The chronology of Harold's exploits, as given in his Saga, is not quite clear. He reaches Constantinople when the Empire was ruled by the Empress Zôê the Great, and with her Michael Catalactus” (Laing, iii. 3). This would seem to mean Michael Kalaphatês, who reigned as Zoe's adopted son for a short time in the year 1042. But the energetic carrying on of the war in Sicily belongs to the earlier reign of Zôê's second husband, Michael the Paphlagonian, 1034-1041. Mr. Laing (iii. 387) places Harold's arrival at Constantinople in 1034, the last year of Römanos Argyropoulos, the first of Michael. But Harold is described as going almost at once to the Saracen wars, and the great campaigns of Maniakês in Sicily belong to the years 1038-1040. Moreover the Saga calls the Imperial commander-in-chief George (Gyrger), which was really the Christian name of Maniakês. Harold therefore, who was born in 1015, and who had spent some years in Russia, most likely came to Constantinople about 1038. The " many years" over which the Saga (Laing, iii. 12) spreads his warfare must be cut down to the two years 1038-1040, busy years enough certainly. He then returns to Constantinople and goes on his pilgrimage to Jerusalem, from which he must have returned between 1042, when Constantine Monomachos began to reign, and 1044, when Harold again appears in the North. The Saga distinctly calls Mary, the princess whom Harold carries off, a daughter of a brother of Zôê, but it is quite certain that her father Constantine the Eighth had no son.

I can see nothing in the Saga which at all suggests a visit to Athens.

NOTE L. p. 53.

THE LOTHARINGIAN CHURCHMEN UNDER EADWard.

THE Connexion between England and the Continent, especially with the nations of the Low-Dutch stock, can be steadily traced from the time of Ælfred onwards. The systematic marriages of the daughters of Eadward the Elder with the chief foreign princes, and the great European position of Æthelstan, are both indeed exceptional. But we have seen (see vol. i. p. 44) that the reign of Eadgar also was a time of close intercourse with the kindred nations beyond sea. Florence (959) speaks of the intimate alliance between Eadgar and the Emperor Otto, and William of Malmesbury (ii. 148), clearly writing with the complaint in the Chronicles (959) before him, speaks of Saxons, Flemings, and Danes as the nations which Eadgar most encouraged, and whose presence helped to corrupt the English people with foreign vices. The marriage of Æthelred and Emma no doubt did something to turn the attention of Englishmen towards Gaul rather than towards Germany; still we have in Æthelred's time evidence enough of the commercial intercourse between London and the German havens (see vol. i. p. 190), and we have also seen (see vol. i. p. 427) an Englishwoman become the wife of a Count of Holland and the mother of an Archbishop of Trier. In Cnut's time of course everything tended to bring England into closer connexion with foreign countries, and the alliance begun between Cnut and Conrad was kept up between Eadward and Henry. We now find the first instances of the appointment of foreign Prelates in England. Cnut, who placed so many Englishmen in the newly founded churches of Denmark, bestowed at least two great English pre

THE LOTHARINGIAN CHURCHMEN UNDER EADWARD. 393

ferments on Germans. Early in his reign, we find the Abbey of Ramsey held by a certain Wythmann, of whom the local historian (c. 75, Gale, p. 264) gives the following account; "Quum esset bonæ vitæ et prudentiæ laudabilis, genuinâ tum animi feritate, utpote Teutonicus natione, damnum aliquod suæ attulit laudi." His appointment is the more remarkable, as he succeeded Wulfsige who died at Assandun (vol. i. p. 264), so that he must have been promoted before Cnut's close connexion with Conrad began. The precedent however was not a very lucky one, as Wythmann (whose story in the Ramsey History is well worth reading) got into all kinds of trouble with his monks, and at last, after a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, died a solitary. Still, two years before Cnut's death, we find Duduc-whom Florence speaking of him incidentally (1060) calls "de Lotharingiâ oriundus," but whom his successor Gisa (Ecclesiastical Documents, p. 15) calls "natione Saxo"-in possession of the Bishoprick of Somersetshire, and, as the story of Gisa shows (see note QQ), in high personal favour with Cnut. Whatever we make of the appointment of Wythmann, we may fairly suspect that the nomination of Duduc to an English Bishoprick was a fruit of Cnut's friendship with Conrad, and we may compare, or rather contrast, the appointment of Savaric to the same see by the less kindly influence of a later Emperor. See Canon. Well. ap. Angl. Sacr. i. 563.

The fact of the frequency of Lotharingian appointments under Eadward, and the fact that they extend over his whole reign, while the Norman appointments are found only in his earlier years, are plain on the face of the history. The reader must judge for himself as to the view which I have taken of the political bearing of these appointments; but when we see that they went on during the years of Harold's greatest power, and that Harold himself promoted Adelhard of Lüttich in his own_College of Waltham, it seems impossible to avoid some such conclusion. The first appointment of this kind was that of Hermann mentioned in the text, and the different forms in which his appointment is described have been already quoted in an earlier Note (see above, pp. 386, 389). That Hermann was a Lotharingian there is no doubt, as Florence (1045) distinctly calls him "de Lotharingiâ oriundus." Soon after (see p. 54) we come to the appointment of Leofric to the Bishoprick of Cornwall and Devonshire, which, though he was of English or British birth, points also to the same Lotharingian influence. Now both these appointments come during the time of the ascendency of Godwine; then we come to the time of Eadward's own Norman appointments, and we have no more Bishops from Lotharingia till the nomination of Gisa and Walter in the days of Harold's greatest power (see p. 298). Each of these last two Prelates is described by Florence (1060) as Lotharingus or de Lotharingiâ oriundus,” and of Gisa's birth-place we get a fuller account from himself. He was a native of the Bishoprick of Lüttich-"G. Hasbaniensis incola ex vico Sancti Trudonis" (Eccl. Doc. p. 16, where see Mr. Hunter's note). His writ and Walter's have been mentioned already (see above, p. 385). These writs should be borne in mind, because the local historian of Wells (Ang. Sac. i. 559), with the notions of the fifteenth century, makes Gisa receive his appointment as well as his consecration from the Pope; "Hic quum in quâdam ambassiatâ cum aliis a dicto Rege ad Apostolicam sedem missus fuisset pro quibusdam negotiis conscientiam dicti Regis moventibus, Apostolicus sibi contulit sedem Wellensem."

On Harold's own Lotharingian favourite Adelhard (see p. 296 and below, Note PP), see De Inv. c. 15, and Stubbs, Preface, p. ix. In c. 25 the writer calls him "institutor et ordinator præsentis ecclesiæ,” and tells us of his son Peter, from whom "fons uberrimus disciplinis doctrinæ scaturiebat" when he himself was a boy in the college, and who still taught "secundum modum Teutonicorum." Adelhard's own birth and studies in his own country are thus described in c. 15. Harold appoints his Canons; "inter quos Theothonicum quemdam, divino munere et inexsperato sibi collatum, magistrum Atdelardum Leodicensem genere, Trajectensem studii disciplinâ, adhibuit, quatenus leges, instituta et consuetudines, tam in ecclesiasticis quam in sæcularibus, ecclesiarum in quibus educatus fuerat, in ecclesiâ Walthamensi constitueret, quum multorum relatione didicerat ordinatissimâ distinctione regi Theutonicorum ecclesias." The romantic Biographer of Harold (pp. 155-161) has a much more wonderful tale, in which several particulars of the real and legendary history of his hero are worked in with a lofty contempt for chronology. Harold, after his great Welsh campaign, is smitten with a grievous paralysis, which King Eadward's best physicians cannot heal. The Emperor, hearing of this, sends over his own physician, "Ailardus,” a man at once skilful and devout. The Earl's disease however baffles his art. He then recommends a resort to the Holy Rood, which had been lately translated to Waltham, and was there working signs and wonders; “Eâ tempestate lapidea crucifixi Regis nostri imago, non multis ante cœlitus revelata et reperta temporibus et ad Waltham nutu perlata divino, miris in loco virtutum coruscabat signis" (p. 157). The holy relic works the wished-for miracle of healing; the King, the Lady, the whole nation, rejoice; Harold, in his thankfulness, rebuilds the church and founds his College, and places Adelhard at the head of its educational branch; "Scholas ibidem institui sub regimine magistri Ailardi, suæ, ut prælibatum est, salutis ministri, dispositione satagebat prudenti" (p. 161). Harold may have had another sickness besides that which, in legend at least, befell him when he was already King (see vol. iii. c. xiv); but the foundation of Waltham certainly did not follow the war in which Wales was subacta, immo ad internecionem per Haroldum pene deleta." If there is any shadow of truth in the story, the writer must have confounded the Welsh campaign of 1055 with the decisive war of 1063.

In p. 238 I spoke of Baldwin, Abbot of Saint Eadmund's, as the one French or Norman Prelate who was appointed during the later days of Eadward, that is during the ascendency of Harold. His birth, more probably French than Norman, is made certain by the words of Florence in recording his death in 1097; "Eximiæ vir religionis monasterii S. Eadmundi Abbas Baldwinus genere Gallus, artis medicinæ bene peritus." In the Monasticon (iii. 100) the date of the death of his predecessor Leofstan is placed, though without a reference, on August 1, 1065. The appointment certainly took place between 1062 and 1066. We have his writ of appointment, which I have already quoted in p. 385. This is addressed to Bishop Æthelmar and Earl Gyrth, and therefore belongs to some year later than 1058. There are also two other writs in his favour (Cod. Dipl. iv. 222, 223), the second of which grants him the privilege of à mint. But the Waltham charter (see below, Note PP) is signed by "Baldewinus Regis Capellanus." If, as is most likely, this is the same person as the Abbot, he could not have been raised to his Abbacy till 1062

THE TITLES OF BISHOPS AND BISHOPRICKS.

395

or later. Baldwin had been a monk of Saint Denis, a certain presumption, though not amounting to proof, of French rather than Norman origin. It was seemingly to his skill in medicine that he owed his advancement. Before his promotion to the Abbacy, he had been Prior of Earl Odda's church at Deerhurst (see pp. 104, 272, and vol. i. p. 237.). In a charter of William of 1069 (Monasticon, iv. 665), by which the cell of Deerhurst is granted to the Abbey of Saint Denis, he is described as "fidelis noster Baldwinus, ejusdem sancti [Dionysii] monachus priusquam abbatiam Sancti Edmundi, cui nunc præest, ab eodem [Edwardo] susciperet." The document implies that he had been Prior. William of Malmesbury also (Gest. Pont. Scriptt. p. Bed. 136 b), describing a miraculous sickness of Abbot Leofstan, adds that Baldwin was applied to to cure him. Leofstan asks King Eadward to send him a physician; "Ille Baldwinum, Sancti Dionysii monachum, ejus artis peritum dirigendum curavit." Baldwin's medical skill appears also in two letters of Lanfranc (20, 21 Giles), in the former of which one Robert "Pultrellus" is entrusted to his care, while in the latter he appears as the physician of the Archbishop_himself. Orderic (678 B) calls him "Archidiaconus et Abbas Sancti Edmundi Regis et Martyris." It is just possible that some confusion between Baldwin and Adelhard may have led to the story about Harold and Adelhard in the "Vita Haroldi."

Baldwin had a brother named Frodo who was enriched by grants from William and from his brother. See Domesday, ii. 92, 103 b (where his English "antecessor" is mentioned), 354 b, and Monasticon, iii. 138, where for "fratris one is tempted to read "fratri."

A Baldwin, godson of King Eadward, appears in Domesday for Oxfordshire, 154 b; "Has dedit Rex E. Sancto Petro de Westmonasterio et Balduino suo filiolo?" Sir Henry Ellis (i. 304) remarks, "The land in all probability was given by King Edward for the education and support of Baldwin as a novitiate, or for his maintenance during his profession as a monk." Baldwin may have been a monk at Westminster before he went to Saint Denis; still if the Abbot is intended, the description is odd. Most likely "Balduinus filiolus" is a different person.

The Ramsey charter in Cod. Dipl. iv. 143, signed by "Baldewinna Abbas," is marked as spurious, and cannot be genuine. Leofric and Eadwine both sign as 66 Dux," Ealdred as Archbishop, Wulfstan, Gisa, and Walter as Bishops, a state of things inconsistent with chronology.

NOTE M. p. 54.

THE TITLES OF BISHOPS AND BISHOPRICKS.

A DIFFERENCE may be easily seen between the usual way of describing Bishops in England and on the Continent, and also between their descriptions in different parts of England. The differences between England and the Continent will be found to have their root in the broad facts of the English Conquest, and the differences between one part of England and another are to a great extent connected with those changes in the nomenclature of central England of which I spoke in vol. i. p. 379. In the countries where Christianity grew up in primitive times, in Italy, Gaul, and Spain, the Bishop was primarily Bishop of a city; the city was the home and centre of everything in ecclesiastical no less than in civil

matters; the later meaning of the word paganus shows how long Christianity remained an affair of the cities only. In England, on the other hand, and also in Ireland and Scotland, Christianity was preached to the Kings and their people at large, and the towns did not hold the same place as centres of civil government which they held in the Romance countries. As a general rule, each kingdom or principality, as it was converted, formed a new diocese. The Bishop had his see, his Bishopstool, in some particular church which formed his special home, but he was, just like the King or Ealdorman, Bishop of the people of his whole diocese. Hence we find an English Bishop, just like an English King, much more commonly spoken of by the name of the people who formed his flock than by the name of the city which held his see. There are exceptions from the beginning, and the custom, which has now died out throughout England, died out earlier in some parts than others. Still the tribal description is certainly the general rule. I will illustrate the rule and its exceptions by some examples; but it must be remembered that, in the case of Bishops no less than in that of Kings, we come across many descriptions, especially in the rhetoric of Latin writers, which are merely descriptions and not formal titles.

I will begin with the exceptions. The Bishops of York, London, and Rochester seem from the beginning to be always spoken of by the names of their cities. The like seems to be the case with the Prelate whose see was moved from Lindisfarn to Durham. It is just possible that in the case of York and London some tradition of the metropolitan rank of those cities in Roman times may have led their first Roman Prelates to use the style which was common in other countries. But it is easy to see other reasons in all these cases. Northumberland fluctuated as much in its ecclesiastical as it did in its political arrangements. Except during a very few years after the conversion of Eadwine, there was no one Bishop who could truly call himself Bishop of the Northumbrians. As there were often two Kings, so there were commonly at least two Bishops. And as the Kings, from whatever reason, do not seem to have commonly distinguished themselves as Kings of the Bernicians or Deirians, it is not wonderful that we do not find that style adopted by the Bishops. At all events, we commonly find the Northumbrian Bishops called by the names of their sees. It is hardly an exception when we find in Bæda (iii. 26), “Suscepit pro illo [Colmano] pontificatum Nordanhymbrorum famulus Christi Tuda." This is a description rather than a title, and yet after all it is strictly accurate, as Colman was actually the only Bishop in Northumberland. So again Bæda (iv. 3) speaks of Wilfrith as holding 66 episcopatum Eboracensis ecclesiæ, necnon et omnium Nordanhymbrorum, sed et Pictorum, quousque rex Osuiu imperium protendere poterat." Here we find both styles used together, but it is a description and not a title. The most distinct exception is in Bæda, iv. 5, where Theodore speaks of Wilfrith as “Nordanhymbrorum gentis episcopus." But at that particular moment in 673 Wilfrith seems to have been the only Bishop in Northumberland. London again gave a title to a Bishop who might very well have been called Bishop of the East-Saxons. But, besides any Roman associations, the peculiar position of London, its half independence, its subjection to Mercia rather than to Essex, most likely hindered the East-Saxon style from taking root. As for Rochester, it would have been hard to call its Bishop by any other name, as "Bishop of the West-Kentishmen" would have been as awkward