The Bayeux Tapestry Elucidated :: APPENDIX. NOTE A. Page 4 .

APPENDIX. NOTE A. Page 4 .

The authority for the odd story of the Duke of Normandy’s courtship is the following passage in the Chronicle of Tours, quoted in the EncyclopÆdia Metropolitana, Vol. xi., p. 527, n.

“Tunc Guillelmus, Dux NormanniÆ, Mathildam, filiam Balduini Comitis FlandriÆ duxit in uxorem in hunc modum. Cum ipsa a Patre suo de sponso recipiendo sÆpius rogaretur, eique Guillelmus Normannicus a Patro, qui eum longo tempore nutrierat, prÆ aliis laudaretur, respondit, nunquam Nothum recipere se maritum. Quo audito, Guillelmus Dux elam apud Brugis, ubi puella morabatur, cum paucis accelerat, eamque, regredientem ab EcclesiÂ pugnis, calcibus, atque calcaribus verberet atque castigat, sicque ascenso equo in patriam remeat. Quo facto, puella dolens ad lectum decubat; ad quam Pater veniens illam de sponso recipiendo interrogat et requirit; quÆ respondens dixit se nunquam habere maritum nisi Guillelinum Ducem NormanaiÆ; quod et factum est.”

NOTE B.—Page 5.

As the following letter of M. Thierry’s is less accessible to the English reader than most of the documents connected with the Bayeux Tapestry it is here given in full. It is addressed to M. de la Fontenelle de VandorÉ:—

“Monsieur,—Pardonnez-moi de rÉpondre bien tard À une demande qui, venant de vous, m’honore infiniment. Vous dÉsirez savoir ce que je pense des Recherches et conjectures de M. Bolton Corney sur la tapisserie de Bayeux; je vais vous le dire, en aussi peu de mots et aussi nettement que je le pourrai. L’opinion soutenue par M. Bolton Corney comprend deux thÈses principales: 1º que la tapisserie de Bayeux n’est pas un don de la reine Mathilde, ni mÊme un don fait au chapitre de cette ville par un autre personne; qu’elle a ÉtÉ fabriquÉ pour l’Église cathÉdrale de Bayeux, sur l’ordre et aux frais du chapitre; 2º que ce vÉnÉrable monument n’est pas contemporain de la conquÊte de l’Angleterre par les Normands, mais qu’il date du temps oÙ la Normandie se trouvait rÉunie À la France. De ces deux thÈses, la premiÈre me semble vraie de toute Évidence, la seconde est inadmissible.

“La tradition qui attribuait À la reine Mathilde la piÈce de tapisserie conservÉe À Bayeux, tradition, du reste, assez rÉcente, et que l’abbÉ de La Rue a rÉfutÉe, n’est plus soutenue par personne. Quant À la seconde question, celle de savoir si cette tapisserie fut ou non un prÉsent fait À l’Église de Bayeux, M. Bolton Corney la rÉsout nÉgativement, et d’une faÇon qui me semble pÉremptoire. Au silence des anciens inventaires de l’Église il joint des preuves tirÉes du monument lui-mÊme, et dÉmontre avec Évidence que ses dÉtails portent une empreinte trÈs-marquÉe de localitÉ, que la conquÊte de l’Angleterre par les Normands y a ÉtÉ considÉrÉe en quelque sorte au point de vue de la ville et de l’Église de Bayeux. Un seul ÉvÊque y figure, et c’est celui de Bayeux, trÈs-souvent en scÈne et quelquefois dÉsignÉ par son seul titre: episcopus. De plus, parmi les personnages laÏques qui figurent À cÔtÉ du duc Guillaume, pas un ne porte un nom historique. Les noms qui reviennent sans cesse sont ceux de Turold, Wadard et Vital, probablement connus et chÉris À Bayeux, car les deux derniers, Wadard et Vital, sont inscrits sur le Domesday-Book, au nombre des feudataires de l’Église de Bayeux, dans les comtÉs de Kent, d’Oxford, et de Lincoln. Si l’on joint À ces raisons celles que M. Bolton Corney dÉduit de la forme et de l’usage particuliers du monument, il est impossible de ne pas croire avec lui que la tapisserie fut commandÉe par le chapitre de Bayeux et exÉcutÉe pour lui.

“Je passe À la seconde proposition, savoir que la tapisserie de Bayeux fut exÉcutÉe aprÈs la rÉunion de la Normandie À la France. Cette hypothÈse n’exige pas une longue rÉfutation, car l’auteur du mÉmoire la fonde sur une seule preuve, l’emploi du mot Franci pour dÉsigner l’armÉe normande. ‘Guillaume de Poitiers, dit-il, appelle ceux qui faisaient partie de l’armÉe Normanni, des Normands; la tapisserie les nomme toujours Franci, des FranÇais. Je considÈre cela comme une bÉvue indicative du temps oÙ le monument a ÉtÉ exÉcute.’ Il n’y a lÀ aucune bÉvue, ni rien qui puisse faire prÉsumer que la tapisserie de Bayeux n’est pas contemporaine de la conquÈte de l’Angleterre par les Normands. En effet, les Anglo-Saxons avaient coutume de dÉsigner par le nom de FranÇais (Frencan, Frencisce men) tous les habitants de la Gaule, sans distinction de province ou d’origine. La Chronique saxonne, dans les mille endroits oÙ elle parle des chefs et des soldats de l’armÉe normande, les appelle FranÇais. Ce nom servait en Angleterre À distinguer les conquÉrants de la population indigÈne, non-seulement dans le langage usuel, mais encore dans celui des acts lÉgaux. On lit dans les lois de Guillaume-le-ConquÉrant, À l’article du meurtre, ces mots: Ki Franceis occist, et, dans la version latine de ces lois: Si Francigena interfectus fuerit. L’emploi du mot Franci au lieu de Normanni, ne prouve donc point que la tapisserie de Bayeux date d’un temps posterieur À la conquÊte. S’il prouve quelque chose, c’est que la tapisserie a ÉtÉ exÉcutÉe non en Normandie, mais en Angleterre, et que c’est À des ouvriers ou ouvriÈres de ce dernier pays que le chapitre de Bayeux a fait sa commande.

“Cette opinion, que je soumets au jugement des archÉologues, est confirmÉe d’ailleurs par l’orthographe de certains mots et par l’emploi de certaines lettres dans les lÉgendes du monument. On y trouve, jusque dans le nom du duc Guilluame et dans celui de la ville de Bayeux, des traces de prononciation anglo-saxonne: Hic Wido adduxit Haroldum ad Wilgelmum normannorum ducem; Willem venit Bagias; c’est le g saxon qui figure ici avec sa consonance hiÉ. Wilgelm pour Wilielm, Bagias pour Bayeux. La dipthongue ea, l’une des particularitÉs de l’orthographe anglo-saxon, se rencontre dans les lÉgendes qui offrent le nom du roi Edward: Hic portatur corpus Eadwardi. Une autre lÉgende prÉsente cette indication de lieu, correctement saxonne: Ut foderetur castellum at Hestenca castra. Enfin le nom de Gurth (prononcez Gheurth), frÈre du roi Harold, est orthographiÉ avec trois lettres saxonnes; le g, ayant le son de ghÉ l’y, ayant le son d’eu, et le d barrÉ, exprimant l’une des deux consonnances que les Anglais figurent aujourd’hui par th.

“Ainsi, je crois, avec la majoritÉ des savants qui ont Écrit sur la tapisserie de Bayeux, que cette tapisserie est contemporaine du grand ÉvÉnement qu’elle reprÉsente; je pense, avec M. Bolton Corney, qu’elle a ÉtÉ exÉcutÉe sur l’ordre et aux frais du chapitre de Bayeux; j’ajoute, pour ma part de conjectures, qu’elle fut ouvrÉe en Angleterre et par des mains anglaises, d’aprÈs un plan venu de Bayeux.

“AgrÉez, Monsieur, l’assurance de ma considÉration la plus distinguÉe.

“AUG. THIERRY.

“Le 25 juin 1843.”

NOTE C.—Page 25.

In the Northumberland Pipe Rolls,[118] we have an interesting trace of Edgar Atheling.—He had been owing the crown 20 marks of silver, probably for the right to institute some law proceeding. Of this sum he paid 10 marks to the Sheriff of Northumberland in 1157 or 1158, and the remainder in the following year. Ten years later he paid 2 marks to the crown for the right to bring some plea. At this time he must have been about 120 years of age. He came with his father to England in 1057, as a child; supposing him to have been 10 years of age at this period, he would be of the great age already mentioned at the time the last payment was made. How much longer he lived there is no evidence to show. The exact place of his residence, at this time, is not known. Edlingham Castle, situated about six miles to the south-west of Alnwick, has, upon the supposition that the neighbouring village of Edlingham takes its name from him (Ætheling’s ham), been by some considered to be the spot.

NOTE D.—Page 87.

The appearances presented on the examination of the remains of St. Cuthbert in Durham Cathedral are in consistency with the opinion that the mitre was not in vogue in Saxon times. Before the body of the saint was put in the shrine in 1104, it was inspected. Reginald, who gives us an account of this circumstance, says, “Upon the forehead of the holy bishop there is a fillet of gold, not woven work, and of gold only externally, which sparkles with most precious stones of different kinds, scattered all over its surface.”[119] In 1827, when the remains were again examined, Mr. Raine tells us. “The scull of the saint was easily moved from its place; and when this was done, we observed on the forehead, and apparently constituting a part of the bone itself, a distinct tinge of gold of the breadth of an ordinary fillet.” It would thus seem that a gilded fillet was the only mitre, if such it can be called, which St. Cuthbert wore.

FINIS.
NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE:
PRINTED BY J. G. FORSTER AND CO., CLAYTON STREET.

Image unavailable: the book's back cover

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Taylor’s Wace, p. xv.

[2] Ibid. p. 3.

[3] ArchÆologia, vol. xvii., p. 105.

[4] Ordericus Vitalis, bk. IV., ch. ii.

[5] Roscoe’s Life of the Conqueror, p. 92. See Note A. at the end of the volume.

[6] See Note B. at the end of the volume.

[7] Taylor’s Wace, p. xxviii.

[8] ArchÆologia, vol. xix., p. 186.

[9] Strutt thus disposes of a difficulty which may occur to some minds.—“If any one should say, by way of objection to this established rule, that though the illuminator has not given us the customs, habits, &c., of those people he designed to picture out, yet is it not most likely that such dresses as are given should be fictitious, agreeable rather to his own wild fancy than to the real customs and habits of his own times? To answer their objection, (and that because the chief materials of the present work are collected from the ancient MSS.) the reader must be informed, that many of these MSS. (especially such as are illuminated) were done as presents, or at the command of kings and noblemen, who are generally represented in the frontispiece in their proper habits receiving the particular MS. done for them from the author, and they are generally pictured attended by their court, or retinue. That these figures should be habited in the true dress of the times will not be doubted; and then, as far as the anonymous illuminations which may chance to follow in the MS. shall agree with those figures in the frontispiece, so far they may be allowed as authentic; other MSS. were done for particular abbeys and monasteries, in the embellishments of which no pains were spared. But a still greater proof of the authenticity of these delineations is, that on examining all the illuminated MSS. of the same century together, which, tho’ various, every one written and ornamented by different hands, yet on comparing the several delineations with each other, they will be found to agree in every particular of dress, customs, &c., even in the minutiÆ, which perfect similitude it would have been impossible to have preserved, had not some sure standard been regularly taken for the whole; therefore the fancy of the painter will be found to have little share in these valuable delineations. Besides, these pictures constantly agree with the description of the habits and customs of the same period, collected from the old historians.”—Strutt’s Manners, Customs, &c., of the Inhabitants of England, vol. i, p. 3.

[10] Taylor’s Wace, p. 162.

[11] Ibid. p. 163. n.

[12] “All have hitherto treated the Bayeux Tapestry as a ‘Monument of the Conquest of England,’ following therein M. Lancelot, and speaking of it as an unfinished work: whereas it is an apologetical history of the claims of William to the crown of England, and of the breach of faith, and fall of Harold; and is a perfect and finished action.”—Mr. Hudson Gurney, ArchÆologia, vol. xvii., p. 361.

[13] The AbbÉ de la Rue, in an elaborate paper in the ArchÆologia (vol. xvii, p. 85-109), supports the opinion that the Tapestry was prepared at the command of Matilda, daughter of Henry I. and wife of Henry V. Emperor of Germany. Lord Lyttleton (History of Henry II., vol. i, p. 353) and Hume (History of England, vol. i, note F.) entertain similar views.

[14] Vol. i., p. 328, 8vo. edition.

[15] ArchÆologia, vol. xvii., p. 105.

[16] Some idea of the labour involved in the work may be learned from the number of figures represented in it. It contains 623 men, 202 horses, 55 dogs, 505 animals of various kinds not already enumerated, 37 buildings, 41 ships and boats, and 49 trees—in all 1512 figures.

[17] See Plate III.

[18] Queens of England, vol. i., p. 66, edition 1851. I have been unable to meet with any authority for this statement.

[19] In a short visit which I made to Italy in the winter of 1853-4, I paid some attention to this subject. I have seen a vettorino, when protesting that his exorbitant charge was a most reasonable one, throw himself into all the contortions exhibited in the Tapestry.

[20] Lives of the Queens of England, edition 1853, p. 65. n.

[21] His words are “L’opinion commune À Bayeux est que ce fut la reine Mathilde, femme de Guillaume-le-ConquÉrant, qui la fit faire. Cette opinion, qui passe pour une tradition dans le pays, n’a rien que de fort vraisemblable.”—Jubinal’s Tapisserie de Bayeux, p. 1.

[22] Letters from Normandy, vol. i. p. 241.

[23] Ducarel, Appendix I., p. 3.

[24] William of Malmesbury’s English Chronicle (Bohn’s edition), p. 196.

[25] See Note C., at the end of the Volume.

[26] Bohn’s edition, p. 253.

[27] Taylor’s Wace, p. 76.

[28] General Introduction to Domesday, vol. i., p. 312.

[29] Ducarel’s Antiquities of Normandy, Appendix, p. 4.

[30] The first account of the hood is in a book written in Latin by the Emperor Frederic II. See History of Inventions and Discoveries by John Beckmann, translated by William Johnston, vol. i. p. 330.

[31] Introduction to Domesday, vol. i, p. 295.

[32] See ArchÆologia, vol. xxiv.

[33] Rich’s Companion to the Latin Dictionary, art. Adoratio.

[34] Quoted in Taylor’s Wace, p. 156.

[35] See Sir J. Gardner Wilkinson’s Popular Account of the Ancient Egyptians, vol. i, p. 235; and Bonomi’s Nineveh, p. 136.

[36] ArchÆologia, vol. 24, plate LV.

[37] Illustrations of CÆdmon’s Paraphrase, ArchÆologia, vol. xxiv., p. 339, plate LXXV. Hudson Turner’s Domestic Architecture of England, vol. i., p. 4.

[38] Pictorial History of England, vol. i. p. 637.

[39] Taylor’s Wace, page 7.

[40] This observation, together with some others which may not in every case require to be specially noted, has been taken from a clever series of papers on the Bayeux Tapestry, which were published in the Ladies’ Newspaper for 1851-2.

[41] Akerman on Celtic and Teutonic Weapons.—ArchÆ., vol. xxxiv.

[42] Mr. Charles Stothard in the ArchÆologia, vol. xix, p. 189.

[43] Taylor’s Wace, p. 11.

[44] Introduction to Domesday, vol. ii. p. 404.

[45] The Song of Roland, London, 1854.

[46] William of Malmesbury, (Bohn’s edition) p. 279.

[47] Thierry’s Norman Conquest (London, 1841), p. 41.

[48] The following passages from the Chronicle of Florence of Worcester furnish distinct evidence as to the marriage of Harold with Algitha:—“Regnavit autem Haraldus mensibus IX. et diebus totidem. Cujus morte audita, comites Eadwinus et Morcarus, qui se cum suis certamini subtraxere, Lundoniam venere, et sororem suam Algitham reginam sumptam ad civitatem Legionum misere.” “Anno regni XXIII. rex Anglorum Eadwardus decessit. Cui ex ipsius concessione comes Haroldus, filius Godwini West-Saxonum ducis ... successit; qui de regina Aldgitha, comitis Alfgari filia, habuit filium Haroldum; eodemque anno a Normanorum comite Willelmo peremptus est in bello.”—Monumenta Historica, pp. 614, 642.

[49] Planche’s Strutt, vol. i., p. 14.

[50] Pict. Eng., vol. i., p. 637.

[51] Thierry’s History of the Normans, p. 36.

[52] It is often asserted that the house of Percy derived its name from one of the family having slain Malcolm, King of Scotland, by thrusting the spear into his eye when he came forward to demand the keys of Alnwick Castle. That historic name occurs in the Battle Abbey Roll, and is derived from the cradle of the family, the hamlet of Perci, in Normandy.

[53] The walls of Tintagel Castle “were evidently constructed in a framework of wood; the square holes which pierce the walls at regular intervals, from the foundations upwards, show the places once occupied by bond pieces, by which the wooden frames were held together.”—Notes by Rev. W. Haslam, in Report of Royal Inst. Cornwall, 1850.

[54] Ingulph’s Chronicle (Bohn), p. 14.

[55] Taylor’s Wace, p. 83.

[56] The Normans seem to have been particularly addicted to the worship of relics. They carried them about their persons, and had them enclosed in the handles of their swords. In the Song of Roland that hero is represented, when dying, as addressing his sword thus:—“Ah, Saint Durandal! in thy golden pommel what precious relics lie hid! A tooth of Saint Peter!—Blood of Saint Basil!—Hair of Monseigneur Saint Denis!—Vesture of the Virgin Mary! And shall a pagan possess thee?” Being thus at all times provided with relics, they were never at a loss as to the administration of an oath. In the Song already referred to we have a case in point:—‘Be it as thou wilt,’ answered Ganelon, and upon the relics of his sword he swore to the treason and consummated his crime.

[57] Wace, p. 138.

[58] Wace, p. 20, 21.

[59] William of Malmesbury, p. 249.

[60] Malmesbury, p. 252.

[61] Vol. i. p. 322.

[62] “Having first washed the corpse, it was clothed in a straight linen garment, or put into a bag or sack of linen, and then wrapped closely round from head to foot with a strong cloth wrapper.”—Strutt, vol. i., p. 66.

[63] The custom of carrying the dead in some slight envelope to the sarcophagus which was to be its last resting place, accounts for the mischance which occurred at the burial of William the Conqueror, force being required to thrust the body into its too narrow cell. Bede tells us (Ecc. Hist. b. iv. c. xi.) how the stone coffin for Sebba, King of the East Saxons, was too small, and when the attendants were for bending the knees of the corpse a miracle ensued, and the coffin elongated of itself.

[64] Wace, p. 89.

[65] Annals of Roger de Hoveden, vol. i. p. 130.

[66] The paludamentum, or official dress of a Roman general, to which the episcopal pallium is probably to be traced, was either of a brilliant white, scarlet, or purple colour.

[67] See note D, at the end of the volume.

[68] Hinde on Comets, p. 52.

[69] Thierry, p. 60.

[70] Taylor’s Wace.

[71] Sir N. Harris Nicolas’ Hist. Royal Navy, vol. i., p. 24.

[72] Wace, p. 123.

[73] Vol. i., p. 464.

[74] “This mode of steering was retained till a comparatively late period. In a bass-relief over the doorway of the leaning tower of Pisa, built in the twelfth century, ships are represented with paddle rudders, as those in the Bayeux Tapestry representing the Norman Invasion. They must have been in use till after the middle of the thirteenth century; for in the contracts to supply Louis IX. with ships, the contractors are bound to furnish them with two rudders. By the middle of the following century we find the hinged rudders on the gold noble of Edward III. The change in the mode of steering must, therefore, have taken place about the end of the thirteenth, or early in the fourteenth, century.”—Smith’s Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul.

[75] They are engraved in Smith’s Collectanea Antiqua, vol. ii., p. 238.

[76] Wace, p. 210.

[77] Crit. Inquiry into Ancient Armour, vol. i., p. 8.

[78] When Harold, in 1063, conducted an expedition against the Welch, he found the heavy armour of his troops unsuitable to the service on which they were engaged, and immediately changed it. Ingulf says, “Seeing that the activity of the Welch, proved remarkably effective against the more cumbrous movements of the English and that, after making an attack, they retreated into the woods, while our soldiers, being weighed down with their arms, were unable to follow them, he ordered all his soldiers to accustom themselves to wear armour made of boiled leather, and to use lighter arms. Upon this the Welch were greatly alarmed, and submitted.”

[79] ArchÆologia, vol. xxiv., p. 270.

[80] See Fenwick’s Introduction to the Slogans of the North of England, and the Notes to the Introduction.

[81] “And all had their cognizances, so that each might know his fellow, and Norman might not strike Norman, nor Frenchman kill his countryman, by mistake.”

Taylor’s Wace, p. 172.

[82] The Saxons as well as the Normans paid great attention to the opinions of the ladies, even upon martial subjects. Strutt says, they “would not go to battle or undertake any great expedition without consulting their wives, to whose advice they paid the greatest regard.” This excellent antiquary pays more regard to truth than gallantry when in the same sentence he adds, “They also superstitiously placed great faith in the neighing of horses.”—Manners of the English, vol i., p. 17.

[83] “This standard ... was sumptuously embroidered with gold and precious stones, in the form of a man fighting.” Can Malmesbury have had in view here the description which Æschylus gives us of the shield of Polynices?

“His well-orb’d shield he holds,
New-wrought, and with double impress charged:
A warrior blazing all in golden arms,
. . . . . . . . . .
Such their devices.”

[84] Florence of Worcester distinctly states that it was “contrary to the custom of the English to fight on horseback.”—Bohn’s Ed. p. 157.

[85] Meyrick, vol. i., p. 27.

[86] Akerman, in the ArchÆologia, vol. xxxiv.

[87] A stream which enters the sea a few miles to the east of the river Orne, upon which the city of Caen is situated.

[88] Roger de Hoveden, vol. i., 134. Ordericus Vitalis, vol. i., p. 464.

[89] Perhaps this is an elipsis for ad litus PevensÆ; more probably, however, these irregularities of construction are to be ascribed to the low state of Latinity at the period.

[90] A stroke has probably been over the last A in Hastinga, so as to make it Hastingam, which the construction requires. Raperentur seems to have been used as a deponent verb, contrary to classical usage.

[91] This was not the first occasion on which a similar occurrence took place. The following passage bearing upon the subject may interest the reader:—“Thou sayest well Sancho (quoth Don Quixote), but I must tell thee that times are wont to vary and change their course; and what are commonly accounted omens by the vulgar, though not within the scope of reason, the wise will nevertheless regard as incidents of lucky aspect. Your watcher of omens rises betimes, and going abroad, meets a Franciscan friar, whereupon he hurries back again, as if a furious dragon had crossed his way. Another happens to spill the salt upon the table, and straightway his soul is overcast with the dread of coming evil: as if nature had willed that such trivial accidents should give notice of ensuing mischances. The wise man and good christian will not, however, pry too curiously into the counsels of heaven. Scipio, on arriving in Africa, stumbled as he leapt on shore; his soldiers took it for an ill omen, but he, embracing the ground, said, ‘Africa, thou canst not escape me—I have thee fast.’”—Don Quixote, Part II. chap. lviii.

[92] It has been argued from the occurrence of AT instead of AD, and of CEASTRA for CASTRA, in these inscriptions, that the clerk who wrote them was an Englishman. It must, however, be borne in mind that the original Norman language, which had a common origin with the Saxon, was at the period of the Conquest spoken in comparative purity at Bayeux. In other parts of the duchy French prevailed.

[93] It was my privilege when wandering over the ground rendered memorable by the battle of Hastings to enjoy the companionship of Mr. Lower, of Lewes. To his local knowledge, his extensive acquaintance with antiquarian science, and his friendly attention, I am largely indebted.

[94] Lower on the Battle of Hastings, ‘Sussex Arch. Col.,’ vi. 18.

[95] During the middle ages the English were much given to the irreverent use of this great name; so much so was this the case, that Godamites became, in France, synonymous with English. Joan of Arc usually designates her enemies by this term.

[96] Vol. xix., p. 206. Mr. Amyot does not profess to adhere strictly to the text of Gaimar, but has introduced into his translation some incidents mentioned by other writers.

[97] On accompanying Mr. Lower to the spot, in January, 1853, I was satisfied of the correctness of his views.

[98] Sussex ArchÆological Collections, vol. vi., p. 27.

[99] There has been a discussion respecting the word pueros, some supposing that the parties thus addressed were young soldiers, inexperienced recruits. It is probable, however, that the word is equivalent to the phrase, “lads” among us, or the word “boys” in the lines which carried so much terror to the heart of James the Second, after he had seen a specimen of the stalwart youth which Cornwall produces—

“And must Trelawney die, and must Trelawney die?
Then twenty thousand Cornish boys will ask the reason why.”

[100] Benoit de Saint-More. Taylor’s Wace, 193.

[101] The special correspondent of The Times, writing from the Heights of Alma, Sep. 21st, 1854, says, “The attitudes of some of the dead were awful. One man might be seen resting on one knee, with the arms extended in the form of taking aim, the brow compressed, the lips clinched—the very expression of firing at an enemy stamped on the face and fixed there by death; a ball had struck this man in the neck. Physiologists or anatomists must settle the rest. Another was lying on his back with the same expression, and his arms raised in a similar attitude, the MiniÉ musket still grasped in his hands undischarged. Another lay in a perfect arch, his head resting on one part of the ground and his feet on the other, but his back raised high above it.—The Times, Oct. 11th, 1854. See also Sir Charles Bell’s Anatomy of Expression, 3rd edition, p. 160.

[102] M. A. Lower’s Battle Abbey Chronicle, p. 7.

[103] Ibid.

[104] The Tapestry represents the death of Harold as rapidly succeeding the infliction of the wound in his eye. The impression left by a perusal of Wace is, that at least an hour or two elapsed between the one event and the other. The diversity of statement between these authorities is probably more apparent than real. After Harold was wounded in so important an organ as the eye, it was impossible that he could long withstand the onset of William’s troops; his defeat, or, in other words, his death, was certain. However manfully Harold may have borne up under the inconvenience and pain of his wound, the artist of the Tapestry is logically correct in at once bringing us to the conclusion of the scene.

[105] Ingulph’s Chronicle, p. 139.

[106] Lower’s Chronicle of Battle Abbey, p. 11.

[107] Sussex ArchÆological Collections, vol. 1., page 33.—For some years the public have been admitted to the Abbey grounds only on one day of the week, and that the day (Monday) most inconvenient to those who reside at a distance from Battle. Let us hope that henceforth no one respectfully requesting permission to muse upon the spot where the deed was done on which the modern history of the world has turned, will meet with a denial.

[108] History of the Anglo-Saxons (European Library), p. 337.

[109] Lingard’s Hist. Eng., vol. i., p. 313.

[110] Vol. i., p. 487.

[111] General Introduction to Domesday, vol. i. p. 311. In all probability William obtained the title of Conqueror from the Latin word conquiro, which in its legal acceptation signified to acquire. It is still used in this sense by the Scottish lawyers.

[112] Saxon Chronicle, Bohn’s edition, p. 462.

[113] Ingulph’s Chronicle, p. 140.

[114] Henry of Huntingdon, vol. i. p. 216.

[115] William of Malmesbury, p. 279.

[116] See Wright’s Biographia Britannica, vol. ii., p. 10.

[117] Would not the United States of America do well to notice this?

[118] Hodgson’s Northumberland, Vol. III., Part iii., pp. 3, 11.

[119] Raine’s St. Cuthbert, p. 88.

Clyx.com