undoubtedly the father of children; and William of Malmesbury (iii. 273) speaks of the "cœlibatus antiquus" of the Great William with exactly the same meaning. Elsewhere (p. 429) Eadward is called "columbinæ puritatis Rex," a phrase which may mean anything, but in the passage in which it occurs there is no special mention of chastity. Lastly, Eadward (433) on his death-bed is made to say of Eadgyth, "Obsequuta est mihi devote, et lateri mec semper propius adstitit in loco carissimæ filiæ." But this is surely no more than might be said by any maundering old man of a wife much younger than himself. One is half tempted to quote the words of Ovid, Metam. x. 467;

"Forsitan ætatis quoque nomine, Filia, dicat,”

and we may bring an exact parallel in the language addressed by Jacqueline of Hainault to her husband Duke Humfrey (Monstrelet, ii. 24, ed. 1595). She calls him "tresredouté seigneur et pere,” “treshonnoré seigneur et pere," and calls herself "vostre dolente et tresaymée fille." (See Stevenson, Wars in France, i. lv.) In none of these passages is there any direct assertion of any vow or of any practice of virginity on the part of Eadward. His chastity is undoubtedly praised. But the language in which it is praised does not necessarily imply anything more than might be said with equal truth of any faithful husband. If the Biographer had any idea of the religious virginity of his hero and heroine, he would surely have expressed himself more distinctly. He would hardly have called Eadgyth "tori ejus consocia" (418), without some sort of qualification. If any one should say that the Biographer's work is dedicated to Eadgyth herself, and that he would not enlarge to her on such a subject, he is looking at the matter with the feelings of our own age. The age of Eadward felt quite differently on such points. The panegyrists of Queens like Pulcheria and Æthelthryth took care that the light of those saintly ladies should in no case be hidden under a bushel. On the whole, I am inclined to think that the expressions of the Biographer, looked at critically, rather tell against the monastic theory. But such ambiguous expressions may well contain the germ of the legend.

One or two other points may be mentioned. Eadward is said (see above, p. 348) to have made an agreement with Swegen Estrithson, by which the Danish prince was to succeed to the English Crown, "vel si filios susceperit." Such an agreement, or even any general belief in the existence of such an agreement, is inconsistent with such a vow on Eadward's part as the monastic writers pretend. And the language of more than one writer seems inconsistent with any general belief in such a vow. William of Jumièges (vii. 31) speaks of Eadward as "disponente Deo successione prolis carens." William of Malmesbury again (ii. 228), in an unguarded moment, when he is discussing the policy of the King and not the merits of the saint, says that Eadward sent for the Etheling from Hungary, "quod ipse non susceperat liberos." And Eadward himself, if it be Eadward who speaks in the Westminster charters, gives as his reason for not going in person to Rome, that the royal race would be jeoparded in his person, "maxime quod nullum habebam filium" (Cod. Dipl. iv. 174). Such language would hardly be used by Eadward himself, still less would it be used by a forger, if the possibility of children had been cut off by any religious vow, formally made and generally known. Again, if Eadward had been known to be under such a vow, it is much less clear why Godwine should be anxious for the

THE LEGENDARY HISTORY OF EADWARD.

355

marriage of Eadward and Eadgyth. The sacrifice of his daughter would be much less intelligible, if there was no chance of its being rewarded by the succession of a grandson of Godwine to the Crown.

We will now look to the accounts which tell the other way. As might be expected, the earlier statements are very much less full and positive than the later. As long as Eadward, however deeply reverenced, was still not a canonized saint, the subject was one which might be discussed, and different opinions might be put forth about it. After the canonization, the slightest doubt would of course have passed for blasphemy.

Thus William of Jumièges (vii. 9) asserts the fact, but somewhat doubtfully; "Ut inter eos [Eadward and Godwine] firmus amor jugiter maneret, Editham filiam ejus uxorem nomine tenus duxit. Nam revera, ut dicunt, ambo perpetuam virginitatem conservaverunt." Elsewhere, as we have just seen, he forgets the story altogether; so also does William of Malmesbury, but in another place he asserts the fact. He is however in doubt as to the motive, and he seems certainly to know of no vow on the part of Eadgyth. He most likely had the words of the Biographer, “tori ejus consocia," before him when he wrote (ii. 197); "Nuptam sibi Rex hâc arte tractabat, ut nec toro amoveret nec virili more cognosceret; quod an familiæ illius odio, quod prudenter dissimulabat pro tempore, an amore castitatis fecerit, compertum non habeo. Illud celeberrime fertur, numquam illum cujusquam mulieris contubernio pudicitiam læsisse.' His account of Eadgyth is singular. She was suspected of unchastity, both during Eadward's lifetime and after his death; but on her death-bed she cleared herself by a solemn and voluntary oath, seemingly without calling in the help of compurgators. Wace again, in the Roman de Rou (9883), gives the report, but does not seem very certain or emphatic about it;

"Feme prist la fille Gwine,

Edif out nom, bele meschine,
Maiz entrels n'orent nul enfant;
E ço alouent la gent disant,

Ke charnelment od li ne jut,
Ne charnelment ne la conut:
Mais unkes hom ne l'aparçut,
Ne mal talent entrels ne fut."

Wace, as Prevost remarks in his note, seems hardly to have known of Eadgyth's disgrace, if not divorce, in 1051. The Hyde writer again, who, whoever he was and whenever he wrote, often preserved independent traditions, and who clearly exercised a sort of judgement of his own, knows the tale only as a report (288); “Fertur tamen Regem Edwardum numquam cum eâdem carnis habuisse consortium, sed mundissimæ vitæ semper dilexisse cœlibatum."

Here we get the story in its second stage. Eadward's reputation for sanctity is advancing; the fact of Eadgyth's childlessness, and the ambiguous expressions of the contemporary writers, are now commonly interpreted in a particular way. Still this interpretation has not yet become an article of faith. For the fully developed legend, setting forth the saint in all his glory, we must go to Ethelred of Rievaux and his followers. They of course know everything, down to the minutest details of everybody's thoughts and prayers. The story will be found in Ethelred (X Scriptt. 377, 378), and it is versified at great length in the French Life (p. 55 et seqq.). As soon as Eadward is established on the throne, his Witan, anxious about the succession, urge him to marry. The vow seems to be assumed. On the mention of marriage, Eadward is in a great strait; he is afraid to refuse; at the same time he is anxious not to violate his chastity.

His prayers and meditations are given at great length, including much talk about the not exactly apposite examples of Joseph and Susanna. At last the difficulty is escaped by his marrying the daughter of Godwine, of whose piety as well as beauty a wonderful description is given. There is of course not a word about the suspicions spoken of by William of Malmesbury, any more than there is about the murder of Gospatric. Eadgyth happily chances to be of the same peculiar turn as Eadward himself; so they exactly suit one another. They marry; but they agree to live, and do live, in great mutual affection, but only as brother and sister. A new scriptural allusion happily presents itself, and Eadgyth is promoted to the rank of a "nova Abisac." The unlucky expression of the Biographer about “locus carissimæ filiæ" is of course seized up and amplified. Eadward, on his death-bed, addresses Eadgyth as "filia mea (X Scriptt. 402). The Biographer (433) had made Eadward commend Eadgyth to the care of her brother Harold, "ut pro dominâ [hlæfdige] et sorore, ut est, fideli serves et honores obsequio." Ethelred either misunderstood the passage, or else flew off at the word "soror." He tells us (402), "Reginam deinde fratri proceribusque commendans, ejus plurimum laudabat obsequium, et pudicitiam prædicabat, quæ se quidem uxorem gerebat in publico, sed sororem vel filiam in occulto."

It will be remembered that William of Jumièges, Wace, and the Hyde writer mention the story only as a report; William of Malmesbury seems to accept the fact as undoubted, and is uncertain only as to the motive. According to Æthelred (378), the public mind in Eadward's own time was in the same state as the mind of William of Malmesbury a generation or two later. No one doubted the fact; "Né aliquis huic Regis virtuti fidem deroget, sciat hoc tempore illius per totam Angliam sic divulgatum et creditum, ut de facto certi plerique de intentione certarent." People who -like William of Malmesbury-failed to rise to the full appreciation of Eadward's saintship, thought it might be because Eadward was unwilling to raise up grandsons to the traitor Godwine. Such rationalizing doubts are indignantly dismissed; "Quidam nihil nisi carnem et sanguinem sapientes, simplicitati regiæ [a clear hit at William] hoc imponebat, quod compulsus generi se miscuerit proditorum, et ne proditores procrearet, operi supersederet conjugali. Sed si consideretur amor quo se complectebantur, facile contemnitur talis opinio. Hoc idcirco inserendum putavi, ut sciatur neminem tunc de Regis continentiâ dubitâsse, quum de caussâ taliter disputaverint." So it is that men get better informed, the further removed they are from personal knowledge of the events.

Having reached the perfect story in Ethelred, it is needless to carry on the examination any further. I will only add that some specially eloquent talk on the subject will be found in the Ramsey History, cap. cxx. (Gale, p. 461), and that in Ethelred (377) we first find the line which has become more famous through the false Ingulf, "Sicut spina rosam genuit Godwinus Edivam."

NOTE C.
P. 18.

EADWARD'S FONDNESS FOR FOREIGN CHURCHMEN.

I MAY here quote a curious story about the relations between Eadward and Eadgyth and a foreign Abbot, which I cannot do better than give in the original Latin. The hero of the tale was Abbot of the famous

EADWARD'S FONDNESS FOR FOREIGN CHURCHMEN. 357

monastery of Saint Riquier in Picardy. The church is a splendid one, but of late date; not far off is the municipal beffroi, to which the inhabitants still point with pride as the memorial of struggles waged with, and victories gained over, their ecclesiastical lords.

66

Regi Anglorum Hetguardo Gervinus semper carus et venerabilis fuit, et ab illo, si ejus fines intrâsset, mirâ honorificentiâ attollebatur. Quique Rex, si eum in aliquâ vel pro aliquâ loci nostri necessitate angustiari comperisset, munificus valde in succurrendo, remotâ omni excusatione, exsistebat. Regina etiam conjux ejusdem, nomine Edith, satis superque Gervinum pro suæ merito sanctitatis diligebat et venerabatur, et juxta mariti exemplum admodum liberalis, si aliqua petiisset, libens conferebat. Quâdam vero vice accidit ut Abbati nuperrime terram illam ingresso osculum salutationis et pacis Regina porrigeret, quod ille gratiâ conservanda sinceritatis abhorrens excipere noluit. At illa ferox, videns se Reginam spretam a monacho, nimis moleste tulit, et quædam quæ, ut pro se orâsset, illi donare statuerat, irata retraxit. Verum, marito id ipsum increpante, quod Abbatem tam religiosum pro non infracto rigore odio insequi voluisset, et aliis honestis viris suggerentibus non esse odiendum hominem qui sic Deo se mancipâsset, ut ne Reginæ quidem osculo se pateretur contra ordinem mulceri, placata est Regina, et hujusmodi factum non solum in illo non vituperavit, sed magnæ laudis attollens præconio, in sui regni Episcopis vel Abbatibus talem manere consuetudinem deinceps conquesta est. Multis ergo honoribus et donis eum fulciens remittebat onustum, hoc solum ab eo reposcens ut tempore orationis inter benefactores computari mereretur. Uxor etiam ipsius Regis donavit ei amictum valde pretiosum, auro et lapide pretioso mirifice decoratum, quem Abbas detulit in nostræ ecclesiæ thesaurum." Chron. Centulense, iv. 22; ap. D'Achery, ii. 345.

This story is referred to, but inaccurately, in Mr. Thorpe's Lappenberg, ii. 244. There is no mention of it in the original, p. 504.

Saint Riquier however does not appear to have held lands in England in Eadward's time, as the lands which were held by it under William (Domesday, ii. 167 b) had been held T. R. E. by a nameless freeman. But this was not the last begging expedition of Gervinus to our shores, nor was he the only foreign Prelate who came on the like errand in Eadward's days. Another was John, second Abbot of Fécamp, the connexion of which monastery with Eadward calls for a little fuller notice.

The gifts of Eadward to Fécamp are of some importance as connecting themselves with those charges against Godwine and Harold with which I shall deal specially in Note E. The history of the lordship of Steyning in Sussex calls for especial attention. Eadward's grant of this property to Fécamp is found in a writ in Cod. Dipl. iv. 229, stating "æt ic_habbe geunnen das landes æt Stæningan into Xan hâlgan mynstre æt Feskamp." Now in Domesday 17 we find Ramsey held by Fécamp and held also T. R. E. But of Steyning we read, "Ipse Abbas tenet Staninges. Heraldus tenuit in fine Regis E." Now Eadward's grant was not to take effect till after the death of Bishop Elfwine ("æfter Ælfwines bisceopes dægæ"), which must mean Elfwine, Bishop of Winchester, who died in 1047. The grant was therefore made early in Eadward's reign, and it seemingly never took effect. It would seem that, on Ælfwine's death, Godwine, and not the monks of Fécamp, got possession of Steyning, and that Godwine handed it on to Harold. To hinder land from going to enrich strangers and to take it to enrich himself was thoroughly in character with Godwine's disposition.

We might have inferred all this from a comparison of Eadward's writ with Domesday; but it is singularly borne out by the Fécamp manuscripts quoted in Neustria Pia, 223. Two charters appear there, one of William before his expedition, in which he promises "si Deus sibi eunti in Anglicam terram daret victoriam," to give to Fécamp "donationem de terrâ de Staningis. . . et omnium aliarum terrarum quæ per Godwinum et suos filios ei injuste ablatæ fuerant." The other is one of William as King"Patronus Normannorum, Rex etiam Anglorum"-confirming the gift of Steyning and all other gifts of his predecessor Eadward to the Church of Fécamp-"terras ipsas quas dominus [I shall have to speak again of this title] et antecessor meus Eduardus Rex concessit prædictæ ecclesiæ, quod quidem non solummodo multorum relatione didici, sed etiam litteris ejus charactere sigillatis." So directly after, "Rex Eduardus, dominus meus easdem terras Deo dari voluit." On this showing also, the Church had never entered on the lands, and we may add this to the other charges of sacrilege against Godwine with which we shall presently have to deal.

But it is also clear from the extracts in the very same page that Harold was less strict in these matters than his father. We read there, from the manuscript history of Fécamp, how Abbot John came over to England, and several gifts which he got out of King Eadward are reckoned up. Now the date given to this journey is 1054, just the time when, as I have suggested (see pp. 230, 238), Harold was allowing some of the less obnoxious Normans to return. The two things fall in precisely with one another. Harold did not feel called on to give up the lordship which he had inherited, but he did not hinder the foreign monks from receiving other gifts from the King.

The possessions of Fécamp at Steyning grew into an alien Priory. A fragment of the church still remains, a splendid specimen of twelfth century Romanesque.

On the gifts of Eadward and Eadgyth to Saint Denis and other monasteries, see Ellis, i. 304, 307, and compare the grants to Saint Michael's Mount of which I have spoken in p. 346. See Cod. Dipl. iv. 251.

Another reference to Eadward's lavishness in this way is found in the Chronicle of Saint Wandrille in the same volume of D'Achery (ii. 286) as the Saint Riquier Chronicle; "Uxorem quoque filiam Hotuvini [sic] magni illius terræ principis, qui fratrem suum Alureth jampridem cum multis crudeliter atque dolo peremerat, accepit, eosque quos secum de Nortmannis duxerat utriusque ordinis amplis honoribus extulit, auro et argento ditavit."

NOTE D. p. 20.

ENGLISH AND NORMAN ESTIMATES OF GODWINE AND HAROLD.

THERE is a remarkable passage of William of Malmesbury, in which, as his manner often is, he sets before his readers two different accounts or opinions of the same thing. He there contrasts the Norman and English accounts of Godwine and his sons, in words which seem, like several other passages, to show that he had the contemporary Biographer before him. His words (ii. 197) are;

"Hunc [Archbishop Robert] cum reliquis Angli moderni vituperant delatorem Godwini et filiorum ejus, hunc discordiæ seminatorem, hunc archiepiscopii emptorem; Godwinum et natos magnanimos viros, et indus