THE ELECTION AND CORONATION OF EADWARD. 349 of the bargain between himself and Eadward or not, we have here quite enough to make an opposition on Swegen's behalf highly probable. "Tyrannus is of course to be taken in the sense of "pretender." Another passage of Adam (iii. 13) must here be mentioned; "Simul eo tempore separabant se Angli a regno Danorum, filiis Gudwini rebellionis auctoribus, quos amitæ Regis Danorum filios esse diximus, et quorum sororem Eduardus Rex duxit uxorem. Hi namque, factâ conspiratione, fratres Suein Regis, qui in Angliâ Duces erant, alterum Bern statim obtruncant, alterum Osbern cum suis omnibus ejecerunt a patriâ." This at first sight appears to be an account of the separation between Denmark and England on the death of Harthacnut. It is not however really so. It must be taken in connexion with a passage two chapters back (iii. 11), in which Adam gives a most strange version of the events which followed the death of Magnus in 1048. In the true account, Swegen then asked for English help, which was refused, and a peace was concluded between England and Harold Hardrada (see p. 60). But Adam makes Swegen possess both Denmark and Norway, and then prepare to invade England ("Suein duo regna possedit, classemque parâsse dicitur, ut Angliam suo juri subjiceret ”). Eadward agrees to pay tribute, and renews the promise of the succession ("verum sanctissimus Rex Edwardus, quum justitiâ regnum gubernaret, tunc quoque pacem eligens, victori obtulit tributum, statuens eum, ut supra dictum est, post se regni hæredem "). This must be another version of the intended expedition of Magnus (see p. 47). On the strength of this tribute, Adam seems to look upon Swegen as at least over-lord of England (" quum Rex juvenis Suein tria pro libitu suo regna tenuerit"). He seems to look on Beorn and Osbeorn as Swegen's representatives in England, and the murder of Beorn by Swegen is made into the groundwork of a story of "rebellio," "conspiratio," and what not, about the sons of Godwine in general. The only historical value of this very confused account is that it helps us to the very probable fact of the banishment of Osbeorn, of whom we do not hear in the English writers till 1069. But the story is very curious, as it is the evident groundwork of the wonderful tale in Saxo (p. 202). Saxo looks on Swegen as the natural sovereign of England after the death of Harthacnut. Going to Denmark to assert his rights there, he left his interests in England in the hands of his cousins the sons of Godwine. From Eadward himself he feared nothing, unlike Harthacnut, who had dreaded his ambition, and who therefore made him his colleague in the Kingdom, lest he should attempt to gain the whole ("Retinendæ insula spem non solum in Godovini filiis, quibus sanguine admodum conjunctus fuerat, reponens, sed etiam ex ipsâ consortis sui"-Eadwardi sc.---"stoliditate desidiâque præsumens"). But Harold the son of Godwine betrays Swegen's trust, makes Eadward King, and massacres the Danes, according to the story in vol. i. p. 522. I do not profess to harmonize every detail of the conflicting stories about Eadward, Magnus, and Swegen. But I think that there is enough evidence to lead us to believe that Eadward's election was opposed by a Danish party in Swegen's interest, and that these were the persons who were marked at the time and gradually punished afterwards. See pp. 6, 41, 46, 58. NOTE B. p. 13. THE LEGENDARY HISTORY OF EADWARD. THERE is something very remarkable in that gradual developement of popular reverence for King Eadward which at last ended in his being acknowledged as the Patron Saint of England. I have endeavoured in the text to point out the chief causes from which this feeling arose; how Eadward was, in different ways, the one person whom Normans and Englishmen could unite in honouring. I will now attempt to trace out the growth of the feeling itself, and to point out some of the ways in which Eadward's true character and history have been clouded over by legendary and miraculous tales. Every English writer, as I shall presently show, speaks of Eadward with marked respect, with a degree of respect, in most cases, which their own narratives of his actions hardly account for. Yet, alongside of this, we find indications of a counter feeling, as if there were all along some who thought of him pretty much as the modern historian is driven to think of him. The Scandinavian writers, placed beyond the influences which had effect upon both English and Norman writers, seem to have all along estimated him nearly at his true value. Saxo, though writing long after Eadward had become a recognized saint, treats him with great irreverence, and speaks openly of his "stoliditas et desidia." The biographer of Olaf Tryggvesson, according to whom Eadward was a special admirer of his own hero, gives him only the rather faint praise of being “princeps optimus in multis" ("oc var agetur Kongr i mórgum lutum." p. 262). In Snorro's time he had advanced somewhat; "Hann var kalladr Játvardr inn Gódi, hann var sva" (Ant. Celt. Scand. 189; Laing, iii. 75). But his sanctity still seems only local; Snorro says emphatically that "Englishmen call him a saint" ("oc kalla Enskir menn hann Helgan." Ant. Celt. Scand. 191; Laing, iii. 77). Adam of Bremen, who, as regards English matters, may almost pass for a Scandinavian writer, is Eadward's warmest admirer in that part of the world. He gives him perhaps the only unreserved praise which he gets in Northern Europe. With Adam he is not only "vir bonus et timens Deum" (ii. 74), but he rises to the dignity of "sanctissimus Rex Edwardus" (iii. 11). William of Malmesbury, in his accustomed way of letting us see both sides of a question, shows us that in his day there were still people in England by whom the royal saint was lightly esteemed, and he himself seems now and then to halt between two opinions. He gives him (iii. 259) no higher surname than "Edwardus Simplex," and over and over again, as if of set purpose, he speaks of his "simplicitas as his chief characteristic. The utmost that he can say for him is that his simplicity won for him favour and protection both with God and man. He was (ii. 196) "vir propter morum simplicitatem parum imperio idoneus, sed Deo devotus, ideoque ab eo directus." "Fovebat profecto ejus simplicitatem Deus." (Ib.) "Quamvis vel deses vel simplex putaretur, habebat Comites qui eum ex humili in altum conantem erigerent." William believes in his holiness, and even in his miraculous powers, but he has not wholly given up the right of criticism upon his character and actions. The English Chroniclers and their harmonizer Florence record Eadward's actions with perfect impartiality. Nowhere in their narratives do THE LEGENDARY HISTORY OF EADWARD. 351 they display towards him any of that affection which they display towards Harold and other actors in the story. Nor do they ever speak of him with bated breath, as of an acknowledged saint. But the Abingdon and Worcester Chroniclers, and Florence also, all send him out of the world with a panegyric. The unbending Godwinist at Peterborough alone makes no sign. But Florence's panegyric is of the most general kind. He is (A. 1066) "Anglorum decus, pacificus Rex Eadwardus." And the elaborate poem in the two Chronicles attributes to the "baleless King" only the mildest and most monastic virtues. One can hardly keep from a smile, till we reach the genuine tribute of admiration with which the poet winds up. He speaks at last from the heart when he makes it Eadward's highest praise to have "made fast his realm" to "Harold the noble Earl." The Chroniclers and Florence imply nothing as to any extraordinary powers possessed by Eadward. Of these powers we get the first glimpses in the contemporary Biographer. Already, within eight years after his death, Eadward was held, at least by those who sought to win favour with his widow, to have wrought miracles, to have seen visions, to have been the subject of the visions of others. When Eadward was taken over as a boy to Normandy, Brihtwold, Bishop of Wiltshire, had a vision in which he saw Saint Peter consecrating Eadward as King (Vita Eadw. 394). The Biographer also (pp. 430, 1) records the unintelligible talk of Eadward on his death-bed, in which he already discerns a prophecy, and he severely rebukes Archbishop Stigand, whose practical mind set small store by the babble of the sick man. Eadward also appears in his pages as the first of the long line of English Kings who undertook to cure the evil by the royal touch. By washing and touching he healed (428) a scrofulous woman, and, what one would hardly have expected, whereas she had hitherto been barren, the touch of Eadward changed her into a joyful mother of children. But here William of Malmesbury again helps us. He is a full believer in Eadward's miraculous power, but he again (ii. 222) lets us see that there were two opinions on the subject. Some people affirmed that Eadward cured the evil, not by virtue of his holiness, but by virtue of his royal descent; "Nostro tempore quidam falsam insumunt operam, qui asseverant istius morbi curationem non ex sanctitate, sed ex regalis prosapiæ hæreditate fluxisse." So others at a later time, as Peter of Blois (ep. 150, vol. ii. p. 82 Giles), held that the Kings of England possessed the gift by virtue of their royal unction. William argues against such views, but by so doing he proves that Eadward's claims to holiness and miraculous power were still a moot point in his time. Besides this official kind of miracle, Eadward, according to his Biographer, wrought other wonderful works. A blind man was cured by the water in which the King had washed (429), and several cures were wrought at his tomb (435). One is almost tempted to suspect that these stories are interpolations, but there is no need for the supposition. An interpolator would surely have taken care to insert the more famous stories of the ring and of the Seven Sleepers, of which the Biographer tells us nothing. We must remember how men then, and for ages afterwards, instead of being surprised at miracles, looked for them. We must not forget that Queen Anne touched for the evil as well as King Eadward; we must remember that alleged miracles were wrought by the blood, not only of Thomas of London and Simon of Montfort, but also of Charles the First. William of Malmesbury, evidently with the Biographer before him, enlarges greatly on Eadward's miraculous and prophetic powers (ii. 220-227), adding to the stories in the Life the vision of the Seven Sleepers (see above, p. 507). But the main disseminator of legendary lore about Eadward was Osbern or Osbert of Clare, Prior of Westminster, who made the first attempt to procure his formal canonization (see vol. iii. chap. xi.), and who wrote a book on his life and miracles (Introduction to M. H. B. 16; Luard, Preface, xxv.; Hardy's Catalogue of British History, i. 637, 642). His work has never been printed, but it forms the groundwork of the well-known Life by Æthelred of Rievaux, printed in the Decem Scriptores, and a collection of his letters, dealing largely with Eadward's merits and claim to canonization, was printed at Brussels in 1846 together with the letters of Herbert de Losingâ. As Ethelred's Life was founded on that of Osbert, so his own work became the groundwork of the French Life printed by Mr. Luard, which however adds many particulars which are not to be found in Æthelred. Both these biographies are truly wonderful productions. Of the French writer I have already given a specimen in vol. i. p. 523. Perhaps his grandest achievement is to make Godwine kill Eadmund Ironside (p. 47. v. 775). Both he and the Abbot of Rievaux agree in describing King Æthelred as a mighty warrior, fighting manfully against the Danes. He is "Rex strenuissimus," "gloriosus Rex (X Scriptt. 372; cf. the Abbot's Genealogia Regum, 362, 363), and in the French Life (v. 131) we read- "Li rois Aedgard avoit un fiz K'ert de force e sens garniz, Edelred k'out non, bon justisers, In short, for historical purposes, the French Life is absolutely worthless, That THE LEGENDARY HISTORY OF EADWARD. 353 historian of Saint Wandrille (Chron. Fontanellense, ap. D'Achery, ii. 286) describes Eadward as being not only elected but crowned in his childhood ("Eguvardus, qui prior natu erat, tener admodum et in puerilibus adhuc annis constitutus Rex, jubente patre et favente populo terræ unctus est et consecratus "). Here the command of Ethelred comes first; the will of the people is something quite secondary. In the time of the French biographer, popular election of Kings was an idea which had altogether gone out of date, and which was not likely to be acceptable at the Court of Henry the Third. The story is left out accordingly. No feature in the legendary history of Eadward fills a more prominent position in hagiography, none has won him more admiration from hagiographers, than the terms on which he is said to have lived with his wife. It is certain that, at a time when it was especially needful to provide direct heirs to the Crown, the marriage of Eadward and Eadgyth was childless. Eadward's monastic admirers attribute this fact to the resolution of Eadward, shared, according to some writers, by Eadgyth also, to devote himself to a life of perpetual virginity. When we come to examine the evidence, we shall find that this is one of those cases in which each later writer knows more than the writers before him. The earliest statements which have any bearing on the subject, though consistent with the monastic theory, do not necessarily imply it, and there are indications which look the other way. The tale grows as it is handed down from one panegyrist to another, in a way which naturally awakens suspicion. And when we consider the portrait of Eadward which is given us, his personal appearance, his personal temperament, and most of his tastes, we shall perhaps be led to guess that the unfruitfulness of Eadward's marriage was owing neither to any religious impediment nor yet to barrenness on the part of the daughter of Godwine. The story is probably due to a very natural process. The fact of Eadgyth's childlessness was explained by her husband's admirers in the way which, to their monastic imaginations, seemed most honourable to him, and details of course grew in the usual fashion. Let us now look through the evidence. Florence and the prose text of the Chronicles are silent on the subject. The poem in the Abingdon and Worcester Chronicles says that Eadward was "Kyninge cystum gód, Clane and milde, But surely this is no more than might be said of any man who was chaste before marriage and faithful to his wife afterwards. The Biographer has several passages which may be thought to bear on the subject. He says (428) that Eadward "consecrationis dignitatem sanctam conservans castimoniâ, omnem vitam agebat Deo dicatam in verâ innocentiâ." This again need not mean anything more than the words of the poem. In the account of Bishop Brihthold's vision (394), Saint Peter is seen to crown Eadward and "cœlibem ei vitam designare.' One might say that this is vision and not history, but the vision would of course be devised so as to fit in with what was held to be the history. But, strange as it may seem, the word calebs does not imply either virginity or single life. The Biographer uses it (409; see above, p. 255) to express the conjugal fidelity of Tostig, who was VOL. II. ла |