4. A more interesting question, as more directly connected with the history and with a very singular and disputed document, arises as to the position at this time of the low lands of Gwent, the modern Monmouthshire. We have seen (see above, p. 401) that at least one fact in our history looks as if the lands at the mouth of the Usk were looked on as English territory as early as 1049. But on the whole I am inclined to think that the land between the Wye and the Usk were incorporated at this time with the English Kingdom and with the West-Saxon Earldom. There are two documents which bear upon the matter.

In

First there is in Domesday (162), as a sort of appendix, or rather preface, to Gloucestershire, the account of a district which has no more definite name than “ Wales,” but which pretty well answers to the part of Monmouthshire between the Wye and the Usk, the part which has long been English in speech and partially English in local nomenclature. one case only do we find any possessions beyond the Usk. Toustain the son of Rou, he who bore the banner at Senlac, had seventeen carucates 'intra Huscham et Waiam" and seven carucates "ultra Huscham." There is no division into hundreds, nor any such clear division into lordships as we see in most other parts of Domesday. Only a few places are mentioned by name, as Estrighoiel or Chepstow, Caerleon, and Caldecot, all sites of well-known castles. We also read, "In Wales sunt III Hardvices, Lamecare, Poteschivet [Portskewet], Dinan." In no case do we hear of any earlier possessors, English or otherwise, T. R. E. The only earlier owners spoken of are Earl William Fitz-Osbern, the founder of Chepstow Castle, and a person bearing the royal Frankish name of Dagobert, a name unique in Domesday, and which is equally remarkable whether its owner were Norman, English, or British. The present owners seem all to hold their lands from William's own grant. All this points to an occupation which was still recent at the time of Domesday. Had the country become an English possession at some time earlier than 1049, we should surely have seen some traces of a more regular state of things, and especially of English ownership. On the other hand, the action of Harold at Portskewet seems to forbid the notion that the occupation recorded in Domesday was due wholly to the wars waged with the Welsh after William's accession. These two lines of argument seem to bring us to the conjecture which I have made in the text. A district which had been so lately incorporated would most likely still remain in the state of Folkland, or rather "Terra Regis," on the day when King Eadward was alive and dead.

There is also another well-known document, which seems to me to belong to this age and to lead to the same conclusion. This is the famous treaty called "Geraèdnes betweox Dúnsétan" and "Senatusconsultum de monticolis Walliae." See Schmid, lxi. 358; Thorpe, i. 352. There has been a good deal of controversy as to the date of this agreement, and as to the people who are intended by the Dunsætas. Sir Francis Palgrave (i. 464, ii. ccxxxiii.), misled by a false reading Deunsætas (which he reads as if it were Defnsætas), takes it to mean the British inhabitants of Devonshire, seemingly in the time of Æthelstan. This view is refuted by Thorpe and Schmid, but they do not give us anything positive instead. I am led to fix it at this time by the words in the last paragraph, which say that the Wentsætas formerly belonged to the Dunsætas, but now more rightly belong to the West-Saxons (" Hwilon Went-sæte hýrdon intó Dún-sætan,

THE REVOLT OF NORTHUMBERLAND.

463.

ac hit gebyre rihtor intó West-sexan, þyder hý scylan gafol and gíslas syllan"). These words seem to agree with no other date. The Wentsætas must, as Schmid says, be the people of Gwent and none other. But there is no earlier time at which the Wentsætas could be said to belong to the West-Saxons, unless conceivably in times far too early, when Ceawlin and his immediate successors still kept the land of the Hwiccas. Any intermediate conquest would allow them to be spoken of as belonging either to the English in general or to the Mercians in particular, but not to the West-Saxons. But if an Earl of the West-Saxons ruling on both sides of the Wye incorporated the lands between the Wye and the Usk with the West-Saxon Earldom, no description could be truer than that "Wentsæte gebyre rihtor into West-sexan." The boundary stream

spoken of in the eighth clause I take to be the Usk.

There are difficulties about this document in any case, but they are not greater on my explanation of it than on any other. The unique description of the Welsh as "Dunsætas" is as odd in one case as in another, and it is strange at any time to find the treaty concluded between the legislative bodies of the two nations, without any mention of Kings or Princes on either side; "Dis is seó gerædnes, pe Angel-cynnes witan and Wealh-þeôde ræd-boran betweox Dúnsétan gesetton." But I am not clear that there is any time which it suits so well as the moment when Harold, seemingly without much reference to the King, was negotiating with the Welsh people ("pæt folc heom gislodon and to bugon," see p. 316) between the deposition of Gruffydd and the grant of Wales to his brothers.

I cannot pretend to point out the extent of these cessions except in a very rough and conjectural way, but I should recommend the study of them, and the determination of their exact boundaries, to those who combine historical criticism with local Welsh knowledge. Some such, I do not doubt, may be found among my friends of the Cambrian Archæological Association.

NOTE TT. p. 321.

THE REVOLT OF NORTHUMBERLAND.

WITH regard to the events which led to the banishment of Tostig, we have to make the same sort of comparison of authorities which we made in describing the banishment and the return of Godwine. Our fullest accounts are found in the Worcester Chronicle, in Florence, and in the Life of Eadward. Some further details are supplied by the Abingdon and Peterborough Chronicles and by William of Malmesbury. As usual, the Chroniclers look on the matter from the point of view of the nation, the Biographer looks on it from the point of view of the Court. Each therefore, as in other cases, fills up gaps in the other. We must also remember that the Biographer lies under the necessity of making out as fair a case as he can for Eadward, Harold, and Tostig all at once. But, writing as he did to Eadgyth, his chief object was to say all that could be said on behalf of Tostig. It is in the Life then that we must look for the fullest account of the doings and feelings of the Northumbrian people. Florence seems to have given special attention to the early part of the story, and he has, as in some other cases, preserved the names of individual actors who are not mentioned elsewhere. William of Malmesbury, as he has often done

before, helps us to reports of speeches, either traditionally remembered or such as he himself thought were in character. Even in this latter aspect, these speeches are worthy of attention, as they never take those rhetorical and other impossible shapes which are often taken by the harangues in Orderic and elsewhere.

The first point where the different narratives show their peculiar characters in such a shape as to amount to a contradiction, is found with regard to the whereabouts of Tostig at the time of the revolt. The Worcester and Peterborough Chronicles do not say where he was; William of Malmesbury (ii. 200), probably writing with the Peterborough Chronicle before him, fancied that Tostig was at York, or at least somewhere in Northumberland, and he seemingly mistook the force of the word "utlagodon," as he expands it into "solitarium repertum ex regione fugârunt, pro contuitu ducatûs occidendum non arbitrati." But the Abingdon Chronicler, writing within the bounds of Wessex, mentions the name of a place which was more likely to be known to him than to his Mercian brethren; "Tostig wæs pa at Brytfordan mid þam kinge." The Biographer, still more accurately, quarters them (422) in some of the forests of the neighbourhood, whence they afterwards go to Bretford to hold the Gemót.

66

With regard to the doings of the rebel Gemót of York, Florence distinguishes the acts of the two days more accurately than any of the Chroniclers. He alone distinguishes the execution, unjust or otherwise, of Amund and Reavenswart on the Monday, from the mere massacre of Tuesday. The Chroniclers run the events of both days together. In the words of Peterborough and Worcester, the Northumbrians utlagodon heora eorl Tostig and ofslogon his hiredmenn ["huskarlas" in Abingdon] ealle ba hi mihton to cuman, ægðer ge Englisce ge Dænisce." Florence, after describing the death of the two officers, goes on, "die sequenti plus quam cc. viros ex curialibus [hiredmenn] illius in boreali parte Humbræ fluminis ["Humbra" must mean the Ouse] peremerunt." Then follows the plundering of the treasury, which is told in much the same way in all the accounts. But the Biographer naturally waxes more indignant and rhetorical in his description of the massacre. Men, he tells us (421), took the opportunity to slay their private enemies; "Nullus ergo modus fit in occasione; rapitur hic et ille ad necem etiam pro familiari odio cujusque." That the movement extended beyond Northumberland is not implied either by the Abingdon Chronicler or by Florence, whose story at this point becomes rather meagre, but it comes out in the Worcester and Peterborough Chroniclers, as also in the Biographer, though in two very different shapes. From the two Chroniclers we learn the adhesion of the shires of Nottingham, Derby, and Lincoln to the rebel cause, but it is only the Biographer who asserts a massacre anywhere but at York. "Fit cædes," he says, "multorum in Eboraca, vel Lincolniâ civitate, in plateis, in aquis, in silvis, et in viis." Every one who had been at any time in Tostig's service ("quicumque poterat notari quod de ejus aliquando fuerit curiâ [hired]") was everywhere put to death without mercy. This all may be or may not be; we can quite understand that the men of the Danish shires of Mercia might sympathize with their Northumbrian brethren. We can hardly fancy that many of Tostig's Housecarls would be found at Lincoln. The Earls Harold, Morkere, Waltheof, and Ralph all had lands and jurisdictions in Lincoln and Lincolnshire, but there is no mention of

THE REVOLT OF NORTHUMBERLAND.

465

Tostig in the city, and he can hardly be the small landowner who appears in Domesday, 342, 343.

But the most important difference between our several accounts is to be found in the different statements as to the place where the negotiations took place between the King and the rebels. The Chroniclers of course give the fullest accounts of the doings of the insurgents, while the Biographer enlarges most fully on the counsels of the King. To judge from him only (422), we should think that all the negotiations took place at Oxford ("Axonevorde oppidum"), while from the Worcester and Peterborough Chroniclers it would seem that all took place at Northampton. But the Abingdon Chronicler, followed by Florence, distinguishes between two assemblies, one at each place ("and pa wel rate paræfter was mycel gemot at Northamtune, and swa at Oxenaforda"). The Biographer sets forth the various messages which were sent by the King, and he naturally thinks chiefly of the place where the matter was finally settled, namely at Oxford. The minds of the two Mercian Chroniclers were no less naturally fixed on Northampton and the ravages which happened in its neighbourhood. Nothing is more likely than that, while messages were passing to and fro, the Northumbrian host should advance, and take up their head-quarters at Oxford instead of at Northampton. I therefore accept the Abingdon account, and hold that the final Gemót on the feast of Saint Simon and Saint Jude was held at Oxford.

66

The repeated messages which passed between the King and the rebels seem implied in the words of the Abingdon Chronicler, who recognizes the gathering at Northampton as well as that at Oxford as a Mycel Gemót." The Biographer is still more express; “Rex Eadwardus, vir Deo dignus, putans indomitum vulgus solitâ sedare sapientiâ, pia per legatos illis mittit mandamina, ut scilicet quiescerent ab inceptâ dementiâ et jus legemque reciperent de omni quam in eum demonstrare possent injuriâ." Then comes the answer of the rebels, then come further messages from the King ("Quum benignissimus Rex item et tertio missis legationibus eos ab insanâ intentione diverso conciliorum conatu amovere tentaret, nec perficeret "); the King then goes from the woods to Bretford ("a silvestribus locis ubi, more suo, caussâ assiduæ venationis morabatur, secessit ad Brethevorde regium vicum oppidoque regio Wiltuni proximum"), and there holds the council at which the royal answer to the rebels is finally determined on. The Biographer does not mention Harold personally, but all the Chroniclers and Florence describe him as being at the head of the embassy. The answer of the rebels is given "Haroldo West-Saxonum Duci et aliis quos Rex Tostii rogatu pro pace redintegrandâ ad eos miserat." William of Malmesbury alone makes Harold go with an army "ut propulsaret injuriam." This is probably a confusion with Eadward's later anxiety to send a military force against the rebels. Harold would doubtless take some Housecarls with him for safety's sake; but what he headed was clearly an embassy and not a military expedition.

In the answer sent by the insurgents to the King, I have followed William of Malmesbury, as the sentiments which he puts into their mouths so exactly suit the circumstances of the case. When he begins by speaking of "Northanhimbri, licet non inferiores numero essent, tamen quieti consulentes," he is to some extent led away by his notion of Harold having come with an army, but the matter of the answer is thoroughly in character; "Factum apud eum excusant; se homines libere natos, libere H h

VOL. II.

educatos, nullius Ducis ferociam pati posse, a majoribus didicisse aut libertatem aut mortem." The Biographer evidently colours in the opposite direction; at the same time the conditional threat of war made by the rebels sounds authentic; "Deo itaque Regique suo rebelles, spretâ pietatis legatione, remandant Regi, aut eumdem Ducem suum citius a se et a toto Angliæ Regno amitteret, aut eos in commune hostes hostis ipse haberet." The Worcester and Peterborough Chronicles give the matter of the message in the simplest and most neutral form; but it is from them that we learn that the answer was carried by messengers from the rebel camp who came to the King's Court in company with Harold; "Hi lægdon ærende on hine [Harold] to pam cynge Eadwarde, and eac ærendracan mid him sendon, and bædon þat hi moston habban Morkere heom to Eorle." The description of the Council in which this answer was discussed comes wholly from the Biographer, and, as it is just the sort of point on which he is always well informed, I have simply followed his narrative in my text. The Chroniclers give the result only; “and se cyng þæs geute, and sende eft Harold heom to Hamtune" (Peterborough, 1065). The efforts of Harold to reconcile all parties come out strongly in the Abingdon Chronicle; "Harold Eorl wolde heora seht wyrcan, gif he mihte; ac he na mihte." Florence gives him several companions in this attempt; "Dum Haroldus et alii quamplures Comitem Tostium cum iis pacificare vellent, omnes unanimi consensu contradixerunt." Harold's conduct in finally yielding to the demands of the rebels is pointedly approved by William of Malmesbury; "Hæc Haroldus audiens, qui magis quietem patriæ quam fratris commodum attenderet, revocavit exercitum." Here we again have William's former mistake about Harold's coming with an army. The description of Eadward's state of mind, his anxiety to make war, his complaints and the cause of his final illness, all come from the Biographer only; but William of Malmesbury in another part of his work (iii. 252) gives a remarkable picture nearly to the same effect, which I have quoted at p. 329, note 3.

It is in the Abingdon Chronicle that we see most plainly that the outlawry of Tostig and his accomplices was the act of a formal Gemót, and, as in some former cases, the words of the formal decree seem to peep out; "And eall his Eorldom hyne anrædlice forsóc and geutlagode and ealle þa mid hym þe unlage rærdón, forpam þe he rypte God ærost, and ealle pa bestrypte pe he ofer mihte, æt life and æt hande. And hig namon heom pa Morkere to Eorle." The same formal character of the meeting is implied in the renewal of Cnut's Law on which I have enlarged in the text. In the rhetoric of the Biographer all this is lost.

With regard to the actual departure of Tostig from England, Florence alone seems to depart from his usual guide at Abingdon, and to assert an expulsion by force. I have already, in p. 332, quoted the passages which bear upon the matter.

One word more as to the answer of the Northumbrians. M. Emile de Bonnechose (ii. 118), following what edition of William of Malmesbury I know not, for "nullius Ducis ferociam" reads "nullius Daci," and on that reading thus comments; "La dénomination de danois [Dacus], donnée ici à Tosti, fils de Godwin et de Githa, sœur du roi de Danemark, est digne d'attention. Cette citation du moine de Malmesbury, suffirait pour ébranler le système selon lequel Godwin et sa famille auraient été toujours