: the phrase employed by mr freeman in criticizing professor pearson.] [footnote 7: see ellis, _ut supra_.] [footnote 8: 'wered', like 'wara' (_supra_, p. 100), refers to assessment and corresponds with the 'defendit se' phrase in domesday. it seems here to represent the land which had actually paid.] [footnote 9: wrongly given by ellis and cockayne as 'xviii'.] [footnote 10: wrongly given by ellis as 'viii. and xx'.] [footnote 11: the ms. reads, 'thus micel is gewered ... viiii. and xx. hida and i. hida and viiii. and fifti hida inland'. the text is clearly corrupt.] [footnote 12: there is no entry for 'waste' in this hundred, so that possibly the words 'xv. hida westa' are omitted.] [footnote 13: there are clearly some words omitted here in the peterborough transcript. we must read: 'and thereof is "gewered" [? 26 hide and] five and twenty hides inland'.] [footnote 14: _monasticon_, vi. 1090.] [footnote 15: _infra_, p. 175.] [footnote 16: _infra_, p. 173.] [footnote 17: see my paper on 'the great carucage of 1198' (_english historical review_, iii, 501 _et seq._).] [footnote 18: 'et ego ipse custodio forestagium regis de feodo meo; et debeo ire cum corpore regis in servitio suo paratus equis et armis, cornu meo in collo meo pendente.'--_lib. rub._, i, 333.] [footnote 19: _domesday studies_, pp. 117-9.] the knights of peterborough (_temp._ henry i) the interesting 'descriptio militum de abbatia de burgo' is found in the same ms. as the northamptonshire geld-roll.[1] it was printed by stapleton in the appendix to his _chronicon petroburgense_ (pp. 168-75),[2] but no attempt was made to date it. the name of eudo dapifer proves that it cannot have been compiled later than 1120. on the other hand, it cannot well be earlier than 1100, for some of the domesday tenants had been succeeded by their sons--robert (?) marmion, for instance, by roger, and coleswegen by picot--while the mention of 'gislebertus filius ricardi', possibly the son of richard of 'wodeford' (i. 224_b_), points in the same direction. as the majority of names, however, seem to be those of domesday tenants, it is probable that the list is not later than the lindsey survey itself, if, indeed, it is not earlier. the first entry it contains is a good specimen of its value: asketillus de sancto medardo tenet de abbatia de burch in hamtonascira x. hidas et iii. partes i. virgæ, et in lincolnescira iii. carrucatas et inde servit se vi. milite. et de feudo hujus militis dedit rex willelmus senior eudoni dapifero in estona hidam et dimidiam et mandavit de normannia in angliam episcopo constantiarum et r. de oilli per breves suos ut inde darent ei excambium ad valens in quocumque vellet de iii. vicinis comitatibus; sed abbas noluit. we duly find 'anschitillus' in domesday, holding 'witheringham', northants and 'osgodeby', linc., of the abbot (i. 221_b_, 345_b_). in the same way we are enabled to identify the 'rogerius infans' of our list with 'rogerius' who held 'pilchetone', according to domesday (i. 221_b_), of the abbot, 'ascelinus de waltervilla' with the 'azelinus' of domesday (_ibid._), 'gosfridus nepos abbatis', with 'goisfridus' who held in 'sudtorp' (_ibid._), and 'rogerius malfed' with that 'rogerius' who held of the abbot at woodford (i. 222). 'rogerus', on the other hand, who held in domesday two hides at milton, northants (i. 221_b_), and seven bovates at cleatham, linc. (i. 346), is represented in our list by the entry: turoldus de meletona ii. hidas in hamtonascira, et in lindeseia vi. bovatas, et inde servit se altero milite (p. 171). the chief lesson taught us here is the rashness of assuming the identity of tenants happening to bear the same name. for even among the few who are named as holding of the abbot of peterborough, we have found three rogers quite distinct from one another. the entries which follow are of value as absolute proofs of succession: domesday descriptio militum in dailintone tenet ricardus de rodbertus filius ricardi iiii. abbate iiii^{or.} hidas (i. 222). hidas in hamtonascira, et inde servit se altero milite (p. 175). in risun habuit elnod iiii. picotus filius colsuaini habet bovatas terre ad geldum ... nunc dimidiam carrucatam in rison, habet colsuan de abbate turoldo quam abbas dedit patri suo tali (i. 345_b_). servicio quod esset ad placita abbatis et manuteneret res suas et homines suos in scira et in aliis locis (p. 175). this second entry not only records a peculiarly interesting enfeoffment, but identifies 'colsuan', the abbot's under-tenant at riseholme, with no less a person than the conqueror's 'english favourite coleswegen, ... an englishman who, by whatever means, contrived to hold up his head among the conquerors of england'.[3] as sons, in such cases as these, have succeeded their fathers, it need not surprise us that our list comprises some names that are found in the _liber niger_ survey of 1125.[4] vivian, whom, it tells us, abbot turold had enfeoffed at oundle (p. 175) occurs there in that survey (p. 158), as does robert d'oilli at cottingham (pp. 159-73).[5] vitalis ('viel') engaine had succeeded william (engaine) at pytchley both in our list and in the survey of 1125 (cf. _ante_, p. 129). one of the most interesting and important points in this list of knights is the gleam of new light it throws on hereward 'the wake'. in it we read: hugo de euremou iii. hidas in dominio et vii. bovatas in lincolneshira, et servit pro ii. militibus. ansford iii. carucatas et servit pro dimidia hida [_sic_]. now hugh de euremou is the name of the man who, according to the pseudo-ingulf, married hereward's daughter. here we have proof of his real existence, and are enabled moreover to detect him, i claim, in that hugh who, as a 'miles' of the abbot, held three hides at 'edintone' [etton, northants] in domesday (i. 222). mr freeman speaking of the vacancy at bayeux in 1908, wrote: william at once bestowed the staff on turold, the brother of hugh of evermont [_sic_], seemingly the same hugh who figures in the legend of hereward as his son-in-law and successor.[6] but the french editors of ordericus, in a note to the passage from which this statement was taken (iv. 18), speak of our man as 'hugue d'envermeu, donateur du prieuré de st. laurent d'envermeu à l'abbaye de bec'.[7] turning for a moment from hugh to ansford, we read in the lincolnshire 'clamores': terram asford in bercham hund' dicit wapentac non habuisse herewardum die quo aufugiit (d.b., i. 376_b_). about this entry, as mr freeman observed, 'there can be no doubt'. but as the result of his careful inquiry,[8] he limited 'our positive knowledge', from domesday, to this entry and to two in the text of the lincolnshire survey (364_b_-377). it is strange that he did not follow up the clue the 'clamores' gave him. the relevant entry in the text of the survey is duly found under the peterborough fief: in witham et mannetorp et toftlund habuit _hereward_ xii. bovatas terræ ad geldum.... ibi asuert [_sic_] homo abbatis turoldi habet, etc.... berew[ita] hujus m. in bercaham et estou i. carucata terræ ad geldum. ... ibi asford habet, etc.... in estov soca in witham iiii. bovatæ terræ et dimidia ad geldum.... ibi asfort de abbate habet, etc.... (i. 346). this is the 'terra asford' referred to in the 'clamores', and, as amounting to 3-1/16 carucates, it is clearly the 'iii. carucatas' assigned in our list to 'ansford'. thus, through his successor ansford, we have at last run down our man; hereward was, exactly as is stated by hugh 'candidus', a 'man' of the abbot of peterborough; and his holding was situated at witham on the hill,[9] not far from bourne, and, at barholme-with-stow a few miles off, all in the extreme south-west of the county. this is the fact for which mr freeman sought in vain, and which has eluded professor tout, in his careful life of the outlaw for the _dictionary of national biography_. we are now in a position to examine the gloss of hugh 'candidus', showing how 'baldwin wake' possessed the holdings both of hugh and of ansford:[10] primus hugo de euremu. baldwinus wake tenet in depinge, plumtre, et stove feoda duorum militum.... et præterea dictus baldewinus tenet feodum unius militis in wytham et bergham de terra affordi. et prædictus baldewinus de predictis feodis abbati de burgo debet plenarie respondere de omni forensi [servitio]. here we see how the legendary name and legendary position of hereward were evolved. the wakes, lords of bourne, held among their lands some, not far from bourne, which had once been held by hereward. thus arose the story that hereward had been lord of bourne; and it was but a step further to connect him directly with the wakes, by giving him a daughter and heir married to hugh de evermou, whose lands had similarly passed to the lords of bourne. the pedigree-maker's crowning stroke was to make hereward himself a wake,[11] just as baldwin fitz gilbert (de clare) is in one place transformed into a wake.[12] the climax was reached when the modern wakes revived the name of hereward, just as 'sir brian newcome of newcome' set the seal to his family legend by giving his children 'names out of the saxon calendar'. returning to hereward himself, we find mr freeman writing (of the spring of 1070): at this moment we hear for the first time of one whose mythical fame outshines all the names of his generation, and of whom the few historical notices make us wish that details could be filled in from some other source than legend.... both the voice of legend and the witness of the great survey agree in connecting hereward with lincolnshire, but they differ as to the particular spot in the shire in which he is to be quartered. legend also has forgotten a fact which the document has preserved, namely, that the hero of the fenland did not belong wholly to lincolnshire, but that he was also a landholder in the distant shire of warwick. but the survey has preserved another fact with which the legendary versions of his life have been specially busy. hereward, at some time it would seem, before the period of his exploits, had fled from his country.[13] let us first dismiss from our minds the alleged fact as to warwickshire. there is absolutely nothing to connect the count of meulan's tenant there with the lincolnshire hero; indeed mr freeman admits in his appendix 'that the hereward of these entries may be some other person' (p. 805). legend had an excellent reason for ignoring this alleged 'fact' as had 'romances' for having 'perversely forgotten' to mention the deeds or the fate of william malet in the isle (_ibid._, p. 473). we must also dismiss the 'fact'--'undoubted history' though it be (_ibid._, p. 805)--of hereward's 'banishment' at some time between 1062 and 1070. for the survey gives no date; it merely speaks of 'die quâ aufugiit' (i. 376_b_), which phrase, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, must be referred to his escape from the 'isle',[14] when (1071) in the words of florence, 'cum paucis evasit'. this at once explains the domesday entry (_ante_, p. 160), for he would, of course, have forfeited his holding before that date. 'but leaving fables and guesses aside,' in mr freeman's words, 'we know enough of hereward to make us earnestly long to know more' (p. 456). my proof that the english hero was a 'man' of the abbot of peterborough explains why 'hereward and his gang', as they are termed in the peterborough chronicle, 'seem', mr freeman is forced to admit, 'to be specially the rebellious tenants of the abbey', as distinct from the danes and the outlaws (p. 459). and the vindication, on this point, of hugh candidus' accuracy makes one regret that mr freeman, though eager for information as to hereward, ignored so completely that writer's narrative. it is in absolute agreement with the peterborough chronicle, mr freeman's own authority, but records some interesting details which the chronicle omits.[15] these place hereward's conduct in a somewhat different light, and suggest that he may really have been loyal to the abbey whose 'man' he was. his plea for bringing the danes to peterborough was that he honestly believed that they would overthrow the normans, and that the treasures of the church would, therefore, be safer in their hands. he may perfectly well have been hostile to the normans, and yet faithful to the abbey so long as brand held it; but the news that turold and his knights were coming to make the abbey a centre of norman rule against him[16] would drive him to extreme courses. professor tout has made some use of hugh, but says, strangely, that 'the stern rule of the new abbot turold drove into revolt the tenants', when his rule had not yet begun. again, there is now no doubt where hereward ought 'to be quartered'. two other places with which the domesday survey connects him are rippingale and, possibly, laughton to the north of bourne. living thus on the edge of the fenland, he may well have been a leader among 'that english folk of the fenlands' who rose, says the peterborough chronicle, in the spring of 1070, to join the danish fleet and throw off the norman yoke. and the prospect of being ousted from his peterborough lands by a follower of the new french abbot would have added a personal zest to his patriotic zeal. mr freeman, followed by professor tout,[17] holds that the story in the false ingulf is not to be wholly cast aside, as it may contain some genuine crowland tradition;[18] but he has not accurately given that story. it might hastily be gathered, as it was by him, that it was hereward's mother-in-law who 'very considerately takes the veil at the hands of abbot ulfcytel', whereas it was, according to the _gesta_, his wife who did this. the _gesta_ version, he writes, 'of turfrida going into a monastery to make way for ælfthryth is plainly another form of the story in ingulf, which makes not herself but her mother do so'. but if the _historia ingulphi_ (pp. 67-8) be read with care, it will be seen that 'mater turfrid_æ_' should clearly be 'mater turfrid_a_', the reading that the sense requires. so there is here no opposition, and ingulf merely follows the _gesta_ version. as for the honour of bourne, it can be shown from the _carta_ of hugh wac in 1166, from our list of knights, and from the pipe-roll of 1130, to have been formed from separate holdings and to have descended as follows: ----------------------------- | | william richard de rullos, de rullos lord of bourne (see p. 161) _temp._ hen. i. | baldwin fitz gilbert, = adelina lord of bourne, | _jure uxoris_, | founder of | bourne priory, | 1138[19] (see p. 359) | -------------------------------- | | roger emma = hugh wac, | lord of ------ bourne, | _jure uxoris_ baldwin in 1166 wac, lord of bourne the psuedo-ingulf's version runs: leofric, = edith lord of bourne, | 1062 | ------------ | hereward, = turfrida lord of bourne | -------------- | a daughter, = hugh de evermou heiress of bourne | lord of depyng (p. 67) --------- | a daughter, = richard de rullos. heiress of living _temp._ will. i. bourne and (pp. 77-8; depyng pp. 95, 99, 118) it will be seen how skilfully the author of this famous forgery brings in the names of real people while confusing their connection and their dates. richard de rullos, for instance, was living shortly before 1130, yet is here described as living under the conqueror, though represented as marrying the great granddaughter of a man who was himself in the prime of life in 1062. the whole account of him as an ardent agriculturist, devoted to the improvement of live-stock and the reclamation of waste, is quaintly anachronistic; but the fact of his being a friend and benefactor to crowland is one for which the writer had probably some ground. for my part, i attach most importance to his incidental statement that the daring deeds of hereward the outlaw, 'adhuc in triviis canuntur', an allusion, perhaps unnoticed, to a ballad history surviving, it may be, so late as the days when the forgery was compiled. but, leaving hereward, no entries in this list are more deserving of notice than those which bring before us the famous name of nevile: gislebertus de nevila [tenet] ii. carrucatas in lincolnescira, et servit abbatiæ pro ii. hidis et inde inventi i. militem (p. 171). radulfus de nevila [tenet] x. carrucatas in lincolnescira et i. hidam et dimidiam in hamtonascira et servit se tercio milite (p. 175). hugh candidus wrote of the former: heres galfridi de nevile tenet in lincolnescire, scilicet in waletone [_sic_] justa folkingham, et yoltorpe duas carrucatas terra et inde facit plenum servitium unius militis (p. 59). with this clue we are enabled to detect gilbert de nevile in that 'gislebertus homo abbatis', who held of the abbot (d.b., i. 345_b_) at 'walecote' (walcot near folkingham). so also hugh 'candidus' writes of the other nevile fee: heres radulfi de nevile tenet decem carrucatas terræ in lincolnshire, scilicet in scottone malmetone; et in norhamtonscire unam hidam et dimidiam, scilicet in holme, rayniltorp, et inde facit plenum servitium trium militum (p. 55). it is, then, ralf de nevile that we have in that 'radulfus homo abbatis', who held of him at 'mameltune', and 'rageneltorp' with 'holm' in domesday (i. 345_b_, 346)--manton, with raventhorpe and holme (near bottesford, co. linc.)--for hugh, of course, has blundered in placing the two latter places in northamptonshire.[20] the _testa_, more exact, enables us to add ashby to holme and raventhorpe as part of one estate, held as a single knight's fee. scotton, in the same neighbourhood, was held by 'ricardus' in domesday, but, in the hands of nevile's heirs, represented a fee and a third. between ralf and gilbert de nevile on fo. 346 we find 'gislebertus homo abbatis' holding ten bovates at hibaldstow. this was the 'gislebertus falvel' of our return, not gilbert de nevile. the last domesday name i shall identify is that of the abbot's under-tenant 'eustacius', who held of him at polebrook, clapton (northants), and catworth (hunts). he was, i believe, the same as that eustace who held land, as a tenant-in-chief, at polebrook, northants, and with that eustace the sheriff ('vice-comes') who held (at catworth, hunts) also _in capite_. indeed the abbot's tenant is identified with the latter in the story of the foundation of huntingdon priory (_mon. ang._, vi. 78), where, as in our list, we find that his two knights' fees soon passed to lovetot.[21] we may learn from this identification that two different tenants-in-chief and at least one under-tenant may prove to be all one man, just as, on the other hand, we found three distinct rogers among the domesday under-tenants of the abbot. an additional conclusion is suggested by the name 'eustachius de huntendune', given to this sheriff in the _inquisitio eliensis_.[22] for we find picot, the sheriff of cambridgeshire, similarly styled in domesday (i. 200), 'picot de grentebrige'. 'ilbert de hertford', i think, was the sheriff of hertfordshire,[23] and hamo, a contemporary sheriff of kent, attests a charter as 'hamo de cantuaria'. turold, sheriff of lincolnshire, is found as turold 'of lincoln' (see p. 255), and hugh, sheriff of dorset, as hugh of 'wareham', while walter and miles 'of gloucester', edward and walter 'of salisbury', are also cases in point. hugh 'of leicester' was sheriff of leicestershire _temp._ henry i, while turchil 'de warwic' (d.b., i. 240_b_) may possibly have owed that appellation to the fact that his father ælfwine was sheriff of warwickshire. enough, in any case, has been said to show that it was a regular practice for sheriffs to derive, as often did earls, their styles from the capital town of their shire. [footnote 1: society of antiquaries' ms. 60.] [footnote 2: ed. camden society.] [footnote 3: _norman conquest_, iv. 219. we know _aliunde_ that 'picot filius colsuani' was the son of colswegen of lincoln. it would seem to be of this estate that we read in the 'clamores': 'abbas de burg clamat iiii. bov. terræ in risun terra colsuani, et wap' testatur quod t.r.e. jacuerunt in æcclesia omnium sanctorum in lincolia.'] [footnote 4: society of antiquaries' ms. 60. printed by stapleton _ut supra_.] [footnote 5: but possibly the robert d'oilli of our list may be the _first_ robert (who, as 'robertus' in domesday, held cranford of the abbot), while the tenant of that name in 1125 may be the _second_ robert, entered in the pipe-roll of 1130, and living _temp._ stephen.] [footnote 6: _william rufus_, i. 571. he makes it 'evermouth' in the _norman conquest_.] [footnote 7: envermeu lay on the coast some 19 miles to the east of dieppe.] [footnote 8: 'the legend of hereward' (_norman conquest_, iv. [1st ed.], 805).] [footnote 9: with its hamlet of manthorpe and toft with lound.] [footnote 10: ed. sparke _historiæ anglicanæ scriptores_ [1723].] [footnote 11: professor tout throws out the unlucky suggestion: 'the _wake_, i.e. apparently the watchful one'.] [footnote 12: see the new _monasticon_ on deeping priory, and the rubric to baldwin's charter. the true parentage of baldwin fitz gilbert will be shown _infra_ in the paper on 'walter tirel and his wife'.] [footnote 13: _norman conquest_ (1st ed.), iv. 455-6.] [footnote 14: _norman conquest_ (1st ed.), iv. 484. professor tout, however, follows mr freeman, and accepts an earlier 'flight from england' as a fact. one must therefore insist that 'the whole story has no historical basis'.] [footnote 15: i am tempted, indeed, to suggest that hugh may have had before him that lost local 'account of hereward's doings', which was inserted (but, according to my own view, in an abbreviated form) into the earlier chronicle, according to professor earle (see _norm. conq._, iv. 461, note 3). this solution would explain everything, and would, if accepted, greatly increase the importance of hugh's chronicle.] [footnote 16: cf. william of malmesbury _in loco_.] [footnote 17: _dictionary of national biography_.] [footnote 18: appendix on 'the legend of hereward', _ut supra_.] [footnote 19: the names of the churches he bestowed on the priory illustrate the constituents of the honour of bourne.] [footnote 20: the name of ralf de nevilla occurs in full in the lincolnshire 'clamores' (i. 376_b_), annihilating the old assertion that this famous surname is nowhere found in domesday. (see my letter in _academy_, xxxvii. 373.)] [footnote 21: it is specially interesting to trace his holding at winwick, hunts, which then lay partly in northants. as 'eustachius' he held _in capite_ at 'winewincle' (i. 228), as 'eustachius vicecomes' at 'winewiche' (i. 206), and as 'eustacius', a tenant of the abbot, at 'winewiche' (i. 221). in the first two cases his under-tenants are given as 'widelard[us]' and 'oilard[us]', doubtless the same man. for 'winewincle' we should probably read 'winewicke'. see also p. 222, _infra_.] [footnote 22: _inq. com. cant._, ed. hamilton, p. 111.] [footnote 23: _ibid._, 56, 192.] the worcestershire survey (_temp._ henry i) we have, in the case of the see of worcester, the means of testing some of the changes which took place among its tenants within a generation of domesday. this is a survey of that portion of its lands which lay within the county of worcester. although printed by hearne in his edition of heming's cartulary (fos. 141, 141_d_), it escaped notice, i believe, till i identified it myself in _domesday studies_ (p. 546). as it follows immediately on the transcript of the domesday survey of the fief, the fact that it represents a later and distinct record might, at first sight, be overlooked. in spite of the importance of heming's cartulary in its bearing on the domesday survey, the documents of which it contains the transcripts have been hopelessly confused and misunderstood. professor freeman, dealing with them, came to utter grief,[1] and as for mr de gray birch, he not only took this survey _temp._ henry i to be a portion of domesday itself, which 'should be collated with the original ms. at the record office',[2] but even repeated ellis's blunder,[3] that the names in a document _temp._ bishop john [1151-7][4] represent 'the list of jurors for the hundred of oswaldeslaw' at the domesday survey.[5] from a writ entered on fo. 136 we may infer that there had been some dispute between the sheriff and the church of worcester as to the number of hides in the county for which the latter should be rated.[6] this inquest or survey was the consequence of that dispute, and resulted in the issue of the writ. its date is roughly determined by the facts that urse d'abetot was dead when it was made, while the count of meulan is entered as a tenant, so that we may probably date it as later (at the earliest) than 1108, and previous to the death of the count of meulan in july 1118.[7] let us now compare, manor by manor, the earlier with the later survey: domesday survey _temp._ henry i _chemesege_ _kemesige_ bishop [13] bishop 13 urso 7 walter de beauchamp 9 roger de laci 2 walter ponther 2 hugh puiher 2 --- --- 24 24 _wiche_ _wike_ bishop 3-3/4 bishop 3 urso 9-3/4 walter de beauchamp 10-1/2 robert despenser 1/2 nicholas (de beauchamp?) 1/2 osbern fitz richard 1 hugh fitz osbern 1 ----- ----- 15 15 _fledebirie_ _fledebyri_ bishop 7 bishop 3 bishop of hereford 5 bishop of hereford 5 urso 12 robert despenser 5 walter de beauchamp 22 alricus archid[iaconus] 1 roger de laci 10 hugh de laci 10 --- --- 40 40 _breodun_ _bredune_ bishop 10 bishop 13 monks 4 monks 4 ælricus archd. 2 urso 16 walter de beauchamp 16 durand 2 gile (? bertus) 1 brictric fil' algar king 1 (in king's hands) 1 --- --- 35 35 _rippel et uptun_ _rippel et uptun_ bishop 13 bishop 14 ordric 1 siward 5 roger de laci 3 hugh de laci 3 urso 1 ralph de bernai (in king's hands) 1 walter de beauchamp 6 brictric fil' algar (in king's hands) 1 king 2 --- --- 25 25 _blochelei_ _bloccelea_ bishop 25-1/2 bishop 22 richard 2 bishop 2 ansgot 1-1/2 walter de beauchamp 5 stephen fil' fulcred 3 'dæilesford' 3 hereward 5 'eunilade' 5 monks 1 monks 1 ----- --- 38 38 _tredingtun_ _tredintun_ [bishop 17] bishop 17 monks 2 monks 2 gilbert fil' thorold 4 'langedun' 4 -- -- 23 23 _norwiche_ _northewike_ bishop 3-1/2 bishop 6-1/2 urso 7-3/4 walter de beauchamp 10 ordric 4-1/4 alric arch' 1 walter ponther 7-1/2 hugh puiher 7-1/2 herlebaldus 1 king 1 -- -- 25 25 _ovreberie cum penedoc_ _werebyri et penedoc_ the church of worcester 6 6 _seggesbarne_ _segesberewe_ the church of worcester 3 3 _scepwestun_ _scepwestune_ the church of worcester 2 2 _herferthun cum wiburgestoke_ _herfortune cum wiburga stoke_ the church of worcester 3 3 _grimanleh_ _grimeleage_ the church of worcester 2 2 robert despencer 1 walter de beauchamp 1 -- -- 3 3 _halhegan cum bradewesham_ _hallhagan cum bradewasse_ the church of worcester 1 [the church of worcester 1] duo radmanni 2 walter de beauchamp 1-1/2 roger de laci 3-1/2 roger de laci 3-1/2 walter de burh 1/2 count of meulan 1 hugh de grentmesnil 1/2 ------ ------ 7-1/2 7 _cropetorn cum neothetune_ _croppethorne_ church of worcester 14 monks 15 robert despencer 11 walter de beauchamp 9 urso 6 robert marmion 7 abbot of evesham 9 abbot of evesham 9 [_ibid._ 10] _ibid._ 'quiete a geldo' 10 -- -- 50 50 _total for oswaldslaw hundred_ hides tenants heming's total (_ut supra_) (_ut supra_) 'he sunt ccc. hide ad 24 bishop 93-1/2 osuualdes lauues hundret.' 15 40 monks 39 35 walter de beauchamp 90 'episcopus habet in 25 king 4 dominio' xciiii. 38 hugh puher 9-1/2 'monachi' xl. 23 hugh de laci 13 } 'walterus de bealcamp' xx.[8] 25 roger de laci 3-1/2 } 24 robert marmion 7 } 'alii barones' lxiii. 50 bishop of hereford 5 } 'rex' iii. - abbot of evesham 19 } 299 hugh fitz osbern 1 } 72-1/2 count of meulan 1 } gile (?bertus) 1 } alii 12 } nicholas (? de } 'quiete apud hamtun beauchamp) 1/2 a geldo' x. ------ --- 299 230 _huerteberie_ _heortlabyri_ church of worcester 20 bishop 15 walter de beauchamp 5 -- 20 _vlwardelei_ _wlfwardile_ church of worcester 5 monks 5 _stoche_ _stoka_ church of worcester 10 monks 10 _alvievecherche_ _ælfithe cyrce_ church of worcester 13 bishop 13 _clive cum lenc_ _clive cum leng_ church of worcester 10-1/2 monks 10 _fepsetenatun_ _fepsintune_ church of worcester 5 monks 1 walter ponther 1[9] hugh puiher 1[9] roger de laci 5 hugh de laci 5 -- -- 11 7 _hambyrie_ _heanbyri_ church of worcester 14 bishop 13-1/2 walter de beauchamp 1/2 ----- 14 _ardolvestone et cnistetone_ _eardulfestun et cnihtetun_ church of worcester ('de monks 15 victu monachorum') 15 _total_ _'summa in kinefolka'_ bishop 41-1/2 'episcopus in dominio xli.' monks 41 'monachi xli.' walter de beauchamp 5-1/2 'walterus de bealcamp vi.' hugh de laci 5 'hugo de laci v.' hugh puiher 1 'hugo puiher i.' ------ ---- 94 94 in oswaldeslaw 299 outside ditto 94 -- 393 summa hidarum, quas episcopus habet in toto vicecomitatu est ccc. et quater xx. et xvii. cum his quas abbas de evesham tenet de oswaldes lauue.[10] it will be seen that of these 397 hides only 393 are accounted for above. the explanation is this. of the five hides held in 'fepsintune' by the church of worcester in domesday, only one is entered in the above list, the other four being wholly omitted, both in the list itself and in the total. these four omitted hides bring up the 393 to 397, the exact sum that we have to account for. if the manors in the above survey are examined with care _seriatim_, it will be found that they bear manifest witness to the aggressions of urse d'abetot, who, we may gather from this cartulary, was the _bête noire_ of the church of worcester. the various extensions of his domesday holdings, as at 'fledebyrie', where twelve hides had been increased to twenty-two, were partly due to the accession of the lands he inherited from his brother, but partly also to his absorption of the lands of other tenants and of portions of the episcopal demesne. all the benefit of these accessions passed to his son-in-law and successor, walter de beauchamp. but perhaps the most important information that this survey gives us is to be found in the light it throws on the succession to robert 'dispensator'. that he was brother to urse d'abetot is, of course, generally known. his relationship to the marmions is the _crux_. i deal with it under the lindsey survey,[11] which shows us his lincolnshire fief in the hands of roger marmion. in the present survey we find that of the seventeen hides and a half which robert dispensator had held, at the time of domesday, from the bishop, only seven were held by robert (not roger) marmion when this document was compiled, the rest being held by walter de beauchamp. we thus learn that here, as in leicestershire, the fief had been divided between the two.[12] but this survey further tells us--if we may trust the text--that, in this succession, roger marmion had been preceded by robert. one may throw it out as a possible suggestion that, in addition to the wife of walter de beauchamp, urse d'abetot may have had a daughter who married robert marmion.[13] on the forfeiture of his son roger, such a daughter would have pressed her claim, and, though the inheritance of urse himself may, by special favour, have been regranted to walter, she may have obtained a share of the fief of her uncle, robert 'dispensator'. but this can only be conjecture. of the other points of family history on which this survey throws light, one may mention that hugh 'puher' had succeeded walter 'ponther', that osbern fitz richard (of richard's castle) had been succeeded by his son, hugh fitz osbern; and that though, as in 1095,[14] the name of hugh de laci supplants that of his brother roger, yet that, if we can trust the text, roger had in one manor been allowed to retain his holding, in accordance with a policy which is believed to have been practised, namely, that of keeping a hold, however small, on the forfeited. the name of the count of meulan also, the supplanter of grentmesnil, will be noticed, and that of a 'nicholas', whom, as the successor in a small holding of robert despencer, one might perhaps be tempted to identify with the mysterious sheriff of staffordshire, nicolas de beauchamp. there are fragments of two other early surveys relating to worcestershire, which, as they contain the names of walter and of william de beauchamp respectively, may be roughly assigned to the reigns of henry i and of stephen. the first, which is found in an evesham cartulary,[15] is mainly an abstract of domesday, but contains a later and valuable analysis of droitwich, with an important reference to the exchequer. the other[16] begins in the middle of a survey of what seems to be the church of worcester's fief, records the lands held, as under-tenant, by william de beauchamp, and shows us the domesday fief of ralf de 'todeni' in the hands of his heir, roger de 'toeni'. droitwich hee sunt x. hidæ in wich'. de witton' petri corbezun ii. hidas. de feodo sancti dionysii ricardus corvus et willelmus filius oueclini tenent i. hidam. de sancto guthlaco willelmus filius ricardi tenet i. hidam. de johanne de suthlega ricardus filius roberti tenet i. hidam. de pagano filio johannis godwi tenet dimidiam hidam. de waltero de bello campo theobaldus et petrus tenent dimidiam hidam. de la berton' de gloucestra [see glouc. cartu.] randulf filius ringulfi tenet dimidiam hidam. de monachis gloucestrie baldwinus et lithulfus dimidiam hidam. de comite warewice randulfus et essulf filii ringulf tenent iii. virgatas. de waltero del burc randulf et essulf dimidiam hidam. de westmonasterio theobaldus et walterus fil' thorald i. hidam. de almega fil' aiulfi et mater ejus i. hidam. de battona aiulfus presbyter i. virgatam. de wichebold rogerus de bolles i. virgatam. de monachis fil' grim tenet i. virgatam. de kinefare et douerdale i. virgatam. alewi caure et socii ejus dimidiam virgatam.[15] h[oc] debet computari ad scacarium regis vicecomiti wirecestrie. habes x. hidas ad danegeld et wasto forestæ ii. hidas. et in ederesfeld vi hid[æ]. et in happeworda i. hid[a]. et in biselega i. hid[a]. et in burlega i. hyda. fragment of a survey subsequent to 1130 and perhaps _circa_ 1150 (_cott. ms. vesp._, b. xxiv. fo. 8.) ... manerio de hambyry. estona ric' dimidiam hidam. in hundredo de camele. in waresleia v. hidæ de manerio de hertlebery. summa quater xx. et xiii. hidæ. in hundredo de persora habet ecclesia de westmustier has terras quas tenet willelmus de bello campo. hekintona iii. hidæ et iii. virgatæ. chaddesleia ii. hidæ. langeduna osmundi i. hida et dimidia. colleduma iii. hidæ et iii. virgatæ. graftona ebrandi i. hida et iii. virgatæ. flavel et pidelet v. hidæ. newentona x. hidæ. broctona inardi iii. hidæ. pidelet radulfi iii. hidæ. berford v. hidæ. branefford i. hida. wicha inardi iii. hidæ. burlingeham ii. hidæ et i. virgata. cumbrintona ii. hidæ. poiwica willelmi de bello campo i. hida. newebolt i. hida. medeleffeld i. hida de poiwica. ad bergam i. hida. olendene i. hida. arleia i. virgata. poiwica inardi i. hida. summa lx. hidæ et dimidia. in predicto hundredo de persora feudum abbatis persore. belega xxi. hidæ. branefford i. hida. wadberga iii. hidæ et dimidia. cumbrintona i. hida et dimidia. lega ricardi dimidia hida. walecote et torendune i. hida et dimidia. in hundredo de leisse tenet idem willelmus chirchlench iiii. hidas de abbatia de evesham. croulega v. hidas de feudo osberti filii hugonis. in hundredo de clent. belua viii. hidæ de feudo folwi paganelli. salawarpa v. hidæ de feudo rogeri comitis. item salawarpa i. hida de feudo episcopi cestrie. chaluestona i. hida de feudo roberti filii archembaldi. apud wich dimidiam hidam gunfrei. item apud wich i. hidam de terra sancti guthlaci quam rodbertus filius willelmi tenet. item ibidem dimidiam hidam de cormell' quam gilebertus tenet. cokehulla ii. hidæ et dimidiam de feudo regis. hactona iii. hidæ de feudo episcopi baiocensis. escreueleia i. hida. summa tocius cclxiiii. hidæ et dimidia et dimidia virgata. terra rogeri de toeney. esla iii. hidæ. bertona iii. hidæ et iii. virgatæ. alcrintona ii. hidæ. linda ii. hidæ et ad halac i. hida. mora hugonis i. hida et dimidia. werueslega ii. hidæ et dimidia. alboldeslega ii. hidæ et dimidia. rudmerlega i. hida et dimidia. estlega i. hida geldans et una hida quieta. sceldeslega i. hida. almelega ricardi de portes xi. hidæ. in the former of these two fragments we recognize in john of sudeley the younger son of harold, son of earl ralf. it would be of interest if we might identify his tenant, richard fitz robert, with the younger son of his brother, robert. the succession in the tenancy of the crowland hide (st guthlac's) needs explanation. in domesday (176) urse held dunclent of nigel the physician, who held both here and at droitwich under crowland abbey. it must have been through him at droitwich also that william fitz richard became tenant, for robert fitz william (who was clearly the latter's son) held here of walter de beauchamp in the second fragment. it is in tracing william de beauchamp's succession, as under-tenant to his grandfather urse, that we find the chief interest of the second fragment. he has succeeded him, for instance, as tenant to the abbeys of westminster, pershore, and coventry (the fief of the last having now become that of 'the bishop of chester'). at wadborough, however, it was robert 'dispensator' whom he had succeeded as tenant of pershore. in one case we find him holding of robert fitz erchembald, whose domesday predecessor we thus learn was william goizenboded (177_b_). we may also note his tenure of madresfield (now lord beauchamp's seat)--the earliest mention, i think, of the place--as a limb of powick. fulk paynell, of whom william held at beoley, had now succeeded to the domesday fief of william fitz ansculf, whose tenant 'robert' may have been robert 'dispensator'. osbern fitz hugh had similarly succeeded to the richard's castle fief held, in domesday, by his grandfather. i append a partial comparison of domesday with the henry i survey so far as concerns droitwich, where property, owing to its value, was divided among many owners. droitwich domesday _temp._ henry i h. h. willelmus filius corbucion petrus corbezun (de witton) 2 (witone) 2 church of st denis 1 'de feodo sancti dionysii ricardus corvus et willelmus filius oueclini' 1 de sancto guthlaco nigellus de sancto guthlaco willelmus medicus 1 filius ricardi 1 heraldus filius radulfi de johanne de suthlega comitis 1 ricardus filius roberti 1 de pagano filio johannis godwi 1/2 urso tenet witune in wich et } de waltero de bello campo gunfrid de eo 1/2} theobaldus et petrus 1/2 æcclesia sancti petri de } de la berton de gloucestra glou. 1/2} randulf filius ringulfi 1/2 in wich est dimidia hida de monachis gloucestrie quæ pertinet ad aulam de baldwinus et lithulfus 1/2 glou. 1/2 de comite warewice randulfus et essulfus filii ringulf 3/4 de waltero del burc randulf et essulf 1/2 ibi duo presbyteri [de de westmonasterio westmonasterio] tenet i. theobaldus et walterus hidam que nunquam geldavit 1 fil' thorald 1 isdem [radulfus] tenent in de almelega fil' aiulfi wich i. hidam de x. hidis et mater ejus 1 [geldantibus] 1 [footnote 1: see my paper 'an early reference to domesday' (_domesday studies_, pp. 542-4).] [footnote 2: _domesday studies_, p. 513; _domesday book_ (s.p.c.k.), p. 305.] [footnote 3: _introduction to domesday_, i. 19.] [footnote 4: _domesday studies_, p. 547.] [footnote 5: _domesday book_ (s.p.c.k.), pp. 78, 305.] [footnote 6: there was a similar dispute about the same time in the case of abingdon abbey and its possessions in berkshire (_abingdon cart._, ii. 1600).] [footnote 7: this, however, as i have elsewhere shown must remain a presumption, as it is possible that, owing to the youth of his heir, he may have been entered as nominal tenant for some time after his death (see p. 155).] [footnote 8: ms. now destroyed here.] [footnote 9: 'non geldat.'] [footnote 10: p. 116.] [footnote 11: _infra_, pp. 149 _et seq._] [footnote 12: we are enabled by this survey, and by the division it records, to carry up the history of elmley, the original seat of the beauchamps, to domesday itself. the great manor of cropthorne, by evesham, was held by the church of worcester. in bengeworth, one of its 'members', urse d'abetot, had seized an estate of five hides (_heming's cartulary_ fo. 125_b_). his brother, robert despencer, had seized two other 'members', charlton ('ceorlatuna') and elmley (_ibid._). in domesday we are merely told that robert held eleven hides in cropthorne. but the present survey fortunately mentions that the portion which fell to marmion's share was seven hides in 'charlton'. this leaves four hides for elmley, which, added to the five hides of urse d'abetot in bengeworth, makes exactly the nine hides here entered to walter de beauchamp. we thus learn how the beauchamps became possessed of elmley. and this calculation is confirmed by the entry in the _testa_ (p. 41): 'willelmus de bello campo ... in elmeleg in dominico iiij. hidas.'] [footnote 13: it is worth noting that we find, in domesday, both a robert and a walter holding of urse in worcestershire.] [footnote 14: see p. 244 _infra_.] [footnote 15: _harl. ms._, 3,763, fo. 80.] [footnote 16: _cott. ms. vesp._, b. xxiv. fo. 8.] the lindsey survey (1115-18) this 'invaluable survey', as mr stevenson has termed it,[1] might be described as a miniature domesday for each of the wapentakes in the three trithings into which lindsey was divided. for although drawn up, wapentake by wapentake, as is the leicestershire survey, hundred by hundred, the lands within each wapentake described are grouped under the names of the holders of fiefs, instead of being entered vill by vill. it was doubtless compiled, like other surveys, in connection with the assessment of the 'geld'.[2] remarkable from a palaeographic standpoint, as well as from the nature of its contents, the record, which is found in a cottonian ms. (claud. c. 5), has been singularly unfortunate in its editors. as mr greenstreet truly observed: the indefatigable hearne, seeing that the manuscript related to a very ancient period of our history, and recognizing its great importance, printed it in the appendix to his 'liber niger', but he does not appear to have properly examined either the question of the date of the writing, or the internal evidence.... as a natural consequence of his superficial examination, he associates it wrongly with the reign of henry ii. stapleton, of course, knew better than this, and assigned the survey at one time to _circ._ 1108,[3] but in his _rotuli scaccarii normanniæ_[4] to 1106-20. it was subsequently investigated and analysed with great care by mr eyton, whose note-books, now in the british museum, show that he adopted the sound method of comparing it in detail with domesday book. after his death mr chester waters issued (1883) an annotated translation of the text, with an introduction, analysis, etc., in which the place-names were carefully identified, and the same system of comparison with domesday adopted.[5] it is, unfortunately, necessary to explain that mr waters in the table of contents described his translation as 'from the cotton ms., claudius c. 5', and wrote on the opposite page: this ms. engaged the attention of thomas hearne, the antiquary, who has printed it amongst the additaments to his edition of the _liber niger scaccarii_; but hearne was one of those industrious but uncritical antiquaries who had no conception of the duties of an editor of the importance of accuracy. knowing the high opinion entertained of mr waters' works,[6] i accepted his translation in all good faith as 'from the cotton ms.' and was, i confess, not a little startled to discover from mr greenstreet's facsimiles that it was made not from the cotton ms., but from that inaccurate edition by hearne, which mr waters had mentioned only to denounce. on fo. 4_b_ a whole line, containing three entries, was accidentally omitted by hearne, and is, consequently, absent also from mr waters' version. on collating the two, however, i found, to my great surprise, that matters were even worse than this, and that hearne's text was far less inaccurate than mr waters' own, the erroneous figures found in the latter being almost always correctly given by the 'uncritical' hearne. as for the version given by mr waters, even in the very first wapentake, there are three serious errors, five carucates being given as three, nine as seven, and eleven as two! and for bradley wapentake (p. 27), his figures are so erroneous that, according to him, 'radulf meschin alone had 42 cars. 6 bovs. in this wapentake', though his real holding was only fifteen cars. three bovs. with another class of resultant errors i shall have to deal below. to the enterprise of mr greenstreet scholars were indebted for an _édition de luxe_ of the record in facsimile, which made its appearance shortly after the treatise of mr waters. unfortunately, no attempt was made in the appended literal translation to identify the names of places or persons, while such a word as '[ap]pendiciis', which occasionally appears in the survey, is mistaken for a place-name 'pendicus'. the book enjoys, however, the great advantage of an index. the identification of places and of persons in mr waters' treatise shows extraordinary knowledge; but both mr eyton and mr waters had the provoking habit of making important assertions without giving their authority. i expressed a wish in the _academy_, at the time, that mr waters would give us some clue as to his sources of information, but as he did not think fit to do so, we have to test his statements as best we can for ourselves. now we learn from him on p. 36 that 'walter fitz william', a tenant at south willingham, was 'brother of simon mentioned above', namely of 'simon fitz william (ancestor to the lords kyme)'. this is impressive until we discover that the actual words in the survey (as indeed in hearne's text) are 'walt[erius] fil[ius] walt[eri]i' (fo. 11 _b_).[7] to an expert such a test as this will prove significant enough. but to turn from an actual misreading of the text to cases in which are incorporated interlineations, not part of the original text, but written in later times, we find mr waters--like other antiquaries who had followed hearne's text--stating that 'ranulf [meschin] is twice styled in the roll earl of lincoln, but there is no record of his creation, and no other authority for possession of the earldom' (p. 8). the difficulty vanishes when we discover that this supposed style was a mere interlineation made by a much later hand.[8] so again we read on p. 30: richard, earl [of chester], has 6 cars. in barnetby-le-wold, where [william], the constable of chester, is his tenant [as his father was earl hugh's in domesday]. but on turning to mr greenstreet's facsimiles, we find that the survey had nothing about 'the constable of chester', the words 'constabularia [_sic_] cestrie' being only a faint interlineation by a later hand. and even where a reference to the true text does not at once dispose of the matter, these statements of mr waters are, on other grounds, open at times to question. he assumes, for instance, that hugh fitz ranulf, who occurs as a landowner in the survey, was a younger son of ranulf meschin, afterwards earl of chester (p. 12). no such son would seem to be known; and this assumption, moreover, does violence to chronology. for the pedigree it involves is this: roger (1) lucy (2) ranulf fitzgerold = = meschin | |-------..... | | . william ranulf, hugh de roumare, earl of fitz ranulf earl of lincoln chester now william de roumare was not old enough to claim his inheritance from the king till 1122, and his half-brother, ranulf, was some years younger than he was, as the words of orderic imply in 1140. consequently hugh, the youngest brother, can have been only a boy in 1122. how then could he, as mr waters alleges, have held a fief in right of his wife so early as 1115 or thereabouts? in this assumption, however, he only follows stapleton, to whom he here refers, and who relied on an abstract in the cartulary of spalding (fol. 416 _a_, _b_). this abstract which cannot, from its form, preserve the wording of the original charter, runs: sciant tam presentes quam futuri quod hugo frater rannulfi comitis cestrie et matild' uxor ejus, fil' filia [_sic_] lucie comitisse concesserunt, etc., etc. stapleton boldly rendered the obviously corrupt words as 'son and daughter-in-law of the countess lucia',[9] and hence pronounced this hugh to be 'a married brother of the whole blood' to the _second_ randulf, earl of chester.[10] as he only knew their gift to spalding to be 'prior to 1141', no chronological difficulty was caused by this view; but the occurrence of hugh's name in the lindsey survey, as already in possession of his small fief, at once raises the difficulty i have explained. the solution that occurs to me is that the hugh fitz ranulf of our survey, and the 'hugo frater ranulfi comitis cestrie' of the spalding charter, was a brother, not of the second but of the _first_ earl ranulf, and that the words 'fil' filia comitisse lucie' were introduced in error by the compiler, whose head was full of the countess lucy, and who had here confused the two earls randulf. stapleton, mr waters has justly observed, was '_facile princeps_ of anglo-norman genealogists'.[11] yet i venture to think that, as he here mistook a brother of the first earl ranulf for a son, so he confused william meschin, another and better known brother, with william de roumare, the earl's stepson, afterwards earl of lincoln. william meschin was not merely a considerable landowner in lindsey, but had also estates in northamptonshire and leicestershire, as our survey of those counties show.[12] stephen, according to stapleton, created him earl of cambridge. remembering the _dictum_ of dr stubbs that 'stephen's earldoms are a matter of great constitutional importance', it is worth while to examine this earldom of cambridge. in one of stapleton's greatest essays, that on holy trinity priory, york,[13] he writes of this william meschin, that by king stephen he was made earl of cambridge, as we learn from the following extract from a charter of alexander, bishop of lincoln, in 1139, founding the nunnery of haverholm, in the parish of ruskington, of the order of st. gilbert of sempringham. 'but this donation ... we have confirmed ... by the testimony of rannulph, earl of chester, and of william, earl of cambridge, his brother' (p. 34). the words in the original are: testimonio rannulfi comitis cestriæ et willelmi comitis cantebrigiæ fratris ejus (_mon. ang._, v. 949). now, though stapleton is positive on the point, speaking again of 'william meschin, earl of cambridge' (p. 35), and though this learned paper well sustains his reputation, yet he has here beyond question gone astray. earl randulf, first of his name, appears as deceased in the pipe roll of 1130. he could not therefore have been the earl randulf of 1139, who was his son and namesake. therefore the latter's 'brother', the earl of cambridge, could not have been william meschin, who was his father's brother.[14] a short chart pedigree will make the matter clear: randulf, _vicomte_ of the bessin ____________|______________ | | roger (1) lucy (2) randulf william fitzgerold = = earl of chester, meschin | dead 1130 | | william randulf de roumare, 'de gernon', earl of lincoln earl of chester ('earl of cambridge') living 1139 the pedigree shows my solution of the mystery. the two brother-earls of 1139 are those who are found so constantly together, and who were jointly concerned, next year, in the surprise of lincoln, but who were really only _half_-brothers, though they spoke of one another as 'frater'. the identity of the 'earl of cambridge' is thus clearly established; but there of course remains the question why he is not here styled 'earl of lincoln'. every mention of him as earl of lincoln is later, if this charter be rightly dated, so that he may possibly have changed his style. it is really strange that precisely as william, earl of lincoln, is here once styled earl of cambridge, so william, earl of arundel, is twice styled earl of lincoln, as i have shown in my _geoffrey de mandeville_ (p. 324), though in that case also the fact had never been suspected. it is most tempting, if rash, to suggest that the reason why the earl of lincoln was at first earl of cambridge is that the earl of arundel (sussex) was at first earl of lincoln, and thus kept him out of that title. in any case an error has now been corrected, and one of stephen's alleged earls disposed of. the question of the date of this interesting survey is no less puzzling than important. mr greenstreet held that 'there is hardly any room for doubting' that it was previous to 1109. this conclusion was based on a misapprehension, and mr waters claimed to have 'established' the date as 'between march 1114 and april 1116' (pp. 2-4). in this conclusion he would seem to have been anticipated by mr eyton, as is shown by that writer's note-books,[15] but i cannot accept the identical and somewhat far-fetched argument on which they relied. they obtained their limit on the one hand from a passage in 'peter of blois', and on the other from the fact that robert, the king's son, is entered in the roll as 'filius regis', and 'was therefore not yet earl of gloucester', whereas he was certainly earl, they say, 'before easter, 1116', when he witnessed as earl, a charter they both assign to that date. of the latter date i disposed in my paper 'the creation of the earldom of gloucester',[16] in which i showed that robert did not become earl till several years later. the other evidence, if it cannot be disproved, cannot at least, be relied on. for, without asserting that the chronicle assigned to 'peter of blois' is so daring a forgery as the 'historia ingulphi', of which it is a 'continuatio', it must be plainly described as absolutely untrustworthy. apart from the passage on cambridge university,[17] we have a description 'inclyti comitis leycestriæ roberti tunc validissimi adolescentis, burgensiumque suæ dictæ civitatis' in 1113, and of his presence, with his knights, at the laying of the abbey foundation stones next year.[18] now the future earl of leicester was some nine years old at the time, and his father, the count of meulan, lived till 1118. so also, about the year 1114 we meet with 'milonis comitis herfordensis', who did not become earl of hereford till 1141, and whose father, walter of gloucester, was living long after 1114; while on the next page we find the notoriously false countess lucy legend, with the additional blunder of converting her son, the earl of lincoln, into her husband's brother![19] it is in the midst of all this that we have the vital passage on which mr waters relies: we know from the _continuator_ [_sic_] _of peter of blois_ (p. 121) that stephen and his elder brother theobald were on a visit to henry i, at oxford, at some period between march 7th and august 1st, 1114, when theobald is described as count of blois, and stephen as 'pulcherrimus adolescens dominus postea rex anglorum'. it is manifest that at this date stephen was not yet count of moreton, so the roll must be later than march 7th, 1114 (p. 3). the fact that this alleged visit is connected by 'peter' with intervention in favour of the abbot of crowland, will not lessen the suspicion under which the evidence must lie. crowland was guilty of 'hiring', dr stubbs has severely observed, 'peter of blois, or some pretended peter who borrows an illustrious name, to fabricate for her an apocryphal chronicle'.[20] the actual proof of the survey's date is minute, no doubt, but conclusive. in the lindsey survey, 'the sons of ragemer' (himself the domesday under-tenant) are found holding of walter de gant; therefore their father, at the time of the survey, had been succeeded by them in this holding. but, as 'rachmar, son of gilbert', he is found attesting a charter of maud, walter de gant's wife, to bridlington priory, which is addressed to thurstan, archbishop of york, and which therefore must be later at the very least than his election, august 15, 1114. therefore ragemer was alive after that date, and the survey, at the time of which he was dead, can consequently scarcely be earlier than 1115. on the other hand, we can scarcely place it later than the death of the great count of meulan in the summer of 1118,[21] though, as i have urged in the _genealogist_, the lands he had held might still be assigned to 'the count of meulan', till his fiefs were divided among his sons, who were boys at the time of his death. on the whole we may safely assign the survey to 1115-1118, and in any case it cannot possibly be later than the close of 1120. as, according to stapleton, the best authority, it is in this survey that the name of marmion first appears in england, it may not be inopportune to examine here the accepted pedigree of that house. in the roger marmion of our survey we have its undoubted ancestor, but of robert marmion, who appears on its opening folio as a tenant of walter de gant at winteringham, one cannot speak so positively. in domesday winteringham, as 12 carucates, was held of gilbert de gant by 'robertus homo gilberti' (354_b_): in our survey eleven[22] of these carucates were held of gilbert's son walter by robert marmion, and the twelfth _in capite_ by roger marmion. mr waters (p. 17) identifies the former with the domesday under-tenant, which is a tempting solution, were not the domesday robert also under-tenant at risby (which was held in our survey not by marmion, but by walter de st paul). it seems to me more probable that robert, the under-tenant in our survey, was, as mr waters, contradicting himself, elsewhere observes (p. 14), the son and heir of roger. yet of roger marmion's estate at fulstow, mr waters writes (p. 27): 'roger's father, robert marmion, was tenant there in domesday of robert dispenser.' this would give us an interesting clue. but on turning to domesday (363_b_), we find that it is only one more mistake of mr waters, its 'robertus' being no other than robert dispenser himself.[23] stapleton, who worked out the descent, held that roger's son robert, who had succeeded by 1130, and who was slain in 1143, was father of the robert who died in 1218. i would rather interpolate another robert between the two: roger marmion, of the lindsey survey | | robert = millicent marmion, | in possession 1130, | slain 1143 | |____________________________| | [robert marmion], living 1155 | | maud = robert = philippa de beauchamp, | marmion | living 1181 | d. 1218 | (stapleton) | | | | ___________| |________________ | | | robert robert william marmion, marmion, marmion, 'senior,' junior clerk d. _circ._ 1242 |________________ | philip marmion, died _circ._ 1292, last of his line the pedigree really turns on the charter of henry iii in 1249, to philip marmion, confirming the royal charters to his ancestor. mr stapleton declares that henry inspected and confirmed the charter which king henry, his great-great-grandfather, had made to robert marmyon, great-grandfather of philip marmyon, of having warren in all his land in the county of warwick, and especially at tamworth; and likewise of the charter of king henry, his uncle ['avunculus noster' is the reading transcribed on the rolls, obviously in error of 'atavus noster'], which he had made to the said robert of having warren in all his land of lindesay (_rot. scacc. norm._, ii. cvi.). this abstract is strangely inaccurate, considering that stapleton had, clearly, examined the inspeximus[24] for himself. henry vi inspected and confirmed: (1) the charter of henry i, granting robert marmion freewarren in warwickshire (specially at tamworth) as his father had. (2) the charter of henry ii (confirming the above charter), 't. tom. canc. apud brugiam', and therefore granted in 1155. (3) the charter of henry iii, who had inspected- (_a_) 'cartam quam henr' rex avus [_sic_] noster [_i.e._ henry ii] fecit roberto marmyon proavo philippi marmyun'; (_b_) 'cartam henrici regis avunculi nostri quam fecit roberto'; and confirmed them as the charters, 'h. regis avi nostri et h. regis avunculi nostri', to philip marmion. it is clear then that henry iii inspected the charter of his grandfather ('avus') henry ii (not, as mr stapleton wrote, his great-great-grandfather'), in 1155, to robert marmion, '_proavus_' of philip. this, it will be seen, could only be the robert whom i have inserted in the pedigree. nor can mr stapleton's 'atavus' assumption be accepted in view of the facts. the 'avunculus' and namesake of henry iii would duly have been the 'young king' henry (crowned 1170). if 'avunculus' is a clerical error, the word to substitute is 'avus'; but the careful way in which the charter distinguishes the king's two predecessors is quite opposed to the idea that they were in both cases his grandfather. as against the evidence afforded us by the charter of henry iii, we have the statements and documents relating to barbery abbey, a daughter of savigny. it is alleged that the house was first founded in 1140[25] by that robert marmion who was slain at coventry in 1143.[26] stapleton accepted this without question. yet, so far as documents are concerned, we have only the charter of robert marmion (1181), in which he speaks of his father robert as beginning the foundation.[27] if that father were indeed the robert who was slain in 1143, stapleton's pedigree is duly proved as against that which i derive from henry the third's charter. but for this identification we have only, it would seem, the _obiter dictum_ of the 'gallia christiana' editors, while the fact that the first abbot was appointed about 1177,[28] combined with the fact that robert marmion, in 1181, was avowedly completing that foundation which his father's death had arrested, certainly seems to point to his father's benefaction being then recent, and little previous to the said appointment of the first abbot. in that case his father would be not the robert who died in 1143, but a robert who, as i suggest, came between the two.[29] leaving now this question of pedigree, there is a theory as to the name of marmion which one cannot pass over in silence, because it has received the sanction even of stapleton. writing on the date of the lindsey survey, that eminent authority observes: robert le despenser [_dispensator_] was brother of urso de abbetot, whose other surname, marmion, is equivalent in norman french to the latin word dispensator; and as robert marmion died in 1107, it was probably in the following year that this catalogue was written.[30] his meaning, though clumsily expressed, as was sometimes the case, is that the latin 'dispensator' represented the name 'marmion'. this theory would seem to be derived from the word 'marmiton' (not 'marmion') which means not a 'dispensator', but a scullion, the most despised of the menials employed in the kitchen. there was indeed in old french a rare word 'marmion', but according to godefroy, it was equivalent to 'marmot', the name of the marmoset. in any case, therefore, this illustrious surname, immortalized by scott they hailed him lord of fontenaye, of lutterworth and scrivelbaye, of tamworth tower and town had nothing to do with 'dispensator', but meant either a scullion or a monkey, and was one of those nicknames that the normans loved to inexorably bestow on one another. what was the actual relation of the marmions to robert 'dispensator' is a problem as yet unsolved. mr waters wrote: it is generally believed that scrivelsby and the rest of the honour of dispenser came to the marmions through the marriage of roger marmion's grandson,[31] robert marmion, who was the husband of matilda de beauchamp, the grand-daughter of urso de abitot, and grand-niece of robert dispenser. but the roll proves that roger marmion was the immediate heir of robert dispenser (p. 14). i know of no such general belief. stapleton, to whom one would naturally turn, had pointed out long before, in his 'rolls of the norman exchequer', that this survey proves roger marmion to have held the lincolnshire fief of robert 'dispensator',[32] while those who have identified the latter magnate with robert 'marmion' have traced the descent of scrivelsby in the marmions even from the conquest.[33] in any case, as i wrote in my _ancient charters_ (1888) of a document there published: the succession of urse [de abetot] to this [lincolnshire] fief is a genealogical discovery which throws a wholly new light on the very difficult problem of the relation of marmion to despenser, and is fatal to the assertion of mr chester waters that 'roger marmion was the immediate heir of robert dispenser'. moreover, in the leicestershire survey,[34] and still more in that of worcestershire,[35] we have evidence that robert's inheritance was shared between beauchamp and marmion which points there also to descent through urse de abetot. in my _geoffrey de mandeville_ (pp. 313-5) i have suggested that in their rivalry for tamworth,[36] the marmions embraced the cause of stephen, and the beauchamps that of maud, their variance being terminated under henry ii by a matrimonial alliance. such a compromise was common enough. it was agreed on in the case of grantmesnil; it was carried out at this very period in that of fitzharding and berkeley; it was again resorted to at a later stage in the history of the house of berkeley; it was arranged in the case of hastings; and it was repeated in that of boleyn, where the butler inheritance was at stake.[37] [footnote 1: _english historical review_, v. 96.] [footnote 2: i have discussed above (pp. 69-72) the bearing of its evidence on the problem of domesday assessment, so need not recur to the subject here.] [footnote 3: see note 31 below.] [footnote 4: vol. ii. p. xcvi.] [footnote 5: _a roll of the owners of land in the parts of lindsey_ ('reprinted from the associated architectural societies reports and papers').] [footnote 6: in consideration of which he received a pension on the civil list.] [footnote 7: there is a similar error on fo. 13, where the 'william fitz aubrey' of mr waters proves to be 'filius _albrede_' (not _alberici_).] [footnote 8: hearne duly prints it as an interlineation.] [footnote 9: _rolls of the norman exchequer_, ii. clvi.] [footnote 10: he further hazarded the erroneous conjecture that roheis, countess of lincoln, was his daughter.] [footnote 11: _gundrada de warrenne_, p. 9.] [footnote 12: see pp. 171, 179, _infra_.] [footnote 13: pp. 1-237. bound up in the york volume of the royal archæological institute.] [footnote 14: stapleton indeed exposed himself unconsciously by stating on the very same page that william meschin's lands had passed to his heirs 'prior to 1138', so that he could not be the earl of 1139.] [footnote 15: see on this point the important letters of mr greenstreet and mr j. a. c. vincent to the _athenæum_, may 9 and june 27, 1885.] [footnote 16: _geoffrey de mandeville_, p. 420 _et seq._] [footnote 17: ed. gale, pp. 114, 115.] [footnote 18: _ibid._, pp. 118, 119.] [footnote 19: _ibid._, pp. 124, 125.] [footnote 20: _lectures on mediæval and modern history_, p. 148.] [footnote 21: _survey of lindsey_, p. 2.] [footnote 22: mr waters, in error, states _two_.] [footnote 23: it is an illustration of the ignorance prevalent on early genealogy that even mr freeman could write of 'mr chester waters, than whom no man better deserves to be listened to on any point of genealogy, especially of the norman genealogy of the eleventh and twelfth centuries' (_english historical review_, iii. 690).] [footnote 24: rot. pat. 27 hen. vi, part i, _m_ 30.] [footnote 25: _neustria pia_, 683.] [footnote 26: _gallia christiana_ (1874), xi. 452.] [footnote 27: _neustria pia_, 881; _gall. christ._, xi., instr. 86.] [footnote 28: _gall. christ._, xi. 452.] [footnote 29: since this was written i have found that mr c. f. r. palmer, in his admirable little treatise on the marmion family (1875), duly inserts this intermediate robert. mr palmer has shown himself by far the best authority on the subject, and has printed a valuable charter of stephen to robert marmion.] [footnote 30: paper on 'holy trinity priory, york', p. 208 note. this identification is accepted by no less an authority than mr a. s. ellis (_domesday tenants of gloucestershire_, p. 69).] [footnote 31: i.e. according to stapleton's pedigree.] [footnote 32; and mr palmer independently had done the same in his _history of the marmions_ (1865).] [footnote 33: lodge's _scrivelsby: the home of the champions_.] [footnote 34: see p. 174.] [footnote 35: see p. 174.] [footnote 36: it is certain that tamworth originally belonged to robert 'dispensator', and equally certain that it was held successively by roger and robert marmion under henry i.] [footnote 37: see my _early life of anne boleyn_, pp. 25-7.] the leicestershire survey (1124-29). asserting the importance of the lindsey survey, mr chester waters observed that 'this is the sole record of its kind which deals with the interval between the completion of domesday in 1086, and the compilation of the pipe-roll of 1129-30, and that no similar return of the landowners of any other county is known to exist' (p. 2). and, indeed, it would seem that the survey to which i now address myself has hitherto remained unknown. it is found in the form of a late transcript on an unidentified roll in the public record office.[1] comprising the whole of gosecote wapentake, and in part those of framland and gartree, it retains for these divisions the domesday name of wapentake--they are now 'hundreds'--while subdividing them into small 'hundreds', of which the existence seems to have been hitherto unsuspected. proceeding, like the i.c.c., 'hundred' by 'hundred', and vill by vill, it enables us, like that document, to reconstitute the aggregate assessments, and thus affords priceless evidence on 'the six-carucate unit'.[2] but apart from this, it is invested with no small importance from that 'great want of documentary evidence' for the reign of henry i which mr hunter rightly lamented in his elaborate introduction to the first great roll of the pipe (p. ii). it affords us new and trustworthy evidence on the many vicissitudes of the great fiefs, and enables us, while tracing the fortunes of their owners, to see how the first henry provided for his _novi homines_, showering escheats and royal demesne on the trusty officials he had raised 'from the dust', as well as on his favourite nephew, stephen, count of mortain. the date of this survey is thus determined. the frequent mention of 'rex d[avid]' places it subsequent to his accession to the throne in april 1124. on the other hand, the name of ralf basset (the justiciar) shows it to be anterior to his death; and he was dead before mich., 1130 (_rot. pip._, 31 hen. i). moreover, it speaks more than once of hugh de leicester as 'vicecomes', and hugh's shrievalty seems from the pipe-roll to have terminated at mich., 1129. we may therefore place this survey between the spring of 1124 and the autumn of 1129, with a likelihood of its having been compiled nearer the latter date. text of the survey ... 'comes lerc[estri]æ vj. car. _h[undredum] de[3] langeton'_.--in eadem villa comes lerc[estriæ] xj. car. et j. virg. ibidem ric[ardus] basset iii. car. et. j. virg. in thorp eustaci[us] iij. car. et. iij. virg. in alia langeton' abbas de burg' iiij. car. et iii. virg. ibidem henricus de pport j. car. in thurlington idem henricus xij. car. in sscanketon' comes lerc[estriæ] x. car. ansch' ij. car.[4] _h[undredum] de chiburd'_.--in eadem villa xii. car. de feodo ansch'. in alia chiburd' walt[erus] de bell' campo xj. car., ricardus basset j. car. in bocton comes leicestriæ xij. car. in carleton' idem comes x. car. et monachi sancti arnulphi v. virg. et de ssoch' regis iij. virg.[5] _h[undredum] de knossinton_.--in eadem villa ij. car. de honore de blida. et henricus de ferr' iij. car. et. iij. virg. in osolinstona rex d[avid] vij. car. in picwell et in lucerthorp de feudo rogeri de moubray xv. car. in neubotel robertus de ferr' j. car. et dim. in burg' marm' iij. car. in balbegrave vj. car. iij. bov. minus de soch[a] regis. in mardefeud iij. car. de eadem soch[a]. in alia mardefeud iij. car.[6] gosecote wap' _h[undredum] de lodinton[e]_, in sceftinton[e] norm[annus] de verdun viij. car. et dim. ricardus bass[et] iij. car. et dim. in gokebia normannus de verdun vj. car. in adelacston[e] v. car. et j. virg. de feodo regis david. et de soch[a] regis iij. virg. in ludinton[e] ricardus basset xii. car. in thorp et in twyford ricardus de roll[os] ix. car. j. bov. minus. ibidem henricus de ferr[ariis] ix. car. j. bov. minus. et de soch[a] regis v. car. ex hiis grimbaldus tenet dim. car. et rex d[avid] j. car. in norton[e] x. bov. walter de bello campo vj. car. et roger de moubray iiij. car. et iij. virg.[7] _h[undredum] de[8] tilton_.--in eadem villa ij. car. j. bov. minus de soch[a] regis. ibidem walt[erus] de bello campo iij. car. archiepiscopus[9] j. car. in neuton[e] walter de bello campo iiij. car. roger de moubray viii. car. in lousebia rex david xij. car. in watebergia dominicum regis iiij. car. in hallested normannus de verdun iij. car. j. virg. minus.[10] _h[undredum] de bebia_.--in eadem villa abbas de croyland xij. car. in cahiham iiij. car. de soch[a] regis. comes lercestrie ij. car. in hung'ton ix. car. in siglebia ix. car. et. vj. bov. et dim. de[11] comite lercestriæ. ibidem comes cestrie iij. car. ibidem ricardus basset ij. car. robertus de ferrer[iis] v. bov.[12] _h[undredum] de barkbia_.--in eadem villa v. car. de feodo de belvar[o]. in hamelton' et in thorp vi. car. de eodem feudo, et de feodo comitis lercestriæ j. car. et dim. in thormedeston canonici iij. car. in crocheston[e] ij. car. et j. bov. et dim. de soch[a] regis. in neubold[e] robertus de ferer[iis] j. car. et dim. in barnesby rex iij. car. et dim. bov. ibidem comes lercestriæ xiij. bov. in gadesby [t]erra[13] reg[is] viij. car. et dim. et dim. et dim. [_sic_] bov. ibidem episcopus lincolniensis viij. bov. comes lercestriæ j. car. et dim. bov. ricardus basset dim. car. rex d[avid] ij. car.[14] _h[undredum] de essebia_.--in eadem villa rex david v. car. ibidem hugo de lerc[estria] j. car. in humberstay roger de ram[is] viij. car. ibidem walter de mustere j. car. rad[ulfus] de martinwast iij. car. in mardegrave comes lercestriæ xij. car. in thurmedeston idem comes car. [_sic._] idem in burstall ix. car. idem in anlepia vij. car. idem in anesting[e] vj. car.[15] _h[undredum] de resebia_.--in eadem villa ricardus basset v. car. ibidem comes cestrie ij. car. et dim. rex david iiij car. et dim. in quenburg[o] xij. car. de feodo de belvar[o]. in siefton[e] comes lercestriæ xij. car. in brokesbya comes [_sic_] cestrie v. car. rex david j. car. quam pip[er]d tenet. in quenebia vj. car. de feodo de belvar[o]. in thurketleston[e] de feodo comitis viij. car. in cropeston[e] iiij. car. in rodeleia terra regis v. car.[16] _h[undredum] de magna dalbia_.--in eadem villa episcopus lincolniensis ix. car. et dim. radulfus basset j. car. et iij. bov. ibidem wil[elmus] gam[erarius] j. car. in frisebia comes cestrie iij. car., et de soch[a] regis viij. car. in rederbia comes cestrie vi. car. in asfordebia comes lercestriæ xiij. car. in wartnadeby de soch[a] regis vi. car.[17] _hundredum de dalbia super wald'_.--in eadem villa ix. car. de feodo edwardi de sar[esbiria], comes lercestrie iij. car. in grimestona de soch[a] regis iij. car. j. bov. et dim. minus. ricardus basset iij. car. in saxebia comes lercestrie v. car. et de soch[a] regis j. car. in siwaldebia comes lercestrie vj. car. in cosinton[e] comes cestrie vj. car. in horton[e] robertus de jor' ij. car.[18] _h[undredum] de turstanestona_.--in eadem villa thomas x. car. et iij. virg. ibidem roger de moubray xiiij. bov. in wileges ij. car. de eodem feudo. in rachedal[e] vj. car. de eodem feudo. in houbia vij. car. et j. virg. de feodo thome. ibidem de feodo albemarl' iiij. car. et iij. virg.[19] _h[undredum] de tunga_.--in eadem villa cum appendiciis xij. car. de feodo roberti de ferr[ariis]. in caggworth comes cestrie xv. car. in wrdintona iij. car. secundum cartam regis et s[uper] dictum[20] hominum hundredi xij. car.[21] _h[undredum] de[22] luaeb'_.--in eadem villa j. h[ida] et xiij. car. cum appendiciis. in cherlega vj. car. et dim. in dixeleia et in geroldon et in thorp ix. car. in hantirna est dim. h[ida].[23] _h[undredum] de beltona_.--in eadem villa normannus de verdon vj. car. in overton[e] ricardus basset iiij. car. in wrdinton[e] j. car. in alia overton[e] robertus de ferr[ariis] ij. car., ibidem comes cestrie j. car. in stanton robertus de ferr[ariis] ij. car. ibidem normannus de verdon iij. car. in dailescroft philippus de bello campo maresc[allus] j. car. in doninton comes cestrie cum appendiciis xxij. car. et dim. in witewic comes lercestrie j. car. et dim. ibidem robertus de ferr[ariis] j. car. et dim.[24] _h[undredum] de dichesword_.--in eadem villa robertus de ferr[ariis] vj. car. et j. virg. comes cestrie vj. car. ibidem comes iij. car. et dim. normannus de verdon j. car. et ij. bov. in hanthirn[e] ix. car. in widesers iij. car. willelmi de gresel[e]. idem in lintona j. car. in blakefordeb[ia] comes lercestriæ iij. car. in culverteb[ia] ij. car. et robertus de ferr[ariis] j. car. in wodete robertus de ferr[ariis] j. car. et dim. in alton[e] comes lercestriæ j. car. et dim. idem in raveneston[e] j. virg. et dim. ibidem comes cestrie iij. virg. et dim. et comes war' ij. car. in suipestona hugo vic[ecomes] ij. car.[25] _h[undredum] de seyla_.--in eadem villa robertus de ferr[ariis] vij. car. in alia seyla idem vj. car. idem in bocthorp j. car. idem in appelbia j. car. et j. bov. idem in strecton j. car. et dim. idem in durantestorp ij. car. quas walkelinus tenet. idem in swepeston[e] vj. car. in neuton ij. car. in actorp dim. car. in chilteston comes cestrie j. car. idem in alpelbia dim. car. in assebia comes lercestriæ iij. car. in pakinton hugo vicecomes v. car. idem in osgodesthorp dim. car. in scegla henricus de alben[eio] ij. car. que pertinent ad defencionem de swepeston[e].[26] _h[undredum] de shepesheved_.--in eadem villa comes [ ][27] et in wacthon[e] et in lokinton et in aminton ij. h[idas] et dim. et iiij. car. in wacton[e] normannus de verdon ij. car. et ij. bov.[28] framelaund wap' _h[undredum] de caleverton[e]_.--in eadem villa xij. car. de feodo willelmi de alben[eio]. in someredebia robertus de ferr[ariis] v. car. ibidem roger de moubray vj. car. ibidem robertus marm[ion] iij. car. et in burg[o] iij. car. in dalbia robertus de ferr[ariis] v. car. et j. bov. de feodo tessun. ibidem roger de moubray xv. bov. in wittok walt[erus] de bello campo j. car. et dim. in gillethorp roger de moubray iij. car. idem in burg[o] j. car. in neubold robertus de ferr[ariis] j. car. et dim.[29] _h[undredum] de estwell_.--in eadem villa robertus de ferr[ariis] ij. car. ibidem roger de moubray vj. car. robertus de insula iiij. car. in aitona idem robertus iij. car. et ij. bov. et de belvero dim. car. et dim. bov. ibidem robertus de insula viij. car. et iij. bov. et dim. in branteston[e] episcopus lincolniensis vij. car. et dim. robertus de insula iiij. car. et dim.[30] _h[undredum] de melton[e]_.--in eadem villa roger de moubray xv. car. idem in burton[e] xj. car. et vij. bov. et de honore blide iij. car. robertus de ferr[ariis] ix. bov. in fredebia ix. car. et ij. bov. et dim.[31] _h[undredum] de chirchebia_.--in eadem villa roger de moubray xxiiij. car. idem in chetlebia viiij. car. in sixtenebia iiij. car. et dim. de eodem feudo. ibidem rex d[avid] iiij. car. et dim. in alebia ix. car. de feudo rogeri. ibidem rex david iij. car.[32] _h[undredum] de droctona_.--in eadem villa comes de moretonio xij. car. in thorp comes lercestriæ xij. car. in brantingbia vj. car. de eodem feodo. in ringolfestorp ij. car. et ij. bov. de eodem feodo. robertus de ferrer[iis] j. car. et vj. bov. in wyfordebia iiij. car. et dim. de blide. roger de moubray j. car. et dim. in chetelby et holewell[e] ix. car. de feodo basset. episcopus lincolniensis j. car.[33] _h[undredum] de scaldeford_.--in eadem villa rex david xj. car. et dim. ricardus basset dim. car. in goutebia roger de moubray vj. car. in knipton comes de moriton[io] viij. car. et vi. bov., et willelmus de alben[eio] iij. car. et ij. bov.[34] _h[undredum] de[35] waltham_.--in eadem villa comes lercestriæ xvj. car. et dim. alanus de creon ij. car. et dim. in stonesbia idem alanus viij. car. in caston robertus de ferr[ariis] ix. car.[36] _h[undredum] de barcheston_.--in eadem villa willelmus de alben[eio] xxiij. car. g. camerarius j. car. in saltebia et berthaldebia xx. car. de feodo peuerelli. in garthorp willelmus mesch[in] vij. car.[37] _h[undredum] de sproxcheston[e]_.--in eadem villa rex david viij. car. alanus de creon ij. car. ibidem filius gilberti ij. car. in bucheminest[re] et in seustern[e] ix. car. et dim. de feodo episcopi lincolniensis. ibidem robertus de ferer[iis] dim. car. willelmus mesch[in] v. car. in sessebia rex david iij. car. robertus de ferrer[iis] iij. car.[38] _h[undredum] de claxton[e]_.--in eadem villa xvi. car. et dim. et dim. bov. ibidem henricus tuchet xj. car. j. bov. minus. in houwes de feodo de beluer vij. car. et dim.[39] _h[undredum] de stapelford_.--in eadem villa x. car. de feodo roberti de ferrer[iis]. in wymundeham et in thorp xxvij. car. et dim. de eodem feodo. ricardus basset iij. car. et dim.[40] _h[undredum] de herdebia_.--in eadem villa et in plungar xvij. car. de feodo willelmi de alben[eio]. ibidem ricardus basset j. car. in stacthirn willelmus de alben[eio] viij. car. et dim. ibidem roger de moubray viij. car. robertus de insula j. car. et dim.[41] _h[undredum] de botlesford_.--in eadem villa et moston et normanton[e] willelmus de alben[eio] xxxij. car. ibidem agnes de gaunt ij. car. in moston[e] robertus de insula j. car. et dim.[42] _[h]undredum de crocstona_.--in eadem villa comes maur[itonii] xxiiij. car. in harestan idem comes xij. car.'[43] ... [finis.] the work of identifying the places named in this survey is difficult, not only from the corruption of the text, but also from the fact that many of them are only obscure names, needing, for their perfect ascertainment, local knowledge. a careful study of the map will show that these leicestershire 'hundreds', unlike those to which we are accustomed in the hidated districts, were strangely intermingled among themselves. another of their peculiarities is that just as we find the reconquered 'shires' named each after its capital town, so these 'hundreds' were each named after one of their vills instead of after some natural object--probably the meeting-place of the primitive moot[44]--as so often in the south of england. it is important to observe that, except for this survey, we should not even have known of the existence of these 'hundreds' in leicestershire. and when we compare the entry on our roll--'framelaund wap'. hundredum de calevertone. in eadem villa xii. car.'--with that in the derbyshire domesday: 'morelestan wepentac. salle hundred. in salle et draicot et opewelle ... xii. car.' (i. 273), it is scarcely possible to resist the conclusion that, in this passage relating to sawley, divided only by a river from leicestershire, we have a glimpse of the same system existing in derbyshire also. that is to say, that sawley was not a 'hundred' of twelve carucates,[45] as has been suggested,[46] but was the _caput_ of a 'hundred' similar to those of leicestershire. i believe, indeed, that in our survey we see the system on which these counties were surveyed in 1086. the original returns will have been drawn up wapentake by wapentake, and 'hundred' by 'hundred'. but when transcribed into domesday book the entries were arranged under wapentakes alone, and the headings of the 'hundreds' omitted. in the case of sawley alone the heading slipped in, immediately preceding the entry of the manor, as it must have done on the original return. it is thus that i account for the mention of 'leets' slipping into the norfolk domesday, in two cases, from the original return;[47] just as, in cambridgeshire, the total assessments of impington and chatteris have slipped, from the original returns, into the _inq. eliensis_,[48] though duly omitted in domesday book. one more point should be noticed. the somewhat mysterious entry of land belonging 'ad defensionem de swepestone' is at once made clear when we compare it with that 'defensio x. acrarum', to which i have appealed[49] in discussing 'wara', and which, like the 'wered' of the northamptonshire geld-roll,[50] refers to assessment for danegeld. we will now collate some of our 'hundreds' with the relative entries in domesday. lodington hundred (1086) (1124-29) _skeffington_ rex 12 norman de verdon 8-1/2 richard basset 3-1/2 _tugby_ rex 6 norman de verdon 6 _allexton_ countess judith 6 king david's fee 5-1/4 rex 3/4 _lodington_ robert de buci 12 richard basset 12 _twyford_ rex 4-1/2 richard de rullos 8-3/4 _thorpe sackville_ henry de ferrers 8-3/4 _east norton_ [?rex 3] [richard basset] 1-1/4 robert dispensator 4-1/2 walter de beauchamp 6 geoffrey de la guerche 4-1/2 roger de mowbray 4-3/4 ------ ----- 12 12 tilton hundred _tilton_ rex 2 rex 1-3/4 robert despencer 3 walter de beauchamp 3 archbishop of york 1 archbishop 1 -------- ------- 6 5-3/4 _newton burdet_ geoffrey de la guerche 6 walter de beauchamp 4 hubert _serviens_ 1/2 roger de mowbray 8 _loseby_ countess judith 9 king david 12 _whadborough_ rex 3 rex 4 _halsted_ rex 2-3/4 norman de verdon 2-3/4 beby hundred _beby_ crowland abbey 10-1/2 crowland abbey 12 _keyham_ rex 4 rex 4 _hungerton_ 9 _sileby_ hugh de grantmesnil 8-1/2 earl of leicester 9-13/16 earl of chester 3 rex 3-1/4 richard basset 2 robert de ferrers 1-1/4 barkby hundred _barkby_[51] robert de todeni 18 'belvoir' 5 _hambleton_ 'belvoir' 6 _barkby thorpe_ adeliza de grentmesnil 1-1/2 earl of leicester 1-1/2 _thurmaston_ hugh de grentmesnil 10 {canons [of st mary de hugh de grentmesnil 3-1/2 {castro, leicester][52] 3 _croxton_ rex 2-3/16 _newbold folvile_ henry de ferrers 1 robert de ferrers 1-1/2 _barnesby_ rex 4-5/8 rex 3-1/16 earl of leicester 1-5/8 _gaddesby_ rex 8-3/8 rex 8-9/16 rex 1 bishop of lincoln 1 countess judith 2 earl of leicester 1-1/16 richard basset 1/2 king david 2 hundred of ashby _ashby folvile_ countess judith 4[53] king david 5 countess judith 1-1/2 hugh of leicester 1 humfrey _camerarius_ 1[54] _humberston_ hugh de grentmesnil? roger de ramis 8 walter de mustere 1 ralf de martinwast 3 _belgrave_ hugh de grentmesnil 7 earl of leicester 12 adeliza de grentmesnil 1 _thurmaston_ earl of leicester [10] _burstall_ hugh de grentmesnil 6 earl of leicester 9 _wanlip_ 'in manu regis' 4 earl of leicester 7 hugh de grentmesnil 2 earl of leicester 6[55] rearsby hundred _reresby_ robert de buci 1-3/4 richard basset 5 rex 1-7/8 earl of chester 2-1/2 countess judith 2-1/2 king david 4-1/2 _queneborough_ geoffrey de la guerche 9 'belvoir' 12 _syston_ hugh de grentmesnil 9 earl of leicester 12 _brooksby_ earl of chester 2 earl of chester 5 countess judith 3/4 king david 1 _quenby_ robert de todeni 2 'belvoir' 6 robert de todeni (in south croxton) 4 _thurcaston_ hugh de grentmesnil 9 earls [of leicester] 8 _cropston_ _rothley_ rex 5 rex 5 dalby hundred _great dalby_ bishop of lincoln 8 bishop of lincoln 9-1/2 robert de buci 1 ralf basset 1-3/8 humfrey cam. 1 william 'gam' 1 _frisby_ rex (barrow) 1 earl of chester 4 rex 8 rex 8 _retherby_ rex (barrow) 2-3/4 earl of chester 6 _ashfordby_ rex (rothley) 12 earl of leicester 13 radulfus framen 3-1/2 _wartnaby_ rex 6 rex 6 hundred of dalby on the wolds _dalby on the wolds_ ralf fitz hubert 9 edward of salisbury 9 earl of leicester 3 _grimston_ rex 2-13/16 rex 2-13/16 robert de buci 3 richard basset 3 _saxelby_ rex 1 rex 1 earl of leicester 5 _sileby_ hugh de grentmesnil 8-1/2 earl of leicester 6 _cossington_ earl of chester 6 earl of chester 6 _hoton_ robert de lorz 4 robert de jor' 2 _thrussington_ guy de raimbercurt 12 thomas 10-1/4? guy de raimbercurt [18] roger de mowbray 1-3/4? '_wilges_' robert de buci 2 roger de mowbray 2 _ragdale_ robert de buci 6 roger de mowbray 6 _hoby_ thomas 7-1/4 dru de bevrere 4-1/4 'albemarle' 4-3/4 hundred of tong _tong_ henry de ferrers 21-1/2 robert de ferrers 12 _kegworth_ earl of chester 15 earl of chester 15 _worthington_ henry de ferrers 4 3 or 12 in the case of this last hundred our survey records a conflict of testimony and, in so doing, mentions incidentally (as would domesday) the witness of the hundred-court. henry de ferrers in the domesday survey, is credited with 21-1/2 car. in 'tunge cum omnibus appendiciis', and with four in 'werditone' (i. 233). but here tong, 'cum appendiciis', is reckoned at twelve car. only. there remained, therefore, to be accounted for a large balance of car., and these the men of the hundred assigned to his manor of worthington. it is desirable to analyse some of the fiefs in our survey, and, by comparison with domesday, to trace their descent or origin. _roger de mowbray's fief_ (1124-29) (1086) car [geoffrey de la guerche] picwell and lucerthorp 15 pichewelle and luvestorp 14 east norton 4-3/4 east norton 4-1/2 newton burdet 8 newton burdet 6 thrussington 1-3/4 [robert de buci] wileges 2 wilges 2 rachedale 6 ragendele 6 [geoffrey de la guerche] somerby 6 dalby 4 dalby 1-7/8 dalby 2-1/2 gillethorp 3 godtorp 3-1/2 burg 1 burg 1 eastwell 6 eastwell 6 melton 15 melton burton 11-7/8 burton 11-7/8 [fredebie 9-5/16 fredebie 10] chirchebia 24 cherchebi (17 + 7) 24 kettleby 9(?) chettlebi 8 sixtenebia 4-1/2 sistenebi (2-1/2 + 2) 4-1/2 alebia 9 alebia 7-3/4 wyfordebia 1-1/2 wordebia 1-1/2 goutebi 6 goutebi 6 stacthirn 8 stachetone 8-1/4 _anschitel's fief_ car car scanketon' 2 scantone 2 robert de veci. chiburd 12 chiborne 12 robert de veci. _edward of salisbury's fief_ dalby on the } wolds } 9 dalbi 9 ralf fitz hubert. _william meschin's fief_ seustern 5 seustern 5 william lovet. _henry de albini's fief_ scegla 2 sela 2 nigel de albini. _gilbert's son's fief_ sproxcheston 2 sprotone 2 godfrey de cambrai. _william chamberlain's fief_ great dalby 1 dalby 1 {hunfridus camerarius. _thomas's fief_ car car thrussington 10-3/4} hoby 7-1/4} 18 thrussington 18 guy de raimbercurt. _count of mortain's fief_ broctone 12 broctone 12 rex. knipton 8-3/4 cnipeton 8-3/4 rex. croxton 24 croxton 24 rex. harestan 12 horstan 12 rex. _alan de craon's fief_ stoneby 8 stoneby 8 guy de craon. waltham 2-1/2 waltham 2-1/2 guy de craon. sproxton 3 sproxton 2 guy de craon. _william de albini's fief_ cold overton 12 cold overton 12 dru de bevrere. knipton 3-1/4 knipton 3-1/4 robert de todeni. herdebi and plungar 17 herdeby 17 robert de todeni. stacthirn 8-1/2 stacthirn 9-3/4 robert de todeni. bottlesford 32 bottlesford 24(?) robert de todeni. _henry tuchet's fief_ claxton 10-7/8 claxton 6 } robert hostiarius. }10-1/2 howes 4-1/2} robert hostiarius _richard basset's fief_ langton 3-1/4 chiburd 1 skeffington 3-1/2 skeffington 3-1/2 rex. lodington 12 lodington 12 robert de buci. sileby 2 sileby 2-1/4 rex. gaddesby 1/2 reresby 5 reresby 1-3/4 robert de buci. grimstone 3 grimstone 3 robert de buci. overton 4 overton 4 robert de buci. kettleby and } holwell 5 } holwell } 9 kettleby 6 } robert de buci. goatby 6 goatby 6 robert de buci. scaldeford scaldeford 1/2 robert de buci. wymondham } and thorpe } 3-1/2 wymondham 3-1/2 robert de buci. hardebi 1 hertebi 1 robert de buci. the fief of richard basset is that of a typical man, of one of those trusted officials who flourished under henry i. we know not the fate of robert de buci, a domesday baron in leicestershire and northants; but as two, at least, of his leicestershire estates passed, we have seen, to mowbray, it was, we may infer, forfeiture or escheat that brought his fief into the king's hands, and enabled him to divide it among his own favourites. we learn from the evidence to which i am coming that the eight carucates in swinford and walcote, and the two in little ashby which robert de buci had held in 1086, were in the hands of geoffrey ridel ninety years later. we may then infer, though they are not included in the sphere of our survey, that they had been obtained, like the rest, by basset _temp._ hen. i.[56] the elaborate fine made at leicester, june 31, 1176,[57] has an important bearing on the bassets' leicestershire possessions. not only does it specify the lands they held at swinford (with walcote), ashby, and fleckney, but it mentions their fee of madeley, staffordshire. now the descent of this staffordshire fee can be traced by charters on the same roll.[58] one of these (no. 12) is a confirmation, by robert de stafford, of madeley to geoffrey ridel, to be held as his 'antecessores' had held it. this was geoffrey, son of richard basset, by maud ridel, as is shown by the fact that the first witness to the charter is hervey de stretton, who held two knights' fees of stafford in 1166,[59] and that another is robert bagot, who held a quarter of a fee,[60] while geoffrey ridel himself then held one, namely, madeley.[61] but the enrolling scribe confused him with his (maternal) grandfather and namesake (d. 1120), and thus wrongly assigned this charter to the reign of henry i, and threw the whole descent into utter confusion. the right clue is found in a charter of robert 'de toni' (_i.e._ de stafford), 'conceding' madeley to robert 'de busa' (_alias_ 'de busci'), 'per servitium unius militis'.[62] this fee, therefore, must have come to the bassets with the rest of the buci estates; and we thus learn that this must have been late in the reign of henry i, for the names of the witnesses to this charter prove that it must be subsequent to 1122.[63] as robert de buci was then in possession, it cannot have been, here at least, till later that basset succeeded him. among the points to be observed in the descent of the above fiefs are edward of salisbury's succession to that of ralf fitz hubert,[64] the appearance of henry de albini, founder of the cainho line, as successor to nigel, and the portions of the great belvoir fief, held in domesday by robert de todeni, now owned by robert de l'isle and william de albini 'brito'. in the midst of great but vanished names, it is pleasant to meet with one, at least, still surviving in the male line: william de gresley, holder of linton (a derbyshire hamlet close to gresley), had succeeded, there and at 'widesers', nigel, a tenant of henry de ferrers in 1086 (d.b., i. 233_b_).[65] in this 'nigel', therefore, it would seem, we have nigel de stafford, lord of drakelow (d.b., i. 278). i will close with the names of those who had succeeded the domesday tenants-in-chief. heirs count of meulan earl of leicester earl aubrey (escheat) 'countess' godgifu 'countess' ælfgifu earl of chester (donnington) earl of chester earl of chester hugh de grentmesnil earl of leicester henry de ferrers robert de ferrers robert de todeni william de albini robert de veci [anschitil] roger de busli [honour of blyth] { walter de beauchamp robert dispensator { robert marmion { henry tuchet (10-7/8) robertus hostiarius, (10-1/2) ralf mortimer ralf fitz hubert edward of salisbury guy de raimbercurt [thomas] guy de craon alan de craon william peverel honour of peverel william buenvaslet comes war'? william loveth will. meschin geoffrey alselin geoffrey de 'wirce' [escheat] godfrey de cambrai the son of gilbert gunfrid de cioches humfrey camerarius willelmus camerarius drogo de bevrere albemarle nigel de albini henry de albini 'countess' judith king david [footnote 1: q.r., misc. bdle. 558, i.p.r., 8113; knight's fees, com. leic.] [footnote 2: see pp. 75-6.] [footnote 3: ms. 'in'.] [footnote 4: langton, thorpe langton, tur langton, shangton.] [footnote 5: kibworth, burton overy, carlton curlieu.] [footnote 6: knossington, owston, picwell and leesthorpe, newbold, burrow, baggrave, marefield.] [footnote 7: skeffington, allexton, thorpe and twyford, east norton.] [footnote 8: ms. 'in'.] [footnote 9: ms. 'archid'.] [footnote 10: tilton, loseby, whadborough, halstead.] [footnote 11: interlined.] [footnote 12: beeby, keyham, hungerton, [? sileby].] [footnote 13: ms. injured here.] [footnote 14: barkby, hambleton, thorpe, thurmaston, south croxton, barsby, gaddesby.] [footnote 15: ashby, humberstone, belgrave, thurmaston, birstall, wanlip, ansty.] [footnote 16: rearsby, queensborough, syston, brooksby, rothley, thurcaston, cropston.] [footnote 17: great dalby, frisby, rotherby, asfordby, wartnaby.] [footnote 18: dalby on the wolds, grimston, saxelby, sileby, cossington, hoton.] [footnote 19: thrussington, ragdale, hoby.] [footnote 20: ms. illegible.] [footnote 21: tong, kegworth, worthington.] [footnote 22: ms. 'in'.] [footnote 23: loughborough, charley, dishley, garendon, thorpe, hathern.] [footnote 24: belton, [? coleorton], worthington, staunton harold, castle donington, whitwick.] [footnote 25: diseworth, hathern, linton (derby), blackfordby, ravenstone, snibston.] [footnote 26: seal (nether and over), bogthorpe, appleby, stretton on le field, donisthorpe, swepston, oakthorpe, ashby, pakington, osgathorpe.] [footnote 27: blank in ms.] [footnote 28: sheepshed, whatton, lockington.] [footnote 29: cold overton, somerby, burrow, dalby, withcote, newbold.] [footnote 30: eastwell, eaton, branston.] [footnote 31: melton mowbray, burton lazars, freeby.] [footnote 32: kirby bellars, abkettleby, sysonby.] [footnote 33: nether broughton, thorpe, brentingby, wyfordby, abkettleby, holwell.] [footnote 34: scalford, goadby, knipton.] [footnote 35: ms. 'in'.] [footnote 36: waltham, stonesby, coston.] [footnote 37: barkstone, saltby, [? bescoby], garthorpe.] [footnote 38: sproxton, seustern, buckminster, saxby.] [footnote 39: clawson, hose.] [footnote 40: stapleford, wymondham, edmondthorpe.] [footnote 41: harby, plungar, stathern.] [footnote 42: bottesford, muston, normanton.] [footnote 43: croxton, harston.] [footnote 44: see the valuable list, for dorset, in mr eyton's _key to domesday_, p. 143.] [footnote 45: the lincolnshire 'hundred'.] [footnote 46: waters' _survey of lindsey_, p. 5; _eng. hist. rev._, v. 100; _supra_, p. 73.] [footnote 47: _supra_, p. 90.] [footnote 48: ed. hamilton, pp. 113, 116.] [footnote 49: _supra_, p. 101.] [footnote 50: _supra_, p. 127.] [footnote 51: including hambleton and hungerton (6) in domesday.] [footnote 52: by grant of robert, count of meulan.] [footnote 53: in newbold.] [footnote 54: in barnsby.] [footnote 55: given (as 24 virgates) to leicester abbey.] [footnote 56: see also _supra_, p. 130.] [footnote 57: _infra_, p. 388.] (see t.n. at end) [footnote 58: _sloane cart._, xxxi. 4.] [footnote 59: _liber rubeus_, ed. hall, p. 266.] [footnote 60: _ibid._, p. 268.] [footnote 61: _ibid._] [footnote 62: _sloane_, xxxi. 4, no. 10.] [footnote 63: they are 'nigellus de aubeni, ran[ulfus] comes cestrie, galfridus cancellarius, simon decanus lincolnie, willelmus fil' reg', thomas de sancto johanne, willelmus de aubeny brito, unfridus de bohun et alii.' the dean's occurrence so late is worth noting.] [footnote 64: compare 'the barons of criche' (_academy_, june 1885).] [footnote 65: that william was his son is proved by the ferrers _carta_ (1166), which enters 'willelmus filius nigelli' as the tenant of four fees under henry i, and as succeeded, in 1166, by his son robert.] the northamptonshire survey (hen. i-hen. ii) this 'hydarium' of northamptonshire is found in a peterborough cartulary (cott. ms. vesp. e. 22, fo. 94 _et seq._). it is drawn up hundred by hundred, like the surveys of leicestershire and of lindsey, and is, therefore, probably connected with the assessment of danegeld. although it is of special value for reconstituting the domesday vills, the assessment it records so often varies from that which is found in domesday that we cannot institute a close comparison. the introduction of a 'parva virgata' further complicates the reckoning. that the original document was written on a roll is shown by the use of the phrase 'per alium rotulum'. the statement on fo. 97_b_ that there ought, at one place, to be half a hide more 'per rotulos wyncestr[ie]', would seem to refer to domesday; but on the next page we read: in pytesle abbas de burgo v. hid. [et] dim. set tamen in rotulis wyncestr[ie] vi. hid. et iii. parvas virgatas. since domesday records this holding as 'v. hid. et una virgata terræ', the reference (if the text of the survey is right) must clearly be to some other record preserved in the national treasury. i append about a fifth of the survey as a specimen of the whole. hokeslawe twywell. albr[icus] camerar[ius] ii. hidas de feudo abbatis de thorneya. ibidem de feudo comitis david. ibidem de feudo abbatis burgi i. magnam virgatam. in slipton i. hidam et unam virgatam de feudo will'i de corcy. ibidem ricardus filius hugonis ii. partes unius hidæ de feudo burgi. ibidem rogerus nepos abbatis tertiam partem unius hidæ de eodem feudo. in suburc [sudboro'] ii. hidas [et] dim. de feudo westmonaster'. in lofwyc [luffwick] th----[1] i. hidam et unam virgatam de feudo de deneford. ibidem radulfus fleming i. virgatam et dim. de feudo comitis david. ibidem wydo frater ejus i. magnam virgatam de feudo de thorneya. in drayton albr[icus] camerar[ius] dimidiam hidam de feudo r[egis]. in yslep [islip] idem albri[cus] de feudo regis. ibidem iiii^{or.} sokemanni regis i. hidam de feudo westmonaster'. in audewyncle [aldwinkle] abbas de burgo iiii. hidas [et] dimidiam quas ascelinus de waterville tenet. ibidem galfridus de glynton i. magnam virgatam de feudo glovernie pertinens ad barton. ibidem ricardus filius wydonis iii. hidas dim. virg. minus de feudo regine [_sic_]. item in benifeld [benefield] willelmus le lisurs iii. magnas virg. de feudo regis. in bernewelle [barnwell] robertus de ferariis vi. hidas et i. magnam virg. de feudo regis. ibidem reginaldus le moyne vi. hidas de feudo de rammeseye. in lilleford willelmus olyfart v. hidas de feudo regis scotie. naueford in tytheni [? tichmarsh] robertus de ferr[ers] x. hid. ibidem ascelinus de waterville iii. hid. et i. virg. et tres partes dim. hid. de burgo. in thrapston radulfus fil. oger ii. hid. et i. virg. de feudo de brunne. ibidem robertus filius edelinæ i. hid. et i. virg. de feudo de clare. in torpe et achirche ascelinus de waterville vi. hid. [et] dim. de feudo burgi. in clopton walterus i. hid. et i. virg. de feudo regis. ibidem iii. hid. [et] dim. de feudo burgi. ibidem ascelinus dim. hid. de feudo burgi. wadenhowe [wadenhoe]. albricus de ver ii. hid. et i. virg. de feudo regis david. ibidem wymunt de stok[e] i. virg. de feudo burgi. ibidem rogerus infans ii. parvas virg. de eodem feudo. ibidem wivienus de chirchefelde dim. hid. de eodem feudo. ibidem galfridus de gonthorp ii. hid. de eodem feudo. in catteworthe i. hid. [et] dim. de feudo burgi. pokebroc in pokebroc robertus de cauz i. hid. et. i. virg. de feudo regis. ibidem walterus de clopton ii. hid. et dim. de feudo burgi. ibidem rogerus marmium i. hid. et i. virg. de eodem feudo. in armeston [armston] de burgelay ii. hid. [et] dim. de eodem feudo. ibidem turkil i. hid. de eodem feudo. ibidem wydo maufee i. hid. de eodem feudo. ibidem galfridus de gunthorp ii. partes dim. hid. de eodem feudo. ibidem tedrik' iii. partes de dim. hid. de eodem feudo. in pappele [papley] i. hid. in lillington [lutton] i. hid. in hennington berengerus le moyne ii. hid. [et] dim. de feudo de rammes[eye]. ibidem ricardus filius gilberti i. hid. et i. virg. et dim. de feodo burgi. ibidem wydo maufe dim. hid. et dim. virg. de eodem feodo. ibidem reginaldus le moyne dim. hid. et dim. virg. de eodem feodo. in kynesthorp [kingsthorp] walterus de lodington i. hid. et i. virg. de feodo burgi. ibidem willelmus de chirchetot dim. hid. de feodo regis. in therninge [thurning] rogerus marmioun iii. parvas virg. de feodo burgi. in ayston [ashton] abbas de burgo iiii. hid. in dominico. ibidem papilun dim. hid. de eodem feodo. ibidem leuenoth dim. hid. de eodem feodo. in undele [oundle] abbas in dominico vi. hid. ibidem vivien i. parvam virg.[2] duo hundred de nasso in stinton willelmus de lisurs ii. hid. in bernak fulco paynel iii. hid.[3] in wirthorpe abbas croylaund ii. hid. ibidem de feodo eudonis dapiferi i. virg. in eston [easton] simon i. hid. [et] dim. in peychirche [peakirk]. in etton. in northburgo dim. virg. in dominico abbatis de burgo sancti petri lxx. hid. et iii. virg. et dim. hundred de sutton in eadem villa [king's sutton] dominus rex habit in dominico iiii. hid. in eadem villa willelmus de quency i. hid. [et] dim. et parvam virg. terre de comitat[u] leycestr[ie]. ibidem alfredus viii. parvas virg. de gilberto de pinkeny. ibidem paganus i. hid. et dim. et i. parvam virg. de feodo comit[is] leycestri[ie], robertus filius osberti tenuit. in evenle i. hid. et i. parvam virg. de feodo comit[is] leyc[estrie]. in preston dim. hid. de feodo comit[is] leyc[estrie]. in croulton [croughton] iiii{^or.} parvas virg. de feodo comit[is] leyc[estrie]. ibidem sewar' i. hid. et ii. parvas virg. de feodo leyc[estrie]. ibidem brien filius comitis i. hid. [et] dim. et ii. parvas virg. de feodo de walinford. in neubottle regis [_sic_] de reynes vi. hid. et i. parvam virg. de feodo comitis leyc[estrie], willelmus de lepyn tenuit. in furningho [farningho] iiii. hid. de feodo comitis leyc[estrie]. in cherlington [charlton] maynardus i. hid. [et] dim. et i. parvam virg. ibidem simon chendut i. hid. [et] dim. de feodo de berkamstede et i. parvam virg. ibidem odo dapifer viii. parvas virg. de feodo de colescestra. in gremesbir' [grimsbury] aunsel' de chokes ii. hid. et iiii. parvas virg. scil. quarta pars ii. hid. in middleton willelmus me[s]chin i. hid. et dim. et i. parvam virg. de feodo willelmi de curcy. in alia middleton [middleton chenduit] simon chendut ii. hid. de feodo de berkamstede. in thayniford [thenford] mainfenn de walrentone i. hid. ibidem robertus basset i. hid. de feodo de walingford. in ayno [aynho] willelmus de mandeville iii. hid. in middelton monachi de sancto eu'ald[4] ii. hid. in walton i. hid. cum ii. virg. in sutton quas suouild tenuit. in gildeby i. hid. et vii. parvas virg. de feodo de mortal' [_sic_]. hundred de albodestowe in chacombe iiii. hid. de feodo episc. lincoln. in evenle ii. hid. et [_sic_] i. parvam virg. minus quas alouf de merke tenuit. in thorpe [thorpe-mandeville] ii. hid. in stanes [stene] gilbertus de pinkeny ii. hid. in colewyth [culworth] willelmus ii. hid. et iiii. parvas virg. ibidem otuer i. hid. in stotebyr[e] [stotesbery] ii. hid. quas monachi norht'[5] tenent. in rodestone [radston] ii. hid. de feodo comitis cestr[ie]. in wytefeld [whitfield] gilbertus de monte ii. hid. et ii. virg. in dominico. in merston [merston st lawrence] radulfus murdac iiii. hid. de feodo comitis leyc[estrie]. in siresham thomas sorel i. hid. [et] dim. ibidem comes leyc[estrie] i. parvam virg. ibidem gilo dim. hid. ibidem willelmus filius alui' [? alan] iiii. parvas virg. in helmendene [helmedon] willelmus de torewelle iiii. hid. de feodo comitis leyc[estrie]. in chelverdescote dim. hid. idem. comes leyc[estrie]. in brackle et hausho [hawes] idem comes vii. hid. [et] dim. hundred de wardon in wardon ricardus foliot[6] ii. hid. [et] dim. et i. magnam virg., scilicet quarta pars i. militis de feodo regis in capite. in estone [aston] et apeltreya [apeltre] willelmus de bolonia vii. hid. de feodo comitis de mandeville. in bottolendon [boddington] fulco paynel[7] ii. hid. una ex illis de feodo cestr[ie]. ibidem willelmus meschin i. hid. ibidem i. hid. de feodo episcopi lincoln. the only writer, it would seem, who has used this important survey is bridges, who refers to it throughout in his _northamptonshire_ as of the time of 'henry ii'. a good instance of the confusion caused by this assumption is seen in the remarks of bridges as to barnack (ii. 491), where he is puzzled by our record, giving as its lord, not gervase paynell, but fulc paynell (who was really his grandfather). to refute his conclusion, it is sufficient to refer to the first name entered--that of 'albricus camerarius'. this was no other than aubrey de vere, a trusted minister of henry i, who was made by him great chamberlain in 1133, and who was slain in may 1141.[8] his northamptonshire estate descended to his younger son, robert, who, as 'robertus filius albrici camerarii', made his return as a northamptonshire 'baron' in 1166.[9] there can, therefore, be no confusion between aubrey the chamberlain (d. 1141) and his eldest son and namesake. yet if, from the occurrence of his name, we pronounced the date of this survey to be 1133-41, we should be in error. there are names belonging to an earlier, as to a later, date than this. among the earliest are 'ricardus filius wydonis', the son and successor of guy de raimbercurt, a great domesday tenant-in-chief; walter fitz winemar, whose father was both a tenant _in capite_ and under-tenant in domesday; and ralf fitz oger, whose name illustrates the value of these early surveys; for the entry proves that oger, the northamptonshire tenant-in-chief (d.b., i. 228), was identical with oger 'brito', the lord of bourne, linc. (i. 364_b_), and that the son and successor of this oger was ralf. we also recognize roger marmion, who was succeeded, under henry i, by robert; nigel de albini, the founder of the house of mowbray; michael de hanslape, who died under henry i; and 'robertus filius regis', who became earl of gloucester _circ._ 1122. other tenants, living _temp._ hen. i, are william de mandeville,[10] william meschin, richard basset, viel (vitalis) engaine, baldwin fitz gilbert, and brian fitz count. as for ascelin de waterville and alouf de merke, they are found as under-tenants in domesday itself. on the other hand, such a name as 'comes warenn de morteyn' points to the latter years of stephen's reign, or to the early days of that of henry ii; while the mention of the earldoms of arundel, ferrers (derby) and essex preclude, of course, an earlier date than 1140. after careful examination, i propound the solution that this survey was originally made under henry i, and was subsequently corrected here and there, to bring the entries up to date, down to the days of henry ii. the late transcriber, to whom we owe the survey in its present form, has incorporated these additions and corrections in a single text with the most bewildering result. we trace exactly the same process in the red book of the exchequer. in the black book the later additions that were made to the barons' _cartae_ of 1166 are distinguished by the difference in handwriting. but in the red book these interpolations are found transcribed in the same hand as the genuine original returns. to the uninitiated this has been the cause of no small confusion. so, too, in the above list of peterborough knights (p. 157), the very first entry, made _temp._ hen. i, has been carried on by a later hand to the time of henry iii. but there stapleton, who transcribed the list, carefully discriminated between the two.[11] it is probable that the lists of abingdon knights, published in the abingdon cartulary, are rendered untrustworthy in places from the same cause of error. the transcriber's ignorance is clearly shown by such a name as 'comes mauricius', which is evidently his erroneous extension of an original 'comes maur'', _i.e._ count of mortain! so also we are enabled to detect proof of the theory i advance in such an entry as 'willelmus meschin de feodo wellelmi de curcy'; for william de curcy held, _temp._ henry ii, the barony held by william meschin (his maternal grandfather, according to stapleton[12]) _temp._ henry i. thus, the original entry will have run 'william meschin', while a later hand, in his grandson's days, will have added, by way of substitution, 'de feodo william de curcy'.[13] our transcriber, combining the two, has, of course, made nonsense of the whole. the same explanation applies to the entry, 'robertus filius regis de feodo glovernie', where the first three words represent the original entry, while the others were added, probably under henry ii, to connect the holding with the fief of [the earl of] gloucester. 'brien filius comitis de feodo de wallin[g]ford' is another instance in point, and so, i suspect, is 'odo [_sic_] dapifer de feodo de colcestra'; for i take it that the entry was originally made in the lifetime of eudo dapifer (d. 1120) and that, as his 'honour' passed into the king's hands, the 'de feodo de colcestra' was added at a later time.[14] i have given sufficient of the survey to prove that, in spite of confusion and corruption, it possesses a real value. if we take, for instance, polebrook ('pochebroc'), a township of five hides, we find that in domesday (221_b_, 228) eustace ('the sheriff') held a hide and a quarter _in capite_ and three hides and three quarters as a tenant of peterborough abbey (see p. 138). now our survey shows us the former holding in the hands of robert de cauz, while the other has been broken up, two-thirds of it passing to walter 'de clopton' and one-third to roger marmion. just below, in the case of hemington, also a vill of five hides, which was equally divided between the abbeys of peterborough and ramsey, we read in domesday that 'iii. milites' held the peterborough half (221_b_). our survey enables us to distinguish their tenancies--richard fitz gilbert holding a hide and three-eighths; guy maufe, five-eighths of a hide, and reginald le moyne the same.[15] but we can go further and identify the first, from his holding, as the son of gilbert fauvel, the domesday tenant (see p. 138); while the second was the heir, and probably the son of roger malfed (see p. 132). one more instance may be given. our survey reckons clapton ('cloptone') as five and a quarter hides, of which 'walter' held one and a quarter _in capite_. here again he had succeeded eustace, whose domesday estate at 'dotone' (228) ought, as bridges conjectured, to have been entered 'clotone'.[16] on the other hand, his tenancy of the abbot at 'clotone' had been broken up, half a hide of it passing to ascelin de waterville. all this goes to show that the fief of eustace the sheriff did not, as has been alleged, descend to his heirs. such an entry as 'in lilleford, willelmus olyfart v. hidas de feudo regis scotiæ' is peculiarly suggestive. it reminds us that david holyfard, godson of king david of scotland, and his protector in 1141, was the founder of the house of oliphant; and in the family's possession of lilford (which was held of the countess judith in 1086) we see the origin of their scottish connection. william 'olifard' was of northamptonshire, and hugh 'olifard' of huntingdonshire in 1130;[17] while hugh 'olifart' (of stoke) was a knight of the abbot of peterborough in rather earlier days. the earliest member of the house, however, it would seem, on record is roger olifard, who witnessed (doubtless as his tenant) earl simon's charter to st. andrew's, northampton, granted, probably, not later than 1108. this, of course, is but one of the cases in which the son of a norman house settled in scotland through its king's connection with the earldoms of huntingdon and northampton. at the close of the survey i have here discussed there is a list of the knights of peterborough (fos. 99_b_, 100) holding in northamptonshire. it ought to be carefully compared with the one i have examined above (p. 131), being, it seems probable, about a generation later. such entries as these, at least, are conclusive for the holding to which they refer: paganus de helpestun terciam roger fil[ius] pagan[i] in partem unius militis helpestun terciam partem i. (_chronicon petroburgense_, militis (vesp. e. xxii., p. 171). fo. 100). in the same way, roger marmion had been succeeded by robert. this second list is of special value from the fact that the peterborough _carta_ of 1166 gives no particulars of the knights or of their fees. [footnote 1: or sh----.] [footnote 2: see _chronicon petroburgense_, p. 158.] [footnote 3: see bridges' _northamptonshire_, ii. 491.] [footnote 4: st. evroul, grantmesnil's in domesday.] [footnote 5: st andrew's priory, northampton.] [footnote 6: the heir of guy de raimbercurt.] [footnote 7: clearly fulk paynel the first, founder of tykford priory.] [footnote 8: _geoffrey de mandeville_, p. 81.] [footnote 9: see also as to twywell itself. _mon. ang._, ii. 603: 'ego albericus, regis camerarius terram de twiwell quamdiu vixero de domino abbate guntero et monachis de thorneya per talem conventionem teneo adfirmam.' 'ego robertus filius albrici camerarii regis terram de twiwelle quamdiu vixero de domino abbate roberto et monachis de thorneia per eandem conventionem in feodi firmam teneo per quam conventionem pater meus ante me tenuit.' the great chamberlain occurs again on fo. 97_b_, where we read: 'in alia adington albric[us] camerar[ius], ii. hid. de feodo regis.'] [footnote 10: if, as probable, the son of the domesday baron.] [footnote 11: _chronicon petroburgense_, pp. 168-9.] [footnote 12: _holy trinity priory, york_, p. 35.] [footnote 13: since this was written i have come across a curious confirmation of the hypothesis advanced. in the lindsey survey (ed. greenstreet), an entry on fo. 20, in the original ran: 'comes odo [tenet] in aldobi', above which a later hand has interlined, 'de feodo comitis albemerle'. it is curious that in the same survey another later interlineation--'comes lincoln'--was, though distinguished by hearne, incorporated with the text by mr waters (see p. 151).] [footnote 14: eudo was identified with colchester.] [footnote 15: giving a total of 2-5/8, instead of 2-1/2--a trivial discrepancy.] [footnote 16: it is singular that in sussex the 'cloninctune' of domesday is, conversely, an error for 'doninctune'. the source of the error in both cases must have been the likeness of 'cl' to 'd' in the original returns, on which these names cannot have begun with a capital letter.] [footnote 17: _rot. pip._, 31 hen. i.] the introduction of knight service into england[1] 'the growth of knighthood is a subject on which the greatest obscurity prevails; and the most probable explanation of its existence in england, the theory that it is a translation into norman forms of the thegnage of the anglo-saxon law, can only be stated as probable.'--stubbs, _const. hist._, i. 260. in approaching the consideration of the institutional changes and modifications of polity resulting from the norman conquest, the most conspicuous phenomenon to attract attention is undoubtedly the introduction of what it is convenient to term the feudal system. in the present paper i propose to discuss one branch only of that process, namely, the introduction of that military tenure which dr stubbs has termed 'the most prominent feature of historical feudalism'. in accordance with the anticataclysmic tendencies of modern thought, the most recent students of this obscure problem have agreed to adopt the theory of gradual development and growth. the old views on the subject are discredited as crude and unhistorical:[2] they are replaced by confident enunciation of the theory to which i have referred.[3] but when we examine the matter closely, when we ask for details of the process by which the anglo-saxon thegn developed into the norman knight, we are met at once by the frank confession that 'between the picture drawn in domesday and the state of affairs which the charter of henry i was designed to remedy, there is a difference which the short interval of time will not account for'.[4] to meet this difficulty, to account for this flaw in the unbroken continuity of the series, a _deus ex machinâ_ has been found in the person of ranulf flambard. now this solution of the difficulty will scarcely, i venture to think, bear the test of investigation. it appears to have originated in dr stubbs' suggestion that there must have been, between the days of henry i and of william i, 'some skilful organizing hand working with neither justice nor mercy'[5]--a suggestion subsequently amplified into the statement that it is to ranulf flambard 'without doubt that the systematic organization of the exactions' under william rufus 'is to be attributed',[6] and that by him 'the royal claims were unrelentingly pressed', his policy being 'to tighten as much as possible the hold which the feudal law gave to the king on all feudatories temporal and spiritual'.[7] there is nothing here that can be called in question, but there is also nothing, be it observed, to prove that either 'feudal law' or 'military tenure' was introduced by ranulf flambard. indeed, with his usual caution and unfailing sound judgment, our great historian is careful to admit that 'it is not quite so clear' in the case of the lay as of the church fiefs 'that all the evil customs owed their origin to the reign of william rufus'.[8] and, even if they did, they were, it must be remembered, distinctly abuses--'evil customs', as henry i himself terms them in his charter--namely (in the matter we are considering), '_excessive_ exactions in the way of reliefs, marriages and wardships, debts to the crown, and forfeiture. in the place,' we are told, 'of _unlimited_ demands on these heads, the charter promises, not indeed fixed amercements, but a return to ancient equitable custom'.[9] all this refers, it will be seen, to the abuse of an existing institution, not to the introduction of a new one. the fact is that ranulf's proceedings have been assigned a quite exceptional and undue importance. broadly speaking, his actions fall under a law too often lost sight of, namely, that when the crown was strong it pressed, through the official bureaucracy, its claims to the uttermost; and when it found itself weak, it renounced them so far as it was compelled. take, for instance, this very charter issued by henry i, when he was 'playing to the gallery', and seeking general support: what was the value of its promises? they were broken, says mr freeman, to the church;[10] they were probably broken, says dr stubbs, to the knights;[11] and they were certainly broken, i may add, to the unfortunate tenants-in-chief, whom the pipe-roll of 1130 shows us suffering from those same excessive exactions, of which the monopoly is assigned to ranulf flambard, and which 'the lion of justice' had so virtuously renounced. i might similarly adduce the exactions from the church by that excellent king, henry ii (1159), 'contra antiquum morem et debitam libertatem'; but it is needless to multiply examples of the struggle between the interests of the crown and those of its tenants-in-chief, which was as fierce as ever when, in later days, it led to the provisions of the great charter. what the barons, lay and spiritual, complained of from first to last, was not the feudal system that accompanied their military tenure, but the abuse of that system in the excessive demands of the crown. mr freeman, however, who had an equal horror of ranulf flambard and of the 'feudal system', did not hesitate to connect the two more closely even than dr stubbs, though invoking the authority of the latter in support of his extreme views. the passages to which i would invite attention, as expressing most concisely mr freeman's conclusions, are these: the system of military tenures, and the oppressive consequences which were held to flow from them, were a work of the days of william rufus. if then there was any time when 'the feudal system' could be said to be introduced into england, it was assuredly not in the days of william the conqueror, but in the days of william the red. it would be more accurate to say that all that we are really concerned with, that is, not an imaginary 'feudal system', but a system of feudal land-tenures, was not introduced into england at all, but was devised on english ground by the malignant genius of the minister of rufus.[12] as the writer's line of argument is avowedly that of dr stubbs, it is only necessary to consider the point of difference between them. where his predecessor saw in henry's charter the proof that ranulf flambard had abused the existing feudal system by 'excessive' and 'unlimited' demands, mr freeman held, and endeavoured to convince us, that he had introduced not merely abuses of the system, but the actual system itself.[13] the question virtually turns on the first clause of the charter;[14] and it will not, i think, be doubted that dr stubbs is right in adopting its natural meaning, namely, that the novelty introduced by ranulf was not the _relevatio_ itself, but its abuse in 'excessive exactions'. indeed, even mr freeman had virtually to admit the point.[15] if, then, the argument breaks down, if ranulf cannot be shown to have 'devised' military tenure, how are we to bridge over the alleged chasm between the date of domesday (1086) and that of henry's charter (1100)? the answer is simply that the difficulty is created by the very theory i am discussing: it is based on the assumption that william i did not introduce military tenure,[16] combined with the fact that 'within thirteen years after the conqueror's death, not only the military tenures, but the worst abuses of the military tenures, were in full force in england'.[17] but, here again, when we examine the evidence, we find that this assumption is based on the silence, or alleged silence, of domesday book.[18] now no one was better aware than mr freeman, as an ardent student of 'the great record', that to argue from the silence of domesday is an error as dangerous as it is common. speaking from a rather wide acquaintance with topographical works, i know of no pitfall into which the local antiquary is more liable to fall. wonderful are the things that people look for in the pages of the great survey; i am always reminded of mr secretary pepys' writing for information as to what it contained 'concerning the sea and the dominion thereof'.[19] like other inquests, the domesday survey--'the great inquest of all', as dr stubbs terms it--was intended for a special purpose; special questions were asked, and these questions were answered in the returns. so with the 'inquest of sheriffs' in 1170; so also with the inquest of knights, if i may so term it, in 1166. in each case the questions asked are, practically, known to us, and in each they are entirely different. therefore, when mr freeman writes: the survey nowhere employs the feudal language which became familiar in the twelfth century. compare, for instance, the records in the first volume of hearn's _liber niger scaccarii_. in this last we find something about knights' fees in every page. in domesday there is not a word--[20] it is in no spirit of captious criticism, but from the necessity of demolishing the argument, that i liken it to basing conclusions on the fact that in the census returns we find something about population in every page, while in the returns of owners of land there is not a word. as the inquest of 1166 sought solely for information on knights and their fees, the returns to it naturally contain 'something about knights' fees in every page'; on the other hand, 'the payment or nonpayment of the _geld_ is a matter which appears in every page of the survey' [of 1086] because 'the formal immediate cause of taking the survey was to secure its full and fair assessment'.[21] nor is this all. when the writer asserts that 'in domesday there is not a word' about knights' fees, he greatly overstates his case, as indeed is shown by the passages he proceeds to quote. i shall be able to prove, further on, that knights' fees existed in cases where domesday does not mention them, but even the incidental notices found in the great survey are quite sufficient to disprove its alleged silence on the subject. as mr freeman has well observed: its most incidental notices are sometimes the most precious. we have seen that it is to an incidental, an almost accidental notice in the survey that we owe our knowledge of the great fact of the general redemption of lands.[22] here then the writer does not hesitate to base on a single accidental notice the existence of an event quite as widespread and important as the introduction of knight service.[23] i have now endeavoured to make plain one of the chief flaws in the view at present accepted, namely, that it is mainly grounded on the negative evidence of domesday, which evidence will not bear the construction that has been placed upon it--and further that, even if it did, we should be landed in a fresh difficulty, the gulf between domesday and henry's charter being only to be bridged by the assumption that ranulf flambard 'devised' and introduced military tenure, with its results--an assumption, we have seen, which the facts of the case not only fail to support, but even discountenance wholly. let us pass to a second difficulty. when we ask the advocates of the view i am discussing what determined the number of knights due to the crown from a tenant-in-chief, we obtain, i venture to assert, no definite answer. at times we are told that it was the number of his hides; at times that it was the value of his estate. gneist, who has discussed the matter in detail, and on several occasions, has held throughout, broadly speaking, the same view: he maintains that 'since alfred's time the general rule had been observed that a fully equipped man should be furnished for every five _hidæ_, but it had never been established as a rule of law as in the carlovingian legislation':[24] consequently, he urges, 'a fixed standard for the apportionment of the soldiery was wanting' at the time of the conquest, and this want was a serious flaw in the anglo-saxon polity. william resolved to make the system uniform, and the object that the royal administration now pursued for a century was to impose upon the whole mass of old and new possessors an equal obligation to do service for reward. the standard adopted in carrying out this system was approximately that of the five hides possession of the anglo-saxon period; yet with a stricter rating according to the value of the produce.[25] the difficulty encountered in ascertaining this value was a main cause of the domesday survey being undertaken. this is gneist's special point on which he invariably insists: 'domesday book laid the basis of a roll of the crown vassals';[26] upon it, 'in later times, the fee-rolls were framed'.[27] by its evidence, 'according to the extent and the nature of the productive property, could be computed how many shields were to be furnished by each estate, according to the gradually fixed proportion of a £20 ground rent'.[28] for 'the _feuda militum_ thus computed are no knights' fees of a limited area',[29] but 'units of possession', the unit being £20 in annual value. dr stubbs, on the other hand, while rejecting the view that military service, since the days of alfred, had been practically fixed at one warrior for every five hides,[30] leans nevertheless to the belief that the knight's fee was developed out of the five-hide unit, and that the military 'service' of a tenant-in-chief was determined by the number of such units which he possessed. but, as he also recognizes the £20 unit, there will be less danger of misrepresenting his views if i append _verbatim_ the relevant passages: the customary service of one the value of the knight's fee fully armed man for each five hides must already have been fixed was probably the rate at which the --twenty pounds a year.[32] newly endowed follower of the king would be expected to discharge his duty ... and the number of knights to be furnished by a particular feudatory would be ascertained by inquiring the number of hides that he held.[31] the number of hides which the it cannot even be granted that knight's fee contained being known, a definite area of land was the number of knights' fees in any necessary to constitute a particular holding could be easily knight's fee; ... it is discovered.[33] impossible to avoid the conclusion that the extent of a all the imposts of the ... norman knight's fee was determined by reigns, were, so far as we know, rent and valuation rather than raised on the land, and according acreage, and that the common to computation by the hide: ... the quantity was really expressed feudal exactions by way of aid ... in the twenty librates, etc. were levied on the hide.[34] [35] the variation in the number of hides contained in the knight's fee.[36] mr freeman's views need not detain us, for he unhesitatingly accepts dr stubbs' arguments as proving that the norman military tenure was based on 'the old service of a man from each five hides of land'.[37] we find then, i submit, that the recognized leaders of existing opinion on the subject cannot agree among themselves in giving us a clear answer, when we ask them what determined the amount of 'service' due from a norman tenant-in-chief, or, in other words, how that 'service' was developed in unbroken continuity from anglo-saxon obligations. the third point that i would raise is this. even assuming that the amount of 'service' bore a fixed proportion--whether in pecuniary or territorial units--to the extent of possession, we are, surely, at once confronted by the difficulty that the owner of _x_ units of possession would be compelled, for the discharge of his military obligations, to enfeoff _x_ knights, assigning a 'unit' to each. a tenant-in-chief, to take a concrete instance, whose fief was worth £100 a year, would have to provide _ex hypothesi_ five knights; if, as was quite usual, he enfeoffed the full number, he would have to assign to each knight twenty librates of land (which i may at once, though anticipating, admit was the normal value of a knight's fee), that is to say, the crown would have forestalled henry george, and the luckless _baro_ would see the entire value of his estate swallowed up in the discharge of its obligations.[38] what his position would be in cases where, as often, he enfeoffed more knights than he required, arithmetic is unable to determine. i cannot understand how this obvious difficulty has been so strangely overlooked. the fourth and last criticism which i propose to offer on the subject is this. if we find that under henry ii--when we meet with definite information--a fief contained, as we might expect, more 'units of possession' than it was bound to furnish knights (thus leaving a balance over for the _baro_ after sub-infeudation), we must draw one of two conclusions: either this excess had existed from the first; or, if the fief (as we are asked to believe) was originally assessed up to the hilt for military service, that assessment must, in the interval, have been reduced. in other words, henry i--if, as dr stubbs in one place suggests,[39] he was the first to take a 'regular account of the knights' fees'--must have found the land with a settled liability of providing one knight for every five hides, and must, yet, have reduced that liability of his own accord, on the most sweeping scale, thus, contrary to all his principles, ultroneously deprived himself of the 'service' he was entitled to claim. having completed my criticisms of the accepted view, and set forth its chief difficulties, i shall now propound the theory to which my own researches have led me, following the same method of proof as that adopted by mr seebohm in his _english village community_, namely working back from the known to the relatively unknown, till the light thrown upwards by the records of the twelfth century illumines the language of domesday and renders the allusions of monks and chroniclers pregnant with meaning. 1. the 'cartae' of 1166 in the formal returns (_cartae_) made to the exchequer in 1166 by the tenants-in-chief (_barones_) of england, of which the official transcripts are preserved in the _liber niger_ and the _liber rubeus_, we have our earliest glimpse of the organization of that purely feudal host among whom our lands had been parcelled out to be held, as i shall show, by military service. we have, therefore, in them our best starting-point for an inquiry into the origin and growth of military tenure in england. it may be well perhaps, at the very outset, to contrast these _cartae_ of 1166 with those of the domesday inquest eighty years before.[40] for the essentially feudal character of the former is at once, by the comparison, thrown into relief. the original returns of the domesday inquest were made hundred by hundred; those of 1166 were made fief by fief. the former were made by the jurors of the hundred-court; the latter by the lord of the fief. thus, while the one took for its unit the oldest and most familiar of native organizations, the other, ignoring not only the hundred, but even the shire itself, took for its unit the alien organization of the fief.[41] the one inquest strictly continued, the other wholly repudiated, the anglo-saxon system. it is consequently worse than lost labour to examine these two inquests, based as they are on opposite systems, and giving us as they do a cross-division as if they were but successive editions of the national register or rate-book. the first point to be considered is this: what was the information which the tenants-in-chief were called upon to supply in these returns? it was _not_, as dr stubbs and others have supposed, the amount of 'service' due from each fief to the crown.[42] the information asked for was _the number of 'milites' actually enfeoffed_ by each 'baron' and his predecessors in title, with the number of 'servitia' due from each such 'miles' to the 'baron'. in this distinction, missed by dr stubbs, we find the key to the problem. the crown, we shall see, must previously have known the total amount of 'service' due from each fief; but what it did not know, and what it wished to know, was the number of knights' fees which, up to 1166, had been created on each fief. although there is great diversity in the form of return adopted--a diversity which imparts to the _cartae_ a pleasant flavour of character--it may fairly be assumed that, as in similar cases, they were called for throughout the realm by one uniform writ. if we may deduce the purport of that writ from the collation of those returns which refer to it most explicitly, we must infer that the information asked for was to be given under four heads: (1) how many knights had been enfeoffed before the death of henry i? (2) how many have been enfeoffed since? (3) how many (if any) remain to be enfeoffed to complete the 'service' due from the fief. or, in other words, what is the balance of your 'service' remaining chargeable to your 'demesne'? (4) what are the names of your knights? in support of these statements i append the whole of the relevant returns. bishop of exeter archbishop of york bishop of durham praecepistis mihi praecipit dignitas praecepit nobis, quod mandarem vobis vestra omnibus domine, vestra per breve meum fidelibus vestris sublimitas, quod sigillatum et apertum, clericis et laicis, literis nostris non quot servitia qui de vobis sigillatis, extra militum vobis debeam, tenent de capite sigillum sed (1) quot habeam in eboracsira, ut pendentibus, vobis milites feffatos de mandent vobis per mandaremus (1) quot tempore regis henrici literas suas, extra milites feffatos avi vestri, et (2) sigillum pendentes haberemus de veteri quot post mortem (1) quot milites feffamento et ipsius, et (3) quot quisquis habeat de (2) de novo, sint super dominium veteri feffamento scilicet, anno et meum.[43] de tempore regis die quo rex henricus henrici avi vestri, fuit vivus et scilicet de die et mortuus et de [_sic_] anno quo ipse fuit post mortem ejus ... vivus et mortuus, (3) super dominium et (2) quot habeat vero nostrum, de quo de novo feodamento similiter mandare feffatos post mortem præcepistis, etc. bonae memoriae avi (pp. 416, 418). vestri ejusdem, et (3) quot feoda militum sint super dominium uniuscujusque, et (4) omnium illorum nomina, tam de novo feffamento quam de veteri feffatorum quae sint in illo brevi scripta, quia vultis quod si aliqui ibi sunt qui vobis nondum fecerunt ligantiam, et quorum nomina non sunt scripta in rotulo vestro, quod infra dominicam primam xl^{ae} ligantiam vobis faciant (p. 412). herbert de engelard de robert de castello strattone brintone michi et comparibus michi et ceteris michi et aliis meis mandastis ut comparibus meis comparibus meis per vobis per breve qui de vobis litteras vestras nostrum pendens tenemus in capite innotuistis ut per extra sigillum, per litteras fidem et ligantiam mandaremus (1) quot vestras mandastis quam vobis debemus milites antiquitus ut vobis per breve per breve nostrum feodatos de tempore nostrum pendens pendens extra regis henrici avi extra sigillum sigillum mandaremus vestri habeamus et mandaremus (1) quot milites (2) quot de novo (1) quot milites haberemus de veteri feodamento.... et habeamus de veteri feodamento de tempore hii omnes ligantiam feodamento de henrici regis avi et homagium vobis tempore henrici vestri, et (2) quot fecerunt (pp. 275-6). regis avi vestri, milites haberemus de et (2) quot novo feodamento post habeamus de novo tempus regis henrici feodamento (p. 276). avi vestri, et (3) quot milites habeamus super dominium nostrum.... et vobis quidem et filio vestro ligantiam et homagium fecerunt (p. 277).[44] let me here break off for a moment to consider one of the most important points suggested by this great inquest, namely, the issue of the writs under which it was held. it has been generally assumed that each tenant received his writ direct from the crown; and a casual reading of the _cartae_ might, perhaps, favour such a view. i have, however, been led to the conclusion that a general writ was issued to the sheriff of each county, and that its terms were communicated by him to the several tenants-in-chief, whose _capita baroniæ_ lay within his jurisdiction. baderun of monmouth has heard the writ read out in the county court;[45] earl patrick also has heard the writ read out.[46] william fitz siward derives from the sheriff, he tells us, his knowledge of the writ:[47] even the bishop of chester has received his instructions from the sheriff.[48] but more especially do i rely upon the return of the archbishop of york because he recites the tenor of the writ in terms which can leave no doubt that it was addressed, through the sheriff, to the whole shire collectively.[49] if the archbishop of york did not receive a special writ, we may fairly infer that no other tenant can have done so. further, i believe that as the 'barons' received their instructions from the sheriffs, so they also sent in their returns through those officers. the memorandum, for instance, on the missing _carta_ of osbert fitz hugh informs us that it was brought to the exchequer by william de beauchamp. now, william de beauchamp was sheriff of the shire. this would account for the grouping of the returns 'per singulos comitatus', as swereford expresses it, and indeed this arrangement would but follow the existing practice of collecting the scutage shire by shire. returning now to the terms of the inquiry, it is obvious that the tenant (_baro_) to whom such queries were addressed must of necessity have belonged to one of these three classes- (_a_) those who had created _the exact number_ of knights' fees sufficient to discharge their 'service'. (_b_) those who had created _more_ than sufficient. (_c_) those who had created _less_ than sufficient. this last class requires some explanation. when the number of knights' fees created was not sufficient to discharge the baron's 'service', the balance of that service remained charged on the non-infeudated portion of his fief, that is, on the 'demesne', and was technically said to be 'super dominium'. it is all-important that this should be grasped, for it might otherwise be supposed that such a phrase as 'quot milites super dominium' implied the existence of actual knights enfeoffed on the demesne, which, to those who realize the working of the system of knight-service, is an absolute contradiction in terms. this, it will be found, beautifully explains the first article of the assize of arms (1181)--that every tenant is to keep in stock harness for as many knights 'quot habuerit feoda militum in dominio suo'.[50] that is to say, that if, after deducting the knights actually enfeoffed, there remained due from his fief a balance of knight-service, he must keep in readiness harness sufficient for those knights whom he would have to provide himself to discharge that balance.[51] having made this point clear, i now pass to the immediate object of the inquest of 1166. what that object was, no one has as yet discovered. dr stubbs, for instance, in his preface to the pipe-roll of 1166, writes: 'on the immediate purpose for which the inquiry was made--and it can scarcely be doubted that it was for the collection of a scutage--we shall look for further information in the rolls of the succeeding years.' my own researches enable me to assert that this inquest formed part of a financial revolution hitherto ignored, which deserves to be compared with those other innovations in administration and finance that characterized the latter half of the twelfth century in england. when we come to place side by side the returns of 1166 and the payments made upon those returns in 1168, we find (at least, on the lay fiefs) the same distinction in both between 'the old feoffment' and 'the new'. but while the _returns_, as we saw, were made under three heads,[52] the _payments_ were made under two, namely, under the two feoffments. the reason of this difference can be established beyond dispute: the exchequer clerks had, in every instance, added the returns under the _third_ head to those under the _first_, and classed them together as 'old feoffment'. this is one of the points which, i think, have never been hitherto explained. plenty of examples might be given, but these two will suffice. walter de aincurt returns 24 fees _de veteri_, 5 _de novo_, and 11 _super dominium_. the exchequer, in 1168, records him as paying on 35 fees _de veteri_, and on 5 _de novo_.[53] richard de haie returns 11 fees _de veteri_, 4 _de novo_, and 5 _super dominium_. the exchequer records him as paying on 16 _de veteri_, and 4 _de novo_. the main point, however, on which i propose to insist, is that these returns were intended to provide, and, as a matter of fact, did provide a new feudal assessment, wholly superseding the old one, in no case to the advantage of the tenant, but in many to the advantage of the crown. the _modus operandi_ was as follows. instead of either adhering to the old assessment (_servitium debitum_), or uniformly substituting a new one based on the fees actually created, the crown selected in every case whichever of these two systems told in its own favour and against the tenant of the fief. if he had enfeoffed fewer knights than his _servitium debitum_ required, the crown retained that _servitium_ as the irreducible minimum of his assessment; but if he had created an excess of fees, the crown added that excess to his pre-existing assessment and increased the 'service' due from him _pro tanto_. this discovery is no conjecture, but is capable of arithmetical demonstration. it should be noticed how skilfully the queries were framed in the inquest of 1166, to entrap the unwary tenant, and make him commit himself to the facts. if his enfeoffed knights were short of the required number, he was caught under the third query; if, on the other hand, he had an excess, he was caught under the others. now, did the 'barons', when they made their returns, anticipate this sweeping and unwelcome reform? presumably not. they appear to have drawn up their _cartae_ carefully and willingly, few of those who had an excess of knights taking even the precaution of mentioning their _servitium debitum_.[54] the church, moreover, from the terms in which her payments are thenceforth entered (_vide infra_), must have uniformly and systematically adopted an attitude of protest. yet there is no trace of such protest in her returns. may we then infer that the crown sought to deliberately entrap its tenants? two circumstances might favour that view. in the first place the tenants had to make their returns _extra sigillum pendentes_, thereby solemnly committing themselves;[55] in the second, the tenants would, of course, have been tempted to conceal or understate their excess of knights, had they foreseen the use that the crown would make of their returns. the question may very fairly be asked, 'what check had the crown upon a tenant in the event of the latter omitting some of his "excess" fees?' the answer is supplied, i think, by a clause in the invaluable return of the northern primate. he there requests that his return may be accepted 'without prejudice', as a lawyer would say, in case of his omitting some small fees. that is to say, these formal returns might be brought up as evidence against tenants-in-chief who had omitted some of their fees, proving that they had thereby themselves disowned their right to the fees in question.[56] two points strike one strongly in the preparation of these returns. the first of these is the difficulty experienced in compiling a correct list of under-tenants and their holdings; the second is the employment of the 'inquest' as a means of ascertaining the particulars. taking the former of these, we find hugh wac writing, 'si amplius inquirere possim, notificabo vobis'; and guarine 'de aula', 'si plus possim inquirere, faciam vobis scire'; so too the bishop of ely, 'de hiis vero certi sumus, et si amplius inquirere poterimus libenter vobis significabimus'; and the bishop of bath, 'si certiorem inquirere poterimus veritatem, nos illam vobis significabimus'; and alfred of lincoln, 'si plus inquiri potest, inquirere faciemus'. the bishop of exeter makes his return, 'sicut eam diligentius inquirere potui'; the abbot of tavistock, 'quantum inde sollicitius inquirendo scire potuit'. hugh de lacy, in a postscript to his return, adds a fee 'quod oblitus sum'; while the earl of clare has to send in a subsequent rider, containing an entry, 'quod ego postquam misi cartam ... recordatus sum'. from this difficulty it is a short step to the inquests which it seems in some cases to have necessitated. the abbot of ramsey heads his return, 'haec est inquisitio'; the earl of warwick similarly commences, 'hoc est quod inquisivi per homines'. earl patrick makes his return, 'secundum quod de probis et antiquis hominibus meis inquirere potui'. 'fecimus inquirere,' writes the bishop of bath, 'per legales homines meos.... haec autem per eos inquisivimus.' this brings us directly to the very important inquest referred to in the _carta_ of the earl of arundel: dominus noster rex henricus quadam contentione quae surrexit inter milites de honore de arundel de exercitu quodam de walliis, elegit iiij. milites de honore, de melioribus et legalioribus, et antiquioribus ... et fecit eos recognoscere servitia militum de honore, et super legalitatem et sacramenta eorum inde neminem audire voluit. mr eyton argued elaborately on genealogical grounds that this inquest must have taken place under henry i, but indeed it is quite obvious from the language of the _carta_ itself that this was so. it is, consequently, worthy of notice for its bearing on 'the sworn inquest'. while on this subject, attention may be called to the unique entry in the pipe-roll of 12 henry ii (1166): 'alanus de munbi debet xl. s. quia non interfuit jurat' feodorum militum' (p. 8). investigation proves (through what is known as the lindsey survey) that alan was an under-tenant of the honour of brittany, the successor of that eudo who held in mumby _temp._ domesday. this fact throws light on the entry, by suggesting that the inquest referred to concerned the honour of brittany, the number of fees in which was then and subsequently doubtful. but to return. it is infinitely easier to trace the change brought about by the inquest of 1166 in the case of the church fiefs than of the lay ones. for on the former it was uniform and glaring. previously to 1166 the church tenants had paid on their _servitium debitum_ alone; after 1166 they paid, as a rule, on all the fees actually created upon the fief. thus the assessment of the bishop of durham was raised at a blow from ten fees to more than seventy.[57] there were several equally striking cases among the prelates. now, whether or not the church tenants feared something of the kind, they had generally been careful in their returns to set forth their _servitium debitum_, and when, in 1168, they were uniformly assessed on their total of fees, their uniform protest is expressed in the formula 'quos non recognoscit' applied to the payment on their excess knights. such is the meaning of this puzzling formula which is peculiar to the church fiefs.[58] in these cases it wholly replaces the _de veteri_ and _de novo_ assessment which, from 1166, was applied to the lay fiefs. ii. the servitium debitum the essential feature we have to keep in view when examining the growth of knight service is the _servitium debitum_, or quota of knight service due to the crown from each fief. this has, i venture to think, been obscured and lost sight of in the generalizations and vague writing about the 'gradual process' of development. it is difficult for me to traverse the arguments of gneist, stubbs and freeman, because we consider the subject from such wholly different standpoints. for them the introduction of knight service means the process of sub-infeudation on the several fiefs; for me it means the grant of fiefs to be held from the crown by knight service. thus the process which absorbs the attention of the school whose views i am opposing is for me a matter of mere secondary importance. the whole question turns upon the point whether or not the tenants-in-chief received their fiefs to hold of the crown by a quota of military service, or not. if they did, it would depend simply on their individual inclinations, whether, or how far, they had recourse to sub-infeudation. it was not a matter of principle at all; it was, as dr stubbs himself put it, 'a matter of convenience',[59] a mere detail. what we have to consider is not the relation between the tenant-in-chief and his under-tenants, but that between the king and his tenants-in-chief: for this was the primary relation that determined all below it. the assumption that the conqueror cannot have introduced any new principle in the tenure of land lies at the root of the matter. assuming this, one must of course seek elsewhere for the introduction of knight service. have not the difficulties of the accepted view arisen from its exponents approaching the problem from the wrong point of view? the tendency to exalt the english and depreciate the norman element in our constitutional development has led them i think, and especially mr freeman, to seek in anglo-saxon institutions an explanation of feudal phenomena. this tendency is manifest in their conclusions on the great council:[60] it colours no less strongly their views on knight service. in neither case can they bring themselves to adopt the feudal standpoint or to enter into the feudal spirit. it is to this that i attribute their disposition to bring the crown face to face with the under-tenant--or 'landowner' as they would prefer to term him--and so to ignore, or at least to minimize the importance of the tenant-in-chief, the 'middleman' of the feudal system. making every allowance for the policy of the conqueror in insisting on the direct allegiance of the under-tenant to the crown, and thereby checking the disintegrating influence of a perfect feudal system, the fact remains what we may term the 'military service' bargain was a bargain between the crown and the tenant-in-chief, not between the crown and his under-tenants. it follows from this that so long as the 'baron' (or 'tenant-in-chief') discharged his _servitium debitum_ to the crown, the king had no right to look beyond the 'baron', who was himself and alone responsible for the discharge of this service. it is, indeed, in this responsibility that lies the key to the situation. if the under-tenant of a knight's fee failed to discharge his service, it was not to him, but to his lord, that the crown betook itself. 'i know nothing of your tenant,' was in effect the king's position; 'you owe me, for the tenure of your fief, the service of so many knights, and that service must be performed, whether your under-tenants repudiate their obligations to yourself or not'. in other words the 'baron' discharged his service to the king, whereas the baron's under-tenants discharged theirs to their lord.[61] so the _dialogus_ speaks of the under-tenant's 'numerum militum quos domino debuerat'. let us then apply ourselves directly to the quotas of military service due from the 'barons' to the crown, and see if, when ascertained, they throw any fresh light on the real problem. no attempt, so far as i know, has ever been made to determine these quotas, and indeed it was the utter want of trustworthy information on the subject that led swereford to undertake his researches in the thirteenth century. those researches, unfortunately, leave us no wiser, partly from his defective method and want of the requisite accuracy; partly from the fact that what he sought was not abstract historical truth, but practical information bearing on the existing rights of the crown. we must turn therefore to the original authorities: (1) the _cartae baronum_, (2) the annual rolls. these were the two main sources of swereford's information, as they must also be of ours. in the next part of this paper i shall deal with the evidence of the rolls, as checking and supplementing the _cartae baronum_. i shall analyse the church fiefs first, because we can ascertain, virtually with exactitude, the _servitium debitum_ of every prelate and of every head of a religious house who held by knight service. the importance of these figures, together with the fact that they have never, so far as i know, been set forth till now, has induced me to append them here in full detail. see service due see service due knights knights canterbury 60 bath 20 winchester 60 london 20 lincoln 60 exeter 17-1/2[62] worcester 50 [60] 'chester' 15 norwich 40 hereford 15 ely 40 durham 10 salisbury 32 chichester 4 [2] york 20 [7] every english see then in existence is thus accounted for with the solitary and significant exceptions of carlisle and rochester. the latter see, we know, had enfeoffed knights for their names (_temp._ henry i, i think, from internal evidence) are recorded in the _textus roffensis_ (p. 223);[63] the former had been created after the date when, as i shall argue, the conqueror fixed the knight service due from the fees. in the above list the figures in brackets refer to the assessments previous to 1166. three changes were made at, or about, that date. the bishop of worcester, in accordance with the protest he had made from the beginning of the reign, obtained a reduction of his quota from sixty knights to fifty; while the archbishop of york's _servitium_ was raised from seven knights to twenty, and that of the bishop of chichester from two knights to four. these changes are known to us only from the details of the prelate's scutages; there is nothing to account for them in the relevant _cartae_, and we can only infer from the formula _quos recognoscit_ that the two bishops whose _servitia_ were increased acquiesced in the justice of the crown's claim. proceeding to the 'service' of the religious houses: house service due house service due knights knights peterborough 60 wilton 5 glastonbury 40 [60] ramsey 4 st edmundsbury 40 chertsey 3 abingdon 30 st bene't of hulme 3 hyde 20 cerne[64] 2 [3] st augustine's 15 pershore 2 [3] westminster 15(?) malmesbury 3 tavistock 15(?) winchcombe 2 coventry 10 middleton 2 shaftesbury 7 [10] sherburne 2 st alban's 6 michelney 1 evesham 5 abbotsbury 1 the changes of assessment on religious houses were few, and are thus accounted for. glastonbury, which paid on sixty knights in the first two scutages of the reign, paid on forty in the third and in those which followed. pershore paid on three in the first scutage, protesting that it was only liable to two, and from 1168 it was only rated at two. shaftesbury, which had paid on ten knights in the first scutage, was assessed at only seven in the third scutage and those which followed. cerne also succeeded in getting its assessment reduced from three knights to two. with these changes should be compared the letter of bishop nigel of ely to ramsey abbey certifying that it was only liable to an assessment of four knights. two cases remain which require special treatment--tavistock and westminster. although tavistock, in the first scutage, appears to have paid on the anomalous assessment of ten and a half knights its payment on fifteen in the two succeeding ones may fairly be taken as evidence that this was its _servitium debitum_.[65] its abbot, however, made no reference to that _servitium_ in his return, and--by an exception to the regular practice in the case of church fiefs--we find him charged, not on the fees, (1) 'quos recognoscit', (2) 'quos non recognoscit', but on those which were enfeoffed 'de veteri', and 'de novo' just as if he were a lay tenant. as his fees 'de veteri' were sixteen, this figure recurs in successive scutages, until in 3 john we find him contesting as to one knight ('unde est contentio') who, doubtless, represented the difference between fifteen and sixteen. the case of westminster presents considerable difficulty, the entries relating to its payments of scutage being very puzzling. the abbey's fees lay chiefly in worcestershire and gloucestershire--especially worcestershire--and it is under this county that we find it ultimately (_i.e._ from 1168 onwards) assessed at fifteen fees, an assessment which the abbot himself seems to have claimed, in the first scutage, as the right one. taking then the _servitium debitum_ of all the church fiefs, at their earliest ascertainable assessment, we obtain this result: bishops 458-1/2 heads of religious houses 318 capellaria de bosham 7-1/2 ------ grand total 784[66] far more difficult is the calculation of the _servitium debitum_ from the lay fiefs. the list which follows is constructed from the evidence of the _cartae_ and the rolls, and, though substantially correct, is liable to emendation in details. it only comprises those fiefs the _servitium_ of which i have been able to ascertain with certainty or probability. robert 'filius regis' 100[67] earl ferrers 80 (? 60)[68] honour of totness 75 honour of tickhill 60 (?)[69] robert de stafford 60 count of eu 60 (?)[70] earl warrenne 60 (?)[71] lacy of pontefract 60 roger de mowbray 60[72] earl of essex 60 walter fitz robert (of essex) 50 honour of richmond 50[73] gervase paynell 50 reginald de st valery 50 (?)[74] patrick, earl of salisbury 40 walter de aincurt 40 william de montfichet 40 payn de montdoubleau 40[75] william de roumare 40 (?)[76] hubert de rye 35 hubert fitz ralf (derbyshire) 30 walter de wahulle 30 william fitz robert (devon) 30 william de traci 30[77] robert de valoines 30[77] maurice de craon 30[77] william de albini (of belvoir) 30[77] bernard balliol 30[78] roger de arundel 30[79] walter de mayenne 30 (?)[80] robert de albini (bucks) 25 robert fitz hugh 25 alfred of lincoln 25 ralf hanselin 25 william de braose 25[81] oliver de traci 25[81] gerard de limesi 25 (?)[82] walter waleran 20 richard de hay 20 honour of holderness 20 william de windsor 20 hugh de bayeux 20 william de vesci 20 (?)[83] daniel de crevec[oe]ur 20 (?)[84] thomas de arcy 20 (?)[85] hugh de dover 15 walter bret 15 baderon de monmouth 15 earl richard de redvers 15[86] adam de brus 15 hamo fitz meinfelin 15 osbert fitz hugh 15 (?)[87] ? hugh de scalers 15[88] ? stephen de scalers 15 gilbert de pinkeni 15 geoffrey ridel 15 robert foliot 15 robert de choques 15 robert de caux 15 william paynell 15 (?) richard de reimes 10 roger de buron 10 richard fitz william 10 william fitz alan 10 richard de cormeilles 10 roger de kentswell 10 william trussebut 10 nigel de lovetot 10 manasser arsic 10 richard de montacute 10 wandrille de courcelles 10 walter de bolebec (bucks) 10 robert de hastings 10 lambert de scotenni 10 drogo de montacute 10 (?)[89] william de reimes 10 (?)[90] william de helion 10 (?)[91] graeland de thani of essex owed seven and a half knights (the half of fifteen), and roger de berkeley probably the same. those who owed a _servitium_ of five knights were robert fitz harding, baldwin buelot, simon de cancy, nigel de lovetot (of the honour of tickhill), amfry de cancy, hugh de dover (of the honour of brunne),[92] walter de bolebec (northumberland), robert de brus, roger bertram, and probably stephen de bulmer,[93] and herbert 'de castello'. the cases in which the _servitium_ can be shown not to have been a multiple of five are comparatively few. that of simon de beauchamp of bedford was 54, of william fossard 33-1/2, of humphrey de bohun 30-1/2, of william malet 20-1/6, of robert de beauchamp (of somerset) 17, of william fitz john (of harptree) 13-3/4, of william blund 12, of hugh wac 10-1/8, of william de ros, william fitz john (of weston) and william de beauchamp (of worcestershire) 7, of john de bidun and jocelin de lovaine 5-1/2.[94] but these, it will be seen, are quite insufficient to overthrow the accumulated array of evidence on the other side, and some of them are, doubtless, capable of explanation. the bohun fief, for instance, in 1162 paid on exactly 30 fees. it is impossible to resist the inference, from such evidence as we have, that the amount of the _servitium debitum_ was a matter of custom and tradition, and could not usually be determined by reference to written grants or charters. on this point the returns of three essex tenants are most instructive, while their similarity is so striking, that, as in the case of the shropshire _formulæ_, it can scarcely be due to accident. the earl of essex closes with the words: 'et homines mei dicunt mihi quod debeo domino regi lx. milites'. walter fitz robert, who follows him, writes: 'et hoc mihi homines mei intelligere faciunt, quod debeo inde regi servitium de l. militibus'. william de montfichet ends thus: 'et hoc faciunt homines mei mihi intelligere--quod pater meus deserviebat per xl. milites'. with these expressions we may compare those of william fitz alan's tenants, who assert that his norfolk fief 'non debet domino regi nisi i. militem ... ut antiqui testantur'; that his shropshire fief 'non debet regi nisi x. milites in exercitu ... sicut antiqui testantur'; and that, as to his wiltshire fief, 'non sumus certi quod servitium debeat regi de hoc tenemento'. the abbot of chertsey, also, states his _servitium debitum_ with the proviso 'secundum quod scire possumus'. these expressions explain the uncertainty as to the _servitium debitum_ in such cases as the see of worcester and ramsey abbey.[95] the same principle applies to the relation between the tenant-in-chief and his under-tenant. thus the very first entry in the _cartae_ runs as follows: willelmus de wokindone iiij. milites et dimidium; et praeter hoc, ex testimonio curiae meae, dimidium exigo, quem ipse se non debere defendit. of another tenant on the same fief we read: 'praeter hoc, _ex testimonio curiae meae_, adhuc j. militem exigo'. here, we see, appeal is made not to record evidence, but to oral testimony. so, too, the bishop of exeter adds this clause to his return: et praeter hos omnes, sicut _a multis audivi_, comes gloucestriæ, et comes hugo, et comes de clare debent tenere de exoniensi episcopo; sed nullum ei servitium faciunt vel recognoscunt. surely in all such cases as these the obvious inference is that the tenant had been enfeoffed _sine carta_, or in the very words of the provisions of the barons (1259) 'feofatus sine carta a tempore conquestus vel alio antiquo feofamento' (§ 1). and now for my theory. no one can have even glanced at the lists i have compiled without being instantly struck by the fact that the 'service' is reckoned in round numbers, and is almost invariably _a multiple of 5, if not of 10_.[96] this discovery, of course, is absolutely destructive of the view that it always represented the number of five-hide (or £20) units contained in the fief. further, the number of differing fiefs assessed at precisely the same figure proves that the assessment was wholly arbitrary and cannot have been even the round sum which approximated most nearly the number of such units.[97] what then was the true determinant in the light of these conclusions? i reply--_the unit of the feudal host_. 'on the continent,' writes gneist, 'fifty _milites_, or at least twenty-five, were reckoned to one banneret; in england, in proportion to the smaller scale of enfeoffments, a smaller number appears to have formed the unit of the _constabularia_.'[98] he is right: the english _constabularia_, where i find it referred to, consists of _ten_ knights.[99] it is interesting to trace this unit and its multiples recurring in the narratives of irish warfare, under henry ii, and in other struggles.[100] we meet with it also in the grant by the empress to geoffrey de mandeville, in 1141, of 'feodum et servicium xx. militum' and in stephen's grant to him of 'lx milites feudatos'.[101] the next step is to show that the normans were familiar with _servitium debitum_ in terms of the ten-knight unit when they landed in england. for this we have only to refer to wace. for in the 'roman de rou', as quoted by mr freeman himself, we find william fitz osbern assuring the duke as to his barons: vostre servise dobleront: ki solt mener vint chevaliers quarante en merra volontiers, e ki de trente servir deit de sesante servir vos velt, e cil ki solt servir de cent dous cent en merra bonement.[102] the _servitium debitum_, therefore, was a standing institution in normandy, and 'to the mass of his (william's) followers', as mr freeman frankly admits,[103] a 'feudal tenure, a military tenure, must have seemed the natural and universal way of holding land'. when we find them and their descendants holding their fiefs in england, as they had been held in normandy, by the service of a round number of knights, what is the simple and obvious inference but that, just as henry ii granted out the provinces of ireland to be held as fiefs by the familiar service of a round number of knights,[104] so duke william granted out the fiefs he formed in england? if to escape from this conclusion the suggestion be made that these _servitia debita_ were compositions effected by english _antecessores_, it need only be answered that the fiefs acquired were wholly new creations, constructed from the scattered fragments of anglo-saxon estates. and though in the case of the church fiefs this objection might not apply, yet we have evidence, as i shall show, to prove that their _servitia_ also were determined by the conqueror's will, as indeed might be inferred from their close correspondence with those of the lay barons. but if the lands of the conquered realm were so granted to be held by a _servitium debitum_ of knights, the key of the position is won, and the defenders of the existing view must retire along the whole line; for, as mr freeman himself observed, 'let it be once established that land is held as a fief from the crown on condition of yielding certain services to the crown, and the whole of the feudal incidents follow naturally.'[105] i am anxious to make absolutely clear the point that between the accepted view and the view which i advance, no compromise is possible. the two are radically opposed. as against the theory that the military obligation of the anglo-norman tenant-in-chief was determined by the assessment of his holding, whether in hidage or in value, i maintain that the extent of that obligation was not determined by his holding, but was fixed in relation to, and expressed in terms of, the _constabularia_ of ten knights, the unit of the feudal host. and i, consequently, hold that his military service was in no way derived or developed from that of the anglo-saxons, but was arbitrarily fixed by the king, from whom he received his fief, irrespectively both of its size and of all pre-existent arrangements. such propositions, of course, utterly and directly traverse the view which these passages best summarize: the belief that william i divided the english landed property into military fees is erroneous.... according to the extent and the nature of the productive property it could be computed how many shields were to be furnished by each estate, according to the gradually fixed proportion of a £20 ground-rent.[106] there is no ground for thinking that william directly or systematically introduced any new kind of tenure into the holding of english lands. there is nothing to suggest any such belief, either in the chronicles of his reign, in the survey, which is his greatest monument, in the genuine or even in the spurious remains of his legislation.... as i have had to point out over and over again, the grantee of william, whether the old owner or a new one, held his land as it had been held in the days of king edward.[107] there can be no doubt that the military tenure ... was itself introduced by the same gradual process which we have assumed in the case of the feudal usages in general. we have no light on the point from any original grant made by the conqueror to a lay follower; but ... we cannot suppose it probable that such gifts were made on any expressed condition, or accepted with a distinct pledge to provide a certain contingent of knights for the king's service.[108] if my own conclusions be accepted, they will not only prove destructive of this view, but will restore, in its simplicity, a theory which removes all difficulties, and which paves the way to a reconsideration of other kindred problems, and to the study of that aspect of anglo-norman institutions in which they represent the feudal spirit developed on feudal lines. iii. scutage, aid, and 'donum' precious for our purpose as are the _cartae_ of 1166, their evidence, as it stands, is incomplete. it needs to be supplemented by the early pipe-rolls of henry ii's reign. by collating these two authorities we obtain information which, singly, neither the one nor the other could afford. all those entries on the rolls which relate to _scutagia_, _auxilia_ or _dona_ require to be extracted and classified before we can form our conclusions. hitherto, historians have remained content with repeating swereford's _obiter dicta_, as extracted from the _liber rubeus_ by madox, without checking these statements by the evidence of the rolls themselves. the question of swereford's authority is one which it is absolutely necessary to deal with, because his statements have been freely accepted by successive historical writers, and have formed, indeed, the basis on which their conclusions rest. now the presumption is naturally in favour of swereford's knowledge of his subject. his introduction to the _liber rubeus_ is dated 1230, and he tells us that he had been at work among the records in the days of king john, under william of ely[109] himself: he wrote with the actual rolls before him; he had been intimate with the leading officials of the exchequer, and enjoyed full knowledge of its practice and its traditions. i cannot wonder that, this being so, his positive assertions should have been readily believed, or that mr hall, when, for a short time, i was associated with him in preparing the red book for the press, should, with a kindly bias in favour of so venerable an authority, have shrunk from my drastic criticism of his famous introduction to that volume. on the other hand we have swereford's own admission that he worked from the rolls alone.[110] these rolls are, for all purposes, as accessible to us as they were to him, while we possess the advantage of having, in contemporary chronicles, sources of information which he did not use, and with which, indeed, he shows no sign of being even conversant. we must go, therefore, behind swereford and examine for ourselves the materials from which he worked. passing, for the present, over minor points, i would fix on the 'great scutage', or 'scutage of toulouse', as the test by which swereford's knowledge and accuracy must stand or fall. if he is in error on this matter, his error is so grievous and so far-reaching that it must throw the gravest doubt on all his similar assertions. the date of the expedition against toulouse was june 1159 (the host having been summoned at mid-lent): from the chroniclers we learn that, to provide the means for it, and especially to pay an army of mercenaries, a great levy was made in england and beyond sea. the roll of the following michaelmas records precisely such a levy, and the payments so recorded must have been made for the expenses of this campaign. but we can go further still; we can actually prove from internal evidence that sums accounted for on the roll of 1159 were levied expressly for the toulouse campaign.[111] yet we are confidently informed by swereford that this levy was for a welsh war, and that the scutage of toulouse is represented by the levies which figure on the rolls of 1161 and 1162. he appears to have evolved out of his inner consciousness the rule that a scutage, though fixed and even paid in any given year, was never accounted for on the rolls till the year after.[112] but as even this rule will not apply to his calculation here, one can only suggest that he was absolutely ignorant of the date of the toulouse campaign.[113] the value of swereford's calculations is so seriously affected by this cardinal error, that one may reject with less hesitation his statement that the scutage of 1156 was taken for a welsh war, and not, as there is evidence to imply, for a campaign against the king's brother. swereford, again, may be pardoned for his ignorance of the fact that scutage existed under henry i,[114] but when he unhesitatingly assigns the domesday survey to the fourteenth year of the conqueror (1079-80), he shows us that the precision of his statements is no proof of their accuracy. on both these points he has misled subsequent writers.[115] the incredible ignorance and credulity even of officials at the time are illustrated by the fact that the conqueror was generally believed to have created 32,000 knights' fees in england, and that swereford plumed himself on his independence in doubting so general a belief.[116] his less sceptical contemporary, segrave, continued to believe it, and even madox hesitates to reject it. the persistent assertion that the _cartae baronum_ were connected with, and preliminary to, the _auxilium ad filiam maritandam_ of 1168 is undoubtedly to be traced to swereford's _ipse dixit_ to that effect. he distinctly asserts that the aid was fixed (_assisum_) in the thirteenth year (1167), that the returns (_cartae_) were made in the same year (1167), and that the aid was paid and accounted for in the fourteenth year (1168).[117] modern research, however, has shown that the returns were made quite early in 1166, while the youthful matilda, we know, was not married till october 1168. this throws an instructive light on swereford's _modus operandi_. finding from the rolls that the payments made in 1168 were based on the returns in the _cartae_, and not being acquainted with the date of the latter, he jumped to the conclusion that they must have been made in 1167, it being his (quite unsupported) thesis that all levies were fixed in the year preceding that in which they were accounted for on the rolls. proceeding further, we find him explaining (p. 9) that he omits the aid of 1165, 'quoniam probata summa auxilii propter hoc non probatur numerus militum'. and yet this aid, the last to be taken before the returns of 1166, is of special value and importance for the very purpose he speaks of. it is, indeed, an essential element in the evidence on which i build; and this compels me to discuss the point in some detail. those who contributed towards this aid either (1) gave arbitrary sums for the payment of _servientes_--whose number was almost invariably some multiple of five--or (2) paid a marc on every fee of their _servitium debitum_. we are only here concerned with those who adopted the latter course. now let us take the case of those who adopted this alternative in the counties of notts and derby, and compare their payments with their _servitium debitum_ as known to us from other sources. payments (1165) service (1166) _marcae_ knights hubert fitz ralf 30 30 ralf halselin 25 25 robert de 'calz' 15 15 roger de burun 10 10 in this case there is no doubt as to the _servitium debitum_, for it is ascertained from the _cartae_ themselves. having then proved, by this test, the exact correspondence of the payments, i turn to the case of devonshire. payments (1165) service (1166) _marcae_ knights[118] robert 'filius regis' 100 (?) william de traci 30 (?) william de braose 25 (?) oliver de traci 25 (?) abbot of tavistock 15 15 william fitz reginald 1 1 ralf de valtort 1 1 robert fitz geoffrey 1 1 here we are supplied by this roll with four important _servitia_ which would otherwise be absolutely unknown to us. and they happen to be of special interest. for while the _carta_ of william de braose returns twenty-eight fees, and that of oliver de traci twenty-three and a half (though he pays on thirty and a half),[119] their payments in 1165, by revealing their _servitium debitum_, show us that their fiefs represent the two halves of the honour of barnstaple (which, therefore, was assessed at 50 knights) then in their respective hands. again, william de traci returns his fees in his _carta_ as twenty-five and three-quarters, and says nothing about any balance on his _dominium_, as he should have done. hence we should not have known his _servitium_ but for the roll of 1165. swereford's extraordinary failure to understand this roll aright is possibly due to the fact that most of the relevant payments are entered without mention of their object. he seems to have been very dependent upon the rolls explaining themselves, and to have worked in the spirit of a copying clerk rather than of an intelligent student. one more example of his errors will suffice. in his abstracts from the aid 'ad maritandam primogenitam filiam regis' (1168), we read: abbas gloucestriæ de promissione, sed non numeratur quid; sed in rotulo praecedenti dicitur:--abbas gloucestriæ debet xxxviij. l. ij. s. vj. d. de veteri scutagio walliae. now (1) the amount of the abbot's contribution is duly entered on the roll ('xl. marcas de promissione de eodem auxilio'), and it is not paid in respect of fees, but is a voluntary proffer; (2) the phrase in the preceding roll is not 'de veteri _scutagio_', but 'de veteri _exercitu'_; (3) the payment there recorded represents a contribution of fifty _servientes_, and had nothing to do with scutage, for the abbot (as swereford should have known) did not hold by military service, and ought not, therefore, to figure in his lists at all.[120] let us turn, therefore, to the rolls themselves. now, although the language of the exchequer was not so precise as we could wish, it is possible, more or less, to distinguish and classify these levies. thus, we have of course a typical 'aid' in the levy for the marriage of the king's daughter (1168), while, on the other hand, we have an equally typical 'scutage' in 1156, in the payments made by the church tenants in lieu of military service. on the institution of 'scutage' there has been much misconception. it is placed by our historians among the great innovations wrought by henry ii, who is supposed by them to have introduced it in 1156.[121] here we see, once again, the danger of seeking our information on such points secondhand, instead of going straight to the fountainhead for ourselves. john of salisbury implies that scutage was no novelty in 1156 when he writes, not that the king imposed it, but that he '_could not remit_ it'. this inference is at once confirmed by the appearance of scutage _eo nomine_ in the reign of henry i. the following charter is found in the (ms.) _liber eliensis_ (lib. iii), no. xxi, and in the cottonian ms. nero a. 15: h. rex anglorum archiepiscopis, episcopis, abbatibus, comitibus, etc. salutem. sciatis me condonasse ecclesiæ s. ætheldredæ de ely pro dei amore et anima patris et matris meae et pro redemptione peccatorum meorum, et petitione hervei ejusdem ecclesie episcopi 40 libras de illis 100 libris quas predicta ecclesia solebat dare de _scutagio_ quando _scutagium_ currebat[122] per terram meam anglie: ita quod ecclesia amodo inperpetuum non dabit inde nisi 60 libras quando _scutagium_ per terram evenerit, et ita inperpetuum sit de predictis libris ecclesia predicta quieta. t. rogero episcopo saresberiensi, gaufrido cancellario meo et roberto de sigillo et willelmo de tancarvilla et willelmo de albineio pincerna et radulfo basset et gaufrido de clintona et willelmo de pondelarche. apud eilinges in transitu meo. this is followed by (no. xxii) a grant of chatteris abbey to the church of ely;[123] and this again is followed, in a register of chatteris abbey,[124] by a remission of 6s 7d wardpenny hitherto paid by that abbey. the first and third charters receive singular confirmation, being thus accounted for in the pipe-roll of henry i: et idem episcopus debet ccxl. li. ut rex clamet eum quietum de superplus militum episcopatus, et ut abbatia de cateriz sit quieta de warpenna (p. 44). this entry, moreover, connects the _scutagium_ with the system of knight-service (_superplus militum_). it is delicious to learn, on comparing the records, that the virtuous king who made these grants for the weal of his parents' souls and the remission of his own sins, extorted from the church, for making them, an equivalent in hard cash.[125] again, the (ms.) cartulary of st evroul contains a confirmation by randulf, earl of chester (1121-29) of his predecessor (d. 1120) earl richard's benefaction, 'liberam et quietam ab _escuagio_', etc., etc. the list of the abbot of peterborough's knights (see p. 131) is a further illustration of knight-service _temp._ henry i, while the entry as to vivian, who was enfeoffed by abbot turold: 'servit pro milite _cum auxilio_' (_chron. petrob._, p. 175), must refer to the somewhat obscure 'auxilium militum' of the period. so also, it would seem, must the curious charter of eustace, count of boulogne,[126] in which he speaks of his knights serving: 'sive _in nummis_, sive in exercitu, sive in guarda', under henry i. most important of all, however, is a passage on which i have lighted since this essay first appeared. in reading through the letters of herbert (losinga), bishop of norwich (d. 1119), i found this appeal to the bishop of salisbury, in the king's absence from england: in terris meis exiguntur quinquaginta libræ pro placitis, cum earundem terrarum mei homines nec in responsionem nec in facto peccaverint.[127] item _pro militibus sexaginta libræ_ quos [? quas] tanto difficilius cogor reddere, quanto annis præteritis mea substantia gravius attenuata est (ed. giles, p. 51). the sum is that to which the ely contribution is reduced by the above charter, and the death of the writer in 1119 proves the early date of the payment. indeed, a little consideration will show that payment in lieu of military service, which was the essential principle of scutage, could be no new thing. the two forms which this payment might assume--payment to a substitute, or payment to the crown--both appear in domesday as applicable to the fyrd; the former is found in the 'customs' of berkshire, the latter in other passages. from the very commencement of knight service, the principle must have prevailed; for the 'baron' who had not enfeoffed knights enough to discharge his _servitium debitum_, must always have hired substitutes to the amount of the balance. nor is this a matter of supposition: we know as a fact, from the _abingdon chronicle_ and the _ely history_, that under william i knights were so hired.[128] here it should be noted, as a suggestive fact, that the 'forty days' of military service, though bearing no direct proportion either to the week or to the month, do so to the marc and to the pound. the former represents 4d, and the latter 6d, for each day of the military service.[129] it may fairly be assumed that this normal 'scutage' would be based on the estimated cost of substitutes paid direct. thus the only change involved would be that the tenant would make his payments not to substitutes, but to the crown instead. there is a valuable entry bearing on this point in the roll of 8 henry ii (p. 53). we there read: et in liberatione vii. militum soldariorum de toto anno quater xx. et iiii. li. et xviii. s. et viii. d. et in liberatione xx. servientium de toto anno xxx. li. et vi. s. et viii. d. et in liberatione viii. arbalist' viii. li. et xvi. sol. et in liberatione v. vigilum et i. portarii vi. li. et xvi. d. this represents 8d a day to each of the seven knights for a year of 364 days, which, be it observed, corresponds precisely with the statements in the _dialogus_: 'duo milites bajuli clavium quisque in die viii. [den.] _ratione militiae_; asserunt enim quod equis necessariis et armis instructi fore teneantur', etc. (i. 3). and so, we see, a scutage of two marcs, such as that which was raised for the expedition of toulouse (1159), would represent, with singular accuracy, 8d a day for the forty days of feudal service, or exactly a knight's pay. again the pay of the _serviens_, recorded in this passage, works out at a penny a day for a year of 364 days, which has an important bearing, we shall find, on the roll of three years later (11 henry ii). a similar calculation shows that the porter received 2d a day, and the _vigil_ 1d--the very pay assigned him in the _dialogus_ (i. 3). there is another similar passage in the roll of 14 henry ii (p. 124): et in liberatione i. militis et ii. portariorum, et ii. vigilum de blancmost' xviii. li. et v. sol. et in liberatione xl. servientum de blancmust' de xxix. septimanis xxxiii. li. et xvi. s. et viii. d. et xx. servientibus qui remanserunt xxiii. septimanas xiii. li. et viii. s. et iiii. d. here again the knight's pay works out at 8d a day, while the porters, the watchmen, and the _servientes_ received 1d. specially valuable, however, are the entries (to which no one, i think, has drawn attention) relating to the small standing guards kept up in the summer months at 'walton' and dover.[130] eventually the payments to these guards were made from the central treasury ('exitus de thesauro'), and are therefore appended, on the rolls, to the list of _combustiones_ where no one would think of looking for them. on the roll of 10 henry ii we find: 'liberatio iiii. militum et ii. servientum de waletone a festo ap. phil' et jac' usque ad festum s. luce xxiiii. li. et xx. d.' this works out at exactly 8d a day for the _miles_, and 1d for the _serviens_. on the roll of the next year the five knights at dover are paid £25 for 150 days' service, or exactly 8d a day each. so too on the roll of the thirteenth year we read: 'liberatio iiii. militum de waletone xxiii. li. et ix. s. et iiii. d. de clxxvi. diebus.... et ii. servientibus de clxxvi. diebus xxix. sol. et iiii. d.' here again the _miles_ gets 8d, the _serviens_ 1d a day. it is needless to multiply instances, but it may be added that similar calculations show the sailors of richard's crusading fleet to have received 2d and their boatswains 4d a day. it is, perhaps, possible to trace a complete change of policy in this matter by the crown. the conqueror, we may gather from divers hints, was anxious to push forward the process of sub-infeudation, that as many knights as possible might be actually available for service. as the chief danger lay, at first, in the prospect of english revolt it was clearly his policy to strengthen to the utmost that 'norman garrison', as we may term it, which the feudal system enabled him to quarter on the conquered land.[131] but as the two races slowly coalesced, the nature of the danger changed: it was no longer a question of norman _versus_ englishman, but of danger to the crown from war abroad and feudal revolt at home. thenceforth its policy would be no longer to encourage personal service, but rather payment in lieu thereof, which would provide the means of hiring mercenaries, a more trustworthy and useful force. clearly the accession of the angevin house would, and did, give to this new policy a great impetus. the first levy to which the rolls bear witness is that of 1156. as this was only raised from the _church_ fiefs, henry ii was, as yet, confining himself strictly to the precedent set him, as we know, in his grandfather's reign. this levy was at the rate of _one pound_ on the fee, and was made on the old assessment (_servitium debitum_). i have already shown that the levy in question was not, as alleged, an innovation. dr stubbs writes: 'the peculiar measure of the second year was the collection of scutage from the knights' fees holding of ecclesiastical superiors,[132] a measure which met with much opposition from archbishop theobald at the time';[133] and speaking of william of newburgh, he suggests that 'possibly in william's estimation the consent of st thomas took from the scutage on church fees its sacrilegious character'.[134] but if the institution was fully recognized under henry i, how was it 'sacrilegious'? theobald's 'opposition' in 1156 can only be inferred from the king's reply explaining the necessity for the levy,[135] and was clearly directed, not against the principle, but by way of appeal against the necessity in that instance. miss norgate holds that 'no resentment seems to have been provoked by the measure', although she sees in it 'the origin of the great institution of scutage'.[136] then there is the question of the object for which the levy was made. swereford says 'pro exercitu walliæ',[137] and this misled, through madox, dr stubbs (who wrote 'the scutage of 1156 was also for the war in wales',[138]) and gneist.[139] the former writer, however, has elsewhere[140] pointed out that 'its object was to enable henry to make war on his brother'; and miss norgate gives the same explanation.[141] swereford's error, i believe, can undoubtedly be traced to an entry on the pipe-roll of the third year (1157) recording the payment by the abbot of abbotsbury of two marcs 'de exercitu walie'.[142] but this must refer to the welsh campaign of that year, not to the foreign trouble of the year before.[143] the next levy was 'the scutage of toulouse' in 1159. this, 'the great scutage' of miss norgate,[144] is, strange as it may seem, on the pipe-roll itself almost uniformly styled not a scutage, but a _donum_. the explanation given by swereford is wholly inadequate, and is this: 'intitulaturque illud scutagium _de dono_ ea quidem, ut credo, ratione quod non solum prelati qui tenentur ad servitia militaria sed etiam alii abbates, de bello et de salopesbiria et alii tunc temporis dederunt auxilium'.[145] miss norgate, adopting this explanation, writes: the reason doubtless is that they were assessed, as the historians tell us, and as the roll itself shows, not only upon those estates from which services of the shield were explicitly due, but also upon all lands held in chief of the crown, and all church lands without distinction of tenure; the basis of assessment in all cases being the knight's fee, in its secondary sense of a parcel of land worth twenty pounds a year. whatever the laity might think of this arrangement, the indignation of the clergy was bitter and deep. the wrong inflicted on them by the scutage of 1156 was as nothing compared with this, which set at nought all ancient precedents of ecclesiastical immunity, and actually wrung from the church lands even more than from the lay fiefs.[146] i am obliged to quote the passage _in extenso_, because, in this case, the accomplished writer betrays a singular confusion of ideas, and misrepresents not only the levy, but also the point at issue. the whole passage is conceived in error, error the more strange because miss norgate enjoyed over her predecessors the advantage of writing with the printed roll before her. the lay estates were not, as implied ('all lands held in chief of the crown'), in any way exceptionally assessed: in no case was the basis of assessment the unit alleged by the writer; and as to the 'church lands', a reference to the roll will show that all over england there were only eight cases in which those not owing 'services of the shield' contributed (and that in no way as an assessment on imaginary knights' fees) to this levy, while in six out of the eight their contributions were so insignificant that their collective amount barely exceeded £50.[147] the true explanation is probably to be found in the fact that only a portion of the tax was raised by way of scutage. as this great levy has been wrongly supposed to have consisted of a scutage alone,[148] and as it played an important part in the development of direct taxation, i propose to set forth, for the first time, the various methods by which the money was raised. these were eight in number: i. (fixed) a _donum_ of two marcs on the fee from the under-tenants of the church, raised _by fiefs_ on the old assessment (_servitium debitum_). ii. (fixed ?) a _donum_ of (it is said) two marcs on the fee from the under-tenants of the lay barons, raised partly _by counties_ and partly _by fiefs_. iii. (arbitrary) a _donum_ from the church tenants-in-chief themselves, irrespective of their fees. iv. (arbitrary) a _donum_ from some of the non-feudal religious houses (tenants _in elemosina_, and not by military service). v. (arbitrary) a _donum_ from the towns. vi. (arbitrary) a _donum_ from the sheriffs. vii. (arbitrary) a _donum_ from the jewries. viii. (arbitrary) a _donum_ from the moneyers. of these, the _first_ was strictly regular, being merely a repetition of the scutage of 1156, at the rate of two marcs instead of twenty shillings. the _second_ presents some difficulty. subject to correction, there are some fifteen cases in which the payment is made separately by fiefs, and in which the rate is clearly two marcs, while there are twenty-two in which the _milites_ of the county pay as a group through the sheriff, and in which, therefore, we cannot actually test the rate of the levy or the manner of raising it. swereford's _ipse dixit_ as to the rate in these latter cases was probably based on analogy, here our only guide. with the _third_ and _fourth_ divisions we return to sure ground. to them i invite particular attention, because it is to them (and especially to the third) that apply the complaints of the church chroniclers, and not (as has always, but erroneously, been supposed) to the perfectly legitimate levy of two marcs on the fee. it is necessary to emphasize the fact that the matter has been wholly misunderstood. the bitter complaint of john of salisbury that henry, on this occasion, 'omnibus (contra antiquum morem et debitam libertatem) indixit ecclesiis ut _pro arbitrio_ ejus satraparum suorum conferrunt in censum', would have been without meaning had it referred (as alleged) to the latter levy (or even to the insignificant sums contributed _ut supra_ by eight foundations); but when we learn that, over and above this legitimate levy, a far larger sum was arbitrarily wrung from the church, the truth and justice of the protest are at once made evident. i here give two tables illustrative of this exaction. each is divided into three columns. in the first column i give the number of the knights due from each bishopric and each religious house. in the second column i give the marcs due, and paid on this occasion, on the old assessment (_servitium debitum_). in the third will be found the exaction complained of, namely, the _dona_ extorted from the spiritual 'barons' themselves. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | | |_donum_ of knights|_donum_ of tenant| |sees |knights due | (in marcs) |(in marcs) | --------------------------------------------------------------------- |winchester | 60 | 120 | 500 | |lincoln | 60 | 120 | 500 | |worcester | 60 | 120 | 200 | |norwich | 40 | 80 | 200 | |bath | 20 | 40 | 500 | |london | 20 | 40 | 200 | |exeter | 17-1/2 | 35 | 150 | |chester | 15 | 30 | 100 | |durham | 10 | 20 | 500 | |york | 7 | 14 | 500 | --------------------------------------------------------------------- |total | - | 619 | 3,350 | --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- | | |_donum_ of knights|_donum_ of tenant| |religious houses |knights due | (in marcs) | (in marcs) | --------------------------------------------------------------------- |peterborough | 60 | 120 | 100 | |st edmund's | 40 | 80 | 200 | |glastonbury | 40 | 80 | - | |abingdon | 30 | 60 | 60 | |hyde | 20 | 40 | 150 | |st augustine's | 15 | 30 | 220 | |st alban's | 6 | 12 | 100 | |evesham | 5 | 10 | 60 | |wilton | 5 | 10 | 20 | |ramsey | 4 | 8 | 60 | |st benet of hulme | 3 | 6 | 30 | |pershore | 3 | - | 7-1/2 | |chertsey | 3 | 6 | 60 | |cerne | 3 | 6 | - | |winchcombe | 2 | 4 | 7-1/2 | |middleton | 2 | 4 | - | |sherburne | 2 | - | 10 | |abbotsbury | 1 | 2 | 7-1/2 | --------------------------------------------------------------------- |total | - | 482 | 1,092-1/2 | ---------------------------------------------------------------------we thus obtain a grand total of 1,101 marcs raised from the church by legitimate scutage, and 4,442-1/2 (or, adding the _dona_ from non-feudal houses, 4,700) marcs by special imposition.[149] this distinction at once explains the real extortion of which churchmen complained;[150] and shows that it had nothing to do with scutage, but was a special imposition on the church fees from which the lay ones were exempt.[151] the idea of the impost was not improbably the adjustment of inequalities in cases where the knight-service was a quite inadequate assessment; the precedent created was not forgotten, and it proved in later days a welcome source of revenue. the discovery of this exaction identifies, it will be seen, in spite of swereford's error, the levy accounted for on the roll with the famous 'scutage of toulouse'. and if even further proof were needed, it is found in an incidental allusion which clinches the argument. giraldus cambrensis (iii. 357) refers to bishop henry of winchester assembling all the priests of his diocese 'tanquam ad auxilium postulandum (dederat enim paulo ante quingentas marcas regi henrico _ad expeditionem tholosanam_)'. the sum here named is that which he paid in 1159, as my table shows. its destination is thus established, as also, it may be noted, the means by which he was expected to recoup himself. as to the scutage on the lay fiefs, the general impression, broadly speaking, is that henry replaced his english feudal host by an army of mercenaries paid from the proceeds of a scutage of two marcs per fee on all lands held by military service.[152] but is that impression confirmed by the evidence of the rolls? without setting forth the evidence in detail, i may sum it up as amounting to this: that the grouped payments found under twenty-two counties[153] present, i think, a total of 1,895 marcs, while those of the fiefs which paid separately amounted to 666. this gives us a grand total of 2,561 marcs, representing, of course, 1,280 knights. now although the amount of knight service due to the crown from its english realm has been, as we shall see, absurdly exaggerated, the above number, i need scarcely say, must represent a minority of the knights due from the lay fiefs. this sets the matter in quite another aspect. in spite of the passage in robert de monte, on which the accepted view is based,[154] the roll presents proof to the contrary, and indeed the words of robert show that he knew so little of the levy in england as to believe that it was wholly arbitrary. there are, perhaps, indications that the fiefs which, on this occasion, paid scutage, were largely those in the king's hands,[155] and if we add to these the escheated honours, of which the scutage would be paid through the sheriffs, we must conclude that the great bulk of the tenants who had a choice in the matter served abroad with their contingents and did not pay scutage. before taking leave of 'the great scutage', another point demands notice. gervase of canterbury sets forth its proceeds in terms of great precision: _hoc anno_ rex henricus scotagium sive scutagium _de anglia_ accepit, cujus summa fuit centum millia et quater viginti millia librarum argenti (i. 167). quite desperate attempts have been made to reconcile this statement with the actual sums raised. in his preface to the _gesta henrici regis_, dr stubbs suggests that gervase included in his total the scutage of two years later (1161), but adds that, if so, the rolls are very incomplete. in his _constitutional history_ he speaks of 'this [scutage] and a very large accumulation of treasure from other sources, amounting, according to the contemporary writers, to £180,000' (i. 457), but admits, in a footnote, that 'the sum is impossible', and throws out as probable a different explanation. miss norgate writes that 'the proceeds, with those of a similar tax levied upon henry's other dominions, amounted to some £180,000'.[156] but gervase distinctly states that this sum was raised _from england_. now the actual sum raised, _by scutage_, in england (1159) was £2,440 in all, as i reckon it, while the special clerical impost produced some £3,130 in addition. consequently, no ingenuity can save the credit of gervase. he was not, after all, worse than his fellows. we shall find that when mediæval chroniclers endeavour to foist on us these absurd sums they require much bolder handling than they have ever yet received. pass we now to the _third_ levy, that of 1161. for this the rate was again _two marcs_ on the fee according to swereford (followed, of course, by subsequent writers), though the study of the roll (7 henry ii) reveals that in many cases, on the lay fiefs at least, the rate was _one_ marc. both this and the levy of the following year are most difficult to deal with in every way. we have seen that an entry on the roll of 1163 led swereford to believe that the levy of 1161 was made for the toulouse campaign, and dr stubbs has made the suggestion that it might have been raised to defray 'debts' incurred on that occasion;[157] but the difficulties in the way of accepting this view seem insuperable.[158] the _fourth_ levy, which is that of 1162 (8 henry ii), was at the rate of _one_ marc, and is recorded by swereford, but not by dr stubbs.[159] though richer in names than that of 1161, it is even less useful for our purpose, as the sums entered are most irregular, perhaps owing to the adoption of a new method of collection.[160] neither of these levies affords, in the absence of corroboration, trustworthy evidence on the _servitium_ of any lay fief. the _fifth_ levy, on the other hand, in 1165 (11 henry ii), affords most valuable evidence, although it is ignored by swereford and by those who have followed him. it is, however, of a singular character. the money was raised, we gather from the roll, on two different systems: (i) by a _fixed_ payment at the rate of one marc on the fee (old assessment). (ii) by an _arbitrary_ payment of certain mysterious sums, which prove to be multiples of the unit 15s 3d. but there is no fixed proportion to be traced between the amount paid and the number of _servitia_ due. numerous instances are found of a single knight's fee being charged with a sum equivalent to five of these mysterious units. magnates, again, are found paying apparently strange sums, which prove on dissection to represent 50, 100, 200 and even 300 of these units. the clue to the mystery is found in an entry on the pipe-roll of the following year (12 henry ii), which proves that this unit was the pecuniary equivalent of a _serviens_, and that the various payers had 'promised' the king so many _servientes_ for the war in wales.[161] such 'promises' were evidently offers, made independently of the actual service due from the 'promising' party. following up this clue, we see that the abbot of abingdon must, like the bishop of hereford, have promised 100 'serjeants',[162] that the abbot of st alban's must have done likewise,[163] while the bishop of london must have promised 150, _in addition_, be it noted, to paying a scutage of a marc on each knight's fee (20) of his _servitium debitum_.[164] for the rolls of 1162 and 1163 prove that he had duly paid the scutage of the former year, and that this was a further payment. the varying form of these entries should be observed, for it was evidently quite immaterial to the clerks whether they wrote '5 serjeants' or their equivalent--76 shillings and 3 pence.[165] taking the pay of the _serviens_ at 1d a day, the unit in question would represent six months' pay (for a year of 366 days). but, for our present purpose, we must confine ourselves to the scutage proper. the passage on which i would specially dwell is the entry on the roll in which the _custos_ of the archbishopric of canterbury 'reddit compotum de cxiii. li. de militibus de archiepiscopatu de ii. exercitibus' (p. 109).[166] in the first place, we have here, surely, witness to the _two_ welsh campaigns of this year, which mr eyton adopts, following mr bridgeman,[167] but which miss norgate rejects.[168] secondly, this sum resolves itself, on analysis, into two constituents of 84-3/4 marcs each. now the return for the archbishopric the following year is: 'archiepiscopus habet iiij^{xx.} et iiij^{or.} et dimidium et quartam partem feffatos.'[169] having set forth this exact corroboration, i will briefly trace the _servitium_ of the see. in 1156 and 1159 it pays no scutage when the other church fiefs do, but within six months of theobald's death it pays to the scutage of 1161 on a _servitium_ of sixty knights, being then in the hands of the crown. under becket, in 1162, it is once more omitted; but in 1165 it again pays, as we have seen, and now not on sixty knights but on 84-3/4. in 1168 it contributes, on the same amount, to the _auxilium_, and in 1172, but the latter year is the first in which the _recognoscit_ formula is employed, enabling us to determine that, as in 1161, the _servitium debitum_ was sixty knights. the typical difference between these sixty knights and the 84-3/4 actually enfeoffed will serve to illustrate the point on which i insist throughout. had the fee been held by its tenant, he would have raised 84-3/4 marcs, paid sixty to the crown, and kept 24-3/4 for himself.[170] but when a _custos_ held the fief, he could keep nothing back, and therefore paid over the whole. we have, i think, an illustration of the same kind in the payment (p. 202, note 76) by the _custos_ of the romare fief, 'de noviter feffatis' (_noviter_, be it observed not yet _de novo_). having brought the levies down to 1165, i hope it has now been made clear that the officials of the exchequer were well aware of the amount of _servitium debitum_ from every fief, the levies being always based on the said amount. swereford, therefore, was quite mistaken in the inference he drew from the inquest of 1166:[171] indeed, his words prove that he completely misunderstood the problem. this was the last levy raised previous to the making of the returns (_cartae_) in 1166. these returns were followed in 1168 by the first levy on the new assessment. i have already dealt with the changes which this new assessment involved, but i would here again insist upon the fact that the church and the lay fiefs were not dealt with alike, the latter being assessed wholly _de novo_, while the former retained their old assessments, while accounting separately, and under protest, for the fees in excess of their _servitium debitum_. so far as the lay fiefs were concerned, their _servitia_, congenital with norman rule, were now swept away. here, from the single county of northumberland, are three cases in point: 1162 1168 de scutagio walteri de bolebec. walterus de bolebec redd. comp. in thesauro v. marcae.[172] de iiii. marcis et dim. de eodem auxilio. idem debet xlviii. s. et v. d. pro tribus militibus et ii^{abus.} terciis partibus mil. de novo feffamento. de scutagio stephani de bulemer. stephanus de bulemer redd. in thesauro v. marcae. comp. de iiii. marcis de eodem auxilio. idem debet xxiii. s. et iiii. d. de i. milite et dim. et quarta parte mil. de novo feffamento. de scutagio radulfi de wircestria. radulfus de wigornio redd. comp. in thesauro i. marca.[173] de i. marca de eodem auxilio pro i. milite. idem debet xiii. s. de dim. mil. et de i. tercia et de i. septima parte mil. de novo feffamento. the change thus made by the restless king was permanent in its effect, and thenceforth the only assessment recognized was that based upon the fees, which, by 1166, had been created de veteri and de novo.[174] before leaving the subject of this levy, there is one point on which i would touch. when we find, as we often do, that the sum paid in 1168 in respect of a fief does not tally with the number of fees recorded in the _cartae_, we must remember that in the _liber niger_ and _liber rubeus_ we have not the original _cartae_, but only transcripts liable to clerical error. checking the _cartae_ by these payments, we constantly find cases in which the number of fees should be slightly greater than is recorded in the _carta_.[175] i suspect that the transcriber, in these cases, has omitted entries in the original _carta_, and this suspicion is strongly confirmed by the fact that where the original return enables us to test the transcript, we find in the great _carta_ for the honour of clare that the original transcriber has omitted half a fee of william de hastinges, has left out altogether the entry 'reginaldus de cruce, _dimidium militem_', and has changed the quarter fee of geoffrey fitz piers into half a fee; while in that of the bishop of chichester, robert de denton's half fee is converted into a whole one. the later (red book) transcriber has made a further omission. another source of discrepancy may be found in the dangerous resemblance of formulae. thus the _carta_ of ranulf fitz walter records three and three-quarter fees duly accounted for. yet his payment in 1168 is not £2 10s but £2 4s 5d. the explanation is that the holding was really three and one-third fees,[176] but the transcriber read 'iij[^{a.}] pars' (one-third) as 'iij. partes' (three-quarters). how easily such errors arose may be seen in the elaborate entries on simon de beauchamp's fief. here the formula 'decem denarios quando rex accipit marcam de milite', correctly reproduced in the black book, becomes 'x. denarius', etc., in the red book. the former expression means '_tenpence_ in the marc' (_i.e._ one-sixteenth of a fee); whereas the latter is equivalent to '_the tenth penny_ in the marc' (_i.e._ one-tenth of a fee), and upsets the whole reckoning. the correct formula is a not uncommon one and should be compared with the 'de xx. solidis viii. denarios' (eightpence in the pound) which is given as the holding of two knights of the honour of clare, and represents the thirtieth of a fee.[177] lastly, i think that, on further examination, there are three fiefs of which the _servitia debita_, though at first sight irregular,[178] may fairly be brought into line as multiples of the _constabularia_. that of bohun, though implied by the _carta_ to be thirty and a half knights, paid in the fifth and eighth years on exactly thirty; that of malet, though similarly given as twenty and one-sixth in the _carta_, is returned in the _testa de nevill_ as exactly twenty;[179] that of beauchamp of hacche, though distinctly given as seventeen in the _carta_, will be found, on careful collation of the rolls for 7 and 8 hen. ii, to be claimed by the exchequer as 17 + 3, _i.e._ 20. here also, perhaps, it may be allowable to glance at the foreign parallels to fiefs of sixty fees and smaller multiples of five. there is a charter of charles the fair (1322-28) 'qua alphonsum de hispania "baronem et ricum hominem" navarræ creat; et, ut baronis et rici hominis statum manu tenere possit, eidem de gratia speciali 60 militias [knight's fees] in regno sua navarræ concedit modo consueto tenendos et possidendos',[180] while an edict of earlier date proclaims: 'de vasvassore [_i.e._ baron] qui _quinque milites_ habet, per mortem [? pro morte] ejus, emendetur 60 unciæ auri cocti, et per plagam [? pro plaga] 30, et si plures habuerit milites, crescat compositio sicut numerus militum.'[181] iv. the total number of knights due 'ad hoc solicitius animum direxi ut per regna angliæ debita regi servitia militaria quatinus potui plenissime percunctarer.'[182] so writes swereford, who proceeds to explain that neither the famous bishop nigel himself, nor his successor, bishop richard, nor william of ely (_ut supra_) had left any certain information on the subject; while he (swereford) could not accept the common belief that the conqueror had created _servitia_ of knights to the amount of 32,000.[183] the cause of his failure is found in the fact that he confused two different things: (1) the _debita regi servitia_, which formed the only assessment of fiefs down to 1166; (2) the assessment based on the _cartae_ of 1166, which superseded the _debita servitia_, and is not evidence of their amount.[184] but then, as i have already explained above, the exchequer official was concerned only with the actual claims of the crown; for him the original 'service due' had a merely academic interest. there are two estimates for the total of which we are in search. one is 32,000 knights; the other 60,000. 'stephen segrave,' dr stubbs reminds us, 'the minister of henry iii, reckoned 32,000 as the number' (which confirms swereford's statement); but he himself wisely declines to hazard 'a conjectural estimate',[185] adding that 'the official computation, on which the scutage was levied, reckoned in the middle of the thirteenth century 32,000 knights' fees, but the amount of money actually raised by henry ii on this account, in any single year, was very far from commensurate'. gneist repeats this figure, but holds that 'as far as we may conjecture by reference to later statements, the number of shields may be fixed at about 30,000'.[186] on the wondrous estimate of 60,000 i have more to say. started by ordericus,[187] this venerable fable has been handed down by higden and others, till in the _short history of the english people_ it has attained a world-wide circulation.[188] dr stubbs has rightly dismissed the statement 'as one of the many numerical exaggerations of the early historians';[189] but neither he nor any other writer has detected, so far as i know, the peculiar interest of the sum. what that interest is will be seen at once when i say that ordericus, who asserts that the conqueror had so apportioned the knight-service 'ut angliæ regnum lx. millia militum indesinenter haberet' (iv. 7), also alleges that the number present at the famous salisbury assembly (1086) was 60,000. it is very instructive to compare this 'body whose numbers were handed down by tradition as no less than sixty thousand',[190] with the 'sixty thousand horsemen'[191]--'ut ferunt sexaginta millia equitum'--of thirteen years earlier, and with the number of the norman invaders, 'commonly given at sixty thousand',[192] of seven years earlier still. it is ordericus, too, who states that the treasure in normandy at the death of henry i was £60,000. his father seems to have left behind him the same sum at winchester, for, though the chronicle left the amount in doubt, 'henry of huntingdon,' mr freeman observed, with a touch of just sarcasm, 'knew the exact amount of the silver, sixty thousand pounds, one doubtless for each knight's fee'.[193] he also reminds us, as to the crusade of william of aquitaine, that 'orderic allows only thirty thousand. in william of malmesbury they have grown into sixty thousand. figures of this kind, whether greater or smaller, are always multiples of one another'.[194] pursuing the subject, we learn from giraldus that the conqueror's annual income was 60,000 marcs.[195] fantosme speaks of marshalled knights as _meins de_ seisante mile, _e plus de seisante treis,_ and the author of the anglo-norman poem on the conquest of ireland gives the strength of the irish host, in 1171, as 60,000 men. even 'sir bevis', if i remember right, slew in the streets of london 60,000 men; and fitz stephen asserts that, in stephen's reign, london was able to turn out 60,000 foot.[196] it may, also, not be without significance that 60,000 moors are said to have been slain at navas de tolosa, and that william of sicily was said to have bequeathed to henry ii three distinct sums of 60,000 each.[197] the fact is that 'sixty thousand' was a favourite phrase for a great number, and that 'sixty' was used in this sense just as the romans[198] had used it in classical times and just as russian peasants (i think i have read) use it to this day. the 'twice six hundred thousand men', who were burning to fight for england,[199] and the £180,000 (60,000 × 3) of gervase (1159), are traceable, doubtless, to the same source. how strangely different from these wild figures are the sober facts of the case! the whole of the church fiefs, as we have seen, were only liable to find 784 knights, a number which, small as it was, just exceeded the entire knight service of normandy as returned in 1171. as to the lay fiefs it is not possible to speak with equal confidence. i have ventured to fix the approximate _quota_ of 104 (more or less), of which ninety-two are in favour of my theory: forty-eight fiefs, of five knights and upwards, remain undetermined.[200] if the average of knights to a fief were the same in the latter as in the former class, the total contingents of the lay barons would amount, apparently, to 3,534 knights; but, as the latter one includes such enormous fiefs as those of gloucester and of clare, with such important honours as those of peverel and eye, we must increase our estimate accordingly, and must also make allowance for fiefs omitted and for those owing less than five knights (which are comparatively unimportant). making, therefore, every allowance, we shall probably be safe in saying that the whole _servitium debitum_, clerical and lay, of england can scarcely have exceeded, if indeed it reached, 5,000 knights. indefinite though such a result may seem, it is worth obtaining for the startling contrast which it presents to the 60,000 of ordericus, to the 32,000 of segrave,[201] and to the 30,000 of gneist. the only writer, so far as i know, who has approximated, by investigating for himself, the true facts of the case, is mr pearson;[202] but his calculations, i fear, are vitiated by the unfortunate guess that the alleged 32,000 fees were really 6,400 of five hides each. it is a hopeless undertaking to reconcile the facts with the wild figures of mediæval historians by resorting to the ingenious devices of apocalyptic interpretation. v. the normal knight's fee much labour has been vainly spent on attempts to determine the true area of a knight's fee. the general impression appears to be that it contained five hides. mr pearson, we have seen, based on that assumption his estimate of 6,400 fees, and other writers have treated the fee as the recognized equivalent of five hides. the point is of importance, because if we found that the recognized area of a knight's fee was five hides, it would give us a link between the under-tenant (_miles_) and the anglo-saxon thegn. but, as dr stubbs has recognized, the assumption cannot be maintained; no fixed number of hides constituted a knight's fee. the circumstance of a fee, in many cases consisting of five hides, is merely, i think, due to the existence of five-hide estates, survivals from the previous _régime_. we have an excellent instance of such fees in a very remarkable document, which has hitherto, it would seem, remained unnoticed. this is a transcript, in heming's cartulary, of a hidated survey of the gloucestershire manors belonging to the see of worcester. i believe it to be earlier than domesday itself, in which case, of course, it would possess a unique interest. here are the entries, side by side, relating to the great episcopal manor of westbury (on trym), gloucestershire. cartulary domesday ad _uuestbiriam_[203] pertinent huesberie. ibi fuerunt et sunt l. l. hide. xxxv. hidas in dominio hidae.... de hac terra hujus habe_t_[203] manerii tenet turstinus filius rolf episcopus, et milites sui habent v. hidas in austrecliue et xv. hidas. in icena_t_une v. gislebertus filius turold iii. hidas, in com_t_una v. hidas, hidas et dimidiam jn contone, et in b_i_scopes s_t_oke v. hidas. constantinus v. hidas jn icetune.... de eadem terra hujus manerii tenet osbernus gifard v. hidae et nullum servitium facit.... quod homines tenent (valet) ix. libras. the three five-hide holdings, we find, figure in both alike, but gilbert fitz thorold's holding of three hides and a half appears in addition in domesday. the inference, surely would seem to be that gilbert was enfeoffed between the date of the survey recorded in the cartulary and the date of the domesday survey. if so, the former survey is, as i have suggested, the earlier; and in that survey we have the three tenants of five-hide holdings described _eo nomine_ as the bishop's _milites_. in the _cartae_ of 1166 we have fees of 5 hides,[204] of 4,[205] of 6,[206] of 10,[207] of 2-1/2,[208] and even of 2;[209] also of 5 carucates,[210] of 11,[211] and of 14.[212] cartularies, however, are richer in evidence of this discrepancy. thus the six fees of st albans contained 40 hides (an average of 6-2/3 hides each), the figures being 5-1/2, 7, 8-1/2, 6, 5-1/2, 7-1/2.[213] so too in the abingdon cartulary (ii. 3) we find four fees containing 19 hides, three containing 14, a half-fee 4, a fee and a half 13, one fee, 10, 5, 9. on the other hand, if we take 20 _librates_ as the amount of the fee--which it was already, as dr stubbs observes, in the days of the conqueror--the _cartae_ confirm that conclusion.[214] we must therefore conclude that the knight's fee, held by an under-tenant, consisted normally of an estate, worth £20 a year, and was not based on the 'five hides' of the anglo-saxon system. vi. the early evidence we will now work upwards from the _cartae_ to the conquest. allusions to early enfeoffment are scattered through the _cartae_ themselves. henry fitz gerold begins his return: 'isti sunt milites eudonis dapiferi', and eudo, we know, 'came in with the conqueror'. we learn from another return (_lib. rub._, p. 397) that henry i had given william de albini, 'pincerna, de feodo quod fuit corbuchun xv. milites feffatos'. now this refers to 'robertus filius corbution', a domesday tenant in norfolk. the _testa_, again, comes to our help. thus we learn from domesday that osbern the priest _alias_ osbern the sheriff (of lincolnshire) was william de perci's tenant at wickenby, co. lincoln, but the _testa_ entry (p. 338_a_) proves that william had enfeoffed him in that holding by the service of one knight.[215] so too count alan (of brittany) had enfeoffed his tenant landri at welton in the same county for the service of half a knight (_ibid._, 338_b_), and we find his son, alan fitz landri, tenant there to count stephen, a generation later than domesday, in the lindsey survey. the barony of bywell in northumberland, we read in the _testa_(p. 392_a_), had been held by the service of five knights[216] since the days of william rufus, who had granted it on that tenure.[217] after this we are not surprised to learn that the barony of morpeth had been held 'from the conquest' by the service of four knights, and that of mitford as long by the service of five (_ibid._, p. 392_b_), or that those of calverdon, morewic, and diveleston had all been similarly held by military service 'from the conquest'. in herefordshire, again, john de monmouth is returned as holding 'feoda xv. militum a conquestu anglie'.[218] so too robert foliot claims in his _carta_ (1166) that his predecessors had been enfeoffed 'since the conquest of england';[219] and william de colecherche, that his little fief was 'de antiquo tenemento a conquestu angliae' (_l.r._, p. 400); humphrey de bohun enumerates the fees 'quibus avus suus feffatus fuit in primo feffamento quod in anglia habuit' (_ibid._, p. 242), and refers to his grandfather's subsequent enfeoffments in the days of william rufus (p. 244), while alexander de alno similarly speaks of sub-infeudation 'tempore willelmi regis' (p. 230). to take one more instance from the _cartae_, an abbot sets forth his _servicium_ due to henry, 'sicuti debuit antiquitus regibus predecessoribus ejus' (p. 224). this brings us to the instructive case of ramsey abbey. dr stubbs refers to a document of the reign of william rufus as 'proof that the lands of the house had not yet been divided into knights' fees'.[220] but he does not mention the striking fact that the special knight service for which the abbot was to be liable is distinctly stated to have been that for which his 'predecessors' had been liable.[221] as this charter is assigned to 1091-1100, the mention of 'predecessors' would seem to carry back this knight service very far indeed. and we have happily another connecting link which carries downwards the history of this knight service, as the above-named charter carries it upwards. this is the entry in the pipe-roll of 1129-30: abbas de ramesia reddit compotum de xlviij. li. xj. s. et vj. d. pro superplus militum qui requirebantur de abbatia (p. 47).[222] further, we have a notable communication to the abbot from bishop nigel of ely, which must refer to the scutage of 1156 or to that of 1159 (probably the former): sciatis quod ubi ricardus clericus[223] reddidit compotum de scutagio militum vestrorum ad scaccarium ego testificatus sum vos non debere regi plusquam quatuor milites, et per tantum quieti estis et in rotulo scripti.[224] lastly, we have the return in the black book (1166): homines faciunt iiii. milites in communi in servitium domini regis, ita quod tota terra abbatiae communicata est cum eis per hidas ad prædictum servitium faciendum. prof maitland, writing on the court of the abbey of ramsey, in the thirteenth century, observes that: the abbot is bound to provide four knights, and (contrary to what is thought to have been the common practice) he has not split up his land into knights' fees so that on every occasion the same four tenants shall go to the war ... the process by which the country was carved out into knights' fees seems in this case to have been arrested at an early stage.[225] the case of ramsey was undoubtedly peculiar, but in the third volume of the cartulary, now published, we have (pp. 48, 218) fuller versions of the abbot's return in 1166. the second of these is specially noteworthy, and reads like a transcript of the original return.[226] here we see separate knights' fees duly entered, with the customary formula 'debet unum militem'. but the service was certainly provided in 1166 and afterwards 'per hidas'. further inquiry, therefore, is needed; but we have in any case, for ramsey, a chain of evidence which should prove of considerable value for the study of this difficult problem. the phenomenon, however, for which we have to account is the appearance from the earliest period to which our information extends of certain quotas of knight-service, clearly arbitrary in amount, as due from those bishops and abbots who held by military service. when and how were these _quotas_ fixed? the answer is given by matthew paris--one of the last quarters in which one would think of looking--where we read that, in 1070, the conqueror episcopatus quoque et abbatias omnes quae baronias tenebant, et eatenus ab omni servitute seculari libertatem habuerant, sub servitute statuit militari, inrotulans episcopatus et abbatias _pro voluntate sua_ quot milites sibi et successoribus suis hostilitatis tempore voluit a singulis exhiberi (_historia anglorum_, i. 13). this passage (which perhaps represents the st albans tradition) is dismissed by dr stubbs as being probably 'a mistaken account of the effects of the domesday survey'.[227] but the abingdon chronicle, quite independently, gives the same explanation, and traces the _quota_ of knights to the action taken by the crown: quum jam regis edicto in annalibus annotarentur quot de episcopiis quotve de abbatiis ad publicam rem tuendam milites (si forte hinc quid causae propellendae contingeret) exigerentur, etc.[228] moreover, the ely chronicle bears the same witness, telling us that william rufus, at the commencement of his reign, _debitum servitium quod pater suus imposuerat_ ab ecclesiis violenter exigit.[229] it also tells us that, when undertaking his campaign against malcolm (1072), the conqueror jusserat tam abbatibus quam episcopis totius angliae _debita militiae obsequia_ transmitti;[230] and it also describes how he fixed the _quota_ of knights due by an arbitrary act of will.[231] the chronicler, like matthew paris, lays stress upon the facts that (1) the burden was a wholly new one; (2) its incidence was determined by the royal will alone.[232] here, perhaps, we have the clue to the (rare) clerical exemptions from the burden of military tenure, such as the abbeys of gloucester and of battle.[233] the beginnings of sub-infeudation consequent on the conqueror's action are distinctly described in the cases of abingdon and ely, and alluded to in those of peterborough[234] and evesham. at the first of these, athelelm primo quidem stipendariis in hoc utebatur. at his sopitis incursibus ... abbas mansiones possessionum ecclesiae pertinentibus inde delegavit, edicto cuique tenore parendi de suae portionis mansione.[235] at ely, the abbot habuit ex consuetudine, secundum jussum regis, prætaxatum militiae numerum infra aulam ecclesiae, victum cotidie de manu celerarii capientem atque stipendia, quod intollerabiliter et supra modum potuit vexare locum.... ex hoc compulsus quasdam terras sanctæ ædeldredae invasoribus in feudum permisit tenere ... ut in omni expeditione regi observarent, [et] ecclesia perpetim infatigata permaneret.[236] for canterbury we have remarkable evidence, not, it would seem, generally known. in domesday, of course, lanfranc's _milites_ figure prominently; but the absence of a detailed return in 1166 leaves their names and services obscure. now in the christ church domesday there is a list of the archbishop's knights,[237] in which are names corresponding with those of his tenants in 1086. it can, therefore, be little, if at all, later than the conqueror's reign. it is drawn up exactly like a _carta_ of 1166, giving the names of the knights and the service due from each. its editor, instead of printing this important document in full, has, unfortunately, given us six names only, and--mistaking the familiar 'd[imidium]' and 'q[uarterium]' of the list for 'd[enarios]' and 'q[uadrans]'--asserts that the contributions of the knights are 'evidently ... expressed in terms of the shilling and its fractions',[238] thus missing the essential point, namely, that they are expressed in terms of knight service. as lanfranc had done at canterbury, as symeon at ely, as walter at evesham, as athelelm at abingdon, so also did geoffrey at tavistock,[239] and so we cannot doubt, did wulfstan at worcester. the _carta_ of his successor (1166) distinctly implies that before his death he had carved some thirty-seven fees out of the episcopal fief. precisely as at ely, he found this plan less intolerable than the standing entertainment of a roistering troop of knights.[240] the influence of nepotism on sub-infeudation, in the case of ecclesiastical fiefs, is too important to be passed over. on every side we find the efforts of prelates and abbots thus to provide for their relatives opposed and denounced by the bodies over which they ruled. the archbishop of york in his _carta_ explains the excessive number of his knights: 'antecessores enim nostri, non pro necessitate servitii, quod debent, sed quia cognatis et servientibus suis providere volebant, plures quam debebant regi feodaverunt.' the abbot of ely, we are told by his panegyrist, enfeoffed knights by compulsion, 'non ex industria aut favore divitum vel propinquorum affectu'.[241] abbot athelelm of abingdon, says his champion, enfeoffed knights of necessity;[242] but a less friendly chronicler asserts that, like thorold of peterborough, he brought over from normandy his kinsmen, and quartered them on the abbey lands.[243] the tavistock charter of henry i restored to that abbey the lands which guimund, its simoniacal abbot (1088-1102), had bestowed on his brother william. abbot walter of evesham and his successor persisted in enfeoffing knights 'contradicente capitulo'.[244] so, during a vacancy at abbotsbury under henry i, 'cum rogerus episcopus habuit custodiam abbatiæ, duas hidas, ad maritandam quandam neptem suam, dedit n. de m., contradicente conventu ecclesiæ'.[245] henry of winchester has left us a similar record of the action of his predecessors at glastonbury.[246] his narrative is specially valuable for the light it throws on the power of subsequent revocation, perhaps in cases where the corporate body had protested at the time against the grant. of this we have a striking instance in the grants of abbot æthelwig of evesham, almost all of which, we read, were revoked by his successor.[247] parallel rather to the cases of middleton and abbotsbury (_vide cartas_) would be the action of william rufus during the canterbury vacancy.[248] it was to guard against the nepotism of the heads of monastic houses that such a clause as this was occasionally inserted: terras censuales non in feudum donet: nec faciat milites nisi in sacra veste christi.[249] and by their conduct in this matter, abbots, in the norman period, were largely judged. but this has been a slight digression. now that i have shown that in monastic chronicles we have the complement and corroboration of the words of matthew paris, i propose to quote as a climax to my argument the writ printed below. startling as it may read, for its early date, to the holders of the accepted view, the vigour of its language convinced me, when i found it, that in it king william speaks; nor was there anything to be gained by forging a document which admits, by placing on record, the abbey's full liability.[250] w. rex. anglor[um] athew' abbati de euesh[am] sal[u]tem. precipio tibi quod submoneas omnes illos qui sub ballia et i[us]titia s[un]t quatin[us] omnes milites quo mihi debent p[ar]atos h[abe]ant ante me ad octavas pentecostes ap[ud] clarendun[am]. tu etiam illo die ad me venias et illos quinque milites quos de abb[at]ia tua mihi debes tec[um] paratos adducas. teste eudone dapif[er]o ap[ud] wintoniam.[251] being addressed to æthelwig, the writ, of course, must be previous to his death in 1077, but i think that we can date it, perhaps, with precision, and that it belongs to the year 1072. in that year, says the ely chronicler, the conqueror, projecting his invasion to scotland, 'jusserat tam abbatibus quam episcopis totius angliae debita militiae obsequia transmitti', a phrase which applies exactly to the writ before us. in that year, moreover, the movements of william fit in fairly with the date for which the feudal levy was here summoned. we know that he visited normandy in the spring, and invaded scotland in the summer, and he might well summon his baronage to meet him on june 3rd, on his way from normandy to scotland, at so convenient a point as clarendon. the writ, again, being witnessed at winchester, may well have been issued by the king on his way out or back. the direction to the abbot to summon similarly all those beneath his sway who owed military service is probably explained by the special position he occupied as 'chief ruler of several counties at the time'.[252] we find him again, two years later (1074), acting as a military commander. on that occasion the line of the severn was guarded against the rebel advance by bishop wulfstan, 'cum magna militari manu, et ægelwius eoveshamnensis abbas cum suis, ascitis sibi in adjutorium ursone vicecomite wigorniae et waltero de laceio cum copiis suis, et cetera multitudine plebis'.[253] the number of knights which constituted the _servitium debitum_ of evesham was five then as it was afterwards, and this number, as we now know, had been fixed _pro voluntate sua_, in 1070, by the conqueror. we find allusions to two occasions on which the feudal host was summoned, as above, by the conqueror, and by his sons and successors. william rufus exacted the full _servitium debitum_ to repress the revolt at the commencement of his reign.[254] henry i called out the host to meet the invasion of his brother robert.[255] in both these instances reference is made to the questions of 'service due' that would naturally arise,[256] and that would keep the _quotas_ of knight service well to the front. that these _quotas_, however, as i said (_supra_, p. 205), were matter of memory rather than of record, is shown by a pair of early disputes.[257] let us pass, at this point, to the great survey. i urged in the earlier portion of this paper that the argument from the silence of domesday is of no value. even independently of direct allusions, whether to the case of individual holders, or to whole groups such as the _milites_ of lanfranc, it can be shown conclusively that the normal _formulae_ cover unquestionable military tenure, tenure by knight service.[258] an excellent instance is afforded in the case of abingdon abbey (fol. 258_b_-9_b_), because the _formulae_ are quite normal and make 'no record of any new duties or services of any kind'.[259] yet we are able to identify the tenants named in domesday, right and left, with the foreign knights enfeoffed by athelelm to hold by military tenure,[260] owing service for their fees 'to lord as lord'. there are some specially convincing cases, such as those of hubert, who held five hides in a hamlet of cumnor,[261] and whose fee is not only entered in the list of knights:[262] but is recorded to have been given before domesday for military service.[263] another case is that of william _camerarius_, who held lea by the service of one knight;[264] so too with the bishop of worcester's manor of westbury-on-trym, where the _homines_ of domesday appear as _milites_ in a rather earlier survey.[265] again, take the case of peterborough. the northamptonshire possessions of that house are divided by domesday (fol. 221) into two sections, of which the latter is headed 'terra hominum ejusdem ecclesiae', and represents the sub-infeudated portion, just as the preceding section contains the _dominium_ of the fief.[266] here 'terra hominum ejusdem' corresponds with the heading 'terra militum ejus' prefixed to the knights of the archbishop of canterbury (fol. 4). the peterborough _homines_ are frequently spoken of as _milites_ (fol. 221_b_, _passim_), and even where we only find such _formulae_ as 'anschitillus tenet de abbate' we are able to identify the tenant as anschetil de st medard, one of the foreign knights enfeoffed by abbot turold.[267] but it is not only on church fiefs that the domesday under-tenant proves to be a feudal _miles_. at swaffham (cambridgeshire) we read in domesday (fol. 196) 'tenet hugo de walterio [gifard]'.[268] yet in the earlier record of a _placitum_ on the rights of ely, we find this tenant occurring as '_hugo de bolebec_ miles _walteri giffard_', while in 1166 his descendant and namesake is returned as the chief tenant on the giffard fief. the same _placitum_ supplies other illustrations of the fact.[269] the cases taken from the percy fief and from the honour of britanny afford further confirmation, if needed, of the conclusions i draw.[270] it will startle the reader, doubtless, to learn that there is in existence so curious a document as a list of knights' fees drawn up in old english. headed 'these beth thare knystene londes', etc., and terming a knight's fee a 'knystesmetehom', it has been placed by the editors of the new _monasticon_ (ii. 477) among documents of the anglo-saxon era, but belongs, i think (from internal evidence), to about the same period as the _cartae_ (1166). the original is extant in a cartulary now in the british museum. vii. the worcester relief (1095) it was urged in the earlier part of this paper that ranulf flambard had been assigned a quite unwarrantable share in the development of feudalism in england. but so little is actually known of what his measures were that they have hitherto largely remained matter of inference and conjecture. it may be well, therefore, to call attention to a record which shows him actually at work, and which illustrates the character of his exactions by a singularly perfect example. the remarkable document that i am about to discuss is printed in heming's 'cartulary' (i. 79-80).[271] it is therefore most singular that it should be unknown to mr freeman--to whom it would have been invaluable for his account of ranulf's doings--as it occurs in the midst of a group of documents which he had specially studied for his _excursus_ on 'the condition of worcestershire under william'.[272] it is a writ of william rufus, addressed to the tenants of the see of worcester on the death of bishop wulfstan, directing them to pay a 'relief' in consequence of that death, and specifying the quota due from each of the tenants named. the date is fortunately beyond question; for the writ must have been issued very shortly after the death of wulfstan (january 18, 1095), and in any case before the death of bishop robert of hereford (june 26, 1095), who is one of the tenants addressed in it. as the record is not long, and practically, as we have seen, unknown, one need not hesitate to reprint it. w. rex anglorum omnibus francis et anglis qui francas terras tenent de episcopatu de wireceastra, salutem. sciatis quia, mortuo episcopo, honor in manum meam rediit. nunc volo, ut de terris vestris tale relevamen mihi detis, sicut per barones meos disposui. hugo de laci xx. libras. walterus punher xx. libras. gislebertus filius turoldi c. solidos. rodbertus episcopus x. libras. abbas de euesham xxx. libras. walterus de gloecestra xx. libras. roger filius durandi [quietus per breve regis][273] x. libras. winebald de balaon x. libras. drogo filius pontii x. libras. rodbert filius sckilin c. solidos. rodbert stirmannus lx. solidos. willelmus de begebiri xl. solidos. ricardus & franca c. solidos. angotus xx. solidos. beraldus xx. solidos. willelmus de wic xx. solidos. rodbertus filius nigelli c. solidos. alricus archidiaconus c. solidos. ordricus dapifer[274] xl. libras. ordricus blaca[275] c. solidos. colemannus[276] xl. solidos. warinus xxx. solidos. balduuinus xl. solidos. suegen filius azor xx. solidos. aluredus xxx. solidos. siuuardus xl. solidos. saulfus xv. libras. algarus xl. solidos. chippingus xx. solidos. testibus ranulfo capellano & eudone dapifero & ursone de abetot. et qui hoc facere noluerit, urso & bernardus sasiant et terras et pecunias in manu mea. the points on which this document throws fresh light are these. first, and above all, the exaction of reliefs by william rufus and his minister, which formed so bitter a grievance at the time, and to which, consequently, dr stubbs and mr freeman had devoted special attention. on this we have here evidence which is at present unique. it must therefore be studied in some detail. broadly speaking, we now learn how 'the analogy of lay fiefs was applied to the churches with as much minuteness as possible'.[277] one of the respects in which the church fiefs differed from those of the lay barons was, that on the one hand they escaped such claims as reliefs, wardships and 'marriage', while, on the other, their tenants, of course also escaped payment of such 'aids' as those 'ad filium militem faciendum' or 'ad filiam maritandam'. in this there was a fair 'give and take'. but ranulf must have argued that bishops and abbots who took reliefs from their tenants ought, in like manner, to pay reliefs to the crown. this they obviously would not do; and, indeed, even had they been willing, it would have savoured too strongly of simony. and so he adopted, as our record shows, the unwarrantable device of extorting the relief from the under-tenants direct. this was not an enforcement, but a breach, of feudal principles; for an under-tenant was, obviously, only liable to relief on his succession to his own fee.[278] it would be easy to assume that this was the abuse renounced by henry i.[279] but _distinguo_. the above abuse was quite distinct from the practice of annexing to the revenues of the crown, during a vacancy, the temporalities. this, which was undoubtedly renounced by henry, and as undoubtedly resorted to by himself and by his successors afterwards, was, however distasteful to the church,[280] a logical deduction from feudal principles, and did not actually wrong any individual. it could thus be retained when the crown abandoned such unjust exactions as the worcester relief, and it afforded an excellent substitute for wardship, though practically mischievous in the impulse it gave to the prolongation of vacancies. there are many other points suggested by the record i am discussing, but they can only be touched on briefly. it gives us a singularly early use of the remarkable term 'honour', here employed in its simplest and strictly accurate sense; the same term was similarly employed, we have seen, in the case of abingdon (1097), where we also find the fief described as reverting to the crown _vacante sede_.[281] it further alludes to a special assessment by 'barons' deputed for the purpose; it affords a noteworthy formula for distraint in case of non-payment; and it gives us, within barely nine years of the great survey itself, a list of the tenants of the fee, which should prove of peculiar value. if the sums entered be added up, their total will amount to exactly £250. it is tempting to connect this figure with a _servitium debitum_ (_teste episcopo_) of fifty fees at the 'ancient relief' of £5 a fee; but we are only justified in treating it as one of those round sums that we find exacted for relief under henry ii, especially as its items cannot be connected with the actual knights' fees. the appended analysis will show the relation (where ascertainable) of sums paid to hides held. domesday, 1086 the relief, 1095 _h._ _v._ _£_ _s._ roger de laci 23 2 hugh de laci 20 0 walter ponther 10 2 walter punther 20 0 gilbert fitz thorold 7 2 gilbert fitz thorold 5 0 bishop of hereford 5 0 bishop robert [of hereford] 10 0 abbot of evesham 9 0 abbot of evesham 30 0 walter fitz roger 8 0 walter de gloucester 20 0 durand the sheriff 6 0 roger fitz durand 10 0 winebald de balaon 10 0 drogo 10 0 drogo fitz ponz 10 0 schelin 5 0 robert fitz schilin 5 0 robert stirman 3 0 anschitil 2 0 anschitil de colesbourne 10 0 roger de compton 1 0 eudo 1 3 eudo 3 0 william de begeberi 2 0 richard & franca 5 0 ansgot 1 2 angot 1 0 berald 1 0 william de wick 1 0 robert fitz nigel 5 0 ælfric the archdeacon 4 0 ælfric the archdeacon 5 0 orderic} 6 1 orderic the _dapifer_ 40 0 orderic} orderic black 5 0 coleman 2 0 warine 1 10 baldwin 2 0 swegen fitz azor 1 0 alfred 1 10 siward 5 0 siward 2 0 sawulf 15 0 ælfar 2 0 cheping 1 0 ---------------- £250 0 the comparison of these two lists suggests some interesting conclusions. roger de laci, forfeited early in the reign for treason, had been succeeded by his brother hugh. 'punher' supplies us with the transitional form from the 'ponther' of domesday to the 'puher' of the reign of henry i. the identity of the names is thus established. walter fitz roger has already assumed his family surname as walter de gloucester, and his uncle durand has now been succeeded by a son roger, whose existence was unknown to genealogists. the pedigree of the family in the norman period has been well traced by mr a. s. ellis in his paper on the gloucestershire domesday tenants, but he was of opinion that walter de gloucester was the immediate successor in the shrievalty of his uncle, durand, who died without issue. this list, on the contrary, suggests that the immediate successor of durand was his son roger, and that if, like his father, he held the shrievalty, this might account for the interlineation remitting, in his case, the sum due. in this roger we, surely, have that 'roger de gloucester' who was slain in normandy in 1106, and whom, without the evidence afforded by this list, it was not possible to identify.[282] the chief difficulty that this list presents is its omission of the principal tenant of the see, urse d'abetot. one can only assign it to the fact of his official position as sheriff enabling him to secure exemption for himself, and perhaps even for his brother, robert 'dispensator'. their exemption, however accounted for, involved an arbitrary assessment of all the remaining tenants, irrespective of the character or of the extent of their tenure. with these remarks i must leave a document, which is free from anachronism or inconsistency, and as trustworthy, i think, as it is useful. it is my hope that this paper may increase the interest in the forthcoming edition of the _liber rubeus_ under the care of mr hubert hall, and that it may lead to a reconsideration of the problems presented by the feudal system as it meets us in england. nor can i close without reminding the reader that if my researches have compelled me to differ from an authority so supreme as dr stubbs, this in no way impugns the soundness of his judgment on the _data_ hitherto known. the original sources have remained so strangely neglected, that it was not in the power of any writer covering so wide a field to master the facts and figures which i have now endeavoured to set forth, and on which alone it is possible to form a conclusion beyond dispute. [footnote 1: reprinted, with additions, from the _english historical review_.] [footnote 2: 'the belief which has come down to us from selden, and the antiquarian school, a belief which was hitherto universally received, that william i divided the english landed property into military fees, is erroneous, and results from the dating back of an earlier [? later] condition of things.'--gneist, _const. hist._, i. 129.] [footnote 3: 'there can be no doubt that the military tenure, the most prominent feature of historical feudalism, was itself introduced by the same gradual process which we have assumed in the case of the feudal usages in general.'--stubbs, _const. hist._, i. 261.] [footnote 4: stubbs, _c.h._, i. 260-1. so too freeman.] [footnote 5: stubbs, _c.h._, i. 261.] [footnote 6: _ibid._, i. 298.] [footnote 7: _ibid._, i. 298, 301.] [footnote 8: _ibid._, i. 300.] [footnote 9: _select charters_, p. 96.] [footnote 10: _norm. conq._, v. 380.] [footnote 11: _c.h._, i. 581.] [footnote 12: _n.c._, v. 377; cf. _history of william ii_, pp. 335, 337, 'the whole system, a system which logically hangs together in the most perfect way, was the device of the same subtle and malignant brain.'] [footnote 13: _ibid._, p. 374.] [footnote 14: 'si quis baronum meorum, comitum sive aliorum qui de me tenent, mortuus fuerit, heres suus non _redimet_ terram suam sicut faciebat tempore fratris mei, sed justa et legitima relevatione _relevabit_ eam.'] [footnote 15: 'in that charter the military tenures are taken for granted. what is provided against is their being perverted, as they had been in the days of rufus, into engines of oppression.'--_n.c._, v. 373.] [footnote 16: _n.c._, v. 372; _c.h._, i. 261.] [footnote 17: _n.c._, v. 373.] [footnote 18: palgrave, as mr freeman observes, 'strongly and clearly brought out the absence of any distinct mention of military tenures in domesday'. dr stubbs more cautiously wrote: 'the wording of the domesday survey does not imply that in this respect the new military service differed from the old.' (_c.h._, i. 262.) mr freeman confidently asserts: 'nothing is more certain than that from one end of domesday to the other, there is not a trace of military tenures as they were afterwards understood.... we hear of nothing in domesday which can be called knight-service or military tenure in the later sense.' (_n.c._, v. 370, 371.) mr hunt (_norman britain_) follows the same line, and gneist, vouching palgrave, stubbs, and freeman, repeats the argument. (_c.h._, i. 130.)] [footnote 19: 'i spoke to mr falconberge to look whether he could out of domesday book give me anything concerning the sea and the dominion thereof' (1661).] [footnote 20: _n.c._, v. 465.] [footnote 21: _n.c._, v. 4.] [footnote 22: _ibid._, p. 42.] [footnote 23: as so much stress has been laid on the argument from domesday, it is desirable further to demonstrate its worthlessness by referring to the lindsey survey (_vide supra_, p. 149). this survey can only be a few years previous to 1120, and was therefore made at a time when, _ex hypothesi_, feudal tenures had been established for some time. yet here, also, page after page may be searched in vain for any mention of 'knights' or 'fees'.] [footnote 24: gneist, _c.h._, i. 132.] [footnote 25: gneist, _c.h._, i. 118.] [footnote 26: _ibid._, i. 156, 133, 124.] [footnote 27: _ibid._, i. 130.] [footnote 28: _ibid._, i. 156.] [footnote 29: _ibid._, i. 133.] [footnote 30: stubbs, _c.h._, i. 192. i do not quite understand the passage that 'it is probable that the complete following out of the frank idea [exact proportion of service to hides] was reserved for henry ii, unless his military reforms are to be understood, as so many of his other measures are, as the revival and strengthening of anti-feudal and pre-feudal custom'. (_ibid._) the allusion is, clearly, to the assize of arms; but was that assize based on fixed quantities of land? mr little has discussed the five-hide question in the _english historical review_, xvi. pp. 726-9 (_vide supra_, p. 65).] [footnote 31: _ibid._, i. 262.] [footnote 32: _ibid._, i. 262.] [footnote 33: _c.h._, i. 386.] [footnote 34: _ibid._, i. 581.] [footnote 35: _ibid._, i. 264-5.] [footnote 36: _ibid._, i. 432.] [footnote 37: 'the growth of the system of knights' fees out of the older system of hides is traced by stubbs. the old service of a man from each five hides of land would go on, only it would take a new name and a new spirit' (_n.c._, v. 866).] [footnote 38: this argument, of course, applies, _mutatis mutandis_, to a five-hide unit as well.] [footnote 39: _c.h._, i. 265.] [footnote 40: henry of huntingdon (p. 207) speaks of the domesday returns by the same name (_cartae_).] [footnote 41: _domesday book_ occupies a medial position, being arranged under counties, but within each county, under fiefs.] [footnote 42: compare the _carta_ of the bishop of exeter, _præcepistis mihi quod mandarem vobis_ non _quod servitia militum vobis debeam_, etc. dr stubbs writes: 'the king issued a writ to all the tenants-in-chief of the crown, lay and clerical, directing each of them to send in a cartel or report of the number of knights' fees for the service of which he was legally liable.'--_const. hist._, i. 584.] [footnote 43: the bishop of 'coventry' expresses it: 'numerum ... eorum si quos in dominio tenemus, et eorum nomina' (p. 263).] [footnote 44: these references are to the pages of the forthcoming edition of the _liber rubeus_. it will be observed that the second three returns are too closely alike for accidental coincidence; the three shropshire 'barons' who made them must have been in some communication. note here the remarkable use of the term 'compares'.] [footnote 45: audivi praeceptum vestrum in consulatu herefordiae.] [footnote 46: audito praecepto vestro.] [footnote 47: praeceptum vestrum, per totam angliam divulgatum, per vicecomitem vestrum northumberlande ad me, sicut ad alios, pervenit.] [footnote 48: mandavit nobis ... vicecomes stephanus, ex parte vestra quatinus, etc.] [footnote 49: praecepit dignitas vestra omnibus fidelibus vestris, clericis et laicis, qui de vobis tenent in capite in eboracsira ut mandent, etc.... quorum ego unus, etc.] [footnote 50: it should be scarcely necessary to warn the reader against confusing the _dominium_, or non-infeudated portion of the entire fief, with the _dominium_, or demesne portion, of each manor upon that fief.] [footnote 51: an instance in point is afforded by the bardolf barony (_i.e._ fief) _temp._ john: 'heres dodon' bardulf tenet feoda xxv. militum per totum. inde xv. milites sunt feoffati et x. feoda sunt super dominium' (_testa de nevill_, p. 19).] [footnote 52: (1) old feoffment, (2) new feoffment, (3) demesne.] [footnote 53: he and his successors are consequently found paying, time after time, on thirty-five fees.] [footnote 54: william de beauchamp, of worcestershire, is virtually a solitary exception. he inserts, _cavendi causa_, this significant clause: 'de hiis praenominatis non debeo regi nisi servitium vii. militum, nec antecessores mei unquam plus fecerunt, sed quia dominus rex praecepit michi mandare quot milites habeo et eorum nomina, ideo mando quod istos [_i.e._ 16] habeo fefatos de veteri feffamento; sed non debeo regi nisi servitium vii. militum.' but william was a sheriff at the time, and may have had special information which put him on his guard.] [footnote 55: compare the case of the irish bishops six years later (1172), who sent the king 'litteras suas in modum cartae extra sigillum pendentes' (howden). note also that the addition of the seal made the return essentially a _carta_. in normandy, the tenants by knight-service were only required (1172) to seal the return (_breve_) of their _servitium debitum_.] [footnote 56: the point is of some importance in its bearing on the right of the individual to assess himself, which is held in this case to have been exercised. 'the assessment,' writes dr stubbs, 'of the individual depended very much on his own report, which the exchequer had little means of checking.'--_c.h._, i. 585.] [footnote 57: by one of those slips so marvellously rare in his writings dr stubbs writes that 'the bishop of durham's service for his demesne land was that of ten knights, but it was not cut up into fees' (i. 263). what the bishop said was that he owed no service for his demesne, because there were already over seventy fees created on his fief, though he only owed ten.] [footnote 58: this is one of the points on which madox is completely at sea. he quotes the case of the bishop of durham (1168) as an instance of 'doubts about the number of knights' fees' (_baronia anglica_, p. 122); and he writes, of the above uniform formula: 'this uncertainty about the number of the fees frequently happened in the case of ecclesiastical persons, bishops, and abbots.'--_exchequer_, i. 647.] [footnote 59: _c.h._, i. 264.] [footnote 60: see my papers on 'the house of lords; the transition from tenure to writ' (_antiquary_, october and december 1884, april 1885).] [footnote 61: see, for instance, the language used in the _carta_ of ralf de worcester (p. 441): 'teneo de vobis in capite de veteri fefamento feodum i. militis, unde debeo vobis facere servitium i. militis. et de eodem feodo jordanus hairum debet mihi facere iiii.^{am.} partem servitii,' etc. in normandy (1172), the phrase ran: 'quot milites unusquisque baronum deberet ad servicium regis, et quot haberet ad suum proprium servicium'.] [footnote 62: sometimes exeter pays on 15-1/2 (14, 33, hen. ii), but 17-1/2 (2, 5, 7, 18 hen. ii) is the normal amount. the explanation of this odd number is found in the _testa de nevill_ (p. 226) where ('veredictum militum de rapo de arundel') we read: 'episcopus exoniensis tenet de domino rege de capellaria de boseham vii. feoda militum et dimidium.' the bosham estate (as belonging to osbern) had formed part of the episcopal fief in domesday, but (the bishops having founded a church there) we find it assessed and paying separately as 7-1/2 fees.] [footnote 63: i have found a case bearing upon this point and reported at great length (thorpe's _registrum roffense_, pp. 70 _et seq._). it arose from an attempt of the archbishop of canterbury, in 1253, to distrain the bishop of rochester for the 'auxilium ad filium regis primogenitum militem faciendum'. the bishop 'posuit se super recordum rotulorum de scaccario, per quos rotulos poterit et illa quam rex contra episcopum et etiam illa quam archiepiscopus contra episcopum movit questio diffiniri. didicerat enim episcopus per unum fidelem amicum quem in scaccario tunc habebat quod nunquam tempore alicujus regis pro aliquo feodo episcopatus aliquod fuit regi factum servicium vel datum scutagium.... unde consulebat quod audaciter poneret se episcopus super recordum rotulorum de scaccario, nichil enim tenet episcopus per baroniam de rege, sed per puram elemosinam, quod non est dicendum de aliquo episcopatu anglie, nec de archiepiscopatu, nisi dumtaxat de karleolen. cumque cum audacia institisset episcopus, quod decideretur per rotulos de scaccario quibus creditur in omnibus illis sicut sancto evangelio', etc., etc. the barons of the exchequer examined the rolls, 'a tempore primi conquestus' (?) and reported: 'nusquam invenerunt episcopum roffensem solvisse aut dedisse aliquod servicium regibus temporale'. but the dispute was not finally decided till 1259. the clue to the matter is found in the canterbury 'domesday monachorum' (8th report hist. mss. i. 316), where a list of the archbishop's knights, perhaps coeval with domesday (_vide infra_, p. 236), is headed by 'episcopus roffensis' with a _servitium_ of ten knights to the primate.] [footnote 64: cerne had to provide 'ten' knights _ad wardam_ at corfe castle, or 'two' _ad exercitum_ (_vide_ cartam).] [footnote 65: this indeed is proved by an extract quoted by madox (_exchequer_) from the roll of 22 hen. ii (rot. 10_a_).] [footnote 66: the effect of all the changes of assessment we have traced under henry ii would only be the reduction of this total to 774.] [footnote 67: roll of 11 hen. ii. (this was, of course, the son of henry i by edith.)] [footnote 68 the custos of his fief paid scutage for eighty knights in 1159, but he speaks 'de meis lx. militibus' in his _carta_.] [footnote 69: the undoubted assessment in 1162. afterwards it is found paying on sixty and a fraction.] [footnote 70: 'lx. milites ... habere solebat pater meus' (_carta_).] [footnote 71: this figure is given in the _liber niger_, but is really derived from his recorded payments.] [footnote 72: tot habuit milites feodatos ... scilicet lx. de antiquo feodo (_carta_).] [footnote 73: in yorkshire alone. in all england, many more.] [footnote 74: this figure is taken from the payments in 1161 and 1172.] [footnote 75: roll of 11 hen. ii.] [footnote 76: _ibid._ it is impossible, within the compass of a note, to discuss the two consecutive and most important entries on the roll (pp. 37-8), which represent a payment by the earl of chester on 20 fees, 'pro feodo turoldi vicecomitis', and by richard de camville on 40 fees, 'pro feodo willelmi de romara'. i called attention to the former entry in the _academy_ (april 21, 1888), but did not at that time explain it. mr r. e. g. kirk undertook to explain 'its real meaning' (_genealogist_, v. 141), which, however, he completely mistook (_ibid._, july 1891). the two entries, i think, should be read together as relating to the estates of the famous lucy, the common ancestress of the earl and of william. if so, they may refer to a fief with an original _servitium_ of 60 knights, of which one-third was in the hands of the earl of chester, and two-thirds in that of his cousin. independently of the light they throw on the obscure history of this divided and contested fief, they are of value for the unique reference (in this roll) to 'noviter feffati' (_vide infra_). the total (including these) for the two fiefs is 66-31/80. there is no return for the earl's lindsey fief in 1166, but william de roumare's return acknowledges 57 fees. if to these we add the 9-1/2 fees which, it says, had formerly existed in addition, we obtain 66-1/2. this suggests that the one fief of 1166 represents the two of 1165. it should be added that the hampshire fief of william de roumare is paid for as 20 fees in 1159 and 1162, and was similarly accounted for by richard de camville in both these years.] [footnote 77: roll of 11 hen. ii.] [footnote 78: he omitted to send in a _carta_ in 1166; but, both before and after, he paid on 30 fees.] [footnote 79: he twice pays on 30 fees before 1166, in which year his fief was held by gerbert de percy. subsequently, as the honour of poerstoke (poorstock), it always pays on 30.] [footnote 80: this is a very difficult case. walter's _carta_ might easily be read as implying a _servitium debitum_ of 20 fees, and his fief paid on 29 _de veteri_ and 1-1/2 _de novo_. but careful scrutiny reveals that the words 'hos iiij^{or.} milites qui has predictas terras tenent' are preceded by _six_ names. if they refer, either to the four names immediately preceding, or (which is more probable) to the four knights who held his lands but rendered him no service, the total of his _servitium debitum_ would, in either case, be 30.] [footnote 81: roll of 11 hen. ii.] [footnote 82: he paid on 25 fees in 1162.] [footnote 83: 'feodum xx. militum de rege de veteri feffamento quod pater suus tenuit' (_carta_).] [footnote 84: he paid on 20 fees in 1161, but the subsequent assessment of the fief varies considerably.] [footnote 85: he paid on 20 fees in 1162 and 1165, and returned his fees in 1166 as 20 _de veteri_ and 3/4 _de novo_.] [footnote 86: the scutages record him as paying always on 15 knights _quos recognoscit_--the formula for _servitium debitum_.] [footnote 87: his payment on 15 fees in 1161 probably represents his _servitium debitum_. his total enfeoffments were 23.] [footnote 88: hugh and stephen de scalers are the names given in the _cartae_, but henry and william de scalers held the fiefs at the time.] [footnote 89: he paid 10 marcs in 1168, though his _carta_ only records 9-5/6 fees.] [footnote 90: a difficult fief to deal with, but almost certainly the half of an original reimes fief owing 20 knights (_vide supra_).] [footnote 91: apparently 15 at first, and 10 later.] [footnote 92: _i.e._ the peverel honour of bourne, cambridgeshire (held in domesday by picot, the sheriff), not bourne, lincolnshire, held by the wakes.] [footnote 93: he only pays on 5 fees in 1162, and the excess _de novo_ in his _carta_ is accounted for, he says, by the necessities of his position.] [footnote 94: this is not proved for the latter fief.] [footnote 95: compare with these allusions to a traditional _servitium debitum_ the significant words of wace (_roman de rou_): 'ne ke jamez d'ore en avant, ço lor a miz en covenant, n'ierent de servise requis, forz tel ke solt estre al paiz, e tel come lor ancessor soleient fere a lor seignor,'- which are the reply to the fears of the barons (_norm. conq._, iii. 298): 'li servise ki est doblez creiment k'il seit en feu tornez, et en costume seit tenu et par costume seit rendu (lines 11272 _et seq._).'] [footnote 96: it can be shown that the 'service' in normandy was based on precisely the same five-knight unit.] [footnote 97: 'the estates of the twenty greatest feodaries in domesday book contain, according to the ordinary computation, 793, 439, 442, 298, 280, 222, 171, 164, 132, 130, 123, 119, 118, 107, 81, 47, 46 and 33 knights' fees.'--gneist (_const. hist._, i. 334).] [footnote 98: _c.h._, i. 289.] [footnote 99: for instance, the abbot of st edmund's 'quinquaginta milites' are spoken of as 'milites de quatuor constabiliis' with 'decem miles de quinta constabilia' (_memorials of st edmunds_, ed. arnold, i. 269, 271).] [footnote 100: robert fitz stephen lands with 30 knights, maurice de prendergast with 10, maurice fitz gerald with 10, strongbow with 200, raymond the fat with 10, henry himself with either 400 or 500, etc.] [footnote 101: see my _geoffrey de mandeville_, p. 103.] [footnote 102: lines 11253 _et seq._ the figures, however, are far too large, and savour of poetic licence.] [footnote 103: _n.c._, v. 368.] [footnote 104: meath with a _servitium debitum_ of 100, limerick of 60, cork with two _servitia_ of 30 each.] [footnote 105: _n.c._, v. 378.] [footnote 106: gneist, _c.h._, i. 129, 156.] [footnote 107: freeman, _n.c._, v. 372, 371.] [footnote 108: stubbs, _c.h._, i. 261.] [footnote 109: mr hall informs me that is the name of the official referred to.] [footnote 110: 'prout rumor ex rotulis ad me devenit.'] [footnote 111: see p. 221 _infra_.] [footnote 112: 'et nota quod quandocumque assidentur scutagia, licet eodem anno solvantur, annotantur tamen in annali anni sequentis' (_red book_, ed. hall, p. 8).] [footnote 113: it is just possible that the source of his error is to be found in a solitary entry on the roll of 1163: 'advocatus de betuna reddit compotum de vi. li. xiii. s. iiii. d. de auxilio exercitus de tolusa' (p. 9)--which refers to the levy of 1161.] [footnote 114: 'temporibus enim regis henrici primi ... nec inspexi vel audivi fuisse scutagia assisa' (p. 5).] [footnote 115: _vide supra_, p. 118 note.] [footnote 116: 'illud commune verbum in ore singulorum tunc temporis divulgatum.'] [footnote 117: see _red book of the exchequer_, pp. 5, 8.] [footnote 118: see list of church fiefs.] [footnote 119: his _carta_ is corrupt.] [footnote 120: 'abbas gloucestrie tenet omnes terras in libera elemosina.'--_testa_, p. 77.] [footnote 121: 'a new impost specially levied (1156) upon some of the ecclesiastical estates, under the name of _scutage_' (norgate's _angevin kings_, i. 433). 'the famous scutage, the acceptance of a money composition for military service, alike for the old english service of the fyrd' [this, of course, is a misconception], 'and for the newer military tenures, dates from this (1159) time' (freeman's _norman conquest_, v. 674). 'the term _scutage_ now (1156) first employed.... as early as his second year (1156) we find him collecting a scutage, a new form of taxation' (stubbs' _const. hist._, i. 454, 458, 581, 590).] [footnote 122: the phrase 'debet scutagium quando currit' is of course, a normal one.] [footnote 123: 'teste gaufrido cancellario et willelmo de albineio pincerna et gaufrido de clintona et pagano fil johannis. apud sanctum petrum desuper divam.'] [footnote 124: cott. ms. julius a., i. 6, fo. 74_a_.] [footnote 125: these charters have an independent value for the light they throw, in conjunction with the roll, on the movements of the king. the roll itself alludes to the occasion on which the king crossed from eling--'ex q[uo] rex mare transivit de eilling[es]'--and as it is assigned to michaelmas, 1130, the entry cannot refer to his departure at that very date, especially as these charters are not paid for among the _nova_ proceedings of the year. they must therefore have been granted at his previous departure (august 1127), when he must have crossed from eling and have gone to s. pierre sur dive (and argentan) in normandy. pleas were heard before him at eling on this occasion (_rot. pip._, pp. 17, 38), and are referred to in a charter of stephen to shaftesbury abbey.] [footnote 126: printed in _athenæum_, december 2, 1893.] [footnote 127: cf. _geoffrey de mandeville_, p. 105.] [footnote 128: 'abbas locum sibi commissum munita manu militum secure protegebat; et primo quidem stipendiariis in hoc utebatur' (_cart. abingdon_, ii. 3). 'unde abbas tristis recedens conduxit milites', etc. (_historia eliensis_, p. 275). so too bishop wulfstan is found 'pompam militum secum ducens qui stipendiis annuis', etc. (w. malmesb.)] [footnote 129: it is singular that in his admirable work, _the english village community_, pp. 38-9, mr seebohm connects 'the normal acreage of the hide of 120 a., and of the virgate of 30 a., with the scutage of 40s per knight's fee', and argues that 'in choosing the acreage of the standard hide and virgate, a number of acres was probably assumed corresponding with the monetary system, so that the number of pence in the _scutum_ should correspond with the number of acres assessed to its payment'. it need hardly be observed that the institution of scutage was, on the contrary, long posterior to that of a hide of 120 acres.] [footnote 130: walton was at the mouth of the orwell and the stour, and was thus an exposed port towards flanders as dover was towards france. it is noteworthy that when the earl of leicester did invade england from flanders a few years later, it was at 'walton' that he landed.] [footnote 131: compare will. pict.: 'custodes in castellis strenuos viros collocavit ex gallis traductos, quorum fidei pariter ac virtuti credebat, cum multitudine peditum et equitum, ipsis opulenta beneficia distribuit,' etc.] [footnote 132: should not this rather be 'from ecclesiastical tenants-in-chief holding by military service'? for it was neither collected from knights' fees, nor with reference to their existing number.] [footnote 133: preface to _gesta henrici regis_, ii. xciv. so too _const. hist._, i. 454: 'the practice was, as we learn from john of salisbury, opposed by archbishop theobald'; and (i. 577) 'archbishop theobald had denounced the scutage of 1156'; and (_early plant._, p. 54) 'he made the bishops, notwithstanding strong objections from archbishop theobald, pay scutage'.] [footnote 134: preface to _gesta henrici regis_, ii. xcviii.] [footnote 135: 'honori et utilitati ecclesiae tota mentis intentione studiosius invigilabit. verum interim', etc. john of salisbury (ep. cxxviii). note that 'ecclesiae' is the church at large, not the see of canterbury.] [footnote 136: _angevin kings_, i. 443.] [footnote 137: _red book_, p. 6.] [footnote 138: preface to _gesta henrici regis_, ii. xcv.] [footnote 139: _const. hist._, i. 454.] [footnote 140: _ibid._, i. 164.] [footnote 141: _angevin kings_, i. 458. both writers quote the passage from john of salisbury (ep. xcxviii), on which this explanation is based.] [footnote 142: his _servitium debitum_ was one knight.] [footnote 143: the force for the welsh campaign was raised, as we learn from robert de monte (_alias_ de torigni), 'by demanding that every three knights should, instead of serving in person, equip one of their number', as dr stubbs rightly puts it (_const. hist._, i. 589), and not, as he elsewhere writes (preface to _gesta henrici regis_, ii. xciv.), by requiring every two to add to themselves a third, 'by which means, if we are to understand it literally, 90,000 knights would appear from 60,000 knights' fees'. the real number would probably be under 2,000.] [footnote 144: 'this impost, which afterwards came to be known in english history as the "great scutage"' (_angevin kings_, i. 459).] [footnote 145: _liber rubeus_, p. 6.] [footnote 146: _angevin kings_, i. 461.] [footnote 147: the abbots of shrewsbury, thorney, and croyland; the abbesses of barking, winchester, and romsey. the total of their _dona_ amounted to £51 13s 4d.] [footnote 148: not, however, by dr stubbs (preface to _gesta henrici regis_, ii. xciv-xcvi).] [footnote 149: dr stubbs, independently, reckons the total payments of the church at £3,700 (_gesta henrici regis_), which does not differ greatly from the above calculation (£3,167 6s 8d). ] [footnote 150: 'ille quidem gladius quem in sancte matris ecclesiae viscera vestra paulo ante manus immerserat cum ad trajiciendum in tolosam exercitum tot ipsam marcarum millibus aporiastis.' gilbert foliot (ep. cxciv).] [footnote 151: 'nec permisit ut ecclesiae saltem proceribus coaequarentur in hac contributione vel magis exactione tam indebita quam injusta.' john of salisbury (ep. cxlv). swereford, though confused in his account of the tax, points out that levy was made 'non solum super praelatos, verum _tam super ipsos_, quam super milites suos' (_l.r._, p. 6).] [footnote 152: gneist, for instance, writes: 'the first general imposition took place in 5 henry ii for the campaign against toulouse, with two marcs per fee from all crown vassals' (_c.h._, i. 212).] [footnote 153: entered as 'dona militum comitatus', not to be confused with the 'dona comitatus', a special levy of the following year (6 hen. ii), raised, it will be found, from the western counties, from stafford in the north to devonshire in the south.] [footnote 154: 'rex ... nolens vexare agrarios milites ... sumptis lx. solidis andegavensium in normannia de feudo uniuscujusque loricae et de reliquis omnibus tam in normannia quam in anglia, sive etiam aliis terris suis, secundum hoc quod ei visum fuit, capitales barones suos cum paucis secum duxit, solidarios vero milites innumeros' (p. 202, ed. howlett).] [footnote 155: this was certainly the case with the fiefs of simon de beauchamp and the earl ferrers, two of the most considerable.] [footnote 156: _angevin kings_, i. 462.] [footnote 157: 'a second scutage was raised in the seventh year, probably for payment of debts incurred for the same war, the assessment being in this, as in the former case, two marcs to the knight's fee.' (preface to _gesta henrici regis_, p. xcv.)] [footnote 158: if it was raised for this purpose, it must have been levied either (1) from _all_ tenants-in-chief, which it certainly was not; or (2) from the _same_ contributors as in 1159, which a comparison of the two rolls will at once show it was not; or (3) from a _new_ set of contributors, which was also not the case, for the prelates, the ferrers fief, etc., are found contributing as before.] [footnote 159: _const. hist._, i. 582.] [footnote 160: instead of a fief paying _en bloc_, it seems to have paid through the sheriffs of the counties in which it was situate.] [footnote 161: "episcopus de heref' reddit compotum de lxxvi. libris et v. solidis de promiss[ione] c. servientium de wal'" (p. 84).] [footnote 162: 'abbas de abendona reddit compotum de lxxvi. libris et v. solidis de promise sione servientium in waliam' (rot. 11 hen. ii, p. 74).] [footnote 163: 'abbas de sancto albano reddit compotum de lxxvi. libris et v. solidis de exercitu' (_ibid._, p. 19).] [footnote 164: 'episcopus lond' reddit compotum de xiii. libris et vi. sol. et viii. den. de servicio militum.... idem reddit compotum de cxiiii. marcis et v. sol. de promissione servientium walie' (_ibid._, p. 19).] [footnote 165: 'willelmus de siffrewast reddit compotum de lxxvi. sol. et iii. den.... hugo de bochelanda reddit compotum de. v. servientibus' (_ibid._, p. 75). compare the love of variety in domesday, _supra_, pp. 41, 42, 77.] [footnote 166: 'scutagium de ii. exercitibus' in next roll (rot. 12 hen. ii).] [footnote 167: _itinerary of henry ii_, p. 79 _et seq._ compare also the payment from the giffard fief 'de secundo exercitu' (p. 25).] [footnote 168: _angevin kings_, ii. 180, note.] [footnote 169: _liber rubeus_, p. 193.] [footnote 170: this was the point on which abbot sampson insisted, against his knights, at st edmund's. in the case of canterbury, the inquest of 1163 would have ascertained the actual number of the archbishop's knights and their fees.] [footnote 171: ignorasse quidem haec [debita] servitia militaria regis ... successores subsequentium argumento non immerito potuit dubitare: quia cum rex henricus ... traderet, a quolibet sui regni milite marcam unam ... exegit, publico praecipiens edicto quod quilibet praelatus et baro quot milites de eo tenerent in capite publicis suis instrumentis significarent' (_liber rubeus_, p. 4).] [footnote 172: 'teneo de vobis ... feodum i. militis, unde debeo vobis facere servitium i. militis' (_carta_).] [footnote 173: 'de hoc predicto feodo debet regi v. milites' (_carta_).] [footnote 174: it must always be remembered that, as explained above, in cases where the requisite number of knights had not been enfeoffed by 1166, the balance _de dominio_ was added to those actually created, as _de veteri_ together.] [footnote 175: thus daniel de crevec[oe]ur pays on one fee (_de veteri_) more than his _carta_ records, william de tracy on half a fee (_de veteri_), adam de port on one, the earl of gloucester on two, the earl of warwick on two and a half, maurice de craon on one, the abbot of hulme on a quarter of a fee, william de albini (pincerna) on one, henry de lacy on one and a half, william de vescy on one, bertram de bulemer on a half, and william paynell on one (these figures are all subject to correction). the case of william de vescy is specially conspicuous, because the nineteen fees enumerated are distinctly spoken of as twenty.] [footnote 176: this brings it into relation with the _constabularia_ of which it thus formed just a third.] [footnote 177: the same formula is found in domesday applied to hidation in east anglia, where the assessment of manors is expressed not in terms of the hide, but in fractions of the pound. (_vide supra_, p. 89.)] [footnote 178: _vide supra_, p. 205.] [footnote 179: 'willelmus malet tenet cari de domino rege et alias terras suas per servicium viginti militum' (p. 163).] [footnote 180: ducange (1887), ii. 581.] [footnote 181: _ibid._, viii. 255. ducange indeed asserts that five knights was the qualification in normandy for barony, but the statement is based on a mistaken rendering and is elsewhere disproved.] [footnote 182: _liber rubeus_, p. 4.] [footnote 183: 'illud commune verbum in ore singulorum, tunc temporis divulgatum, fatuum reputans et mirabile, quod in regni conquisitione dux normannorum, rex willelmus, servitia xxxii. militum infeodavit' (_ibid._).] [footnote 184: swereford, it is clear, failed to grasp the great change of assessment in 1166.] [footnote 185: _const. hist._, i. 432.] [footnote 186; _ibid._, i. 157. dr stubbs rightly rejects mr pearson's conjecture that the number of 32,000 applied to the hides, and that 'the number of knights' fees, calculated at five hides each, would be 6,400'.] [footnote 187: 'his temporibus militiam anglici regni rex willelmus conscribi fecit et lx. millia militum invenit, quos omnes, dum necesse esset, paratos esse praecepit.'] [footnote 188: 'a whole army was by this means encamped upon the soil, and the king's summons could at any moment gather 60,000 knights to the royal standard.'] [footnote 189: _const. hist._, i. 264. compare pp. 16, 17.] [footnote 190: freeman (_norm. conq._, iv. 694).] [footnote 191: _ibid._, iv. 562.] [footnote 192: _ibid._, iii. 387. in _social england_ (i. 373) we read that 'william is believed to have landed in england with at least 60,000 men, 50,000 horse and 10,000 foot'. but on turning to p. 306 of that great effort of co-operative genius, we learn that only 'some of william's ships carried horses to the number of from three to eight--as well as men'. so the number of his ships (396, according to wace) is as great a difficulty as the proportions of noah's ark.] [footnote 193: _william rufus_, i. 17.] [footnote 194: _ibid._, i. 313.] [footnote 195: 'annui fiscales redditus ... ad sexaginta millia marcarum summam implebant.'] [footnote 196: 'sexaginta millia peditum' (p. 4).] [footnote 197: 'sexaginta millia silinas de frumento, sexaginta millia de hordeo, sexaginta millia de vino' (_richard of devizes_, ed. howlett, p. 396).] [footnote 198: 'sexaginta accipitur indefinite de magno numero. sexcenti saepe usurpatur pro numero ingenti et indefinito' (forcellini, _totius latinitatis lexicon_).] [footnote 199: 'bis sex sibi millia centum' (_carmen de bello hastingensi_).] [footnote 200: it must be clearly understood that these figures cannot be absolutely accurate. some honours are omitted, it seems, in the returns from which we have to work, and for these allowance must be made.] [footnote 201: '[1235] sicut stephanus segrave ... asserebat et affirmabat vetus scutagium ad xxxii. millia scuta assumabatur et irrotulabatur; et ad tantundem plene et plane potuit novum scutagium de novis terris assumari' (_ann. monast._, i. 364).] [footnote 202: 'nine thousand for all england would be a large estimate at any time of the twelfth century' (_early and middle ages_, i. 375).] [footnote 203: the italics represent anglo-saxon characters.] [footnote 204: _lib. rub._, pp. 188, 214, 237, 238, 292.] [footnote 205: _ibid._, pp. 211, 214.] [footnote 206: _ibid._, pp. 214, 292.] [footnote 207: _lib. rub_., p. 292.] [footnote 208: _ibid._, pp. 200, 210.] [footnote 209: _ibid._, p. 210.] [footnote 210: _ibid._, pp. 390, 444.] [footnote 211: _ibid._, p. 429.] [footnote 212: _ibid._, pp. 431-2.] [footnote 213: m. paris, _additamenta_, p. 436. this list, which seems scarcely known, is very valuable for its early date, being, i think, about contemporaneous with the _cartae_ of 1166.] [footnote 214: _l.r._, pp. 229, 245, 356.] [footnote 215: 'et predictus willelmus dedit predictas tres carucatas terre osberto vicecomiti pro servicio unius militis.'] [footnote 216: together with castle-guard of thirty knights at newcastle.] [footnote 217: 'post tempus domini regis willelmi ruffi, qui eos feoffavit.'] [footnote 218: _testa_, p. 69.] [footnote 219: 'post conquestum angliae' (_liber rubeus_, p. 332).] [footnote 220: _const. hist._, i. 263.] [footnote 221: 'et deinceps tres (milites) mihi habeat _sicut antecessores sui faciebant_ in septentrionali parte fluminis tamesie' (1091-1100).--_ramsey cartulary_, i. 234.] [footnote 222: compare the ely entry (_supra_ p. 213) for 'superplus'.] [footnote 223: could this have been richard fitz nigel himself?] [footnote 224: _ramsey cartulary_, i. 255. compare with this expression 'in rotulo scripti', the conqueror's command (_infra_), that the number of knights 'in annalibus annotarentur'.] [footnote 225: select pleas in manorial courts, p. 50.] [footnote 226: it enables us to correct such an entry in the black book as 'radulfus maindeherst', by identifying him with ralph mowyn, the tenant at hurst. it supplies an entry as to henry de 'wichetone' (whiston) which is omitted in _l.r._, and entered in _l.n._, with wrong name and wrong holding; and, better still, it shows that silvester of holwell held only 2 hides, not 12, as given in error, both in _l.n._, and _l.r._ the existence of this error in both bears, of course, on their relation (cf. p. 287, _supra_).] [footnote 227: _const. hist._, i. 357. gneist writes that matthew's statement 'is for good reasons called in question by stubbs' (_c.h._, i. 255, note).] [footnote 228: _cartulary of abingdon_, ii. 3.] [footnote 229: _historia eliensis_ (ed. 1848), p. 276.] [footnote 230: _ibid._, p. 274.] [footnote 231: 'praecepit illi (_i.e._ abbati) ex nutu regis custodiam xl. militum habere in insulam.' _ibid._, p. 275. this is the very _servitium debitum_ that appears under henry ii.] [footnote 232: compare for the initiative of the crown, the domesday phrase, 'miles jussu regis', and the statement that lanfranc replaced the drengs of his see by knights at the royal command ('rex praecepit.')] [footnote 233: madox writes (_baronia anglica_, p. 114) bitterly and unjustly: 'in process of time, several of the religious found out another piece of art. they insisted that they held all their land and tenements in frankalmoigne, and not by knight-service.' in the cases he quotes, 'this allegation' was perfectly correct, and was recognized as such by the judges.] [footnote 234: turoldus vero sexaginta et duo hidas terrae de terra ecclesiae burgi dedit stipendiariis militibus' (_john of peterborough_, ed. giles).] [footnote 235: _cart. abingdon_, ii. 3.] [footnote 236: _liber eliensis_, p. 275.] [footnote 237: 'de militibus archiepiscopis.' 8th report on historical mss., i. 316.] [footnote 238: _ibid._] [footnote 239: a charter of henry i (_mon. ang._, vi. 496) addressed 'willelmo episcopo exoniensi et ricardo filio baldwini vicecomiti' (see p. 256) contains the clause: 'prohibeo ne aliquis præter monachos ipsas terras amplius teneat vel alias aliquas quæ de dominio ecclesie fuerunt, exceptis illis quas gaufridus abbas dedit _ad servicium militare_.' abbot geoffrey is said to have died in 1088. a curious difficulty has been raised about the words in italics. it is argued in alford's _abbots of tavistock_ (p. 68) that as, according to mr freeman, military tenures did not exist in abbot geoffrey's day, there was perhaps a second abbot of that name to whom that charter refers. but he is only introduced by mr alford under protest; and we see now that there is no need for him. henry's charter being witnessed by ralph, archbishop of canterbury, william, the king's son, and the count of meulan, at odiham, belongs, i may observe to 1114-16.] [footnote 240: 'quis stipendii annuis quotidianisque cibis immane quantum populabantur' (will. malmesb., _gesta pontificum_).] [footnote 241: _liber eliensis_, p. 275.] [footnote 242: _cart. abingdon_, ii. 3.] [footnote 243: _ibid._, p. 2331: 'misit ... in normanniam pro cognatis suis, quibus multas possessiones ecclesiae dedit et feoffavit, ita ut in anno lxx. de possessionibus ecclesiae eis conferret.'] [footnote 244: cott. ms. vesp. b. xxiv. f. 8, 'randulfus frater abbatis walterii habet in withelega iii. hidas de dominio, etc., etc. ... dono walterii abbatis contradicente capitulo'. this was the 'rannulfum [_sic_] fratrem ejusdem walteri abbatis ... qui cum fratre suo tenebat illud placitum' (_temp._ will. i), whom the bishop of worcester's knights challenged to trial by battle (heming's _chart. wig._, ed. hearne, p. 82). his holding was represented in 1166 by the fees of randulf de kinwarton and randulf de coughton. other cases of contested enfeoffment by abbots walter and robert are those of hugh travers and hugh de bretfertun.] [footnote 245: see the _carta_ of 1166, which explains how this holding became half a fee.] [footnote 246: 'miles quidam, odo nomine, dono praedecessoris mei sifridi abbatis, ob graciam cusjusdam consobrinae suae, quam idem odo conjugem duxerat ... tria maneria de dominio sibi astrinxerat ... invitis fratribus. alius quidam ... dono abbatis ... tamen absque fratrum consensu manerium possidebat' (_domerham_, p. 306).] [footnote 247: 'de his terris quas, ut diximus, suo tempore acquisivit, quibusdam bonis hominibus pro magna necessitate et honore ecclesiae dedit, et inde deo et sibi fideliter quamdiu vixit serviebant' (_chronicon evesh._, p. 96). his successor, walter (1077-86), incited by his own young relatives, 'noluit homagium a pluribus bonis hominibus quos praedecessor suus habuerat suscipere eo quod terras omnium, si posset, decrevit auferre' (_ibid._, p. 98). in the result, 'dicitur quod fere omnes milites hujus abbatiae haereditavit' (_ibid._, p. 91).] [footnote 248: he begged anselm that 'terras ecclesiae quas ipse rex, defuncto lanfranco, suis dederat pro statuto servicio, illis ipsis haereditario jure tenendas, causa sui amoris, condonaret' (_eadmer_).] [footnote 249: foundation charter of alcester priory.] [footnote 250: three other documents are found on the same folio. of these the first is addressed to lanfranc, odo of bayeux, bishop wulfstan, and urse d'abetot, and witnessed by bishop geoffrey (of coutances) and (like our writ) by eudo dapifer, being also witnessed, like it, at winchester. it is noteworthy that it grants æthelwig the hundred of fishborough 'in potestate et _justitia_ sua'.] [footnote 251: cott. ms. vesp. b. xxvi. f. 15[18].] [footnote 252: 'rex commisit ei curam istarum partium terrae ... ita ut omnium hujus patriae consilia atque judicia fere in eo penderent' (_hist. evesham_).] [footnote 253: florence of worcester.] [footnote 254: 'cernens itaque rex grande sibi periculum imminere, debitum servitium ... exigit' (_liber eliensis_, p. 276).] [footnote 255: 'rex henricus contra fratrem suum robertum, normanniae comitem, super se in anglia cum exercitu venientem, totius regni sui expeditionem dirigit' (_cart. abingdon_, ii. 121).] [footnote 256: in the former case, between the crown and its tenant; in the latter, between the tenant and his under-tenant.] [footnote 257: 'idem [godcelinus de riveria] dicebat se non debere facere servitium, nisi duorum militum, pro feudo quem tenebat de ecclesia, et abbas et sui dicebant eum debere servitium trium militum' (_cart. abingdon_, ii. 129). 'cum a quodam duos milites ad servicium regis exigerem (tantum enim inde deberi ab olim a commilitonibus didiceram) ipse toto conatu obstitit, unius dumtaxat se militis servicio obnoxium obtestans.'--henry, abbot of glastonbury (_domerham_, p. 318).] [footnote 258: thus undermining mr freeman's argument: 'we hear of nothing in domesday which can be called knight-service or military tenure in the later sense; the old obligations would remain; the primeval duty of military service, due, not to a lord as lord, but to the state and to the king as its head, went on,' etc. (_norm. conq._, v. 371).] [footnote 259: _norm. conq._, v. 865.] [footnote 260: _cartulary of abingdon_, ii. 3-7.] [footnote 261: 'in winteham tenet hubertus de abbate v. hidas de terra villanorum' (i. 58_b_).] [footnote 262: 'hubertus i. militem pro v. hidis in witham' (p. 4).] [footnote 263: 'in wichtham de terra villanorum curiae cumenore obsequi solitorum, illo ab abbate cuidam militi nomine huberto v. hidarum portio distributa est' (p. 7).] [footnote 264: see _cart. ab._, ii. 138. cf. _domesday_, i. 58_b_: 'willelmus tenet de abbate leie.'] [footnote 265: see p. 231.] [footnote 266: this distinction, it will be found, is preserved in henry's charter of liberties (1101): 'nec ... aliquid accipiam [1] de dominico ecclesiae vel [2] de hominibus ejus'.] [footnote 267: see my paper on 'the knights of peterborough', _supra_, p. 131.] [footnote 268: in the transcript of the original return it is: 'habet hugo de bolebech ... de waltero giffard'.] [footnote 269: _inquisitio eliensis_ (_o._ 2. 1), f. 210, _et seq._ (see below, page 349).] [footnote 270: see p. 166.] [footnote 271: hemingi _chartularium_ (ed. hearne), 1723.] [footnote 272: _norman conquest_, vol. v.] [footnote 273: interlineation.] [footnote 274: _dapifer_ to bishop wulfstan.] [footnote 275: he witnessed, as 'ordric niger', the _conventio_ between bishop wulfstan and abbot walter of evesham, and was perhaps bishop wulfstan's reeve (heming, p. 420).] [footnote 276: probably bishop wulfstan's chancellor.] [footnote 277: although, from his ignorance of this document, dr stubbs was not aware of ranulf's _modus operandi_, its evidence affords a fresh illustration of his unfailing insight, and of his perfect grasp of the problem even in the absence of proof. 'the analogy', he writes, 'of lay fiefs was applied to the churches with as much minuteness as possible.... ranulf flambard saw no other difference between an ecclesiastical and a lay fief than the superior facilities which the first gave for extortion.... the church was open to these claims because she furnished no opportunity for reliefs, wardships, marriage, escheats, or forfeiture' (_const. hist._, pp. 298-300).] [footnote 278: it has been urged to me that relief on _mutatio domini_ was a recognized practice, but i cannot find proof of it in english feudalism.] [footnote 279: 'nec mortuo archiepiscopo, sive episcopo, sive abbate, aliquid accipiam de dominico ecclesiae vel de hominibus ejus donec successor in eam ingrediatur.'] [footnote 280: there is a very important allusion to it, as introduced under rufus, in the _abingdon cartulary_, ii. 42: 'eo tempore [1097] infanda usurpata est in anglia consuetudo, ut si qua prelatorum persona ecclesiarum vita decederet mox honor ecclesiasticus fisco deputaretur regis.'] [footnote 281: compare the words of the chronicle on the king claiming to be heir of each man, lay or clerk, with the expression 'honor in manum meam rediit'.] [footnote 282: 'rogerium de glocestra, probatum militem, in obsessione falesiae arcubalistae jactu in capite percussum' (_william of malmesbury_, ii. 475).] part ii historical studies normans under edward the confessor it is probable that in spite of all the efforts of that school which found in mr freeman its ablest and most ardent leader, the 'fatal habit', as he termed it at the outset of his _magnum opus_ 'of beginning the study of english history with the norman conquest itself', will continue, in practice, to prevail among those who have a choice in the matter. it was characteristic of the late professor to assign the tendency he deplored to 'a confused and unhappy nomenclature', for to him names, as i have elsewhere shown,[1] were always of more importance than they are to the world at large. more to the point is the explanation given by mr grant allen, who attributes to the unfamiliar look of anglo-saxon appellatives the lack of interest shown in those who bore them. and yet there must be, surely, a deeper cause than this, an instinctive feeling that in england our consecutive political history does, in a sense, begin with the norman conquest. on the one hand it gave us, suddenly, a strong, purposeful monarchy; on the other it brought us men ready to record history, and to give us--treason though it be to say so--something better than the arid entries in our jejune native chronicle. we thus exchange aimless struggles, told in an uninviting fashion, for a great issue and a definite policy, on which we have at our disposal materials deserving of study. from the moment of the conqueror's landing we trace a continuous history, and one that we can really work at in the light of chronicles and records. i begin these studies, therefore, with the conquest, or rather with the coming of the normans. for, as mr freeman rightly insisted, it is with the reign of edward the confessor that 'the norman conquest really begins':[2] it was 'his accession' that marked, in its results, 'the first stage of the conquest itself'.[3] as he, elsewhere, justly observed of edward: normandy was ever the land of his affection.... his heart was french. his delight was to surround himself with companions who came from the beloved land, and who spoke the beloved tongue, to enrich them with english estates, to invest them with the highest offices of the english kingdom.... his real affections were lavished on the norman priests and gentlemen who flocked to his court as to the land of promise. these strangers were placed in important offices about the royal person, and before long they were set to rule as earls and bishops over the already half conquered soil of england.... these were again only the first instalment of the larger gang who were to win for themselves a more lasting settlement four and twenty years later. in all this the seeds of the conquest were sowing, or rather ... it is now that the conquest actually begins. the reign of edward is a period of struggle between natives and foreigners for dominion in england.[4] one has, it is true, always to remember that if edward, on his mother's side, was a norman, so was harold, as his name reminds us, on his mother's side, a dane. nor is it without significance that, on the exile of his house (1051), he fled to the scandinavian settlers on the irish coast, and found, no doubt, among them those who shared his almost piratical return in 1052.[5] the late professor's bias against all that was 'french', together with his love for the 'kindred' lands of germany and scandinavia, led him, perhaps, to obscure the fact that england was a prey which the dane was as eager to grasp as the norman. but this in no way impugns the truth of his view that 'the norman tendencies of edward' paved the way for the coming of william. nor can we hesitate to begin the study of the norman conquest with the coming of those, its true forerunners- 'ke ewart i aveit menéz et granz chastels è fieux dunez,' and with whom may be said to have begun the story of feudal england. professor burrows is entitled to the credit of setting forth the theory, in his little book upon the cinque ports,[6] that edward the confessor 'had evidently intended to make the little group of sussex towns, the "new burgh" [? afterwards hastings], winchelsea, and rye, a strong link of communication between england and normandy', by placing them under the control of fécamp abbey. he holds, indeed, that godwine and harold had contrived to thwart this intention in the case of the latter; but this, as i shall show in my paper on the cinque ports, arises from a misapprehension. this theory i propose to develop by adding the case of steyning, edward's grant of which to fécamp is well known, and has been discussed by mr freeman. it might not, possibly, occur to any one that steyning, like arundel, was at that time a port. but in a very curious record of 1103, narrating the agreement made between the abbot and de braose, the lord of bramber, it is mentioned that ships, in the days of the confessor, used to come up to the 'portus s. cuthmanni' [the patron saint of steyning], but had been lately impeded by a bridge that had been erected at bramber. here then was another sussex port placed in norman hands. yet this does not exhaust the list. mr freeman seems to have strangely overlooked the fact that the great benefice of bosham, valued under the confessor at £300 a year, had been conferred by edward on his norman chaplain, osbern, afterwards (1073) bishop of exeter, whose brother, in the words of the regius professor, was the 'duke's earliest and dearest friend', and who, of course, was of kin both to william and to edward. now this bosham, with thorney island, commanded a third sussex harbour, chichester haven.[7] but at london itself also we find the normans favoured. the very interesting charter of henry ii, granted by him, as duke of the normans, in 1150 or 1151, to the citizens of rouen, confirms them in possession of their port at dowgate, as they had held it from the days of edward the confessor.[8] here then we have evidence--which seems to have eluded the research of our historians, both general and local--that, even before the conquest, the citizens of rouen had a haven of their own at the mouth of the walbrook, for which they were probably indebted to the norman proclivities of the confessor. the building of 'richard's castle' plays a most important part in mr freeman's narrative of the doings of the normans under edward the confessor. we hear of its building, according to him, in september 1051: just at this moment another instance of the insolence and violence of the foreigners in another part of the kingdom served to stir up men's minds to the highest pitch. among the frenchmen who had flocked to the land of promise was one named richard the son of scrob, who had received a grant of lands in herefordshire. he and his son osbern had there built a castle on a spot which, by a singularly lasting tradition, preserves to this day the memory of himself and his building. the fortress itself has vanished, but its site is still to be marked, and the name of richard's castle, still borne by the parish in which it stood, is an abiding witness of the deep impression which its erection made on the minds of the men of those times.... here then was another wrong, a wrong perhaps hardly second to the wrong which had been done at dover. alike in kent and herefordshire, men had felt the sort of treatment which they were to expect if the king's foreign favourites were to be any longer tolerated.[9] accordingly, godwine, mr freeman wrote, demanded (september 8, 1051) 'the surrender of eustace and his men and of the frenchmen of richard's castle'. in a footnote to this statement, he explained that '"the castle" [of the chronicle] undoubtedly means richard's castle, as it must mean in the entry of the next year in the same chronicle'.[10] of the entry in question (1052) he wrote: '"the castle" is doubtless richard's castle.... here again the expressions witness to the deep feeling awakened by the building of this castle.'[11] so, too, in a special appendix we read: a speaking witness to the impression which had been made on men's minds by the building of this particular richard's castle, probably the first of its class in england, is given by its being spoken of distinctively as 'the castle' even by the worcester chronicler (1052; see p. 309), who had not spoken of its building in his earlier narrative.[12] we have, thus far, a consistent narrative. there was in herefordshire one castle, built by richard and named after him. it had been the cause of oppression and ravage, and its surrender, as such, had been demanded by godwine in 1051. a year later (september 1052) godwine triumphs; 'it was needful to punish the authors of all the evils that had happened' (p. 333); and 'all the frenchmen' who had caused them were at last outlawed. but now comes the difficulty, as mr freeman pointed out: the sentence did not extend to all the men of norman birth or of french speech who were settled in the country. it was meant to strike none but actual offenders. by an exception capable of indefinite and dangerous extension, those were excepted 'whom the king liked, and who were true to him and all his folk' (ii. 334).... we have a list of those who were thus excepted, which contains some names which we are surprised to find there. the exception was to apply to those only who had been true to the king and his people. yet among the normans who remained we find richard, the son of scrob, and among those who returned we find his son osbern. these two men were among the chief authors of all evil (ii. 344). that is to say, the lord of richard's castle, on whose surrender and punishment godwine had specially insisted, was specially exempted, as guiltless, when godwine returned to power.[13] in me, at least, this discrepancy aroused grave suspicion, and i turned to see what foundation there was for identifying the offending garrison of 1051 with that of richard's castle. i at once discovered there was none whatever. we have here, in short, one of those cases, characteristic, as i think, of the late professor's work, in which he first formed an idea, and then, under its spell, fitted the facts to it without question. the view, for instance, of the unique position of richard's castle as '_the_ castle' at the time is at once rendered untenable by the fact that, on the return of godwine, normans fled 'some west to pentecostes castle, some north to robert's castle', in the words of the chronicle.[14] moreover, the former belonged to osbern, 'whose surname was pentecost' (_cognomento pentecost_), who, as we learn from florence, was forced to surrender it and leave the country, as was also the fate of another castellan, his comrade hugh.[15] it is important to observe the clear distinction between richard, son of scrob, of richard's castle, and osbern pentecost, of pentecost's castle, of whom the former was allowed to remain, while the latter was exiled. but it is another peculiarity of mr freeman's work that he was apt to confuse different individuals bearing the same name.[16] in this instance, he boldly assumed that 'pentecost, as we gather from florence [?] ... is the same as osbern, the son of richard of richard's castle, of whom we have already heard so much' (ii. 329), although the latter, a well-known man, is always distinguished as a son of his father, and never as pentecost. and he further assumes that 'pentecost's castle' was identical with richard's castle, 'the first cause of so much evil' (_ibid._). these identifications led him into further difficulty, because osbern, the son of richard, is found afterwards holding 'both lands and offices in herefordshire' (ii. 345). to account for this, he further assumes as 'certain that osbern afterwards returned' (_ibid._). this assumption led him on to suggest that others also returned from exile, and that 'their restoration was owing to special entreaties of the king after the death of godwine' (ii. 346). the whole of this history is sheer assumption, based on confusion alone. now let us clear our minds of this confusion, and keep the two castellans and their respective castles apart. on the one hand, we have richard, the son of scrob, who was left undisturbed at his castle, and was succeeded there by his son osbern;[17] on the other hand, we have osbern, 'whose surname was pentecost', and who had to surrender his castle, to which the guilty normans had fled, and to go into exile. can we identify that castle? i would venture to suggest that it was no other than that of ewyas harold in the south-west corner of herefordshire, of which domesday tells us that earl william had _re_-fortified it ('hoc castellum refirmaverat'), implying that it had existed, and been dismantled before the conquest. it heads, in the great survey, the possessions of alfred of marlborough, and although its holder t.r.e. is not mentioned, we read of the two manors which follow it: 'hæc duo maneria tenuit osbernus avunculus alveredi t.r.e. quando goduinus et heraldus erant exulati' (i. 186). mr freeman, of course, assumed that this osbern was identical with osbern, the son of richard, the domesday tenant-in-chief. this assumption is not only baseless, but also most improbable: for alfred was old enough to be father-in-law to thurstan (mortimer), a domesday tenant, and would scarcely therefore be young enough to be nephew to another domesday tenant-in-chief. i would suggest that his uncle was that osbern 'pentecost' who had to surrender his castle and flee on the return of godwine and harold. this would exactly fit in with the domesday statement, as also with the dismantling of ewyas castle.[18] ewyas harold fits in also with the chronicle's mention of the normans fleeing 'west' to pentecost's castle. we have now seen that richard's castle did not stand alone, and that there is nothing to identify it with that herefordshire castle ('ænne castel') of which the garrison had committed outrages in 1051, and which is far more likely, so far as our evidence goes, to have been 'pentecost's castle'. mr freeman rightly called attention to 'the firm root which the normans had taken in herefordshire before 1051, which looks very much as if they had been specially favoured in these parts' (ii. 562); and he argued from this that earl ralf had probably ruled the shire between 1046 and 1050. the earl would naturally have introduced the foreign system of castles, as he did the foreign fashion of fighting on horseback. indeed, speaking of the capture of hereford in 1055, mr freeman wrote: it is an obvious conjecture that the fortress destroyed by gruffyd was a norman castle raised by ralph. a chief who was so anxious to make his people conform to norman ways of fighting would hardly lag behind his neighbour at richard's castle. he would be among the first at once to provide himself with a dwelling-place and his capital with a defence according to the latest continental patterns (ii. 391). but if this is so, he would have built it while he ruled the shire (as mr freeman believed he probably did) from 1046 to 1050, and would, in any case, have done so on taking up its government in 1051.[19] consequently he would have had a castle and garrison at hereford in 1052. but mr freeman, describing gruffyd's raid in that year into herefordshire, and finding a castle mentioned, assumed that it could only be richard's castle,[20] although, a few lines before, he had admitted the existence of other castles in the shire.[21] even in 1067 he would have liked to hold that richard's castle was the only one in herefordshire, but the words of the chronicle were too clear for him.[22] i have endeavoured to make clear my meaning, namely, that mr freeman's view that 'richard's castle' stood alone as '_the_ castle', and that richard and his garrison were the special offenders under edward the confessor, is not only destitute of all foundations, but at variance with the facts of the case. when we read of herefordshire (1067) that the norman colony, planted in that region by eadward and so strangely tolerated by harold, was still doing its work. osbern had been sheriff under edward, even when harold was earl of the shire, and his father richard, the old offender, still lived (iv. 64)-we must remember that the conduct of harold was only strange if richard, as mr freeman maintained, was 'the old offender'. if, as florence distinctly tells us, he was, on the contrary, void of offence, harold's conduct was in no way strange.[23] let us now turn from the herefordshire colony, planted, i think, not so much by king edward as by his earl ralph, just as earl william (fitz osbern) planted a fresh one after the conquest. among the normans allowed to remain, on the triumph of godwine's party in 1052, florence mentions 'ælfredum regis stratorem'. on him mr freeman thus comments: several ælfreds occur in domesday as great landowners, ælfred of marlborough (osbern's nephew) and ælfred of spain, but it is not easy to identify their possessions with any holder of the name in edward's time. the names ælfred and edward and the female name eadgyth seem to have been the only english names adopted by the normans. the two former would naturally be given to godsons or dependants of the two althelings while in normandy [_i.e._ after 1013].[24] an appendix, in the first volume, devoted to ælfred the giant--who appears in normandy, _circ._ 1030--claims that ælfred is a name so purely english that the presumption in favour of the english birth of any one bearing it 'in this generation is extremely strong',[25] and that it was only adopted by 'a later generation of normans'. mr freeman seems to have been unaware that in britanny the name of alfred enjoyed peculiar favour. i find it there as early as the ninth century,[26] while i have noted in a single cartulary seventeen examples between 1000 and 1150. among these are 'alfridus frater jutheli' (_ante_ 1008) and juthel, son of alfred (1037). now, at the conquest, 'judhael, who from his chief seat took the name of judhael of totnes, became the owner', in mr freeman's words, 'of a vast estate in devonshire, and extended his possessions into the proper cornwall also'. but we know from charters that this judhael was the son of an alfred, and was succeeded by another alfred, who joined baldwin of redvers at exeter in 1136.[27] in the same county, as mr freeman reminds us, we have another breton tenant-in-chief, 'alvredus brito'. in all this i am working up to the suggestion that the well-known alfred of lincoln was not, as mr freeman holds, an englishman,[28] but a breton. we have not only the overwhelming presumption against any considerable tenant-in-chief being of english origin, but the fact that his lands were new grants. when we add to this fact that his heir (whether son or brother) bore the distinctively breton name of alan,[29] we may safely conclude that alfred was not only a foreigner but a breton. but the strange thing is that we do not stop there; we have a jool (or johol) of lincoln, who died in 1051[30] after bestowing on ramsey abbey its lincolnshire fief.[31] thus we have an alfred and a juhel 'of lincoln', as we have an alfred and a juhel 'of totnes'; and in juhel of lincoln we must have a breton settled in england under the confessor. the name of 'lincoln' leads me to another interesting discovery. 'both alfred of lincoln and the sheriff thorold,' mr freeman wrote, 'were doubtless englishmen.'[32] and speaking of abbot turold's accession in 1070, he observed that turold was 'a form of the danish thorold, a name still [1070] familiar in that part of england, one which had been borne by an english sheriff'.[33] now this thorold (_turoldus_) has been the subject of much speculation by mr stapleton, mr freeman,[34] etc., in connection with william malet and the mysterious countess lucy, but the facts about him are of the scantiest, nor, i believe, has any one succeeded in finding him actually mentioned in the conqueror's reign, though he is referred to in domesday. this, however, i have now done, lighting upon him in a passage of considerable interest _per se_. in the 'de miraculis sancti eadmundi' of herman we read that when herfast, bishop of thetford, visited baldwin, abbot of st edmund's, to be cured of an injury to his eye, the abbot induced him to renounce his claim to jurisdiction over the abbey: in sacri monasterii vestiario, præsentibus ejusdem loci majoris ætatis fratribus, sed etiam accitis illuc ab abbate quibusdam regis primoribus, qui dictante justitia in eadem villa regia tenebant placita. quorum nomina, quamvis auditoribus tædio, tamen sunt veræ rationis testimonio; videlicet hugo de mundford, et rogerius cognomento bigot, richardus gisleberti comitis filius, ac cum eis _lincoliensis turoldus_ et hispaniensis alveredus, cum aliis compluribus.[35] the date of this incident can be fixed with certainty as 1076-79; and it is of great interest for its mention both of the eyre itself and of those 'barons' who took part in it; there can be no question that 'turoldus' was the mysterious thorold, sheriff of lincolnshire, taking his name from lincoln.[36] he was, therefore, not 'an english sheriff' of days before the conquest, but a norman--as were his fellows--who died before domesday.[37] the name of william malet, connected with that of thorold, reminds me of a suggestion i once made,[38] that he held aulkborough in lincolnshire, t.r.e., 'and was, to that extent, as m. le prêvost held, "established in england previously to the conquest"'. stapleton, whose name in such matters rightly carries great weight, maintained that because the manor was held in 1086 by ivo tailbois, and is stated in domesday 'to have previously belonged to william malet', it must have been alienated by william by a gift in frank marriage with a daughter, who must, he held, have married ivo. but i pointed out, firstly, that 'it is not the practice of domesday to enter manors held _in maritagio_ thus', and gave an instance (i. 197) 'where we find picot holding lands from robert gernon, which lands are entered in the gernon fief with the note: "has terras tenet picot vicecomes de roberto gernon in maritagio feminæ suæ."' i can now, by the kindness of dr liebermann, add the instance of the mandeville fief in surrey, where we read of 'aultone': 'de his hidis tenet wesman vi. hidas de goisfrido filio comitis eustachii; hanc terram dedit ei goisfridus de mannevil cum filia sua' (i. 36).[39] in addition to this argument i urged that 'in default of any statement to the contrary, we must always infer that the two holders named in the survey are (_a_) the holder t.r.e., (_b_) the holder in 1086'. this would make william malet the holder t.r.e. another 'norman' on whom i would touch is 'robert fitz wimarc', so often mentioned by mr freeman. i claim him too as a breton, on his mother's side at least, if wimarc, as seems to be the case, was his mother, for that is a distinctively breton name. mr freeman queried the biographer's description of him as 'regis consanguineus', when at edward's death-bed;[40] but he is clearly the 'robertus regis consanguineus' of the waltham charter.[41] he was also of kin to william.[42] the last on my list is regenbald 'the norman chancellor of edward', as mr freeman termed him throughout. he must have had, i presume, some authority for doing so: but i cannot discover that authority; and, in its absence, the name, from its form, does not suggest a norman origin.[43] of regenbald, however, i shall have to speak in another paper. [footnote 1: _quarterly review_, june 1892, pp. 9, 10.] [footnote 2: _norm. conq._, i. 525, 526.] [footnote 3: _ibid._] [footnote 4: _norm. conq._, ii, 29, 30.] [footnote 5: mr freeman admits that his crews 'probably consisted mainly of adventurers from the danish saxons of ireland, ready for any enterprise which promised excitement and plunder' (_n.c._, ii. 313).] [footnote 6: _historic towns: cinque ports_, pp. 26-9.] [footnote 7: see for osbern, mr a. s. ellis's _domesday tenants in gloucestershire_, p. 18. may not peter, william's chaplain, bishop of lichfield, 1075, have similarly been the peter who was a chaplain of edward?] [footnote 8: chèruel's _histoire de rouen pendant l'époque communale_, i. 245.] [footnote 9: _norm. conq._, ii. 136-8.] [footnote 10: _ibid._, p. 140.] [footnote 11: _ibid._, p. 309.] [footnote 12: _ibid._, p. 607.] [footnote 13: 'norman richard still held his castle in herefordshire' (hunt's _norman britain_, p. 69).] [footnote 14: mr clark refers to this passage, adding: 'so that these places, probably like richard's castle, were in norman hands' (_m.m.a._, i. 37).] [footnote 15: 'osbernus vero, cognomento pentecost, et socius ejus hugo sua reddiderunt castella.'] [footnote 16: i have noted several cases in point, that of walter giffard being the most striking. but we also read in _william rufus_ (ii. 551) that 'henry, son of swegen, who comes so often under henry the second, is the unlucky descendant of robert, son of wymarc', that is to say, henry 'of essex', who was a son of robert, not of swegen, and who belonged to a wholly different family and district.] [footnote 17: 'worse than all, the original sinners of the herefordshire border, richard and his son osbern, were still lords of english soil, and holders of english offices' (iv. 53).] [footnote 18: named, as mr freeman pointed out, after harold, son of earl ralph, not after harold, son of godwine.] [footnote 19: 'that ralph succeeded swegen on his final banishment in 1051, i have no doubt at all' (ii. 562).] [footnote 20: '"the castle" is doubtless richard's castle.... here again the expressions witness to the deep feeling awakened by the building of this castle' (ii. 309).] [footnote 21: 'the norman lords whom eadward had settled in herefordshire proved but poor defenders of their adopted country. the last continental improvements in the art of fortification proved vain to secure the land' (_ibid._).] [footnote 22: florence (1067) speaks of the 'herefordenses castellani et richardus filius scrob' as the opponents of eadric. i could almost have fancied that the words 'herefordenses castellani' referred to 'the castle' in herefordshire (see vol. ii. p. 139); but the words of the worcester chronicler 'þa castelmenn on hereforda' seem to fix the meaning to the city itself' (iv. 64).] [footnote 23: i have no hesitation in offering these criticisms, because mr freeman's views have been embraced throughout by mr hunt, who has followed closely in his footsteps. for instance: 'a private fortress ... would 'it was the first fortress which seem even stranger to us now was raised in england for the than it seemed to our indulgence of private insolence forefathers when richard the and greed, and not for the son of scrob raised the first protection of englishmen; it was castle on english ground' to be the first of many, and the (_norm. conq._, v. 640). evil deeds which richard's men wrought were a foretaste of the evil times when fortresses such as his were common in the land' (_norman britain_, p. 64). mr hunt, therefore, survives to defend the position.] [footnote 24: vol. ii., p. 345.] [footnote 25: vol. i., p. 747.] [footnote 26: about 849; alfret machtiern, 868; alfritus tyrannus, 871; alfrit presbyter, 872; filius alurit, 879.] [footnote 27: gesta stephani.] [footnote 28: iii. (2nd ed.) 780; iv. 214.] [footnote 29: see the lindsey survey.] [footnote 30: _ramsey cartulary_, iii. 167.] [footnote 31: _ramsey cartulary_, i. 208, ii. 74. _domesday_, i. 346_b_.] [footnote 32: iii. (2nd ed.) 780.] [footnote 33: iv. (1st ed.) 457.] [footnote 34: _ibid._, 778-80. mr freeman spoke of him as 'a kind of centre' for the inquiry, and stated that in domesday 346_b_ we have 'turoldus vicecomes' as a benefactor of spalding priory. this is an error, for the words there are 'dedit s. gutlaco' (_i.e._ crowland). he also urged that 'we must not forget the crowland tradition' about him 'preserved by the false ingulf'. but the fact is that 'ingulf' made him into _two_ (1) 'thuroldus vicecomes lincoln', whose benefaction to crowland (d.b., i. 346_b_) was confirmed in 806 (!) and subsequently (pp. 6, 9, 15, 19), (2) 'quidam vicecomes lincolniæ, dictus thoroldus ... de genere et cognatione illius vicedomini thoroldi qui quondam', etc. (p. 65). it is the one living in '1051', to whom the spalding foundation was assigned.] [footnote 35: _memorials of st edmund's abbey_, i. 63-4. herman wrote from personal knowledge.] [footnote 36: there are plenty of instances of this practice, as at exeter, salisbury, gloucester, leicester, etc.] [footnote 37: it may be well here to allude to a still more remarkable commission, some twenty years later, namely in 1096, when william rufus sent 'in quadragesima optimates suos in devenesiram et in cornubiam et exoniam, walcalinum, videlicet, wyntonensem episcopum, randulphum regalem capellanum, willelmum capram, hardinum belnothi filium (_i.e._ elnoth or eadnoth; _see_ greenfield's _de meriet pedigree_, p. 6) ad investiganda regalia placita. quibus in placitis calumpniati sunt cuidam [_sic_] mansioni abbacie taviensis,' etc. (tavistock cartulary in _mon. ang._, ii. 497). this eyre cannot be generally known, for mr t. a. archer, in his elaborate biography of ranulf flambard, does not mention it. the association of bishop walkelin with ranulf is specially interesting because they are stated to have been left by the king next year (1097) as joint regents of the realm. the name, i may add, of 'willelmus filius baldwini' among those to whom the consequent charter is addressed (_mon. ang._, ii. 497), is of considerable importance, because it is clearly that of the sheriff of devon, and is proof therefore that baldwin the sheriff (baldwin, son of count gilbert) had left a son william, who had succeeded to his shrievalty by 1096, and who was in turn succeeded by his brother, richard fitz baldwin, sheriff under henry i.] [footnote 38: _genealogist_, viii. 4.] [footnote 39: dr liebermann asks whether geoffrey's daughter was not thus 'the first wife, else unknown, of the future king of jerusalem'.] [footnote 40: _norm. conq._, iii. 576.] [footnote 41: _ibid._, ii. 673.] [footnote 42: _ibid._, iii. 416.] [footnote 43: mr a. s. ellis has suggested that 'elward filius reinbaldi' (d.b., i. 170_b_) king's thegn in glo'stershire 'was evidently a son' of the chancellor. this suggestion is highly probable, and in any case, the thegn bearing this english name, it may fairly be presumed that his father reinbald was not of norman birth.] mr freeman and the battle of hastings [greek: hotan ho ischyros kathôplismenos phylassê tên heautou aulên, en eirênê estin ta hyparchonta autou. epan de ischyroteros autou epelthôn nikêsê auton, tên panoplian autou airei eph' hê epepoithei.] it might well be thought the height of rashness to attempt criticism, even in detail, of mr freeman's narrative of the battle of hastings. for its story, as his champion has well observed, is 'the centre and the very heart of mr freeman's work; if he could blunder here in the most carefully elaborated passage of his whole history he could blunder anywhere; his reputation for accuracy would be gone almost beyond hope of retrieving it'.[1] and indeed, it may fairly be described as mr freeman's greatest achievement, the point where he is strongest of all. he himself described the scene as the 'battle which is the centre of my whole history', and reminded us that on its historic importance i need not dwell; it is the very subject of my history.... looking also at the fight simply as a battle, it is one of the most memorable in all military history. that is the first point. the second is that in his battle pieces our author was always at his best. essentially a concrete historian, objective as macaulay in his treatment, he loved incident and action; loved them, indeed, so well, that he could scarcely bring himself to omit the smallest details of a skirmish: e ripenso le mobili tende, e i percossi valli, e 'l campo dei manipoli, e l'onda dei cavalli. precentor venables has well described that wonderful discourse, one of his greatest triumphs--in which, with flashing eye and thrilling voice, he made the great fight of senlac--as he loved to call it, discarding the later name--which changed the fortunes of england and made her what she is, live and move before his hearers. my third point is that his knowledge of the subject was unrivalled. he had visited the battlefield, he tells us, no less than five times, accompanied by the best experts, civil and military, he could find; he had studied every authority, and read all that had been written, till he was absolutely master of every source of information. he had further executed for him, by officers of the royal engineers, an elaborate plan of the battle based on his unwearied studies. never was historian more splendidly equipped. thus was prepared that 'very lucid and quite original account of the battle', as mr g. t. clark describes it, which we are about to examine; that 'detailed account of the battle' that mr hunt, in his _norman britain_, describes as written 'with a rare combination of critical exactness and epic grandeur'. the name of 'senlac' before we approach the great battle, it is necessary to speak plainly of the name which mr freeman gave it, the excruciating name of 'senlac'. it is necessary, because we have here a perfect type of those changes in nomenclature on which mr freeman insisted, and which always remind one of macaulay's words: mr mitford piques himself on spelling better than any of his neighbours; and this not only in ancient names, which he mangles in defiance both of custom and of reason.... in such cases established usage is considered as law by all writers except mr mitford ... but he proceeds on no principle but that of being unlike the rest of the world. every child has heard of linnæus; therefore mr mitford calls him linné. rousseau is known all over europe as jean jacques; therefore mr mitford bestows on him the strange appellation of john james. none of mr freeman's peculiar 'notes' is more familiar than this tendency, and none has given rise to bitterer controversy or more popular amusement. 'pedantry' was the charge brought against him, and to this charge he was as keenly sensitive as was browning to that of 'obscurity'. of both writers it may fairly be said that they evaded rather than met the charge brought against them. the regius professor invariably maintained that accuracy, not 'pedantry', was his true offence. writing, in the _fortnightly review_, on 'the study of history', he set forth his standing defence in these words: i would say, as the first precept, dare to be accurate. you will be called a pedant for doing so, but dare to be accurate all the same. he who shall venture to distinguish between two english boroughs, between two hadriatic islands when the authorized caterer for the public information thinks good to confound them, must be content to bear the terrible name of pedant, even if no worse fate still is in store for him. was, then, our author a mere pedant, or was this the name that ignorance bestowed on knowledge? for an answer to this question, 'senlac' is a test-case. 'every child', in macaulay's words, had heard of the battle of hastings; it was known by that name 'all over europe' from time immemorial. unless, therefore, that name was wrong, it was wanton and mischievous to change it; and, even if changed, it was indefensible to substitute the name of senlac, unless there is proof that the battle was so styled when it was fought. as to the first of these points, the old name was in no sense wrong. precisely as the battle of poitiers was fought some miles from poitiers, so was it with that of hastings. yet we all speak of the battle of poitiers, although we might substitute the name of maupertuis more legitimately than that of senlac. the only plea that mr freeman could advance was that people were led by the old name to imagine that the battle was fought at hastings itself! of those who argue in this spirit, it was finely said by the late mr kerslake that instead of lifting ignorance to competence by teaching what ought to be known, they cut down what ought to be known to the capacity of those who are deficient of that knowledge. instead of making them understand the meaning of the ancient and established word 'anglo-saxon', they disturb the whole world of learning with an almost violent attempt to turn out of use the established word, which has been thoroughly understood for ages. the simple answer to mr freeman's contention is, that it is needless to make the change in histories, because those who read them learn that the fight was at battle; while as to those who do not read histories, it is obvious that such a name as 'senlac' will in no way lighten their darkness. the change, therefore, was uncalled for. but it was not merely uncalled for; it was also absolutely wrong. 'to the battle itself,' mr freeman wrote, 'i restore its true ancient name of senlac.' in so doing the writer acted in the spirit of those who 'restore' our churches and who gave that word so evil a sound in the ears of all archæologists, mr freeman himself included. i am reminded of the protest of the society of antiquaries on hearing 'with much regret that a fifteenth-century pinnacle' at rochester cathedral 'is in danger of destruction in order that a modern pinnacle, professing to represent that which stood in the place in the twelfth century, may be set up in its stead'. precisely such a 'restoration' is mr freeman's 'senlac'. professing to represent the ancient name of the battle, it is substituted for that name which the battle has borne from the days of the conqueror to our own. in william of malmesbury as in domesday book we read of 'the battle of hastings' (_bellum hastingense_), and all mr freeman's efforts failed admittedly to discover any record or any writer who spoke of the battle of senlac (_bellum senlacium_) save orderic alone. now orderic wrote two generations after the battle was fought; the name he strove to give it fell from his pen stillborn; and the fact that this name was a fad of his own is shown by what mr freeman suppressed, namely, that orderic, in the same breath, tells us that battle abbey was founded as 'c[oe]nobium sanctæ trinitatis senlac', whereas we learn from mr freeman himself that the usual title is 'ecclesia sancti martini de bello', 'ecclesia de bello', or, as we have seen, in english 'þæt mynster æt þære bataille'. the fuller form, 'abbas sancti martini de loco belli', appears in domesday, 11_b_: but it is commonly called in the survey 'ecclesia de labatailge'. so much for orderic's authority. so violent an innovation as this of our author's could not pass unchallenged. mr frederic harrison threw down the gauntlet (_contemporary review_, january 1886), attacking, in a brilliant and incisive article, mr freeman's 'pedantry' along the whole line. but he chiefly complained of a far more serious change of name that the 'old english' school have introduced; which, if it were indefinitely extended, would wantonly confuse historical literature. i mean the attempt to alter names which are the accepted landmarks of history. it is now thought scholarly to write of 'the battle of _senlac_' instead of 'the battle of _hastings_'. as every one knows, the fight took place on the site of battle abbey, seven miles from hastings; as so many great battles, those of tours, blenheim, cannæ, chalons, and the like, have been named from places not the actual spot of the combat. but since for 800 years the historians of europe have spoken of 'the battle of hastings', it does seem a little pedantic to rename it.... the sole authority for 'battle of senlac' is orderic, a monk who lived and wrote in normandy in the next century. yet, on the strength of this secondary authority, the 'old english' school choose to erase from english literature one of our most familiar names. mr freeman's rejoinder must be noticed, because singularly characteristic. treating mr harrison 'de haut en bas', he expressed surprise that his friends should expect him to reply to an article which had merely amused him, and--unable, of course, to adduce any fresh authority for 'senlac'--denounced his critic for a 'reckless raid into regions where he does not know the road'. for this charge there was no foundation in the matter of which we treat. mr freeman persisted that he had given the battle 'the only name that i found for it anywhere' (which we have seen was not the case), and sarcastically observed that 'so to do is certainly "pedantic", for it conduces to accuracy'. the truth is simply that the site of the battle had no name at all. as the professor himself wrote: the spot was then quite unoccupied and untilled; nothing in any of the narratives implies the existence of any village or settlement; our own chronicle only describes the site as by 'the hoar apple-tree' ('he com him togenes æt þære haran apuldran'). consequently, when men wished to speak of the great conflict, they were driven, as in similar cases, to term it the battle of hastings, or, if they wished to be more exact, they had to describe it, by periphrasis, as fought on 'the site which is now called battle'. henry of huntingdon, our author tells us, is guilty, though otherwise well informed, of 'a statement so grotesquely inaccurate as that harold "aciem suam construxit in _planis hastinges_"'. why 'grotesque'? it would be strictly accurate to describe a battle, even seven miles from salisbury, as fought on salisbury plain; while, as to the word 'plain', his horror of field-sports may have caused mr freeman's ignorance of the fact that another such stretch of sussex down is known as 'plumpton plain'.[2] but the fact is that the whole difficulty arose from that singular narrowness that cramped our author's mind, and that lies at the root, when rightly understood, of his most distinctive tenets. for he was a pedant, after all. and, observe, this 'pedantry' did, in practice, conduce not to true accuracy, but to the very reverse. paradoxical though this may sound, it is literally true. let us take a striking instance. in his account of the attack on dover in 1067, mr freeman argued, 'from the distinct mention of _oppidum_ and _oppidani_ in orderic', that it was not the castle, as supposed, but the town that was attacked. and so convinced was he of this, that he forced his authorities into harmony with his view against their plain meaning. this was because he was not aware that orderic--'my dear old friend orderic', as in one place he terms him--was in the habit of using _oppidum_ for castle. he must have afterwards discovered this; for his theory was tacitly and significantly dropped, and the old version substituted, in a subsequent edition. again, an article on 'city and borough', which he contributed to _macmillan's magazine_, was based on the fundamental assumption that _civitas_, in the norman period, must have had a specialized denotation. the fact that, on the contrary, the same town is spoken of as a _civitas_ and as a _burgus_, cuts the ground from under this assumption, and, with it, destroys the whole of its elaborate superstructure. our author's method, in short, placed him in standing conflict with every authority for his period. never was 'the sacredness of words' treated as of less account; never, indeed, were words more wantonly changed. what would mr freeman have said had he known that the compilers of that sacrosanct record, domesday book itself, revelled in altering the wording of the sworn original returns? such was the spirit of the men whose language he strove to limit by a terminology as precise as that of modern philosophy. i may have wandered somewhat from 'senlac', but my object was to show that mr freeman misunderstood twelfth-century writers by assigning to them his own peculiarities. it did not in any way follow from their speaking of a 'battle of hastings' that they 'grotesquely' supposed it to have been fought at the town itself: they allowed themselves an elasticity, both in word and phrase, which was so alien to himself that he could not realize its existence, and therefore accused them of ignorance because their language was different from his. in the same spirit he would never admit that the 'castellum warham' of domesday book was no other than corfe castle, although, as mr eyton and mr bond have shown, the fact is certain. but the _crux_ is yet to come. to any one acquainted with 'old english' it must instantly occur that 'senlac' is not an english name. mr freeman glided over this by simply ignoring the difficulty, but was he aware that the name in question, as 'senlecque' (or 'senlecques'), is actually found--in france? one is reminded of his own criticism on the name 'duncombe park': when the lands of helmsley were made to take the name of duncombe, a real wrong was done to geography.... how came a _combe_ in yorkshire? the thing is a fraud on nomenclature as great as any of the frauds which the first duncombe, 'born to carry parcels and to sweep down a counting-house', contrived to commit on the treasury of the nation. how came a french 'senlac' in 'old english' sussex? the name is as obviously foreign as 'senlis' itself, and the occurrence, in later days of 'santlachæ' as a local field-name, cannot avail against this fact, or prove that this open down, in days before the conquest, could have borne such a title. therefore, when mr freeman wrote that the english king 'pitched his camp upon the ever memorable heights of senlac', he was guilty, not only of anachronism, but of a 'real wrong to geography', and, in the name of accuracy, he introduced error.[3] i have gone thus carefully into this matter because the name has been meekly adopted by historians, and even by journalists, thereby proving the power of that tendency to fashion and imitation on which, in his _physics and politics_, mr bagehot loved to insist. for my part i make an earnest appeal to all who may write or teach history to adhere to the 'true ancient name' of the battle of hastings, and to reject henceforward an innovation which was uncalled for, misleading, and wrong.[4] the palisade the distinctive peculiarity of the english tactics, we learn from mr freeman at the outset, is found in an entirely novel device introduced on this occasion by harold. instead of merely forming his troops in the immemorial array known as the shield-wall, he turned 'the battle as far as possible into the likeness of a siege',[5] by building around them a 'palisade' of solid timber. how large a part this 'palisade' plays in mr freeman's story may be gathered from the fact that it is mentioned at least a score of times in his account of the great battle. this 'fortress of timber', with its 'wooden walls', had 'a triple gate of entrance', and was composed of 'firm barricades of ash and other timber, wattled in so close together that not a crevice could be seen'. it would be easier for me to deal with this 'palisade' if one could form a clear idea of what it represented to mr freeman's mind. judging from the passages quoted above, and from his praising henry of huntingdon for his 'admirable comparison of harold's camp to a castle';[6] i was led to believe that he imagined precisely such a timber wall as crowned in those days a castle mound. such a defence is well shown in the bayeux tapestry, crowning the castle mound which william threw up at hastings. now, this very parallel is suggested by mr freeman himself. describing harold's position as 'not without reason called a fortress' [where?] he suggested that 'its defences might be nearly equal to those of william's own camp at hastings' (p. 447). following up this parallel, we find mr freeman writing of this latter: a portion of english ground was already entrenched and _palisaded_, and changed into a norman fortress (p. 418).... he saw the carpenters come out with their axes; he saw the fosse dug, and the _palisade_ thrown up (p. 419). they had already built a fort and had fenced it in with a _palisade_ (p. 420). without binding mr freeman down to a defence precisely of this character--and, indeed, in this as in other matters, he may not even himself have formed a clear idea of what he meant--it gives us, i think we may fairly say, a general idea of his 'palisade'. it was certainly no mere row of stakes,[7] no heap of cottage window frames,[8] no fantastic array of shields tied to sticks,[9] no '_abattis_ of some sort'[10] that mr freeman had in view, whatever his champions may pretend. as for the defenders of the 'palisade', they cannot even agree among themselves as to what it really was. mr archer produces a new explanation, only to throw it over almost as soon as it is produced.[11] one seeks to know for certain what one is expected to deal with; but, so far as it is possible to learn, nobody can tell one. there is only a succession of dissolving views, and one is left to deal with a nebulous hypothesis.[12] mr freeman wrote of his 'palisade' as a mere 'development of the usual tactics of the shield-wall'; but this is an obvious misconception. it might, indeed, be used as a substitute for the 'shield-wall', and would enable the troops behind it to adopt a looser formation; but to suppose that they were ranged 'closely together in the thick array of the shield-wall', with this second wall in front of them, is surely absurd. till the 'wooden walls' were broken the 'shield-wall' was needless. to retain the disadvantages of its close order, when that order had been rendered needless, would have been simply insane. yet this insanity, in our author's eyes, was 'the master-skill of harold'. was there time, moreover, to construct such a fortress, if 'the battle followed almost immediately', as we learn, 'on the arrival of harold'? lastly, would there be material on the spot for a palisade (see ground plan) about a mile in length?[13] these awkward points may not have occurred to mr freeman; but to others they will, i think, cause some uneasiness. let us then examine mr freeman's authorities for the existence of this palisade. mr freeman's authorities for it in his note on 'the details of the battle of senlac' (iii. 756), mr freeman explained that he had given the authorities on which his statements rested, adding: each reader can therefore judge for himself how far my narrative is borne out by my authorities. loyally keeping to this principle, i propose to test his statements by the authorities he gives for them himself. i therefore address myself to the passages in henry of huntingdon and in wace. (1) _henry of huntingdon_ the passage relied on by the historian is this: quum ergo haroldus totam gentem suam in una acie strictissime locasset _et quasi castellum inde construxisset_[14] impenetrabiles erant normannis (iii. 444, note). mr freeman thus paraphrased henry's words: he occupied and fortified, as thoroughly as the time and the means at his command would allow, a post of great natural strength, which he made into what is distinctly spoken of as a castle (_ibid._).[15] although the writer made it his complaint against one of the editors in the rolls series that he could not 'construe his latin', we see that the same failing led him here himself into error. _inde_ refers, and can only refer, to harold's troops themselves. a fortress harold wrought; but he wrought it of flesh and blood: it was behind no ramparts that the soldiers of england awaited the onset of the chivalry of france. the metaphor, of course, is a common one. henry of huntingdon himself recurs to it, when describing that 'acies', at the battle of lincoln, which stephen 'circa se ... strictissime collocavit' (p. 271), as harold, he wrote, 'gentem suam in una acie strictissime locasset' (p. 203). for he shows us stephen's 'acies' assailed 'sicut castellum'.[16] in the same spirit an irish bard tells us how his countrymen, on the battlefield of dysert o'dea (may 10, 1318), closed in their ranks, 'like a strong fortress', as their enemies surged around them. it was felicitous, indeed, to describe as 'quasi castellum' that immovable mass of warriors girt by their shield-wall,[17] that 'fortress of shields', as mr freeman termed it, at hastings itself (iii. 492), at stamford bridge (iii. 372), at maldon (i. 272), and even in earlier days (i. 151). it was mr freeman's initial error in thus materializing a metaphor (through misconstruing his latin) that first led me to doubt the existence of the 'palisade'. his champion, mr archer, in his first article,[18] was ominously silent as to this error: in the second, he had to confess of this passage, the first of mr freeman's proofs, that he himself 'should never think of using it to prove a palisade'.[19] _exit_, therefore, henry of huntingdon. (2) _wace_ two passages, and two alone, are in question-(a) ll. 6991-4, which mr freeman has paraphrased thus: wace mr freeman heraut a le lieu esgarde, he occupied the hill; he closre le fist de boen fosse, surrounded it on all its de treis parz laissa treis entrees accessible sides by a palisade, qu'il a garder a commandees. with a triple gate of entrance, and defended it to the south by an artificial ditch (iii. 447). my criticism on this has been from the first that wace here speaks _only_ of a ditch, and that mr freeman has not only introduced here the alleged palisade, from which wace's 'fosse' was quite distinct, but has also transferred to that palisade the 'treis entrees' of the fosse. that mr freeman did treat the 'palisade' and the 'fosse' as distinct and considerably apart is proved by this passage: the normans had crossed the [_sic_] english fosse, and were now at the foot of the hill with the palisades and the axes right before them (iii. 476). the 'fosse' is that 'artificial ditch' of which mr freeman speaks in the above passage, the only one of which he does speak. therefore, that 'artificial ditch' was, in his view, down in the valley to the south, and had nothing to do with that 'palisade' which he placed on the hill. there is thus no possible doubt as to mr freeman's view. on his own showing, the above lines make no mention of a palisade on the hill.[20] (b) ll. 7815-26: the passage in question runs thus: fet orent devant els _escuz_ de fenestres è d'altres fuz, devant els les orent levez, come cleies joinz è serrez; fait en orent devant closture, n'i laissierent nule jointure, par onc normant entr'els venist qui desconfire les volsist. d'escuz e d'ais s'avironoent, issi deffendre se quidoent et s'il se fussent bien tenu, ia ne fussent le ior vencu. in his first edition, writing, i believe, under the influence of taylor's version, mr freeman gave these lines in a footnote to his narrative of the battle, and appears to have then looked on them as describing his palisade.[21] but in his 'second edition, revised', in preparing which he went 'minutely through every line, and corrected or improved whatever seemed to need correction or improvement' (p. v), he transferred these lines to his appendix on the battle, where he wrote concerning them as follows: [(at maldon) the english stood, _as at senlac_, in the array common to them and their enemies--a strong line, or rather wedge, of infantry, forming a wall with their shields (i. 271).][22] of the array of the shield-wall we have often heard already, as at maldon (see vol. i. p. 271), but it is at senlac that we get the fullest descriptions of it [_sic_] all the better for coming in the mouths of enemies. wace gives his description, 12941: 'fet orent devant els escuz de fenestres è d'altres fuz; devant els les orent levez. . . . . . et s'il se fussent bien tenu ja ne fussent li jor vencu.' so william of malmesbury, 241. 'pedites omnes cum bipennibus, conserta ante se scutorum testudine, impenetrabilem cuneum faciunt; quod profecto illis eâ die saluti fuisset, nisi normanni simulatâ fugâ more suo confertos manipulos laxassent.' so at the battle of the standard, according to æthelred of rievaux (343), 'scutis scuta junguntur, lateribus latera conseruntur' (iii. 763-4). the unquestionable meaning of mr freeman's words is that wace's lines (like the other passages) describe the time-honoured shield-wall, 'the fortress of shields, so often sung of alike in english and in scandinavian minstrelsy' (iii. 372). appealing to this, his own verdict, in my original article,[23] i spoke of these lines as referring to the 'shield-wall', and maintained that 'escuz' meant shields, not 'barricades'. this also, it will be seen, must have been mr freeman's view, when he pronounced these lines to be a description of the shield-wall. i therefore declared that the only evidence he adduced for his palisade had been demonstrably obtained by misconstruing his latin, and (on his own showing) by mistranslating his french. this has been my case from the first: it remains my case now. unlike our forefathers on the hill of battle, i will not be decoyed into breaking 'the line of the shield-wall'.[24] my argument against it in order to show clearly that i adhere to my original position, i need only reprint my argument as it appeared in the _quarterly review_. it is clear that if he (mr freeman) found it needful, in his story of the great battle, to mention this barricade about a score of times, it must have occupied a prominent place in every contemporary narrative. and yet we assert without fear of contradiction that (dismissing the 'roman de rou') in no chronicle or poem, among all mr freeman's authorities, could he find any ground for this singular delusion; while the bayeux tapestry itself, which he rightly places at their head, will be searched in vain for a palisade, or for anything faintly resembling it, from beginning to end of the battle.[25] on this passage we take our stand: it is the very essence of our case. we made our statement 'without fear of contradiction'; and it is not contradicted. moreover, we can now further strengthen it by appealing to baudri's poem,[26] an authority of the first rank, in which, as in the others, there is no allusion to the existence of any 'palisade'. it will be observed that, in this passage, we expressly excluded wace's poem. we did so because--although, as we have seen, mr freeman failed to produce from it any proof of a palisade--we preferred to leave it an open question whether wace did or did not believe the english to have fought behind a palisade. in rebutting mr freeman's evidence, that question did not arise. there is another argument that we refrained from bringing forward because we thought it superfluous. the normans, of course, as mr freeman reminds us, magnified the odds against them: 'nothing but the special favour of god could have given his servants a victory over their enemies, which was truly miraculous' (p. 440). william of poitiers, he adds (p. 479), sets forth their difficulties in detail:- 'angli nimium adjuvantur superioris loci opportunitate, quem sine procursu tenent, et maxime conferti; atque ingenti quoque numerositate suâ atque validissimâ corpulentiâ; præterea pugnæ instrumentis, quæ facile per scuta vel alia tegmina viam inveniunt.' now william who was not only a contemporary writer, but, says mr freeman (p. 757), 'understood' the site, had, obviously, every inducement to include, among the difficulties of the normans, that special 'development', which according to mr freeman (pp. 444, 468), 'the foresight of harold' had introduced on this occasion, and which, he assures us, involved 'a frightful slaughter' of the normans. and yet this writer is absolutely silent, both here and throughout the battle, as to the existence of a barricade of any sort or kind.[27] here i would briefly refer to certain misrepresentations. mr archer claimed, in his original article (_cont. rev._, 344) to 'mainly rely' upon wace, on the ground that i did so myself. i was obliged to describe this statement at once as 'the exact converse of the truth'.[28] for it will be seen, i expressly excluded wace from the authorities on whom i relied, and specially rested my case, from the first, on the evidence of the bayeux tapestry. it is much to be regretted that mr archer has deliberately repeated his statement,[29] though even his ally reluctantly admits that it was 'not very happily worded'.[30] mr archer might well seek to avoid the bayeux tapestry, for its evidence is dead against him, and he cannot explain it away. his first attempt was a brief allusion, accepting its authority without question, but suggesting that it might represent that part of the line where the barricade was absent.[31] of this suggestion i at once disposed by showing that it is 'not only absolutely without foundation, but is directly opposed to mr freeman's theory, and, indeed, to his express statements'.[32] forced to drop this explanation, my opponent, in his next article, fell back on the desperate device of repudiating the authority of the tapestry,[33] 'the most authentic record' of the battle according to the late professor, who was never weary of insisting on its 'paramount importance'. on my showing, beyond the possibility of question, that this amounted to rejecting everything that mr freeman had written on the subject,[34] mr archer once more shifts his tactics, and now writes thus: if any fact in hastings is more certain than another, it is that at the beginning of the battle the main body of the english was posted _on a hill_. now 'the priceless record'--the bayeux tapestry--represents them _on a plain_. if the tapestry could leave out this central feature--the hill of senlac--from its picture of the _opening_ battle, still more easily could it leave out the intricate barriers upon the hill.[35] this _ad captandum_ argument is disposed of as easily as the others. the tapestry does not concern itself with landscape, and shows us neither a hill nor a plain. it could not, on a narrow strip, show us 'the hill of senlac', but it could--and would--show us the alleged palisade. for not only does it strive under every difficulty to represent such objects as churches, castles and houses, but it faithfully shows us the 'palisade'[36] raised by william at hastings itself. and if it be urged that it could not depict men fighting behind such a defence, let us turn to the scene at dinan. if we compare it with the opening scene of the great battle itself, we see precisely similar horsemen advancing to the attack, similar infantry resisting that attack, and similar spears flying between them. but at dinan the defenders have a palisade, and on the hill of battle they have not.[37] but although the evidence of the bayeux tapestry, mr freeman's own supreme authority, remains absolutely unshaken, it must not be supposed that i rely on that evidence alone. i attach as much importance as ever--and so will, i think, all prejudiced persons--to the other portion of my argument, that if there had been a barricade playing so important a part in the battle that mr freeman found it needful to mention it at least a score of times, it is practically inconceivable that all the authorities i enumerate should have absolutely ignored its existence. judging from mr freeman's own experience, it would be simply impossible to describe the battle without mentioning the 'palisade'. it is very significant that when we turn to a real feature of the english line, namely its close array, we find the above authorities as unanimous in mentioning the fact as they are in ignoring that 'curious defence',[38] those 'intricate barriers', as mr archer terms them, 'upon the hill'.[39] the fight has raged so fiercely around this 'palisade' that i have been obliged to discuss it at somewhat disproportionate length. but to sum up, we have now seen, firstly, that the alleged palisade was a new 'development', and needs, as such, special proof of its existence; secondly, that of mr freeman's proofs, one at least must admittedly be abandoned, while he himself has impugned the other;[40] thirdly, that the evidence, both positive and presumptive, is altogether opposed to the existence of a palisade. in the narrative of the battle we shall find mr freeman interpolating the alleged defence solely from his own imagination, such references proving, on inquiry, to be imaginary and imaginary alone.[41] the shield-wall it is a pleasure to find myself here in complete agreement with mr freeman. in his very latest study of the battle mr freeman wrote as follows: the english clave to the old teutonic tactics. they fought on foot in the close array of the shield-wall.[42] mr archer says they cannot have done so.[43] there was also, according to mr freeman, a barricade, in front of--and distinct from--the shield-wall, being a special development which, he tells us, 'the foresight of harold' had introduced on this occasion (pp. 444, 468). the barricade is denied by me, the shield-wall by mr archer. whichever of us is right, mr freeman's accuracy is, in either case, equally impugned. it is essential to remember that mr freeman, throughout, treated the palisade and the shield-wall as _separate and distinct_. thus he wrote so late as 1880: besides the palisade the front ranks made a kind of inner defence with their shields, called the shield-wall. the norman writers were specially struck with the close array of the english.[44] so in his great work we read of 'the shield-wall _and the_ triple palisade still unbroken' (iii. 467). later still 'the shield-wall still stood _behind the_ palisade' (p. 487). even when 'the english palisade was gone _the english shield-wall_ was still a formidable hindrance in the way of the assailants (p. 491). the array of the shield-wall was still kept, though now without the help of the barricades' (p. 491). here we have the very phrase of note nn, 'the array of the shield-wall',[45] and it is shown beyond question that mr freeman's shield-wall, whatever mr archer may pretend, was quite distinct from the palisade, and was a shield-wall 'pure and simple'. let it also be clearly understood what mr freeman meant by that 'array of the shield-wall', of which the disputed passage in wace was, he held, a description. he shows us the whole english army 'ranged so closely together in the thick array of the shield-wall, that while they only kept their ground the success of an assailant was hopeless'.[46] he describes them as, 'a strong line, or rather wedge, of infantry, forming a wall with their shields',[47] and he ascribes their defeat to their 'breaking the line of the shield-wall'.[48] of this shield-wall my opponent rashly wrote: the reviewer's [_sic_] theory of an extended shield-wall vanishes like smoke. if wace is any authority ... the question is settled once and for all. there was no extended shield-wall at hastings.[49] of course, 'the reviewer's theory' here is no other than mr freeman's own. if, in spite of the above evidence, it should still be pretended by anyone that the plain meaning of mr freeman's words is not their meaning, i will refer them not to my own interpretation, but to that of mr freeman's friend and colleague, the rev w. hunt, who wrote in the historian's lifetime, 'at his request' and by his 'invitation', and whose proofs were revised by mr freeman himself.[50] this is mr hunt's version: set in close array behind a palisade forming a kind of fortification, _shoulder to shoulder and shield to shield_, the army of harold presented a steady and immovable front to the norman attack ... fatal was the national formation of the english battle, when _men stood in the closest order, forming a wall with their shields_. while no mode of array could be stronger so long as the line remained unbroken it made it hard to form the line again.[51] so, again, in his life of harold: all the heavy-armed force fought in close order, _shield touching shield_, so as to present a complete wall to the enemy.[52] here we have no tortuous imaginings, but, in plain and straightforward words, 'what historians in general evidently mean' when they speak of a 'shield-wall', what it meant to mr freeman, what it means to mr hunt, and it is admitted, to myself.[53] such was the english shield-wall, according to mr freeman, at 'senlac'; it was what mr archer definitely declares it cannot possibly have been. lastly, as to the ground on which mr archer pronounces impossible a continuous shield-wall[54]--namely, that the english could not have fought in such close order,[55] and that the axe-men being 'shieldless ... could not have formed the shield-wall'; one need only confront him with mr freeman's words. mr freeman mr archer referring to the mode of fighting it is enough for me that common of an english army in that age, sense, the tapestry, wace,[58] and to 'the usual tactics of the our italian chronicler, and his shield-wall', mr freeman wrote of later old french translator all 'the close array of the show that the english axe-men battle-axe men' (p. 444). he had could not or did not form the already written of 'the english shield-wall (_english house carls with their ... huge historical review_, ix. p. 14). battle-axes', accustomed to possibly they [the house carls] fight in 'the close array to the may have formed a genuine shield-wall.'[56] shield-wall; but while forming it they cannot have been _using_ 'they still formed their the 'bipennis', or the two-handed shield-wall and fought with axe (_ibid._, p. 20, note). their great axes.'[57] i am compelled to repeat what i said in the _quarterly review_. we almost hesitate to waste our own and our readers' time on a writer who, professing to vindicate mr freeman's view as against us, devotes his energies to proving that view to be utterly absurd.[59] nor will mr archer derive comfort from 'our only english "specialist" on mediaeval warfare';[60] who holds, as i had pointed out, that 'the english axemen' did fight 'arranged in a compact mass'.[61] it is significant that the fact mr archer so confidently rejects is precisely that on which i am at one with mr freeman, mr hunt, and mr oman, and to which the original authorities bear witness with peculiar unanimity. thus william of poitiers, an authority of the first rank, describes the english as 'maxime conferti', speaks of their 'nimia densitas', and proceeds to dwell on the terrible effect of their weapon, the famous battle-axe. william of malmesbury tells us that the axemen 'impenetrabilem cuneum faciunt'. even mr archer's authority, wace, writes of these warriors: a pie furent _serrement_. baudri describes the english as 'consertos',[62] and the _brevis relatio_ as 'spissum agmen'. bishop guy writes of the 'spissum nemus angligenarum', and styles them 'densissima turba'; henry of huntingdon, we saw, tells us that they were arranged 'in una acie strictissime', and were thus 'impenetrabiles normannis'. no feature of the great battle is more absolutely beyond dispute. it was the denseness of the english ranks that most vividly struck their foes. 'shield to shield, and shoulder to shoulder', as æthelred describes them at the battle of the standard, they wedged themselves together so tightly that the wounded could not move, nor even the corpses drop. and so they stood together, the living and the dead.[63] and we must remember that this mass of men was 'ranged so closely together in the thick array _of the shield-wall_, that while they only kept their ground the success of an assailant was hopeless'.[64] the conqueror saw, mr freeman reminds us, 'that his only chance was to tempt the english to break their shield-wall'.[65] i need not insist on the point further: i need not even have said so much, but that some of those who read these pages may not have realized the true character of mr archer's phantasies. the 'scutorum testudo', as william of malmesbury describes the famous shield-wall,[66] is depicted, with his usual painstaking care, by the designer of the bayeux tapestry. we read of the 'testudo' at ashdown fight, even in the days of alfred;[67] it was, again, with the shield-wall that 'glorious æthelstan' won the day on the hard-fought field of brunanburh (937);[68] we hear of it at maldon (991), where brihtnoth, we read, 'bade his men work the war-hedge',--'that is, had made his men form the shield-wall, a sort of fortress made by holding their shields close together'.[69] and we do, in mr freeman's words, meet with it 'down to the end', when the war-hedge of maldon was wrought anew, by harold, on the hill of battle, and stood once more as if a fortress--'quasi castellum'. the disposition of the english to render clear the problem involved, i must first sketch as briefly as possible the nature of the ground the english held. the hill of battle is so fully described in mr freeman's narrative that i here need only explain that it was a long narrow spur of the downs, running nearly east and west, of which the south front was defended by the english and attacked by the normans. the one and only point that is certain is that 'on the very crown of the hill', the site of the high altar in the future, was erected the standard of harold.[70] this, then, the centre of the hill, was the centre of the english host. but the ground to which our attention is directed, as having 'really played the most decisive part in the great event of the place', lay to the west of this, 'where the slope is gentlest of all, where the access to the natural citadel is least difficult'.[71] mr freeman assumes that this ground--the 'english right', as he terms it--where the 'ascent is easiest in itself', was allotted to 'the least trustworthy portion of the english army', to 'the sudden levies of the southern shires'.[72] for this assumption, i hasten to add, there is no authority whatever. he further assumes that the first english to leave their post, in pursuit of the enemy, 'were, of course, some of the defenders of the english right'.[73] william, he holds, at the crisis of the battle, resolved to draw them again from their post by a partial feigned retreat, that 'meanwhile another division might reach the summit through the gap thus left open'. accordingly, tempted by this stratagem, 'the english on the right wing rushed down and pursued', and their error proved 'fatal to england'.[74] the duke's great object was now gained; the main end of harold's skilful tactics had been frustrated by the inconsiderate ardour of the least valuable portion of his troops. through the rash descent of the light-armed on the right, the whole english army lost its vantage-ground. the pursuing english had left the most easily accessible portion of the hill open to the approach of the enemy.... the main body of the normans made their way on to the hill, no doubt by the gentle slope at the point west of the present buildings. the great advantage of the ground was now lost; the normans were at last on the hill.[75] such is mr freeman's explanation of how the battle was won,[76] for in this episode he discovers the decisive turning-point of the day.[77] now, let us consider what is involved in the theory here set forth. 'harold's skilful tactics', we find, consisted in entrusting his weakest point, the least defensible portion of his position, to 'the least trustworthy portion of the english army'. the natural result of these insane tactics was that his weak point was forced, and the english right turned.[78] and mr freeman, having made this clear, complains of 'the criticisms of monks on the conduct of a consummate general', and insists that 'nowhere is harold's military greatness so distinctly felt as when ... we tread the battlefield of his own choice'. but there is worse to come. such tactics as these would have been mad enough, even if these raw peasants had stood behind a barricade; but if, as i hold, that barricade is a purely imaginary creation, we ask ourselves what would have happened to these unhappy creatures, protected by no 'shield-wall', and armed with 'such rustic weapons as forks and sharp stakes',[79] when, first riddled by norman arrows and then attacked by norman infantry, they were finally, broken and defenceless, charged by heavy cavalry. the first onslaught would have scattered them to the winds, and have won, in so doing, the key of the english position.[80] remembering this, it is strange to learn that 'the consummate generalship of harold is nowhere more conspicuously shown than in this memorable campaign', and that his was 'that true skill of the leader of armies, which would have placed both harold and william high among the captains of any age'. but if the generalship of harold was shown by entrusting to his worst troops his weakest and most important point, while posting 'the flower of the english army' just where his ground was strongest, what are we to say of 'the generalship of william, his ready eye, his quick thought', if he failed to detect and avail himself of this glaring blunder? for instead of concentrating his attack upon harold's weak point, he left it to be assailed, we learn, by 'what was most likely the least esteemed' portion of his host,[81] while he himself with his picked troops dashed himself against an impregnable position like a mad bull against a wall. 'we read,' says mr freeman, 'with equal admiration of the consummate skill with which harold chose his position and his general scheme of action, and of the wonderful readiness with which william formed and varied his plans.' for myself, i should have thought that the tactics he describes--tactics which stirred him to a burst of admiration for 'the two greatest of living captains'--would have disgraced the most incompetent commander that ever took the field. but harold, after all, was no fool. are we then justified in accusing him of this supreme folly? mr freeman held that 'the relative position of the different divisions in the two armies seems beyond doubt'. there is, however, as i said, absolutely no evidence for mr freeman's assumption that the english right was entrusted to the raw levies. against it is the fact that in this quarter the first assault was soonest repulsed: against it also is all analogy drawn from the study of english tactics. snorro's description of stamfordbridge is evidence, at least, that 'the fortress of shields' had a continuous line of bucklers along its whole front: æthelred gives us the reason in his story of the battle of the standard; namely, that it was the front line which had to meet the shock ('periculosum dicebant si primo aggressu inermes armatis occurrerent'). it was therefore an essential principle of tactics 'quatinus armati armatos impeterent, milites congrederentur militibus'.[82] therefore on cowton moor (1138), as (i hold) on the hill of battle (1066), we find the 'strenuissimi milites in prima fronte locati'.[83] the words 'and the lighter troops behind them', which originally followed here, have been objected to by miss norgate, who had originally made the same statement,[84] but who now wishes to withdraw it.[85] henry of huntingdon, however--like æthelred, a contemporary authority--agrees with him in describing the dismounted knights, men with shields and _loricæ_ like the 'housecarls' at hastings, as forming an 'iron wall' along the english front.[86] if then mailed warriors formed the front line, it is difficult to see where the 'inermis plebs', as æthelred terms it, could be but 'behind them'. the fact is that the battle of the standard, for which we have excellent authorities, is of no small value for the study of the battle of hastings, as my opponents seem to be uncomfortably aware. 'the tactics,' mr freeman admits, 'were english.' we find there again the same dense array,[87] the same tactics for defence, though now rendered less passive by the development of the bowman.[88] there can, i think, be little question, if we combine the several accounts, that the standard, with the older chiefs around it, formed the kernel of the host;[89] that the rude levies of the shire were massed round about them;[90] and that the outer rim was formed by the mailed knights, with the archers crouching for shelter behind their 'iron wall'. harking back to sherstone fight (1016), we encounter precisely the same formation. 'the king,' mr freeman writes, 'placed his best troops in front, and the inferior part of his army in the rear.' and he added, 'we must remember these tactics when we come to the great fight of senlac'.[91] this was, unhappily, just what he failed to do. 'william of poitiers,' he strangely complained, 'has his head full of agamemnon and of xerxes, but this obvious analogy does not seem to have occurred to him.' have we also the reason why our author himself overlooked these obvious analogies in the fact that to illustrate the battle of hastings he quotes some five and twenty times from the odyssey and the iliad, from herodotus and xenophon, from æschylus, plutarch, and dio cassius; from livy, tacitus, ammianus, and even ælius spartianus? in his later edition, however, he inserted in a footnote the words: 'on placing the inferior troops in the rear, see the tactics of eadmund at sherstone.'[92] 'in the _rear_?' yes, but that is precisely my contention. the assumption that i am assailing is that they formed the _wings_. but we are not even here at the end of mr freeman's confusion. he had meanwhile, in another work, published about the same time as the first edition of his third volume, written thus: as far as i can see, king harold put these bad troops _in the back_ ... but his picked men he put _in front_, where the best troops of the enemy were likely to come.[93] this is exactly my own view; it is that 'essential principle of tactics' on which i have insisted throughout, and on which miss norgate has rashly endeavoured to pour contempt.[94] mr freeman, moreover, further on, wrote of his 'light armed' as 'the troops _in the rear_',[95] which is again my contention. what seems to have happened is that he got into his head (i can imagine how) that the 'light-armed' formed the wings, and arranged the battle on that assumption. then remembering, when it was too late, that, according to his own precedent, they ought to have been in the rear, he hesitated to introduce a change which would affect his whole theory of the battle, and compel him to approach it _de novo_.[96] but indeed, even apart from this, it seems doubtful, examining mr freeman's narrative, whether he had formed a clear conception of how the english troops were arranged, and whether, if so, he kept it in view, consistently, throughout. if we honestly seek to learn what his conception was, a careful comparison of pp. 472, 473, 475, 490, and 505, with the ground-plan, will show that the whole right wing was composed of 'light-armed troops, who broke their line to pursue'. and this view seems to be accepted and defended by miss norgate, who, writing as his champion, declares that to her the conclusion embodied in his ground-plan 'seems irresistible'.[97] on the other hand, pp. 471, 480, 487, and 732 most undoubtedly convey the impression that, as i have maintained, the heavy-armed english were extended along the whole front,[98] and that their defeat, in mr freeman's words (p. 732), was 'owing to their breaking the line of the shield-wall'. i suspect that he was led thus to contradict himself by the obvious concentration of his interest on 'the great personal struggle which was going on beneath the standard' (p. 487). here, as is often the case throughout his work, mr freeman's treatment of his subject was essentially dramatic. to bring his heroes into high relief, he thrust into the background the rest of his scene as of comparatively small account. in this spirit, for instance, he wrote: a new act in the awful drama of that day had now begun. the duke himself, at the head of his own normans, again pressed towards the standard.... a few moments more and the mighty rivals might have met face to face, and the war-club of the bastard might have clashed against the lifted axe of the emperor of britain (p. 483). homer, doubtless, would have made them meet; but a great dramatic opportunity was lost: the 'mighty rivals' seem never to have got within striking distance. meanwhile, however, the warring hosts are left quite in the background; their fate is that of a stage crowd engaged in a stage battle. i do not mean, of course, that mr freeman ignores them, but that he was so engrossed in the personal exploits of his heroes as to be impatient of that careful study which the battle as a whole required, and comparatively careless of consistency in his allusions to the english array. the charge, in short, that i have brought throughout against the disposition of the english in mr freeman's narrative is that his view, 'with all that it involves, was based on no authority, was merely the offspring of his own imagination, and was directly at variance with the only precedent that he vouched for the purpose'.[99] there is absolutely not a scrap of evidence that--as shown on the 'accurate' ground-plan--the english army was drawn up in three divisions, the 'housecarls' forming the centre, and the 'light-armed' the two wings. we do not even know that it formed an almost straight line.[100] the whole arrangement is sheer guesswork, and analogy, here our only guide, is wholly against it. i cannot insist too strongly on the charge i have here made. it is no 'matter of secondary importance';[101] nor is it the case that my argument as to the 'palisade' is, as mr archer pretended, 'the only definite and palpable charge' that i bring 'against mr freeman's account of the great battle'.[102] for, as i wrote from the very first, 'rejecting mr freeman's views on the groupings of the english host, we reject with them _in toto_ the story he has built upon them'.[103] my own view is based upon the fact that, in the military tactics as in the military architecture of the age, the defence trusted largely to its power of passive resistance: this was the essential principle of the ponderous norman keep; and precisely as the walls of that keep were formed of an ashlar face of masonry backed by masses of rubble, so the fighting line of a force standing on the defensive was composed of a compact facing of heavily-armed troops backed by a rabble of half-armed peasants, or at best by what we may term the light infantry of the day. when the foe was advancing to the attack, these rear lines could discharge such weapons as they possessed--darts, arrows, stones, etc.--from behind the shelter of their comrades,[104] while at the moment of actual shock they would form a passive backing, which would save the front ranks from being broken by the enemy's impact. as the great object of the attack was to break through the line, a formation which virtually gave the advantage now possessed by a solid over a hollow square would naturally commend itself to the defence. now in these tactics we have the key to the true story of the battle. but, first, we must dismiss from our minds mr freeman's fundamental assumption, and understand that the english 'hoplites' were not massed in the centre, but were extended along the whole front, precisely as they were in battles fought both before and after. the fighting face of harold's host was composed of this heavy soldiery, clad in helmets and mail. arrayed in the closest order, they presented to an advancing enemy the aspect of a living rampart ('quasi castellum'). how the normans attacked that rampart it will now be my task to show. the norman advance from telham hill duke william scanned that living rampart, and saw clearly that 'his only chance was to tempt the english to break their shield-wall'.[105] it is chiefly from baudri's poem that we learn how he set about it.[106] there is no question that the fight began with an advance of the norman infantry. william of poitiers and bishop guy are in complete accordance on the fact.[107] but as my description of the infantry has been challenged,[108] i may show that it is quite beyond dispute.[109] to my argument, as reprinted below, it has been objected that i fail 'to take account of the distinction between light-armed and heavy-armed infantry'.[110] it will be seen that my argument turns, not on the armour, but on the _weapons_ of the foot. i have challenged my opponents to produce mention of any weapons but crossbows,[111] or bows and arrows, and need scarcely say that they cannot. describing the 'armour and weapons of the normans', mr freeman, avowedly following the tapestry, represented the infantry as all archers,[112] and divided them into two classes: (1) those 'without defensive harness'; (2) those who 'wore the defences common to the horse and foot of both armies ... the close-fitting coat of mail ... and the conical helmet'.[113] now this division is exactly reproduced in the words of william of poitiers, who divides his 'pedites' into two classes, distinguished only by the fact that in one were the 'firmiores et loricatos'. he does not say that the latter were _not_ archers, or crossbowmen, nor did mr freeman venture to assign them any other weapons.[114] bishop guy, moreover, distinctly tells us that they were crossbowmen (_vide infra_). the advance, therefore, in modern language, consisted of skirmishers, represented by archers and perhaps some crossbowmen; supports, namely, crossbowmen who, as a somewhat superior class, would mostly have defensive armour; and, lastly, the cavalry as reserve.[115] now what was the intention of this advance? mr freeman assumed, without hesitation, that the foot 'were to strive to break down the palisades ... and so to make ready the way for the charge of the horse' (p. 467); that 'the infantry were, therefore, exposed to the first and most terrible danger' (_ibid._); 'that the french infantry had to toil up the hill, and to break down the palisade' (p. 477).[116] but we find, on reference, that the above writers say nothing of any such intention, and do not even mention the existence of a palisade.[117] moreover, the only weapons they speak of are crossbows and bows and arrows, which are scarcely the tools for pioneers. but william of poitiers puts us on the track of a very different explanation: 'pedites itaque normanni propius accedentes _provocant_ anglos, missilibus in eos vulnera dirigunt atque necem'. here baudri comes to our aid: nam neque normannus consertos audet adire nec valet a cuneo quemlibet excipere. arcubus utantur dux imperat atque balistis; nam prius has mortes anglia tunc didicit. tunc didicere mori quam non novere sagitta creditur a cælo mors super ingruere hos velut a longe comitatur militis agmen, palantes post se miles ut excipiat. the normans dared not face the serried ranks of the english: the maxim that cavalry should not charge unbroken infantry was asserting itself already. but the only means of breaking those ranks, of throwing the english into confusion, was to gall them by archers and slingers till some of them should sally forth, when their assailants would turn tail and leave them to be caught in the open and ridden down. as bishop guy expresses it: præmisit pedites committere bella sagittis, et balistantes inserit in medio, quatinus infigant volitantia vultibus arma, vulneribusque datis ora retro faciant, ordine post pedites sperat stabilire quirites these tactics, says baudri, were crowned with success; the maddened english, as they dashed forth to strike their tormentors to the ground, were cut off in every direction by the horsemen waiting their chance: tunc præ tristitia gens effera præque pudore egreditur palans, insequiturque vagos. normanni simulantque fugam fugiuntque fugantes, intercepit eos undique præpes equus. ilico cæduntur; sic paulatim minuuntur, nec minuebatur callidus ordo ducis. this account is both intelligible and consistent, but differs wholly from that of mr freeman. it had, however, been virtually anticipated by mr oman, who in his _art of war in the middle ages_ (p. 25), points out, with much felicity, that the archers, if unsupported by the knights, could easily have been driven off the field by a general charge. united, however, by the skilful tactics of william, the two divisions of the invading army won the day. the saxon mass was subjected to exactly the same trial which befell the british squares in the battle of waterloo: incessant charges by a gallant cavalry were alternated with a destructive fire of missiles. nothing can be more maddening than such an ordeal to the infantry soldier, rooted to the spot by the necessities of his formation. let us compare the two theories. mr freeman's, here again, is not even consistent. he first tells us that for the knights to charge, with 'the triple palisade still unbroken, would have been sheer madness'; in fact it was 'altogether useless' for them to advance until the infantry had broken down the palisade.[118] but this the infantry failed to do,[119] whereupon--the cavalry charged 'the impenetrable fortress of timber' (p. 479)! one is surely reminded of the immortal don, when 'a todo el galope de rocinante', he charged the windmill. my own theory involves no such inconsistencies. i hold--not as a conjecture based on a hypothetical palisade, but on the excellent authority of baudri and william of poitiers, that the infantry were used for the definite purpose of galling the english by their missiles, and so enticing them to leave their ranks and become a prey to the horse. as soon as their line had thus been broken, the cavalry were to charge. up to this point, the english army, as a whole, had kept its formation; but now the strain on its patience had become too great to be borne. breaking its ranks, with one accord, the whole host rushed upon its foes, and drove them before it in confusion right up to the duke's post: tandem jactura gens irritata frequenti, ordinibus spretis irruit unanimis. tunc quoque plus solito fugientum terga cecidit, et miles vultum fugit ad usque ducis. this explains what had always been to me a difficulty, namely, the panic-stricken flight of the normans at this stage of the battle. that they should have 'lost heart' (p. 480) at the firmness of the english is natural enough; but that they should have 'turned and fled' (_ibid._) from a force which did not pursue them seemed improbable. the difficulty is solved by baudri's mention of the wild onslaught by the english. moreover, bishop guy's description of the rout of the assailants--which mr freeman assigned to this stage of the battle--agrees well with that of baudri: anglorum populus, numero superante, repellit hostes inque retro compulit ora dari; et fuga ficta prius fit tunc virtute coacta; normanni fugiunt, dorsa tegunt clipei. again, baudri's poem suggests a novel view by its definite statement that the normans in their flight reached the duke's post. mr freeman imagined that the duke himself had been fighting in the front line (pp. 479, 480), but a careful comparison of his two authorities, william of poitiers and bishop guy (p. 482), will show that, on the contrary, they support baudri's statement. each speaks of the duke as 'meeting' (_occurrens_--_occurrit_) the fugitives, a difficulty which mr freeman evaded by writing that 'he met _or pursued_ the fugitives'. from this flight the normans were rallied by the desperate efforts of the duke himself, who, as is usual at such moments, was believed to have fallen. i deem this episode a fixed point, and it conveniently divides the battle. all our four leading authorities--the tapestry, william of poitiers, bishop guy, and baudri--are here in complete agreement. william describes the duke as 'nudato insuper capite'; guy tells us that 'iratus galea nudat et ipse caput'; baudri writes 'subito galeam submovet a capite'; in the tapestry, 'william (writes dr bruce), when he wishes to show himself in order to contradict the rumour that he has been killed, is obliged to lift his helmet almost off his head' (p. 98). it is singular that so striking and well-established an episode is wholly ignored by wace. the fosse disaster the serious character of the assailants' flight is duly recognized by mr freeman.[120] we could have no more eloquent witness to the fact than the admission even by william of poitiers that the duke's normans themselves gave way, or the description of them by bishop guy as 'gens sua victa'. the only point in question here is whether what i call 'the fosse disaster' was an incident of this headlong flight or happened at a later stage of the battle. mr freeman, discussing 'the order of events',[121] faced the difficulty frankly, observing that guy had placed the feigned flight before what i have termed above the dividing incident of the day, and that this view 'may be thought to be confirmed by the tapestry', etc., etc. we have here perhaps the most difficult problem raised in the course of the battle, and one which it would be easier and safer to pass over in silence. as to guy, i suggest, as a possible solution--it does not profess to be more--that what he was describing was not the great feigned flight but the lesser man[oe]uvres of the same character described by baudri above. he may, of course, have transferred to these the importance of the later episode. on the real flight, at least, he is sound. of the tapestry i would speak with more confidence. 'in the nature of things,' mr freeman wrote, 'exact chronological order is not its strongest point' (p. 768). but in this case there was nothing to make it depart from that order, no reason why it should not place the incident of 'the fosse disaster' after the central incident of the day, instead of before, if that were its right position. moreover, it is here, we find, in the closest agreement with wace; and though i claim, as did mr freeman, the right of rejecting his testimony when wholly unsupported (as still more, when opposed to probability), yet such marked agreement as this is not to be lightly cast aside. in any case, nothing can be more unfortunate than mr freeman's treatment of what he describes as the 'great slaughter of the french in the western ravine' (p. 489). this is a scene invented by mr freeman alone, and illustrates the peculiar use he made, at times, of his authorities. there is no question that the norman knights suffered, in the course of the day, at least one such disaster as the nobles of france at courtrai (1302) or her cuirassiers at waterloo. but five authorities, so far as one can see, place the incident in the thick of the battle, while three others assign it to the pursuit of the defeated english. it is not strange, therefore, that some writers should have held that there was but one such incident: mr freeman, however, holds that there were two; and i expressly disclaim questioning his view, the matter being one of opinion. assuming then, as he does, that the episode occurred in the course of the battle, i turn to the spirited version of wace, as mr archer defies me to 'impeach wace's authority' (p. 346). the 'old norman poet' is here very precise. he first tells us (ll. 7869-70, 8103-6) that the english had made a 'fosse', which the normans had passed unnoticed in their advance.[122] these passages mr freeman accepts without question (p. 476). but then wace proceeds to state (ll. 8107-20) that the normans, driven back, as we have seen, by the english, tumbled, men and horses, into this treacherous 'fosse' and perished in great numbers. now wace, far from standing alone, is here in curiously close agreement with the tapestry of bayeux. two successive scenes in that 'most authetic record' are styled 'hic ceciderunt simul angli et franci in pr[oe]lio; hic odo episcopus baculum tenens confortat pueros.' wace describes these scenes in thirty-six lines (ll. 8103-38), devoting eighteen lines to the first and the same number to the second. actual comparison alone can show how close the agreement is. henry of huntingdon, we may add, independently confirms the statement that english as well as french perished in the fatal fosse.[123] now all this is quite opposed to mr freeman's 'conception of the battle'. he had, therefore, to adapt, with no gentle hands, his authorities to his requirements. cinderella's stepmother, when her daughter's foot could not be got into the golden shoe, armed herself, we read, with axe and scissors, and trimmed it to the requisite shape. with no less decision the late professor set about his own task. wace's evidence he simply suppressed; henry of huntingdon's he ignored; but that of the bayeux tapestry could not be so easily disposed of. i invite particular attention to his treatment of this, his 'highest authority'. retaining in its natural place (pp. 481-2) the second of the two scenes we have described, he threw forward the one preceding it to a later stage of the battle (p. 490). nor did his vigorous adaptation stop even here. the scene thus wrenched from its place depicts a single incident: mounted normans are tumbling headlong into a ditch at the foot of a mound, on which 'light-armed' english stand assailing them with their weapons. the fight is hand to hand; the bodies touch. and yet the professor treats this scene as a description of two quite separate events happening at a distance from each other. these he terms (p. 489) the 'stand of the english at the detached hill'; and the 'great slaughter of the french in the western ravine'. but on referring to his own ground-plan, we find that this 'ravine' and the 'detached hill' were a quarter of a mile apart, with the slopes of the main hill between them. my criticism here is twofold. in the first place, mr freeman endeavoured to conceal the liberties he had taken with his leading authority. no one would gather from his narrative of the battle that any such violence had been used; nor would anyone who read of the 'hill' episode that 'the scene is vividly shown in the tapestry' (p. 489), and, subsequently, of the 'ravine' disaster, that 'this scene is most vividly shown in the tapestry' (p. 490), imagine that 'the incidents of the ravine and the little hill' (p. 768) are in the tapestry one and the same. in the second place, the large part which the writer's own imagination plays in his narrative of the fight is here clearly seen. there is nothing, for instance, in any authority to connect 'the western ravine' with 'the great slaughter of the french'. it is placed by those who mention it in a 'fosse', 'fossatum', or 'fovea'. 'if wace is any authority,' to quote mr archer's words, 'the question is settled once and for all';[124] the slaughter took place not in the 'ravine', but in a ditch which according to him, the english had dug to the south of the hill, and which, according to henry of huntingdon, they had cunningly concealed. mr freeman produces no authority in support of his own fancy; his only argument is that the slaughter must have happened somewhere to the south or south-west of the hill. the small ravine to the south-west seems exactly what is wanted (p. 771). the 'western ravine' however, does not fulfil these requirements (see ground-plan, where it lies to the north-west of the hill); while wace's 'fosse', which--though here ignoring it--he had already accepted, lay, as required, to the south of the hill. wace mentions another instance (ll. 1737-50) in which this stratagem was adopted,[125] but whether our ditch was dug, as he states, expressly or not, the fact of its existence does not depend on his evidence alone. to resume: accepting provisionally mr freeman's view (iii. 770) that there were two disasters to the horse, one 'happening comparatively early in the battle', and the other 'which william of poitiers, orderic and the battle chronicler place at the very end of the battle', as occurring in the pursuit of the defeated english, we find that the former is mentioned by five writers. the tapestry and wace agree absolutely in making it an episode of the real flight of the normans before the great rally; henry of huntingdon assigns it to the great feigned flight, later in the battle; william of malmesbury seems to make it happen during the pursuit by the normans after their feigned flight; the anonymous writer quoted by andresen (ii. 713) from le prevost may be left out of the question. yet, in spite of all this contradiction, mr freeman assigns this striking episode, not as a conjecture, but as historic fact, to the pursuit of the english by the 'bretons'[126] after the feigned flight (p. 489). let me make my position clear. we expect an historian to weigh, as an expert, the evidence before him: we look to him for guidance where that evidence is conflicting. but we have a right to protest against the statement, as historic fact, of hypotheses which cannot be established, and which are quite possibly wrong. where the evidence is flatly contradictory, the fact that it is so should be made clear; conflicting statements should not be evaded, nor evidence, such as that of the tapestry, appealed to, when it proves to be opposed to, not in favour of, the writer's hypothesis. dealing with the conqueror's march on london, after his great victory, mr parker has insisted with much force, on the principle for which i am contending. though, by leaving out here and there the discrepancies, the residue may be worked up into a consecutive and consistent series of events, such a process amounts to making history, not writing it. amidst a mass of contradictory evidence, it is impossible to arrive at any sure conclusion.... it is, however, comparatively easy to piece together such details as will fit of the various stories, and still more easy to discover reasons for the results which such mosaic work produces ... [but] it cannot be reasonably regarded as real history. the method by which the results are obtained bears too close a resemblance to that by which ... some of the legends described in the fifth chapter have come to be accepted as historical narratives.[127] that is the danger. such a narrative as that which mr freeman has given us must 'come to be accepted as historical' if allowed to pass current without a grave warning. it will doubtless be replied that in his appendices, he frankly admits that 'it is often hard to reconcile the various accounts'; but the question at issue is whether one is justified when, as here, the various accounts are not only 'hard' but impossible to reconcile, in constructing a definite narrative at all, instead of honestly admitting that the matter must be left in doubt. the great feigned flight there is no feature of the famous battle more familiar or more certain than that of the feigned retreat. it is necessary here to grasp mr freeman's view, because he discovers in this man[oe]uvre and its results the decisive turning point of the day.[128] that there was a great feigned flight, which induced a large portion of the english to break their formation and pursue their foes, is beyond question.[129] but mr freeman, on this foundation, built up a legend, for which, we shall find, there exists no evidence whatever. he first assumed that it was 'most likely' the left wing of the assailants which 'turned in seeming flight'[130] (p. 488), and that it was, consequently, 'the english on the right wing' who 'rushed down and pursued them'. thus: through the rash descent of the light-armed on the right, the whole english army lost its vantage ground. the pursuing english had left the most easily accessible portion of the hill open to the approach of the enemy (p. 490). the result, of course, was that 'the main body of the normans made their way on the hill, no doubt by the gentle slope' at this point (_ibid._). the great advantage of the ground was now lost; the normans were at last on the hill. instead of having to cut their way up the slope, and through the palisades, they could now charge to the east right against the defenders of the standard (_ibid._). these words are most important. they set forth mr freeman's theory that harold now found the normans charging down upon his right flank instead of attacking him in front. it was in this sense i wrote 'that his weak point was forced, and the english right turned', as the natural result of the 'insane' tactics attributed to him by his champion.[131] the man[oe]uvre assigned by mr freeman to the duke is, in fact, that by which marlborough won the battle of ramillies, where he got on to the hill by dislodging the french right, and then wheeled to his own right, outflanking the french centre. when we turn from this elaborate theory to the authorities on which it is supposed to be based, we find, with some astonishment, that it is all sheer imagination. william of poitiers, on whom the writer seemed mainly to rely for the feigned flight, states that: normanni sociaque turba ... terga dederunt, fugam ex industriâ simulantes-words which distinctly imply that this feigned flight was general. henry of huntingdon merely writes: 'docuit dux willelmus _genti suæ_ fugam simulare.' no one, certainly, says or implies that it was restricted to the left wing. as for the theory that 'the main body of the normans' were, by this man[oe]uvre, enabled to seize the western portion of the hill, and thus attack harold on his flank, it is more imaginary, if possible, still. the fact is that, as i explained in my original article,[132] mr freeman had wholly misconceived the nature of william's man[oe]uvre. the feigned flight was not a simple (as he supposed), but a combined movement. the best account of that movement is found in the battle chronicle: tandem strenuissimus boloniæ comes eustachius clam, callida præmeditata arte--fugam cum exercitu duce simulante--super anglos sparsim agiliter insequentes cum manu valida a tergo irruit, _sicque et duce hostes ferociter invadente ipsis interclusis utrinque_ prosternuntur innumeri. this precise statement, which mr freeman omits,[133] affords the clue we seek, explaining the words of william of poitiers, 'interceptos et inclusos undique mactaverunt'. the retreat of the pursuing english was cut off by the count's squadrons, and, caught 'between two fires', they were cut down and butchered. the supposition that, while this was going on, the main body of the normans was riding on to the hill is baseless. the whole host, we have seen, were below, surrounding the english who had left the hill. had mr freeman kept in mind, as he had intended to do, the employment of this old norman device at the relief of arques (1053), he would have seen more clearly what really happened. but this, precisely as with his sherstone precedent, he failed to do. the relief of arques to illustrate the feigned flight by analogy, i append this passage relating to the stratagem at arques. a plan was speedily devised; an ambush was laid; a smaller party was sent forth to practise that stratagem of pretended flight which norman craft was to display thirteen years later [1066] on a greater scale. the normans turned; the french pursued; presently the liers-in-wait were upon them, and the noblest and bravest of the invading host were slaughtered or taken prisoners before the eyes of their king (iii. 133). the man[oe]uvre is elaborately described by wace (ll. 3491-514) in a passage which ought to be compared, in places, with that on the great 'feinte fuie' itself (ll. 8203-70). he carefully distinguishes the two parties essential to the stratagem:[134] partie pristrent des normanz, des forz e des mielz cumbatanz, . . . . . puis pristrent une autre partie, etc., etc. the latter detachment turned in flight and decoyed some of the leading frenchmen past the spot where the ambush was laid. then, facing round, they caught their rash pursuers 'between two fires'. i have shown above, from the 'precise statement' which is found in the 'battle chronicle', that the great man[oe]uvre which deceived the english was a similarly combined one. mr freeman, completely missing this point, makes the norman 'division', which did not take part in the flight 'ride up the hill' (p. 490), where its slopes were deserted, whereas, on the contrary, they thrust themselves between the pursuers and the hill, and then charged on their rear, riding, of course, not on to, but away from the hill. so close is the arques parallel that in wace we find the same words occurring in both cases: a cels kis alouent chazant engleis les aloent gabant e quis alouent leidissant e de paroles laidissant sunt enmi le vis tresturne, .... e franceis sunt a els mesdle (ll. torne lor sunt enmi le vis 3501-4); .... e as engleis entremesler (ll. 8241-2, 8262-4); while william of malmesbury describes the french king as thus 'astutia insidiis exceptus', just as he describes harold, in turn as thus 'astutiâ willelmi circumventus'. mr freeman quoted both passages, yet failed to note the parallel. i speak, it will be seen, of 'the relief of arques'. as my critic so rashly assumed that in my original article i exhausted mr freeman's errors,[135] i may point out that this subject introduces us, at once, to fresh ones. our author, for instance, held that arques was not relieved. let us see. we are first rightly told, on the authority of william of poitiers, that the duke blockaded the stronghold (_munitio_) by erecting a _castellum_ at its foot (p. 128). on the next page we are told that the latter was 'a wooden tower'--which is precisely what it was not--and that it 'is described as a _munitio_' by william of poitiers, whereas that term, as we have just seen, denoted, on the contrary, the rebel stronghold itself. then we are told that the french king marched to the relief of the rebels, bringing with him 'a good stock of provisions, of corn, and of wine' for the purpose, but 'was far from being successful in his enterprise' (p. 131). in fact, he 'went home, having done nothing towards the immediate object of his journey--the relief of the besieged' (p. 137). mr freeman added in a note: 'so i understand the not very clear statement of william of poitiers that the king went away.' now, william's statement (which is quoted by him) is absolutely clear: _perveniens tamen quo ire intenderat_, rex exacerbatissimis animis summâ vi præsidium attentavit: willelmum ab ærumnis uti eriperet, pariter decrementum sui, stragem suorum vindicaret. the king, that is, in spite of the ambush, reached his destination (the blockaded stronghold) and then furiously attacked the _castellum_ below, with the double object of raising the blockade and of avenging the death of his followers. wace is, if possible, even more explicit. after describing the affair of the ambush, he proceeds thus: les somiers fist apareilier, la garisun prendre e chargier, _à la tur d'arches fist porter_, il meisme fu al mener (ii. ll. 3519-22). arques, therefore, was duly relieved; the blockading party being only strong enough to defend, when attacked, its own _castellum_. we will certainly not say of mr freeman that he had not read his wace 'with common care'--to quote from his criticism on professor pearson--but really, when _more suo_ he corrected _ex cathedrâ_ the faults of others, he might at least have made sure of his facts. we will take (from the narrative of the battle of hastings) the case of the knighting of harold on the eve of the breton war: wace mr freeman e heraut out iloc geu, mr planché says that wace lays e par la lande fu passez, the scene at avranches. he probably quant il fu duc amenez, refers to the roman de rou, 13723, qui a aurenches donc esteit but the knighthood is not there e en bretaigne aler deueit, spoken of (p. 229). _la le fist li dus chevalier_ [ll. 13720-5]. but it is only the feigned flight that connects the battle of hastings with arques and its blockade. we read, as the battle is about to begin, of 'the aged walter giffard, the lord of longueville, the hero of arques and mortemer' (p. 457). as our author breaks the thread of his narrative (pp. 128-37) to tell us in detail about those whose names occur in it, we need not scruple in this instance to do the same. turning back, therefore, we read: the chief who now commanded below the steep of arques lived to refuse to bear the banner of normandy below the steep of senlac ... and to found, like so many others among the baronage of normandy, a short-lived earldom in the land which he helped to conquer (p. 123). in the act of that refusal he is thus described: even in the days of arques [1053] and mortimer [1054] he was an aged man, and now [1066] he was old indeed; his hair was white, his arm was failing (p. 465). yet we meet the veteran again, a generation later, as 'old walter giffard, now [1090] earl of buckingham, in england ... the aged warrior of arques and senlac' (_w.r._, i. 231). 'nor do we wonder,' we read, 'to find,' among the supporters of william rufus in 1095, 'the name of walter giffard, him [_sic_] who appeared as an aged man forty years before' (_w.r._, i. 472). but even mr freeman admits that 'we are somewhat surprised to find', among the opponents of henry i in 1101, 'now at the very end of his long life, the aged walter giffard, lord of longueville, and earl of buckingham' (_w.r._, ii. 395). surprised? we are indeed; for, if he was 'an aged man' half a century before, what must he have been when he joined the rebels in 1101? it reminds one of a delightful passage in the quaint 'memorie of the somervells', where the artless author, speaking of the action, in 1213, of his ancestor 'being then near the nyntieth and fourth year of his age', observes: what could have induced him ... to join himself with the rebellious barrons at such an age, when he could not act any in all human probabilitie, and was as unfit for counsel, is a thing to be admired, but not understood or knowne. one need scarcely point out that mr freeman has confused two successive bearers of the name. the confusion is avoided by the duchess of cleveland in her work on 'the battle abbey roll', as it had been by planché and previous writers. i here notice it chiefly as illustrating mr freeman's ready acceptance of even glaring improbabilities. but one of the most singular flaws in the late professor's work was his evident tendency to confuse two or more persons bearing the same name. three or four leofstans of london were rolled by him into one; henry of essex was identified with a henry who had a different father and who lived in cumberland; while a whole string of erroneous conclusions followed, we saw, from identifying osbern 'filius ricardi' with osbern 'cognomine pentecost'.[136] it is strange that one who was so severe on confusion of identity where places were concerned[137] should have been, in the case of persons, guilty of that confusion. summary i would now briefly recapitulate the points i claim to have established. we have seen, in the first place, that mr freeman's disposition of the english forces is, with all that it involves, nothing but a sheer guess--a guess to which he did not consistently adhere, and to which his own precedent, moreover, is directly opposed. secondly, as to the 'palisade' which formed, according to him, so prominent a feature of the battle, we have found that of the passages he vouched for its existence only one need even be considered; and that one, according to himself, where he last quotes and deals with it, describes, not a palisade but the time-honoured 'array of the shield-wall'.[138] then, passing to the battle and taking it stage by stage, i have shown that on its opening phase he went utterly astray in search of an imaginary assault on a phantom palisade; we have seen how another such guess transported to 'the western ravine' a catastrophe which, even on his own showing, must have happened somewhere else, and assigned it to a stage of the battle which is quite possibly the wrong one. we have watched him missing the point of the great feigned flight and failing to see how norman craft caught the english in a trap. and lastly, the critical man[oe]uvre of the day, by which the duke's great object was gained, and 'the great advantage of the ground lost' to the english, proves on inquiry--although introduced, like other assertions, as a historic fact--to be yet another unsupported guess: for the statement that by this man[oe]uvre 'the normans were at last on the hill' and could thus 'charge to the east right against the defenders of the standard' there is absolutely no foundation. we have now--confining ourselves to points as to which there can be no question--examined mr freeman's account of the battle of hastings. it is, as i showed at the outset, the very crown and flower of his work, and it is, i venture to assert, mistaken in its essential points. must it, then, be cast aside as simply erroneous and misleading? hardly. in the words of his own criticism on mr coote's _romans in britain_: 'it ought to be read, if only as a curious study, to show how utterly astray an ingenious and thoroughly well-informed man can go.' for there is the true conclusion. the possession of exhaustive knowledge, the devotion of unsparing pains--neither of these were wanting. then 'wanting is--what?' men have differed and will always differ, as to how history should be written; but on one point we are all agreed. the true historian is he, and he only, who, from the evidence before him, can divine the facts. other qualities are welcome, but this is the essential gift. and it was because, here at least, he lacked in that, in spite of all his advantages, in spite of his genius and his zeal, our author, in his story of this battle, failed as we have seen. mr freeman held that his predecessors, thierry and sir francis palgrave, 'singularly resemble each other in a certain lack of critical power'. his own lack, as i conceive it, was of a somewhat different kind. for if he studied the text and weighed the value of his authorities, yet he was often liable to danger from his tendency to a _parti pris_. setting out with his own impression, he read his texts in the light of that impression rather than with an open mind. thus we might say of his 'very lucid and original account' of the great battle, as he said of mr coote's work: 'the truth of the whole matter is that all this very ingenious but baseless fabric has been built upon the foundation of a single error.' had he not stumbled at the outset over that 'quasi castellum', he might never have erected that 'ingenious but baseless fabric'. as it is, while the battle should be largely rewritten, preserving only such incidents as are taken straight from the authorities, the accompanying plan must be wholly destroyed. till then, as dr stubbs has said of the discovery that 'ingulf' was a forgery, 'it remains a warning light, a wandering marshfire, to caution the reader not to accept too abjectly the conclusions of his authority'. what then remains, it may be asked, of mr freeman's narrative? when one remembers its superb vividness, carrying us away in spite of ourselves, one is tempted to reply, in his own words on the saga of stamfordbridge: we have, indeed, a glorious description which, when critically examined, proves to be hardly more worthy of belief than a battlepiece in the iliad.... such is the magnificent legend which has been commonly accepted as the history of this famous battle.... and it is disappointing that, for so detailed and glowing a tale, we have so little of authentic history to substitute (pp. 365-8). for, as he has so justly observed, when dismissing as 'mythical' this 'famous and magnificent saga' (pp. 328-9), 'a void is left which history cannot fill, and which it is forbidden to the historian to fill up from the resources of his own imagination'. accepting the principle here enunciated by mr freeman himself, i do not merely reject demonstrably erroneous statements. i protest against his giving us a narrative drawn 'from the resources of his own imagination'. it is no answer to say that his guesses cannot be actually proved to be wrong; the historian cannot distinguish too sharply between statements drawn from his authorities and guesses, however ingenious, representing imagination alone. no one i am sure, reading mr freeman's brilliant narrative, could imagine how largely his story of the battle is based on mere conjecture. what the battle really was may be thus tersely expressed--it was waterloo without the prussians. the normans could avail nothing against that serried mass. dash'd on every rocky square, their surging charges foam'd themselves away. as mr oman has so well observed, the norman horse might have surged for ever 'around the impenetrable shield-wall'.[139] it was only, as he and mr hunt[140] have shown, by the skilful combination of horsemen and archers, by the maddening showers of arrows between the charges of the horse, that the english, especially the lighter armed, were stung into breaking their formation and abandoning that passive defence to which they were unfortunately restricted. 'while no mode of array could be stronger so long as the line remained unbroken, it made it hard to form the line again.'[141] dazzled by the rapid movements of their foes, now advancing, now retreating, either in feint or in earnest, the english, in places, broke their line, and then the duke, as mr oman writes, 'thrust his horsemen into the gaps'.[142] all this is quite certain, and is what the authorities plainly describe. let us, then, keep to what we know. is it not enough for us to picture the english line stubbornly striving to the last to close its broken ranks, the awful scene of slaughter and confusion, as the old guard of harold, tortured by norman arrows, found the horsemen among them at last, slashing and piercing right and left. still the battle-axe blindly smote; doggedly, grimly still they fought, till the axes dropped from their lifeless grasp. and so they fell. mr archer, when he first came forward to defend 'mr freeman's account of the great battle',[143] observed that i claimed 'here to prove the entire inadequacy of mr freeman's work', that i held him 'wrong, completely wrong in his whole conception of the battle'.[144] and he admitted that 'such a contention, it will at once be perceived, is very different from any mere criticism of detail; it affects the centre and the very heart of mr freeman's work. if he could blunder here in the most carefully elaborated passage of his whole history, he could blunder anywhere; his reputation for accuracy would be gone almost beyond hope of retrieving it' (p. 336). 'blunder', surely, is a harsh word. i would rather say that the historian is seen here at his strongest and at his weakest: at his weakest in his tendency to follow blindly individual authorities in turn, instead of grasping them as a whole, and, worse still, in adapting them, at need, to his own preconceived notions; at his strongest, in his homeric power of making the actors in his drama live and move before us. not in vain has 'the wand of the enchanter', as an ardent admirer once termed it, been waved around harold and his host. we are learning from recent german researches how the narratives of early irish warfare are 'perfectly surrounded with magic'; how, for instance, at the battle of culdreimne 'a druid wove a magic hedge, which he placed before the army as a hindrance to the enemy'. but spells are now no longer wrought with woven paces and with waving hands; and the druid's hedge must go the way of our own magician's 'palisade'. but, as i foresaw, in his eagerness to prove, at least, the existence of a palisade, my critic was soon reduced to impugning mr freeman's own supreme authority, and at last to throwing over mr freeman himself. 'incidit in scyllam cupiens vitare charybdim.' sneering[145] at what the historian termed his 'highest', his 'primary' authority, that 'precious monument', the bayeux tapestry--merely because it will not square with his views--he rejects utterly mr freeman's theory as to its date and origin,[146] and substitutes one which the professor described as 'utterly inconceivable'.[147] he has further informed us that 'common sense' tells him that the english axemen cannot possibly have fought 'in the close array of the shield-wall', as mr freeman says they did.[148] and then he finally demolishes mr freeman's 'conception of the battle' by dismissing 'an imaginary shield-wall',[149] and assuring us that the absurd vision of 'an extended shield-wall vanishes like smoke'.[150] it is impossible not to pity mr freeman's would-be champion. scorning, at the outset, the thought that his hero could err 'in the most carefully elaborated passage of his whole history',[151] his attitude of bold defiance was a joy to mr freeman's friends.[152] [greek: amphi d' ar' autô baine leôn hôs alki pepoithôs, prosthe de hoi dyry t' esche kai aspida pantos eisên, ton ktamenai memaôs hos tis tou g' antios elthoi, smerdalea iachôn.] but his wildly brandished weapon proved more deadly to friend than foe: he discovered, as i knew, he could only oppose me by making jettison of mr freeman's views. of this we have seen above examples striking enough; but the climax was reached in his chief contention, namely, that the lines in the _roman de rou_, which describe, mr freeman asserted, 'the array of the shield-wall',[153] cannot, on many grounds, be 'referred to a shield-wall'.[154] no contradiction could be more complete. so he now finds himself forced to write: i do not say--i have _never_ said--that i agree with every word that mr freeman has written about the great battle; but i do regard his account of hastings as the noblest battle-piece in our historical literature--perhaps in that of the world.[155] 'o most lame and impotent conclusion!' we are discussing whether that account is 'right', not whether it is 'noble'. to the splendour of that narrative i have borne no sparing witness. i have spoken of its 'superb vividness', i have praised its 'epic grandeur', i have dwelt on the writer's 'homeric power of making the actors in his drama live and move before us', and have compared his tale with the 'glorious description' in the saga of stamfordbridge. but the nearer it approaches to the epic and the saga, the less likely is that stirring tale to be rigidly confined to fact. i will not say of mr archer, 'his attack must be held to have failed', for that would imperfectly express its utter and absolute collapse. the whole of my original argument as to the narrative of the battle remains not merely unshaken, but, it will be seen, untouched. mr archer himself has now pleaded that 'the only' point he 'took up directly' was that of the disputed passage in wace;[156] and here he could only make even the semblance of a case by deliberately ignoring and suppressing mr freeman's own verdict (iii. 763-4), to which, from the very first, i have persistently referred. in his latest, as in his earliest article, he adheres to this deliberate suppression, and falsely represents 'mr freeman's interpretation' as 'a palisade or barricade' alone.[157] those who may object to plain speaking should rather denounce the tactics that make such speaking necessary. when my adversary claims that his case is proved, if the disputed passage does not describe a shield-wall, he is perfectly aware that mr freeman distinctly asserted that it did. to suppress that fact, as mr archer does,[158] can only be described as dishonest. judging from the desperate tactics to which my opponent resorted, it would seem that my 'attack' on mr freeman's work cannot here be impugned by any straightforward means. the impotent wrath aroused by its success will lead, no doubt, to other attempts equally unscrupulous and equally futile. but truth cannot be silenced, facts cannot be obscured. i appeal, sure of my ground, to the verdict of historical scholars, awaiting, with confidence and calm, the inevitable triumph of the truth. conclusion 'history is philosophy teaching by examples.' in one sense the period of the conquest was, as mr freeman asserted in his preface, 'a period of our history which is full alike of political instruction and of living personal interest'. in one sense, it is an object-lesson never more urgently needed than it is at the present hour. only that lesson is one which mr freeman could never teach, because it is the bitterest commentary on the doctrines he most adored. in the hands of a patriot, in the hands of a writer who placed england before party, the tale might have burned like a beacon-fire, warning us that what happened in the past, might happen now, today. the battle of hastings has its moral and its moral is for us. an almost anarchical excess of liberty, the want of a strong centralized system, the absorption in party strife, the belief that politics are statesmanship, and that oratory will save a people--these are the dangers of which it warns us, and to which the majority of englishmen are subject now as then. but mr freeman, like the bourbons, never learnt, and never forgot. a democrat first, an historian afterwards, history was for him, unhappily, ever 'past politics'. if he worshipped harold with a blind enthusiasm, it was chiefly because he was a _novus homo_, 'who reigned purely by the will of the people'. he insisted that the english, on the hill of battle, were beaten through lack of discipline, through lack of obedience to their king; but he could not see that the system in which he gloried, a system which made the people 'a co-ordinate authority' with their king, was the worst of all trainings for the hour of battle; he could not see that, like poland, england fell, in large measure, from the want of a strong rule, and from excess of liberty. to him the voice of 'a sovereign people' was 'the most spirit-stirring of earthly sounds'; but it availed about as much to check the norman conquest as the fetish of an african savage, or the yells of asiatic hordes. we trace in his history of sicily the same blindness to fact. dionysius was for him, as he was for dante, merely- dionisio fero che fe' cicilia aver dolorosi anni. but, in truth, the same excess of liberty that left england a prey to the normans had left sicily, in her day, a prey to carthage: the same internal jealousies paralysed her strength. and yet he could not forgive dionysius, the man who gave sicily what she lacked, the rule of a 'strong man armed', because, in a democrat's eyes, dionysius was a 'tyrant'. that i am strictly just in my criticism of mr freeman's attitude at the conquest, is, i think, abundantly manifest, when even so ardent a democrat as mr grant allen admits that a people so helpless, so utterly anarchic, so incapable of united action, deserved to undergo a severe training from the hard task-masters of romance civilization. the nation remained, but it remained as a conquered race, to be drilled in the stern school of the conquerors.[159] such were the bitter fruits of old-english freedom. and, in the teeth of this awful lesson, mr freeman could still look back with longing to 'a free and pure teutonic england',[160] could still exult in the thought that a democratic age is bringing england ever nearer to her state 'before the norman set foot upon her shores'. but the school of which he was a champion has long seen its day. a reactionary movement, as has been pointed out by scholars in america, as in russia[161] has invaded the study of history, has assailed the supremacy of the liberal school, and has begun to preach, as the teaching of the past, the dangers of unfettered freedom. politics are not statesmanship. mr freeman confused the two. there rang from his successor a truer note when, as he traversed the seas that bind the links of the empire, he penned those words that appeal to the sons of an imperial race, sunk in the strife of parties or the politics of a parish pump, to rise to the level of their high inheritance among the nations of the earth. what was the empire, what was india--we all remember that historic phrase--to one whose ideal, it would seem, of statesmanship, was that of an orator in hyde park? godwine, the ambitious, the unscrupulous agitator, is always for him 'the great deliverer'. whether in the sicily of the 'tyrants', or the england of edward the confessor, we are presented, under the guise of history, with a glorification of demagogy. no man ever deserved a higher or a more lasting place in national gratitude than the first man who, being neither king nor priest, stands forth in english history as endowed with all the highest attributes of the statesman. in him, in those distant times, we can revere the great minister, the unrivalled parliamentary leader, the man who could sway councils and assemblies at his will, etc., etc.[162] we know of whom the writer was thinking, when he praised that 'irresistible tongue';[163] he had surely before him a living model, who, if not a statesman, was, no doubt, an 'unrivalled parliamentary leader'. do we not recognize the portrait?- the mighty voice, the speaking look and gesture of that old man eloquent, could again sway assemblies of englishmen at his will.[164] the voice which had so often swayed assemblies of englishmen, was heard once more in all the fulness of its eloquence.[165] but it was not an 'irresistible tongue', nor 'the harangue of a practised orator', of which england stood in need. forts and soldiers, not tongues, are england's want now as then. but to the late regius professor, if there was one thing more hateful than 'castles', more hateful even than hereditary rule, it was a standing army. when the franco-german war had made us look to our harness, he set himself at once, with superb blindness, to sneer at what he termed 'the panic', to suggest the application of democracy to the army, and to express his characteristic aversion to the thought of 'an officer and a gentleman'.[166] how could such a writer teach the lesson of the norman conquest? 'the long, long canker of peace' had done its work--'vivebatur enim tunc pene ubique in anglia perditis moribus, et pro pacis affluentia deliciarum fervebat luxus.'[167] the land was ripe for the invader, and a saviour of society was at hand. while our fathers were playing at democracy, watching the strife of rival houses, as men might now watch the contest of rival parties, the terrible duke of the normans was girding himself for war. _de nobis fabula narratur._ [footnote 1: mr t. a. archer (_contemporary review_, march 1893, p. 336).] [footnote 2: mr freeman saw nothing grotesque in orderic's description of exeter, as 'in plano sita' (_norm. conq._, iv. 153), though its site 'sets exeter distinctly among the hill cities' (freeman's _exeter_, p. 6).] [footnote 3: that i may not be accused of passing over any defence of mr freeman, i give the reference to mr archer's letter in _academy_ of november 4, 1893, arguing, as against mr harrison, that the story of a great 'naval engagement' in 1066 may probably be traced 'to the seaside associations of the name hastings'. unfortunately for him, mr freeman himself had quoted this wild story (iii. 729) and suggested quite a different explanation, namely, that it originated, not in the battle of hastings, but in some real 'naval operations'.] [footnote 4: since this passage appeared in print my opponents themselves have written of the battle of hastings [_sic_], and mr archer has admitted that 'to speak of senlac in ordinary conversation, or in ordinary writing, is a piece of pedantry' (_academy_ _ut supra_). on my own use of the word before i had examined mr freeman's authority, see p. 273.] [footnote 5: _norm. conq._, iii. 444.] [footnote 6: _ibid._, p. 757.] [footnote 7: mr archer writes: '_pel_ is literally "stake", and originally, of course, represented the upright or horizontal stakes which go to make a palisade' (_english historical review_, ix. 6).] [footnote 8: _ibid._, p. 10. the word which mr freeman (and others) rendered 'ash' is rendered 'windows of farm dwellings' by mr archer (see below, p. 308).] [footnote 9: mr archer would have us believe that 'mr freeman really had in his mind ... a real wall of real shields and stakes' (_english historical review_, 16), and that the english would 'strap up their shields to the stakes', would combine 'their shields and poles', and so forth (20).] [footnote 10: this is mr oman's third and (up to now) final explanation (_academy_, june 9, 1894).] [footnote 11: _english historical review_, ix. 232.] [footnote 12: _ibid._, ix. 232-3, 237-8, 240.] [footnote 13: the difficulty of hauling timber even a short distance over broken and hilly ground 'in an october of those days' (_n.c._, iii. 446) must not be forgotten.] [footnote 14: the italics are mr freeman's own.] [footnote 15: he even spoke of it as 'the main castle' (_arch. journ._, xl. 359).] [footnote 16: miss norgate (_angevin kings_) follows him, speaking of their assailants striving 'to assault them as if besieging a fortress'. one is reminded of mr freeman's remark as to hastings, that harold turned 'the battle as far as possible into the likeness of a siege' (see above).] [footnote 17: 'men ranged so closely together in the thick array of the shield-wall' (iii. 471).] [footnote 18: _cont. rev._, march 1893.] [footnote 19: _english historical review_, ix. 12.] [footnote 20: my detailed reply to mr archer's attempt to confuse the 'fosse' and the palisade will be found in _ibid._, ix. 213, 214.] [footnote 21: he paraphrased 'escuz de fenestres è d'altres fuz' as 'firm barricades of ash and other timber'.] [footnote 22: i supply the passage in square brackets (the italics are my own) from the earlier volume to explain mr freeman's reference.] [footnote 23: _quarterly review_, july 1892, p. 14.] [footnote 24: i am loth to introduce into the text the wearisome details of controversy, especially where they are _nihil ad rem_, and have no bearing on my argument. but, lest i should be charged with ignoring any defence of mr freeman, i will briefly explain in this note the attitude adopted by his champions. in the _contemporary review_ of march 1893, mr t. a. archer produced a reply to my original article (_quarterly review_, july 1892), or rather, to that part of it which dealt with the battle of hastings. declaring my attack on the palisade to be my 'only definite and palpable charge against mr freeman's account' (p. 273) which, it will be found, is not the case--he undertook to 'show mr freeman to have been entirely right in the view he took of the whole question' (p. 267). to do this, he deliberately suppressed the fatal passage (iii. 763-4) i have printed above--to which, in my article, i had prominently appealed--in order to represent me as alone in seeing a description of the shield-wall in wace's lines (p. 267). he then insisted that 'there are six distinct objections to translating this passage as if it referred to a shield-wall' (p. 270). instantly reminded by me (_athenæum_, march 18, april 8, 1893), that mr freeman himself had taken it as a description of the shield-wall, and challenged to account for the fact, again charged (_quarterly review_, july 1893, p. 88), with 'ignoring a fact in the presence of which his elaborate argument collapses like a house of cards', further challenged (_academy_, september 16, 1893) to reconcile mr freeman's words (iii. 763-4), with his representation of the historian's position, mr archer continued to shirk the point, till in the _english historical review_ of january 1894, he grudgingly confessed that 'the discovery that a shield-wall (of some sort or other) was implied in this so-called "crucial passage", is due to mr freeman' (p. 3), but he and miss norgate endeavoured to urge that it could not be as i imagined, the shield-wall that he had always spoken of (pp. 3, 16, 62). even this feeble evasion, now seems to be dropped since i disposed of it (_ibid._, 225-7).] [footnote 25: _quarterly review_, july 1892, p. 15.] [footnote 26: see below, p. 284.] [footnote 27: _quarterly review_, july 1893, p. 84.] [footnote 28: _athenæum_, march 18, 1893.] [footnote 29: _english historical review_, ix. 40.] [footnote 30: _ibid._, p. 58.] [footnote 31: _cont. rev._, 351.] [footnote 32: _quarterly review_, july 1893, pp. 93-4.] [footnote 33: _ibid._, ix. 27, 28.] [footnote 34: _english historical review_, 219-25.] [footnote 35: _ibid._, ix. 607. the italics are mr archer's own. his own trusted authority, wace, posts the english in 'un champ' (ii. 7729, 7769)!] [footnote 36: _norman conquest_, iii. 419, 420.] [footnote 37: no one, of course, would treat the tapestry like a modern illustrated journal; but if it be fairly treated, in mr freeman's spirit, one's real wonder is that, under such obvious limitations, the designer should have been so successful as he has. nowhere, perhaps, is the painstaking accuracy of the bayeux tapestry better seen than in its miniature representation of the fortress at dinan. it shows us the _motte_, or artificial mound, surrounded by its ditch, and even the bank beyond the ditch, together with the wooden bridge springing (as we know it did in such castles) from that bank to the summit of the mound. as to mr archer's attempts to show that mr freeman in one or two instances did not value so highly as he did what he deemed the supreme authority for the battle, i need only print mr freeman's words, parallel with his own comments, to show how their character is distorted. mr freeman mr archer the testimony of florence is he rejects the tapestry's account confirmed by a witness more of harold's coronation, unexceptionable than all, by following florence of worcester's the earliest and most statement--that harold was trustworthy witness on the crowned by aldred, archbishop norman side, by the of york--in avowed contemporary tapestry ... in opposition to his own reading of every statement but one.... the tapestry, i.e. that harold the tapestry implies--_it can was crowned by stigand. hardly be said directly to affirm_--that the consecrator was stigand (iii. 582). the representation in the tapestry is singular. _it does not show stigand crowning or anointing harold_ (iii. 620). it has been remarked by mr he rejects _in toto_ the planché and others, that at tapestry's version of edward the this point the order of time confessor's death, for that is forsaken; the burial of 'priceless record' makes _edward eadward is placed before his buried before he died!_ mr deathbed and death. on this freeman, and perhaps not dr bruce says _very truly_: altogether without reason, 'the seeming inconsistency follows the saner notion of other is very easily explained', authorities, that edward died etc., etc. (iii. 587) ... i before he was buried (_english do not think that any one historical review_, ix. 607). who makes the comparison minutely (between the tapestry and the life) will attach much importance to the sceptical remarks of mr planché (_ibid._). one would hardly imagine from mr archer's sneers that mr freeman had really vindicated the tapestry from its 'seeming inconsistency', did one not know him, as a writer, to be _capable de tout_.] [footnote 38: _cont. rev._, p. 351.] [footnote 39: _english historical review_, ix. 607.] [footnote 40: i wish, as i have done throughout, to make it absolutely clear that i am here concerned only with mr freeman's rendering of wace. if we are to go outside that rendering and discuss wace _de novo_, it is best to do so in a fresh section. this i hope to do below, when i shall discuss the question of his authority (which has not yet arisen), and shall also propound my own explanation of the now famous disputed passage.] [footnote 41: in my first article (_quarterly review_, july 1892, pp. 15-16) i pointed out that the great weight attached to mr freeman's statements had of course 'secured universal acceptance' for the palisade, and that it figures 'now in every history'. mr archer, in his latest paper, refers to these remarks (_english historical review_, ix. 602) and triumphantly charges me with self-contradiction in having myself once accepted it, like every one else. he refers to an incidental allusion by me in the _dictionary of national biography_ so many years ago that i was unaware of its existence. i am particularly glad to be reminded of the fact that i did allude, in early days, to the 'palisade' and to 'senlac', for it emphasizes the very point of my case, namely, that that mischievous superstition of mr freeman's unfailing accuracy must be ruthlessly destroyed lest others should be taught, as i was, to accept his authority as supreme. my opponent writes: 'mr round ... in direct contradiction to the _quarterly_ reviewer, has found for it [the palisade] an authority in william of poitiers, and _has gone far beyond mr freeman himself in giving us the name of the man who first broke it down_.' how has mr archer produced the alleged 'contradiction'? he has taken a passage from my notice of robert de beaumont, written years before i had made any independent investigation of the battle of hastings, and when i thought, like the rest of the world, that i might, here at any rate, safely follow mr freeman, when it was only a matter of a passing allusion to the fight. the following parallel passages will prove, beyond the shadow of doubt, that i here merely followed mr freeman, accepting his own authority--william of poitiers--for the incident. any one in my place would have done the same. but mr archer asserts that, on the contrary, i went 'far beyond mr freeman himself in giving us the name of the man who first broke it down'. let us see if this definite statement is true: mr freeman my article the new castle was placed in of these [sons] robert fought at the keeping of henry, the senlac ... [and] was _the first younger son of roger of to break down the english beaumont. a great estate in palisade_ ... he was rewarded the shire also fell to with large grants in henry's elder brother, warwickshire, and warwick castle robert, count of melent, who, was entrusted to his brother at the head of the french henry--_dict. nat. biog._, iv. 64. auxiliaries, had been _the (mr freeman's works, of course, first to break down the are given among the authorities english palisade_ at for the article.) senlac--_norman conquest_, iv. [1871] 191-2. see also iii. 486, and _will. rufus_, i. 185, ii. 135, 402. so much for mr archer's assertion that i made an independent statement not found in mr freeman's pages. it is obviously impossible to conduct a controversy with an opponent who does not restrict himself to fact.] [footnote 42: _william the conqueror_ (1888), p. 90.] [footnote 43: 'had they done so, they must have been set so close that they could not have used their weapons with any freedom' (_cont. rev._, p. 346).] [footnote 44: _short history_, p. 79.] [footnote 45: _norm. conq._, iii. 763, _ut supra_.] [footnote 46: _ibid._, iii. p. 471.] [footnote 47: _ibid._, i. 271; cf. _w.r._, ii. 411.] [footnote 48: _ibid._, iii. 732.] [footnote 49: _cont. rev._, 348.] [footnote 50: _norman britain_ (s.p.c.k.), p. vi.] [footnote 51: _ibid._, pp. 79, 80.] [footnote 52: _dict. nat. biography_ (1890), xxx. 424.] [footnote 53: _english historical review_, ix. 2.] [footnote 54: _cont. rev._, p. 348.] [footnote 55: _ibid._, p. 346.] [footnote 56: _quarterly review_, july 1893, p. 90.] [footnote 57: _old english history_, p. 335.] [footnote 58: wace, of course, is the only one worth mentioning of the three last, and even his 'decisive words' prove to be only a personal opinion ('_ço me semble_') that the axeman's shield must have hampered him (see _cont. rev._, 348, and _norm. conq._, iii. 765).] [footnote 59: _q.r._, july 1893, p. 91.] [footnote 60: _english historical review_, ix. 607.] [footnote 61: oman's _art of war in the middle ages_, 24 (see _q.r._, july 1893, p. 90).] [footnote 62: compare (as mr freeman does) æthelred's description of the english array of the battle of the standard: 'lateribus latera conseruntur'.] [footnote 63: _norm. conq._, iii. 491.] [footnote 64: _ibid._, p. 471.] [footnote 65: _old english history_, p. 334.] [footnote 66: _norm. conq._, iii. 764; cf. _english historical review_, ix. 18.] [footnote 67: 'this is the _shield-wall_, the famous tactic of the english and danes alike. we shall hear of it in all the great battles down to the end.' (freeman's _old english history_, p. 112.)] [footnote 68: _ibid._, p. 155.] [footnote 69: _ibid._, p. 196.] [footnote 70: _norm. conq._, iii. viii.] [footnote 71: _ibid._, pp. 445-6.] [footnote 72: _ibid._, p. 472.] [footnote 73: _ibid._, p. 480.] [footnote 74: _norm. conq._, iii. pp. 488, 490.] [footnote 75: _ibid._, p. 490.] [footnote 76: 'the battle was lost through the error of those light-armed troops who, in disobedience to the king's orders, broke their line to pursue' (_ibid._, 505).] [footnote 77: 'the day had now turned decidedly in favour of the invaders' (_ibid._, 491). i am obliged to quote these two passages, because my opponents have not shrunk from impugning (_cont. rev._, 353; _english historical review_, ix. 70) the accuracy of the words in the text (which are from _q.r._, july 1892, p. 17).] [footnote 78: _q.r._, july 1893, 101.] [footnote 79: _norm. conq._, iii. 472.] [footnote 80: to have placed some of them as an advanced post on the 'small detached hill' in front would have been to leave them _en l'air_, exposed to certain destruction from an attack which they could not check. for mr freeman held that, even if occupied by an outpost, it was only by the 'light-armed'. (see _q.r._, july 1893, pp. 99, 100.)] [footnote 81: on what ground are the bretons so described? guy, quoted by mr freeman (iii. 459) writes of them here: 'gensque britannorum quorum decus exstat in armis, tellus ni fugiat est fuga nulla quibus'.] [footnote 82: i have replied in _english historical review_ (ix. 255) to miss norgate's characteristic quibble (_ibid._, p. 75) that these quotations apply to the scottish army alone--for the principle applies alike to 'armati' and 'armatos', to 'milites' and to 'militibus'.] [footnote 83: down to this point the present section is all reprinted from my original article (_q.r._, july 1892), as not calling for any alteration or correction.] [footnote 84: 'the general mass of the less well-armed troops of the shire in the rear.' (_england under the angevin kings_, i. 290.)] [footnote 85: _english historical review_, ix. 611.] [footnote 86: when the scotch, he writes, 'amentatis missilibus et lanceis longissimis super aciem equitum nostrorum loricatam percutiunt, quasi muro ferreo offendentes, impenetrabiles [compare the 'impenetrabiles' ranks of the english at hastings, _supra_, p. 276] invenerunt.... equitantes enim nulla ratione diu persistere potuerunt contra milites loricatos pede persistentes et immobiliter coacervatos' (pp. 264-5). miss norgate follows him, writing: 'the wild celts of galloway dashed headlong upon the english front, only to find their spears and javelins glance off from the helmets and shields of the knights as from an iron wall.'] [footnote 87: 'tota namque gens normannorum et anglorum in una acie circum standard conglobata, persistebant immobiles' (hen. hunt). 'australes, quoniam pauci erant, in unum cuneum sapientissime glomerantur' (_æth. riv._).] [footnote 88: it is no less interesting than curious that the bayeux tapestry enables us to see how the archers were combined with the mailed knights at the battle of the standard. it shows us (on its principle of giving a type) an english archer of whom mr freeman has well observed: 'he is a small man without armour crouching under the shield of a tall housecarl, like teukros under that of aias' (iii. 472). so æthelred writes that the mailed warriors 'sagittarios ita sibi inseruerunt ut, _militaribus armis protecti_, tanto acrius quanto securius vel in hostes irruerent, vel exciperent irruentes'.] [footnote 89: 'proceres qui maturioris ætatis fuerunt ... circa signum regium constituuntur, quibusdam altius ceteris in ipsa machina collatis' (_æth. riv._). 'circum standard in pectore belli condensantur' (_ric. hex._).] [footnote 90: 'reliqua autem multitudo undique conglomerata eos circumvallabat' (_ibid._).] [footnote 91: _norm. conq._, i. 383.] [footnote 92: _ibid._, iii. 472.] [footnote 93: _old english history_, p. 331.] [footnote 94: _english historical review_, ix. 75.] [footnote 95: _old english history_, p. 333.] [footnote 96: miss norgate, unable to deny the glaring 'self-contradiction' involved in mr freeman's words, dismisses it as a 'matter of secondary importance' (_english historical review_, ix. 74).] [footnote 97: _english historical review_, ix. 74.] [footnote 98: _q.r._, july 1892, p. 19.] [footnote 99: _q.r._, july 1893, pp. 102-3; cf. _q.r._, july 1892, p. 18; _english historical review_, ix. 254.] [footnote 100: it might, for all we know, have formed a crescent or semi-circle, its wings resting strongly on the rear-slopes of the hill; or even a 'wedge', as, indeed, mr freeman twice described it (i. 271, iii. 471).] [footnote 101: _english historical review_, ix. 74.] [footnote 102: _cont. rev._, p. 353.] [footnote 103: _q.r._, july 1892, p. 19.] [footnote 104: since this passage appeared (as it stands) in my original article (_q.r._, july 1892, p. 19), i have noted a curious confirmation in æthelred's words where he speaks of the archers at the battle of the standard as 'militaribus armis protecti [ut] tanto acrius quanto securius vel in hostes irruerent, vel exciperent irruentes'. for, as i wrote (p. 20), 'it would naturally be they who, like cavalry in modern times, would harass and follow up a retreating foe'.] [footnote 105: _old english history_, p. 334.] [footnote 106: for baudri's poem see _q.r._, july 1893, pp. 73-5. as to baudri's authority, i need only repeat what i wrote in the _english historical review_ (ix. 217): 'mr archer endeavours, of course, to pooh-pooh it. now i call special attention to the fact that the test i apply to baudri is that which mr freeman applied to the tapestry, the obvious test of internal evidence. but mr archer's ways are not as those of other historians: instead of examining, as i did, baudri's account in detail he dismisses it on the ground that the writer's "description _of the world_" at that date could not be accurate (_ibid._, 29). we are not dealing with his "description of the world"; we are dealing with his lines on the battle of hastings.'] [footnote 107: _norm. conq._, iii. 467, 477.] [footnote 108: _english historical review_, ix. 42-3, 603.] [footnote 109: though i have already done so in _english historical review_, ix. 250.] [footnote 110: _english historical review_, ix. 42.] [footnote 111: mr freeman rendered the 'sagittis armatos et balistis' of william by 'archers, slingers, and crossbowmen'. 'balistæ' can hardly mean slings _and_ crossbows, and i think, on consideration, it is best referred to the latter; but the question is not of much importance.] [footnote 112: so, too, in _arch. journ._, xl. 359: 'you may call up the march of archers and horsemen across the low ground between the hills.'] [footnote 113: _norm. conq._, iii. 462. i regret that i must call attention to the fact that i gave (_english historical review_, ix. 250) this precise reference for my statement that, according to mr freeman, the infantry were all archers, explaining that in another passage (p. 467) william of poitiers had led him to take a somewhat different view. mr archer, however, has printed (_english historical review_, ix. 603) the other passage (p. 467) in triumph by the side of my statement. he further denies that mr freeman held, even on p. 462, that the infantry were all archers. anyone can test the value of mr archer's denial for himself by referring to _norm. conq._, iii. 462, where he will find that mr freeman, describing the norman host, mentions no infantry but archers.] [footnote 114: as he had merely copied from the tapestry on p. 462, so he copied william of poitiers on p. 467.] [footnote 115: the distinction between archers and crossbowmen is of little or no consequence, the missile being common to both.] [footnote 116: my opponents complain that in the former passage mr freeman assigns this task to 'the heavier foot' only; but my point is that no palisade is here mentioned, and no attack on it by _any_ infantry, heavy or light, and no weapons assigned to that infantry of any use for the purpose.] [footnote 117: this is an excellent instance of what i said as to mr freeman's 'imaginary' references to the now famous palisade. i have challenged my opponents to disprove my statement that none of mr freeman's own authorities says anything here of a palisade. and, of course, they cannot do so. here is another instance in point. we read on pp. 486-7 that robert of beaumont was specially distinguished in the work of breaking down the 'barricade' (see also _supra_, p. 273). but when we turn to william of poitiers, the authority cited, we find no mention of a 'barricade', but read only of him 'irruens ac sternens magnâ cum audaciâ'. as the writer had just described how the duke '_stravit_ adversam gentem', we see that robert, in his charge, laid low, not a barricade, but 'adversam gentem'. this brings me to an extraordinary case of mediaeval plagiarism. the author of the ely history has applied this description of robert's exploits to the conqueror himself at ely (_liber eliensis_, pp. 244-5). the passages 'exardentes normanni--deleverunt ea', 'egit enim quod--magna cum audacia', 'scriptor thebaidos vel æneidos', _et seq._, are all 'lifted' bodily from william's narrative of the battle of hastings and applied to the storming of the isle of ely!] [footnote 118: _norm. conq._, iii. 467.] [footnote 119: 'the norman infantry had now done its best, but that best had been in vain' (_ibid._, 479).] [footnote 120: _norm. conq._, iii. 481.] [footnote 121: _ibid._, 767-8.] [footnote 122: 'un fosse ont d'une part fait qui parmi la champaigne vait * * * * en la champaigne out un fosse: normanz l'aueient adosse en beliuant l'orent passé ne l'aueint mie esgarde.' i had followed taylor in my rendering of this passage; but miss norgate (_english historical review_, ix. 46) would prefer to say that the normans did not heed, than that they did not notice the fosse. 'the passage,' as she says, 'is somewhat obscure.'] [footnote 123: miss norgate has rightly pointed out (ix. 47) that henry places the disaster during the great feigned flight.] [footnote 124: _cont. rev._, p. 348.] [footnote 125: compare the death of robert marmion, at coventry, under stephen, when he fell into one of the ditches he had dug to entrap the enemy's horse. the passage quoted by andresen in his wace (ii. 713) from michel's notes to benoit is very precise: 'fecerant autem angli foveam quandam caute et ingeniose, quam ipsi ex obliquo curantes maximam multitudinem normannorum in ea præcipitaverant. et plures etiam ex eis insequentes et tracti ab aliis in eadem perierunt.'] [footnote 126: see below, p. 292.] [footnote 127: _early oxford_, pp. 191, 192. and see my preface.] [footnote 128: see above, p. 278, for mr freeman's view.] [footnote 129: 'angli vero, illos putantes vere fugere, c[oe]perunt post eos currere volentes eos si possent interficere' (_brevis relatio_). 'ausa sunt, ut superius, aliquot millia quasi volante cursu, quos fugere putabant urgere' (_will. pict._).] [footnote 130: though admitting, in a footnote, that the 'brevis relatio' was opposed to this assumption.] [footnote 131: _supra_, p. 278.] [footnote 132: _q.r._, july 1892, p. 20.] [footnote 133: miss norgate has indignantly retorted (_english historical review_, ix. 50) that mr freeman 'only' omitted the words from 'sicque' onwards. but it is precisely on these words that my statement is based. mr freeman, moreover, did not even quote the rest _à propos_ of the feigned flight, where we should look for it.] [footnote 134: so does will. gem., as quoted by mr freeman (iii. 133): 'de suis miserunt si quos forte hostium a regio c[oe]tu abstraherent, quos illi in latibulis degentes incautos exciperent.' see also my addenda.] [footnote 135: _cont. rev._, p. 354.] [footnote 136: see above, p. 251.] [footnote 137: see above, p. 259.] [footnote 138: _norm. conq._, iii. 763-4.] [footnote 139: _social england_, i. 299. 'mr oman, like mr j. h. round, knows nothing of the famous "palisade", but only of the "shield-wall" of the english' (_speaker_, december 2, 1893).] [footnote 140: _norman britain_, p. 79.] [footnote 141: _ibid._, p. 80.] [footnote 142: _social england_, p. 300.] [footnote 143: _cont. rev._, p. 353.] [footnote 144: _ibid._, p. 335.] [footnote 145: _english historical review_, ix. 607.] [footnote 146: _ibid._, ix. 219-25.] [footnote 147: _ibid._, 224, 257.] [footnote 148: _norm. conq._, ii. 469; and _supra_, p. 356.] [footnote 149: _cont. rev._, 352.] [footnote 150: _ibid._, 348.] [footnote 151: _cont. rev._, 335-6.] [footnote 152: 'the reviewer ... tells us that ... mr freeman ... is wrong, completely wrong, in his whole conception of the battle.... his attack must be held to have failed' (_cont. rev._, pp. 335, 353).] [footnote 153: _norm. conq._, iii. 763.] [footnote 154: _cont. rev._, p. 349. cf. mr archer's articles _passim_.] [footnote 155: _english historical review_, ix. 22.] [footnote 156: _english historical review_, ix. 607.] [footnote 157: _ibid._, ix. 606. _supra_, p. 269.] [footnote 158: _ibid._, ix. 606, 607. my readers are invited to refer to this article and to that in the _cont. rev._ (march 1893), and test my statement for themselves.] [footnote 159: _anglo-saxon britain_, p. 172.] [footnote 160: _norman conquest_, iii. 454.] [footnote 161: e.g. vinogradoff and dr andrews.] [footnote 162: _norm. conq._, ii. 352.] [footnote 163: _ibid._, 327.] [footnote 164: _ibid._, 326.] [footnote 165: _ibid._, 332.] [footnote 166: 'we shall get rid of the talk about "an officer and a gentleman".' (_macmillan's_, xxiv. 10).] [footnote 167: _vita wlstani_.] master wace mr freeman mr archer of the array of the shield-wall now, there are six distinct we have often heard already as objections to translating this at maldon, but it is at senlac passage [of wace] as if it that we get the fullest referred to a shield-wall. these descriptions of it, all the objections are, of course, of better for coming in the unequal value; but some of them mouths of enemies. wace gives would, by themselves, suffice to his description, 12941:--(_norm. overthrow such a theory (_cont. conq._, iii. 763). rev._, 349). in discussing mr freeman's treatment of the great battle, we saw that the only passage he vouched for the existence of a palisade[1] consisted of certain lines from wace's _roman de rou_, which he ultimately declared to be, on the contrary, a description of 'the array of the shield-wall'.[2] the question, therefore, as to their meaning--on which my critics have throughout endeavoured to represent the controversy as turning--did not even arise so far as mr freeman was concerned. still less had i occasion to discuss the authority of wace, mr freeman's explicit verdict on the lines (iii. 763-4) having removed them, as concerns his own narrative, from the sphere of controversy. the case, however, is at once altered when mr archer insists on ignoring mr freeman's words, and makes an independent examination of the lines, quoting also other passages which were not vouched by mr freeman, as proving 'beyond the shadow of a doubt that wace did mean to represent the english at hastings as fighting behind a palisade'.[3] so long as i make it clearly understood that this question in no way affects the controversy as to mr freeman, i am quite willing to discuss the question thus raised by mr archer. it is most naturally treated under these three heads: (1) did wace believe and assert that there was a palisade? (2) if so, what weight ought to be attached to his authority? (3) if we reject it, can we explain how his mistake arose? wace's meaning i have elsewhere[4] discussed 'the disputed passage' (_supra_, p. 267), and agreed with mr archer that there are 'four views which have been suggested' as to its meaning.[5] two of them, i there showed, were successively held by mr freeman, and the two others successively advanced by mr archer. when i add (anticipating) that, according to m. paris, 'le passage de wace présente quelque obscurité',[6] and that m. meyer introduced yet another element of doubt in a special kind of shield ('de grands écus') not previously suggested, it will be obvious, quite apart from any opinion of my own, that the passage presents difficulties. so long as i only dealt with mr freeman's work, i found on his admission that the passage described the shield-wall.[7] now that we are leaving his work aside, i fall back on my own conclusion, namely, that the passage is with equal difficulty referred either to a palisade or to a shield-wall. the word 'escuz', it will be seen, occurs twice in the passage. mr archer held, at first, that in neither case did it mean real 'shields',[8] but he afterwards assigned that meaning to the second of the two 'escuz', while still rendering the first 'in a metaphorical sense'.[9] it is obvious that when mr freeman took the lines to describe 'the array of the shield-wall', he must have done so on the ground that 'escuz' meant 'shields'. that is my own contention. while fully recognizing the obstacles to translating 'the disputed passage' as if it referred throughout to a shield-wall, i maintain that 'escu' means shield, as a term 'which is one of the commonest in wace' and invariably means shield.[10] but to cut short a long story, it was decided by mr gardiner to settle this issue by submitting the disputed passage to the verdict of mm. gaston paris and paul meyer. in spite of my protest, this was done without my articles and my solution of the problem[11] being laid before them at the same time. a snap verdict was thus secured before they had seen the evidence. i am sure that mr gardiner must have thought this fair, and editors, we know, cannot err; but it seems to me quite possible that these distinguished french scholars were not familiar with the shield-wall, an old english tactic, and were not aware that this information was the great feature of the battle. had all this, as i wished, been duly set before them, their verdict would, of course, have carried much greater weight. but having said this much, i frankly admit that their verdict is in favour of mr archer's contention, and, so far as the first 'escuz' is concerned, against my own.[12] they may not agree in detail with each other, or with either of mr archer's views, but, on the broad issue, he has a perfect right to claim that their verdict is for him so long as he does not pretend that it also confirms 'mr freeman's interpretation', by ignoring the historian's own latest and explicit words.[13] it must also be remembered that this admission in no way diminishes the obscurity of the passage, which, as we have seen, is beyond dispute, and which forms an important element in my own solution of the problem.[14] having now shown how the matter stands with regard to 'the disputed passage', i need not linger over those which mr freeman ignored, and which mr archer adduced to strengthen his views as to the main passage. i have dealt with these elsewhere,[15] and need here only refer to ll. 8585-90, because that passage raises a point of historical interest quite apart from personal controversy. i have maintained that it can only be accepted at the cost of 'throwing over mr freeman's conception of the battle',[16] and have proved, by quoting his own words, that he placed the standard with harold at his foot 'in the very forefront of the fight'.[17] i do not say that he was right in doing so: he was, i think, very probably wrong, and was influenced here, as elsewhere, by his dramatic treatment of harold. but as this can only be matter of opinion, i have not challenged his view; i only say that those who accept it cannot consistently appeal to a passage in wace which places the standard in the rear of the english host. wace's authority assuming then, for the sake of argument, that wace mentions a defence of some kind,[18] even though not consistently[19] in front of the english troops, let us see whether his statement is corroborated, whether it is in harmony with the other evidence, and whether, if it is neither corroborated nor in such agreement, his authority is sufficient, nevertheless, to warrant its acceptance. as to corroboration, mr archer undertook 'to produce corroborative evidence from other sources';[20] but this at once dwindled down to one line--'tending in the same direction'[21]--from benoît de st maur, who does not even mention a palisade.[22] there is therefore, on his own showing, not a shred of corroborative evidence. as to the second point, i may refer to my arguments against the palisade,[23] where i showed that none of our authorities is here in agreement with wace. we come, therefore, to our third point, namely, the weight to which wace's testimony, when standing alone, is entitled. here, as elsewhere, i adhere to my position. as i have written in the _quarterly review_: even if wace, clearly and consistently, mentioned a palisade throughout his account of the battle, we should certainly reject the statement of a witness, writing a century after it, when we find him at variance with every authority (for that is our point), just as mr freeman rejected the bridge at varaville,[24] or the 'falsehood' of the burning of the ships, or the 'blunder' of making the duke land at hastings, or his anachronisms, or his chronology. for, 'of course', in the professor's own words, 'whenever he [wace] departs from contemporary authority, and merely sets down floating traditions nearly a hundred years after the latest events which he records, his statements need to be very carefully weighed'.[25] let me specially lay stress upon the points on which, when wace and the tapestry differ, the preference is given by mr freeman himself to the tapestry as against wace: had the tapestry been a work of later date, it is hardly possible that it could have given the simple and truthful account of these matters which it does give. a work of the twelfth or thirteenth century[26] would have brought in, _as even honest wace does in some degree_, the notions of the twelfth or thirteenth century. one cannot conceive an artist of the time of henry ii, still less an artist later than the french conquest of normandy, agreeing so remarkably with the authentic writings of the eleventh century (iii. 573). [in the tapestry] every antiquarian detail is accurate--the lack of armour on the horses (iii. 574). [but] wace speaks of the horse of william fitz osbern as 'all covered with iron' (iii. 570). wace again, is 'hardly accurate' (iii. 765), we read, as to the english weapons, because he differs from the tapestry. as to harold's wound, 'wace places it too early in the battle' (iii. 497); mr freeman follows the tapestry. as to the landing of the normans at pevensey: _venit ad pevenesæ_, says the tapestry ... wace ... altogether reverses the geography, making the army land at hastings, and go to pevensey afterwards' (iii. 402). as to the 'mora', the duke's ship, the tapestry shows 'the child with his horn'; wace describes him 'saete et arc tendu portant'. mr freeman adopts the 'horn' (iii. 382). harold, says mr freeman, was imprisoned at beaurain. this is quite plain from the tapestry: 'dux eum ad belrem et ibi eum tenuit'. wace says, 'a abevile l'ont mené....' this i conceive to arise from a misconception of the words of william of jumièges (iii. 224). this illustrates, i would remind mr archer, the difference between a primary authority and a mere late compiler. to these examples i may add wace's mention of harold's _vizor_ (_ventaille_). mr freeman pointed out the superior accuracy of the tapestry in 'the nose-pieces' (iii. 574), and observed that 'the vizor' was a much later introduction (iii. 497).[27] here again we see the soundness of mr freeman's view that wace could not help introducing 'the notions' of his own time into his account of the battle. miss norgate admits that he 'transferred to his mythical battles the colouring of the actual battles of his own day', but urges that these narratives illustrate the 'warfare of wace's own ... contemporaries'.[28] quite so. but the battle of hastings belonged to an older and obsolete style of warfare. that is what his champions always forget. if miss norgate's argument has any meaning, it is that the men who fought in that battle were 'wace's own contemporaries'. but, even where wace's authority is in actual agreement with the tapestry, mr freeman did not hesitate to reject, or rather, ignore it, as we saw in the matter of the fosse disaster. as to wace's sources of information, and the _prima facie_ evidence for his authority, a question of considerable interest is raised. mr archer discusses it from his own standpoint.[29] on wace's life, age and work, facts are few and speculations many. these have been collected and patiently sifted in andresen's great work, with the following result: wace was certainly living not merely in 1170,[30] but in 1174, for he alludes to the siege of rouen (august 1174) in his epilogue to the second part of the 'roman'.[31] it is admitted on all hands, though mr archer does not mention it, that he did not even begin the third part till after the coronation of the younger henry (june 14, 1170).[32] allowing for its great length, he cannot have come to his account of the battle _at the very earliest_ till 1171, 105 years after the event. for my part, i think that it was probably written even some years later. but imagine in any case an englishman, ignorant of belgium, writing an account of waterloo, mainly _from oral tradition_, in 1920. mr archer contends that wace was born 'probably between the years 1100 and 1110' (_ante_, p. 31). andresen holds that the earliest date we can venture to assign is 1110,[33] forty-four years after the battle. special stress is laid by mr archer on wace's oral information: he had seen and talked with many men who recollected things anterior to hastings and the hastings campaign. among his informants for this latter was his own father, then, we may suppose, a well-grown lad, if not an actual participator in the fight (_ante_, p. 32). 'we may suppose'--where all is supposition--exactly the contrary. if wace was born, as we may safely say, more than forty years after the battle, 'we may suppose' that his father was not even born before it. all this talk about wace's father is based on ll. 6445-7, of which andresen truly remarks, 'die verse "mais co oi dire a mon pere, bien m'en souient mais vaslet ere, que set cenz nes, quatre meins, furent", u.s.w., sind viel zu unbestimmt gehalten, so dass wir aus ihnen streng genommen nicht einmal entnehmen können, ob der vater im jahre 1066 schon auf der welt war oder nicht' (p. lxx). i venture to take my own case. born within forty years of waterloo, i can say with wace that i remember my father telling me, as a boy, stories of the battle. but he was born after it. the information was second-hand. over and over again does mr archer lay stress on the fact (_ut supra_) that wace gives us 'the reminiscences of the old heroes who fought at hastings as no one else has cared to do'.[34] i must insist that wace himself nowhere mentions having seen or spoken to them. he does mention having seen men who remembered the great comet (mr archer italicizes the lines[35]); but this exactly confirms my point. for when wace _had_ seen eyewitnesses he was careful, we see, to mention the fact. men would remember the comet, though little children at the time. one of my own very earliest recollections is that of a great comet, even though it did not create the sensation of the comet in 1066. wace had talked with those who had been children, not with those who had been fighting men, in 1066. i need only invite attention to one more point. mr archer assures us that 'wace is a very sober writer', with 'something of the shrewd scepticism' of modern scholars.[36] what shall we say then, of his long story (ll. 7005-100) of the night visit, by harold and gyrth, to the norman camp, to which mr archer appeals as evidence for the _lices_ (l. 7010)? 'nothing,' replies mr freeman (iii. 449), 'could be less trustworthy.... no power short of divination could have revealed it.'[37] mr archer tells us he has only space for one instance[38] of wace's conscientiousness. that instance is his story of the negotiation between william and baldwin of flanders on the eve of the conquest. of this story mr freeman writes: of the intercourse between william and baldwin in his character of sovereign of flanders wace has a tale which strikes me as so purely legendary that i did not venture to introduce it into the text.... the whole story seems quite inconsistent with the real relations between william and baldwin (iii. 718-19). comment is superfluous. having now shown that wace's evidence is not corroborated, is not in accordance with that of contemporary witnesses, and cannot on the sound canons of criticism recognized by mr freeman himself, be accepted under these circumstances, i propose to show that my case can be carried further still, and that i can even trace to its origin the confused statement in his 'disputed passage' which is said to describe a palisade or defence of some sort or other. wace and his sources[39] in studying the authorities for the battle of hastings, i was led to a conclusion which, so far as i know, had never occurred to any one. it is that william of malmesbury's 'gesta regum' was among the sources used by wace. neither in korting's elaborate treatise, 'ueber die quellen des roman de rou', nor in andresen's notes to his well-known edition of the 'roman' (ii. 708), can i find any suggestion to this effect. dr stubbs, in his edition of the 'gesta regum', dwells on the popularity of the work both at home and abroad, but does not include wace among the writers who availed themselves of it; and the late mr freeman, though frequently compelled to notice the agreement between wace and william, never thought, it appears, of suggesting the theory of derivation; indeed, he speaks of the two writers as independent witnesses, when dealing with one of these coincidences.[40] the more one studies wace, the more evident it becomes that the 'roman' requires to be used with the greatest caution. based on a _congeries_ of authorities, on tradition, and occasionally of course, on the poetic invention of the _trouveur_ it presents a whole in which it is almost impossible to disentangle the various sources of the narrative. before dealing with the passage which led me to believe that the 'gesta regum' must have been known to wace, i will glance at some other coincidences. we have first the alleged landing of william at hastings instead of pevensey. on this mr freeman observed: _venit ad pevenesæ_, says the tapestry. so william of poitiers and william of jumièges. william of malmesbury says carelessly, _placido cursu hastingas appulerunt_. so wace, who altogether reverses the geography, making the army land at hastings and go to pevensey afterwards.[41] here william of malmesbury, who was probably using 'hastingas' as loosely as when he applied that term to battle, appears to be responsible for the mistake of wace, who may have tried to harmonize him with william of jumièges by making the normans proceed to pevensey after having landed. take again the hotly disputed burial of harold at waltham. on this question mr freeman writes: william of malmesbury, after saying that the body was given to gytha, adds _acceptum itaque apud waltham sepelivit_.... wace had evidently heard two or three stories, and, with his usual discretion, he avoided committing himself, but he distinctly asserts a burial at waltham.[42] this, then, is another coincidence between the two writers, while, as before, wace found himself in the presence of a conflict of authorities. on yet another difficult point, the accession of harold, i see a marked agreement, though mr freeman did not. harold, according to william of malmesbury, _extorta a principibus fide, arripuit diadema_, and _diademate fastigiatus, nihil de pactis inter se et willelmum cogitabat_. wace's version runs: heraut ki ert manant è forz se fist énoindre è coroner; unkes al duc n'en volt parler, homages prist è féeltez des plus riches è des ainz nes. not only is the attitude of wace and william towards harold's action here virtually identical, but the mention of his exaction of homage seems special to them both. the passages, however, on which i would specially rest my case are those in which these two writers describe the visit of harold's spies to the norman camp before the battle of hastings. this legend is peculiar to william of malmesbury and wace, and though it may be suggested that they had heard it independently, the correspondence--it will, i think, be admitted--is too close to admit of that solution. i print these passages side by side: william of malmesbury wace premisit tamen qui numerum heraut enveia dous espies hostium et vires specularentur. por espier quels compagnies e quanz barons e quanz armez aueit li dus od sei menez. ia esteient a l'ost uenu, quant il furent aparceu quos intra castra deprehensos a guillaume furent mene, willelmus circum tentoria duci, forment furent espoente. moxque, largis eduliis pastos, mais quant il sout que il quereient domino incolumes remitti jubet. e que ses genz esmer ueneient, par tos les tres les fist mener e tote l'ost lor fist mostrer; bien les fist paistre e abeurer, pois les laissa quites aler, nes volt laidir ne destorber. redeuntes percunctatur haroldus quant il vindrent a lor seignor, quid rerum apportent: illi, verbis del duc distrent mult grant enor. amplissimis ductoris magnificam un des engleis, qui out veuz confidentiam prosecuti, serio les normans toz res e tonduz, addiderunt pene omnes in exercitu quida que tuit proueire fussent illo presbyteros videri, quod e que messes chanter peussent, totam faciem cum utroque labio kar tuit erent tondu e res, rasam haberent; ... subrisit rex ne lor esteit guernon remes. fatuitatem referentinum, lepido cil dist a heraut que li dus insecutus cachinno, quia non aueit od sei proueies plus essent presbyteri, sed milites que chevaliers ne altre gent; validi, armis invicti. (§ 239) de co se merueillout forment que tuit erent res e tondu. e heraut li a respondu que co sunt cheualiers uaillanz, hardi e proz e combatanz. 'n'ont mie barbes ne guernons,' co dist heraut, 'com nos auons.' (ll. 7101-34) the story is just one of those that william of malmesbury would have picked up, and wace has simply, in metrical paraphrase, transferred it from his pages to his own. yet another story, on which mr freeman looked with some just suspicion, is common to these two writers, and virtually to them alone. it is that of 'the contrast between the way in which the night before the battle was spent by the normans and the english' (iii. 760). wace, says mr freeman, 'gives us the same account' as william 'in more detail', while william 'gives us a shorter account'. i here again append the passages side by side, insisting on the fact mentioned by mr freeman, that wace expands the story 'in more detail': itaque utrinque animosi duces quant la bataille dut ioster, disponunt acies.... angli, ut la noit auant, c'oi conter, accepimus, totam noctem insompnem furent engleis forment haitie cantibus potibusque ducentes. mult riant e mult enueisie. tote noit maingierent e burent, . . . . . onques la noit en lit ne jurent. mult les veissiez demener, treper e saillir e chanter. . . . . . contra normanni, nocte tota e li normant e li franceis confessioni tote noit firent oreisons peccatorum vacantes, mane e furent en afflictions. dominico corpore communicarunt. de lor pechiez confes se firent, (§§ 241, 242) as proueires les regehirent, e qui nen out proueires pres, à son ueisin se fist confes. . . . . . quant les messes furent chantees, qui bien matin furent finees.... (ll. 7349-56, 7362-8, 7407-8) this brings me to my destination, namely, § 241 of the 'gesta regum'. we may divide this section into three successive parts: (1) the description of the way in which the english spent the night--which is repeated, we have seen, by wace; (2) the array of the english, with which i shall deal below; (3) the dismounting of harold at the foot of the standard. i here subjoin the parallels for the third, calling special attention to the phrases, 'd'or e de pierres (auro et lapidibus)' and 'guil. pois cele victoire le fist porter a l'apostoire (post victorium papae misit willelmus).' rex ipse pedes juxta vexillum quant heraut out tot apreste stabat cum fratribus, ut, in e co qu'il uolt out commande commune periculo aequato, nemo enmi les engleis est uenuz, de fuga cogitaret. vexillum lez l'estandart est descenduz illud post victoriam papae lewine e guert furent od lui misit willelmus, quod erat frere heraut furent andui, in hominis pugnantis figura, assez out barons enuiron; auro et lapidibus arte heraut fu lez son gonfanon. sumptuosa intextum. li gonfanon fu mult vaillanz, d'or e de pierres reluissanz. guill. pois cele victoire le fist porter a l'apostoire, por mostrer e metre en memoire son grant conquest e sa grant gloire. (ll. 7853-66) the only part of § 241 which remains to be dealt with is the second. the two passages run thus: pedites omnes cum bipennibus geldons engleis haches portoent conserta ante se _scutorum_ e gisarmes qui bien trenchoent testudine, impenetrabilem fait orent deuant els _escuz_ cuneum faciunt; quod profecto de fenestres e d'altres fuz, illis _ea die_ saluti fuisset, deuant els les orent leuez, nisi normanni, simulata fuga comme cleies joinz e serrez; more suo confertos manipulos fait en orent deuant closture, laxassent. n'i laissierent nule iointure, (§ 241) par onc normant entr'els venist qui desconfire les volsist. d'escuz e d'ais s'auironoent, issi deffendre se quidoent; et s'il se fussent bien tenu, ia ne fussent _le ior_ uencu. (ll. 7813-26) mr freeman, of course, observed the parallel, but, oddly enough, missed the point. he first quoted the lines from wace, and then immediately added, 'so william of malmesbury' (iii. 764), thus reversing the natural order. the word that really gave me the clue was the _escuz_ of wace. it was obvious, i held, that, here as elsewhere,[43] it must mean 'shield'; and mr freeman consequently saw in the passage an undoubted description of the 'shield-wall' (iii. 763). moreover, the phrase _lever escuz_ is, in wace, a familiar one, describing preparation for action, thus, for instance: mult ueissiez engleis fremir . . . . . armes saisir, escuz leuer. (ll. 8030, 8033) on the other hand, there are, in spite of mr freeman, undoubted difficulties in rendering the passage as a description of the 'shield-wall', just as there are in taking _escuz_ to mean 'barricades' (iii. 471). the result was that, perhaps unconsciously, mr freeman gave the passage, in succession, two contradictory renderings (iii. 471, 763). now, starting from the fact that the disputed passage supported, and also opposed both renderings, i arrived at the conclusion that it must represent some confusion of wace's own. he had, evidently, himself no clear idea of what he was describing. but the whole confusion is at once accounted for if we admit him to have here also followed william of malmesbury. his _escuz_--otherwise impossible to explain--faithfully renders the _scuta_ of william, while the latter's _testudo_, though strictly accurate, clearly led him astray. the fact is that william of malmesbury must have been quite familiar with the 'shield-wall', if indeed he had seen the fyrd actually forming it.[44] wace, on the contrary, living later, and in normandy instead of england, cannot have seen, or even understood, this famous formation, with which his cavalry fight of the twelfth century had nothing in common. it is natural therefore that his version should betray some confusion, though his _fait en orent deuant closture_ clearly renders william of malmesbury's _conserta ante se scutorum testudine_. there is no question as to william's meaning, for a _testudo_ of shields is excellent latin for the shield-wall formed by the romans against a flight of arrows. moreover, the construction of william's latin (_conserta_) accounts for that use by wace of the pluperfect tense on which stress has been laid as proof that the passage must describe a 'barricade'.[45] that wace could, occasionally, be led astray by misunderstanding his authority, is shown by his taking harold to abbeville, after his capture on the french coast, a statement which arose, in mr freeman's opinion, 'from a misconception of the words of william of jumièges (iii. 224)'. no one, i think, can read dispassionately the extracts i have printed side by side, without accepting the explanation i offer of this disputed passage in wace, namely, that it is nothing but a metrical, elaborate, and somewhat confused paraphrase of the words of william of malmesbury. passing from william of malmesbury to the bayeux tapestry, we find a general recognition of the difficulty of determining wace's knowledge of it. i can only, like others, leave the point undecided. on the other hand, his narrative, as a whole, does not follow the tapestry; on the other, it is hard to believe that the writer of ii. 8103-38 had not seen that famous work. his description of the scene is marvellously exact, and the tapestry phrase, in which odo _confortat pueros_--often a subject of discussion--is at once explained by his making the _pueri_ whom odo 'comforted' to be- vaslez, qui al herneis esteient e le herneis garder deueient. of these varlets in charge of the 'harness' he had already spoken (ll. 7963-7). the difficulty of accounting for wace, as a canon of bayeux, being unacquainted with the tapestry is, of course, obvious. but in any case he cannot have used it, as we do ourselves, among his foremost authorities. in discussing his use of william of jumièges, we stand on much surer ground. it certainly strikes one as strange that in mentioning the obvious error by which wace makes harold receive his wound in the eye early in the fight (l. 8185), before the great feigned flight, mr freeman does not suggest its derivation from william of jumièges, though he proceeds to add (p. 771): i need hardly stop to refute the strange mistake of william of jumièges, followed by orderic: 'heraldus ipse in primo militum progressu ['congressu', _ord._] vulneribus letaliter confossus occubuit'. but a worse instance of the contradictions involved by the patchwork and secondary character of wace's narrative is found in his statement as to harold's arrival on the field of battle. 'wace,' says mr freeman, 'makes the english reach senlac on thursday night' (p. 441). so he does, even adding that harold fist son estandart drecier et fist son gonfanon fichier iloc tot dreit ou l'abeie de la bataille est establie. (ll. 6985-8) but mr freeman must have overlooked the very significant fact that when the battle is about to begin, wace tells a different story, and makes harold only occupy the battlefield on the saturday morning: heraut sout que normant vendreient e que par main se combatreient: un champ out _par matin_ porpris, ou il a toz ses engleis mis. _par matin_ les fist toz armer e a bataille conreer. (ll. 7768-72) i have little doubt that he here follows william of jumièges: '[heraldus] in campo belli apparuit mane', and that he was thus led to contradict himself. mr freeman had a weakness for wace, and did not conceal it: he insisted on the poet's 'honesty'. but 'honesty' is not knowledge; and in dealing with the battle, it is not allowable to slur over wace's imperfect knowledge. mr freeman admits that 'probably he did not know the ground, and did not take in the distance between hastings and battle' (p. 762). but he charitably suggests that 'it is possible that when he says "en un tertre s'estut li dus" he meant the hill of telham, only without any notion of its distance from hastings'. but, in spite of this attempt to smooth over the discrepancy, it is impossible to reconcile wace's narrative with that of mr freeman. the latter makes the duke deliver his speech at hastings, and then march with his knights to telham, and there arm. but wace imagined that they armed in their quarters at hastings ('issi sunt as tentes ale'), and straightway fought. the events immediately preceding the battle are far more doubtful and difficult to determine than could be imagined from mr freeman's narrative, but i must confine myself to wace's version. i have shown that his account is not consistent as to the movements of harold, while as to the topography, 'his primary blunder', as mr freeman terms it, 'of reversing the geographical order, by making william land at hastings and thence go to pevensey', together with his obvious ignorance of the character and position of the battlefield, must, of course, lower our opinion of his accuracy, and of the value of the oral tradition at his disposal. to rely 'mainly'[46] on such a writer, in preference to the original authorities he confused, or to follow him when, in mr freeman's words, he actually 'departs from contemporary authority, and merely sets down floating traditions nearly a hundred years after the latest events which he records'--betrays the absence of a critical faculty, or the consciousness of a hopeless cause. [footnote 1: dismissing _ut supra_ the 'fosse' passage, which neither mentions nor implies it, together with the passage from henry of huntingdon.] [footnote 2: _norm. conq._, iii. 763-4. i have shown in the _english historical review_ (ix. 225) that he meant here by the shield-wall 'exactly what he meant by it elsewhere', a shield-wall and nothing else.] [footnote 3: _cont. rev._, 344.] [footnote 4: _english historical review_, ix. 231-40.] [footnote 5: _english historical review_, ix. 2.] [footnote 6: _ibid._, 260.] [footnote 7: _norm. conq._, iii. 763-4.] [footnote 8: _cont. rev._, p. 348.] [footnote 9: _english historical review_, ix. 17-20.] [footnote 10: i explained, in one of my replies to mr archer, that this statement applied _only_ to its usage '_in wace_' (_academy_, september 16, 1893), but, characteristically, he has not hesitated to suppress this explanation, and renew his sneers at my knowledge of 'old french', on the ground of a statement which, i had explained, was not my meaning (_english historical review_, ix. 604). it is difficult to describe such devices as these. common as the word is in wace, i have never found any other instance of its use (_i.e._ by him) in a metaphorical sense, nor, if there is one, has mr archer attempted to produce it.] [footnote 11: _infra_, pp. 313-18.] [footnote 12: _english historical review_, ix. 260.] [footnote 13: _norm. conq._, iii. 736-7.] [footnote 14: the word 'fenestres', for instance, which mr archer first rendered 'ash', out of deference to mr freeman and his predecessors, but subsequently 'windows' (_english historical review_, ix. 18), is either a corruption or quite inexplicable. 'if it pleases mr archer,' as i wrote (_ibid._, 236), 'to construct a barricade, of which "windows" are the chief ingredient, on an uninhabited sussex down, in 1066, he is perfectly welcome to do so.' i may add that the rendering adopted by the two french scholars does not in the least alter my view as to the improbability, or rather absurdity, of the suggestion.] [footnote 15: _ibid._, ix. 244.] [footnote 16: _q.r._, july 1893, p. 95.] [footnote 17: _english historical review_, ix. 251-3. i was careful to add that 'if it be claimed that his text is contradictory, this would but prove further how confused his mind really was as to the battle' (p. 252). mr archer, as i anticipated, now prints, as a conclusive reply (_ibid._, ix. 603), words which look the other way, ignoring, as usual, the quotations on which i explicitly relied. he has thereby, as i said, only proved how confused, here as elsewhere, mr freeman's conception was.] [footnote 18: mr archer now prefers to leave its details doubtful (_english historical review_, ix. 606).] [footnote 19: as i have shown in _ibid._, ix. 244-5.] [footnote 20: _cont. rev._, 344.] [footnote 21: _ibid._, 346.] [footnote 22: i have shown (_academy_, september 16, 1893) by reference to godefroi and michel that either mr archer or they must here have been ignorant of old french. the former alternative seems to be accepted.] [footnote 23: _supra_, pp. 269-70.] [footnote 24: the case of the battle of varaville, in 1058, is precisely similar in this respect to that of the battle of hastings. of the former mr freeman writes: 'wace alone speaks, throughout his narrative, of a bridge. all the other writers speak only of a ford' (iii. 173). now wace's authority was better for this, the earlier battle, because, says mr freeman, he knew the ground. yet the professor did not hesitate to reject his 'bridge'. so again, in 'the campaign of hastings', mr freeman rejects 'the falsehood of the story of william burning his ships, of which the first traces appear in wace' (iii. 408). so much for placing our reliance upon wace, when he stands alone.] [footnote 25: _q.r._, july 1893, p. 96.] [footnote 26: mr archer's limit is 1066-1210.] [footnote 27: we have, i suspect, a similar instance, in wace's _gisarmes_ (ll. 7794, 7814, 8328, 8332, 8342, 8587, 8629, 8656). an excellent vindication of the bayeux tapestry--oddly enough overlooked by mr freeman--namely, m. delauney's 'origine de la tapisserie de bayeux prouvée par elle-même' (caen, 1824)--discusses the weapons, the author observing: 'la hache d'armes ressemble à celle de nos sapeurs; celle des temps postèrieurs au xi^{e} siècle à, dans les monuments, une espèce de petite lance au-dessus de la douille du côté opposé au tranchant' (see jubinal, _la tapisserie de bayeux_, p. 17). this exactly describes the true _gisarme_, a later introduction. so again, wace makes the _chevalier_ who has hurried from hastings exclaim to harold: 'un chastel i ont ia ferme de _breteschese_ de fosse' (ll. 6717-8), whereas _bretasches_ of course were impossible at the time. one is reminded of the description, by piramus, of the coming of the english, when 'over the broad sea britain they sought': 'leuent bresteches od kernels, ke cuntrevalent bons chastels, de herituns [? hericuns] e de paliz les cernent, si funt riulez del quer des cheygnes, forze e halz, ki ne criement sieges ne asalz.' (_vie seint edmund le rey_, ll. 228-33.)] [footnote 28: _english historical review_, ix. 66.] [footnote 29: _ibid._, 31-7, 17-18, and throughout his paper.] [footnote 30: _ibid._, ix. 32.] [footnote 31: 'al siege de rouen le quidierent gaber' (l. 62).] [footnote 32: 'demn nicht etwa am schlusse, sondern gleich zu anfang des genannten theiles' (l. 179) 'spricht er von den drei königen heinrich die er gesehen und gekannt' (p. xciv).] [footnote 33: 'nimmt man das jahr 1110 als geburtsjahr des dichters an', etc. (p. xciv).] [footnote 34: _english historical review_, ix. 33. it need scarcely be said that these 'old heroes' would be found rather in england than in normandy.] [footnote 35: _ibid._, ix. 17. 'assez vi homes qui la virent, qui ainz e pois longues vesquirent.'] [footnote 36: _ibid._, ix. 33.] [footnote 37: compare his scornful rejection (iii. 469-71) of wace's tales in ll. 7875-950.] [footnote 38: _english historical review_, ix. 34.] [footnote 39: reprinted from _ibid._, october 1893.] [footnote 40: _norm. conq._, iii. 783.] [footnote 41: iii. 402, note 2.] [footnote 42: iii. 782.] [footnote 43: i mean, as i explained above, elsewhere in wace.] [footnote 44: he describes, as mr freeman observed, king henry bidding the english 'meet the charge of the norman knights by standing firm in the array of the ancient shield-wall' (_william rufus_, ii. 411).] [footnote 45: _cont. rev._, march 1893, p. 351.] [footnote 46: 'it is upon wace that we shall mainly rely.' _cont. rev._, p. 344.] note on the pseudo-ingulf i owe to my friend mr hubert hall the suggestion that the great battle described by the pseudo-ingulf as taking place between the english and the danes in 870--and all accepted as sober fact by turner in his _history of the anglo-saxons_--may be a concoction based on the facts of the battle of hastings. this is also the theory mr freeman advanced as to snorro's story of the battle of stamford bridge. the coincidence is very striking. in both narratives the defending force is formed with 'the dense shield-wall';[1] in both it breaks at length that formation; in both it is, consequently, overwhelmed; and in both cases the attacking force consists of horsemen and archers. but the most curious coincidence is found in the principal weapon of the defending force. in snorro's narrative, as mr freeman renders it, 'a dense wood of spears bristles in front of the circle to receive the charge of the english horsemen';[2] in the pseudo-ingulf the defending force 'contra violentiam equitum densissimam aciem lancearum prætendebant'.[3] such a defence savours of the days when the knight, fighting on foot with his lance,[4] had replaced the housecarl with his battle-axe: it was not that of harold's host, but one which we meet with in the twelfth century. there are marks, however, in the pseudo-ingulf, of study, not merely of the battle of hastings, but of william of malmesbury's account of it. from him, it would seem, are taken the words 'testudo' and 'tumulus'. the first parallel passages are these: william 'ingulf' conserta ante se _scutorum in unum cuneum conglobati, testudine_, impenetrabilem ... _testudinem clypeorum_ cuneum faciunt. prætendebant. again, after the disaster caused, in each case, by a feigned flight, we have the rally thus described: william 'ingulf' nec tamen ultioni suæ defuere, in quodam campi _tumulo_ cetera quin crebro consistentes ... planitie aliquantulum altiore occupato _tumulo_, normannos, in orbem conferti, barbaros calore succensos acriter ad arietantes diutissime superiora nitentes, in vallem sustinuerunt ... suum sanguinem dejiciunt. vindicantes. the pseudo-ingulf alludes but briefly to the battle of hastings itself. yet here again we have traces of william of malmesbury's words in 'nec de toto exercitu, præter paucissimos eum aliquis concomitatur' and 'more gregarii militis manu ad manum congrediens', which phrases are applied to harold. [footnote 1: _norm. conq._, iii. 367.] [footnote 2: _ibid._, p. 365.] [footnote 3: ed. 1684, p. 21.] [footnote 4: _vide supra_, p. 279. cf. the fight at jaffa, august 5, 1192.] regenbald, priest and chancellor no better illustration could be given of the fact that valuable historical evidence may lurk, even in print, unknown, than the charters printed, from the cirencester cartulary, by sir thomas phillips in _archæologia_ (1836).[1] one can imagine how highly prized they would have been by mr freeman, had he only known of their existence. regenbald, of whom sir thomas would seem never to have heard, was the first chancellor of england.[2] mr freeman called him, i know not on what authority, 'the norman chancellor of eadward'. whatever his nationality, it is well established that he was that king's chancellor. he occurs repeatedly in domesday, where he is distinguished as 'canceler', 'presbyter', and 'de cirencestre'. we learn also from its pages that he held land in at least three counties--berkshire, herefordshire, and dorset t.r.e.--and that he seems to have received further grants from king william in his return.[3] the three charters of which i treat are found in the cirencester cartulary and are in anglo-saxon. the first is one of king edward's in favour of 'reinbold min preost', and is a confirmation to him of soc and sac, toll and team, etc., as his predecessors had enjoyed it 'on cnutes kinges daie'. the third is a notification from king william that 'ic hæbbe geunnen regenbald minan preoste eall his lond' as 'he hit under ed[w]earde hædde mine meie'. the chief points to be noticed here are that the land is granted _de novo_, not confirmed, and that the conqueror speaks of regenbald as 'minan preoste', implying that he has taken him into his service. it is the second of these charters that is of quite extraordinary importance. i here append it _in extenso_ as printed by sir thomas phillips: 'vyllelm king gret hereman b. & wulstan b. & eustace eorl & eadrich & bristrich & ealle mine þegenes on [w]yltoneshyre & on glouc'shyre fronliche & ic cuþe eo[w] ic habbe geunnan reinbold mina preost [þt] land æt esi & [þt] land æt latton & ealle þæra þinge [þt] þar to lið binnan port & buten mið sace & mið socne s[w]a full and s[w]a forð s[w]a his furmest on hondan stodan harald kinge on ællan þingan on dæge & æfter to atheonne s[w]a s[w]a ealra lefest ys & ic nelle nenna men geþafian [þt] him fram honda teo ænig þære þinga þæs þa ic him geunne habbe bi minan freonshype.' the relevant entry in domesday speaks for itself: reinbaldus presbyter tenet latone et aisi. duo taini tenuerunt pro ii. maneriis t.r.e. heraldus comes junxit in unum. geldabat pro ix. hidis (68_b_). if the charter were nothing more than a grant from the conqueror to a private individual of lands duly entered in domesday, it would, i believe, as such be unique. historians have long and vainly sought for any genuine charter of the kind; and here it has been in print for nearly sixty years. but the document, i hope to show, does far more for us than this: it opens a new chapter in the history of the norman conquest. we first notice that the writ is addressed not to norman, but to english authorities. the only exception is count eustace, who was, of course, not a norman, and who was known in england before the conquest as brother-in-law to edward the confessor. the obvious inference is that, at the time this writ was issued, norman government had not yet been set up in the district. urse d'abetot, for instance, the dreaded sheriff of worcestershire, would probably have been addressed in conjunction with bishop wulstan had he been then in power. but we know that he came into power soon after the conquest, for he had time to be guilty of oppression and to be rebuked for it by ealdred before that primate's death in 1069. but as our writ is of this early date, it must be previous to the treason of count eustace in 1067. it must therefore belong to the beginning of that year, when william had only recently been crowned king. we see then here, i think, the conqueror, in his first days as an english king, addressing his subjects, in a part of the realm not yet under norman sway, and doing so in their own tongue and in the forms to which they were accustomed. as king edward in his charter to regenbald had greeted bishops, earls, and sheriffs, so here his successor greets two bishops, 'eustace eorl', and two englishmen representing the power of the sheriff. and so again in his charter to london he began by greeting the bishop and the portreeve.[4] the writ, it will be seen, is addressed to the authorities of gloucestershire and wilts. the estate lay in the latter county, but the connection of regenbald de 'cirencestre' with glo'stershire may account for the inclusion of that county. can we identify 'eadrich' and 'bristrich' with any local magnates? with some confidence i boldly suggest that the latter was no other than the 'bristricus' of the exon domesday, that famous brihtric, the son of ælfgar, who, to quote from the appendix mr freeman devotes to him, 'appears distinctly as a great landowner in most of the western shires', one from whose vast domains was carved out later the great honour of gloucester. until now, all we have known of him has been derived from the domesday entries of his estates t.r.e. and from the legend which associates his name with that of queen matilda. but this charter enables us to say that he was living and still holding his great position in the west in the early days of william's reign.[5] from 'bristric' i turn to 'eadric', and ask if we may not here recognize 'eadric the wild' himself? this can only be matter of conjecture, but it is certain that these two englishmen are here assigned the place that would be given to a sheriff, and that 'eadric the wild'--'quidam præpotens minister', as florence terms him--was a magnate in the west (herefordshire and shropshire) at the time of the conquest. mr freeman terms him 'a man about whom we should gladly know more'. it is stated by orderic that he was one of those who came in and submitted to william at the outset. but mr freeman held it 'far more likely that he did not submit till a much later time', because florence says of him in william's absence: 'se dedere regi dedignabatur'. orderic's statement, however, is not denied, and florence's words seem to me quite explicable by the hypothesis that eadric had refused the 'dangerous honour', as mr freeman terms it, of following william to normandy in 1067 among 'his english attendants or hostages'. harried, in consequence, by his norman neighbours, he retaliated by ravaging herefordshire in august of that year; while count eustace also threw off his allegiance and made his descent on dover. if the identity of 'eadric' is matter of conjecture, that of 'eustace eorl' is certain. but no one has known, or even suspected, that he held, at this period, high position in the west. it may be that, as i have already hinted, he was sent by william to a district, as yet only nominally subject, as being, from his previous connection with england, less obnoxious than a norman was likely to prove. it would be refining overmuch to suggest that william might also intend to establish him as far as possible from his base of operations at boulogne. in any case, we have in this charter a welcome addition to our scanty knowledge of that obscure period when william, as it were, was feeling his feet as an english king. nor is it its least important feature that it shows us william, contrary to what mr freeman held to be his fundamental rule, speaking of his predecessor as 'harald kinge'. before taking leave of regenbald, we may glance at one of the domesday entries relating to his lands. mr freeman, in two distinct passages, wrote as follows: an entry in 99 reads as if the the rights of the antecessor are same regenbald had been defrauded handed on to the grantee of his of land by a norman tenant of his land.... so in exon 432. own. 'ricardus tenet in rode i. 'ricardus interpres habet hidam, quam ipse tenuit de i. hidam terræ in roda quam ipse rainboldo presbytero licentia emit de rainboldo sacerdote regis, ut dicit. reinbold vero [eadward's chancellor?] per tenuit t.r.e.' licentiam regis, ut dicit qui (_norm. conq._, v. 751) tenuit eam die qua rex e. fuit[6] et mortuus.' (_ibid._, p. 784) although these two passages are found in two different appendices, the entries thus diversely adduced, are, of course, one and the same. but, it will be seen, the 'tenuit' of domesday is equated by the 'emit' of the exon book. one of the two must be wrong. i should accept the exon text because 'emit licentia regis' is the right domesday phrase, because it makes better sense, and because it is a sound principle of textual criticism that the exchequer scribe was more likely to write the usual 'tenuit' for the exceptional 'emit' than the exon scribe to do the converse. i should then read the passage thus: 'emit de rainboldo sacerdote--per licentiam regis, ut dicit--qui tenuit eam die', etc. if my view be adopted, we here detect noteworthy error in our great and sacrosanct record. the charter of henry i to cirencester abbey--in which he had placed canons regular, and of which he claimed to be the founder--sets, as it were, the coping-stone on the story of regenbald.[7] in it we read: dedi et concessi ... totam tenuram reimbaldi presbyteri in terris et ecclesiis, et ceteris omnibusquæ subscripta sunt.... de rebus autem predictis quæ fuerunt rembaldi hec statuimus. the details of regenbald's possessions are given, and are of special value for collation with domesday. they set him before us not only as a landowner in five different counties, but also as the first great pluralist. sixteen churches, rich in tithes and glebe--one might really term them 'fat livings'--had passed into the hands of regenbald 'the priest'. from the king's phrase, '_dedi_ et concessi', he would seem to have been not merely confirming an endowment by regenbald, but granting lands which had escheated to himself.[8] and this conclusion is confirmed by the fact that the king, while granting them, especially reserved the life interest of the bishop of salisbury and of two others--one of them, alas! a bishop's nephew--who must have acquired their rights since regenbald's death. this charter, apart from its contents, is of great interest from its mention of the place where and the time when it was granted, together with its list of witnesses. these were the two archbishops, the bishops of salisbury, winchester, lincoln, durham, ely, hereford, and rochester: robert 'de sigillo', robert de ver, miles of gloucester, robert d'oilli, hugh bigot, robert de curci, payne 'filius johannis et eustacio et willelmo fratribus ejus, et willelmo de albini britone'. the charter was granted 'apud burnam in transfretatione mea anno incarnationis domini mcxxxiii. regni vero mei xxxiii.'; and 'burna', as i have elsewhere shown,[9] was westbourne in sussex, on the border of hampshire, then in the king's hands by forfeiture and near the coast. here therefore we see the king, when leaving england for the last time, surrounded by his prelates and ministers, and are enabled to say positively who were with him. i would note the predominance of the official class represented by the bishops of salisbury, lincoln, and ely, by the late chancellor, the bishop of durham, and by laymen who are found specially entrusted with administrative work. a long list of witnesses such as this is specially characteristic of the closing period of the reign,[10] and, of course, always possesses biographical value.[11] another english writ of the conqueror, which may be profitably compared with that we have discussed, is found in one of the cartularies of bury st edmund's.[12] its address, as rendered in the transcript, runs: william [_sic_] kyng gret ægelmær bischop and raulf eorl and nordman and ealle myne thegnaes on sudfolke frendliche. this writ is obviously previous to the deposition of bishop æthelmær in april, 1070, but how far previous it is not easy to say. 'nordman' is clearly the sheriff of suffolk, who appears in domesday as 'normannus vicecomes' (ii. 438). his name affords presumption, though not proof, that he was of english birth;[13] and as his domesday holding consisted only of rights over two ipswich burgesses (which he may have acquired during his shrievalty) he is hardly likely to have been one of the conquering race. of the third official, earl ralf, we know a good deal. mr freeman was much puzzled by this 'somewhat mysterious person',[14] but eventually came to the conclusion that 'there were two ralfs in norfolk, father and son, the younger being the son of a breton mother: the elder was staller under edward and earl under william'. the younger was the earl of norfolk (or 'of the east angles'), who rebelled and was forfeited in 1075; the elder was that 'rawulf' who, in the words of the chronicle, 'wæs englisc and wæs geboren on norðfolce'. putting our evidence together, i lean strongly to the view that we have here, as in the case of regenbald, a writ addressed to english authorities before norfolk had passed into the hands of norman authorities. mr freeman held that a passage in domesday (ii. 194), to which he had given much attention, should be read--'hanc terram habuit a[rfastus] episcopus in tempore utrorumque [radulforum]', and that therefore 'the elder ralph was living as late as 1070, in which year the episcopate of erfast begins'. but the context clearly shows that we should read 'a[ilmarus] episcopus', and that, therefore, the elder ralf died before æthelmær was deposed. moreover, norwich, we are specially told, was entrusted by the conqueror to william fitz osbern before his departure from england in march 1067. william was placed, some two years later, in charge of york castle, and we read in mr freeman's work that 'the man who now (autumn, 1069) commanded at norwich, and who was already, or soon afterwards, invested with the east-anglian earldom, was the renegade native of the shire, ralf of wader'.[15] this, it will be seen, contradicts his own, and supports my reading of the domesday passage quoted above. everything therefore points to the 'raulf eorl' of our writ dying or being deposed shortly after the conquest. before taking leave of this writ we may note that, dealing as it does with suffolk, it is addressed to earl ralf as earl, not merely of norfolk, but of east anglia. this is of some importance, because mr freeman wrote, speaking of the regents appointed in 1067: there was no longer to be an earl of the west saxons or an earl of the east angles.... returning in this to earlier english practice, the earl under william was to have the rule of a single shire only, or if two shires were ever set under one earl they were at least not to be adjoining shires. the results of this change have been of the highest moment. (iv. 70.) yet on page 253, as we have seen, we read of 'the east anglian earldom', and on page 573 that the younger ralph 'had received the earldom of east anglia'--florence of worcester distinctly terming him 'east-anglorum comite'. mr freeman, indeed, was led by this passage to style him 'earl of norfolk or of the east angles'.[16] i believe this latter style to be perfectly correct, and, as i have shown in my _geoffrey de mandeville_ (p. 191), to apply even to the bigod earldom in the days of stephen. the curious english writ that has suggested these considerations ought to be compared with a latin one, also in favour of st edmund's, on which i lighted in examining the 'registrum album' of the abbey. it is one of those exceedingly rare documents that find their correlatives in domesday. the words of the writ are these: w. rex anglor' e. epo. b. abbi w. malet salm. sciatis vos mei fideles me concessisse servitium de liuremere quam werno hactenus de me tenuit sancto ædmundo et filia guernonis in vita sua de abbate b. tenuit.[17] the last clause is clearly an addition by the cartulary scribe. now this charter being addressed, like the other, to æthelmær ('ethelmerus'), bishop of the east angles, is, of course, previous to april 1070. i should, therefore, also place it previous to the capture of william malet at york in september 1069. but this, unlike the other date, is matter of probability rather than of proof. mr freeman believed that william returned, and died 'in the marshes of ely' (1071), but this is only a guess in which i cannot concur.[18] in any case, we have evidence here of this well-known man having held a position in suffolk (where he owned the great honour of eye) analogous to that of sheriff. he may have succeeded northman in that office. the relevant domesday entry is as follows: hujus terram rex accepit de abbate et dedit guernoni depeiz [de peiz]. postea licencia regis deveniens monachus reddidit terram. (363_b_.) the charter records, i take it, the 'licencia regis' of domesday.[19] [footnote 1: vol. xxvi., p. 256.] [footnote 2: not counting leofric, styled 'regis cancellarius' by florence in 1046.] [footnote 3: see my life of him in _dictionary of national biography_.] [footnote 4: it might even be suggested that not only this charter but the essex writ in favour of deorman (addressed to bishop william and swegen the sheriff) belonged to the same early period. compare, however, the conqueror's old english writ that i have discussed ('londoners and the chase') in the _athenæum_ of june 30, 1894.] [footnote 5: it is a noteworthy coincidence that 'brihtricus princeps' and 'eadricus princeps' are among the witnesses to harold's waltham charter in 1062, which regenbald himself also attests as chancellor.] [footnote 6: _sic._] [footnote 7: see _monast. anglic._, ii. 177.] [footnote 8: it is possible, i think, that the only endowment entered to the church at cirencester in domesday, viz., two hides at cirencester, had been originally given by regenbald.] [footnote 9: henry i, at 'burne' (_english historical review_, 1895).] [footnote 10: as in the charters to aubrey de vere (_baronia anglica_, 158) and william mauduit.] [footnote 11: here, it would seem, is further proof of the bishops of ely and durham assuming their styles before consecration (_infra_, pp. 366-7).] [footnote 12: harl. ms., 743, fo. 8_d_.] [footnote 13: mr freeman held him to be an englishman.] [footnote 14: _norm. conq._ (2nd ed.), iii. 773. cf. 1st ed., iii. 752-3; iv. 277.] [footnote 15: _ibid._ (1st ed.), iv. 252-3.] [footnote 16: _ibid._ (2nd.), iii. 773.] [footnote 17: add. ms., 14,314, fo. 32_b_ (pencil).] [footnote 18: see my letter on 'the death of william malet' in _academy_ of august 26, 1884.] [footnote 19: since this paper was written, there has appeared the valuable bath cartulary (somerset record society) containing a most remarkable charter (p. 36), which should be closely compared with those to regenbald. it is issued by william the king and william the earl, and must undoubtedly be assigned to the former's absence from england, march-december 1067. it shows us therefore william fitz osbern acting as regent and anticipating the office of the later great justiciar by inserting in the document his own name. this charter, like that to regenbald, is addressed to the still english authorities of an unconquered district.] the conqueror at exeter 'and y seide nay, and proved hit by domesday.'[1] for a companion study to the battle of hastings, one could not select a better subject than the siege of exeter by william in 1068. it is so, because, in the tale of the conquest, 'no city of england', in mr freeman's words, 'comes so distinctly to the front as exeter':[2] and because, as editor of 'historic towns', he chose exeter, out of all others, as the town to be reserved for himself.[3] 'its siege by william', we are told, 'is one of the most important events of his reign';[4] but it was doubtless the alleged 'federal' character of exeter's attitude at this crisis that gave its story for him an interest so unique. this episode, moreover, has many advantages: it is complete in itself; it is rich in suggestion; it is taken from the period in which the professor described himself as 'most at home'; and its scene is laid within his own borders, his own west saxon land. it presents an admirable test of mr freeman's work at the point where he was admittedly strongest, and his thoroughly typical treatment of it affords a perfect illustration of the method he employed. the year 1067 was drawing to its close when the conqueror, summoned back from normandy by the tidings of pressing danger, returned to spend his christmas at westminster amidst 'the sea of troubles which still awaited him in his half-conquered island-kingdom'.[5] threatened at once by foes within and without the realm, he perceived the vital necessity of severing their forces by instant suppression of the 'rebellions' at home, _swift_ suppression before the invaders were upon him, _stern_ suppression before the movement spread. let us bear in mind these twin motives, by which his policy must at this juncture have been shaped, the need for _swiftness_, with invasion in prospect, and the need for _sternness_ as a warning to 'rebels'. of all the 'rebellious' movements on foot, that at exeter, as mr freeman admits, was 'specially hateful in william's eyes'.[6] it was against exeter, therefore, that the conqueror directed his first blow. in the depths of winter, in the early days of the new year, 'he fared to devonshire'. such is the brief statement of the english chronicle. we hear of william at westminster; we next hear of him before the walls of exeter: all that intervenes is a sheer blank. of what happened on this long westward march not a single detail is preserved to us in the chronicle, in orderic or in florence. now it is precisely such a blank as this that, to mr freeman, was irresistible. we shall see below how, a few months later, we have, in william's march from warwick to nottingham, a blank exactly parallel.[7] there also mr freeman succumbed to the temptation. he seized, in each case, on the empty canvas, and, by a few rapid and suggestive touches, he has boldly filled it in with the outlines of historical events, not merely events for which there is no sufficient evidence, but events which can be proved, by demonstration, to have had no foundation in fact. the scene elaborated by mr freeman to enliven the void between the departure from london and the entrance into devonshire is the resistance and the downfall of 'the civic league'.[8] this striking incident in the exeter campaign i propose to analyse without further delay. it must, in the first place, be pointed out that we have no proof whatever of this 'civic league' having even existed. to apply mr freeman's words to his own narrative: the story is perfectly possible. we only ask for the proof. show us the proof;... then we will believe. without such a proof we will not believe.[9] for proof of its existence mr freeman relies on a solitary passage in orderic.[10] but orderic, it will at once be seen, does not say that any such league was effected; he does not even say that the league which was contemplated was intended to be an exclusively civic league. what he does say is that the men of exeter sought for allies in the neighbouring coasts (_plagæ_)[11] and in other cities. the dorset townlets, such as bridport, with its 120 houses, would scarcely represent these 'cities'. mr freeman assumed, however, that 'the civic league' was formed, assumed that the dorset towns had 'doubtless' joined it, and finally assumed that they were 'no doubt' besieged by william in consequence.[12] these assumptions he boldly connected with the entries on the towns in domesday, entries which we shall analyse below, and which are not only incorrectly rendered, but are directly opposed to the above assumptions. what, then, is the inference to be drawn? simply this. the 'civic league' must share the fate of the 'palisade on senlac'. the sieges which took place 'probably' never took place at all; the league never resisted; the league never fell; in short, there is not a scrap of evidence that there was ever such a league at all. the existence of such a league would be, unquestionably, a fact of great importance. but its very importance imperatively requires that its existence should be established by indisputable proof. of such proof there is none. one can imagine how severely mr freeman would have handled such guesses from others. for he wrote of a deceased somersetshire historian who boldly connects the story of gisa with the banishment of godwine: one is inclined to ask with henry ii, 'quære a rustico illo utrum hoc somniaverit?' but these things have their use. every instance in the growth of a legend affords practice in the art of distinguishing legend from history. it should, however, in justice be at once added that this story did not originate wholly with mr freeman himself. he refers us on the subject of the league to his predecessor, sir francis palgrave. the brilliant imagination of that graceful writer was indeed led captive by the fascinating vision of 'the first federal commonwealth', yet he did not allow himself, when dealing with the facts, to deviate from the exact truth. his statement that exeter '_attempted to form_ a defensive confederation' reproduces with scrupulous accuracy orderic's words. and even when he passed from fact to conjecture, there was nothing in his conjecture at variance from fact. from him we have no suggestion that the dorset towns resisted william or 'stood sieges'. it was left for mr freeman to carry into action palgrave's line of thought, and, by forcing the evidence of the domesday survey into harmony with the story he had evolved, to show us, in his own words, 'the growth of a legend'. for, as he observed with perfect truth: what we call the growth of a story is really the result of the action of a number of human wills. the convenient metaphor must not delude us into thinking that a story really grows of itself as a tree grows. in a crowd of cases ... the story comes of a state of mind which does not willingly sin against historical truth, but which has not yet learned that there is such a thing as historical truth. had mr freeman done so himself? did he ever really learn to distinguish conjecture from fact? one asks this because within the covers of a single work, his _english towns and districts_, that civic league which in the _norman conquest_ is said to have existed 'no doubt', is in one place said to have existed 'perhaps', and in another is set forth as an undoubted historic fact: exeter stood forth for one moment ... the chief of a confederation of the lesser towns of the west.... a confederation of the western towns, with the great city of the district at their head, suddenly started into life to check the progress of the conqueror. finally, in his 'exeter' (1887), the same story again appears, without a word of caution, as absolute historic fact. exeter, we read, was the head of a gathering of smaller commonwealths around her; ... the towns of dorset were in league with exeter.... we have no record of the march, but it is plain that the towns of dorset were fearfully harried. through all mr freeman's work we trace this same tendency to confuse his own conjectures with proved historic fact. for the details of this fearful harrying we are referred to the domesday survey. it was 'no doubt', we learn, when william marched on exeter (1068), that dorchester, bridport, wareham, and shaftesbury underwent that fearful harrying, the result of which is recorded in domesday. bridport was utterly ruined; not a house seems to have been able to pay taxes at the time of the survey. at dorchester, the old roman settlement, the chief town of the shire, only a small remnant of the houses escaped destruction. these facts are signs, etc., etc. 'these facts', we find, will not bear investigation. to refute them in the case of bridport, 'there is nothing to be done but to turn to the proper place in the great survey'. following this, his own, precept, we learn that there is nothing in domesday of our author's 'utter ruin'; and that so far from 'not a house' being 'able to pay taxes', domesday tells us that four-fifths of the houses then existing could and did pay them. here, again, the errors arose from not reading domesday 'with common care'. the entry runs: 'modo sunt ibi c. domus, et xx. sunt ita destitutæ', etc. the meaning, of course, is that twenty houses were impoverished. mr freeman must have hurriedly misconstrued his latin, and read it as a hundred and twenty. no error that he detected in mr froude could be worse than representing bridport, on the authority of domesday, as the greatest sufferer among the dorset towns, when domesday itself proves that it suffered least of all. and so, too, with dorchester. on turning to domesday, we learn with surprise that the 'small remnant' of houses remaining there was eighty-eight as against one hundred and seventy-two in the days of king edward. from an appendix of our author's to which we are referred, we glean the fact that at dorchester, out of a hundred and seventy-two houses no less than a hundred and twenty-eight were 'penitus destructæ a tempore hugonis vicecomitis usque nunc'. here, again, mr freeman's error can be traced beyond the possibility of question, to a misreading of domesday: the entry runs, 'modo sunt ibi quater xx. et viii. [88] domus, et c. [sunt] penitus destructæ'. mr freeman must have hurriedly ignored the 'quater', and then added the 'twenty-eight' thus evolved to the hundred houses that were destroyed. all this mr freeman did, and we have in 'that great record, from which there is no appeal', the proof of the fact. clearly, in the notable words of m. bémont (_revue historique_), 'il est prudent de revoir après lui les textes qu'il invoque'.[13] the strange thing is that sir henry ellis's work, though 'far from being up to the present standard of historical scholarship', could have saved him, here also, from error, as it gives the correct figures from domesday. but passing from 'facts' to theories, we find mr freeman holding that 'no doubt', 'doubtless', 'probably', the destruction recorded in domesday was wrought by the conqueror himself in 1068. why should this guesswork be substituted for history, when we have 'always the means', as our author himself wrote, 'of at once turning to the law and testimony to see whether these things are so'? a glance at domesday effectually disposes of mr freeman's theory; for the survey is here peculiarly explicit: with anxious care, with painful iteration, it assures us that, in the case of wareham, the devastation was wrought 'a tempore hugonis vicecomitis', and that, in the case of shaftesbury and in the case of dorchester, it was wrought 'a tempore hugonis vicecomitis usque nunc'. these categorical statements are conclusive: they place the whole of the devastation subsequent to the accession of the norman sheriff, hugh fitzgrip. mr eyton, in his work on the dorset domesday, held that they fix it as having occurred between 1070 and 1084; the words, however, 'usque nunc' carry it on down to 1086, and, but that i must now come to exeter, i could show the real bearing of these allusions to sheriff hugh. the breakdown, when tested, of the alleged 'civic league' strangely vindicates the sound insight of that sagacious historian who explicitly asserted that the english boroughs never, as was the case in scotland and in germany, adopted a confederate bond of union, or organized themselves in leagues.[14] yet, in his _english towns and districts_, mr freeman was led by his own tale of the resistance of the western lands and their capital to argue from it as from a proved historic fact: when exeter stood forth for one moment ... _the chief of a confederation of the lesser towns of the west_ ... we see that the path was opening by which exeter might have come to be another lübeck, the head of a damnonian hanse, another bern, the mistress of the subject-lands of the western peninsula. such a dream sounds wild in our ears.[15] it does indeed. but it does so for the reason that it is founded on a fact which has no historic existence. yet, for mr freeman, with his fertile imagination afire with the glories of ancient greece and of countless mediaeval commonwealths, this same 'wild dream' possessed an irresistible fascination. 'it is none the less true', he hastened to add, that when a confederation of the western towns, with the great city of the district at their head, suddenly started into life to check the progress of the conqueror, it shows that a spirit had been kindled, etc., etc.... it is worth while to stop and think how near england once was to running the same course as other lands, etc., etc.[16] returning now to sober fact, let us ask how the city of exeter came into william's hands. this is the pivotal point on which the whole story revolves. on this point mr freeman spoke with no uncertain sound: the city was 'taken by means of a mine'.[17] it was, he wrote, 'by undermining the walls that william at last gained possession of the city', the citizens being thus forced 'to submit unreservedly'.[18] he added, contrasting the success of william with the failure, in 1003, of swend: william might have been beaten back from exeter as swend had been, if the military art of normandy in william's days had not been many steps in advance of the military art of denmark in the days of swend. this allusion to 'swend' involves a perfect tangle of confusion. turning back a couple of pages, we are reminded that on penhow, 'sixty-seven years before (1001), swend, of denmark, driven back from the city, had found his revenge' (p. 154). guided by a footnote, we turn for information to the earlier volume to which the author refers us, only to learn that it was not swegen, but the adventurer pallig who was driven back from exeter in 1001 (i. 307), while 'of swegen himself we hear nothing in english history for nine years (994-1003)'.[19] moreover, when swegen did come--in 1003--invading england to avenge the massacre of saint brice, he was not 'driven back from the city', but, on the contrary, 'stormed and plundered it' (p. 315), for 'the citizens who had beaten back pallig had no chance of beating back swegen' (_exeter_, p. 27). moreover, the suggestion that the danes would not have been able to attack and breach the city wall is in direct conflict with the evidence quoted by mr freeman himself. not only did pallig, in 1001, direct his attack against the wall,[20] but 'swegen', we read, in 1003, 'civitatem exanceastram infregit'.[21] now, speaking of 1063, mr freeman wrote that 'the expression of florence "infregit" seems to fall in with' his view that william breached the wall. that is to say that, according to mr freeman, 'swend' was 'beaten back' (which he was not), because he could not breach the walls, which is precisely what, on his showing, swegen succeeded in doing. could confusion further go? for his statement that 'william's mine advanced so far that part of the wall crumbled to the ground, making a practicable breach' (p. 156), mr freeman relied on an ingenious combination of orderic's statement that the conqueror 'obnixe satagit cives desuper impugnare et subtus murum suffodere' with william of malmesbury's assertion that he triumphed 'divino scilicet adjutus auxilio, quod pars muralis ultro decidens ingressum illi patefecerit'. he argued that, on the supposition that 'exonia' is the right reading in william of malmesbury, his 'story, allowing for a little legendary improvement, fits so well into orderic's as to support the theory of a breach'. the argument is ingenuous and plausible, nor can it be lightly dismissed. but whether the words of orderic imply, of necessity, a mine or not,[22] the real point is that he does not mention a breach. he speaks of william's efforts, but he does not say they were successful. it is difficult to suppose that william of poitiers, of whom orderic is here the mouthpiece, would not have mentioned his hero's success, had success rewarded his efforts. we are reduced then, as the sole and unconfirmed authority for mr freeman's absolute statement--or rather as the legend from which he 'infers' the facts he states--to the words of william of malmesbury. now william was classed, by mr freeman himself, among those writers whose 'accounts are often mixed up with romantic details', so that 'it is dangerous to trust them' (i. 258); and he pointed out of the murder of edward that: in the hands of william of malmesbury the story becomes a romance.... the _obiter dictum_ of william of malmesbury that ælfhere had a hand in edward's death is contrary to the whole tenor of the history ... (i. 265). if there is thus, on mr freeman's showing, need for accepting with some caution a statement made by william alone, there is further, in this special case, the consideration that even if his story does refer to exeter, the phrase, '_leviter_ subegit' is justly queried by mr freeman;[23] and that william here deals in hyperbole and miracle. indeed, when we find mr freeman writing: 'i infer this from william of malmesbury', we are reminded of his words on his predecessor's treatment of the legend of siward: 'such stuff would not be worth mentioning, had not sir francis palgrave inferred from it the existence of an historical tostig, earl of huntingdon' (iv. 768-9). i will not express an opinion of my own, but will quote from mr freeman's able essay on 'the mythical and romantic elements in early english history'.[24] in it he expressly disclaimed sympathy with the old pragmatizing or euhemeristic school of mythological interpretation.... the pragmatizers take a mythical story; they strip it by an arbitrary process of whatever seems impossible; they explain or allegorize miraculous details; and having thus obtained something which possibly may have happened, they give it out as something which actually did happen.... it will never do to take the tale of troy, to leave out all intervention of the gods, and to give out the remnant as a piece of real grecian history (p. 3). this criticism would seem to apply to the 'legendary' tale that the walls of exeter fell down, like those of jericho, by supernatural intervention. at least, we may say of the breaching of the walls, when given out 'as something which actually did happen', what was said of the possible siege of oxford, this same year, by mr freeman: the direct evidence for a siege of oxford is so weak that the tale cannot be relied on with any certainty (iv. 188). having now examined the direct evidence for the statement that the citizens were forced to surrender unconditionally to william by the successful breaching of their walls, i propose to show that the acceptance of this statement does violence not only to the facts of the case, but to all that is known of william's character, to the english chronicle, and to domesday; and i shall prove that it rests beyond dispute 'on the foundation of a single error'. assuming for the moment the accuracy of mr freeman's version, namely, that the city had been placed, by a breach, absolutely at william's mercy, what treatment of its citizens would his character and his whole career lead us to expect? 'at all stages of his life,' as mr freeman observed, paraphrasing the famous words of the english chronicle (1087), 'if he was _debonnair_ to those who would do his will, he was beyond measure stern to all who withstood it' (ii. 167). again, speaking of his march on exeter, the professor insisted on the fact that 'the policy of william was ever severity to those who withstood him, and gentleness to those who submitted to his yoke'.[25] how he applied this principle in practice was shown at romney and at dover in 1066. romney had successfully resisted the landing of a party of normans,[26] and william was resolved to avenge the deed. it was his policy now, as ever, to be harsh whenever he met with resistance, and gentle to all who submitted easily.... harrying then as he went, william reached romney. the words which set forth his doings there are short, pithy, and terrible. he took what vengeance he would for the slaughter of his men (iii. 533-4). dover, on the contrary, made no resistance, but surrendered before he 'had thrown up a bank, or shot an arrow'. it was, therefore, 'plainly his policy to show himself mild and _debonnair_ as it had been his policy at romney to show himself beyond measure stark'.[27] such being william's settled principle, what might the citizens of exeter expect? even before the siege began the fear that they had sinned too deeply for forgiveness made them disown the capitulation their leaders had arranged.[28] the reference is doubtless to conduct similar to that which had brought upon romney william's merciless vengeance.[29] but how stood the case at its close? (1) they were rebels. and for these 'rebels, as they were deemed in norman eyes' (iv. 135), confiscation was the penalty (iv. 127-8). (2) 'the movement at exeter' was not merely a rebellion, but one which was 'specially hateful in william's eyes' (iv. 140). (3) they had been guilty of 'cruel and insulting treatment' to william's earlier emissaries (iv. 138). (4) they had offered william himself an 'insult as unseemly as it was senseless' (iv. 155). (5) they had flung to the winds their own capitulation with such audacity that william 'ira repletus est' (iv. 152). (6) they had offered a prolonged and desperate resistance, costing the lives of many of his men (iv. 156). verily, in william's eyes, the cup of exeter's iniquities must have been exceedingly full. even in cases of ordinary resistance his practice, we learn, was so uniform that mr freeman could take it for granted, 'after the fall of exeter', that the heavy destruction which fell on the town of barnstaple, in the north-western part of devonshire, and the still heavier destruction which fell on the town of lidford, might seem to show that these two boroughs were special scenes of resistance (iv. 163).[30] therefore, in the aggravated case of exeter, we could but expect him to deal with its citizens as he had dealt with those of alençon,[31] and as he was to deal, hereafter, with the sturdy defenders of ely.[32] a fearful vengeance was their certain doom. there was, moreover, as i stated at the outset, a need for sternness at this juncture that might justify william, apart from vengeance, in inflicting such signal punishment as should deter all other 'rebels'. yet what do we find? the citizens, we read, were 'favourably received', and 'assured of the safe possession of their lives and goods'. nay, william even 'secured the gates with a strong guard of men whom he could trust in order to preserve the goods of the citizens from any breaches of discipline'.[33] the dreaded conqueror, 'post tot iras terribilesque minas', had suddenly become mild as a lamb, and mr freeman accepts it all quite as a matter of course. such conduct would, surely, have been a positive premium on revolt. a castle, of course, was raised; but this was inevitable, whether a town submitted peaceably or not. for instance, 'it is plain', mr freeman wrote, 'that lincolnshire submitted more peaceably, and was dealt with more tenderly, than most parts of the kingdom' (iv. 216); but 'a castle was, of course, raised at lincoln, as well as elsewhere', and 'involved the destruction of a large number of houses' (217-8), very many more than at exeter. one 'penalty', however, remains as the price that exeter was called upon to pay for all her guilt. this, we read, was 'the raising of its tribute to lessen the wealth which had enabled it to resist'.[34] for its wealth is admitted. now, before criticizing mr freeman's view, let us clearly understand what that view was. taking, as is right, his latest work--though his view had not altered--we read of exeter in 1050: the city which had been the morning-gift of norman emma was now, along with winchester, part of the morning-gift of english edith, daughter of godwine, sister of harold. at exeter she was on her own ground; the royal revenues within the city were hers.[35] in 1086, we learn: the whole payment was eighteen pounds yearly. of this sum six pounds--that is the earl's third penny--went to the sheriff baldwin.... the other twelve pounds had formed part of the morning-gift of the lady, and though edith had been dead eleven years, they are entered separately as hers.[36] so far, all is consistent and clear enough. but we find it immediately added that: this regular yearly payment of eighteen pounds had taken the place of various uncertain payments and services.... thus the citizens of exeter, who had offered to pay to william what they had paid to former kings, found their burthens far heavier than they had been in the old time. and the lady, while she lived, reaped her full share of the increased contributions of her own city.[37] or, as expressed in his great work: the money payment was now raised from an occasional half-marc of silver to eighteen pounds yearly. the rights of the old lady were not forgotten, and eadgyth received two-thirds of the increased burthen laid upon her morning-gift.[38] if the 'twelve pounds had formed part of the morning-gift of the lady', and were accordingly received by her, as we learn,[39] in the days of king edward, how could they possibly form part of a new 'burthen' laid upon exeter, as a punishment for its resistance, by william? and if the only payment due, under edward, was an occasional half-marc of silver 'for the use of the soldiers'[40] what were 'the royal revenues' from exeter that edith was drawing in 1050? a moment's thought is enough to show that mr freeman's statements contradict themselves, as, indeed, he must have seen, had he stopped to think. but this he sometimes failed to do. the whole source of mr freeman's confusion was his inexplicable misunderstanding of the domesday entry on the city.[41] we must first note that both his predecessors--palgrave, who was lacking in 'critical faculty', and ellis, who was 'far from being up to the present standard of historical scholarship'--had read this entry rightly, and given, independently, its gist. it will best enable my readers to understand the point at issue if i print side by side the paraphrases of exeter's offer given by palgrave and by our author. palgrave freeman tribute or gafol they would we are ready to pay to him the proffer to their king such as tribute which we have been used was due to his predecessors.... to pay to former kings.... the they (1) would weigh out the city paid in money only when eighteen pounds of silver; (2) london, york, and winchester the geld would be paid, if paid, and the sum to be paid was london, york, and winchester a single half-marc of silver. submitted to the tax; and (3) when the king summoned his _fyrd_ if war arose, the king should to his standard by sea or by land, have the quota of service exeter supplied the same number of imposed upon five hydes of men as were supplied by five hides land.... but the citizens of land.... but the men of exeter refused to become the men ... of would not, each citizen personally, their sovereign; they would become his men; they would not not ... allow the basileus to receive so dangerous a visitor enter within their walls. within their walls.[42] i have numbered the clauses in palgrave's paraphrase which render the three successive clauses in the domesday book entry. the first refers to the _firma_ of the town, payable to its lord (the king);[43] the second to the 'geld' (tax), payable to the king _qua_ king;[44] the third to its military service.[45] the distinction between the three clauses is admirably seen under totnes (i. 108, _b_), and the sense of domesday is absolutely certain to any one familiar with its formulas.[46] the 'commutation of geldability' (as mr eyton termed it) was by no means peculiar to exeter. totnes paid, 'when exeter paid', the same sum of half a marc 'pro geldo'. bridport paid the same 'ad opus huscarlium regis' (75), dorchester and wareham a marc each, and shaftesbury two marcs (eyton's _dorset domesday_, 70-72). in these dorset instances, one marc represented an assessment of ten hides. what mr freeman did was to confuse the first clause with the second, and to suppose that both referred to the 'money payment' of the town, the first under william, the second under edward. he thus evolved the statement that under william 'the money payment was raised from an occasional half-marc of silver to eighteen pounds yearly'. this is roughly equivalent to saying of a house rented at fifty pounds, and paying a tax of one pound, that its 'money payment' was raised from one pound to fifty. but this confusion, with all its results, is carried further still. edith's share of the eighteen pounds is entered in domesday as 'xii. lib[ras] ad numerum'. this mr freeman rightly gave as the amount in 1086;[47] but turning back a few pages, we actually read that in domesday twelve houses in exeter appear as 'liberæ ad numerum in ministeriis edid reginæ'.[48] this is, of course, the same entry, only that here our author changed pounds into houses, and _libras_ into _liberæ_. what idea was conveyed to his mind by a house 'libera ad numerum' i do not profess to explain. but, oddly enough, as he here turned pounds into houses, so in a passage of his _william rufus_ he turned houses into pence.[49] the essence of the whole matter is that the 'burdens' to which exeter was subject were not raised at all, but remained precisely the same as had been paid to former kings. and this fact is the more notable, because, as mr freeman had to admit, 'even the tribute imposed by william' [on his own hypothesis] 'was not large for so great a city', and, one may add, a rich one.[50] indeed, it was so small as to fairly call for increase.[51] even lincoln, which, according to mr freeman, received 'favourable' treatment from william, had its 'tribute largely raised'[52] in fact, more than trebled.[53] what we have to account for, therefore, is the fact that a city which had defied, insulted, and outraged william, received not only 'a free pardon',[54] but peculiar favour at his hands. the paradox itself is beyond dispute, whatever may be said of my solution. for a solution there is. only it is not to miracles or legends, nor to the flatterings of courtly chaplains that we must look to learn the truth, but, in the words of a memorable essay, to 'the few unerring notices in domesday and the chronicles'.[55] as yet we have not, it must be remembered, heard the story from the english side. let us turn, therefore, to the english version, to what mr freeman described as 'the short but weighty account in the worcester chronicle, which gives hints which we should be well pleased to see drawn out at greater length'.[56] these hints i shall now examine, though i doubt if mr freeman's friends will be well pleased with the result. we have in the chronicle a straightforward story, not only intelligible in itself, but also thoroughly in harmony with the known facts of the case. the king finds himself compelled to lay formal siege to exeter ('besæt þa burh'); he is detained before its walls day after day ('xviii. dægas') in the depth of an english winter, 'and þær wearð micel his heres forfaren'. the need for sternness was there indeed; but swiftness was to him, for the moment, a matter of life and death. held at bay by those stubborn walls, learning the might of those 'two generals'--january and february--in whom the emperor nicholas put his trust, william was in sore straits. take mr freeman's own words: the disaffected were intriguing for foreign help;... there was a chance of his having to struggle for his crown against swend of denmark;... men were everywhere seeking to shake off the yoke, or to escape it in their own persons. even where no outbreak took place local conspiracies were rife.[57] swend was in his rear, half england on his flank; before him reared their head the walls of dauntless exeter.[58] in that bleak wilderness of frost and snow his men were falling around him, and, in very bitterness of spirit, the conqueror bowed himself for need. so, at least, i boldly suggest. he fell back on his 'arts of policy', and set himself to win by alluring terms the men whom he could not conquer. in the words of the chronicle, he promised them well ('ac he heom well behet'). this solution, of course, differs _toto cælo_ from mr freeman's narrative. we have seen that he blindly accepted the statements of that 'abandoned flatterer', william of poitiers (whom orderic had here 'doubtless followed'[59])--against whom he elsewhere warned us--and combined them with a miracle from william of malmesbury, which he euhemerized in the style that he himself had ridiculed in thierry.[60] and as he could not harmonize the courtly version with the 'short but weighty account' in the chronicle he cut the knot by dismissing the latter, and pronouncing his own version 'the most likely'.[61] resuming the narrative, we learn that the thegns--the party of non-resistance from the first--must have seized this opportunity for impressing on their 'concives' the necessity of embracing the offer, whereupon the latter, in the words of the chronicle, 'gave up the town because the thegns had betrayed them'. it is just possible that the word 'geswicon' may point to some direct treachery, but it seems best and most naturally explained as referring to their unpatriotic advice, which would naturally appear to english eyes a 'betrayal' of the national cause. there can be little doubt, from the admissions of william of poitiers (through the mouth of orderic), that the terms of agreement included not only a free pardon for all past offences, and for the city's aggravated resistance, but also security for person and property from plunder by the norman soldiery. and the witness of 'the great record' implies that 'the exeter patricians', as mr freeman styled them[62]--'the civic aristocracy'[63]--gained their original selfish aim, and secured an undertaking that they should not pay a penny more than their 'tributum ex consuetudine pristina'. what security, it may be asked, could they obtain for the terms they seem to have exacted? bold as it may seem, i would here venture to read between the lines, and to make the suggestion--it is nothing more--that when there issued from the gates 'the clergy of the city, bearing their sacred books and other holy things' (as mr freeman rendered the words of orderic), the real object of their coming forth was to make the king swear upon their relics[64] to the observance of the terms they had obtained. it was indeed the irony of fate if william, who was ever insisting on the breach of harold's oath, was driven, by the force of circumstances, to take such an oath himself. but, it may be urged, should we be justified in treating thus drastically the witness of orderic, or rather, of william of poitiers? at alençon, i reply, in mr freeman's words: william of poitiers is silent altogether, both as to the vengeance and as to the insult. neither subject was perhaps altogether agreeable to a professed panegyrist (_norm. conq._, ii. 285). stronger, however, is the case of le mans, and more directly to the point. 'william,' we read, 'followed the same policy against exeter (1068) which he had followed against le mans' (1063);[65] and so, in 1073, we find him 'calling on the men of le mans, as he had called on the men of exeter', to submit peacefully, and escape his wrath.[66] unlike 'the exeter patricians', indeed, 'the magistrates of le mans' did receive the king peacefully within their walls; they did not incur the guilt of offering armed resistance. but the essential point at le mans is that the norman version simply tells how they brought the keys of the city, how they threw themselves on william's mercy, and were graciously received by him. the local writer speaks in another tone. the interview between the king and the magistrates of le mans is described by a word often used to express conferences--in a word, _parliaments_--whether between prince and prince, or between princes and the estates of their dominions. they submitted themselves to william's authority as their sovereign, but they received his oath to observe the ancient customs and _justices_ of the city. le mans was no longer to be a sovereign commonwealth, but it was to remain a privileged municipality.[67] the words 'acceptis ab eo sacramentis, tam de impunitate perfidiæ quam de conservandis antiquis ejusdem civitatis consuetudinibus'[68] would apply exactly to the case of exeter, and william may well have done there what he actually did, we here read, at le mans. there would have been at exeter even greater need for an oath, in that its 'perfidia' had been so much the worse. but now comes the curious parallel. though quoting and scrutinizing so closely the meagre accounts of the exeter campaign, mr freeman seems to have oddly overlooked the significant words of florence, although, of course, familiar with his narrative. florence, we find, employs a phrase corresponding with that in the _vetera analecta_. florence 'vet an' cives autem _dextris acceptis_ _acceptis ab eo sacramentis_ regi se dedebant. ... sese et sua omnia dederunt. mr freeman argues from the case of le mans that _dedere_ in these times did not imply the fulness of a roman _deditio_.[69] but we are not merely dependent upon this. the words, 'dextris acceptis', i contend, imply a promise and a pledge for its performance, and cannot therefore be reconciled with an unconditional surrender. now if it were not for the fortunate preservation of the _vetera analecta_ in the case of le mans, mr freeman would there also, as at exeter, have been hoodwinked by 'the norman version'.[70] i am anxious not to employ a phrase which might be deemed offensive or unjust, so i restrict myself to that which he himself applied to his predecessor, palgrave, when, speaking of the story of eadric and his brother, he wrote that sir francis palgrave 'swallowed the whole tale'.[71] whether my solution be accepted or not, it is, i repeat, conjectural. i have, at least, shown that there is a mystery to be solved, that mr freeman's version fails to solve it, and that, so far from domesday recording the punishment inflicted upon exeter, it actually heightens the mystery of the case by proving that exeter obtained exceptionally favourable treatment. it is not merely a question of how exeter fell. the issue illustrates the policy and affects the character of william. the lame manner in which mr freeman accounts for his sudden conversion from fury to lamb-like gentleness is no less unsatisfactory than his treatment of the 'weighty account' in the chronicle when he found that this, his valued authority, rendered the problem difficult. even at le mans more was needed than merely to print both stories. the fact that we find in 'the norman version' the truth conveniently glossed over ought to be insisted on and duly applied. time after time in mr freeman's work we find him paraphrasing patches of chronicles, under the impression that he was writing history. the statements of witnesses are laid before us, neatly pieced together, but they are not subjected to more than a perfunctory cross-examination. even if the accurate reproduction of testimony were all that we sought from the historian, we should not, so far as domesday is concerned, obtain it in this instance. but the case of exeter is one where something more is needed, where even accuracy is not sufficient without the possession of that higher gift, the power of seizing upon the truth when the evidence is misleading and contradictory. the paraphrasing of evidence is the work of a reporter; from the historian we have a right to expect the skilled summing-up of the judge. [footnote 1: letter from john shillingford, mayor of exeter, 1447.] [footnote 2: _exeter_ (1887), p. 34.] [footnote 3: it was also the subject of a special paper in his 'historic towns and districts' (1883) reprinted from _arch. journ._, xxx. 297, pp. 49 _et seq._, and _sat. rev._, xxix. 764-5.] [footnote 4: _sat. rev._, xxix. 765.] [footnote 5: _norman conquest_, iv. 123. the metaphor of a 'sea' waiting in an 'island' is sufficiently original to be deserving of notice.] [footnote 6: _ibid._, iv. 140.] [footnote 7: see 'the alleged destruction of leicester', _infra_, p. 347.] [footnote 8: iv. 151. 'it is certain', mr freeman had written, 'that what william had to strive against in the west was a league of towns' (_sat. rev._, xxix. 765).] [footnote 9: _cont. rev._, june 1877, p. 22. see also preface.] [footnote 10: 'hi nimirum socios e plagis finitimis inquiete arcessebant ... alias quoque civitates ad conspirandum in eadem legationibus instigabant.' _ord. vit._, 510 a (quoted in _norman conquest_, iv. 140).] [footnote 11: mr freeman rendered it 'neighbouring shires', but i am not at all sure that, taken in conjunction with the words just before about the accessibility of exeter from ireland and brittany, and those just after, about 'mercatores advenas', _plagæ_ does not refer to the shores from which these merchants came.] [footnote 12: the boroughs of dorset were doubtless among the towns which had joined in the civic league. probably they stood sieges and were taken by storm (_norm. conq._, iv. 151).] [footnote 13: mr archer deemed it sufficient reply to all these 'trifling blunders' to admit that 'mr freeman did misread 128 for 100' (_cont. rev._, march 1893, p. 337). i invite comparison of the errors i have corrected, and of all the edifice built upon them, with this disingenuous attempt to represent them as unimportant 'slips' (_ibid._, p. 354).] [footnote 14: stubbs' _const. hist._, i. 625.] [footnote 15: stubbs' _const. hist._, i. 71.] [footnote 16: _ibid._] [footnote 17: _norm. conq._, iv. xiii, and marginal note on p. 156.] [footnote 18: _ibid._, p. 156.] [footnote 19: _ibid._, i. 289.] [footnote 20: 'dum murum illius destruere moliretur' (quoted from florence, on i., p. 309).] [footnote 21: quoted from florence, on i., p. 315.] [footnote 22: it seems possible, at least, that they might describe a direct attack on the foot of the walls.] [footnote 23: i would here compare william's description of the conqueror's 'peaceful progress' to london after his great victory, which better evidence, mr freeman observed, 'quite upsets' (iii. 533).] [footnote 24: _essays_, 1st series.] [footnote 25: _exeter_, p. 36.] [footnote 26: _norm. conq._, iii. 412.] [footnote 27: _ibid._, iii. 536-7.] [footnote 28: 'supplicia pro reatu nimis metuebant.'] [footnote 29: 'militibus crudeliter et contumeliose illuserant quos ipse de normannia miserat et tempestas ad portum illorum appulerat.'] [footnote 30: so too we read of torkesey, a little later on, that it suffered so 'severely as to suggest the idea that william met with some serious resistance at this point' (_ibid._, iv. 217); while speaking of the 'fall of chester', mr freeman wrote: 'we know that the resistance which william met with in this his last conquest was enough to lead him to apply the same stern remedy which he had applied north of the humber. a fearful harrying fell on city and shire, and on the lands round about' (_ibid._, iv. 314-5).] [footnote 31: 'the conqueror, faithful to his fearful oath, now gave the first of that long list of instances of indifference to human suffering', etc. (_ibid._, ii. 285).] [footnote 32: 'at ely, as at alençon, the conqueror felt no scruple against inflicting punishments which to our notions might seem more frightful than death itself' (_ibid._, iv. 476).] [footnote 33: _ibid._, iv. 160.] [footnote 34: _english towns and districts_.] [footnote 35: _exeter_ (1887), p. 32.] [footnote 36: _ibid._, pp. 43-4.] [footnote 37: _ibid._, p. 44.] [footnote 38: _norm. conq._, iv. 162.] [footnote 39: _exeter_, p. 32.] [footnote 40: _exeter_, p. 44; _norm. conq._, iv. 147.] [footnote 41: this grave confusion, with all that it involves, was one of the 'trifling slips', as mr archer terms them (_cont. rev._, p. 354), exposed in my original article (_q.r._, july 1892). such a description is either dishonest, or must imply that mr archer, who boasts that he has 'a sterner criterion' than myself (_english historical review_, ix. 606), deems such errors of no consequence.] [footnote 42: _norm. conq._, iv. 146-7.] [footnote 43: 'hec reddit xviii. lib. per annum' (100).] [footnote 44: 'hæc civitas t.r.e. non geldabat nisi quando londonia et eboracum et wintonia geldabant, et hoc erat dimidia marka argenti ad opus militum' (100).] [footnote 45: 'quando expeditio ibat per terram aut per mare, serviebat hæc civitas quantum v. hidæ terræ' (100).] [footnote 46: the practice in the survey of devon was to state the render in 1086, and, if it had been different formerly, to add a note to that effect. thus we read on 100_b_: 'reddit xlviii. lib. ad pensam. ante balduinum reddebat xxiii. lib.' so, too, of totnes: 'inter omnes redd' viii. lib. ad numerum. olim reddebant iii. lib. ad pensam et arsuram' (108_b_).] [footnote 47: _norm. conq._, iv. 162.] [footnote 48: _ibid._, 139.] [footnote 49: reading 'eudo dapifer [tenet] v. denarios', where domesday (ii. 106) has, of course, 'v. d[omus]'.] [footnote 50: mr freeman held that domesday hinted it might be classed with london, york, and winchester (_norm. conq._, iv. 147; _exeter_, 45), and quotes william of malmesbury's description of its wealth and importance. even in earlier days, he wrote, 'both the commercial and the military importance of the city were of the first rank' (i. 308).] [footnote 51: the _firma_ of gloucester had been raised to £60, and that of chester to over £70, while at wallingford, where the king had about as many houses as at exeter, it was £80.] [footnote 52: _norm. conq._, iv. 213.] [footnote 53: 't.r.e. reddebat civitas lincolia regi xx. libras et comiti x. libras. modo reddit c. libras ad numerum inter regem et comitem' (d.b., i. 336_b_).] [footnote 54: _norm. conq._, iv. 160.] [footnote 55: mr freeman's 'pedigrees and pedigree-makers' (_cont. rev._, june 1887, p. 33).] [footnote 56: _norm. conq._, iv. 151.] [footnote 57: _ibid._, iv. pp. 103, 118. so too _ibid._, p. 126: 'there was the imminent fear of an invasion from denmark, and the threatening aspect of the still independent west and north. william had need of all his arts of war and policy to triumph over the combination of so many enemies at once.'] [footnote 58: 'cives eam tenebant furiosi, copiosæ multitudinis, infestissimi mortalibus gallici generis.'--_ord. vit._] [footnote 59: _norm. conq._, iv. 146.] [footnote 60: it is curious to see how thierry waters down the miracle: 'son cheval, glissant sur le pavé, s'abattit et le froissa dans sa chute.' of course this is likely enough to have been the kernel of truth in the legend, but no man has a right to tell the tale in this shape as if it were undoubted fact.--_norm. conq._, iv. 291.] [footnote 61: _norm. conq._, iv. 151-2.] [footnote 62: _ibid._, 146.] [footnote 63: _ibid._, p. 147.] [footnote 64: cf. the familiar phrase, 'tactis sacris evangeliis', with orderic's words here, 'sacros libros'.] [footnote 65: _norm. conq._, iv. 151.] [footnote 66: _ibid._, 559.] [footnote 67: _ibid._, 560.] [footnote 68: _ibid._] [footnote 69: _norm. conq._, iv. 560.] [footnote 70: 'edicta regalia suis opportune intimavit, et urbanis imperiose mandavit, ut prudenter sibi consulerent' (_ord vit._, ii. 255).] [footnote 71: _ibid._, i. 662.] the alleged destruction of leicester (1068) this question was raised and discussed by mr freeman in his _history of the norman conquest_ (iv. 196-7). we there read as follows: is it possible that in the case of leicester, at least, no power was left either to follow or to resist? while we have no evidence either way on which we can rely with confidence, one of those secondary and local records, which sometimes contain fragments of authentic tradition, suggests, in a perfectly casual way, that a doom fell upon leicester, which might, doubtless, with some exaggeration, be spoken of as utter destruction. and this incidental hint may perhaps draw some indirect confirmation from the highest evidence of all [domesday] ... and it may be that leicester earned its overthrow by a defence worthy of a borough which was to give its name to the greatest of england's later worthies. the 'record' referred to is quoted in a footnote, and is a history of the foundation of leicester abbey, one of a class of narratives notoriously inaccurate and corrupt: robertus comes mellenti, veniens in angliam cum willelmo duce normanniæ, adeptus consulatum leycestriæ, ex dono dicti ducis et conquestoris angliæ, _destructa prius civitate leicestriæ_ cum castello et ecclesia infra castellum tempore prædicti conquestoris, reædificavit ipsam æcclesiam sancta mariæ infra castellum. now, it strikes one in the first place as somewhat unlikely that william, on his arrival at leicester, should find a castle to destroy. but, further, how could robert have obtained the 'consulatus' of leicester from the conqueror, when he is well known to have first obtained it (under very peculiar circumstances) from henry i? if this known event has been so glaringly ante-dated, may not the alleged 'destruction' be so likewise? these it may be said are only doubts. but, as it happens, we can not only discredit the suggested 'destruction' in the days of the conqueror: we can actually fix its date as the reign of henry i. we learn from orderic that the town of leicester ('urbs legrecestria') was divided into four quarters, of which ivo de grantmesnil possessed two, one in his own right, and one (which was the king's share) as the king's reeve and representative. we also learn that he was among the 'seditiosi proceres', who rebelled against henry in 1101, and that of these, 'aliqui contra fideles vicinos guerram arripuerunt et gremium almæ telluris rapacitatibus et incendiis, cruentisque cædibus maculaverunt'. ivo is again mentioned by orderic in 1102, not only among the 'proditores' of the previous year, who were now called to account, but also as a special ringleader in that internecine conflict to which he had already referred. he tells us that henry ivonem quoque, quia guerram in anglia c[oe]perat et vicinorum rura suorum incendia combusserat (quod in illa regione crimen est inusitatum nec sine grave ultione fit expiatum), rigidus censor accusatum nec purgatum ingentis pecuniæ redditione oneravit, et plurimo angore tribulatum mæstificavit. in short, as dr stubbs reminds us, ivo 'has the evil reputation of being the first to introduce the horrors of private warfare into england'. bearing in mind the divided authority from which leicester suffered, and the statement that ivo, ruling half the town, plundered and made fierce war upon his neighbours, we arrive at the conclusion that the 'destruction', which, in the _monasticon_ narrative, precedes the accession of the count of meulan to the _comitatus_ of leicester, may be assigned, without a shadow of doubt, to the struggle of 1101. on ivo's disgrace, as is well known, the wily count stepped at once into his shoes, 'et auxilio regis suâque calliditate totam sibi civitatem mancipavit, et inde consul in anglia factus'. there is no reason to doubt the statement that st mary 'de castro' was rebuilt and refounded by count robert after his obtaining this position at leicester. it is singular that just as the _monasticon_ seems to have misled mr freeman at leicester, so it is responsible for thierry's 'story of the fighting monks of oxford', at about the same time, a story of which mr freeman wrote that 'the whole story is a dream', and 'would not have been allowable even in an historical novel' (iv. 779-80). ely and her despoilers (1072-5) the elaborate record of this trial is only found, i believe, in the trinity college (cambridge) ms., o. 2, 1 (fos. 210_b_-213_b_) from which it has been printed by mr hamilton in his _inquisitio comitatus cantabrigiensis_ (pp. 192-5). this 'placitum', therefore, would seem to have remained unknown till the publication of that work (1876). the date of this important document can be fixed within a few years. it mentions earl waltheof among those before whom the plea was held, so that it cannot be later than 1075; and as it also mentions 'rodulfus comes', it is evidently previous to the revolt of the earls in that year. on the other hand, it is later than the death of william malet, for it mentions his son robert as in possession, and later, therefore, than the restoration of waltheof at the beginning of 1070. moreover, it is subsequent to the death of stigand ('post obitum illius'). now stigand was not even deposed till the spring of 1070; and we know from domesday and other sources that he lived some time afterwards. we may safely say, therefore, that this 'placitum' did not take place till after the suppression of the ely revolt in the autumn of 1071. practically, therefore, our document belongs to the years 1072-1075. now, as abbot thurstan did not die till 1076--the date given in the _liber eliensis_, and accepted by mr freeman--it follows that this great act of restitution in favour of the abbey took place under abbot thurstan himself, a fact unmentioned by the chroniclers, and unsuspected by mr freeman, who held that he found no favour in william's eyes. the great length of this document--so important for its bearing on domesday--precludes its discussion in detail. but its opening clause must be given and some of its features pointed out. ad illud placitum quo pontifices gosfridus et remigius, consul vero waltheuus, necnon vicecom[ites] picotus atque ilbertus jussu willelmi dei dispositione anglor[um] regis, cum omni vicecomitatu sicut rex preceperat, convenerunt, testimonio hominum rei veritatem cognoscentium determinaverunt terras que injuste fuerant ablate ab ecclesia sancte dei genitricis marie de insulâ ely ... quatinus de dominio fuerant, tempore videlicet regis ædwardi, ad dominium sine alicujus contradictione redirent quicunque eas possideret. the mention of count eustace among those withholding lands proves that at the date of this document he was already restored to his possessions. another individual whose name occurs several times in this document is lisois ('de monasteriis'), the hero of the passage of the aire. collating its evidence with that of domesday, we find that lisois had been succeeded, at the date of the great record, by the well-known eudo dapifer in a fief, ranging over at least five counties--cambridgeshire, bedfordshire, norfolk, suffolk, and essex--in all of which domesday records his name as the predecessor of eudo. this is of the more interest because mr freeman wrote: the only notice of this lisois which i can find in domesday is in ii. 49_b_, where he appears in possession, but seemingly illegal possession, of a small holding in essex. so again we have in our document this passage relating to stigand: he sunt proprie ville monasterii insule ely quos stigandus archipresul tenebat, unde per annum victum fratribus reddidit tantum quantum pertinet ad hoc. has vero tenet rex noster w. post obitum illius, methelwald et crokestune et snegelwelle et dictun. now stigand, according to the _liber eliensis_ 'quasdam illius optimas possessiones sicut liber terrarum insinuat, ad maximum loci dispendium retinuit'. our document identifies these 'possessiones' with methwold and croxton in norfolk, snailwell and ditton in cambridgeshire, and thus disposes of mr freeman's very unfortunate suggestion--advanced, of course, to justify stigand--that the _liber eliensis_ here referred to a tiny hampshire estate, which the abbey had held under stigand t.r.e.[1] in my paper on domesday i have pointed out the importance of this document in its bearing on socmen and their services, while we saw in investigating knight service that its language affords, in this matter, a valuable gloss on that of domesday. close examination of its details shows that the aggressions on the abbey's property which it records, were, in spite of the verdict on this occasion, persisted in, if not increased. those, for instance, of hardwin may be recognized in the duplicate entries in domesday book, representing the conflicting claims.[2] on persons as on lands we have some fresh information. ilbert the sheriff was, i believe, identical with that 'ilbert de hertford', who is alluded to in domesday (i. 200), and would thus be a pre-domesday sheriff of herts.[3] the entry, 'tenet rotbertus homo bainardi in reoden de soca', when compared with the holding of 'rienduna' by ralf 'baignardi' in domesday (ii. 414), suggests that we have in bainard the father (hitherto unknown) of this domesday tenant-in-chief. bainard would thus be a christian name, as was also mainard, which occurs in this same document. [footnote 1: d.b., i. 40_b_.] [footnote 2: see p. 32 _supra_.] [footnote 3: domesday (i. 200_b_) styles him, 'ilbertus de hertford', and connects him with 'risedene', a hertfordshire manor. on the other hand, the i.c.c. makes him 'ilbertus de hereforda' (p. 56), and 'ilbertus vicecomes' is actually found in herefordshire (d.b., i. 179_b_). but what could he be doing in cambridgeshire?] the lords of ardres in the _history of the norman conquest_ (2nd ed.) we read of eustace of boulogne: an incidental notice of one of his followers throws some light on the class of men who flocked to william's banners, and on the rewards which they received. one geoffrey, an officer of the abbey of saint bertin at saint omer, who had the charge of its possessions in the county of guines, sent his sons, arnold and geoffrey, to the war ... and in the end they received a grant of lands both in essex and in the border shires of mercia and east-anglia, under the superiority of their patron count eustace (iii. 314). in an appendix on 'arnold of ardres', which mr freeman devoted to this subject (iii. 725-6), he gave the 'historia comitum ardensium' (of lambert of ardres) for his authority, and he verified, by domesday, the manors which lambert assigns to 'these adventurers', holding that a bedfordshire estate was omitted, while 'stebintonia', which he identified with stibbington, hunts, was wrongly included, as it was 'held of count eustace by lunen'. the first point to be noticed here is that 'these adventurers' were the sons (as lambert explains) not of any 'geoffrey', a mere abbey officer, but of a local magnate, arnold, lord of ardres. the next is that lambert was quite correct in his list of manors. in the fourth series of his historical essays mr freeman included a paper on 'the lords of ardres', for which he availed himself of dr heller's edition of lambert in the _monumenta_ (vol. xxiv). in this edition the passage runs: feodum stevintoniam et pertinencias eius, dokeswordiam, tropintoniam, leilefordiam, toleshondiam, et hoilandiam (cap. 113, p. 615). dr heller, on this, notes: secundum 'domesday book' recepit ernulfus de arda dochesworde, trupintone (com. cantabrig.) et stiventone (comit. bedford) a comite eustacio ... e contra toheshunt [_sic_] hoiland, leleford recepit ab eodem comite adelolfus de merc (prope calais). this note enabled mr freeman to identify 'adelolfus' (which he had failed to do in the _norman conquest_), though he must have overlooked the identification of 'stevintonia' (namely stevington, beds.), for we find him still writing: but of the english possessions reckoned up by our author two only ... can be identified in domesday as held by arnold ... the local writer seems to have mixed up the possessions of arnold with those of a less famous adventurer from the same reign, adelolf--our athelwulf--of merck (pp. 184-5). and he again insisted that 'arnold had other lands in bedfordshire'. we will now turn to an entry in the _testa de nevill_ from the 'milites tenentes de honore bononie': comes de gines tenet xii. milites, scilicet--in bedefordescire, in _stiveton_ et parva wahull iii milites, in cantabr' in _dukesword_, et _trumpeton_ iii milites ... in essex, _tholehunt_ et galdhangr' iii milites, in _hoyland'_ et _lalesford_ ibidem iii milites. here we have all the manors mentioned by lambert (with their appurtenances) assigned to the count of guines, the heir of arnold of ardres; and we can thus believe the _testa_ entry (p. 272) of tolleshunt and holland, 'quas idem comes et antecessores sui tenuerunt de conquestu angliæ'. but the _testa_ does more than this; it informs us that holland and lawford were held of the count by 'henry de merk'. now, 'adelolf' de merk is found in domesday holding many manors direct from eustace of boulogne, and these manors are divided in the _testa_ between his descendants simon and henry de merk.[1] it is, therefore, possible that he held the three essex manors in 1086, not directly from count eustace, but, like his descendant, from their under-tenant (arnold). this raises, of course, an important question as to domesday.[2] it is interesting to observe that the village of marck in the pas de calais has, through adelolf and his heirs, transferred its name to the essex parish of mark's tey, though not to that of marks hall (so named in domesday). while on the subject of the lords of ardres, it may be convenient to give the reference to a letter of mine to the _academy_ (may 28, 1892), explaining that lambert's 'albericus aper', who puzzled dr heller and mr freeman, was our own aubrey de vere, first earl of oxford, and that lambert's statement (accepted by mr freeman) as to the parentage of emma, wife of count manasses, had been disproved by stapleton. [footnote 1: an interesting charter belonging to the close of stephen's reign shows us queen matilda compensating henry 'de merch' for his land at donyland (one of these manors)--which she was giving to st john's, colchester--'de redditibus transmarinis ad suam voluntatem'. another and earlier charter from her father and mother (printed by mr e. j. l. scott in the _athenæum_ of december 2, 1893) has fulco de merc and m. de merc among the witnesses.] [footnote 2: the non-appearance of arnold's brother, 'geoffrey', in domesday which has been deemed a difficulty, is accounted for by lambert's statement that he made over his english possessions to arnold.] early irish trade with chester and rouen[1] the eighth report of the royal commission on historical manuscripts speaks of the records of the city of chester as 'beginning with henry the second's writ of licence to the citizens of chester to trade in durham [_sic_] as they were wont to do in the time of henry the first' (p. xv). the records themselves are similarly described in the actual report on them (pp. 355-403) as 'beginning with a curious writ, addressed by henry the second to his bailiffs of the city of durham' [_sic_]. this, which is among those items spoken of as 'especially interesting and important', figures thus as the head of the calendar: (1) henry ii. licence to the burgesses of chester to buy and sell at durham [_sic_] as they were wont to do in the time of henry i--'henricus dei gratia rex anglie et dux normannie et aquitanie et comes andegavie balluis [_sic_] de dunelina [_sic_] salutem:--precipio quod burgenses cestrie possint emere et vendere ad detaillum [_or_ doraillum] apud dunelinam [_sic_] habendo et faciendo easdem consuetudines quas faciebant tempore regis henrici avi mei et easdem ibi habeant rectitudines et libertates et liberas consuetudines quas tempore illo habere solebant, teste, willelmo filio ald' dapifero apud wintoniam. durham is not only a most improbable place for such a writ to refer to, but is also an impossible rendering of the latin name. the interest and importance of this 'curious writ' has, in short, been obscured and lost through the ignorance of mr j. c. jeaffreson, to whom the report was entrusted. the charters which follow the writ, and which are printed on the same page, refer to this writ as relating to ireland; and the town, of course, to which it refers is not durham but dublin (_duuelina_). we have, therefore, in this writ an almost, if not quite, unique reference by henry ii to dublin in the days of his grandfather, and a confirmation of the 'libertates', etc., which the men of chester had then enjoyed there, just as if his grandfather had been in his own position. secondly, we have here record evidence, not merely of a recognized connection, but of what might be termed treaty relations between the traders of chester and the ostmen of dublin, long previous to the conquest of ireland, thus confirming mr green's observation, 'the port of chester depended on the trade with ireland, which had sprung up since the settlement of the northmen along the irish coasts'.[2] and this has, of course, a bearing on the question of 'a danish settlement' at chester. thirdly, we learn from this document that at the date of its issue dublin was governed by bailiffs of the king (_ballivi sui_). what, then, was its date? the clue, unfortunately, is slight; but it may not improbably belong to the close of 1175 or early part of 1176. this brings us to the interesting question, why was such a writ issued? remembering that during his stay at dublin (november 1171-january 1172) henry ii had granted that city to his men of bristol, we may hold it in accordance with the spirit of the time, and, indeed, a matter of virtual certainty, that bristol would have striven on the strength of this grant to exclude 'its rival port' (_conquest of england_, p. 443) from the benefits of the dublin trade. chester would, therefore, appeal to the king on the strength of its antecedent rights, and would thus have obtained from him this writ, recognizing and confirming their validity. the domesday customs of the city (i. 262_b_) contain a curious allusion to its irish trade: si habentibus martrinas pelles juberet prepositus regis ut nulli venderet donec sibi prius ostensas compararet, qui hoc non observabat xl. solidis emendabat ... hæc civitas tunc reddebat de firma xlv. lib et iii. timbres pellium martrinium. there is nothing to show where these marten skins came from, or why they are mentioned under chester alone. but on turning to the customs of rouen, as recorded in the charters of duke henry (1150-1) and king john (1199), we find they were imported from ireland. quæcunque navis de hibernia venerit, ex quo caput de gernes [guernsey] transierit, rothomagum veniat, unde ego habeam de unaquâque nave unum tymbrium de martris aut decem libras rothomagi, si ejusdem navis mercatores jurare poterint se ideo non mercatos fuisse illas martras ut auferrent consuetudinem ducis normanniæ, et vicecomes rothomagi de unaquaque habeat viginti solidos rothomagi et camerarius tancarvillæ unam accipitrem aut sexdecim solidos rothomagi. giraldus cambrensis, it may be remembered, alludes to the abundance of martens in ireland,[3] and describes how they were captured. we thus have evidence in domesday of the irish trade with chester, even in the days of edward the confessor. [footnote 1: the error as to the chester writ was explained by me in a letter to the _academy_ (no. 734).] [footnote 2: _conquest of england_, p. 440.] [footnote 3: 'martrinarum copia abundant hic silvestria' (_top. hib._, i. 24).] walter tirel and his wife in his detailed examination of all the evidence bearing on the death of william rufus, the late mr freeman carefully collected the few facts that are known relative to walter tirel. they are, however, so few that he could add nothing to what lappenberg had set forth (ii. 207) in 1834. he was, however, less confident than his predecessor as to the identity of walter tirel with the essex tenant of that name in domesday. i hope now to establish the facts beyond dispute, to restore the identity of walter tirel, and also to show for the first time who his wife really was. the three passages we have first to consider are these, taking them in the same order as mr freeman: adelidam filiam ricardi de sublimi prosapia gifardorum conjugem habuit, quæ hugonem de pice, strenuissimum militem, marito suo peperit (_ord. vit._). laingaham tenet walterus tirelde r. quod tenuit phin dacus pro ii. hidis et dimidia et pro uno manerio (_domesday_, ii. 41). adeliz uxor walteri tirelli reddit compotum de x. marcis argenti de eisdem placitis de la wingeham (_rot. pip._, 31 hen. i). dealing first with the domesday entry, which comes, as mr freeman observed, 'among the estates of richard of clare', i would point out that though ellis (who misled mr freeman) thought that 'tirelde' was the name, the right reading is 'tenet walterus tirel de r[icardo]', two words (as is not unusual) being written as one. turning next to the words of orderic, we find that lappenberg renders them 'adelaide, tochter des richard giffard', and mr freeman as 'a wife adelaide by name, of the great line of giffard'. but there is no trace of a richard giffard, nor can 'adelida' herself be identified among the giffards. the explanation of the mystery, i hold, is that she was the daughter, not of a giffard, but of richard _de clare_, by his wife rohese, daughter of walter giffard the elder. it is noteworthy that orderic employs a precisely similar expression in the case of another adeliza, the daughter of robert de grentmesnil. he terms her 'soror hugonis de grentemaisnil de clara stirpe geroianorum', though she was only descended from the famous geroy through her mother. richard's daughter was sufficiently described as 'adelida filia ricardi', just as her brothers were known as 'gilbertus filius ricardi', 'rogerus filius ricardi', etc. the position of that mighty family was such that this description was enough, and they were even known collectively as the 'ricardi', or 'richardenses' (_mon. ang._, iv. 609). this is well illustrated by the passage in the ely writer, describing adeliza's brother richard, abbot of ely, as parentum undique grege vallatus, quorum familiam ex ricardis et gifardis constare tota anglia et novit et sensit. ricardi enim et gifardi, duæ scilicet ex propinquo venientes familiæ, virtutis fama et generis copia illustres effecerat. the above forms are curious, but not without parallel. thus the descendants of urse d'abetot are spoken of as 'ursini' in heming's cartulary. æthelred of rievaulx speaks of 'poncii' and 'morini' as present at the battle of the standard; gerald, in a well-known passage (v. 335), speaks of the 'giraldidæ' and 'stephanidæ', and orderic, we have seen, of the 'geroiani'. the doubly influential character of this descent is well illustrated in this passage (_quantum valeat_) from the chronicle of st john's abbey, colchester. parcebatur tamen eudoni, propter genus uxoris ipsius rohaisæ: erat enim hæc de genere nobilissimo normannorum, filia scilicet ricardi, qui fuit filius gilbert comitis, duxitque rohaisam uxorem, quæ erat soror willelmi giffardi, episcopi wintoniæ. itaque, cum fratres et propinqui junioris rohaisæ quoslibet motus machinaturi putarentur, si contra maritum ipsius aliquid durius decerneretur, sic factum est ut interventu predicti episcopi, etc., etc. this passage is, i believe, the sole evidence for the real parentage of bishop william. it was clearly unknown to canon venables, who wrote the bishop's life for the _dictionary of national biography_. like most of these 'foundation' histories, this document is in part untrustworthy. but it is dugdale who has misread it, and not the document itself that is responsible for the grave error (_baronage_, i. 110) that eudo's wife was 'rohese, daughter of walter giffard, earl of buckingham'. here again, as in the tirel case, the daughter of a clare, by a giffard, is converted into a giffard. the error arose from referring the 'qui' to eudo instead of to his father-in-law, richard. the 'historia' is perfectly consistent throughout in its identification of the younger rohese, of whom it states that 'commorata est marito annis triginta duobus, cui ante habiles annos nupta est' (iv. 609). in asserting under 'clare' (_baronage_, i. 208) that eudo married the widow (not the daughter) of richard, dugdale relied on another and more inaccurate document (_mon. ang._, v. 269) which actually does speak of rohesia una sororum walteri [giffard secundi]--duas plures enim habuit--conjuncta in matrimonio ricardo filio gilberti, qui in re militari, tempore conquestoris, omnes sui temporis magnates præcessit-as marrying eudo dapifer after her husband's death. but we must decide in favour of the colchester narrative: eudo's wife was her daughter and namesake. we see then that walter tirel was son-in-law to richard de clare, who had enfeoffed him in 'laingaham' before 1086. now this 'laingaham' was langham in essex, just north of colchester, which gives us an important clue. walter's widow 'adeliz' was in possession in 1130 (_rot. pip._, hen. i) because, as we have seen, it was probably given her by her father 'in maritagio'. but her son hugh held it under stephen, and anstis saw among the muniments of the duchy of lancaster a mortgage of it by hugh to gervase 'justiciar of london'. i have not yet identified this 'mortgage', but the confirmation of it to gervase de cornhill by earl gilbert de clare, as chief lord of the fee, is extant,[1] and its first witness is earl gilbert of pembroke, so that it cannot be later than 1148, or earlier than 1138 (or 1139). moreover in yet another quarter (lansdown ms. 203, 15 dors.) we find a copy of a charter by this latter earl gilbert, belonging to the same occasion, which runs as follows: com. gilb. de penbroc omnibus hominibus francis et anglis sal. sciatis me concessisse illam convencionem et vendicionem quam hugo tirell fecit gervasio de chorhella de manerio suo de laingham parte mea. nam comes de clara ex parte sua illud idem concessit, de cuius feodo predictum manerium movet. both charters contain the curious 'movet' formula, in england so rare that i think i have not met with any other instance. it is, of course, equivalent to the regular french phrase: 'sous sa mouvance'. this mortgage or sale was probably effected as a preliminary to the crusade of 1147, in which hugh tirel is known to have taken part. now the above gervase, as i have shown in my _geoffrey de mandeville_, was no other than gervase de cornhill, and after his death we find langham duly in the possession of his son, henry de cornhill.[2] the chain of evidence is thus complete, and the identity of the tirels and of their manor placed beyond question. but returning to the parentage of walter's wife, we find that it raises a curious question by the family circle to which it introduces us. for we now learn that gilbert and roger, sons of richard de clare, who were present at brockenhurst when the king was killed, were brothers-in-law of walter tirel, while richard, another brother-in-law, was promptly selected to be abbot of ely by henry i, who further gave the see of winchester, as his first act, to william giffard, another member of the same powerful family circle.[3] moreover, the members of the house of clare were in constant attendance at henry's court, and 'eudo dapifer', whose wife was a clare, was one of his favourites. i do not say that all this points to some secret conspiracy, to which henry was privy, but it shows at least that he was on excellent terms with walter tirel's relatives. i have explained in my article on the clares in the _dictionary of national biography_ that there has been much confusion as to the family history. as the errors are very persistent, it may perhaps be of some service, especially for identifying names, if i append a pedigree for the period of the tirel connection, which will distinguish the descendants of count gilbert, 'illustrious in his forefathers and his descendants'. two charters will illustrate the attendance of the family at court in the early days of henry i. an interesting charter belonging to christmas, 1101, is attested by 'gislebertus filius ricardi et robertus filius baldwini et ricardus frater ejus', while the attestations to one of september 3, 1101, comprise 'g[islebertus] filius r[icardi] r[ogerus] (or r[obertus]) frater suus w[alterus] frater suus.... r[obertus] (or r[icardus]) filius b[aldwini].'[4] among the most persistent of errors are those which identify richard 'filius baldwini' with richard de redvers (who was of a different family and died long before him), and which make this compound richard an earl of devon. planché endeavoured to slay the former of these errors--which, originating in the _monasticon_, is embalmed in dugdale's _baronage_--as taylor had previously done in his 'wace', and the duchess of cleveland has rightly observed in her _battle abbey roll_ (1889) that 'there is not the slightest authority for assuming' the identity. but the necessity for again correcting the error is shown by its reappearance in mr freeman's _exeter_ (1887) and by the life of baldwin de redvers, in the _dictionary of national biography_, by mr hunt, which begins by stating that he was 'the eldest son of richard, earl of devon, the son of baldwin de moeles', whereas his father was not an earl, and was not the son of baldwin de moeles. i may also take this opportunity of pointing out that (as is shown in my _geoffrey de mandeville_) richard fitz gilbert (d. 1136) was not an earl, the earldom of herts having been ante-dated like that of devon. dugdale again has omitted, because he failed to identify, another daughter of the house of clare, who made a most interesting match. this was 'adelidis de tunbridge', wife of william de percy, a niece and namesake, i confidently suggest, of walter tirel's wife. she seems to have brought into the percy family the names of richard and walter. the charters which establish, i think, her identity are those of sallay abbey, in which maud (widow of william, earl of warwick) and her sister agnes (ancestress of the later percies) speak of their mother as 'adelidis de tunbridge' (_mon. ang._, v. 512-13). she can only, therefore, in my opinion, have been a daughter of gilbert 'de tunbridge'; and with this conclusion the dates harmonize well. yet another daughter was margaret, wife of william de montfichet, who brought into that family the names of gilbert and richard. [illustration: family tree] count gilbert, of brionne. benefactor to bec. murdered 1040 | --------------------------------------------(connect to | richard de bienfaite) | albreda=(1) baldwin (2) emma de meules, = _alias_ de clare, | _alias_ baldwin of | exeter, _alias_ | baldwin the | sheriff [of devon]. | benefactor to bec | | (connect | to roger, | 'filius ricardi') ------------------------------------------ ---- | | | william,[1] robert,[2] richard, gilbert, 'filius baldwini', 'filius baldwini', 'filius baldwini', 'filius baldwini', sheriff of devon, held brionne sheriff of _alias_ gilbert 1090 (see p. 256). against robert devon, 1129. de tunbridge, benefactor to bec of normandy died 1136.[3] mar. adeliza in 1090. benefactor to bec de clermont benefactor to bec (see p. 394) | ----------------------------------------(connect | | to baldwin, | | 'filius gilberti') | | | richard, gilbert, walter,[7] 'filius gilberti,' 'filius gilberti', 'filius gilberti,' d. 1136[3] earl of pembroke. of maldon. | protector of went on crusade v st neot's[5] _circ._ 1147 a quo the | earls of v hertford (connect to count gilbert of brionne) --- | richard = rohese, dau. of de bienfaite, walter giffard. _alias_ 'filius benefactress of gilberti', _alias_ st neot's priory 'filius comitis | gilberti', _alias_ | 'de tunbridge', | _alias_ 'de clare'. | founder of st | neot's priory | (cell to bec) | | (connect to |(connect gilbert, |to robert 'filius baldwini') |'filius -----------------------------------------------ricardi') | | | roger, walter, richard, 'filius ricardi', 'filius ricardi', 'filius ricardi', living 1130 ob. s. p. monk of bec, ob. s. p. founder of abbot of ely 1100. benefactor to tintern abbey, died 1107 bec[4] 1131, living 1136[5] (connect to walter,' 'filius gilberti') ---------------------------------------- | | | baldwin, adelidis rohese,[8] 'filius gilberti', 'de tunbridge' mar. baderon _alias_ baldwin mar. william de monmouth de clare. de percy founder of deeping | priory (benedictine) | and bourne priory v (austin) (connect to richard 'filius ricardi') --------------------------------------- | | | robert, rohese, adeliza = walter 'filius ricardi', 'filia ricardi', 'filia ricardi', | tirel, d. (after easter) mar. eudo dapifer died at | lord of poix, 1136. _circ._ 1088 conflans, an | under-tenant bur. at st neot's, he died 1120. offshoot of bec, | of his (? dapifer regis) she died 1121, _circ._ 1138 | father-in-law, | and was buried | 1086 | at bec | | | ------------------------------- | | hugh walter maude = william tirel, 'filius "roberti', 'de senliz'. | de albini lord of poix, 'dapifer regis[6] benefactress | 'brito' benefactor to bec. (see p. 360) to st neot's v went on crusade 1147 | v [footnotes from family tree: [footnote 1: 'baldwinus vero genuit rodbertum, et guillelmum, richardum, nothumque guigerum' (ord. vit.). this last was a monk of bec. 'baldwinus frater istius [ricardi] willelmum, robertum et ricardum cum tribus sororibus genuit' (_mon. ang._, v. 269). the authority is not good, but is confirmed _aliunde_. it is not proved that william was a son of emma.] [footnote 2: 'baldwino patri meo molas et sapum reddidit [rex w.] et filiam amitæ suæ uxorem dedit' (_ord. vit._)] [footnote 3: 'eodem anno obierunt plures ex principibus angliæ.... ricardus filius gisleberti robertus filius ricardi, patruus ejus, ricardus filius baldwini, consobrinus ejus' (_robert of torigni_).] [footnote 4: 'mortuis autem absque liberis rogero et waltero.'] [footnote 5: 'oportet me habere in custodia et defensione mea omnes res becci sicut ecclesie que fundata est ab antecessoribus meis' (cartulary of st neot's, fo. 73).] [footnote 6: ancestor of the fitzwalters of dunmow and of baynard's castle, who are accordingly spoken of by fantôme as 'clarreaus'--a word which has puzzled his editor, mr howlett.] [footnote 7: _mon. ang._ iv. 597. _formul ang._ p. 40.] [footnote 8: _mon. ang._, iv. 597.]] [_to face page_ 359.] we have yet to deal with one more member of this historic house, baldwin fitz gilbert, or baldwin de clare, ancestor, through his daughter and heir, of the family of wake. i had always suspected that baldwin fitz gilbert, the recognized grandfather of baldwin wac (1166), could be no other than baldwin, son of gilbert de clare, a well-known man. but dugdale, under 'wake' (i. 539) positively asserts that the former was 'brother to walter de gant, father of gilbert de gant, the first earl of lincoln of that family'. this proves, however, on inquiry, to be based on an almost incredible blunder. dugdale actually relied on a charter,[5] which includes baldwin among the clares, and which he himself under 'clare' rightly so interprets (_baronage_, i. 207_b_). there is, therefore, no ground for deriving baldwin from de gant, or for rejecting his identity with that baldwin _de clare_, who addressed the troops on behalf of stephen at the battle of lincoln.[6] having made several additions to the pedigree of de clare, i have also to make one deduction in robert fitz richard's alleged younger son 'simon, to whom he gave the lordship of daventry in northamptonshire' (_baronage_, i. 218). this erroneous statement is taken from a monastic genealogy (blundering as usual) in the daventry cartulary.[7] the documents of that house show at once that simon was the son of robert fitz 'vitalis' (a benefactor to the house in 1109), not of robert fitz richard, and was not, therefore, a clare. nor was he lord of daventry. but dugdale's most unpardonable blunder is his identification of maud 'de st liz', wife of william de albini brito. he makes her sixty years old in 1186 (p. 113), and yet widow of robert fitz richard, who died in 1134 (p. 218), finally stating that 'she died in _anno_ 1140' (_ibid._)! here, as in the case of eudo dapifer, william's wife was the daughter, not the widow. in both cases the lady was a clare. the fact is certain from his own authority, the cartularies of st neot's.[8] we have a grant that 'rob[ertus] filius ric[ardi]', at fo. 79_b_, grants from 'matildis de sancto licio (_al._ "senliz") filia roberti filii ricardi' on the same folio, and on the preceding one (fo. 79) this conclusive one as to her husband: ego willelmus de albineio brito et matild' uxor mea dedimus et concessimus ecclesiam de cratefeld deo et ecclesie sci. neoti et monachis beccensibus pro anima roberti filii ricardi et antecessorum meorum. then follows their son's confirmation, as 'willelmus de albeneio filius matillidis de seint liz'. next, 'willelmus de albeneio filius matild' de senliz', gives land, 'quam terram domina matild' senliz mater mea eis prius concesserat'--her said grant of land in cratfield duly following as from 'matild de senliz filia roberti filii ricardi'. further, we have walter fitz robert (fitz richard) confirming this grant by his sister matildis. finally, we learn that cratfield belonged to her in 'maritagio'. now (as 'cratafelda') it belonged in domesday to ralf baignard. his honour, on his forfeiture, was given to robert fitz richard, who was thus able to give cratfield 'in maritagio' to his daughter. here then is independent proof of what her parentage really was, and further independent proof, if needed, is found in this entry (1185): matillis de sainliz que fuit filia roberti filii richardi, et mater willelmi de albeneio est de donatione domini regis et est lx. annorum (_rot. de dominabus_, p. 1). we thus learn that, as with avicia 'de rumilly', daughter of william meschin, it was possible for a woman to bear, strange though it may seem, the maiden name of her mother. clearly, maud was the widow of william de albini, who sent in his _carta_ (under leicestershire) in 1166, and died, as i reckon, from the pipe rolls, in november 1167. she was not, as alleged, the widow of the william who fought at the battle of tinchebrai in 1106. lastly, we come to the parentage of walter tirel himself. mr freeman wrote that this was 'undoubted', that 'walter was one of a family of ten, seemingly the youngest of eight sons' of fulc, dean of evreux, and that 'he became, by whatever means, lord of poix in ponthieu and of achères by the seine' (_w. rufus_, ii, 322, 673).[9] but the mystery of his rise is not lessened by the fact that, as mr freeman put it, most accounts 'connect him with france rather than with normandy'. closer investigation suggests that orderic in no way identifies the walter tirel of 1100 with the son of dean fulc, and shows indeed that his french editors had specially declared the two to be distinct. in short, walter had nothing to do with dean fulc or with normandy, but was, as categorically stated, a frenchman, the third of his name who occurs as lord of poix. père anselme identifies him with the second (who occurs in 1069), but he is probably identical with the third, who occurs in an agreement with the count of amiens, 1087, and who, with his wife 'adelice', founded the priory of st denis de poix,[10] and built the abbey of st pierre de sélincourt. it was he who was father of hugh the crusader.[11] here may be mentioned another name by which walter seems to have been known. i take it from the twelfth century chronicle of abbot simon in the 'chartularium sithiense',[12] which appears to have eluded mr freeman's researches when he made his collection of all the versions of the death of william rufus: willelmus prioris willelmi regis angliæ filius, eodem anno a waltero _de bekam_, ex improviso, interficitur. qui, cum rege in saltu venatum iens, dum sagitta cervum appeteret, eadem divinitus retorta, rex occiditur. cujus interitus sancte recordationis viro hugoni, abbati cluniacensi est præostensus, etc., etc. the testimony of a st omer writer on the deed of the lord of poix is, even if traditionary, worth noting; but i do not profess to explain the 'bekam'.[13] if we now turn to the french writers, we find that the special work on the family is that of m. cuvillier-morel-d'acy, 'archiviste-généalogiste'.[14] it savours, however, of peerage rather than of history, and relies for its expansion of père anselme's somewhat jejune narrative[15] on private ms. collections instead of original authorities. this work was followed by an elaborate monograph on 'poix et ses seigneurs' by m. l'abbé delgove,[16] who accepts the former writer's genealogy without question, though dealing more critically with the charters of foundation for the priory of st denis de poix. he admits that these charters are not authentic in their present form, but accepts their contents as genuine. now the endowment of st denis, according to them, included two marcs out of the tithes 'de lavingaham en angleterre'. here, though these writers knew it not, we have again our essex langham, the 'lawingeham' of the pipe-roll. is this the reason why walter required the consent of his wife 'adeline' and son hugh to the grant? neither of these writers knew of the english evidence, nor did they solve the mystery of walter tirel's wife, whom they, like lappenberg, imagined to be the daughter of a richard giffard. this tends to diminish our trust in the pedigree they give. they took a walter tirel to england at the conquest, but only because wace mentions the 'pohiers', or men of poix, and because the name of tirel is found in the battle roll. in their view, hugh tirel, lord of poix, the crusader of 1147, was grandson of the famous walter. now orderic, whose evidence on the point they ignore, says, as we have seen, he was the son; and as the chronicler was contemporary both with father and son, we cannot think him mistaken. moreover, the pipe-roll of 1130 cannot be harmonized with their pedigree. adeliz, wife (? widow) of walter tirel, then answered for langham, and could not be 'adeline dame de ribecourt', who was dead, according to both writers, before 1128 (or 1127), and who could not, in any case, have aught to do with langham. but there is other evidence, unknown to these french writers, which proves that the version they give must be utterly wrong. among the archives at evreux there is a charter of hugh tirel to the abbey of bec, granting 'decem marcas argenti in manerio quod dicitur lavigaham' to its daughter-house of conflans, where, he says, his mother had taken the religious 'habit', and retired to die. the priors of conflans, and [st denis of] poix are among the witnesses; and we read of the charter's date: hoc concessum est apud piceium castrum anno m.cxxxviii. ab incarnatione dominica viii. idus martii. even if we make this date to be 1139, we here find hugh in possession of poix and langham at that date, whereas the french writers tell us that he only succeeded in 1145, and that his father died in that year.[17] the above charter, moreover, points to his mother having survived his father, and died at conflans as a widow. until, therefore, evidence is produced in support of the french version, we must reject it _in toto_. i close this study with an extract from that interesting charter by which richard i empowered henry de cornhill to enclose and impark his woods at langham, the same day (december 6, 1189) on which he empowered his neighbours the burgesses of colchester to hunt the fox, the hare and the 'cat' within their borders. the words are: sciatis nos dedisse et concessisse henrico de cornhell' licentiam includendi boscum suum in lahingeham et faciendi sibi ibidem parcum, et ut liceat illi habere omnes bestias quos poterit ibi includere.[18] thus did the wealthy londoner become a country squire seven centuries ago. nor is it irrelevant to observe that the 'langham lodge coverts' are familiar to this day to those who hunt with the essex and suffolk. [footnote 1: duchy of lancaster: grants in boxes, a. 157. it is there described as 'conventionem et venditionem quam hugo tirell' fecit gervasio de cornhella de manerio suo de lauhingeham', which implies an actual sale rather than a mortgage. the seal of earl gilbert, with the three chevrons on his shield, is, i claim, an earlier instance, by far, of coat-armour on a seal than any hitherto known (see my paper in _arch. journ._, ii. 46).] [footnote 2: duchy of lancaster: royal charters, no. 42.] [footnote 3: a metrical epitaph, preserved by rudborne, claims for him a descent from charlemagne, which implies that he, like walter's wife, was 'de sublimi prosapia gifardorum' (see p. 355 _supra_).] [footnote 4: see also _geoffrey de mandeville_, p. 329.] [footnote 5: old _monasticon_, i. 245_b_; and _vide infra_, p. 393. a curious sketch of the above scene in a ms. of henry of huntingdon (arundel ms. 148) depicts baldwin with two of the clare chevrons on his shield, and a marginal note, almost illegible, duly describes him as grandfather of baldwin wac. this sketch is overlooked in the british museum catalogue of drawings.] [footnote 6: see also _rot. pip._, 31 hen. i, and my _geoffrey de mandeville_.] [footnote 7: _mon. ang._, v. 178.] [footnote 8: cott. ms. faustina a. iv. see also addenda.] [footnote 9: mr freeman rendered walter map's 'achaza' by 'achères'. but as the tirels always styled themselves 'sires de poix vicomtes d'_equesnes_' it is probable that the latter was meant.] [footnote 10: his gift was confirmed by geoffrey, bishop of amiens, who died in 1116.] [footnote 11: the essential reference occurs in the charter of 1069 granted by ralf, count of amiens, which mentions 'symon filius meus et gualterus gualteri tirelli natus' (archives depart. de le somme: cartulaire de n.d. d'amiens, no. 1, fo. 91). these were the first and second known bearers of the name. the latter occurs in a st riquier charter of 1058. poix was some fifteen miles from amiens, and its lordship was of considerable importance. a charter of 1030 to rouen cathedral is said to contain the name 'galtero tyrello, domino de piceio'.] [footnote 12: _cartulaire de l'abbaye de st bertin_ (_documents inédits_), pp. 267-8.] [footnote 13: i find entered in the cartulary of hesdin (bibliothèque nationale, paris) on fo. 29, a notification 'quia walterus tireel et filius eius hugo hospitem unum eum omni mansione ... apud villam verton concesserunt', and that they have granted freedom from toll 'apud belram ... coram militibus suis'. could 'bekam' possibly be a misprint for 'belram' [beaurain]?] [footnote 14: _histoire genealogique et héraldique de la maison des tyrel, sires, puis princes de poix_, etc., etc. (2nd ed.) 1869.] [footnote 15: vol. vii., pp. 820 _et seq._] [footnote 16: _memoires de la société d'antiquaires de picardies_ (1876), xxv. 287 _et seq._] [footnote 17: m. l'abbé delgove produces (p. 369) a precisely similar case, in which a deed of 1315 proves john tirel to have been already in possession of poix, although, according to the family history, he did not die till 1315. this throws doubts, he admits, on m. cuvillier-morel-d'acy's chronology.] [footnote 18: duchy of lancaster, royal charter, no. 42. _supra_, p. 357.] waldric, warrior and chancellor the importance of fixing the sequence of chancellors, for chronological purposes and especially the dating of charters, is very great. waldric, who preceded ranulf as chancellor to henry i, was, as a warrior and then a bishop, a man of mark. it has hitherto been supposed, as by mr archer (who wrote his life for the _dictionary of national biography_), that his latest appearance as chancellor was early in 1106, before the king's departure for normandy. his feat in taking duke robert prisoner at tinchebrai (september 28, 1106) is well known, but was believed to be the only evidence of his presence in normandy with the king. there is, however, in _gallia christiana_ (vol. xi) a valuable charter recording a 'causa seu placitum', decided before king henry at rouen, november 7, 1106, among those present being 'waldricus qui tunc temporis erat regis cancellarius'. we can trace, therefore, his tenure of the office up to that date. there is some doubt and difficulty as to another charter. foss believed that waldric was the 'walterus cancellarius' who is found in a charter to tewkesbury of '1106'.[1] this charter is printed in the _monasticon_ (ii. 66) from an inspeximus _temp._ henry iv. there is, however, a better inspeximus on the charter roll of 28 edward i[2] (no. 16), in which the name is clearly waldric. but the difficulty is that the same inspeximus contains another version of this charter (no. 2), with a fuller list of witnesses.[3] i have examined the roll for myself, and there is no doubt as to the date, for the clause runs: facta est hec carta anno.... ab incarnacione domini m^{o} centesimo vii^{o} apud wintoniam. the other version, in the body of the charter, contains the words, 'anno dominicæ incarnationis millesimo centesimo sexto apud wintoniam'. i have always looked with some suspicion on these tewkesbury charters,[4] and that suspicion is not lessened by the double version of this, or by the name of the last witness in that of 1107, namely, 'roger de pistres'. the only known bearer of that name was dead before domesday, though this witness may just possibly be identical with roger de gloucester (son, i hold, of durand de pistres[5]) who was killed in 1106. on the whole, it is safer to deem that waldric's last appearance as chancellor, at present known, is in the rouen charter of november 1106. ranulf, his successor, first appears as foss pointed out,[6] in a charter to st andrew's priory, northampton.[7] its date is determined by the appearance among the witnesses of maurice, bishop of london (d. september 26, 1107) and of ranulf himself as chancellor, combined with the statement appended to the charter that it was granted in the king's eighth year ('octavo imperii sui anno'). one must not attach too great importance to these clauses, which did not, as a rule, form part of the original charter, but in this case the names of the witnesses point to easter--september 1107; and it is just possible to assign to the eighth year the close of the westminster gathering, at the beginning of august, when this charter to st andrew's may well have been granted. miss norgate holds that bishop roger 'probably resumed' the chancellorship in 1106, on waldric's elevation to the bishopric of laon,[8] but i do not know of any evidence to that effect. [footnote 1: _judges of england_, i. 140.] [footnote 2: _30th report of deputy-keeper_, p. 203.] [footnote 3: _ibid._, p. 204.] [footnote 4: see _geoffrey de mandeville_, 421, 431-2.] [footnote 5: see p. 245 _supra_.] [footnote 6: _judges of england_, i. 79.] [footnote 7: _monasticon_, v. 191.] [footnote 8: _england under the angevin kings_, i. 22.] a charter of henry i (1123) a good illustration of the value of charters for chronological and biographical purposes is afforded by one which henry i granted to the church of exeter. it is printed in the _monasticon_ under plimpton, to the foundation of which priory it is asserted to have been preliminary. that foundation is assigned to 1121. the charter, however, is also found among those confirmed by henry viii (confirmation roll, i henry viii, p. 5, no. 13), with a list of witnesses arranged in correct order; whereas the _monasticon_ version is taken from the pleadings under richard ii (coram rege, hil. 2 richard ii, rot. 20, devon), and records the witnesses in grievous disorder. the explanation of such disorder is that the clerk in the latter case was not familiar with the system on which the attestations to these charters were arranged, the names of the leading witnesses being placed in a line above the others. this will be made evident from the two lists of witnesses: _right order_ _wrong order_ king henry queen adeliza queen adeliza william, archbishop of canterbury william, archbishop of canterbury thurstan, archbishop of york robert, earl of gloucester richard, bishop of london thurstan, archbishop of york william, bishop of winchester william, earl of surrey roger, bishop of salisbury roger, bishop of salisbury alexander, bishop of lincoln roger, earl of warwick evrard, bishop of norwich alexander, bishop of lincoln hervey, bishop of ely robert, earl of leicester ralf, bishop of chichester evrard, bishop of norwich ranulf, bishop of durham hugh bigot, _dapifer_ robert, bishop of coventry hervey, bishop of ely 'theold', bishop of worcester william de pirou, _dapifer_ bernard, bishop of st david's ralf, bishop of chichester richard, bishop of hereford william d'aubeny godfrey, bishop of bath ranulf, bishop of durham geoffrey the chancellor nigel d'aubeny geoffrey, abbot of st peter's, robert, bishop of coventry winchester osbert, abbot of tavistock richard fitz baldwin thurstan, abbot of sherborne 'theold', bishop of worcester vincent, abbot of abingdon baldwin de redvers seffrid, abbot of glastonbury bernard, bishop of st david's robert, earl of gloucester johel de berdestaple william, earl of surrey richard, bishop of hereford david, earl of huntingdon guy de totness ranulf, earl of chester godfrey, bishop of bath roger, earl of warwick robert de cadentona [_sic_] robert, earl of leicester geoffrey the chancellor hugh bigot, _dapifer_ william fitz odo william de pirou, _dapifer_ geoffrey, abbot of st peter's, william d'aubeny winchester nigel d'aubeny goislin de pomereda richard fitz baldwin osbert, abbot of tavistock baldwin de redvers rainald de valle torta johel de berdestaple thurstan, abbot of sherborne guy de totness william fitz richard robert de 'badentona' vincent, abbot of abingdon william fitz odo herbert de alneto goislin de pomereda seffrid, abbot of glastonbury rainald de valle torta humfrey de bohun william fitz richard william, abbot of cerne herbert de alneto walter fitz thurstan[1] humfrey de bohun walter fitz thurstan it is obvious that this charter was granted before the death of the bishop of worcester (october 20, 1123), and before the king's departure from england (june 1123). but it must be subsequent to the death of the previous chancellor, ranulf (christmas 1122), and to the appointment or consecration (february 1123) of archbishop william. the narrow limit thus ascertained points to the easter court of 1123 at winchester, the great gathering of bishops and earls implying some such occasion. easter fell that year on april 15th. now two sees had fallen vacant at the beginning of the year, those of lincoln and of bath. lincoln was given to alexander, whether at easter (winchester), as stated by henry of huntingdon, or in lent, as asserted by the continuator of florence; but he was not consecrated till july 22nd. bath was bestowed on godfrey, whose consecration did not take place till august 26th, though henry of huntingdon assigns his appointment, like that of alexander, to easter (winchester). both these bishops, it will be seen, attest the above charter, which proves that it cannot be earlier than easter (april 15th), while the evidence below practically limits it to the easter court at winchester. the first point to be observed is that these two bishops attest as such (not as 'elect') long before their consecration. as it is generally held that bishops never did so, this point is of importance (always assuming the accuracy of the evidence) for its bearing on other charters.[2] secondly, four of the witnesses--the two archbishops, the bishop of st david's, and the abbot of glastonbury--are said by the continuator to have left for rome after alexander's appointment. from this charter it is clear that they did not leave till after easter. the third point is that earl roger of warwick had, at the date of this charter, succeeded his father, henry. turning to geoffrey the chancellor, we find in this charter perhaps his earliest appearance. foss, in his useful work, is here a year out. he wrongly assigned the death of the preceding chancellor, ranulf, to christmas 1123, instead of christmas 1122, and he assumed that our charter must be subsequent to bishop godfrey's consecration (august 26, 1123), and, in fact, that it belonged to 1124 (to which year he wrongly assigned the death of bishop theowulf). it is important for chronological purposes to date the change of chancellor correctly. i have already determined (p. 481) the date of ranulf's accession to the post. the correction of this date of ranulf's death affects that of the foundation of laund priory, leicestershire, which is assigned by nichols and by the editors of the _monasticon_ to 'about 1125'. as the foundation charter is addressed to william, archbishop of canterbury, and alexander, bishop of lincoln, it must be subsequent to alexander's promotion in the spring of 1123 (if not to his consecration on june 22nd). this is admitted by foss, who accepts the charter without question. there is nothing in the document to excite suspicion, nor do i impugn it without reluctance. but the awkward fact remains that it is witnessed by ranulf the chancellor, who died, as we have seen, at the beginning of 1123, and actually in the lifetime of bishop robert, alexander's predecessor at lincoln. there can be no question as to ranulf's death, for the sequence of events is inexorable. henry of huntingdon tells us that (1) the king spent christmas (1122) at dunstable; that (2) he went thence to berkhampstead, where ranulf was accidentally killed; that (3) he then visited woodstock, where bishop robert met with an equally sudden death; that (4) at the purification (february 2, 1123) he gave the see of canterbury to william of corbeuil; that (5) he gave (at winchester) the see of lincoln to alexander at easter. it is singular that the members of the foundation had two strings to their bow, another charter of henry i being adduced for inspeximus. its witnesses imply a later date, and their names do not involve any chronological difficulty. we have in this exeter charter one of the earliest attestations (according to my theory) of robert as earl of gloucester. it should be noted that he takes at once precedence of all other earls, just as he had taken, before his elevation, precedence of all laymen under the rank of earl. of the barons most are familiar. richard fitz baldwin was the son and successor of the famous baldwin of exeter, and was, like him, sheriff of devon (see p. 237). baldwin de redvers was the son of richard de redvers, and became subsequently first earl of devon (the confusion of these two families, from the similarity of name, seems to be incorrigible).[3] the lords of the great honours of barnstaple and totnes[4] are followed by robert of bampton, who had succeeded to the domesday fief of walter de douai, and who, as i have shown (_english historical review_, v. 746), was afterwards a rebel against stephen. goislin de pomerey was the heir of ralf de pomerey, the domesday baron; and reginald (rainaldus) de vautort was a great under-tenant of the honour of mortain. william fitz richard i identify with that great cornish magnate, whose daughter and heiress carried his fief to reginald, afterwards earl of cornwall. herbert de alneto also was a cornish baron, father of that richard who, in 1130, paid £100 for his succession (_rot. pip._, 31 henry i, p. 158). specially interesting, however, is the name of william fitz odo, in whom i detect not the william fitz _otho_, of essex and middlesex (with whom he is confused in the index to the 1130 pipe-roll), but the son of 'odo filius gamelin'; a devonshire tenant-in-chief (d.b., i. 116_b_). i see him in that '--filius odonis', who is entered on the damaged devonshire roll (_rot. pip._, 31 henry i, p. 157) in connection with thirty-four shillings, which proves that he held a considerable estate. the fief of 'odo filius gamelin' was assessed at 21-3/16 hides, representing in devon large estates.[5] [footnote 1: it will be observed that this list omits the bishops of london and winchester and the earls of huntingdon and chester, but adds the abbot of cerne.] [footnote 2: an excellent instance of this practice is found, ten years later, in the case of bishop nigel, who attested three charters in 1133, before the king's departure, as bishop of ely, though he was not consecrated till some months later. they are those found in _monasticon_, vi. 1174, 1274, and that which granted the chamberlainship to aubrey de vere.] [footnote 3: it has found its way, under 'baldwin', into the _dictionary of national biography_.] [footnote 4: the _guido de totteneys_ of this charter seems to be identical with the _wido de nunant_ of the charter granted by henry ii to this priory. this conjecture is confirmed by the entry in the pipe-roll of 31 hen. i: 'wido de nunant reddit comp. de x. marcis pro concessione ferie de totneis' (p. 154). there is a story quoted by dugdale, under totnes priory, from the records of the abbey of angers, that juhel 'of totnes', the domesday baron, was expelled by william rufus, and his lands given to roger de nunant. i certainly find roger de nonant attesting in 1091 the foundation charter of salisbury cathedral in conjunction with william fitz baldwin (see pp. 330, 472); and manors belonging to juhel in 1086 are found afterwards belonging to valletort, nonant's successor, as part of his honour of totnes. but it would seem that juhel retained part of his honour of barnstaple, while the nonants held the rest as the honour of totnes. indeed, he must have held both _capita_ so late as 1113, when, say the monks of laon, 'venimus ad castrum, quod dicitur bannistaplum, ubi manebat quidam princeps nomine joellus de totenes', etc. (_hermannus_, ii. 17), adding that they afterwards visited totnes 'præfati principis castrum' (_ibid._, 18).] [footnote 5: reprinted, with additions, from _english historical review_.] the origin of the nevilles it is difficult to believe that so interesting a genealogical question as the origin of this famous house should have remained as yet undetermined. i have shown above (p. 137) that we can identify in domesday gilbert and ralph de neville, the earliest bearers of the name in england, as knightly tenants of the abbot of peterborough; but the existing house, as is well known, descends from them only through a female. it is at its origin in the male line that i here glance. the innumerable quarters in which, unfortunately, information of this kind has been published makes it impossible for me to say whether i have been forestalled. so far, however, as i can find at present, two different versions are in the field. first, there is dugdale's view that robert fitz maldred, their founder, was 'son of dolfin, son of earl gospatric, son of maldred fitz crinan by algitha daughter of uchtred, earl of northumberland, who was son-in-law to king æthelred'. this was, apparently, mr shirley's view, for, in his _noble and gentle men of england_ he derives the nevilles from 'gospatric, the saxon earl of northumberland', though he makes robert fitz maldred his _great_-grandson, as rowland had done in his work on the house of nevill (1830), by placing maldred between dolfin and robert fitz maldred. even that sceptical genealogist, mr foster, admitted in his peerage their descent from this earl gospatric. the immediate ancestry, however, of their founder, robert fitz maldred, can be proved, and is as follows: dolfin, fitz uchtred, received 'staindropshire' from the prior of durham, 1131. (_feod. prior. dun._ 56, 140) | __________________|________________________ | | | | meldred patrick fitz dolfin, fitz dolfin (f.p.d. 53, 100, 140) (f.p.d. 100) | d. 1195-6 |___________________________________________ | | | | isabel = robert gilbert de neville | fitz meldred fitz meldred | of raby (f.p.d. 53, 54) | geoffrey de neville drummond's _noble british families_ (1842) set out a new origin for the family without any hesitation, and this was adopted by the duchess of cleveland, whose elaborate work on the _battle abbey roll_ has much excellent genealogy. their patriarch dolfin was now made the son of that uchtred, who was a grandson and namesake of dugdale's earl uchtred, _temp._ king æthelred. a chart pedigree is required to show the descent of the earls: (1) earl (2) (3) = uchtred, = = | slain 1016 | | ___________| _____________| |________ | | | | | | | | earl earl gospatric ealdgyth, ealdred eadwulf | mar. maldred | | | fitz crinan | | | | daughter, | | | mar. siward | | | | earl uchtred earl | osulf | gospatric | | ___________|________ | | | | | earl eadwulf dolfin waltheof gospatric waltheof, 'rus', of carlisle, of dunbar beheaded 1075 living 1080 1092 no authority, unfortunately, is given for the identity of this uchtred with uchtred, father of dolfin, and the assumption of that identity involves the conclusion that eadwulf 'rus', who took the lead in the murder of bishop walcher (1080), was brother to dolfin who received staindrop in 1131, and uncle to a man who died in 1195 or 1196! we cannot therefore accept this descent as it stands, or carry the pedigree at present beyond dolfin fitz uchtred (1131). but as this dolfin, when doing homage to the prior of durham for staindrop, reserved his homage to the kings of england and of scotland, as well as the bishop of durham, he was, no doubt, a man of consequence, and was probably of high northumbrian birth. it may be worth throwing out, as a hint, the suggestion that his father uchtred might have been identical with uchtred, son of ligulf, that great northumbrian thegn who was slain at durham in 1080. but this is only a guess. one cannot, in fact, be too careful, as i have shown in my two papers on 'odard of carlisle' and 'odard the sheriff',[1] in identifying two individuals of the same christian names, when, in these northern districts, the names in question were so widely borne. the whitby cartulary, for instance, proves that thomas de hastings was (maternal) grandson of alan, son of thorphin 'de alverstain', son of uchtred (son of gospatric), which uchtred gave the church of crosby ravensworth to the abbey in the time, it would seem, of william rufus. but who gospatric, his father, was has not been clearly ascertained. the skilled genealogists of the north may be able to decide these points, and to tell us the true descent of 'dolfin, the son of uchtred'. [footnote 1: _genealogist_, n.s., v. 25-8; viii. 200.] the alleged invasion of england in 1147 when mr richard howlett, in the preface to his edition of the _gesta stephani_ for the rolls series, announced that we were indebted to its 'careful author' for the knowledge of an invasion of england by henry fitzempress in 1147, 'unrecorded by any other chronicler', and endeavoured at considerable length to establish this proposition,[1] it was received, from all that i can learn, with general incredulity. as, however, in the volume which he has since edited, he reiterates his belief in this alleged invasion,[2] it becomes necessary to examine in detail the evidence for a discovery so authoritatively announced in the pages of the rolls series. the accepted view of henry's movements has hitherto been that, by his father's permission, in the autumn of 1142 he accompanied the earl of gloucester to england; that he remained there about four years; that, by his father's wish, at the end of 1146 or beginning of 1147 he returned from england; that he then spent two years and four months over sea; that in the spring of 1149 he again came to england, and was knighted at carlisle by the king of scots on may 22nd. as to the above long visit, commencing in 1142, gervase of canterbury is our chief authority, but the other chroniclers (omitting for the present the _gesta stephani_) harmonize well with his account. gervase and robert of torigni alike mention but one arrival of henry (1142) and one departure (1146 or 1147), thus distinctly implying there was then only one visit--namely, that visit which gervase tells us lasted four years. the only slight discrepancy between gervase and robert is found in the date of henry's departure. robert places that event under 1147, and mentions that henry visited bec may 29th in that year. there is also, mr howlett has pointed out, charter evidence implying that henry was back in normandy in march or april. now gervase says distinctly that he was away from england two years and four months. the chroniclers, gervase included, say that he returned to england in the middle of may 1149. counting back the two years and four months, this would bring us to january 1147, as the date of his departure from england. but there is a charter of his to salisbury cathedral, tested, as mr howlett observes, at devizes, april 13, 1149. if this evidence be trustworthy, it would take us back to december 1146, instead of january 1147. it is easy to see how gervase may have included in 1146, and robert in 1147, an event which appears to have taken place about the end of the one or the beginning of the other year. much has been made of the alleged circumstance that gervase assigned the earl of gloucester's death to 1146, whereas he is known to have died in 1147. but reference to his text will show that he does nothing of the kind. writing of henry's departure at the close of 1146, he tells us that the earl was destined never to see him again, for he died in november [_i.e._ november 1147]. he is here obviously anticipating. such being the evidence on which is based the accepted view of henry's movements, let us now turn to the _gesta stephani_. though mr howlett's knowledge of the period is great and quite exceptional, i cannot but think that he has been led astray by his admiration for this fascinating chronicle. miss norgate sensibly observes that 'there must be something wrong in the story' as actually preserved in the _gesta_,[3] but mr howlett, unwilling to admit the possibility of error in his chronicle, boldly asserts that the 'romantic account'[4] of henry's adventures which it contains does not refer to his visit in 1149, but to a hitherto unknown invasion in 1147. he appears to imagine that the only objection in accepting this story is found in the fact that henry was but just fourteen at the time.[5] but this is not so. putting aside this objection, as also the silence of other chroniclers, there remains the chronological difficulty. how is the alleged visit to be fitted in? its inventor, who suggests 'about april 1147', for its date, must first take henry back to normandy (why or when he does not even suggest) and then bring him back to england as an invader, neither his alleged going or coming being recorded by any chronicler. then he assigns to his second return to normandy (after the alleged invasion) the only passages in gervase and robert which speak of his returning at all. surely nothing could be more improbable than that henry should rush back to england just after he had left it, and had returned to his victorious father, and this at a time when his cause seemed as hopeless there as it was prosperous over the sea. the evidence of the _gesta stephani_ would have, indeed, to be beyond question if we are to accept, on its sole authority, so improbable a story. but what does that evidence amount to? the _gesta_, unlike other chronicles, not being arranged chronologically under years, the only definite note of time here afforded in its text is found in the passage, 'consuluit [henricus] et avunculum [_sic_] glaorniæ comitem, sed ipse suis sacculis avide incumbens, rebus tantum sibi necessariis occurrere maluit'.[6] as earl robert is known to have died in the autumn of 1147, the word _avunculus_ does, undoubtedly, fix these events as prior to that date. but is not _avunculus_ a slip of the writer for _cognatus_? is not the reference to earl william rather than to his father, earl robert?[7] such a slip is no mere conjecture; the statement that earl robert was too avaricious to assist his beloved nephew in his hour of need is not only absolutely contrary to all that we know of his character, but is virtually discredited by the _gesta_ itself when its author tells us, further on: comes deinde glaorniæ ut erat regis adversariorum strenuissimus et ad magna quevis struenda paratissimus, iterum atque iterum exercitum comparare, jugi hortaminis et admonitionis stimulo complices suos incitavit; illos minis, istos promissis sibi et præmiis conjugare; quatinus omnes in unam concordiam, in unum animum conspirati, exercitum e diverso ad idem velle repararent, et collectis undecumque agminibus, vive et constanter in regem insurgerent.[8] how can such language as this be reconciled with the statement as to earl robert's apathy at the very time when henry's efforts offered him a unique opportunity of pursuing his war against the king? mr howlett does not attempt to meet, or even notice, this objection. moreover, when the _gesta_ proceeds to describe earl william of gloucester as devoted to his own pleasures rather than to war,[9] we see that the conduct so incredible in his father would in him be what we might expect. i will not follow mr howlett in his lengthy argument relative to the knighting of eustace and henry, because he himself admits that it is based only on conjecture.[10] it is sufficient to observe that if the 'romantic' narrative in the _gesta_ refers to the events of 1149,[11] then the knighting of eustace, which is a pendant to that narrative, belongs, as the other chroniclers assert, to 1149. the statement, i may add, that henry applied for help to his mother, by no means involves, as mr howlett assumes, her presence in england at the time. i would suggest, then, that the whole hypothesis of this invasion in 1147 is based on nothing more than a confusion in the _gesta_. mr howlett, indeed, claims that 'mediaeval history would simply disappear if the evidence of chroniclers were to be treated in this way,[12] and detects 'among some modern writers a tendency to incautious rejection', etc.[13] but he himself goes out of his way to denounce, in this connection, as a 'blundering interpolation' a passage in john of hexham, which he assigns to notes being 'carelessly misplaced' and 'ignorantly miscopied'.[14] the _gesta_, to my knowledge, is by no means immaculate; its unbroken narrative and vagueness as to dates render its chronology a matter of difficulty; and the circumstance that the passage in dispute occurs towards its close renders it impossible to test it as we could wish by comparison with later portions. the weakness of mr howlett's case is shown by his desperate appeal to 'the exact precedent' set by fulk nerra, and no talk about the contrast presented by 'physical science' and that 'fragmentary tale of human inconsistencies which we term history' can justify the inclusion of this alleged invasion as a fact beyond dispute in so formal and authoritative a quarter as the preface to a rolls volume. [footnote 1: _chronicles_, stephen, henry ii, richard i, vol. iii. pp. xvi-xx, 130.] [footnote 2: _ibid._, vol. iv. pp. xxi-xxii.] [footnote 3: _england under the angevin kings_, i. 377.] [footnote 4: _ibid._] [footnote 5: 'the invasion of england by henry in 1147, when he was but a boy of fourteen, a piece of history which has hitherto been rejected solely on the ground of improbability.'--preface (_ut supra_), p. xxi.] [footnote 6: _gesta_ (ed. howlett), p. 131.] [footnote 7: there is a precisely similar slip, by john of salisbury, in the _historia pontificalis_ (pertz, xx. 532), where the 'duke' of normandy is referred to in 1148 as 'qui modo rex est' (_i.e._ henry). mr howlett himself has pointed out (_academy_, november 12, 1887) that the author 'slipped in the words "qui modo rex est", and thus transferred to henry a narrative which assuredly relates to his father'. the slip in question, as he observed, had sadly misled miss norgate.] [footnote 8: _gesta_ (ed. howlett), p. 134.] [footnote 9: 'successit in comitatum suum willelmus filius suus, senior quidem ætate, sed vir mollis, et thalamorum magis quam militiæ appetitor' (_gesta_, ed. howlett, p. 134).] [footnote 10: mr howlett incidentally claims that knighthood was a necessary preliminary to comital rank, and appeals to the fact that the younger henry was even carefully knighted before his coronation (_gesta_, p. xxii). but what has he to say to the knighting of earl richard of clare, by henry vi, and more especially to the knighting of malcolm, already earl of huntingdon and king of scots, by henry ii, in 1159? (_robert of torigni_, p. 203).] [footnote 11: mr howlett asserts (_gesta_, p. 130, note) that 'when henry made his better known visit in 1149 his acts were quite different' from those recorded in the _gesta_. but if, as he himself admits, in 1149 henry visited devizes on his way to carlisle, what more natural than that he should pass by cricklade and bourton (the two places mentioned in the _gesta_), which lay directly on his road?] [footnote 12: preface to _gesta_, p. xx.] [footnote 13: preface to _robert of torigni_, p. xxii.] [footnote 14: preface to _gesta_ (_ut supra_), p. xvi.] the alleged debate on danegeld (1163) the great importance attached by historians to the financial dispute at the council of woodstock in 1163 renders it desirable that the point at issue should be clearly stated and understood. as i venture to believe that the accepted view on the matter in dispute is erroneous, i here submit the reasons which have led me to that conclusion. 'two most important points,' writes dr stubbs, 'stand out' on this occasion: (1) 'this is the first case of any express opposition being made to the king's financial dealings since the conquest'; (2) 'the first fruit of the first constitutional opposition is the abolition of the most ancient property-tax [danegeld] imposed as a bribe for the danes'.[1] it is with the second of these points that i propose especially to deal. the passage which forms our best evidence is found in grim's _life of st thomas_, and its relative portion is as follows: movetur quæstio de consuetudine quadam quae in anglia tenebatur. dabantur de hida bini solidi ministris regis qui vicecomitum loco comitatus servabant, quos voluit rex conscribere fisco et reditibus propriis associare. cui archiepiscopus in faciem restitit, dicens, non debere eos exigi pro reditibus, 'nec pro reditu', inquit, 'dabimus eos, domine rex, salvo beneplacito vestro: sed si digne nobis servierint vicecomites, et servientes vel ministri provinciarum, et homines nostros manutenuerint, nequaquam eis deerimus in auxilium.' rex autem aegre ferens archiepiscopi responsionem, 'per oculos dei', ait, 'dabuntur pro reditu, et in scriptura regis scribentur'. on this passage dr stubbs thus comments: a tax so described can hardly have been anything else than the danegeld, which was an impost of two shillings on the hide, and was collected by the sheriffs, being possibly compounded for at a certain rate and paid by them into the exchequer. as the danegeld from this very year 1163 ceases to appear as a distinct item of account in the pipe-rolls, it is impossible to avoid connecting the two ideas, even if we may not identify them. whether the king's object in making this proposition was to collect the danegeld in full amount, putting an end to the nominal assessment which had so long been in use, and so depriving the sheriffs of such profits as they made from it, or whether he had some other end in view, it is impossible now to determine; and consequently it is difficult to understand the position taken by the archbishop.[2] the attempt to identify the payment in dispute with the danegeld does indeed lead to the greatest possible difficulties, and miss norgate, who follows closely in dr stubbs' footsteps, is no more successful in answering them;[3] for, in the first place, the words of grim do not apply to the danegeld if taken in their natural sense; and in the second the proceeds of the danegeld were already royal revenue, and were duly paid in, as such, at the exchequer. to meet this latter and obvious difficulty dr stubbs suggests that: as the sums paid into the exchequer under that name (danegeld) were very small compared with the extent of land that paid the tax, it is probable that the sheriffs paid a fixed composition and retained the surplus as wages for their services (etc.).[4] so, too, miss norgate urges that the danegeld 'still occasionally made its appearance in the treasury rolls, but in such small amount that it is evident the sheriffs, if they collected it in full, paid only a fixed composition to the crown, and kept the greater part as a remuneration for their own services'.[5] now this suggestion raises the whole question as to the revenue from danegeld. we are told that 'the danegeld was a very unpopular tax, probably because it was the plea on which the sheriffs made their greatest profit ... having become in the long lapse of years a mere composition paid by the sheriff to the exchequer, while the balance of the whole sums exacted on that account went to swell his own income'.[6] as against this view i venture to hold that the danegeld was in no way compounded for, but that every penny raised by its agency was due to the royal treasury, leaving no profit whatever to the sheriff. the test is easily applied: let us take the case of dorset. the domesday assessment of this county, according to the late mr eyton, who had investigated it with his usual painstaking labour, and collated it with the geld-rolls of two years before, was about 2,300 hides.[7] this assessment would produce, at two shillings on the hide, about £230. now the actual amount accounted for on the pipe-roll of 1130 is £228 5s; on that of 1156 it is £228 5s; and on that of 1162, the last levy, it is £247 5s.[8] there is certainly no margin of profit for the sheriff here. in other counties, we find that the proceeds of the danegeld in 1130, 1156, and 1162, whilst slightly fluctuating, roughly correspond, as, indeed, they were bound to do, the domesday assessment remaining unchanged.[9] i can, therefore, find no ground for the alleged discrepancy between the amounts accounted for by the sheriffs and those which the assessment ought to have produced. this being so, the solitary explanation suggested for henry's action falls to the ground, and it becomes clear that the payment in dispute could not have been the danegeld, as the proposed change could not increase the amount it produced already. as a matter of fact, the last occasion on which danegeld _eo nomine_ was levied was in 1162, but to connect that circumstance with the woodstock dispute of 1163 is an instance of the _post hoc propter hoc_ argument, more especially as the danegeld was not in dispute, still less its abolition. on the contrary, the primate desired to keep things as they were. what, then, was this mysterious payment but the _auxilium vicecomitis_, or 'sheriffs' aid'? garnier distinctly states that this is what it was,[10] and grim's words no less unmistakably point to the same conclusion. to institutional students of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries the _auxilium vicecomitis_ is familiar enough. it was, writes dr stubbs, a 'payment made to the sheriff for his services',[11] and was, it may be added, a customary charge, varying in amount,[12] paid over locally to the sheriffs. it may fairly be said to have stood to the danegeld in the relation of rates to taxes. on this hypothesis the difficulties of the case vanish at once, and henry's object is made plain. to add this regular annual levy to his own revenues would be all clear gain, and would relieve him _pro tanto_ from the necessity of spasmodic and irregular taxation. as for the sheriffs and the districts beneath their sway, they were possibly to be left to their own devices to find a substitute for the lost 'aid', like a modern county council bereft of its wheel tax; for the thought suggests itself that henry was attempting to reverse the process that we have lately witnessed, by relieving the taxes at the expense of the rates, instead of the rates at the expense of the taxes. whether, therefore, the attitude of the primate can be described as 'opposition to the king's will in the matter of taxation' is perhaps just open to question. he took his stand on the sure ground of existing 'custom', recognized at that time as binding on all.[13] one is tempted to discern a grim irony in henry's action when he promptly proceeded to turn the tables on his old friend by appealing to the _avitæ consuetudines_ as obviously binding on so rigid a constitutional purist as the primate.[14] [footnote 1: _early plantagenets_, pp. 69, 70. so, too, miss norgate: 'it seems, therefore, that for the first time in english history since the norman conquest the right of the nation's representatives to oppose the financial demands of the crown was asserted in the council of woodstock, and asserted with such success that the king was obliged not merely to abandon his project, but to obliterate the last trace of the tradition on which it was founded' (_angevin kings_, ii. 16).] [footnote 2: _const. hist._, i. 462; so, too, _early plantagenets_, pp. 68-70; and _select charters_, p. 29, where it is described as 'henry's proposal to appropriate the sheriffs' share of danegeld'.] [footnote 3: _angevin kings_, ii. 15, 16.] [footnote 4: _early plantagenets_, p. 69.] [footnote 5: but the auctor anonymus makes it clear that the king was not asking for the balance of the sums raised, but for the entirety: 'duo illi solidi ... si in unum conferuntur immensum efficere possunt cumulum'.] [footnote 6: stubbs' _const. hist._, i. 381, 582.] [footnote 7: _dorset domesday_, p. 144.] [footnote 8: thus accounted for (_rot. pip._, 8 hen. ii): £ s. d. paid in 141 10 0 paid out previously 63 0 0 allowed for remissions 20 1 2 balance due 22 13 10 ---------------- 247 5 0 n.b. the roll sums up the remissions as £21 [_sic_] 1s 2d, but the total of the items is £20 1s 2d.] [footnote 9: oxfordshire, for instance, where the amounts were £239 9s 3d, £249 6s 5d, £242 0s 10d; or wiltshire, where they run £388 13s 0d, £389 13s 0d, £388 11s 11d.] [footnote 10: _l'aide al vescunte_, as quoted by miss norgate, who observes thereon, 'this payment, although described as customary rather than legal, and called the "sheriffs' aid", seems really to have been nothing else than the danegeld.... his (garnier's) story points directly to the danegeld.'] [footnote 11: _const. hist._, i. 382.] [footnote 12: in this detail alone grim appears to have confused it with the uniform two shilling rate of the danegeld. the record in the _testa de nevill_ (pp. 85, 86) of the 'auxilium vicecomitis', due from the vills in the wapentake of framelund (leic.), illustrates well the payment.] [footnote 13: thus the statement that he 'declared at woodstock that the lands of his church should not pay a penny to the danegeld' (_const. hist._, i. 578) misrepresents his position by making him repudiate his undoubted obligation.] [footnote 14: this and the preceding and succeeding papers are reprinted from the _english historical review_.] a glimpse of the young king's court (1170) the charter given below is cited by madox as evidence that in the days of henry ii the exchequer was still 'sometimes holden in other places' than westminster. contrary to his usual practice, he does not print the charter; so, wishing to ascertain what light it might throw on the private transaction it records, i referred to its original enrolment.[1] finding that its evidence would prove of some historical value, i decided to edit it for the use of students.[2] willelmus comes de essex' omnibus hominibus [et] amicis suis, francis [et] anglis, clericis [et] laicis, tam futuris quam presentibus, salutem. sciatis me dedisse [et] concessisse [et] hac carta mea confirmasse rogero filio ricardi [et] suis heredibus villam de aynho cum omnibus pertinen[ciis] in escambio pro cunctonia hereditarie tenendam de me [et] heredibus meis sibi [et] heredibus suis per servicium unius militis [et] dimidii, libere et quiete [et] honorifice sicut unquam antecessores mei liberius [et] honorificencius eam tenuerunt [et] habuerunt; scilicet in bosco [et] in plano, in pratis et pascuis, in viis [et] semitis, in aquis, [et] molendinis, [et] in omnibus predicte ville adjacentibus. et insuper dedi [et] concessi predicto rogero filio ricardi terram de wlauynton' quam pater meus comes gal[fridus] dedit willelmo de moretonio, per servicium michi faciendum quod predictus willelmus patri meo facere debuit, hereditarie tenendum [_sic_] de me [et] heredibus meis, illi [et] heredibus suis. quare volo [et] firmiter precipio quod ista donacio rata [et] inconcussa permaneat. et notum sit omnibus quod istud eschambium factum fuit apud wynconiam [_sic_] ad scaccarium coram domino rege henrico filio regis henrici secundi [et] baronibus suis. tes[et]e [_sic_] reg' comite, bac'[3] de luc[i], willelmo de sancto johanne, galfrido archidiacono cantuar', ricardo archidiacono pick[tavensi], hunfrido de buh[un] constant[e],[4] manser' biset dap[ifero], gilberto malet dap[ifero], hugone de gundvil[la], alano de nevill[a], thoma basset, willelmo filio audel[ini], johanne mereschal, roberto de bussone, johanne const[abulario] cestr[iae], ranulpho de glanvile, gaufrido de say, gerard de kanvill[a], oseberto filio ricardi, david de jarpenvilla, ricardo filio hugonis, johanne burd, willelmo filio gill[eberti], roberto de sancto claro, johanne de roch, hasculfo capellano, henrico clerico, roberto clerico, qui hanc cartam scripsit, [et] multis aliis. the purpose of the charter is soon disposed of; it records a grant by the earl of essex to roger fitz richard (who had married the earl's aunt 'alice of essex'[5]) of aynho, northants, in exchange for compton, co. warwick. both manors were in the mandeville fief, and the former was to be held, as the latter had been (in 1166[6]), 'per servicium unius militis et dimidii'. the interest of the document is to be sought in its witnesses, and its place of testing, and above all in the date which, i hope to show, they suggest. the mention of the two inseparable archdeacons proves that this date cannot be later than 1174, and consequently, as the young king was present, must have been previous to his revolt in 1173, and therefore to his departure from england about the close of 1172. on the other hand, the date must be subsequent to june 1170, when the young king was crowned, and therefore probably to the meeting at fréteval (july 22, 1170), at which the archdeacon of canterbury was present. thus we obtain a limit of date. within this limit we may exclude the young king's stay in england after the departure of the two archdeacons (december 1170), as also his subsequent presence in england in 1171-2 while his father was in ireland, for william fitz aldelin was in ireland with him. indeed, we are told by giraldus (v. 286) that when the king left ireland (april 1172) william was left behind in charge of wexford.[7] as the young king then accompanied his father over sea, the only period remaining (except july-december 1170) to which we could assign the document is august-november 1172, when he visited england, with his consort margaret, for his second coronation. this ceremony took place at winchester, but we cannot tell whether william fitz aldelin had yet returned from ireland, or whether any other of our witnesses were present on that occasion.[8] but if we turn to the other possible period, the latter half of 1170, we find an occasion when six of the witnesses to the above charter can actually be shown to have been present, under circumstances of peculiar interest, with the young king at winchester. the evidence of charters is so deficient at this period of the reign that from august 1170 to june 1171, mr eyton could only adduce two charters 'quite problematically' and one more 'safely', as he claims, but erroneously, as his own pages show.[9] if, then, our charter belongs to this period, its evidence is proportionately valuable. now all that we know of the movements of the young king at the time is that he was at westminster on october 5th, and that he kept his christmas at winchester. mr eyton's book must here be used with great caution. he has been misled by r. de diceto (i. 342)[10] into the statement that henry was at woodstock when becket sought to visit him in december; and adds--by a confusion, it would seem, with his october movements--'the young king is at windsor' (december 4th[11]). henry was neither at woodstock nor windsor at this time, but at winchester. becket's biographers are unanimous in stating that he sent his envoy before him to the young king at winchester. landing on december 1st, and entering canterbury next day, the primate (says william fitz stephen), 'post octo dierum moram in sede',[12] sent richard, prior of dover (who was destined to be his own successor), to the young king to ask permission to visit him 'tanquam regem et dominum suum'. richard 'veniens wintoniam, regem invenit, ubi optimates regni ... coegerat'.[13] the purpose of this special assembly was connected with the scheme for an irregular election to the vacant sees, at the court of the elder king, by deputations whom his son was to send over.[14] prior richard was confronted by the young king's guardians (three of whom attest our charter).[15] he himself, on receiving the application, sent (as i read it) to consult geoffrey ridel, who was believed to know his father's wishes, and who, with the archdeacon of poitiers, was at southampton, waiting to cross.[16] turning, for their movements, to william fitz stephen, we learn that, while on their way to cross from a kentish port, the two archdeacons, on entering the county, learnt that the primate had arrived at canterbury, and, turning their horses' heads, made for a more westerly port.[17] southampton clearly was the port they made for, and on their way thither they must have visited the young king at winchester. this is admitted in the case of geoffrey, who went there, says becket, to lay before him the complaint of the excommunicated bishops. i believe that our charter belongs to this occasion, when the two attesting archdeacons were at winchester. _reg'_ no doubt is earl reginald of cornwall, who was certainly present at the same time[18] and who is probably referred to in 'li cunte' of garnier. this will establish the presence of six of our witnesses. of the others, richard de luci takes precedence as justiciar; alan de nevill, thomas basset, and the great glanville were, like the two archdeacons and the three guardians of the king, members of the judicial body; humfrey de bohun, gilbert malet, and manasser bisset were present as officers of the household; john, constable of chester, was (then or afterwards) son-in-law to the grantee's wife, and geoffrey de say was the son of the earl's aunt; osbert fitz richard and david de jarpenville (probably john de rochelle also) were among the earl's feudal tenants and are found attesting another of his charters; and hasculf was the enterprising chaplain who had plotted to carry off the late earl's corpse and present it to the nuns of chicksand. the only person whose presence need puzzle us is the earl of essex himself; for william fitz stephen[19] asserts that he was despatched from henry's court after the arrival there of the excommunicated prelates and the archdeacon of poitou. either, then, he had previously paid a flying visit to winchester, or he must have been absent when this transaction was recorded. [footnote 1: madox gives a misleading reference. the charter occurs among the clavering enrolments of m. 17 (not 19) of the l.t.r. memoranda of the exchequer, containing the michælmas _communia_ of 5 edward ii.] [footnote 2: mr hubert hall, of the public record office, kindly undertook to transcribe the charter for me.] [footnote 3: read _ric[ardo_].] [footnote 4: read _constab[ulo_].] [footnote 5: see my paper on 'who was alice of essex?' in the _essex arch. transactions_.] [footnote 6: 'rogerus filius ricardi i. militem et tres partes unius militis.' probably the quarter fee was a separate holding.] [footnote 7: humfrey de bohun also and hugh de gundeville were left behind at waterford.] [footnote 8: foss (_judges of england_, i. 235) states positively that hugh de gundeville did not leave ireland till 1173, at the time of the rebellion. this, if true, would dispose at once of an 1172 date for our charter; but, unfortunately, he does not give his authority, and i have not succeeded in finding it.] [footnote 9: _court, etc., of henry ii_, pp. 147, 154. the archdeacon of canterbury attests the chinon charter, which mr eyton 'safely' assigns to the middle of october 1170, adding that he had 'apparently been with the king ever since the peace of fréteval' (july 22nd). but he is known to have been with the young king at westminster on october 5th, as indeed mr eyton elsewhere observes (p. 151).] [footnote 10: becket, he says, visited london on his way, 'ad videndam faciem novi regis, qui tunc temporis morabatur apud wdestoc' [_sic_].] [footnote 11: 'court of king henry the younger' (eyton, pp. 151-2).] [footnote 12: _materials_, p. 121. william of canterbury places richard's despatch 'post aliquot dies reditus sui' (_ibid._, i. 106).] [footnote 13: _ibid._, i. 106; so garnier (p. 166, ed. hippeua)- 'le juefne rei aveit à wincestre trové. là èrent del pais li barun assemblé.'] [footnote 14: _ibid._, 106; so garnier- 'pur c'èrent assemblé cele genz à cel jur, et li prince et li cunte et des baruns plusur.'] [footnote 15: 'veniens itaque legatus ad curiam, convenit tutores regis ... willelmum de sancto johanne, willelmum filium aldelinae, hugonem de gundulfivilla, randulfum stephani' (i. 108-9).] [footnote 16: 'qui de portu suthamtune transfretaturi erant' (i. 111). geoffrey sent back a scornful reply (see also garnier) expressing his wonder that the young king could think of meeting a man who meant to disinherit him. this statement agrees with becket's own complaint (vii. 406) that his _archidiabolus_ geoffrey was instructed to make this charge.] [footnote 17: iii. 120. 'duo archidiaconi ... jam in cantiam venerant, ad regem illac transfretaturi. audito autem quod archiepiscopus appulsus cantuariae esset, lora statim diverterunt, ad occidentals maris portus tendentes.' this convicts mr eyton of error in asserting that on december 1st the two archdeacons were at dover, waiting to cross (p. 149).] [footnote 18: _ibid._, i. 111.] [footnote 19: _memorials_, iii. 127.] the first known fine (1175) in his masterly introduction to _select pleas of the crown_,[1] professor maitland, with his usual skill, discusses the evolution of the _curia regis_ and the relation of the central to the itinerant courts. an appendix to this introduction is devoted to 'early fines'; and the conclusion arrived at, as to the date when regular fines began, is that 'the evidence seems to point to the year 1178 or thereabouts, just, that is, to the time when king henry was remodelling the curia regis; thenceforward we have traces of a fairly continuous series of fines' (p. xxvii). more definitely still, in his latest work, he traces the existence of fines 'from the year 1179'. the earlier document i here print from the valuable cartulary of evesham (_vesp._ b. xxiv., fo. 71, etc.) is, i contend, a true fine, and is fortunately dated with exactitude (july 20th): hæc est finalis concordia facta in curia domini regis apud evesham ad proximum festum sancte margarete post mortem comitis reginaldi[2] cornub' coram willelmo filio audelini et willelmo filio radulfi et willelmo basset et aliis justiciariis domini regis qui ibi tunc aderant, inter rogerum filium willelmi et robertum trunket de terra de ragl' unde placitum fuit inter eos in curia domini regis. scilicet quod predictus wibertus trunket clamavit quietam predicto rogero terram illam de ragl' et [_sic_] feud[um] et hereditatem suam et totum jus suum quod in predicta terra habebat, et ipse trunchet reddidit in curia domini regis terram illam de ragl' in manu [_sic_] abbatis de evesham, et ipse abbas ibi statim in curia regis reddidit eam predicto rogero. pro hac autem concessione dedit predictus rogerus predicto trunchet xx. marcas argenti, et predictus abbas dedit truchet unum anulum argenteum cum cural. the transcript of this fine is immediately followed by a royal charter confirming it, and establishing roger in possession: h. dei gratia ... sciatis me concessisse et presenti carta confirmasse finem que factus fuit in curia mea inter, etc., etc. ... et wibertus eam reddidit solutam et quietam in manu abbatis de evesham de cujus feodo terra illa est.... et ideo volo et firmiter precipio.... test. willelmo audelin', willelmo filio radulfi, willelmo basset, berteram de verdun, gaufrido salvagio. apud evesham. mr eyton, to whom this fine was unknown, does not, in his _court and itinerary of henry ii_, include evesham among the places visited by the king in 1175, but makes him visit feckenham about october (p. 196). but as we learn from the above fine that henry was at evesham on july 20th, mr eyton's conclusions must be reconsidered. henry, according to him, was at woodstock july 8th and at nottingham august 1st. now this latter date is derived from a nottingham charter (p. 193), among the witnesses to which are william fitz audelin 'dapifer', william basset, and william fitz ralf, the very three justices before whom our fine had been levied at evesham on july 20th. i hold, therefore, that henry proceeded (possibly through lichfield, as mr eyton asserts) from woodstock to nottingham _via_ evesham; and, further, that he visited feckenham (to the north of evesham) on this occasion, and not, as mr eyton imagined, in october. we find accordingly that of the feckenham charters quoted by that writer (p. 196), one is witnessed by all three of our officers, william fitz audelin 'dapifer', william fitz ralf, and william basset; one by william fitz audelin and william fitz ralf; and the third by william fitz ralf and william basset. now, working from the pipe-rolls, mr eyton discovered that: while the king was in staffordshire there were pleas held in that county which are expressed to have been held by william fitz ralph, bertram de verdon, and william basset _in curia regis_ (p. 193). he also noted that the pipe-roll of 1175, after duly recounting the results of the ordinary assizes, held by william de lanvall and thomas basset (who appear to have visited york while the king was there), contains the following (in regard to a different kind of judicature than that at which the two justiciars presided), and which probably took place in a court of which the king in person was president: 'placita et conventiones per willelmum filius radulfi, bertram de verdon, et willelmum basset, in curia regis.' these _placita_ were apparently nothing more than fines with the crown (p. 194). so, too, he found that at northampton the three justiciars who had attended him in his special _curia_ in staffordshire and at york, negotiated a fine by robert de nevill, 'pro rehabenda saisina de uppetona quæ fuit radulfi de waltervilla' (p. 194). my own evidence proves that the same three justiciars had been with him, earlier in the summer, in his special _curia_ at evesham, where an actual fine was levied. thus we have proof that in the summer of 1175 the king was accompanied on his progress by a special group of justices, with whose assistance he held pleas, just as, a generation later, john, in his ninth year, 'was journeying about the country with three judges in his train--simon pateshull, potterne, and pont audemer'.[3] while he was doing this, as eyton has shown, two great eyres were going on throughout the country, one of them conducted by william de lanvall[ei] and thomas basset, the other by ranulf de glanville and hugh de cressi. it is noteworthy that all these four are found, with william fitz audelin, among the witnesses to a royal charter assigned by mr eyton--rightly, no doubt--to the king's stay at york (_circ._ august 10, 1175), as they also are among the witnesses to the nottingham charter mentioned above (p. 385), assigned by eyton to august 1st. the latter, therefore, brings together the king's own party of three or four justices with the four justices in eyre. the great importance of this royal _iter_ consists in its bearing on the evolution of the _curia regis_. the years 1175 and 1176 form a critical epoch in this institutional development. dr stubbs, writing on this subject, reminds us that 'the first _placita curiæ regis_ mentioned by madox are in 1175' (i. 600), and speaks of the 'two circuits of the justices in 1175, and the six circuits of the judges in 1176' (_ibid._). so far, indeed, all is clear. the two judicial eyres of 1175 are known to us from the pipe-rolls; the six of 1176 are found in the chronicles also, for they were settled by the assize of northampton in january of that year (i. 484-5). the really difficult subject is the king's own _iter_, for which, we have seen, there is clear evidence, but of which dr stubbs, working from madox, seems to have been unaware. his words are: all the eighteen justices of 1176 were officers of the exchequer; some of them are found in 1175 holding 'placita curiæ regis' in bodies of three or four judges, and not in the same combinations in which they took their judicial journeys. we can scarcely help the conclusion that the new jurisprudence was being administered by committees of the general body of justices, who were equally qualified to sit in the curia and exchequer, and to undertake the fiscal and judicial work of the eyre. [_note_: for instance, in 1176, william fitz ralf, bertram de verdun, and william basset hear pleas in curia regis touching bucks. and beds.; yet on the eyre, these two counties are visited by three other judges, etc.] these statements are based on madox's extracts from the pipe-rolls,[4] which afford, however, more definite evidence than dr stubbs discovered. in the pipe-roll of 1175 and its immediate successor we find 'placita _in curia regis_' held by a single group of judges--william fitz ralf, bertram de verdon, and william basset (thomas basset is a substitute in one case and william fitz audelin, we have seen, in another)--quite distinct from the 'placita' of the justices in eyre, which were not described as 'in curia regis'. the view, therefore, that i now advance is that these pleas, 'in curia regis', were held by a separate group of judges in the train of the king himself, whose _iter_ began at reading, june 1175.[5] it was there, i believe, that were held the 'placita' for bucks and beds, duly recorded in the pipe-roll of 1175. that this royal _iter_ was continued through the exchequer year 1175-6 seems to be well established, and the chronological difficulty of distinguishing between the two years renders the discovery of a fixed point, such as that afforded by the evesham fine, of special value. its evidence also establishes the presence of the king in person,[6] whose charter of confirmation should be carefully noted on account of its reciting the fine. having now traced the royal _iter_, of which the pleas are distinguished on the pipe-rolls as held 'in curia regis', i turn to the circuits of the judges. i have fortunately lighted, in the course of my researches, on two more fines earlier than any known to professor maitland. and, better still, one of these is the original document itself. the date of the first is july 1 and of the second june 29, 1176. the justices named in each case are those who are known to have gone the circuits, in which leicester and oxford were respectively comprised.[7] the importance of these documents demands that they should be printed _in extenso_. i hec est finalis concordia facta apud legr[ecestr]am proxima die jovis post proximum festum apostolorum petri et pauli postquam hugucio legatus rome pervenit in angliam,[8] coram hugonem de gundevile et willelmo filio radulfi et willelmo basset, justiciariis domini regis, et ceteris baronibus qui ibi tunc aderant inter galfridum ridel et bertramum de verdun de terra de madeleye, unde placitum fuit inter eos in curia domini regis, videlicet quod galfridus ridel dedit bertrammo [_sic_] de verdun feodum i militis in leycest'syre, scilicet servitium viii. car. terre quas robert devel tenet in swineford et in walecote et servitium ii. car. terre quas walterus de folevile tenet in parva essebi et servitium i car. terre quam peverel tenet in flekeneye, et servitium i. car. terre quam hardeui[nus] tenet in eadem flekeneye. et has xii. car. terre dedit ei et concessit in feodo et hereditate per servicium unius militis. et in staffordesyre dedit predictus galfridus prenominato bretamo [_sic_] xii. bov. terre quas habebat in crokestene de feodo de madelye et servitium de foxwiss et de hanekote per v. sol. inde annuatim reddendos galfrido pro omnibus que ad illum pertinent. has vero terras in leycest'syre et in staffordsyre dedit galfridus ridel et concessit bertramo et heredibus suis tenendas de illo et de heredibus suis in feodo et hereditate libere et quiete per prenominatum servitium pro omnibus que ad illum pertinent, et pro ista donatione et concessione bertrammus [_sic_] de werdun [_sic_] totam calumpniam quam habuit versus galfridum in madeleye quietum clamavit de illo et de heredibus suis galfrido ridel et heredibus suis.[9] ii hec est finalis concordia que facta fuit apud ox[eneforde] in curia regis coram ricardo giffard et rogero filio reinfr[idi] et johanne de caerdif justitiis regis ... proximum festum apostolorum petri et pauli postquam dominus rex cepit ligantiam baronum scotie apud [ebo]racum[10] inter canonicos oseneie et ingream et tres filias eius scilicet gundream et isabella et margaretam de terre de oxenef[orde] unde placitum fuerat inter eos in curia regis scilicet quod ingrea et tres filie sue prenominate clamaverunt predictis canonicis quietam terram illam in oxenenef[orde] de se et de heredibus suis pro xx. sol. quos canonici illi dederunt et omne jus quod in eadem terra habebant quietum illis clamaverunt.[11] it will be observed that the oxford fine is described as made 'in curia regis', while the leicester one is not. it would seem, then, that in spite of the distinction drawn at first on the rolls, the phrase 'curia regis' was already creeping in as describing a court at which the king was not present. i have also discovered, in ms., a 'fine' of some ten or twelve years earlier, most valuable for comparison with those which i have here discussed. we have there a similar charter of confirmation, in which the king describes the transaction as 'finem illum quem abbas willelmus de hulmo fecit coram me',[12] and the document confirmed, moreover, describes itself as a 'finis' between the abbot of holme and william and henry de neville, brothers.[13] but the form is very different from that of the true fine, which is fully developed in our example of 1175. the holme 'fine' may be safely assigned to march 1163-march 1166,[14] and as it was 'made' at westminster, it not improbably belongs to the series of proceedings there _circ._ march 8, 1163. it may fairly be presumed that if, at the date of this fine, the fully developed form existed it would have been duly employed at westminster on this occasion. we may therefore safely assert, at least, that it came into use between the dates of these two transactions. as bearing on the evolution of the fine, the charter of henry ii, confirming a 'finis et concordia', and assigned by me to 1163-70,[15] ought to be compared with the holme charter, as indicating, perhaps, some advance, through the close resemblance between the clauses, in these royal charters, confirming the fine points to an almost common stage of development. holme lewes quare volo et firmiter precipio et ideo volo et firmiter precipio quod finis ille sicut coram me ut finis iste et concordia factus est stabilis sit, et stabilis sit et firma maneat et firmiter et inconcusse ex inconcusse inter eos teneatur, utraque parte teneatur. sicut facta fuit coram me et utrobique concessa. the part played by william fitz audelin in the affairs, at this time, of ireland, gives also some importance to this proof of his presence at evesham on july 20, 1175. it brings us, indeed, in contact with the great 'laudabiliter' controversy. miss norgate holds that william fitz audelin was sent to ireland in charge (with the prior of wallingford) of that contested document in 1175.[16] professor tout, in his biography of william, writes on the contrary, oddly enough, that he was 'sent in 1174 or 1175' [_sic_] on this mission, but 'soon left ireland, for he appears as a witness of the treaty of falaise in october 1174 [_sic_], and in 1175 and 1176 he was constantly in attendance at court in discharge of his duties as steward or seneschal'.[17] this confusion, however, is slight when compared with the statements as to william's tenure of the government of ireland. it is agreed that he was sent to succeed earl richard (who died april 5, 1176); but while miss norgate holds that 'early in the next year henry found it necessary to recall him',[18] professor tout places his recall in 1179, consequent on complaints against him to the king in january of that year. without undertaking to decide the question, i may suggest that william had returned to england by may 1177--for he is proved by charters to have attended the oxford council of that date--when henry replaced him, as governor, by hugh de lacy, but entrusted him, as hoveden states, with wexford. we have only to assume that gerald, by mistake, assigns to 1172 his wexford appointment, which really belonged to 1177 (professor tout thinks this probable), and then the solution i suggest satisfies all the requirements. william fitz audelin, i may add, has been peculiarly the sport of genealogists. having been selected by them as ancestor to the great irish house of burke ('de burgo') he was further transformed, by a flight of fancy even wilder than usual, into a lineal descendant of charlemagne. who he really was seems to have remained unknown, for his life in the _dictionary of national biography_ treats with suspicion, though duly mentioning, his alleged descent from charlemagne. moreover, his very name would seem to have been left in doubt. it would, of course, be difficult to distinguish 'aldelinus' from 'aldelmus' in ms., and i confess to having looked on the latter--which is the form adopted by professor tout in the _dictionary of national biography_, as by miss norgate and others--as probable enough from its likeness to the english 'aldhelm'. but the 'fitz audeline' of the anglo-norman poem on the conquest of ireland seems decisive. 'willelmus filius audelini, domini regis dapifer' was the style he used in his own charters.[19] having always kept a look-out for him in yorkshire, i recognized william at once in a charter which is among those abstracted in the report on the portland mss.[20] this is a confirmation by roger de mowbray of a grant to fountains by 'aldelin de aldefeld and ralph his son and his other sons'. among the witnesses are 'ralph son of aldelin, william his brother', and at the close, 'amelin son of aldel'. now, if we turn to the _cartæ_ of 1166, we find, under yorkshire, that ralph 'filius aldelin' held half a knight's fee of roger de mowbray, and william filius aldelin one fee of henry de lacy. here we recognize the two brothers mentioned in the charters above.[21] the small fief of william 'filius aldelin' himself is entered under hampshire, where it is described as 'terra quam dominus rex dedit willelmo filio aldelin, marscallo suo, cum juliana filia roberti dorsnelli'. it is through this juliana that we obtain the coping-stone of proof. her charter granting little maplestead, essex, to the hospitallers, has for its first witness 'radulfo filio adelini', who, as we have seen above, was her husband's brother.[22] and he is also the first witness to william's confirmation of her gift.[23] the parentage and the true name of william fitz audelin are thus, at length, clearly established. [footnote 1: vol. i. (selden society).] [footnote 2: 'reg.' ms. the earl died july 1, 1175. this fine further confirms the accuracy of the _gesta henrici_ (see eyton, p. 192).] [footnote 3: maitland's _select pleas of the crown_, i. xv.] [footnote 4: _history of the exchequer_ (ed. 1711), pp. 64, 65.] [footnote 5: eyton's _itinerary_ p. 191.] [footnote 6: prof maitland has explained that this presence was formal (_select pleas of the crown_, i. xiv).] [footnote 7: except that robert fitz bernard's place is taken by john of cardiff.] [footnote 8: october 27, 1175.] [footnote 9: sloane charter xxxi. 4, no. 34. see also addenda.] [footnote 10: august 1175.] [footnote 11: cotton charter, xi. 73 (original).] [footnote 12: galba, e., ii. fo. 31_b_.] [footnote 13: _ibid._, 62_b_.] [footnote 14: the witnesses to the fine and the charter confirming it included richard archdeacon of poitiers and robert earl of leicester. the former gives us the limit march 1163, and the king was not in england in the lifetime of the latter after march 1166.] [footnote 15: see my _ancient charters_, pp. 67-8.] [footnote 16: 'it is acknowledged on all hands that there is no sign of any attempt on henry's part to publish the letter in ireland ... before 1175. in that year gerald states that the letter was read ... at waterford.' _english historical review_, viii. 44. cf. p. 31. see also _angevin kings_, ii. 182.] [footnote 17: _dictionary of national biography_. i differ wholly from both writers, and take the view, based on record evidence, that, contrary to the accepted belief, william visited ireland some two years earlier.] [footnote 18: _england under the angevin kings_, ii. 183.] [footnote 19: the name of 'audelin' is extant as a surname. i have met with it in london.] [footnote 20: 13th report hist. mss., app. ii., p. 4. we are indebted, i believe, to mr maxwell lyte for these interesting abstracts.] [footnote 21: the name seems to be preserved in thorpe-audlin (_vulgo_ audling), a township in the west riding of yorkshire, some 4-1/2 miles from pontefract.] [footnote 22: it seems to be printed only in a footnote to morant's _essex_ (i. 282). 'radulfo filio willelmi domini mei' is a witness, which certainly suggests that william had been married before.] [footnote 23: see _monasticon_. prof tout seems to have been unaware of these charters of william, one of which is dated. indeed he only says that william 'is said to have married' juliana, giving the _carta_ (1166) as his authority.] the montmorency imposture many a jest has been levelled at the irish family of morres for seeking and obtaining permission from the crown, some eighty years ago, to assume the glorious name of 'de montmorency', in lieu of their own, as having been originally that of their family.[1] they have since borne, as is well known, not merely the name, but even the arms and the proud device of that illustrious house. moreover, the introduction of the name bouchard, borne by the present lord mountmorres, proves the determination of the family to persist in their lofty pretensions. i am not aware whether these pretensions have ever been regularly exposed: they seem to have been thought too fantastic for serious criticism. at the same time, it must be remembered that they have been formally and officially recognized by sir w. betham as deputy ulster, by the english crown (on the strength of his statement) and by the chevalier de la rue, 'garde-général des archives du royaume', on the french side, in 1818. on the other hand, it must not be forgotten that mm. de montmorency at the time, in spite of the repeated and strenuous appeals of the morres family, declined to admit their claim to be members of the house of montmorency. to the indignant protest of col. hervey morres (styling himself 'de montmorency-morres') against this action of the french house, we owe the most complete exposition of the case on behalf of his family.[2] on it, therefore, my criticisms will be based. nor will these criticisms be destructive only: they will show that the pedigrees upheld by col. morres and his opponents were both alike erroneous, and will establish the real facts, which, it will be found, completely vindicate the accuracy of giraldus cambrensis. the controversy hinged on a well-known personage. 'herveius de monte mauricii', as giraldus terms him. the french house, taking their stand on the historians of their family, insisted that he was the only montmorency who had gone to ireland in his time, and that as he had, admittedly, left no legitimate issue, the morres claim was untenable. the irish house contended that, on the contrary, others of the family had come over also, and that they were lineally descended from one of hervey's brothers, but the whole story undoubtedly sprang from the mention of this hervey--the sole connecting link--and from the curious form in which giraldus chose to latinize his name. now duchesne, the historian of the house of montmorency, whose version desormeaux and père anselme did but follow in the main, wrote thus of hervey: il espousa elizabeth de meullent veuve de gislebert de claire, comte de pembroc en angleterre et mère de richard de claire, surnommé strongbow, comte de pembroke, dompteur de l'hibernie, duquel à raison de cette alliance un autheur du temps le qualifie parastre ou beaupère (p. 92).[3] but this 'autheur' is giraldus cambrensis, on whom duchesne based his account, and who, we find, does not speak of hervey as stepfather, but as paternal uncle of strongbow: herveius de monte mauricii, vir quoque fugitivus a facie fortunæ, inermis et inops, ex parte richardi comitis cujus _patruus_ erat, explorator potius quam expugnator advenit (i. 3). duchesne's version, therefore, is out of court, although it was repeated by père anselme, and even adopted in the _genealogist_ by so skilled and able a genealogist as mr g. w. watson.[4] col. hervey morres went so far as to accuse duchesne and desormeaux 'd'adulation, d'immoralité, et de mauvaise foi' in giving this account of his great namesake; and he proceeded to substitute a version of his own, severing the hapless man and converting him into two! to make this clear, i must print the essential part of the pedigree as given by him. hervé de montmorency | ------------------------------------------ | | | bouchard geoffroi hervé, de montmorency dit le riche 1st bishop v | of ely [1109-31] | ------------------------------ | | adelaide = hervé robert, fils de de de montmorency geoffroi, fils clermont | de hervé | | | | --------------- ---------------------- | | | | | guillaume, hervé, etienne, jordan hervé, ob. s. p. fils de hervé, d. 1136, v connétable chamberlain to aged 56 or 57 d'irelande, henry ii, 1182 | ob. s. p. 1205 | | robert, fils d'etienne the explanation is extremely simple: the whole pedigree is concocted with a view to making the irish hervey uncle to robert fitz stephen. this was done to satisfy the supposed requirements of giraldus, whose words col. morres thus triumphantly quoted: robertus stephanides ... inter cæteros _herveius de montemaurisco_ roberti patruus, _nepoti suo se_ comitem præbuit (p. 77). unfortunately for him, he had gone, not to giraldus, but to 'stonyhurst de rebus hibernicis i. 69-70, _d'après giraldus cambrensis'_. stonyhurst had carelessly made giraldus speak of hervey as uncle, not to earl richard, but to robert fitz stephen, and the pedigree was accordingly constructed to fit this error. when the error is corrected, the pedigree collapses; and the very passage which is quoted to confirm it at once unmasks the concoction. and now having made it clear that both sides were in error, i shall set forth the true explanation of the words of giraldus. the clue is given us by those deeping charters which, oddly enough, col. morres duly quoted and appealed to. the first is found in the _monasticon_, ii. 601: adeliz, uxor gilberti filii ricardi et gillebertus, et baldewinus, et rohaisia pueri gilberti episcopo lincolniensi ... salutem.... hiis testibus, gilberto filio gilberti, galterio, _hervæo_, baldwino fratribus ejus et rohaisia sorore eorum, etc., etc. the next is the confirmation of this grant by robert bishop of lincoln (ob. 1123) as 'donum adelidæ _de montemoraci_' (p. 602). the third is a charter of 'adeliz, mater comitis gilberti' (p. 603), who is also styled in the thorney register 'adelitia de claromonte'. col. morres also relied much on a grant to castleacre by 'adalicia de claromonte', to which the first witness is 'her. de montemorentino',[5] but the relationship of the witness to the grantor is not stated. gilbert (1) adeliz (2) [? bouchard] fitzrichard = of clermont = de montmorenci of clare | __________|__________________________ |_____ | | | | | richard gilbert walter | hervey fitzgilbert, fitzgilbert, fitzgilbert | de montmorenci, slain 1136 earl of of clare | constable pembroke | of ireland | __|________________ | | | richard baldwin rohaisia fitzgilbert, fitzgilbert earl of pembroke, of clare 'strongbow' hervey de montmorency is also mentioned in the bilegh abbey confirmation charter of richard i, but it gives us no information. we have now, however, sufficient evidence to recover the true genealogy, which is interesting enough. this shows us how hervey was 'paternal uncle' to strongbow,[6] and why he witnessed his mother's charter (_ut supra_) with his brothers and sister, but did not join in their grant. we see, also, how duchesne's error arose from his making the widow not of gilbert, but of his son and namesake the first earl of pembroke, marry a montmorenci. the error is not surprising in the case of such a family as the clares, whose alliances and ramifications are made specially puzzling by the repetition of their christian names. on the other hand, the 'dimidiation' of hervey in the pedigree put forward by the morres family was merely the fruit of the resolve to make him at all costs uncle to robert fitz stephen, as the words of giraldus were supposed to require, in their misquoted form. poor hervey has, indeed, been the sport of genealogists and historians. mr dimock, in his rolls edition of giraldus, renders his name as 'mont-maurice', miss norgate as 'mountmorris',[7] mrs green as mount moriss,[8] mr hunt, who has written his life in the _dictionary of national biography_ as mount-maurice, and even mr orpen, in his admirable edition of the anglo-norman poem on the conquest, as 'montmaurice' (p. 335). this last is the strangest case, because the forms found in the poem are 'mumoreci' and 'momorci', while, as mr orpen duly points out, it is 'munmoreci' in the register of st thomas's, and 'mundmorici' in the cartulary of st mary's (p. 266). hervey was constable to his nephew earl richard's troops in ireland, and described himself as 'marescallus domini regis de hibernia, et senescallus de tota terra ricardi comitis'. having now shown that the alleged descent can be absolutely disproved so far as concerns the only montmorenci whose name occurs in connection with ireland, i proceed to glance at his supposed relatives, none of whom, it is important to remember, even bore the name of montmorency. the chart pedigree printed above (p. 357) will show how robert fitz stephen was converted into a montmorenci, though the parentage of his father stephen, constable of cardigan, is wholly unknown. it need scarcely be said that no proof is, or can be, given for this filiation; but the following passage on stephen is an excellent illustration of the sort of evidence which is vouched for this wholly imaginary pedigree: ce seigneur, très-jeune encore, en 1087, confirma conjointement avec son père et son aïeul hervé, fils de bouchard, la donation faite par turillus le gros à l'abbaye de st. florent de saumur de certaines bénéfices. sig. hervei filii burchardi, sig. roberti filii ejus, sig. stephani militis ejus. all that is needed, we are told, is to read grandson ('petit fils') instead of _filius_ for robert, and great-grandson for _miles_--on the ground that _miles_ sometimes meant 'un jeune homme'! such is a type of the 'proofs' on which this pedigree rests. but its absurdities and inconsistencies go even further than this. the dates work out as follows: hervey de montmorency | geoffrey 'le riche' | robert fitzgeoffrey tenant-in-chief 1166 | ------------------------------------------ | | | stephen, hervey, geoffrey, born. _circ._ 1080, d. 1205 d. 1211 died 1136, having witnessed above charter in 1087 | robert fitz stephen thus stephen, who was born about 1080, and was a witness in 1087, would be _son_ to a man who flourished in 1166, and _brother_ to men who died in 1205 and 1211.[9] but what are we to say when we learn further that this stephen, who died in '1136', is the 'stephanus de marisco' who appears in the _liber niger_ as a tenant of the bishop of ely in 1166! the probable, and indeed only, explanation is that col. morres did not even know when the returns in the _liber niger_ were compiled. their real date again destroys this cock-and-bull pedigree, or genealogical nightmare, which, for sheer topsy-turveydom, has, i venture to assert, never been surpassed. i strongly suspect that the whole story arose from the occurrence in ireland, in the thirteenth century, of the latinized name 'de marisco' or 'de mariscis', which represents of course, neither montmorenci nor morres, but simply marsh. genealogists, no doubt, were attracted by the form 'de monte maurisco' into tracing a connection; but, so far as can be understood, col. morres discarded this resemblance, and represented his alleged ancestors as 'seigneurs de mariscis ou des marches' in england, connecting them with the fen district in cambridgeshire. it would be easy to show that the early pedigree positively teems with absurdities similar to those i have already exposed, but it would be sheer waste of time to devote any more attention to proofs, which col. morres proudly boasted were 'vérifiés avec la plus scrupuleuse attention par l'autorité competente et sanctionnés désormais par l'autorisation du prince qui gouverne aujourd'hui l'empire britannique' (p. 25). i do not hesitate to say that a more impudent claim was never successfully foisted on the authorities and the public. the chief sinner in the matter was, of course, sir w. betham, who certified (june 29, 1815) that this audacious concoction was 'established on evidence of the most unquestionable authority, chiefly from the ancient public records' (p. 203). the crown naturally could only accept the statement of its own officer of arms, and accordingly described the alleged descent as being duly proved and recorded.[10] as for the french expert, the chevalier de la rue, of whose investigation and favourable verdict (april 17, 1818) so much has been made, it will scarcely be believed that he actually, with the sole exception of the _monasticon_, did not attempt to verify the 'proofs' set before him! it will be seen from his own words that his decision was subject to their genuineness: toutes les citations puisées par monsieur de morrès dans les monuments, registres, et terriers publics d'angleterre étant, _comme je n'en doute pas_, aussi exactes que celles du monasticon (p. 37). the value of his loudly-trumpeted verdict may be estimated from this admission. it is only right that mm. de montmorency and all those in france who are interested in historical genealogy should understand that no one among ourselves, whose opinion is worth having, would dream of defending this gross usurpation. we may hope and believe that in the present day no officer of arms would behave like sir w. betham, and certify, as 'established on evidence of the most unquestionable authority' a descent which is not merely 'not proven', but can be absolutely disproved. it cannot be stated too emphatically, or known too widely, that the house of morres has no more right, by hereditary descent, to the name and arms of 'de montmorency' than any of the numerous families of morris, or indeed, for the matter of that, the family of smith.[11] [footnote 1: see, for instance, the _complete peerage_ of g. e. c. _sub_ 'frankfort de montmorency'.] [footnote 2: _les montmorency de france et les montmorency d'irlande, ou précis historique des démarches faites à l'occasion de la reprise du nom de ses ancêtres par la branche de montmorency-marisco-morres._ paris, 1828.] [footnote 3: _histoire de la maison de montmorency_. paris, 1624.] [footnote 4: vol. x., p. 6.] [footnote 5: blomefield's _norfolk_, ix. 5.] [footnote 6: since this article was written, mr hunt's life of hervey has appeared in the _dict. nat. biog._ he has arrived at precisely the same conclusions as myself.] [footnote 7: _england under the angevin kings_, ii. 101, 112.] [footnote 8: _henry the second_, p. 159.] [footnote 9: 'etienne de mariscis [_sic_] ... fut tué en 1136 par les gallois lorsqu'il gouvernait ce pays' (p. 74). 'il n'était agé lors de sa mort que de cinquante six ou cinquante sept ans' (p. 75).] [footnote 10: _london gazette_, september 9, 1815; _dublin gazette_, august 12, 1815.] [footnote 11: for an even more illustrious foreign descent, see my paper, 'our english hapsburgs: a great delusion' (_genealogist_, n.s., x. 193).] the oxford debate on foreign service (1197) great importance is rightly assigned to the first instances of 'a constitutional opposition to a royal demand for money',[1] of which the two alleged earliest cases are 'the opposition of st thomas to the king's manipulation of the danegeld [1163], and the refusal by st hugh of lincoln to furnish money for richard's war in france [1197]'.[2] these two precedents are always classed together: dr stubbs writes of st hugh's action: the only formal resistance to the king in the national council proceeds from st hugh of lincoln and bishop herbert of salisbury, who refuse to consent to grant him an aid in knights and money for his foreign warfare ... an act which stands out prominently by the side of st thomas's protest against henry's proposal to appropriate the sheriff's share of danegeld.[3] and mr freeman repeats the parallel: thomas ... withstands, and withstands successfully, the levying of a danegeld.... as thomas of london had withstood the demands of the father, hugh of avalon withstood the demands of the son. in a great council ... [he] spoke up for the laws and rights of englishmen ... no men or money were they bound to contribute for undertakings beyond the sea.[4] having already discussed the earlier instance,[5] and advanced the view that the woodstock debate [1163] did not relate to danegeld at all, but to an attempt of the king to seize for himself the _auxilium vicecomitis_ (a local levy) i now approach the later instance. 'this occasion,' we read, 'is a memorable one':[6] it is that of an 'event of great importance',[7] of 'a landmark in constitutional history'.[8] no apology, therefore, is needed for endeavouring to throw some further light on an event of such cardinal importance. but, to clear the ground, let us first define what we mean by 'opposition to a royal demand for money'. however autocratic the king may have been--and on this point there is not only a difference of opinion but a difference in fact corresponding with his strength at any given period--there were limits set by law or custom (or, should we rather say, limits, both written and unwritten?) beyond which he could not pass. 'domesday', for instance, was a written limit: if the king claimed from a manor assessed at ten hides the danegeld due from twenty, the tenant need only appeal to 'domesday' (_poneret se super rotulum winton'_). or, again, if from a feudal tenant owing the forty days' service the king were to claim eighty days, he would be transgressing unwritten custom as binding as a written record. but outside these limits there lay a debatable ground where that elastic term _auxilium_ proved conveniently expansive. it was here that the crown could increase its demands, and here that a conflict would arise as to where the limit should be placed, a conflict to be determined not by law, but by a trial of strength between the crown and its opponents. we have, then, to decide to which of these spheres the action of st hugh should be assigned, whether to that of the lawyer appealing to the letter of the bond, or to that of the popular leader opposing the demands of the king, though they did not contravene the law. if one may use the terms, for convenience sake, it was a question of law or a question of politics; and only if it was the latter had it a true constitutional importance. the two chief accounts of the oxford debate are found in _roger hoveden_ and the _magna vita st hugonis_. as they are both printed in _select charters_, i need not repeat them here. there is, however, an independent version in the _vita_ of giraldus cambrensis, which it may be desirable to add: in anglicanam coepit [rex] ecclesiam duris exactionibus debacchari. unde collecto in unum regni clero, habitoque contra insolitum et tam urgens incommodum districtiore consilio, verbum ad importunas pariter et importabiles impositiones contradictionis et cleri totius pro ecclesiastica libertate responsionis, in ore lincolnensis tanquam personae prae ceteris approbatae religionis authenticae magis communi omnium desiderio est assignatum (vii. 103-4). gerald's editor impugns the correctness of these statements, on the grounds that the assembly was not clerical merely and that the bishop did not speak on behalf of the whole church. but the passage seems to me to refer to a meeting of the clergy in which it was decided that st hugh should be their spokesman at the council. of the other objection i shall treat below. according to hoveden, richard asked for either (1) three hundred knights who would serve him, at their own costs, for a year, or (2) a sum sufficient to enable him to hire three hundred knights for a year at the rate of three shillings a day. the _magna vita_, however, implies that the former alternative alone was laid before the council. the grounds on which st hugh protested are thus given by our two authorities: respondit pro se, quod ipse in hoc voluntati regis nequaquam adquiesceret, tum quia processu temporis in ecclesiae suae detrimentum redundaret, tum quia successores sui dicerent, 'patres nostri comederunt uvam acerbam, et dentes filiorum obstupescunt' (hoveden). scio equidem ad militare servitium domino regi, sed in hac terra solummodo exhibendum, lincolniensem ecclesiam teneri; extra metas vero angliae nil tale ab ea deberi. unde mihi consultius arbitror ad natale solum repedare ... quam hic pontificatum gerere et ecclesiam mihi commissam, antiquas immunitates perdendo, insolitis angariis subjugare (_magna vita_). two points stand out clearly--one that st hugh took his stand on the prescriptive rights of his church, rights infringed by the king's demand; the other, that he spoke for himself alone, not for the church, still less for the barons, and least of all for the nation. our authorities, however, are so vague that they leave in doubt the precise point 'taken' by the saintly prelate. mr freeman, we have seen, confidently assumes that he 'spoke up for the laws and rights of englishmen'; miss norgate holds that he took up the position of thomas and anselm as 'a champion of constitutional liberty',[9] whatever that may mean; even dr stubbs claims that he 'acted on behalf of the nation to which he had joined himself'.[10] i venture to think that the clue to the enigma is to be found in quite another quarter. in the chronicle of jocelin de brakelond we find a most instructive passage, which refers, it cannot be doubted, to the same episode. the story is told somewhat differently, but the point raised is the same. king richard, we are told, demanded that knights should be sent him from england, in the proportion of one from every ten due by the church 'baronies'. the _servitium debitum_ of st edmund's being forty, the abbot was called upon to send four.[11] that the principle of joint equipment, which had been adopted under henry ii in 1157,[12] and again i think by longchamp in 1191,[13] was resorted to on this occasion is the more probable because a few years later (1205) we find king john similarly demanding 'quod novem milites per totam angliam invenirent decimum militem, bene paratum equis et armis, ad defensionem regni nostri'. i admit, however, that it is not mentioned in the other versions of our episode, and jocelin speaks only of the demand upon the church fiefs. but the point is that when the abbot consulted his tenants as to sending the four knights required, they protested that they were liable to pay scutage, but not to serve out of england.[14] now this is a _locus classicus_ on the institution of scutage. its bearing i shall examine below, after finishing the story. the abbot, we read, finding himself in a strait, crossed the sea in search of the king, who told him that a fine would not avail; he wanted men, not money.[15] surely we have here the key to the position taken by st hugh. when he claimed that his fief was not bound 'ad servitium militare ... extra metas angliae' he cannot have referred to the payment of scutage, for that had been paid by his predecessors and himself without infringing the liberties of their church.[16] he must, therefore, have referred not to 'money', but to _personal_ service outside the realm. but was this exemption peculiar to the church of lincoln? if we find the same privilege existing at st edmund's and at salisbury, may we not infer that the church contingents were only bound to serve in person for 'defence, not defiance',[17] and that we have here the perfect explanation of the fact that scutage, as commutation for service, is an institution, when it first appears, peculiar to church fiefs? the mediaeval dread of creating a precedent preyed on the abbot as on the saint. from the council of lillebonne to the bedford _auxilium_ (1224) it was always the same cry: creiment k'il seit en feu tornez et en costume seit tenu et par costume seit rendu. it was in this spirit that hugh of avalon, i take it, made his stand: other prelates might waive the point, in consideration of the king's necessities, but he, at least, would never allow a standing exemption to be broken through and thus impaired for all time. his attitude, we are told, proved fatal to the scheme, compelling the king and his ministers to abandon it in impotent wrath. but perhaps his biographer exaggerates the defeat, for the bishop of salisbury, we know, had to purchase the king's pardon for his action by a heavy fine, while the abbot of st edmund's had to compromise the matter by the payment of a large sum.[18] it seems probable that similar compromises would be arranged in other cases where the request was not complied with. if, then, i am right in the solution i offer, st hugh must have taken the narrowest ground, and have acted on behalf of ecclesiastical privilege, and only incidentally even for that, his protest being limited to his own church.[19] and, further, it follows that, like st thomas, he was acting strictly on the defensive. to say that his action affords 'the first clear case of the refusal of a money grant demanded directly by the crown, and a most valuable precedent, for later times',[20] is, i submit with all respect, to set it in a quite erroneous light. in 1197, as in 1163, the crown was trying to infringe on well-established rights, and st hugh like st thomas, resisted that infringement, so far as his own rights were concerned, just as he would have resisted an attempt of the crown to deprive his see of a manor, of feudal services, or of goods. the crown might take its pound of flesh, but more than that it should not have; never, through any action of his, should his church be deprived of its prescriptive rights.[21] here this article originally closed; but i am tempted to refer to one touching on the same subject which appeared a year later in the pages of the same review.[22] alluding to 'the question of foreign service' as a prominent grievance under john,[23] i wrote: ralf of coggeshall, and walter of coventry, assert that the northern barons denied their liability to foreign service in respect of lands held in england. john retorted that the principle had been admitted in the days of his father and his brother, and therefore claimed it _tanquam debitum_. this justifies the fears expressed sixteen years before by st hugh of lincoln, and explains what i termed, in examining his action, the mediaeval dread of creating a precedent.[24] the final loss of normandy had, of course, altered the case, but even while it still formed part of an english king's possessions, there must always have been scope for argument as to feudal obligations. to quote once more from the same article: the question must have been complicated by the growth of the king's dominions. did the feudatories owe service to the king, as their lord, in whatever war he was engaged? or were they only bound to follow him as king of england? or were they, as holding _a conquestu_, only bound to serve in the dominions of the conqueror who enfeoffed them, i.e. in england and normandy?[25] on the death of the conqueror, the question would arise for the king of the english and the duke of the normans were no longer one and the same. it comes to the front accordingly in a gathering of the barons at winchester, which mr freeman assigns to easter, 1090.[26] orderic, here his authority, places it under 1089, and although his chronology is not to be always blindly followed, there is no ground for supposing here that the date is wrong. when he is following out a story or carried on by allusion, orderic, like other chroniclers, anticipates or wanders in his dates; but this gathering has no connection with what precedes or follows; there is, therefore, nothing to account for his placing it under 1089, if it really belonged to 1090. but the point to which i would call attention is the nature and intention of this gathering. orderic writes: confirmatus itaque in regno, turmas optimatum ascivit, et guentoniæ congregatis, quæ intrinsecus ruminabat sic ore deprompsit. mr freeman attaches to the speech that follows no small importance. holding that the king 'was now ready to take the decisive step of crossing the sea himself or sending others to cross it', he pointed out that: even william rufus, in all his pride and self-confidence, knew that it did not depend wholly on himself to send either native or adopted englishmen on such an errand. he had learned enough of english constitutional law not to think of venturing on a foreign war without the constitutional sanction of his kingdom. in a gemot [_sic_] at winchester, seemingly the easter gemot of the third year of his reign, he laid his schemes before the assembled witan [_sic_], and obtained their consent to a war with the duke of the normans.[27] of course, in reading mr freeman's works we must reconcile ourselves to 'gemot' and 'witan' being thrust upon us at every turn, however radically false a conception these words may convey. at the close of his dealing with this episode, he refers us, as a parallel, to the 'full gemot' of 1047, in which 'the popular character of the assembly still', we learn, 'impresses itself on the language of history'. now orderic describes those who were summoned to our winchester gathering as 'turmas optimatum'; he makes william begin his speech 'nostri egregii barones'; and he places in his mouth language essentially feudal and norman: nunc igitur commoneo vos omnes, qui patris mei homines fuistis, et feudos vestros in normannia et anglia de illo tenuistis[28] ... c[oe]nobia quæ patres nostri construxerunt in neustria ... decet ergo ut, sicut nomen ejus [_i.e._ willelmi] et diadema gero, sic ad defensionem patriæ inhæream ejus [_i.e._ normanniæ] studio. mr freeman expressed astonishment and delight at william's 'constitutional language', and declared that though, in its actual wording, the speech, of course, was orderic's: the constitutional doctrines which he has worked into his speech cannot fail to set forth the ordinary constitutional usage of the time. even in the darkest hour in which england had any settled government at all, etc., etc.[29] and then follows the usual lament for 'the days of king eadward', when it was not a 'cabinet', but a crowd, that dealt with the delicate question of peace or war. now even the late professor's most ardent followers cannot represent my criticism here as 'trifling', or unimportant. mr freeman, i hold, had misconceived the matter altogether. the whole thing is sheer delusion. william's appeal, as set before us, was not the fruit of studies in english 'constitutional law': it was the appeal of a feudal lord to 'barons' holding by feudal tenure. should there be any one who feels the slightest doubt upon the question, let him turn to mr freeman's own account of the great 'assembly of lillebonne'. he could not himself avoid a passing glance at the parallel, when he wrote that 'william the red had as good reasons to give for an invasion of normandy as his father had once had to give for an invasion of england'.[30] contrasting that assembly (1066) with an english gemot, he wrote that 'in william's assembly we hear of none but barons'.[31] precisely. but that remark is equally true of his son's assembly at winchester.[32] and when we learn, a few years later, the composition of his assembly, we find it admittedly restricted to tenants-in-chief.[33] of the two assemblies, that of lillebonne revealed a more active opposition, showed more 'parliamentary boldness', than that of winchester.[34] the latter merely applauded, we read, the king's appeal. like his father, he appealed to his barons to follow him on foreign service; like him also, he pleaded his wrongs and the justice of his righteous cause. of the two, the father seems, as i have said, to have met with more opposition than the son. one might therefore produce an argument _ad absurdum_, and contend that, on mr freeman's showing, an english king was not less, but more, absolute than a norman duke. in any case we have now seen that the ideas about 'constitutional usage', and so forth, imported here by mr freeman, were nothing but a figment of his brain. the assembly of winchester no more resulted from 'english constitutional law' than did the assembly of lillebonne, convened for a similar purpose. william rufus had to deal with barons who could not be anxious to invade normandy merely to make him duke of the normans. if they had any preference in the matter, it would be rather for robert than for william, for a weak rather than a strong ruler; but, apart from preference, the barons would be loth to engage in internecine warfare merely for the personal advantage of one brother or the other. this was seen in the peaceful close of the invasion by duke robert, as with that of duke henry half a century later. the question, in short, that arose in 1066, when a duke of the normans asked his barons to make him king of the english, arose once more in the days of his son, when a king of the english asked his barons to make him duke of the normans. it was here no question of 'the laws and rights of englishmen':[35] it was to no folkmoot that william rufus spoke. when we read of the king in his court, composed of his tenants-in-chief,[36] as surrounded by 'no small part of the nation',[37] when we hear of the mass of 'the assembly ... crying yea, yea';[38] when we learn that 'a great numerical proportion, most likely a numerical majority, were natives',[39] we are fairly prepared for the astounding statement that: the wide fields which had seen the great review and the great homage in the days of the elder william, could alone hold the crowd which came together to share in the great court of doom which was holden by the younger.[40] for we see that in all these fantasies of a brain viewing plain facts through a mist of moots and 'witan', we have what can only be termed history in masquerade. [footnote 1: stubbs' _const. hist._ (1874), i. 510.] [footnote 2: _ibid._, p. 577.] [footnote 3: _select charters_ (1870), pp. 28-9. so too, preface to _rog. hoveden_ (1871): 'it may be placed on a par with st thomas's opposition to henry ii in 1163' (iv., pp. xci-xcii). so also _early plantagenets_ (1876), p. 126, and _const. hist._, i. 510.] [footnote 4: _norm. conq._, v. 675, 695.] [footnote 5: see above, p. 377.] [footnote 6: _early plantagenets_, p. 126.] [footnote 7: _const. hist._, i. 509.] [footnote 8: _ibid._, p. 510, and pref. to _rog. hoveden_, iv., pp. xci-xcii.] [footnote 9: _england under the angevin kings_, ii. 350.] [footnote 10: _early plantagenets_, p. 126.] [footnote 11: 'precepit rex ricardus omnibus episcopis et abbatibus angliae ut de suis baroniis novem milites facerent decimum, et sine dilacione venirent ad eum in normanniam, cum equis et armis in auxilium contra regem franciae. unde et abbatem oportuit respondere de iiii. militibus mittendis' (ed. camden soc, p. 63).] [footnote 12: 'præparavit maximam expeditionem ita ut duo milites de tota anglia tertium pararent ad opprimendum gualenses.' _robert de torigni_.] [footnote 13: 'tertium cum omnibus armis totius angliae militem die nominato mandavit venire wintoniam.' ric. devizes (rolls series), p. 409.] [footnote 14: 'cumque summoneri fecisset omnes milites suos, et eos inde convenisset, responderunt feudos suos, quos de sancto ædmundo tenuerunt, hoc non debere, nec se nec patres eorum unquam angliam exisse, set scutagium aliquando ad praeceptum regis dedisse' (_ibid._).] [footnote 15: 'abbas vero in arcto posito, hinc videns libertatem suorum militum periclitari, illinc timens ne amitteret saisinam baronie sue pro defectu servicii regis, sicut contigerat episcopo lundonensi [? lincolnensi] et multis baronibus angliæ, statim transfretavit, et ... in primis nullum potuit facere finem cum rege per denarios. dicenti ergo se non indigere auro nec argento, sed quatuor milites instanter exigenti', etc. (_ibid._).] [footnote 16: 'in quibis conservandis sive exhibendis hactenus fere per tredecim annos a rectis praedecessorum meorum vestigiis non recessi' (_magna vita_).] [footnote 17: 'ad publicam rem tuendam' (_abingdon cart._, ii. 3).] [footnote 18: 'quatuor milites stipendiarios optulit abbas. quos cum rex recepisset, apud castellum de hou misit. abbas autem in instanti eis xxxvi. marcas dedit ad expensas xl. dierum. in crastino autem venerunt quidam familiares regis, consulentes abbati ut sibi caute provideret, dicentes werram posse durare per annum integrum vel amplius, et expensas militum excrescere et multiplicari in perpetuum dampnum ei et ecclesiae suae. et ideo consulebant ut, antequam recederet de curia, finem faceret cum rege, unde posset quietus esse de militibus predictis post xl. dies. abbas autem, sano usus consilio, centum libras regi dedit pro tali quietantia' (_jocelin_, p. 63). it is noteworthy that thirty-six marcs would represent just three shillings a day (for forty days) for each knight, the very sum named by hoveden. in 1205 the pay named in john's writ was two shillings a day (home service), but both these sums are largely in excess of the eight pence a day paid, as we have seen, under henry ii, the discrepancy being incomprehensible, unless the higher wage implied a larger following.] [footnote 19: dr stubbs held [1870] that he acted 'not on ecclesiastical but on constitutional grounds' (_select charters_, p. 28), though he subsequently [1871] doubted whether 'the grounds of the opposition' were 'ecclesiastical or constitutional' (pref. to _hoveden_, iv., p. xci), and even admitted that 'the opposition of st hugh was based not on his right as a member of the national council, but on the immunities of the church' (_const. hist._, i. 578).] [footnote 20: _hoveden_, iv., xcii.] [footnote 21: 'antiquas immunitates perdendo.'] [footnote 22: 'an unknown charter of liberties.' _english historical review_, viii. 288 _et seq._] [footnote 23: see dr stubbs' pref. to _w. coventry_, p. lxiv.] [footnote 24: _english historical review_, viii. 293.] [footnote 25: _ibid._] [footnote 26: _will. rufus_, i. 222.] [footnote 27: _ibid._, i 222.] [footnote 28: mr freeman quotes this passage and duly renders it in his text (i. 232).] [footnote 29: _ibid._, i. 22.] [footnote 30: _ibid._, i. 222.] [footnote 31: _norm. conq._, iii. 290.] [footnote 32: 'turmas optimatum'--'barones'. cf. _supra_, pp. 247, 262.] [footnote 33: _will. rufus_, ii. 56-7.] [footnote 34: _norm. conq._, iii. 294-6, 298.] [footnote 35: _supra_, p. 398.] [footnote 36: at salisbury, january 13, 1096.] [footnote 37: _will. rufus_, ii. 57.] [footnote 38: _ibid._, 59.] [footnote 39: _ibid._, 57.] [footnote 40: _ibid._, 56.] richard the first's change of seal (1198) with the superficial student and the empiric politician, it is too common to relegate the investigation of such changes to the domain of archæology. i shall not attempt to rebut the imputation; only, if such things are archæology, then archæology is history.--stubbs, preface to _r. hoveden_, iv, lxxx. historical research is about to pass, if indeed it is not already passing, into a new sphere--the sphere of archæology. the central idea of that great advance which the present generation has witnessed in the domain of history has been the rebuilding of the historical fabric on the relatively sure foundation of original and contemporary authorities, studied in the purest texts. chronicles, however, are not inexhaustible: for many periods they are all too few. the reaper has almost done his work; the turn of the gleaner has come. the smaller _quellen_ of history have now to be diligently examined and made to yield those fragments of information which will supplement, often where most needed, our existing stock of knowledge. but this is not our only gain as we leave the broad highways trodden by so many before us. those precious fragments which are to form our spoils will enable us to do more than supplement the statements of our standard chroniclers: they will afford the means of checking, of testing, by independent evidence, these statements, of submitting our witnesses to a cross-examination which may shake their testimony and their credit in a most unexpected manner. as an instance of the results to be attained by archæological research, i have selected richard the first's celebrated change of seal. interesting as being the occasion on which the three lions first appear as the royal arms of england--arms unchanged to the present day--it possesses exceptional historical importance from the circumstances by which it was accompanied, and which led, admittedly, to its adoption. historians have agreed, without the least hesitation, to refer this event to the year 1194, and to place it subsequent to the truce of tillières or about the beginning of august. 'that richard i,' writes a veteran student,[1] 'adopted a new seal upon his return from the holy land is a matter of notoriety.' speed, in fact, had shown the way. we are told by him that 'the king caused [1194] a new broad seale to be made, requiring that all charters granted under his former seale should be confirmed under this, whereby he drew a great masse of money to his treasurie'.[2] the bishop of oxford, with his wonted accuracy, faithfully reproduces the statement of hoveden (the original and sole authority we shall find for the story), telling us that 'amongst other oppressive acts he [richard] took the seal from his unscrupulous but faithful chancellor, and, having ordered a new one to be made, proclaimed the nullity of all charters which had been sealed with the old one.'[3] mr freeman similarly places the episode just before 'the licenses for the tournaments' (august 20, 1194), and consistently refers to dr stubbs's history.[4] miss norgate, in her valuable work, our latest authority on the period, assigns the event to the same date, and tells us that 'rog. hoveden's very confused account of the seals is made clear by bishop stubbs'.[5] mr maitland, in his noble edition of 'bracton's note-book', gives a case (ii. 69) in which a charter sealed 'secundo sigillo regis ricardi' was actually produced in court (1219), and explains that 'richard had a new seal made in 1194', referring to hoveden for his authority.[6] it should be observed that all these writers rely merely on hoveden, none of them throwing any light on the process of confirmation, or telling us how it was effected, and whether any traces of it remain. an independent writer, m. boivin-champeaux, in his monograph on william longchamp, discusses the episode at some length, and asserts that the repudiated documents were 'assujettis, pour leur revalidation, à une nouvelle et coûteuse scellure'. like the others, however, he relies on the authority of hoveden, and consequently repeats the same date. in the course of examining some ancient charters, i recognized one of them as nothing less than an actual instance of a confirmation consequent on this change of seal. but its incomprehensible feature was that the charter was confirmed on august 22, 1198, having originally been granted, 'sub primo sigillo', so recently as january 7th preceding. how could this be possible if the great seal had been changed so early as august 1194, and if the first seal, as stated by dr stubbs, was 'broken' on that occasion? careful and prolonged research among the charters of the period (both in the original and in transcripts) has enabled me to answer the question, and to prove that (as, of course, the above charter implies) the change of seal did not take place in 1194, but 1198, and between january and may of that year. original charters under the second seal, confirming grants under the first, are distinctly rare. i have found, as yet, but one in the public record office, and only two at the british museum. but of originals and transcripts together i have noted twenty-eight. the dates of the original grants range from september 5, 1189, to january 7, 1198 (1197-8), and of the confirmations from may 27, 1198, to april 5, 1199.[7] in a single instance there is fortunately preserved not only the text of the confirmation charter, but also that of the original grant.[8] from this we learn that the charter of confirmation did not necessarily give the wording, but only the gist ('tenor') of the original grant. we are thus brought to the instructive formula invariably used in these charters: is erat tenor carte nostre in primo sigillo nostro. quod quia aliquando perditum fuit, et, dum capti essemus in alem[anniâ], in aliena potestate constitutum, mutatum est. huius autem innovationis testes sunt hii, etc., etc. we may here turn to the passage in hoveden [ed. stubbs, iii. 267] on which historians have relied, and see how far the reasons for the change given in the charters themselves correspond with those alleged by the chronicler. fecit sibi novum sigillum fieri, et mandavit, per singulas terras suas, quod nihil ratum foret quod fuerat per vetus sigillum suum; tum quia cancellarius ille operatus fuerat inde minus discrete quam esset necesse, tum quia sigillum illud perditum erat, quando rogerus malus catulus, vicecancellarius suus, submersus erat in mari ante insulam de cipro, et præcepit rex quod omnes qui cartas habebant venirent ad novum sigillum ad cartas suas renovandas. in both cases we find there are two reasons given; but while one of these is the same in both, namely the temporary loss of the seal when roger malchael was drowned, the other is wholly and essentially different. the whole aspect of the transaction is thus altered. to illustrate this i shall now place side by side the independent glosses of the bishop of oxford and of m. boivin-champeaux: richard's first seal was lost sur deux exemplaires usuels du when the vice-chancellor was grand sceau, le premier, que drowned between rhodes and cyprus portait le vice-chancelier in 1190; but it was recovered mauchien, avait été perdu lors with his dead body. the seal that de l'ouragan qui, en vue de was now broken must have been the chypre avait assailli la flotte one which the chancellor had used anglo-normande, le second était during the king's absence. resté en angleterre; mais il richard, however, when he was at avait subi, par suite de la messina, had allowed his seal to revolution du 10 octobre, de be set to various grants for nombreuses vicissitudes. which he took money, but which richard se prévalut de ces he never intended to confirm. circonstances jointes au therefore probably he found it désaveu de la trève de tillières convenient now to have a new pour publier un édit aux termes seal in lieu of both the former duquels tous les actes publics ones, although he threw the blame passés sous son règne, qui of the transactions annulled upon avaient été légalisés avec les the chancellor. the importance of anciens sceaux étaient frappés the seal is already very great. de nullité et assujettis, pour (_const. hist._, i. 506, note.) leur revalidation â une nouvelle et coûteuse scellure. cette ordonnance aurait pu, à la rigueur, se colorer, si elle n'avait concerné que les actes accomplis pendant l'expédition et la captivité du roi; mais le comble de l'impudence et de l'iniquité était de l'appliquer même à ceux qui avaient précéde son départ ou suivi son retour (p. 223). thus both writers assume that there were two seals, one which remained in england with the chancellor, and one which accompanied the king to the east. they further (though dr stubbs is somewhat obscure) hold that the two excuses given refer respectively to the two seals, thus discrediting both. but when we turn to the charters themselves, we find but one seal mentioned, and to that one seal alone both the excuses refer. the king explains that on two occasions it was, so to speak, 'out on the loose'--(1) when his vice-chancellor was drowned; (2) when he himself was captured in germany. this was, of course, the seal which accompanied him to the east.[9] the king makes no allusion to any other or to the chancellor. such charters and grants as are known to us all proceed from the king himself, either before he left messina or after he had reached germany on his return. no charter or grant of longchamp, as representing him, is known. in short, the whole of our record evidence points one way: the charters which the king proclaimed must be confirmed, and which we find brought to him for that purpose were those which he had himself granted, and no other. lastly, even had we nothing before us but the passage in hoveden which all have followed, i contend that it may, and indeed ought to be, read as referring to a single seal. but it is, as miss norgate justly observes, 'very confused', from its allusion to the chancellor's use of the seal. that allusion, however, would most naturally refer to the truce of tillières, and not to the use of a separate seal in england. therefore even if we accepted, which i do not, hoveden's statement, it would not warrant the inference that has been drawn. again, when miss norgate writes of the 'withdrawal of the seal from william', and when dr stubbs tells us that the king 'took the seal from' him, these statements may have two meanings. but m. boivin-champeaux is more precise: 'l'emploi de ces procédés emportait le mépris et la violation non seulement de tous les actes étrangers au chancelier, mais encore de tous ceux où il avait mis la main. il ne pouvait décemment conserver les sceaux. le roi les lui enleva.' this is a distinct assertion that longchamp was deprived of his office. yet all our evidence points to the conclusion that he remained chancellor to the day of his death. dismissing hoveden for the time, and returning to the testimony of the charters, we have seen that they point to the event we are discussing having taken place in 1198, between january 7, at which date the first seal was still in use, and may 27, when charters were already being brought for confirmation under the second seal. passing now from the charters to the seals still in existence, we learn from mr wyon's magnificent work[10] (which has appeared since i completed my own investigation) that the first seal was still in use on april 1, 1198,[11] while an impression of the second is found as early as may 22, 1198.[12] thus our limit of time for the change is narrowed to april 1-may 22, 1198.[13] the evidence of the charters and of the seals being thus in perfect harmony, let us see whether this limit of date corresponds with a time of financial difficulty. for, so desperate a device as that of the king's repudiation of his charters would only have been resorted to at a time of extreme pressure. what do we find? we find that the time of this change of seal corresponds with the great financial crisis of richard's reign. the church had at length lost patience, and had actually in the council at oxford (december 1197) raised a protest. the 'want of money', in miss norgate's words, was 'a difficulty which ... must have seemed well-nigh insurmountable'. preparations were being made for a huge levy at five shillings on every ploughland. it was at this moment that the desperate king repudiated all the charters he had granted throughout his reign, and proclaimed that they must be 'brought to him for confirmation; in other words ... paid for a second time'.[14] let us now look at the other chroniclers. r. coggeshall is independent and precise: accessit autem ad totius mali cumulum, juxta vitæ ejus terminum, prioris sigilli sui renovatio, quo exiit edictum per totum ejus regnum ut omnes cartæ, confirmationes, ac privilegiatæ libertates quæ prioris sigilli impressione roboraverat, irrita forent nec alicujus libertatis vigorem obtinerent, nisi posteriori sigillo roborarentur. in quibus renovandis et iterum comparandis innumerabilis pecunia congesta est (p. 93). this is in complete accordance with the now ascertained fact that richard changed his seal, and regranted the old charters, within the last year of his life. similarly independent and precise evidence is afforded by the annals of waverley: mcxcviii. anno x. regis ricardi præcepit idem rex omnes cartas in regno suo emptas reformari, et novo sigilli sui impressione roborari, vel omnes cassari, cujuscunque dignitatis aut ordinis essent, qui vellent sua protectione defensari, vel universa bona sua confiscari.[15] further, we read in the annals of worcester[16] and in the _historia major_ of m. paris (ii. 450-451)[17] that in 1198, 'circaque festum sancti michaelis, mutatæ sunt carte quas prius fecerat rex ricardus, novo sigillo suo'. now this michaelmas fell just in the heart of the period within which the process of confirmation is proved to have been going on. we see, then, that the evidence (1) of the seals, (2) of the charters, (3) of the circumstances of the time, (4) of other chroniclers, all concur in pointing to the spring of 1198. and now we will lastly appeal to hoveden against himself. after telling us of the king's proclamation on the refusal of the religious to contribute to the carucage in the spring of 1198, he adds: præterea præcepit idem rex ut omnes, tam clerici quam laici, qui cartas sive confirmationes habebant de sigillo suo veteri deferrent eas ad sigillum suum novum renovandas, et nisi fecerint, nihil quod actum fuerat per sigillum suum vetus ratum haberetur (iv. 66). this passage, which ought to be compared with coggeshall, is merely ignored by dr stubbs. miss norgate, however, boldly explains it as 'a renewal of the decree requiring all charters granted under the king's old seal to be brought up for confirmation under the new one' (ii. 356). but the passage stands by itself, as describing a new measure.[18] the only conclusion to be drawn from this cumulative evidence is that the earlier passage in hoveden (1194) which has been so universally accepted, must be rejected altogether. against the facts i have adduced it cannot stand. incredible though it may seem that a court official, a chronicler so able and well informed, indeed, in the words of his editor, 'our primary authority for the period',[19] should have misstated so grossly an event, as it were, under his own eyes, we must remember that 'hoveden's personality is to a certain degree vindicated by a sort of carelessness about exact dates'.[20] yet even so, 'few are the points', our supreme authority assures us, 'in which a very close examination and collation with contemporary authors can detect chronological error in hoveden'.[21] nor, of the eight anachronisms laboriously established by dr stubbs, does any one approach in magnitude the error i have here exposed. the importance of every anachronism in its bearing on the authorship of the chronicle is by him clearly explained. how far does the rejection of this statement on the change of seal affect the statement which precedes it as to the truce of tillières? hoveden places the latter and the former in the relation of cause and effect: deinde veniens in normanniam moleste tulit quicquid factum fuerat de supradictis treugis, et imputans cancellario suo hoc per eum fuisse factum, abstulit ab eo sigillum suum, et fecit, etc. (iii. 267). this is rendered by dr stubbs in the margin: 'he annuls the truce and all the acts of the chancellor passed under the old seal.' the passage has also been so read by m. boivin-champeaux (p. 221); but if that is the meaning, which i think is by no means certain, hoveden contradicts himself. for he speaks five months later of the truce ('treuga quæ inter eos statuta fuerat duratura usque ad festum omnium sanctorum') as not having stopped private raids on either side.[22] r. de diceto, mentioning the truce (ii. 120), says nothing of it being annulled, nor does r. newburgh in his careful account. on the contrary, he implies that it held good, though the terms were thought dishonourable to richard (ii. 420). i should, therefore, read hoveden as stating simply that richard was much annoyed at ('moleste tulit') its terms, and was wroth with the chancellor for accepting them. in addition to correcting the received date for richard the first's change of seal, the evidence i have collected enables us, for the first time, to learn how and to what extent the confirmation of the charters was effected. we find that it was no sweeping process, carried out on a single occasion, but that it was gradually and slowly proceeding during the last eleven months of the king's life. here, then, is the explanation of another fact (also hitherto overlooked), namely that only a minority of the charters were ever confirmed under the second seal.[23] for the king's death abruptly stopped the operation of that oppressive decree which was being so reluctantly obeyed. it should be superfluous for me to add that, in thus correcting previous statements, i have not impeached the accuracy of our greatest living historian, who could only form his judgment from the evidence before him. the result of my researches has been to show that the evidence itself breaks down when submitted to the test of fact. _granted_ _at_ _confirmed_ 1. 16 april, 1194[24] winchester 27 may, 1198 2. 2 december, 1189 canterbury 15 june, 1198 3. 10 october, 1189 westminster 1 july, 1198 4. 28 november, 1189 canterbury 1 july, 1198 5. 1 july, 1190 dangu 3 july, 1198 6. 5 september, 1189 westminster 30 july, 1198 7. 17 september, 1189 geddington 30 july, 1198 8. 25 april, 1194 22 august, 1198 9. 12 december, 1194 chinon 22 august, 1198 10. 7 january, 1198 vaudreuil 22 august, 1198 11. 8 december, 1189 dover 10 september [1198] 12. 6 december, 1189 dover 15 september [1198] 13. 14 march, 1190 nonancourt 18 september, 1198 14. 23 march, 1190 rouen 19 september, 1198 15. 29 november, 1189 canterbury 9 october, 1198 16. 6 october, 1189 westminster 20 october, 1198 17. 7 december, 1189 dover 24 october, 1198 18. 23 march, 1190 rouen 5 november, 1198 19. 7 december, 1189 dover 10 november, 1198 20. 17 september, 1189 geddington 12 november [1198] 21. 28 november,[25] 1189 canterbury 13 november, 1198 22. 27 july, 1197 isle d'andely 14 november, 1198 23. 10 november, 1189 westminster 30 november, 1198 24. 5 august, 1190 marseilles 7 december, 1198 25. september, 1197 rouen 17 december, 1198 26. 1189 [no place] 24 january, 1199 27. 15 april, 1190 evreux 3 march, 1199 28. 22 june, 1190 chinon 11 march, 1199 29. 25 april, 1194 portsmouth 5 april, 1199 _at_ _grantee_ _authority_ 1. lions robert fitz roger cart. ant. ee. 6 2. château gaillard hugh bardulf cart. ant. ee. 10 3. château gaillard ely cart. ant. jj. 43 4. château gaillard ely cart. ant. nn. 26 5. château gaillard william longchamp cart. ant. jj. 46 6. lire rievaulx abbey rievaulx cartulary (surtees soc.), p. 308 7. lire rievaulx abbey rievaulx cartulary (surtees soc.), p. 308 8. thomas basset hist. mss., 9th report, ii. 404 9. roche d'orival alan basset cott. cart. xvi. 1 (rymer i. 67) 10. roche d'orival alan basset anc. deeds, ser. a. no. 5924 11. château gaillard shaftesbury abbey harl. ms. 61, fo. 26 12. château gaillard peterborough abbey cart. ant. ee. 21 13. château gaillard waltham abbey cart. ant. rr. 7 & 8 14. château gaillard roger de sancto manveo cart. ant. bb. 6 15. château gaillard fontevrault cart. ant. f. 1 16. lions st leonard's, stratford add. ms. 6, 166, fo. 341 17. château gaillard stratford langthorne abbey cart. ant. e. 1 18. château gaillard st jacques de boishallebout add. cart. (brit. mus.) no. 3 19. château gaillard boxley abbey cart. ant. q. 8 20. château gaillard st alban's abbey ancient deeds, a. 1050 21. château gaillard tynmouth priory cart. ant. bb. 18 22. château gaillard llanthony abbey cart. ant. b. 26 23. lions the templars deville's transcripts 24. lions church of durham surtees soc., vol. ix. p. lvi. 25. 'sanctum ebruskum' domus dei (southampton) cart. ant. d. 30 26. cahagnes spalding priory add. ms. 5844, fo. 228 27. château du loir gilbert fitz roger hist. mss., 10th report, 325 28. chinon w. briwerre great coucher ii. 1, 67 iv. (1, 2) 29. [no place] noel 'serviens' cart. ant. d. 30 [footnote 1: canon raine, _historiæ dunelmensis scriptores tres_ (surtees soc.), p. 379.] [footnote 2: speed's history (1611).] [footnote 3: _const. hist._, i. 506.] [footnote 4: _norman conquest_, v. 693. compare _the office of the historical professor_, pp. 16, 17: 'in a long and careful study of the bishop of chester's writings ... i have never found a flaw in the statement of his evidence. if i have now and then lighted on something that looked like oversight, i have always found in the end that the oversight was mine and not his.'] [footnote 5: _england under the angevin kings_, ii. 343.] [footnote 6: i have been able to identify this very charter.] [footnote 7: this is the only confirmation i have found later than march 3. if the date can be relied on, it is of special interest as being the day before the king died.] [footnote 8: charters to w. briwere, june 22, 1190, and march 11, 1199 (1198-9), transcribed in the great coucher (duchy of lancaster).] [footnote 9: dr stubbs, indeed, writes, as we have seen, that 'the seal that was now broken must have been the one which the chancellor had used during the king's absence'. but longchamp had been ejected from the chancellorship in october 1191, whereas richard limits the period of abuse to the duration of his captivity, which did not begin till december 20, 1192.] [footnote 10: _the great seals of england_ (stock), p. 149.] [footnote 11: its impression is attached to a charter tested at tours, now at lambeth palace. if the date of this charter is correctly given, it is an important contribution to the itinerary of richard.] [footnote 12: _ibid._, p. 19.] [footnote 13: it is singular that mr wyon, while giving these _data_, should himself assign the change to '_circ._ 1197', and still more singular that he should elsewhere (p. 20) accept the usual passage from hoveden (iii. 267).] [footnote 14: miss norgate (1194), ii. 343.] [footnote 15: _annales monastici_, ii. 251.] [footnote 16: _ibid._, iv. 389 (vespasian e, iv.).] [footnote 17: faust a. 8. fo. 136. it is a striking instance of the confusion and blundering to be met with even in our best chronicles that m. paris (_chron. maj._, ii. 356) has an independent allusion to the king's change of seal (as a 'factum ricardi regis enorme') in which he gives us a circumstantial account of the event and of the prior of st alban's going over to france to secure the confirmation, 'cum effusione multæ pecuniæ et laboris', but assigns it to the year 1189. hoveden's error pales before such a blunder as this, which has been accepted without question by the learned editor, dr luard.] [footnote 18: hoveden, by placing it wrongly (p. 66) _after_ hubert's resignation (p. 48), to which it was some two months previous, has misled miss norgate into the belief that it was the work of his successor, geoffrey.] [footnote 19: stubbs' _hoveden_, iv., xxxii.] [footnote 20: _ibid._, p. xxv.] [footnote 21: _ibid._, p. xxxi.] [footnote 22: iii. 276. this distinctly implies that the truce had been nominally in full force. note that it is here spoken of as '_till_ all saints', while in the document itself (iii. 259) it is made for a year _from_ all saints. miss norgate (ii. 367) speaks of it as 'till all saints' (1195), but i think it was made from july 1194 to all saints 1195.] [footnote 23: i have not found a single charter of municipal liberties, though the reign was so rich in them, among these confirmations. nor since this article first appeared, in 1888 (_arch. rev._, vol. i.), have i found more than four additional cases of resealed charters, raising the total to twenty-eight. of these a detailed list is given on pp. 442-15.] [footnote 24: 'scilicet die secunda coronationis nostræ.'] [footnote 25: 'december' in cart. ant., which date is accepted in gibson's 'monastery of tynmouth'.] communal house demolition there was a strange custom peculiar to the ancient community of the cinque ports, which has not, so far as i know, been found elsewhere in england. if a member of any one of these towns was elected to serve as mayor or 'jurat' (the governing bodies consisting of a mayor and twelve 'jurats'), and refused to accept the office, his house was publicly demolished by the community. an extract from the custumal of sandwich, headed 'pena maioris electi recusantis officium suum', will make the custom clear: si maior sic electus officium suum recipere noluit, primo et secundo et tercio monitus, tota communitas ibit ad capitale messuagium suum, si habuerit proprium, et illud cum armis omnimodo quo poterit prosternat usque ad terram.... similiter quicunque juratus fuerit electus, et jurare noluerit, simile judicium.[1] although the custom of house demolition is apparently, as i have said, peculiar in england to the cinque ports, it was of widespread occurrence abroad. thither, therefore, we must turn our steps in order to investigate its history. it is in flanders and in northern france, and in picardy, most of all, that we find this singular custom prevailing, and discover its inseparable connection with the institution of the _commune_. it would seem that the penalty of house demolition was originally decreed for offences against the _commune_ in its corporate capacity. thierry, basing his conclusions mainly on the charters of the _commune_ of amiens and the daughter-charter of abbeville writes: celui qui se soustrait à la justice de la commune est puni de banissement, et sa maison est abattue. celui qui tient des propos injurieux contre la commune encourt la même peine. voilà pour les dispositions communes aux chartes d'amiens et d'abbeville, c'est-à-dire pour celles qui authentiquement sont plus anciennes que l'acte royal de 1190. si l'on ne s'y arrête pas et qu'on relève dans cet acte d'autres dispositions, probablement primitives aussi, on trouvera les peines du crime politique, _l'abatis de maison_ et le banissement, appliquées à celui qui viole sciemment les constitutions de la commune et à celui qui, blessé dans une querelle, refuse la composition en justice et refuse pareillement de donner sécurité à son adversaire. une peine moindre, car elle se réduit à ce que la maison du délinquant soit abattue s'il n'aime mieux en payer la valeur, est appliquée à celui qui addresse des injures au maire dans l'exercice de ses fonctions, et à celui qui frappe un de ses jurés devant les magistrats, en pleine audience. ainsi l'abatis de maison, vengeance de la commune lésée ou offensée, était à la fois un châtiment par lui-même et le signe qui rendait plus terrible aux imaginations la sentence de banissement conditionnel ou absolu. il avait lieu dans la plupart ... des communes du nord de la france avec un appareil sombre et imposant; en présence des citoyens, convoqués à son de cloche, le maire frappait un coup de marteau contre la demeure du condamné, et des ouvriers, requis pour service public, procédaient à la démolition qu'ils poursuivaient jusqu'à ce qu'il ne restât plus pierre sur pierre.[2] the public character of the ceremony, which was no less marked at sandwich (_vide supra_), is well illustrated in the _ordonnances_ of philip of alsace (_circ._ 1178) on the powers of his _baillis_ in flanders: domus diruenda judicio scabinorum, post quindenam a scabinis indultam, quandocunque comes præceperit, aut ballivus ejus, diruetur a communia villæ, campana pulsata per scabinos; et qui ad diruendam illam non venerit, in forisfacto erit, etc., etc. this ringing of the communal bell--parallel to the moot-bell of england--is an important feature in the matter. without insisting upon a stray allusion, one may ask whether an entry in the colchester records in the sixteenth century, threatening that if an offending burgess does not make amends, the town will 'ring him out of his freedom', may not be explained by this practice. there are plenty of other early instances of this house demolition in recognized _communes_. at bruges we read (_circ._ 1190): 'si scabini voluerint domum eius prosternere, poterunt', etc., etc. so, too, at roye, the charter (_circ._ 1183) provides: 'domus forisfactoris diruetur si major voluerit, et si major redempcionem accipiet de domibus diruendis', etc., etc.... 'si quis extraneus ... forisfactum fecerit ... major et homines ville ad diruendam domum ejus exeant; quæ si sit adeo fortis ut vi burgensium dirui non possit, ad eam diruendam vim et auxilium conferemus'.[3] so essential was the power of distraint, as we might term it, given to the community over its members, by the possession of a house, that it was sometimes made compulsory on a new member to become possessed of a house within a year of his joining. this was the case at laon, one of the oldest of the _communes_, the charter of louis vi (1128) providing that 'quicunque autem in pace ista recipiatur, infra anni spatium aut domum sibi edificet, aut vineas emet ... per que justiciari possit, si quid forte in eum querele evenerit'. where, in the absence of such provision, the culprit had no house to be demolished, it would seem that, in some cases, he had to procure one, for the express purpose of being demolished, before he could be restored to his membership. thus, at abbeville, the charter of _commune_ provides that 'si domum non habuerit, antequam villam intret, domum centum solidorum, quam communia prosternat, inveniet'. thierry pointed out how the 'commune' of north-eastern france found its way, through its adoption in normandy, to the opposite corner of the country 'sur les terres de la domination anglaise'.[4] the form 'jurats' adopted by the cinque ports for the members of their governing body suggests, indeed, some connection with gascony, to which region, as thierry observed, it more especially belongs.[5] i was much struck, when visiting bayonne, with its interesting municipal history. thierry alludes to its peculiar character;[6] and, as the town had commercial relations with the cinque ports, and illustrates, moreover, the tendency of a commercial port to adopt, from other regions, a constitution peculiar to itself, i shall here give from its local customs the provisions as to house demolition. appended to john's charter granting a _communa_ to bayonne (april 19, 1215) we find a code of communal ordinances based partly on those in the rouen and falaise charters and partly on the customs of la rochelle. in this code the penalty of destroying the offender's house was decreed for a magistrate who accepted bribes,[7] for a citizen who shirked his military service,[8] for a perjured man,[9] for a thief.[10] it again appears as the penalty for receiving bribes in the local custumal assigned to 1273: 'la soe maison sera darrocade, et que jameis ed ni son her no hage juridiccion en le communi.' in the foundation-charter granted to sanabria by alphonso ix of leon, in 1220, we find this penalty similarly assigned to perjury ('que la su casa sea derribada por esta razon'); but when the charter was altered by alphonso x (september 1, 1258), the penalty was commuted for a pecuniary fine of sixty 'sueldos', on the ground that the destruction of the house was an injury to the city and to himself.[11] this is important as affording an instance of the actual introduction of commutation. now, my contention is that, as the practice of communal house demolition wandered down into gascony, and thence actually crossed the pyrenees into spain, so--in the opposite direction--it crossed the channel and established itself in the cinque ports. as these movements become better understood, we are learning to treat them scientifically, and to trace them through their growth to their origin. in the case of the _commune_, the principle of filiation enables us to accomplish this with remarkable success. but, it may be asked, is there any instance, on the other side of the channel, of house demolition being the penalty prescribed for refusal to accept office as mayor or jurat? it is, i reply, at amiens the very penalty prescribed for that offence! the custumal of amiens contained these two clauses: et convient que chis qui pris est faiche le serment de le mairie; et se il ne veult faire, on abatera se maison, et demourra en le merchy du roy au jugement de esquevins. derekief se li maires qui eslus seroit refusoit le mairie et vausist souffrir le damage, jà pour che ne demouerroit qu'il ne fesist l'office; et se aucuns refusoit l'esquevinage, on abateroit sa maison et l'amenderoit au jugement de esquevins, et pour chou ne demoureroit mie que il ne fesist l'office de l'esquevinage.[12] thierry, who was ignorant of the cinque ports custom--as the historians of the cinque ports appear to have been ignorant of that at amiens--describes this provision as 'loi remarquable en ce qu'elle faisait revivre et sanctionnait par des garanties toutes nouvelles ce principe de la législation romaine, que les offices municipaux sont une charge obligatoire'.[13] but this brings us face to face with the difficult and disputed question of the persistence of roman institutions. personally, i have always thought it rash to accept similarity as proof of continuity. here, for instance, the occurrence of this practice at sandwich might lead to the inference that the institutions of sandwich were of direct roman origin. yet, if this practice was imported from france, we see how erroneous that inference would be. a _reductio ad absurdum_ of this rash argument, as i have elsewhere pointed out, would be found in the suggestion that every modern borough rejoicing in the possession of aldermen had derived its institutions continuously from anglo-saxon times. in the particular instance of this practice, we should note that it occurs (_a_) in that portion of france where the municipal development was least roman in character; (_b_) in a peculiar and original form--the 'garanties toutes nouvelles' of thierry. again, we find the infliction of fines for non-acceptance of municipal office a familiar custom in england even to the present day. these fines were undoubtedly commutations for an original expulsion from the community; and at colchester, for example, we have a case of a man being deprived of 'his freedom' for declining the office of alderman, and of his having to make 'submission' and pay a fine before it was restored. the fact is, that in every community, whether urban or rural, where office was a necessary but burdensome duty--like modern jury-service or mediaeval 'suit'--a penalty had to be imposed upon those who declined to discharge it. the peculiarity of the sandwich and amiens cases consists not in the imposition of a penalty, but in the character of the penalty imposed. pass we now from the consideration of this penalty to the wider and important conclusions suggested by its local occurrence. i have always been puzzled by the peculiar phenomena presented by the 'cinque ports' organization. to other writers it would seem to present no such difficulty; but to me it is unique in england, and inexplicable on english lines. in that able monograph of professor burrows,[13] which is the latest contribution on the subject, the writer, i venture to think, leaves the problem as obscure as ever. i shall now, therefore, advance the suggestion, which has long been taking form in my mind, that the 'cinque ports' corporation was of foreign origin, and was an offshoot of the communal movement in northern france. from picardy, which faced the cinque ports, they derived, i believe, their confederation. to quote thierry: la région du nord, qui est le berceau, et pour ainsi dire la terre classique des communes jurées, comprend la picardie, l'artois, etc.... parmi ces provinces, la picardie est celle qui renferme le plus grand nombre de communes proprement dites, où cette forme de régime atteint le plus haut degré d'indépendance et où dans ses applications, elle offre le plus de variété. les communes de picardie avaient en général toute justice, haute, moyenne et basse. nonseulement dans cette province les chartes municipales des villes se trouvaient appliquées à de simples villages, dont quelques-uns n'existent plus, mais encore _il y avait des confédérations de plusieurs villages ou hameaux réunis en municipalités sous une charte et une magistrature collectives_.[14] let me briefly summarize the arguments on which i base my hypothesis: (1) there is no parallel to the cinque ports confederation in england,[15] but there is in picardy. (2) the very name 'cinque ports' betrays a foreign origin,[16] as does the fact that the oath taken by the king's warden to the corporation was termed, not an oath, but a 'serement' (as in france). (3) the english merchant-guild[17] and the english 'alderman'[18] were unknown to the cinque ports constitutions; but they all possessed the typical constitution of the _communes_ of northern france, namely a mayor, with a council of twelve, these twelve councillors having the french name of _jurats_.[19] (4) in the cinque ports, as in the french _communes_, we find side by side with this elective administration, a royal officer, with us a warden, with them the _sénéchal_ (or _prévôt_ or _bailli_) _du roi_. (5) the very same penalty of house demolition for refusal to accept office as mayor or jurat was exacted in the cinque ports (and nowhere else in england) as at amiens. i do not contend that the french 'commune' was adopted intact by the cinque ports, for, of course, it was not so. in the matter of names alone, they are not styled a 'commune', nor are the members of their community termed 'jurés' (_jurati_), but 'barons' (_barones_). the study, however, of the 'commune' in france itself reveals the adaptation to environment it underwent on transplantation. and, the salient feature of the cinque ports organization, the fact that they formed a single community, possessing a single assembly, and receiving a joint charter, is paralleled most remarkably in the joint 'communes' of picardy, containing from four to eight separate 'vills'.[20] it would be very satisfactory if the french 'communes' could throw light on the obscure title of 'barons' appertaining to the men of the cinque ports, and to them, i maintain (against professor burrows), alone among english burgesses. i have elsewhere shown that there is evidence of the use of this term at an earlier period than is supposed, viz., in the early years of stephen;[21] but on its origin the 'commune' throws no light. one can only quote the parallel afforded by the 'commune' of niort, and this is taken from a late document (1579). its officers are said to hold of the king 'à droit de baronie, à foi et homage-lige, au devoir d'un gant ou cinq sols tournois, pour tous devoirs, payables à chaque mutation de seigneur'.[22] this 'devoir' is parallel, it will be seen, to the 'canopy-service' (or 'honours at court') of the cinque ports, rendered as it was, in practice, 'à chaque mutation de seigneur'. it is noteworthy that a french royal charter of 1196 contains the clause: 'prefati quatuor ville exercitum et equitationem novis debent _sicut alie communie nostre_';[23] but one can scarcely connect this with the naval service of the cinque ports. yet it was part, undoubtedly, of the communal principle that the 'commune' should hold directly of the king, and not of any mediate lord, and this principle would explain the style 'barones regis' applied to the men of the cinque ports. to sum up, there are features about the cinque ports organization which can only be accounted for, it seems to me, by the hypothesis here advanced. if this novel solution be accepted,[24] a question at once arises as to the date at which this communal confederacy was established. from what we know of the origin of the 'commune', we can scarcely believe in its adoption here till a generation, at least, after the conquest. 'only the least informed and most sceptical,' writes professor burrows, 'have placed the act of incorporation later than the date of the conqueror',[25] but a wider knowledge of municipal institutions would lead to the opposite conclusion. it is possible that the reign of henry i may have witnessed the superimposing of a communal confederacy on the existing institutions of the several ports; it is impossible, at any rate, to trace it in domesday, and difficult, indeed, to reconcile with its existence the evidence afforded by the great survey. it is conceivable that the position already attained, in the conqueror's days, by dover, may have served as a model for the other ports, when they learnt the power of the principle that lay at the root of the _commune_--'l'union fait la force'.[26] [footnote 1: boys' _sandwich_, p. 431.] [footnote 2: _monographie de la constitution communale d'amiens_ (_essai sur l'histoire ... du tiers-etat_, pp. 347-8). the charter of abbeville prescribed this penalty ('domus ejus et omnia ad ejus mancionem pertinentia prosternantur') for homicide, which lies outside the class of 'political offences'. giry, in his _etablissements de rouen_ (1883), speaks of the 'abattis de maison' as 'caractéristique du droit municipal du nord' (i. 431), but i do not find that he anywhere mentions it as the penalty appointed for refusing office.] [footnote 3: _recueil des ordonnances des rois de france_, xi., p. 228.] [footnote 4: so also p. 263, where he calls attention to 'l'établissement de la constitution communale de rouen et de falaise dans quatre des provinces annexées au xii^{e} siècle à la domination anglo-normande'; and to 'cette adoption de la commune jurée selon le type donné par les grandes villes de la normandie, événement auquel contribua sans doute la politique des rois d'angleterre'.] [footnote 5: 'à bordeaux ... le principal titre de magistrature était celui de jurats, titre qu'on retrouve dans une foule de villes, depuis la gironde jusqu'au milieu de la chaîne des pyrénées' (p. 247).] [footnote 6: 'au milieu de cette unité d'organisation administrative et judiciaire la ville de bayonne se détache, et contraste avec toutes les autres. on la voit, au commencement du xiii^e siècle, abandonner le régime municipal indigène et chercher de loin une constitution éstrangère, celle des communes normandes, transportée et perfectionée dans les villes du poitou et de la saintonge; c'est une double cause, la suzeraineté des rois d'angleterre étendue de la normandie aux pyrénées, et le commerce d'une ville maritime, qui amène ainsi aux extrémités de la zone municipale du midi la commune jurée dans sa forme native, avec toutes ses règles et ses pratiques' (p. 249).] [footnote 7: 'la soe maizon, so es del marie o d'aquet quiu loguer aura pres, sera darrocade seins contredit.'] [footnote 8: 'e en merce de la comunie, de sa maizon darrocar.'] [footnote 9: 'sera en merce dou maire e dous pars de sa maizon darrocar.'] [footnote 10: 'la maison ons ed estaue sera abatude per les justizies de la comunie.'] [footnote 11: 'ca esto tornarie en dano de nos e de la nuestra puebla.' (_boletin de la real academia de la historia_, october 1888.)] [footnote 12: 'ancienne coutume d'amiens' (_recueil des monum. ined. de l'histoire du tiers-etat_, i. pp. 159, 160).] [footnote 13: he refers us to the theodosian code. lib. xii, tit. 1, 'de decurionibus', and d., lib. i, tit. 4, 'de muneribus et honoribus'.] [footnote 13 (sic): _cinque ports_ (historic towns series), by montagu burrows.] [footnote 14: _essai sur l'histoire du tiers-etat_, p. 240. (the italics are my own.)] [footnote 15: the danish 'five boroughs' stand apart, as a temporary confederation, the character of which we do not know.] [footnote 16: professor burrows makes light of this name, asserting that 'it is hard to say when the french form came into common use' (p. 56). but 'the five cinque ports', which he admits to be the correct style, is a pleonasm which proves the 'cinque' to be older than the 'five'.] [footnote 17: 'london and the cinque ports stand isolated from their fellows in the common absence of the institution' (burrows, p. 43).] [footnote 18: 'the same may be said of the office of "alderman" ... the term seems to be only accidentally, if not erroneously, used' (_ibid._, p. 44).] [footnote 19: the mayor and his twelve _pairs_, _jurats_ (or _jurés_) or _échevins_, were an essential feature of the _commune_, and spread with the communal movement.] [footnote 20: _recueil des ordonnances des rois de france_, xi. 231, 237, 245, 277, 291, 308, 315. the text must now be modified in the light of my further criticism, in the next paper, of the early date alleged for the confederation of the ports.] [footnote 21: this was written in reliance on the statement by mr howlett (_chronicles of the reigns of stephen, henry ii and richard i_, vol. iii., p. xl) that an interesting writ he quoted from 'the cartulary of st benet-at-hulme' was 'safely attributable to the year 1137'. it is a writ of robert, earl of leicester, acting as justiciary, and 'gives', says mr howlett, 'a clear idea of the earl's position at the opening of the reign'. as he has made himself master of the period, and has specially studied its manuscript sources, i accepted his assurance without question. but as it subsequently struck me that such a writ was more likely to be issued by the earl when justiciary under henry ii, i referred to the cartulary and found that the writ contained the words 'avi regis', proving it, of course, to belong to the reign, not of stephen, but of henry ii: 'r. com(es) leg(recestriæ) baronibus regis de hastingg' salutem. precipio quod abbas et monachi de hulmo teneant bene et in pace et juste terras suas in gernemut ... sicut eas melius tenuerunt tempore regis h. _avi regis_ ... t. r. basset per breve regis de ultra mare' (galba e. 2, fo. 33_b_). we can only, therefore, say of its date that it is previous to the earl's death in 1168. in any case, however, it is of much interest as connecting yarmouth with hastings alone, not, as alleged, with the cinque ports as a whole. this is in perfect accordance with the fact that john's charter to hastings in 1205 duly mentions its rights at yarmouth, of which there is no mention in his charters to the other ports. i have noted in this same cartulary, and on the same page, an interesting confirmation by henry ii to the abbey of the land, 'quam lefwinus et robertus presbyteri et bonefacius et ceteri barones mei de hastingges eidem ecclesie dederunt in gernemut' apud den ... test' thom' cancellario. apud westmonasterium'. the name of thomas fixes the date as not later than 1158. in the charters of 1205, the people of hastings are styled 'barons', but those of the other ports only 'homines'.] [footnote 22: this represents the 'esporle' of south-western france (cf. p. 243, n. 278).] [footnote 23: _recueil_ (_ut supra_), xi. 277.] [footnote 24: i can find no trace of it in professor burrows' careful _résumé_ of the factors in the cinque ports organization.] [footnote 25: _cinque ports_, p. 56.] [footnote 26: professor burrows is very severe on those who question the alleged charter of edward the confessor to the ports and 'the sweeping franchises' that it conferred (pp. 55-6, 59). but the sole evidence for its alleged existence is the charter of 1278, which does not even, i think, necessarily imply it. for the allusion to the liberties the ports possessed in the days of edward and his successors might well be taken from such a charter as that of henry ii to lincoln, in which he grants to the citizens all the liberties 'quas habuerunt tempore edwardi et willelmi et henrici regum anglorum'. this does not imply that those kings had granted charters. [the result of my further investigation has been to develop much further the position here _arch. rev._, december 1889, adopted, and to modify accordingly the closing paragraph in the text.]] the cinque ports charters i have allowed the preceding paper to stand as it was written, in spite of the rejoinder by professor burrows, entitled, 'the antiquity of the cinque ports charters'.[1] so far as regards my french analogies, professor burrows adopts the argument that i have not proved a parallel sufficiently close and complete. but this does not meet my contention: (1) that in the cinque ports organization we find peculiar words and things; (2) that these peculiarities are not found elsewhere in england; (3) that they are found in france. admitting, however, that 'the earliest title is norman french', the professor urges that edward the confessor was a 'half-norman king', and that 'nothing is more likely than that he should grant his charter to the confederation under a norman name'.[2] this brings us at once to edward's alleged charter; and, indeed, my critic recurs at the outset to his belief in 'the ports having been chartered as a confederation by edward the confessor' (p. 439). at the close of the article he reminds us again that he 'accepted the charter of edward the confessor as a faithful landmark, and showed how the history of our early kings and their institutions appeared to coincide with the statement'. but he adds that 'if proof can be brought against the issue of such a charter', he will be 'the first to recognize it'. it is curious that my critic cannot perceive what must be obvious to all those who are familiar with 'the history of our early kings and their institutions', namely that the _onus probandi_ rests, not, as he alleges, on those who question, but on those who maintain the startling proposition that edward the confessor issued such a charter of incorporation. nothing short of proof positive could induce us to accept so unheard-of an anticipation of later times. that proof professor burrows claims to find in the great charter of edward i to the ports. he contends that, according to this document, edward 'saw' the confessor's charter,[3] and blames me for omitting its statement to that effect (p. 443). unfortunately he quotes the words, as indeed he had done in his book, from an english translation only, and that a misleading one. the actual words (as given by jeake), confirms to the ports their liberties as held: temporibus regum angliæ edwardi, willelmi primi et secundi, henrici regis proavi nostri, et temporibus regis richardi et regis johannis avi nostri et domini henrici regis patris nostri per cartas eorundem, sicut cartæ illæ quas iidem barones nostri inde habent, et quas inspeximus, rationabiliter testantur. in this peculiar wording we notice two points: (1) that it divides the kings into two groups, and that henry ii is placed in the first group, not, as we should expect, with his sons; (2) that edward does not say that he has 'inspected' charters of all the kings named, but only 'cartæ _illæ_ quas iidem barones nostri inde habent'.[4] i claim, therefore, to read the words as not implying that edward had actually seen any charter older than that of richard, whose name heads what i have termed the second group of kings. it is noteworthy that richard's is the earliest charter of which the contents are known to ourselves. but let us see how the matter stands with reference to previous charters. professor burrows holds that the form of edward i's charter 'certainly supposes that the former charters were granted' also to the ports collectively.[5] indeed, he 'need not point out', we read, 'that the charters referred to are charters to the confederation, not to separate ports' (p. 444). where do we find them? 'that the charter of henry,' we are told (p. 439), 'which we know about from those of his sons, has no more survived than those of his predecessors, has always seemed to me an argument of some weight.' but no charter of henry ii to the confederation is spoken of by his sons. we have in the _rotuli chartarum_ what professor burrows terms, 'the series of six charters, dated june 6, and 7, 1205'. each port on this occasion received a separate charter, and in each case reference is made to that port's charter from henry ii. of a collective charter we hear nothing. nor are john's charters even identical in form: to quote once more professor burrows: it should also be noted that the franchises of sandwich are to be such as the town enjoyed in the reigns of 'william and henry'; of dover, as in that of edward'; of hythe, as in those of 'edward, william i, william ii, and henry'.[6] and in none of them is any charter mentioned earlier than that of henry ii. these charters of john are most important, but have not, so far as i know, received scientific treatment. the charter to hastings is in many ways distinct from the others. it alone speaks of the 'honours at court', the rights at yarmouth, and the ship-service due, and alone mentions that this service was rendered 'pro hiis libertatibus'. the charter to rye and winchelsea is modelled on that of hastings, and neither of them goes back beyond the charter of henry ii. the charters to dover and to hythe, it will be found, are closely parallel, and in both cases the privileges are to be enjoyed as in the times of edward, william i, william ii, and henry (i). sandwich has her liberties confirmed as in the days of henry i, king william, 'and our predecessors'; romney as in the days of henry i. if it be urged that the rights of yarmouth, though only specified in the hastings charter, were included under general liberties in the charters to the other ports, i appeal, in reply, to that writ of henry ii[7] which treats the barons of hastings alone as possessing authority at yarmouth. the charter and the writ confirm one another. we see, then, that when we interpret the great charter of edward i to the ports (1278) in the light of evidence, not of supposition, we find that henry ii and john did grant separate charters to the different ports as to other towns (not a collective charter to them all), and that these therefore must have been the charters referred to in the general confirmation of 1278. in other words, it was edward i, not edward the confessor, who granted the first 'charter to the confederation', as a whole. utterly subversive though it be of professor burrows' view, this is the only conclusion in harmony with the known facts. thus the sole result of examining my critic's evidence is to make me carry my scepticism further still. i now hold that even so late as the days of john, the ports had individual relations to the crown, although their relations _inter se_ were becoming of a closer character, as was illustrated by the fact that their several charters were all obtained at the same time. hastings alone, as yet, had rights at yarmouth recognized: hers were the only portsmen styled 'barons' by the crown. it is always, in these matters, necessary to bear in mind that the local organization was apt to be ahead of the crown, and that communal institutions and municipal developments might be winked at for a time to avoid formal recognition. in this way i believe the rights and privileges belonging in strictness to hastings alone were gradually extended in practice to the other ports. there is, for instance, a st bertin charter granted by the so-called 'barons of dover', although the formal legend on their seal styles them only 'burgesses'. the portsmen may all in practice have been loosely styled 'barons', even though hastings alone had a special right to that distinction. professor burrows speaks of 'its acknowledged claim to be the premier port of the confederation' as 'a circumstance of the greatest significance in our inquiry',[8] and here i entirely agree with him. but i cannot think his explanation of that pre-eminence in any way satisfactory. he lays great stress on 'the identification lately established beyond any reasonable doubt between the town in the bourne valley and the "new burgh" of domesday book'. i have searched long and in vain for this identification, but, whether it be accepted or not, it throws no light on the old town, the king's town, of hastings.[9] the importance of hastings before the conquest is shown not only by the action of its ships in 1049, but also by its possessing a mint. yet the only mention of this town in domesday is the incidental entry that the abbot of fécamp had 'in hastings' appurtenant to his manor of brede, 'iiii. burgenses et xiiii. bordarios'.[10] one is fairly driven to the bold hypothesis that hastings, which ought to have figured at the head of the county survey (as did dover in kent), was one of the important towns wholly omitted in domesday.[11] the fact that its ship-service, when first mentioned, was as large as that of dover is a further proof of its importance. the geographical position of hastings also severs its case, as widely as do its privileges, from those of the kentish ports. it is therefore difficult to resist the impression that the distinction in john's charter had a real origin and meaning. the 'barons' of hastings were, i believe, the men of the _king's_ town (not, as alleged, the abbot's) and so far from the abbot's men being admitted to share their distinction, we find the latter, at rye and winchelsea, styled in john's charter 'homines', not even 'homines nostri'. the accepted view as to rye and winchelsea is thus set forth by professor burrows: the confessor had evidently intended to make the little group of sussex towns, the 'new burgh', winchelsea, and rye, a strong link of communication between england and normandy; but godwin and harold had contrived to prevent the two latter from becoming the property of the abbey of fécamp, to which edward granted them in the early part of his reign; and this formed one of the norman grievances. william promised to restore them to the abbey, and when he had conquered england he kept his word.... of the grant of winchelsea and rye to the same abbey as part of the lands of steyning we have distinct evidence in the charter of resumption issued by henry iii in 1247 (p. 27; cf. _supra_, p. 248). although this view has always been held by local historians and antiquaries, it seems to me obvious that there must be error somewhere. rye and winchelsea belonged geographically to the abbey's lordship of brede in the extreme west of the county; its lordship of steyning was in east sussex. on examining for myself the charter of resumption and comparing it with the abbey's claims as to brede at the _quo warranto_ inquiry, i discovered the solution of the mystery. rye and winchelsea were not, as alleged, appurtenant to steyning, but belonged to the manor of brede. the abbey, however, claimed on behalf of its manor of brede (including rye and winchelsea) all the franchises granted to steyning, contending that they were meant to extend to all its lands in sussex. this claim was urged and recognized in the case of the charter of resumption (1246), the source of the whole misapprehension. but to return to the 'barons', professor burrows, discussing the title, writes thus:[12] it is admitted that the title was at first only held by the portsmen in common with the citizens of several other places, as that of a responsible man in a privileged community, of a 'baro' or 'vir' of some dignity; but, of course, not in the least in the sense of a 'baron' such as the word came to mean in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. i do not know which were these 'several other places'; but i think the word 'baron' can be shown to have here had a definite connotation. the exemption from 'wardship and marriage', for instance, granted by edward i (1278), implies that these 'barons' were subject to the burdens of tenants-in-chief, while their extraordinary appeal, after the battle of st mahé (1293), to 'the judgment of their peers, earls, and barons'[13] has not, so far as i know, received the attention it deserves. by such a phrase the cinque ports 'barons' virtually claimed the privilege of peers of the realm. but one must not wander too far along these tempting paths. when tradition is replaced, as it may be in part, by evidence, we shall have, not improbably, to unlearn much that now passes current as genuine cinque ports history. on the other hand, there may be in store for us glimpses of much that is interesting and new.[14] apart, however, from problems as yet difficult and obscure, we shall be standing on sure ground in asserting that the charter of edward i is the first that was granted to the ports collectively, and that the rights and liberties it confirmed were those which had been granted to the separate ports by henry ii and john, and which it then made uniform and applicable to the whole confederation. as at london,[15] we have always to remember that communal institutions might develop locally before their existence is proved by the crown's formal recognition. delay in that recognition is not proof of their non-existence. what complicates so greatly the study of the cinque ports polity is the difficulty of disentangling its three component elements: the old english institutions common to other towns; the special relation to the crown in connection with their ship-service; and the foreign or communal factor on which i have myself insisted. no impartial student, i believe, will deny that i have fairly established the existence of this third element. its relative importance and its sphere of action must remain, of course, as yet matter of conjecture. [footnote 1: _archæological review_, iv. 439-44.] [footnote 2: _ibid._, p. 441.] [footnote 3: _the cinque ports_, p. 64.] [footnote 4: had he seen them all, the wording would have run, 'per cartas eorundem, quas iidem', etc.] [footnote 5: _the cinque ports_, p. 63.] [footnote 6: _ibid._, p. 71.] [footnote 7: _supra_, p. 421.] [footnote 8: _the cinque ports_, p. 26.] [footnote 9: the professor's argument that 'the lordship of st denis over the saxon hastings had ceased--probably when the northmen took possession of the seine valley and blocked out the french; that of fécamp was the renewal of the old idea on an adjoining territory' (_cinque ports_, p. 27), is as baseless as that which follows it as to winchelsea and rye. for the 'charter of offa, king of the mercians' (p. 25), granting hastings to st denis, has been conclusively shown by mr stevenson to be a forgery.] [footnote 10: one cannot, of course, speak positively without seeing that 'identification' on which professor burrows relies. but, unless there is evidence to the contrary, it seems difficult to resist the conclusion that this estate of the abbey 'in hastings' was identical with that which it actually possessed in the bourne valley. for this by no means included the whole 'town in the bourne valley', but only that portion of it at the foot of the west hill, which is bordered by courthouse street, bourne street, john street, and high street, together with st clement's church and its block of buildings (_sussex arch. coll._, xiv. 67). and this conclusion is strengthened by the fact that in domesday its rents are 63s 'in hastings', and 158s in the 'novus burgus', while at the dissolution they were only 35s 4d in hastings. in that case we must after all look for the 'novus burgus' of domesday at winchelsea or rye. nor is the history of hastings harbour at all as clear as could be wished. 'the ancient harbour once occupied', no doubt, 'priory valley' (_cinque ports_, p. 9); but i can find no trace of a haven 'formed by the bourne between the east and west hills', which replaced it on its silting-up. on the contrary, the old map of hastings in 1746 (_sussex arch. coll._, vol. xii) shows us the 'haven' (with ships) in the priory valley to the west of the castle hill. was not this a later harbour (1637), and the real original one out to the south?] [footnote 11: chichester, lewes, and pevensey are all duly entered, under the names of their respective lords.] [footnote 12: _the cinque ports_, pp. 77-9.] [footnote 13: _the cinque ports_, p. 123. compare the banishment of the despencers (1321) by the 'piers de la terre, countes et barouns'.] [footnote 14: the courts of the cinque ports, for instance, greatly need investigation. one can only throw out as a mere conjecture the suggestion that if the court of guestling derived its name, as professor burrows admits is probable, from guestling (the _caput_ of a hundred), midway between hastings and winchelsea, it may have been originally a _sussex_ court for the hastings group, while the court of broadhill--afterwards 'broderield' and 'brotherhood' (_the cinque ports_, p. 178)--may have been the kentish one. the admitted corruption in the traditional derivation of both names, together with the court's change of _locale_, shows how much obscurity surrounds their true origin. few, i think, would accept professor burrows' view that, because the brodhull, when we first have record of it, was held 'near the village of dymchurch' (p. 46), it was named from 'the "broad hill" of dymchurch, which may well have been some portion of the wall which extended for three miles along the beach' (p. 47). as the guestling was not a court of 'guests', so 'the broad hill', from which the meeting derived its name, must have been originally somewhere else than down 'on dymchurch beach' (p. 75), between romney marsh and the sea.] [footnote 15: see my paper on the origin of 'the mayoralty of london', in _archæological journal_ (1894).] addenda pages 20, 107. in case i should not have made sufficiently clear my views as to the filiation of the domesday mss., it may be well to explain that what i deny on p. 21 is that the _inq. com. cant._ and the _inq. el._ can both have been copied from a third document intermediate between them and the original returns. but, as i state on pp. 20, 123, it cannot be _proved_ that the _inq. com. cant._ was itself transcribed direct from the original returns, as it might, possibly, be only a copy of an earlier transcript of these returns. page 30. a remarkable instance of the occasional untrustworthiness of the figures given in these texts is afforded by the manors of stretham and wilburton, co. cambridgeshire, which were farmed together. the correct figures for their ploughteams were these: dominium homines total stretham 4[1] 5 9 wilburton 3[2] 4 7[3] __ __ 7 9 the footnotes show the errors. thus the a text, which is the best known, gives two figures out of three wrongly for wilburton, and mr pell, by accepting as genuine these two erroneous figures, was led to quite erroneous conclusions. pages 68-9. the parallel for this system of counting by threes and sixes is found in the wergild of scandinavia, with its _rétt_ of 3 marcs, or 6, or 12, the 6 or the 12 _aurar_, the 12 ells or the 12 feet of _vadmal_. for the _formulæ_ on p. 68 an instructive parallel is found in the frostathing's law: if a _haulld_ wounds a man, he is liable to pay 6 _baugar_ (rings) to the king, and 12 _aurar_ are in each ring ... a _lendrmann_ 12, a jarl 24, a king 48, 12 _aurar_ being in each ring. thus we find in scandinavia the counterpart of the system of counting found in the 'danish' districts of england, just as we find in angeln and ditmarsh the counterpart of the 'hide', with its four 'yards', found in southern england (_archæologia_, xxxvii. 380). page 105. for the election of _juratores_ we may compare the abingdon abbey case, under henry ii: 'ex utroque parte seniores viri eligerentur qui secundum quod eis verum videretur ... jurarent; ... segregati qui jurarent diversis opinionibus causam suam confundebant'. for juries of eight or sixteen we may compare jocelin de brakelonde's narrative of a suit for an advowson in 1191: 'delatum est juramentum per consensum utriusque partis sexdecim legalibus de hundredo'. page 126. compare here mr freeman's text (iii. 413-4): there can be little doubt that william's ravages were not only done systematically, but were done with a fixed and politic purpose.... it is impossible to doubt that the systematic harrying of the whole country round hastings was done with the deliberate purpose of provoking the english king.... the work was done with a completeness which shows that it was something more than the mere passing damage wrought by an enemy in need of food. domesday is appealed to, as in the appendix, for this view. page 205. though i have spoken in the text of _william_ de montfichet, following, like dugdale, the _liber niger_, i have since found that the tenant of the fief, in 1166, was his son gilbert, the _carta_ being wrongly assigned in the _liber niger_ itself to william. there are similar and instructive errors to be found in it. page 244. the succession of schelin, the domesday under-tenant by his son robert, in 1095 identifies the former with schelin, the dorset tenant-in-chief, from whom shilling ockford took its name, and who was succeeded in dorset also by his son robert (_montacute cartulary_). pages 293-4. to guard (as i have to do at every turn) against misrepresentation, i may explain that the battle chronicle is the primary authority i follow for the feigned flight. its words 'fugam, cum exercitu duce simulante', distinctly assert that the duke himself, with the main body of his army, 'turned in seeming flight'. it must, surely, be because this evidence is quite opposed to mr freeman's view that he ignored it in his text (pp. 488-90). the essential point to grasp, according to my own view, is that a detachment, told off for the purpose, thrust itself between the pursuing english and the hill to cut off their retreat, and that the main body of the normans then faced about. the english, one may add, are hardly likely to have ventured down into the plain unless the feigned flight was so general as to make them think they could safely do so. pages 311-12. 'mainly from oral tradition.' this refers, of course, to mr archer's contention. page 356. on the great influence, by their connection, of the clares see also the _becket memorials_ (iii. 43), where fitz stephen writes (1163): illi autem comiti de clara fere omnes nobiles angliæ propinquitate adhærebant, qui et pulcherrimam totius regni sororem habebat, quam rex aliquando concupierat. we are reminded here of the curious story in the _monasticon_ (iv. 608) that, some forty years before, roheis de clare, the wife of eudo dapifer, was, on his death (1120), destined by her brethren for the second wife of henry i, a story which illustrates, at least, the position attributed to the family. pages 357-8. the montfichet match is not shown in the chart pedigree, nor is the important marriage of adeliza, another daughter of gilbert (fitz richard) de clare, to aubrey de vere, the chamberlain, which is well ascertained (_geoffrey de mandeville_, pp. 390-2). by him she had _inter alios_ a daughter, with the clare name of 'rohese', who married geoffrey de mandeville, first earl of essex (_ibid._). the existence of this adeliza may be held to be against my affiliation of 'adelidis de tunbridge', which avowedly is only a conjecture. page 360. a chart pedigree is here given to illustrate the connection of robert fitz richard (de clare), through his wife, with the earls of northampton and the scottish kings: earl (1) = maud = (2) david simon | dau. of earl | of scotland d. '1115'| waltheof | king 1124 | | d. 1153 ___________| |__________ | | | earl maud = robert henry simon de senlis | fitz richard of scotland d. 1153 d. '1140' | d. 1136 d. 1152 ____________________| ______________|________ | | | | | walter maud malcolm william david fitz robert 'de senlis,' king 1153 king 1166 earl 1184 d. 1198 'aged 60' d. 1166 d. 1214 d. 1219 in 1185 robert fitz richard and his children (see p. 389) are included in this pedigree, in order to show that their ages present no chronological difficulty, and that the length of time they survived him is clearly due to his marrying rather late in life. page 388. i have identified a third fine, since this book was in type, as belonging to the great circuits of 1176. it proves that they began early in the year. as a corollary to my conclusions on pp. 386-7, i should like to allude to the well-known changes in 1178-80. great importance is attached to the passage in the _gesta regis henrici_, which describes how the king selected five justices 'de privata familia sua' in the place of the eighteen previously appointed, who as i read the passage, were to accompany his court. i cannot think that this reform, if it took place, enured, for the central body that we really meet with from 1179 onwards is, it seems to me, distinctly different. it consists of the bishops of winchester, ely, and norwich, whom, says r. de diceto, in a passage to which the bishop of oxford rightly draws attention, henry, in 1179, appointed 'archijustitiarios regni', with glanvill, who soon became a chief justiciar with them. these four continue to hold a position severed from that of the other justices, of whom some act with them at one time and some at another. the earliest appearance at present known to me of this well-defined central group is at oxford, february 11, 1180. we there find the three bishops associated with five justices, headed by ranulf glanvill, recorded on a fine. now, we happen to know that the king was at oxford about this very time, for he decided there on the issue of his new coinage.[4] his presence would account for this gathering of the four leading justiciars, so that we need not hesitate to connect the two phenomena. we have then here record evidence of the true _personnel_ at the time of the central judicial body, together with the fact of its presence with the king, the fact which had not till now been proved, on his progress through the land. [footnote 1: a, b, and c give this figure as 3 (p 141). their own title requires 4.] [footnote 2: a, b, and c give this figure as 3 (p. 141), but elsewhere (wrongly) as 4 (p. 101).] [footnote 3: a gives this figure as 6 (p. 101), but b and c, rightly, as 7.] [footnote 4: so eyton (p. 230), not giving his authority; nor have i found it.] index abetot, urse d', 129, 141-5^{12}, 147-8, 159, 238^{250}, 239, 245, 324, 356 abingdon abbey: its knights, 179, 239-40 airy, revs. w. and b. r., 55-6 albini 'brito', william de, 172, 173; his wife, 359-60 albini, henry de, 163, 171, 173-4 ---nigel de, 174, 179 alfred, the name of, 254; _see also_ lincoln alfred of espagne (not spain), 254, 255 alfred of marlborough, 252, 254 alneto, herbert de, 369 amiens: custumal of, 419 andrews, dr, 303^{161} 'anglicus numerus'--_see_ hundred archer, mr t. a., 256^{37}, 263^{4}, 264, 265, 266-7, 269, 270-3, 284^{106}, 289, 290, 364, 431; his remarkable statement, 273^{41}; champions prof freeman, 300; throws him over, 300-1; contradicts him flatly, 301-2, 306; opposes him wrongly, 274-7; his tactics, 302, 307-8, 309; his knowledge of old french, 309^{22}; on wace's age and sources, 311-12; on his sobriety, 313; on prof freeman's errors, 334^{13}, 340^{1} archers: use of, 280, 283^{104}, 284-7 'archijustitiarii,' the, 433 ardres, the lords of, 351-2 armorial bearings: earliest, 357^{1}, 359^{5} arms of england, royal, 406 arques, the relief of, 294-6 arundel, earl of: his _carta_ [1166], 196 ---earldom of, 153 assessment, the system of, 430; anglo-saxon, 48 _sqq._; reduced, 51-5, 64; independent of area or value, 62; said to be determined by area, 80, 82, by value, 63; origin of, 82 _sqq._ assessment for danegeld, 378-9 ---in east anglia, 88-91; in kent, 91 _sqq._, 95; exemption from, 95-7; changes of, 129; of abingdon and worcester abbeys, 140; in lindsey, 149: _see also_ vills; _wara_ _auxilium_--_see_ scutage aynho, northants, 381 bainard, ralf, 350, 360 baldwin (de clare), the sheriff, 256^{37}, 340, 341^{46}, 359, 394-5; his sons, _ib._ 357-8, 369 bampton, robert of, 367, 369 barbery abbey, 157 barnstaple, fief of, 369; honour of, 212 _barones_ were tenants-in-chief, 102 barons--_see_ cinque ports basset family and fief, 129 ---ralf, 160, 169 ---richard, 161-5, 172-3 ---thomas, 381, 384, 386, 387 ---william, 385-8 bath, godfrey, bishop of, 366, 367-8 baudri: his poem, 269, 284, 286, 287-8 bayeux tapestry, 264, 269, 270-2, 276-7, 280^{88}, 288-9, 290, 300, 310, 318 bayonne, custumal of, 418 beauchamp, family and fief, 141-8, 159, 160-3 beauchamp, maud de, 156, 158-9 ---philip de, 163 beaumont, robert de, 273^{41} becket, thomas; his opposition in 1163, 377, 379-80, 398; his movements in 1170, 383, 402 bedfordshire, assessment in, 55-8 bell: ringing of the town, 417 bémont, m. ch., 334 berkshire, hidation in, 63-4 betham, sir w., 392, 397 bigot, roger, 255 birch, mr de gray, 18, 118^{250}, 140 bishops: knight service of, 198-9, 220; their style before consecration, 327^{11}, 367-8 blois--_see_ peter boivin-champeaux, m., 407, 408-10, 412 bosham: _capellaria de_, 199^{62}, 201, 249 boulogne, eustace, count of, 250, 256, 293, 324, 325, 349, 351 boulogne, eustace (the younger), count of, 214 bourne (cambridgeshire), honour of, 204 bourne (lincoln): descent of, 136-7 brakelond, jocelin de, 400-1, 402^{18}, 431 bretons, 254-5, 256-7, 291; their alleged inferiority, 279^{81} _breve abbatis_, the: its meaning, 35, 36, 115-6 brihtric, son of ælfgar, 323, 324-5 bristol: its trade with ireland, 354 britanny, honour of, 196 buci, robert de, 129, 172-3 buckinghamshire, hidation in, 64 burkes: origin of the, 390-1 'burna' (westbourne), 327 burrows, prof montagu, 248, 420-1, 422-9 cahors, patrick de, 95 cambridge: its wards, 68; its 'lawmen', 79; alleged earldom of, 152-3 cambridgeshire, hundreds of: analysed, 48-55--_see also inquisitio_; picot _camerarius_, aubrey de vere, 175, 178-9, 432; his son robert, 179 'candidus'--_see_ hugh 'candidus' canterbury, see of: its knights, 199, 236 canterbury, geoffrey (ridel), archdeacon of, 381, 382, 383-4, 388 _cartæ_ of 1166, 189 _sqq._, 210-11, 225, 228, 396; sealing of, 194; their evidence, 198-9 _sqq._; errors in, 226-7, 234, 431 _caruca_, the domesday: contained eight oxen, 40, 41 carucate: 120 acres in the, 42^{75}, 67; as a measure of assessment, 66 _sqq._, 73, 78, 79-82; connected with the plough team, 95 castle-guard, 200^{64}, 232^{216} castles built in england, 249-53 chancellors--_see_ geoffrey, ranulf, regenbald, waldric charters, the re-sealed [1198], 412-15 chester: earls of, 151-3; 'lawmen' of, 79; its trade with dublin, 353-4 chokes, anselin de, 177 church, the: exactions from the, 221, 242-3, 400, 410 cinque ports: their system of 'purses', 88^{183}; peculiar penalty in, 416 _sqq._; confederation of, 420-1, 422-4; its name, 421 cinque ports: barons of, 421-2, 428-9; 'honours at court', 422, 425 cinque ports: their charters, 424-6, 429; their courts, 429^{14}; their complex polity, 429 cirencester charters, the: 323, 326 civic league, an alleged, 331-3 _civitas_, meaning of, 262 clare family and fief, 226, 355-60, 394, 431-2. _see_ baldwin clare, baldwin fitz gilbert de, 134, 179, 359, 394 clare, richard fitz gilbert de, 255, 355 clermont, adeliz de, 394 cleveland, duchess of, 297, 358, 371 clinton--_see_ glynton cockayne, mr t. o., 124^{1}, 125^{3}, 128^{9} colchester: charter to, 363; municipal custom at, 417 _commendatio_, 36-40 commune: offences against the, 416-420; spread of the, 418-19; its independent growth, 426, 429 _constabularia_, the, 206, 208, 227 _consuetudines_: due from sokemen and freeman, 36-9 corfe castle, 263 cornhill, gervase de, 357 ---henry de, 363 cornwall, assessment in, 62; low, 84, 86; _see also_ devon cornwall, earldom of, 369 ---reginald, earl of, 381, 384, 385 counties, groups of: defined by assessment, 85-6 courcy, william de, 180 coutances, geoffrey, bishop of, 114-15, 238^{250} craon, alan de, 164, 172, 174 crown, power of the, 399 _curia regis_, the, 385-9, 405, 432-3; mention of, 120. _see placita_ danegeld: normal, 55, 91; its origin, 82-83; its local incidence, 84-6; its connection with the hundred, 88-91, 125, 128, 130; early levy of, 124-5; remitted on 'waste', 125; unpaid, 128-9; its assessment, 165-6, 379; alleged debate on, 377; not compounded for, 378 danish districts: assessment of the, 66, 67-8, 430; the 'long' hundred in, 66-7; limits of, 67-8, 79, 94; carucated, 82-3. _see_ 'six carucates' _dare_--_see recedere_ _defensio_: represents assessment, 102, 166 de la rue, chevalier, 392, 397 delgove, m. l'abbé, 361-2 democracy: its failure, 302-5 derbyshire: a danish district, 68; low assessment of, 85; possible hundreds in, 165-6 devon: assessment in, 61-2; low, 84, 86; earldom of, 358, 369; sheriffs of, 236^{239} _dialogus de scaccario_, 121-2 'dispensator', robert, 141-5, 147-8, 155, 158-9, 245 distraint, 243 domesday book: omissions in, 26-7, 35, 41; errors in, 28-30, 41, 44^{76}, 44^{77}, 44^{78}, 47, 74, 113, 119, 180-1, 326; general excellence, 29-30; duplicate entries in, 30-5, 350; not a verbal transcript, 31-5; analysis required, 56, 64, 82, 88; its love of variety, 31, 34, 77, 223-4; leets mentioned in, 90; its compilation, 118; _liber de wintonia_, 118; its two volumes, 119-20; its date, 118, 209-10; used by the pseudo-ingulf, 120; first mention of, 120-1; _liber de thesauro_, 121; preserved at winchester, 121-2; removed to westminster, 121-2; names of tenants in, 131-3, 137-9; its alleged silence as to feudal tenures, 184-5, 240; contrasted with returns of 1166, 189-90; mentions knight service, 236 domesday hide--_see_ hide ---mss: pedigree of, 122-3, 430 ---survey, the: how executed, 102-6, 114-15; styled _descriptio_, 118, 122 ---of st paul's, the, 92-4 ---tenants, and their heirs, 104-5, 106, 109-10, 128-30, 131-4, 137-9, 141-8, 150-2, 154-5, 158-9, 166-74, 179-81, 231-2, 232-3, 237, 240-1, 244-5, 251-2, 254, 256, 350, 355-6, 358, 369, 431 _dominium_: meaning of, 193 _donum_--_see_ scutage dorset boroughs in domesday, 99, 331-4, 341; _see_ civic league dorset, the _firma unius noctis_ in, 96, 99 dover: as a cinque port, 425, 426; garrison of, 216 droitwich, survey of, 146, 148 dublin: its trade with chester, 353-4 dugdale, sir william: his errors, 356, 359-60 eadgyth--_see_ edith eadric the wild, 253^{22} eadric (? the wild), 323, 325 earldoms of two counties, 328 east anglia--_see_ norfolk, suffolk edith, wife of edward the confessor, 124, 129, 340, 342 edward the confessor: his foreign tastes, 248, 428; his priest, regenbald, 323; his alleged charter to the cinque ports, 422-6 edward i: his cinque ports charter, 424, 425, 426, 428-9 ellis, mr a. s., 249^{7}, 257^{43} ---sir henry: ignored the _inq. com. cant._, 18; misrepresented the northamptonshire geld-roll, 59; edited the _inq. el._, 107; on date of domesday, 118^{250}; on its mention, 120; prints the northamptonshire geld-roll, 124; on domesday jurors, 140; unduly depreciated by prof freeman, 334, 341; on walter tirel, 355 elmley castle, descent of, 145^{12} elton, mr c., 95 ely: charters to church of, 213; its knights, 236; despoiled of lands, 349-50; _see also placitum_ ely, nigel, bishop of, 327, 368^{2} ---william, bishop of: _see_ longchamp enfeoffment: _sine carta_, 206; antiquity of, 232, special, 132; _see_ feoffment engaine family and fief, 124, 129-30, 132, 179 eschalers, hardwin d', 31, 32, 117 'escuz', meaning of, 307-8, 317-18 essex, alice of, 381 ---geoffrey, earl of, 381, 432 ---william, earl of, 381, 384 eudo dapifer, 131, 180; his fief, 350 his wife, 356, 358, 432 euremou (envermeu), hugh de, 132-134, 137 eustace, sheriff of hunts, 138, 180-1 evesham: henry ii at, 385-6, 390 ---abbey: its knights, 237-8; its service, 238; æthelwig, abbot of, 238-9; walter, abbot of, 237-8^{247} evidence, treatment of historical, 291-292, 336-7, 343, 344, 346, 376 ewald, mr a. c., 118^{250} ewyas harold, 252 exaggerations of chroniclers, 222, 228-9 exchequer: early mention of, 146-7; at winchester, 381 exchequer rolls, 199-200, 209 _sqq._ exeter: military service of, 65; the conqueror's siege of, 330 _sqq._; breaching of its walls, 335-7; besieged by swegen, 335-6; offends william, 338-9; is favoured by him, 339; its alleged penalty, 340; its tribute, 340-2, 344-5; baffles william, 343; is 'betrayed', 344; parallel with le mans, 345 exeter, baldwin of: _see_ baldwin _exoniensis, liber_: _see liber exoniensis_ eyton, mr: on the domesday hide, 42, 47^{83-5}, 63; his methods, 46, 62, 98-100, 150; his somerset book, 61, 98; on the leicestershire hide, 76; on the devonshire hide, 84; on assessment in lincolnshire, 86; on the _firma unius noctis_, 99; on the comital manors of somerset, 100; his 'key to domesday', 99-100, 165^{44}; on domesday book, 118; on the lindsey survey, 153-4; on danegeld, 378; on henry ii, 382-4, 385-7, 433^{4} falvel (fauvel), gilbert, 138, 180 faritius, abbot, 120 fécamp abbey, grants to, 248-9, 427-8 feoffment: the 'old' and 'new', 190-2, 194, 196-7. _see_ enfeoffment feudal court, the, 205-6 feudalism in england: underrated, 7-8, 208, 245, 248, 403-5. _see_ knight-service fiefs: descent of, 171-4; 'mouvance' of, 357; the chief lay ones, 201-5; succession to, 129-30, 132-3, 134, 138-9, 144-5, 147-8, 160, 171-4 fifield: origin of the name, 66 finance--_see_ danegeld fine, an early leicestershire, 173 fines: introduction of, 385 _sqq._, 432-3; development of, 389-90 _firma unius noctis_, 96-100 fitz audelin, william, 353, 381-2, 385-6, 387, 390-1 fitz count, brian, 177 fitz dolfin, patrick, 370 ---uchtred, 370 fitz maldred, gilbert, 370 ---robert, 370 fitz odo, william, 369 fitz osbern, earl william, 328, 329^{19} fitz ralf, william, 385-8 fitz richard, william, 369 fitz stephen, robert, 394-6 fitz uchtred, dolfin, 370, 371-2 fitz walters, origin of the, 359-60, 432 fitz winemar, walter, 179 five boroughs, the, 67^{136}, 68 five hides: a unit of assessment, 47 _sqq._; even in towns, 48, 130; connected with military service, 48, 65-6, 187-8; conspicuous in oxon and berks, 63-4; in bucks, wilts and middlesex, 64; originates place-names, 66; its origin, 82 _sqq._; its antiquity, 83; not a knight's fee, 231-2; _see also_ towns five knights: unit of military service, 204-5, 206, 227, 232-3 flambard, ranulf: his alleged action, 182-4, 186; his real action, 241-3, 256^{37} fleming, ralf and guy, 175 foliot, richard, 178 food-rents--_see_ wales foreign service: liability to, 398 _sqq._; exemption from, 399-400, 401-2; a moot obligation, 403, 405 freeman, professor: unacquainted with the _inq. com. cant._, 18; ignores the northamptonshire geld-roll, 125; confuses the _inquisitio geldi_, 124; his contemptuous criticism, 126, 261, 295-6, 332, 346; when himself in error, 126-7; his charge against the conqueror, 127, 431; on hugh d'envermeu, 132-3; on hereward, 133-6; his 'certain' history, 251, 331; his 'undoubted history', 134-5, 360-1; his 'facts', 333; on heming's cartulary, 140; on mr waters, 155^{23}; on the introduction of feudal tenures, 183-6, 207, 213^{121}, 236^{239}, 239^{258}; on the knight's fee, 188; on ranulf flambard, 184; on the evidence of domesday, 185-6; underrates feudal influence, 198, 404-5; on scutage, 213^{121}; overlooks the worcester relief, 241; influenced by words and names, 247, 262; on normans under edward, 248 _sqq._; his bias, 248, 302-4; on richard's castle, 249 _sqq._; confuses individuals, 251-2, 296-7, 358; his assumptions, 251; on the name alfred, 254; on the sheriff thorold, 255-6; on the battle of hastings, 258 _sqq._; his pedantry, 259-63; his 'palisade', 264 _sqq._, 273-4, 285, 287, 297, 300, 309; misconstrues his latin, 265-6, 333-4; his use of wace, 267-9, 270, 272^({40}), 274, 289; on william of malmesbury, 268, 314-17, 336; his words suppressed, 269^{24}, 301-2; on the bayeux tapestry, 269-72; imagines facts, 272-3, 285^({117}), 297, 331; his supposed accuracy, 273^{41}, 274, 295, 333-4, 336, 340-1, 342; right as to the shield-wall, 273-7; his guesses, 277-8, 279-80, 282, 289, 291-2, 297, 298-9, 331-3, 347, 351; his theory of harold's defeat, 278, 292-3; his confused views, 280-1, 309, 335-6, 340-1, 342; his dramatic tendency, 282; evades difficulties, 287-8, 346; his treatment of authorities, 290, 343-4; on the relief of arques, 295; misunderstands tactics, 293-4, 297; on walter giffard, 296-7; his failure, 298; his special weakness, 298, 300; his splendid narrative, 298, 301; his homeric power, 300; on harold and his standard, 308; on wace, 309-11, 313; on regenbald, 326; on earl ralf, 327-8; on william malet, 329; on the conqueror's earldoms, 328-9; his domesday errors and confusion, 126-7, 326, 328, 333-4, 339-42, 351-2; on 'the civic league', 331-3; his wild dream, 335; his special interest in exeter, 330; on legends, 336-7; on thierry, 344, 348; his method, 346; on lisois, 350; on stigand, 350; on walter tirel, 360-1; on st hugh's action [1197], 398; on the winchester assembly, 403-5; distorts feudalism, 404; on the king's court, 405; on richard's change of seal, 407; necessity of criticizing his work, 11-12, 273 fyfield--_see_ fifield gant, walter de, 155 gardiner, prof, 307 gaunt, agnes de, 165 geld-roll--_see_ danegeld, northamptonshire genealogy--_see_ domesday tenants, fitz audelin, marmion, montmorency, neville, tirel 'gemot', the: not feudal, 404-5 geoffrey the chancellor, 366, 368 geroy and his offspring, 355 gervase, chronology of, 373-4 _gesta stephani_, authority of, 374-6 'gewered', 124--_see wara_ giffard, the aged walter, 296; his daughter rohese, 355, 356 ---william, bishop of winchester, 356 giffards, greatness of the, 355-6, 357-8 glanvile, ranulf de, 381, 384, 433 glastonbury abbey: its knights, 237, 239^{257} gloucester, family of de, 244-5 ---robert, earl of, 154, 179, 180, 369, 374-5 ---william, earl of, 375 glynton, geoffrey de, 175 gneist, dr r.: on knight-service, 182^{2}, 186^{24}, 206^{97}, 208^{106}, 228 godwine, prof freeman on, 304 grantmesnil, ivo de, 347-8 green, mr j. r.: on chester, 353; on the danish districts, 67^{136}, 79; greenstreet, mr j., on the lindsey survey, 149-50, 153-4 gresley, william de, 163, 174 gross, dr c., on the coroner, 105^{212} grouping of vills for assessment, 48 _sqq._; _see also_ vills guines, count of, 352 gundeville, hugh de, 381, 382^{7}, 382^{8}, 383^{15}, 388 hale, archdeacon, 92 hall, mr hubert, 121, 122, 209, 245, 321, 381^{2} hamilton, mr n. e. s. a.: edits the _inq. com. cant._, 18, 349; rates it too highly, 22-3; edits the _inq. el._, 107 hampshire, the _firma unius noctis_ in, 96-7 hanslape, michael de, 179 hapsburgs, the english, 397^{11} harding, son of eadnoth, 256^{37} harold: half a dane, 248; his tactics, 265-6, 276, 277-9, 280-3; styled king by william, 323, 325 hardy, sir t. d., 18 harrison, mr f., 261, 263^{3} hastings, 248; in domesday, 427; its barons, 422, 426-7, 428; its charter, 425; its harbour, 427-8 hastings, battle of, 258 _sqq._, 431 (_see_ table of contents) hastings, ravages near, 126-7, 431 henry i: his favourites, 160, 172-3, (358); charters of, 213, 236^{239}, 237, 358, 364-5; he exacts military service, 239; and the church, 243; his cirencester charter, 326-7; his plimpton charter, 366-9 henry ii: his alleged invasion in 1147, 373; his movements in 1142-9, 373-4, 375-6; his action in 1163, 377, 379, 380, 398; his movements in 1175-6, 385-8; confirms fines, 385, 389; his cinque ports charters, 422^{21}, 425-6, 429; his writ for chester, 353; his legal reforms, 432-3 henry (king), son of henry ii: his court at winchester, 381 _sqq._; his movements in 1170-1174, 382 hereford castle, 252-3. _see also_ ralf herefordshire, normans in, 249-54 hereward 'the wake', 132-6 hertford, earldom of, 358 hertfordshire, assessment in, 59 hesdin, ernulf de, 95 _hidarii_: their relation to the hide, 94 hide, the domesday: four virgates in, 24^{14}, 41-2, 430; a hundred and twenty acres in, 43-7; not an areal measure, 62-3, but a term of assessment, 63, 82-3, 96; peculiar use of the word in leicestershire, 76-8, and in lancashire, 79; the alleged double, 92-4; its origin, 430 hide, the areal, 66-7 ---of lancashire, 79 ---of leicestershire, 76 historical evidence, treatment of--_see_ evidence historical research, present sphere of, 406 historical truth, 332 'honour': the term, 243 'hostiarius', robert: his fief, 34-5 house, communal demolition of, 416, _et seq._ hoveden, accuracy of, 407, 408-9, 410, 412-413 howlett, mr r., 373-6, 422^{21} hugh 'candidus': value of his chronicle, 133-4, 135^{15}; on the peterborough fees, 137 hundred: quartering of the, 49 _sqq._, 58, 90; it was assessed as a whole, 51-55, 62, 82; the unit for the domesday survey, 54; and for collection of danegeld, 54, 85-6, 88-91; the 'double', 58; and the 'half', 59, 70, 83; the triple, 60; its relation to 100 hides, 59, 87-8; its origin, 87; how named, 165 hundred court: used for the domesday survey, 102-4, 105, 114; witness of, 170 hundred, the leicestershire, 74-6, 160, 165-6 hundred: the 'long', 66-8 ---of twelve carucates, the, 69-74, 77-8, 166 hunt, rev. w., 250^{13}, 253^{23}, 259, 275, 276, 299, 358, 395 hunter, rev. j., 56 hunting: connected with pytchley, 129-30; with langham, 362-3 huntingdonshire, assessment in, 58 husting, the court of, 105 hythe: its charter, 426 ilbert, the sheriff, 350 ingulf, the pseudo-, 120, 122, 132, 136-7, 154, 255^{34}; uses william of malmesbury, 321-2 _inquisitio comitatus cantabrigiensis_, the: its discovery, 17; is a transcript of the domesday returns, 19, 123, 430; its system, 20; collated with the _inq. el._, 20-2; specimen of, 21; its omissions, 23-5; errors in, 25-6, 31, 36, 45, 46; special information in, 36; illustrates the _caruca_, 41, and the domesday hide, 42; often omits _terra regis_, 46-7, 50^{88}; value of its vill-assessments, 47 _sqq._, 52; its lists of jurors, 102 _sqq._; its variants from the _inq. el._, 108-11 _inquisitio comitatus eliensis_, the, 17-18, 19, 106-18; edited by sir henry ellis, 106-7; again by mr hamilton, 18; its origin, 20-1; specimen of, 21; its value, 28-9; its texts, 30, 103-4, 107, 112, 114-15, 123, 430; represents a return, 114; ordered by the conqueror's writ, 105, 114; errors in, 107-8, 113; its variants from the _inq. com. cant._, 108-10; its lost original, 111; its constituents, 111, 115; its special information, 112-13; its heading and its date, 115; materials employed for it, 115, 430; including domesday book (vol. ii), 116, 120; analysis of its contents, 116-18 _inwara_, 101 irvine, mr fergusson, 79 jeaffreson, mr j. cordy, 353 john, king: demands service abroad, 402-3; his charters to the cinque ports, 425-6, 429 jones, mr: on wilts, in domesday, 125^{2} jumièges, william of, 314, 318, 319 _jugum_, the kentish: its four 'virgates', 95 juhel: a breton name, 254-5 ---'of lincoln', 255; _see also_ thorold 'jurats', the, 416, 421 jurors of the domesday survey, 102-6, 430-1; half english and half foreigners, 104; variants in lists of, 108-10; in herts, 115 kemble, mr j. m.: on the hide, 62 kent: low assessment of, 86; the _sulung_ of, 92-5; the 'lathes' of, 94^{197}; its landowners, 95; under stephen, 125-6 knight-service; its introduction into england, 182 _sqq._; how determined, 186-9, 206; returns of, 189 _sqq._; '_super dominium_', 191-2, 193-194; the '_servitium debitum_', 194-195, 197 _sqq._, 212, 219, 220, 225, 227, 228, 234, 239; in normandy, 206^{96}, 207, 230; in ireland, 207; introduced by the conqueror, 207, 234-6; the author's theory of, 206-8; aggregate of, 228, 230 knight-service: of bishops, 399-401 knight's fees: standard of, 186-9, 231-232; return of, 189-90 _sqq._; views on, 208; number of, 210-11, 228-30; old-english list of, 241 knights: inquest of [1166], 185, 189-190 _sqq._, 210-11; through the sheriffs, 191-2; its object, 193 _sqq._; how conducted, 195-6; effect on church fiefs, 196-7; depends on tradition, 205-6 knights: joint equipment of, 400; payment of, 214-6, 235-6; wages of, 399-400, 402^{18} laci family and fief, 141-4, 145, 244 lancashire, the 'hide' in, 79 lanfranc, archbishop, 114, 235^{232}, 236 langham, essex, 355, 357, 362 'laudabiliter', the 'bull', 390 laund priory: when founded, 368 law, constitutional: studied by william rufus, 403 leets: mentioned in domesday, 90, 166; found a century later as groups of vills, 89 leicester: alleged destruction of [1068], 331^{7}, 347; justices at [1176], 388; military service of, 68 leicester, hugh de, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164 leicestershire survey, the, 74-6, 80-2, 160, _sqq._ _liber exoniensis_: 42^{72}, 122^{265}, 125^{2} ---_niger_, 179, 189, 226, 431. _see_ 'cartæ' ---_rubeus_, 179, 189, 192^{44}, 209, 226, 245 _liberi homines_: their tenure, 37^{52}, 38-40 liebermann, dr f., 256 lincoln: alfred of, 255; colswegen of, 131, 132; earldom of, 151-3; the 'long' hundred at, 66; william's treatment of, 342: _see also_ juhel, thorold lincoln, alexander, bishop of, 327, 366, 367, 368 ---st hugh of: opposes the crown, 398 _sqq._; in the cause of privilege, 402 lincoln, simon, dean of, 173^{63} lincolnshire: a danish district, 67, 68; assessment in, 86 lindsey survey, the, 69-73, 149 _sqq._, 160, 180^{13}, 186^{23}, 196 l'isle, robert de, 164, 165, 174 lisures, fulc, de, 130 ---william de, 176, 177 little, mr: on the five-hide unit, 65 london: its norman port at dowgate, 249 londoners and the chase, 324^{4} longchamp, william, 400, 407, 409-10, 414-15 longevity, remarkable, 296 lords, the house of: its feudal origin, 198^{60} luard, dr h. r., 411^{17} luci, richard de, 381, 384 lucy, the countess, 151-2, 153, 154, 255 madeley (staffs.), descent of, 173 madox: on church fees, 197^{58} maitland, prof: on the hundred, 87; on the leet, 90; on the ramsey knights, 234; on fines, 385, 388; on richard's seals, 407 malchael, drowning of roger, 408-9 maldon, battle of, 266, 268, 277 malet, william, 255, 256, 329, 349; his death, 134 malmesbury, william of, 268, 276, 277, 291, 295; used by wace, 313-18; by 'ingulf', 322; his legends, 315-316, 336 man, isle of: 'sheaddings' in, 71^{145} mandeville, geoffrey de, 256. _see_ essex mandeville, william de, 177, 179 manor, the two-field and the three-field, 79-82 manors 'de comitatu', 100 marmion family and fief, 143, 145, 155-9, 176, 179, 180, 181; name, 158 marriage, rival claims settled by, 159 marsh (_de marisco_), family of, 396-7 marten skins: ireland exports, 354 martinwast, ralf de, 162, 168 matilda, wife of king stephen, 352^{1} maud, queen of henry i, presides over suit, 120 mayoralty, compulsory, 416, 419-20, 421 merc (marck) family and fief, 351-2 ---alouf de, 177, 179 meschin, ranulf, 150-2 ---william, 152-3, 164, 171, 174, 177, 178, 179, 180, 360 meulan, robert, count of, 140, 142-3, 145, 154-5, 347-8 meyer, m. paul, 307 middlesex, hidation in, 64 monasteries, knight-service of, 200-1, 220, 233-8 montfichet, william de, 202, 205; his wife, 358; their son gilbert, 431 montfort, hugh de, 255 montmorency claim, the, 392 _sqq._ moore, mr stuart, 124 morkere, earl, 125 morres--_see_ montmorency mortain, robert, count of, 124, 128; his wife, 124, 128 mortain, stephen, count of, 160, 164-165, 172, 180 moustiers, lisois de, 38, 349-50 mowbray, roger de: his fief, 171 mustere, walter de, 162 nepotism, ecclesiatical, 236-8, 326-7 neville family and fief, 137-8, 370 ---their origin, 370-2 ---alan de, 381, 384 nomenclature, loose norman, 138^({21}), 178-9, 360-1 norfolk, assessment in, 88 _sqq._ ---ralf, earl of, 327-8, 349 norgate, miss kate, 213^{121}, 217-18, 222, 224, 266^{16}, 269^{24}, 279^{82}, 280^({84, 86}), 281^{96}, 282, 289^{122, 123}, 293^{133}, 311, 365, 374, 375^{7}, 377^{1}, 378, 379^{10}, 390-1, 395, 400, 407, 409, 410-12, 412^{18, 22}; on scutage, 217-18, 222 norman conquest, the: a starting point, 247-8 normans under edward, 247 _sqq._ northamptonshire: its geld-roll, 124-130; its devastation in 1065, 125; its hundreds, 59, 128; its 'hidation', 67^{136} northamptonshire survey, the, 175-81 nottinghamshire: a danish district, 68; low assessment of, 85-6 odards, two, 371 oger 'brito': his son ralf, 176, 179 olifard family, 181 ---william, 176 oliphant--_see_ olifard oman, mr, 265^{10}, 276, 286, 299 _oppidum_, meaning of, 262 ordericus vitalis, 260-2, 291, 331, 336, 347-8, 360-1, 362 osbern, bishop of exeter, 249 ---the son of richard, 249-52, 253 ---'pentecost', 251-2 osmund, 'the king's writer', 124 oswaldslow hundred, 141-4 oxen--_see caruca_ oxford, justices at [1176], 389, [1180], 433 oxford, aubrey, first earl of, 352 oxfordshire, hidation in, 63 palgrave, sir francis, 17-18, 332, 341, 346 palmer, mr c. f. r., 157^{29} paris, m. gaston, 307 paynel, fulk, 148, 177, 178 pearson, prof.: on knight service, 231 pedantry is not accuracy, 262 pedigree-makers, 134, 390-1, 394-7 pell, mr o.: his theories, 30, 41, 46, 63, 66, 74^{149}, 76, 101, 430 pembroke, gilbert, earl of, 357, 393-4 ---richard, earl of, 393-4 pepys, samuel: on domesday book, 185 percy, william de: his wife, 358-9 peter of blois: his alleged chronicle, 120, 154 peterborough, cartulary of, 124; its _scriptorium_, 124--_see_ hugh peterborough, turold, abbot of, 135-6 peterborough, knights of, 131-9, 181, 214, 240 picardy, the commune in, 416-17, 418, 420-1 picot, sheriff of cambridgeshire, 31, 103, 104, 117, 138, 204^{92}, 349 pistres, roger de, 244-5, 364 _placita_, 115, 214^{125}, 349, 387-8; _regia_, 255; _regalia_, 256^{37}; _in curia regis_, 386-8; _abbatis_, 132 _placita_, early: in cambridgeshire, 104; in dorset, 105; in london, 105; in hants, 214^{125} _placitum_, the great ely, 37-8, 39, 349 plagiarism, medieval, 285^{117} plimpton priory, royal charter to, 366 plough--_see caruca_ ploughland--_see carucate_ plumpton plain, 262 pluralist, the first great, 326-7 poitiers, william of, 270, 273^{41}, 276, 284, 285-6, 287, 288, 291, 292-4, 295, 336, 343-5 pomerey family, 369 port, henry de, 161 precedent, dread of creating a, 401, 403 puher family, 145, 244 quency, william de, 177 raimbercurt, guy de, 31, 35, 117, 170, 178^{6}; his son richard, 175, 179 ralf, earl of hereford, 252-4 ramis, roger de, 162 ramsey abbey: knight-service of, 233-234; its _carta_, 234 ranulf, the chancellor, 365, 367, 368 _recedere, potuit_: a phrase distinguishing tenure, 28, 31, 32-4, 35-40 records, historical value of, 406 red book of the exchequer--_see liber rubeus_ redvers, baldwin de, 367, 369 regenbald, the chancellor, 257, 323 _sqq._ regent, the justiciar as, 329^{19} relief, the feudal, 241-3 'ricardi': clares so styled, 355 richard i: his demand in 1197, 398-402; his change of seal [1198], 406 _sqq._; his captivity, 408, 409; his want of money, 399, 410; angry with longchamp, 412-13; his movements, 414; his cinque ports charter, 425 richard the son of scrob, 249-54 richard's castle: descent of, 145, 147-8; building of 249 _sqq._ ridel, geoffrey (i and ii), 173; (ii), 388 robert, son of wimarc, 251^{16}, 256-7 rochester, see of: its knight-service, 199^({63}) rollos, richard de--_see_ rullos _rotuli wincestrie_, 175 rouen: its trade with ireland, 354; henry i at, 364 roumare, william de, 151-3, 202 rullos, richard and william de, 136-7, 161 rutland in domesday, 68^{137}, 73, 84^{173} rye--_see_ winchelsea _saca_--_see soca_ st bertin, abbey of, 351, 361^{12} st edmund's abbey: its knights, 400-1; baldwin, abbot of, 255, 329 st john, thomas de, 173^{63} ---william de, 381, 383^{15} st medard, anschetil de, 131, 240 salisbury, edward of, 162, 171, 173, 174 salisbury, herbert, bishop of, 398, 401-402 salisbury, roger, bishop of, 213, 214, 327 sandwich: custumal of, 416, 419-20; its charter, 425 sawley, the 'hundred' of, 73, 165-6 _scalariis_--_see_ eschalers scotland, david, king of, 160-5, 174, 175, 176, 432 scotland, malcolm, king of, 124, 432 scrivelby, descent of, 158 scutage, 209 _sqq._; antiquity of, 212-15, 217 _sqq._; on church fiefs, 401 seal, richard i's change of, 406 _sqq._ seebohm, mr f., 40, 83-4, 86, 92, 93-5, 97, 189, 215^{129} 'senlac', the name of, 259-63 senlis, matilda de, 360, 432 _servientes_, pay of, 215-16, 223-4 sheriff's aid, the, 379 sheriffs named from county town, 138-9 sherstone, battle of, 280-1 shield-wall, the, 264, 265, 266, 268-9, 273-7, 284, 300-1, 306, 307, 317-18, 321. _see_ 'testudo' sicily, prof freeman on, 303 six carucates a unit of assessment, 66-76, 79-82, 160; scandinavian, 430 'sixty thousand', loose use of, 228-9 skeat, prof: on 'leet', 90 snorro, 321 _soca_, 28-9, 31, 32-3, 35-40, 112; detached from tenure, 100-101 soke of eadulfsness, the, 94 sokemen, 28-9, 31, 32-3, 35-40 _solanda_: not identical with _solinum_, 91-4; referred to a prebend, 93 _solinum_: the kentish _sulung_ or ploughland, 91-5; its four _juga_, 95 somerset: assessment in, 61; the _firma unius noctis_ in, 96-9; comital manors of, 100 stafford, robert de, 173 staffordshire, low assessment of, 85-6 stamford: its wards, 68 standard, battle of the, 276^({62})-277^{67}, 279-80 stapleton, 131, 132^{4}, 352; on the lindsey survey, 149; on william meschin, 151-2, 153^{14}; on the marmions, 155-9; lambert's statement disproved by, 352 stephen, king, devastation under, 125; _see also_ mortain stevenson, mr w. h., 149; on mr pell's theories, 63; on the 'long' hundred, 66; on the hundred of land, 70^{143}; on the leicestershire 'hide', 77-8; on the st denis charters, 427^{9} steyning: granted to fécamp, 249, 428 stigand, archbishop, 349-50 stubbs, dr (bishop of oxford): on the hide, 47^{85}; on the hundred, 54, 87-8; misled by ellis, 59, 124; on stephen's earldoms, 152; on the origin of knight-service, 182-4; on the knight's fee, 187-9, 232; on the _cartæ baronum_, 189 _sqq._; on personal assessment, 195^{56}, 196^{57}; on scutage, 217-18; on joint equipment, 218^{143}; on feudal tenures, 208^{108}, 234; on aggregate of knights, 228-9; on knights' fees, 233; his insight, 54, 242, 245, 334^{14}, 335^{15}; on 'ingulf' 298; on the woodstock debate, 377, 398; on danegeld, 377-8; on becket's opposition, 380^{13}; on the _curia regis_, 387-8, 432-3; on st hugh's opposition [1197], 398, 400, 402^{19}; on archæology, 406; on richard's change of seal, 407-10, 411-15 sudbury, peculiar position of, 90 sudely, john de, 147 suffolk: assessment in, 88 _sqq._; nordman, sheriff of, 327, 329 sussex ports, normans at, 249; _see also_ cinque ports swereford, errors of, 118^{250}, 198, 209-10, 212, 217-18, 225, 228 tamworth, descent of, 156, 158-9 tavistock abbey, military service of, 201, 236 taxation--_see_ danegeld, assessment taylor, canon isaac: his theory of assessment, 62, 80^{166}-81; on the carucate, 66^{133}; on the hundred, 74^{151} 'testudo' (shield-wall), 277, 317-18, 321 thegn, the: qualification of, 65-6; in yorkshire, 69 'thegnland', 35-40 thierry, mons.: on the commune, 416-17, 418 thinghoe, hundred of: inquest on, 88 thorold (of lincoln) the sheriff--_see_ turold tillières, truce of, 406, 409, 412-13 tirel, walter, 355 _sqq._; his parentage, 360-1; his wife adeliz (de clare), 355-6, 362-3; their son hugh, 355, 357, 361, 362-3; the family, 360-2 toeni family and fiefs, 146 toni, robert de--_see_ stafford totnes, honour of, 369^{4} ---juhel de, 254-5, 367, 369^{4} toulouse, the 'scutage' of, 209-10, 215, 218-23 tout, prof t. f.: on hereward, 134^{11}-136; on william fitz audelin, 390 towns: assessed on same system as vills, 48, 55, 58, 59, 60, 64-5, 130 tracy family--_see_ sudeley treasury, the royal: at winchester, 121-2; its contents, 121-2 trithing: in lindsey, 70; an equal division, 71 tuchet, henry, 165, 172, 174 turold, the sheriff, 202^{76}, 255-6 vautort, reginald de, 369 _vendere_--_see recedere_ verdon, bertram de, 387-8 verdon, norman de, 161-3, 166-7 vere, aubrey de--_see camerarius_ vills, grouping of, 49 _sqq._, 63^{122}, 71-3, 75, 88-91, 96-7, 99 vinogradoff, prof p., 92, 93-5, 101, 303^{161} vincent, mr j. a. c., 67, 154^{15} virgate, the domesday: 30 acres in, 42; essentially a quarter, 50, 430; in kent a quarter of the _jugum_ and even of an acre, 95; the 'parva', 175 wace: master, 306 _sqq._; prof freeman's use of, 267-9, 289, 309-11, 319-20; the disputed passage in, 267, 302, 306; its four or five renderings, 307, 317-18; prof freeman's final view of it, 268, 300-1, 306, 308, 317; contradicted by mr archer, 301-2, 306; his accuracy, 271, 309-10, 313-14; on the 'fosse' disaster, 289-91; on the feigned flight, 294-5; his 'escuz', 307; lacks corroboration, 309; his errors, 310; his anachronism, 310-11; his late date, 311; his sobriety, 312-13; his sources, 313-20 wake family and fief, 134, 136-7; pedigree of, 359 walchelin, bishop of winchester, 114-15 waldric, the chancellor, 364 wales, food-rents in, 84, 97 waltheof, earl, 349 walton, garrison of, 216 wapentake, the: in lindsey, 70, 76, 149; in holland, 73; in rutland, 73; in yorkshire, 80; in leicestershire, 160 _wara_, 35, 60^{114}, 166; its meaning in domesday, 100-2; in the burton cartulary, 101 warenne, william de, 37 warwick: military service of, 68 ---roger earl of, 367, 368 'waste': on the rolls, 125-6, 128; in domesday, 126-8; under stephen, 126 waters, mr chester, 62; on the lindsey survey, 149-52, 153-4, 155, 160, 166^{46} 180^{13}; on the marmions, 158-9 webb, mr p. c., 17-18, 118^{250} william i: introduces knight-service, 207, 232, 234-6, 239; writs of 114, 238; his tactics, 285-6, 293, 294, 299; his charter to regenbald, 324; his english writs, 324-5, 327-8, 329; his 'licentia', 326-7, 329; his siege of exeter, 330 _sqq._; his great danger [1067], 330; his alleged harrying, 333; his policy, 337-8, 343, 346; his vengeance, 339; raises castles, 339; increases town tributes, 342; his treatment of exeter and le mans, 345; favours ely abbey, 349; his lillebonne assembly, 401, 405 william ii: exacts military service, 235, 239; did not introduce it, 182-4; his extortions, 241-3; his dealings with the church, 241-3; his appeal to the barons, 403-5; studies constitutional law, 404; his court at salisbury, 405^{36} wiltshire: the _firma unius noctis_ in, 96, 98. _see also_ jones winchelsea and rye, 248; their charter, 425-6; members of 'brede', 428 winchester: early suit at, 120; the royal treasury in its castle, 120-2, 175; exchequer at, 381; feudal assembly at, 403-405 winchester, henry bishop of, 237 windows, strange use of, 308^{14} winemar, walter fitz, 179 wirral peninsula, the, 79 witan--_see_ gemot; lords woodstock, council at, 377, 398-9 worcester, see of: its knights, 231, 236, 240, 241 _sqq._ worcestershire: assessment of, 60; survey, 140-8 wording, alteration of, 22, 34-5 writs addressed through sheriff [1166], 192-3 wyon, mr, 410 yarmouth, rights of hastings at, 422^{21}, 425-6 yorkshire: a danish district, 68-9; its assessment, 73-4, 79-81 * * * * * transcriber's note: ^ denotes a superscript. the ligature æ is not necessarily consistent in its use, e.g. 'mediæval' is used more in part i of this book, but not in part ii; 'mediaeval' is used in both parts. the original book contained a foreword, which is not present in the scans from which this book derives. 'foreword ... page 7' has been removed from the table of contents. page 51: text and table were slightly re-arranged for better flow. page 138: 'lincolnshire' could be an error for 'lincolnescire' or 'lincolnescira', both appearing on page 137. (p. 137): "hugh candidus wrote of the former: heres galfridi de nevile tenet in lincolnescire,..." page 251: "as we gather from florence [?] ..." 64 floriacensis vigorinensis: john of worcester (fl. 1095-1140), chronicler, the author of the world history formerly attributed to florence of worcester. survives in five twelfth-century manuscripts. holinshed's last citation is under 1115, ... ~ catalogue of principal sources used in 1577 edition of holinshed�s chronicles compiled by henry summerson [http://www.cems.ox.ac.uk/holinshed/ catalogue%20of%20principal%20sources.....pdf] 'stamford bridge' and 'stamfordbridge' both appear more than once in this book, and in the first edition. two instances of 'stamfordbridge' have been corrected to 'stamford bridge', to correspond to the first edition. page 323 (in chaper 'regenbald, priest and chancellor'): a charter in anglo-saxon has been restored from the 1st edition (1895). anglo-saxon letters in this charter include: þ = (lower-case) thorn; [w] representing capital wynn; [w] representing lower-case wynn; ð = (lower-case) eth; [þt] representing thorn with stroke, an abbreviation for þæt þ and ð are also used elsewhere in the book. page 381: the printer has used a symbol to simulate a mediaeval scribe's abbreviarion of 'et'. this has been replaced in this .txt version of the book by [et]. pages 412-415: the 2-page table which interrupted the text has been removed to the end of the chapter (as it was in the first edition), and the page numbers and footnote numbers amended. as the table is spread across two pages, line numbers have been added to connect the two pages. the column headings run: _granted_ _at_ _confirmed_ _at_ _grantee_ _authority_ line 1. of the first table is followed by line 1. of the second table, and so on. the brackets between lines 6. and 7. have been removed, and the common information duplicated, to enable the two sets of line-numbers to co-relate. page 432: 'enured' = 'inured' = (legal) 'took effect', etc. errata: many printer's errors, nearly all absent from the first edition, appear to have been introduced by a careless printer working from a copy of the first edition. abbreviated titles, 'mr.', 'prof.', etc., in the first edition have mostly appeared in this edition as 'mr', 'prof', etc. these have been retained. incorrect punctuation has been repaired without comment, except in the index. here the printer of this edition has replaced many of the colons of the first edition with commas, and added extra commas after sub-listings. these have been retained. double quotes were used in the first edition; single quotes in this edition. this has led to some confusion where ' is used for both an abbreviation and a following end quote (''). other errors are listed below. page 10, footnote 3: '1404' corrected to '430'. "see p. 430." page 24: 'invinit' corrected to 'invenit'. (correct in 1895 ed.) "... et vendere potuit, et iiii^{tam.} partem unius avere vicecomiti invenit." page 26: 'defend [ebat]' corrected to 'defend[ebat]'. "pro v. hidis se defend[ebat] semper." page 29: 'vig.' corrected to 'virg.', (as 1895 ed.). "i. 198 (_b_) 1. 'tenet durand ... i. hidam et i. virg.', _for_ 'tenet durand i. hidam et dim. virg.'" page 30, footnote 38: 'earucis' corrected to 'carucis'. 'carucis' is a ploughland; 'earucis' does not exist. "... 'vi. carucis ibi est terra'. see _addenda_.]" page 33: 'licentiat' corrected to 'licentia', (as 1895 ed.). "absque eius licentia dare terram suam potuerunt,..." page 33: 'receder' corrected to 'recedere', (as 1895 ed.). "potuerunt recedere cum terra ad quem dominum voluerunt." page 34: 'teræ' corrected to 'terræ', (as 1895 ed.). "robertus hostiarius tenet de rege ii. car. terræ in howes." page 34, footnote 44: 'ne musad' corrected to 'nemus ad' "'silua ad sepes refici.' (i.c.c.) = 'nemus ad claud. sepes' (d.b.)." page 36: 'abbats' corrected to 'abbatis', (as 1895 ed.). "non potuit dare nec vendere absque licentia abbatis." page 37, footnote 54: 'commdantione' corrected to 'commendatione', (as 1895 ed.). "[... 'in soca et commendatione abbatis de eli' (d.b., ii. 441).]" page 66, footnote 133: 'curacate' corrected to 'carucate', (as 1895 ed.). "mr stevenson, perhaps, is rather too severe on canon taylor's 'carucate' remarks in the _new english dictionary_." page 68: 'emenadtionis' corrected to 'emendationis', (as 1895 ed.). "hujus emendationis habet rex ii. partes, comes terciam." page 72: '65' corrected to '63'. "lastly, to complete the parallel with the leicestershire hundreds _infra_, we may take this case (_cf._ p. 63, note 122.)" page 81, footnote 169: '43' (11 (2 + 3 + 3 + 43).) corrected to '3'. "... these assessments would give us 24 (6 + 6 + 6 + 3 + 3) + 24 (4 + 6 + 10 + 2 + 2) + 18 (3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3) + 11 (2 + 3 + 3 + 3)." page 89, footnote 184: 'constituuntut' corrected to 'constituuntur', (as 1895 ed.). "'in hundredo de tinghowe sunt xx. villæ ex quibus constituuntur ix. lete, quas sic distinguimus.' gage's suffolk, p. xii." page 90: eim[idium] corrected to 'dim[idium]', (as 1895 ed.) "'hund[redum] et dim[idium] de clakelosa de x. leitis' (ii. 212_b_)." page 93: '_sullung solanda_'corrected to '_sullung_ or _solanda_', (as 1895 ed.). "... shows that in the kentish district, and in essex, where the _sullung_ or _solanda_ takes the place of the hide,..." page 95: 'basse' corrected to 'bases'. "mr seebohm bases this statement on anglo-saxon evidence,..." page 95: 'cland. a. iv' corrected to 'claud. (for claudius) c. iv'. ('the bookcases of sir robert cotton's library were identified by busts of roman emperors. cf. <http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=h2p8tebz9yyc&pg=pa193> 'a. iv' corrected to 'c. iv' (wrong in 1895 ed., correct in elton's book).) "mr elton, in his well-known _tenures of kent_, attaches considerable importance to a list, 'de suylingis comitatus kantiæ et qui eas tenent;...' in the cottonian ms., claud. c. iv, which he placed little subsequent to domesday." page 96: 'numquam' and 'nunquam' are interchangeable; they both mean 'never', or 'not'. page 96: 'indominio' corrected to 'in dominio', (as 1895 ed.). "rex tenet in dominio _basingestoches_." page 101: 'p. 61' corrected to 'p. 60'. "in those worcestershire manors which were annexed as estates to hereford, but which were assessed in those worcestershire hundreds where they actually lay (see p. 60)." page 107: missing tag for footnote 219 added to page (as 1895 ed.). page 109: 'p[ræ] fectus' corrected to 'p[ræ]fectus' and 'hui [us]' corrected to 'hui[us]' "ric[ardus] p[ræ]fectus hui[us] hundreti" (tn: words italicised in text). page 113: 'abllot's' corrected to 'abbot's'. "abbot's sokeman 8(acres) 20(pence)" page 116: '_brere_' corrected to '_breve_'. "et sunt scriptæ in _breve regis_ (i. 178)." page 117: "... by by...." first 'by' replaced with 'but'. "is arranged not by hundreds but by fiefs." page 117: 'dermodesdun a' corrected to 'dermodesduna', (as 1895 ed.). "in dermodesduna tenuerunt xxv. liberi homines...." page 122: 'huntington' corrected to 'huntingdon', (as 1895 ed.). "and henry of huntingdon states that '... inter thesauros reposita usque hodie servantur'." page 147: 'hidæet' corrected to 'hidæ et'. "summa lx. hidæ et dimidia." page 151: '1212' corrected to '1122'. "consequently hugh, the youngest brother, can have been only a boy in 1122." page 151: '50' corrected to '60'. "... two knights' fees of stafford in 1166,[59] and that another is robert bagot, who held a quarter of a fee,[60] while geoffrey ridel himself then held one, namely, madeley.[61]" page 161: 'ed' corrected to 'de'. (roger de moubray) "in picwell et in lucerthorp de feudo rogeri de moubray xv. car." page 173: 'june 31st'. this agrees with the 1895 ed., but may refer to a document of 1st july, 1176. (see page 388, paragraph beginning: "having now traced the royal _iter_, of which the pleas are...."). page 177: 'comitis[is]' corrected to 'comit[is]', to match similar. "in evenle i. hid. et i. parvam virg. de feodo comit[is] leyc[estrie]." page 189 (et seq.): 'i. the cartae of 1166'. the 3rd impression agrees with the 1st edition (1895). subsequent 'cartæ' in this chapter (3rd impression) do not. all instances of 'cartæ' in this chapter have been corrected to 'cartae', as 1895 ed. page 208, footnote 106: 'gnesit' corrected to 'gneist'. "[footnote 106: gneist, _c.h._, i. 129, 156.]" page 212: _cartae_ corrected to '_carta_. "for while the _carta_ of william de braose returns twenty-eight fees,..." page 212: 'xxxviij. lij. s. vj. d.' corrected to 'xxxviij. l. ij. s. vj. d.' (38 pounds, 2 shillings, 6 pence) "abbas gloucestriæ de promissione, sed non numeratur quid; sed in rotulo praecedenti dicitur:--abbas gloucestriæ debet xxxviij. l. ij. s. vj. d. de veteri scutagio walliae." page 213: 'charteris abbey' corrected to 'chatteris abbey'. chatteris is a town about ten miles from ely. charteris appears to be in scotland. r/t is a not uncommon printer's error in older books. page 215, footnote 128: 'millitum' corrected to 'militum'. "so too bishop wulfstan is found 'pompam militum secum ducens qui stipendiis annuis', etc. (w. malmesb.)" page 217: 'archibishop' corrected to 'archbishop'. "... archbishop theobald...." page 224, footnote 161: this edition used single quotes, where earlier editions used double quotes. sometimes this leads to confusion: 'episcopus de heref' reddit compotum de lxxvi. libris et v. solidis de promiss[ione] c. servientium de wal'' (p. 84). where the following would have been clearer: [... "episcopus de heref' reddit compotum de lxxvi. libris et v. solidis de promiss[ione] c. servientium de wal'" (p. 84).] (heref' and wal' are abbreviations). page 230: 'restoring' corrected to 'resorting'. "it is a hopeless undertaking to reconcile the facts with the wild figures of mediæval historians by resorting to the ingenious devices of apocalyptic interpretation." (as 1895 ed.) page 253, footnote 22: 'pa' corrected to 'þa', as in 1895 ed. "... but the words of the worcester chronicler 'þa castelmenn on hereforda' seem to fix the meaning to the city itself'" page 254: 'althelings' corrected to 'athelings', as in 1895 ed. "the two former would naturally be given to godsons or dependants of the two athelings while in normandy [_i.e._ after 1013]." page 254: 'britio' corrected to 'brito' as in 1895 ed. "... we have another breton tenant-in-chief, 'alvredus brito'." page 255: 'al veredus' corrected to 'alveredus'. "... et hispaniensis alveredus, cum aliis compluribus." page 256: 'leibermann' corrected to 'liebermann'. "i can now, by the kindness of dr liebermann, add the instance of the mandeville fief in surrey,..." page 256: 'wesmam' corrected to 'wesman' as in 1895 ed. "'de his hidis tenet wesman vi. hidas de goisfrido filio comitis eustachii;..." page 261: 'pæt mysnter æt pære bataille' corrected to 'þæt mynster æt þære bataille'. "... the usual title is 'ecclesia sancti martini de bello', 'ecclesia de bello', or, as we have seen, in english 'þæt mynster æt þære bataille'." page 261: 'pære' corrected to 'þære'. "('he com him togenes æt þære haran apuldran')." page 273: 'in' corrected to 'it'. "... the palisade, and that it figures 'now in every history'." page 285, footnote 117: '_stravil_' corrected to '_stravit_.' as 1895 ed. "as the writer had just described how the duke '_stravit_ adversam gentem',..." page 289, footnote 122: 'foosse' corrected to 'fosse'. "... than that they did not notice the fosse." page 289, footnote 123: 'smewhat' corrected to 'somewhat'. "'the passage,' as she says, 'is somewhat obscure.'" page 292, footnote 129: 'quas ivolante' corrected to 'quasi volante'. "'ausa sunt, ut superius, aliquot millia quasi volante cursu, quos fugere putabant urgere' (_will. pict._).]" page 295: '_d' arches_' corrected to '_d'arches_' (as 1895 ed.) "_à la tur d'arches fist porter_," page 300, footnote 148: 'coonq.' corrected to 'conq.' "[footnote 148: _norm. conq._, ii. 469; and _supra_, p. 356.]" page 301, footnote 152: missing 'is' inserted, as in 1985 ed. "[footnote 152: 'the reviewer ... tells us that ... mr freeman ... is wrong, completely wrong,...']" page 318: 'ii.' corrected to 'll.' (lines), as in 1895 ed. "it is hard to believe that the writer of ll. 8103-38 had not seen that famous work." page 327: 'buro nam' corrected to 'burnam', as 1895 ed. "the charter was granted 'apud burnam in transfretatione mea anno incarnationis domini mcxxxiii...." page 329, footnote 17: '14, 314' but corrected to '14,314'. "add. ms., 14,314, fo. 32_b_ (pencil)." page 335: 'lubeck' corrected to 'lübeck'. "... we see that the path was opening by which exeter might have come to be another lübeck, the head of a damnonian hanse,..." page 355: 'daous' corrected to 'dacus', as 1895 ed. laingaham tenet walterus tirelde r. quod tenuit phin dacus pro ii. hidis et dimidia et pro uno manerio (_domesday_, ii. 41). page 358, footnote 1: 'guillelum' corrected to 'guillelmum', as 1895 ed. "'baldwinus vero genuit rodbertum, et guillelmum,...'" page 358, footnote 6: 'boynard's' corrected to 'baynard's', and 'fatome' corrected to 'fantôme' as 1895 ed. "ancestor of the fitzwalters of dunmow and of baynard's castle, who are accordingly spoken of by fantôme as 'clarreaus'--a word which has puzzled his editor, mr howlett." page 360: 'acheres' corrected to 'achères', as 1895 ed. "... lord of poix in ponthieu and of achères by the seine'..." page 368: 'p. 481' corrected to p. 365'. i have already determined (p. 365) the date of ranulf's accession to the post. page 369: (richard fitz baldwin, a sheriff of devon): 'page 237' corrected to 'page 236, note 239' "... ricardo filio baldwini vicecomiti...." page 369, footnote 4: 'pp. 330, 472' corrected to 'pp. 256, footnote 37; 358' "... in conjunction with william fitz baldwin (see pp. 256, footnote 37; 358") page 369, footnote 4: three instances of 'nunant' corrected to 'nonant', as 1895 ed. [1st ed. has nunant for the previous 3 occurrences of the name, but nonant here and the next 2 occurrences. possibly the variation may be deliberate and reflect the spelling in the sources.] page 371: there would appear to be some error here. the family tree (also in the 1st ed.) disagrees with the text, where dolfin is said to be the son of uchtred and brother of eadwulf. page 377: 'notros' corrected to 'nostros', as 1895 ed. "... et servientes vel ministri provinciarum, et homines nostros manutenuerint,..." page 381: 'pertinen [ciis]' corrected to 'pertinen[ciis]', as 1895 ed. "... suis heredibus villam de aynho cum omnibus pertinen[ciis]...." page 394: 'robert i' corrected to 'roberti', as 1895 ed. "robertus stephanides ... inter cæteros _herveius de montemaurisco_ roberti patruus, _nepoti suo se_ comitem præbuit (p. 77)." page 400: 'sevitium' corrected to 'servitium', as 1895 ed. "scio equidem ad militare servitium domino regi,..." page 402, footnote 18: 'consuelentes' corrected to 'consulentes', as 1895 ed. "in crastino autem venerunt quidam familiares regis, consulentes abbati ut sibi caute provideret,..." page 417, footnote 2: 'donus' corrected to 'domus', as 1895 ed. "('domus ejus et omnia ad ejus mancionem pertinentia prosternantur')" page 424: 'confirms' corrected to 'confirm', as 1895 ed. "the actual words (as given by jeake), confirm to the ports their liberties as held:..." page 430, footnote 10: 'sitting' corrected to 'silting', as 1895 ed. "... but i can find no trace of a haven 'formed by the bourne between the east and west hills', which replaced it on its silting-up." page 432: 'p. 389' corrected to 'p. 359'. "robert fitz richard and his children (see p. 359) are included in this pedigree," page 438: 'habour' corrected to 'harbour' "hastings, harbour, 427-8, and footnote 10." page 442: index numbers: 555, 558-60 removed. correct for first edition; too high for 3rd impression. index: the index was unreliable. though most page numbers were correct, some page numbers belonged to the first edition, and had not been correctly translated, or not removed after translation; some were merely incorrect. all page numbers were checked, and retained, amended, or deleted without tn comment, except where the error was not simply numerical. as the footnotes have now been removed from the ends of pages to the ends of chapters, there is no longer the connection from the index page reference to a footnote, which may have held the only information on the page to the index topic. accordingly, where the information sought is only in the footnote, the footnote number, as a superscript, has been added to the page number in the index, e.g. "ellis, mr a. s., 249^{7}, 257^{43}" index: 'feif' corrected to 'fief'. "barnstaple, fief of,..." index: 'beauchamp, maud de, 156, 158-9'. the reference to p. 158 is to 'matilda beauchamp'. 'matilda' and 'maud' were apparently interchangeable, so this reference would be correct. however, p. 159 has: "... in their rivalry for tamworth,[36] the marmions embraced the cause of stephen, and the beauchamps that of maud, their variance being terminated under henry ii by a matrimonial alliance." surely this maud is not maud de beauchamp, as the entry implies, but the empress maud, daughter, and surviving heir, of henry i, and mother of henry ii; and bitter rival of her cousin, stephen of blois, crowned king of england, while she was not quite crowned queen. index: 'couut' corrected to 'count'. "fitz count, brian,..." index: 'hamslape' corected to 'hanslape'. "hanslape, michael de, 179" index: 'knight's-fees' corrected to 'knight's fees', as 1895 ed. 