« PreviousContinue »
they reinforced the well-known Varangian body-guards, and did good service against the Norman conquerors of Naples.1 Many took refuge in the fen-countries, and maintained a guerilla war with the neighbouring Normanized counties. This at one time threatened to assume national proportions. An English thane, Hereward, returning from Flanders to his native county, Lincolnshire, found his estate occupied, and his widowed mother insulted by a Norman. Hereward at once took to the fens; he received knighthood from the patriotic Brand, abbot of Peterborough; and finding that Brand was replaced by a Norman abbot, Turold, carried off the plate of the monastery, that it might not fall into strange hands. Hereward's success against his neighbours Taillebois, viscount of Spalding, and the fighting churchman, Turold, was great; the abbot was captured, and forced to ransom himself with thirty thousand marks. Sven of Denmark appeared off the coast offering assistance. But William took the field in person; Sven was bought off; and a way to Hereward's stronghold was pointed out by the treacherous monks of Ely, who could not bear to be enclosed in the besieged lines. The last patriotic army was broken up. Hereward himself escaped, and so harassed the Normans, that they were glad to give him peace on his own terms. A noble Saxon lady, Alswitha, who "loved him for the dangers he had borne," is said to have persuaded him to make peace. The issue was disastrous. His house was soon after surrounded, and he himself, fighting gallantly, fell a victim to Norman assassins. Had there been three such in England, said a Norman poet, William could never have come there; and had Hereward lived, he would have driven out the invaders.
1 "Ce corps de Varengues existait à Constantinople dès le règne de Michel le Paphlagonien" (1034-1041 A.D.) — Orderic, vol. ii., p. 173, note by M. le Prevost.
2 "Then they (Hereward's troops) laid on fire and burned all the houses of the monks, and all the town, except one house. The monks met them, and besought peace of them. But they regarded nothing. They went into the minster, climbed up to the holy rood, took away the diadem from our Lord's head, all of pure gold," &c.-A. S. Chron., A., 1070.
REVOLT OF THE NOBLES.
William was now at leisure to renew the English claim of supremacy over Scotland. It was a matter of some importance, as Malcolm Canmore had married the sister of Edgar Ætheling, had harboured the Northumbrian exiles, and devastated the northern counties. A short campaign was sufficient. The Norman army had penetrated to Abernethy on the Tay, when the Scotch king, convinced of his inability to resist, consented to pay homage and give hostages (1072 A.D.) The promise was faithfully kept during the reign of the conqueror. William was now able to leave England for the continent, where the people of Maine had risen against the Norman yoke. The conqueror's army was chiefly composed of Englishmen, who revenged the wrongs of their country on the innocent province of Maine, slaying and laying waste unsparingly (1073 A.D.) Meanwhile an insurrec tion broke out in England, which showed that royalty had other enemies than national feeling. It was part of William's policy to restrict all intermarriages between the great nobles. In spite of a distinct prohibition, Roger de Breteuil, earl of Hereford, and son of William Fitz-Osbern, who had been the king's most trusted minister, took advantage of the weakness of government, and married his sister Emma to Raoul de Gael, the earl of Norfolk, a grand-nephew of the late king. The weddingguests, heated with wine, began to discuss their grievances and the prospects of a rebellion. They had placed William the bastard on the throne; he had only rewarded them with lands desolated by war; and even these were often reclaimed or curtailed by the ministers of the crown. The men who had spent their blood for him received no favour at his hands, and were liable to suffer the full penalties of the law for slight causes.1 Let them only rise in revolt while the army was occupied though the English would not desert their fields and feasts to help in a revolt, they would gladly witness its success. Animated by these hopes, the earls invited Waltheof to join their conspiracy, and share in its fruits: England was to be
1 "Pro frivolis occasionibus ad mortem usque velut hostes pumit."-Orderic, vol. ii., p. 260.
LANFRANC AS VICEROY.
divided as of old between a king and two dukes. Waltheof held back; it is doubtful whether he shrunk from rebellion or stipulated for obtaining support from Denmark. It seems that Danish aid was applied for, but before it could arrive the rebellion was crushed. It had broken out in the counties of the two earls, Norfolk and Hereford. The king's viceroy, Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury, was a man of consummate ability. "We should rejoice to see you as an angel of God," he wrote to William, when the rebellion first broke out; "but we do not wish you to cross the sea at present, for it were a great shame to us, if you should come over to conquer such perjured men and brigands." The next letter announced that the insurrection had been crushed in detail. Raoul's army was first beaten near Swaffham with detestable barbarity, the Normans cut off the right feet of all their prisoners, as a sign by which they might be known. The count stood a short siege in Norwich, but was glad to be allowed to fly the country with his Breton followers. His confederate, Roger, was starved out of Hereford castle, and condemned by his peers to imprisonment. He would soon have been pardoned but for his own obstinacy. Having received at Easter the customary present of a rich dress from the king, he made a fire in his prison and cast the silk tunic and ermine mantle into the flames. William swore "by the splendour of God" that he would never let him loose, and William never broke a vow of vengeance. The saddest fate of all was reserved for Waltheof. Denounced for conspiring with the Danes by his treacherous wife Judith, he was condemned by his peers on the other count of concealing treason against his suzerain. William was by this time throughly embittered against his English subjects, and had every political reason for destroying a powerful noble like Waltheof. The earl was therefore beheaded (1075) A.D.) after a year's imprisonment. The piety of his last days edified all who heard of them; he recited the psalter daily, and died saying the Lord's Prayer. Above all, he was the last great English earl, and his countrymen revered him as a saint. Edwin had perished four years before (1071 a.d.) by the hand of traitors, as he was about to fly from England:
even William wept over the young and beautiful man whom he had learned to love at his court. About the same time Morcar was thrown into prison, where he ended his days.
The tedious tale of English risings and their suppression has only one other important episode. Walcher, a native of Lorraine, had been appointed bishop of Durham; he seems to have been an easy, well-meaning man, who guided himself by the councils of Liulf, a native of those parts. Norman jealousy was aroused, and Liulf was murdered by the bishop's chaplain, and the Norman viscount Gilbert. Walcher allowed the murder to go unpunished. But the people rose up furiously, drove all the Normans into a church, and set fire to the doors. The besieged sent out the criminals, who were instantly despatched. The bishop then appeared at the doors, hoping to conciliate respect by his character and office. "Short rede, good rede, slay ye the bishop," was the cry; Walcher fell on the consecrated threshold, and not a Norman escaped. But William's brother and viceroy, the bishop of Bayeux, took a speedy and sharp vengeance for the crime. He marched northwards, mutilating and beheading at random on his way, and renewed the horrors that had made Northumbria a desert ten years before.
RESULTS OF THE CONQUEST.
COMPILATION OF DOMESDAY BOOK.-ITS USE.-OMISSIONS.-NUMBERS AND CONDITION OF THE POPULATION.-SOCIAL AND MATERIAL ADVANCE UNDER WILLIAM'S GOVERNMENT.-SMALL AMOUNT OF THE FOREIGN ELEMENT INTRODUCED.-LEGAL CHARACTER OF THE CHANGES MADE. THE CHURCH HIERARCHY AND RITUAL NORMANIZED.-THURSTAN.-GUITMUND.-LIMITATION OF THE POWERS OF THE CHURCH.-NORMAN INFLUENCES ON POLICE AND LAW.CONTRASTS OF NORMAN AND SAXON CHARACTER.
In the year 1085 A.D., William was alarmed by the news of a joint invasion from Denmark and Flanders. An army was hastily brought over from Normandy, and quartered throughout England; the numbers were greater than had ever landed before; perhaps the king apprehended rebellion. In a few months, the danger had passed away; Knut was detained by contrary winds and the treason of his captains, so that William was able to dismiss a portion of his force. But that such a kingdom as England should lie at the mercy of any foreign foe, was not to be endured; the king determined in council on a new military organization, which should enable him to collect an army at a moment's notice. As land was the basis of all calculations of this sort, commissioners were appointed to make a census of population and property. Their method of procedure was to summon before them the sheriffs, the lords of manors, the parish priests, the hundred reeves, the bailiffs, and six villeins out of every hamlet. These men stated on oath what amount of land there was in the district, whether it was wood, meadow, or pasture, what was its value, what services were due from its owners; and generally the numbers of free and bond on the estate. In some instances, other particulars were inserted, such as the number of live stock; which the transcribers struck out or retained without any fixed rule, in the summary made for the