The Background to the Tapestry: A King, an Archbishop and an Earl, Part 5

In which Godwin returns from exile and exacts his revenge upon the Archbishop. 

In the previous episode, we saw Earl Godwin of Wessex and his family have their lives his  thrown into turmoil, caused by the apparent connivance of King Edward and his friend, the Norman Archbishop Robert and the King's brother-in-law Eustace of Boulogne. They had lost support for their cause when many of their man either balked at the idea of a civil war - or were summoned as King's thegns to Edward's side. These would have been men who lived within Godwin's jurisdiction but owed their land to the King, therefore if they had refused the summons they could have been tried for treason. Godwin and his sons must have decided that the best way forward for them was to gather up as much of their treasure and flee. Tostig might have already been wed to Judith of Flanders at this stage and the family would have found refuge at the court of her brother Baldwin . They decided to double their chances by splitting up into two groups, Harold and his younger brother Leofwin took Swegn's ship to Ireland  to the court of  MacDiarmid whilst the rest of the family went to Baldwin in Flanders. The Queen, also a Godwin, took her chances at court whilst the youngest son Wulfnoth and Swegn's son Hakon were taken as hostages into the Queen's household first, then into the Archbishop's perhaps when Edith her self was sent to a nunnery by the King.

According to David Hume (The History of England, Volume I ), the Count of Flanders allowed Godwin to purchase ships from his harbour and man them with mercenaries and those of his followers that had arrived from England with him. The King got to hear about Godwin's activities in Flanders and had set up a fleet of his own. Here it might be conjectured that Godwin  practiced his cunning, by sailing out toward Sandwich harbour. As he expected, the King's fleet set sail out to meet them. He turned tail and sailed back with his forces to Flanders. The King and his counsel felt safe in the knowledge that the Earl had fled from their naval blockade and Edward allowed his fleet to stand down, thinking that the Earl would not dare to attempt an invasion again. As soon as Godwin felt it was convenient, he set sail once more with his force, this time to the Isle of Wight. There he met up with Harold and Leofwin who arrived with 9 ships and an army of Irish mercenaries in his pay. Harold had  landed simultaneously in Porlock and ravaged the lands there. He had to fight hard against those Somerset and Devonshire men who opposed him, killing some '30 good thegns' and putting the rest to flight. Some of the locals may have augmented his army of Irish mercenaries. Landing in the Isle of Wight, Godwin may have boosted his support even more as the Isle was in their former jurisdiction of Wessex. He then went on having met up with Harold and Leofwin, to the mainland gathering more men to him. Ian Walker states in his book Harold: The last Anglo-Saxon King, his belief that that because Godwin returned with such a large fleet, he must have men who had also followed him into exile. This is very plausible. The C Chronicle stated that Godwin had come to the land before the King's fleet knew about them and 'enticed' all  the boat men from Kent and Hastings and along the coasts of Sussex and also men of Surrey so that when he embarked later on his mission to regain his lands, they were already waiting to join him to 'live and die' with him.

Meanwhile during the Godwinsons exile, those men who had turned  from Godwin, were not happy with the increasing influence at court of the King's Norman advisors. Robert de Jumieges was not the all people's original choice for Archbishop and the Norman's were advancing  within the church. The Bishops of London and Dorchester were also Normans.  Despite their unpopularity with the Northern Earls, the Godwins  were much loved in the south. One would imagine that the men of Dover would have had their morale buoyed by the Earl's refusal to punish them. The Duke of Normandy's visit and those foreign officials who were influencing the King toward a possible Norman succession, may have disheartened the English who were not keen to see a foreigner with no blood tie to the House of Wessex on the throne. The arrival of Godwin on English shores again may have been a Godsend for some, for he found that many men rallied to him, promising to aid him to seek justice for him and his family. With this large body of men, the Godwinsons marched upon London and Godwin threw himself upon his knees at the King and declared his loyalty and that he had no wish to cause him harm and that he knew that the King had been counselled evilly. The King appears to have been under the illusion that he was still being supported by the northern earls who had loyally stood by his side last time, but he was wrong. They refused to take Godwin into custody and with Bishop Stigand as go-between, they advised the King to listen to the Earl's plea. According to Walker, Godwin most likely had sent Swegn on a pilgrimage whilst they were in exile to atone for his sins, believing that Edward would be more likely to look favourably on a reconciliation if a penitent Swegn was away seeking forgiveness. He was to die on that pilgrimage anyway, ridding his father of the problem.

The King's court was in chaos. On one side he was being advised by the foreign counsel against  Godwin's return and now on the other, he was being counselled to negotiate and come to terms with him. The Norman camp must have continued to try to maintain their grip on the King, however Bishop Stigand's negotiations brought about a truce and a meeting of the Witan was called for the next day. Archbishop Robert knew the game was up and pre-empted Godwin's wrath by fleeing London with his fellow Norman bishops, Ulf and William and other 'Frenchmen', as the Abingdon (C) chronicle claims. He went across the sea to Normandy. 

During the great council meeting, Earl Godwin set out his case and declared his innocence and that of his sons. The King, whether he liked it or not, had no option but to restore Godwin and the rest of his family to their estates and Edith Godwinson was released from her incarceration at Wilton Abbey and restored  as his Queen once more. As well as the family's restoration, the witan passed judgement over those who sought to do evil to the kingdom by causing  the unrest and accusing the Godwinsons  falsely. Of course the King was found to be blameless and the Norman camp were easy scapegoats, most having already fled. Those French and Normans of Herefordshire were also sent packing having been given safe conduct by Earl Leofric to go north to Scotland. But not all the foreigners were forced out; William the Bishop of London was eventually allowed to return and the King's nephew, Ralph de Mantes were just some who were permitted to stay. It seems that only those who were mostly responsible for causing the dispute between the King and his leading Earl were forced out.

So at last Godwin had his day and his revenge must have felt very satisfying indeed. It was remarkable that Godwin, who had always been able to avoid such trouble, had managed to bounce back from the devastating effect of exile to sweep back in a wind of fury across the sea and ravage his way back into office like a tornado, as if nothing had ever happened. Robert Champart returned to Jumieges, but with him he was to take the most precious things that Godwin might have possessed. Champart might have been outwitted by Godwin, but he was not going down in defeat without taking something of Godwin's with him.

Find out in the final episode - the Aftermath - what happens next.

References
Bates D (2004) William the Conqueror, The History Press.

Barlow F (2003) The Godwins: The Rise and Fall of a Noble Dynasty (The Medieval World), Longman.

Barlow F (1997) Edward the Confessor (2^nd ed) Yale University Press, US.  

Stenton F (1971) Anglo Saxon England (3^rd Ed) Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Swanton M (2000) The Anglo Saxon Chronicles (2^nd ed) Phoenix Press, London.

A Tale of a King, an Archbishop and an Earl: Part 4

The Background to the Tapestry: A King, an Archbishop and an Earl, Part 4

In which the Godwins return to power, Robert Champart flees their retribution and Edward throws in the towel.

The Godwins were forced into exile in the autumn of 1051. Harold and younger brother Leofwin went west to find Swegn's ship to take them to the court of Macdiarmid in Ireland to drum up support there. The rest of the family fled to Flanders to seek refuge with Count Baldwin IV, that is at least nearly all of the rest of them.The ones left behind were Queen Edith and the hostages,  Godwin's youngest son Wulfnoth and the boy believed to have been the son of Swegn, Hakon. Edith was eventually sent packing to a nunnery. Her decision to stay loyal to her husband would backfire on her. Edward might have beeen prepared to keep her at first but whatever happened, she eventually had to go. Robert Champart, also known as Robert de Jumieges might have had other ideas for a new wife for Edward, perhaps a Norman alliance. As for Hakon and Wulfnoth, Godwin and Swegn were never to see their boys again.
  Champart had recently been conscecrated as Archbishop of Canterbury, a decision that had angered Godwin and the supporters of the popular candidate for the job, Aelfric as reported  here in Part One. At sometime in 1051, either before or after the Dover incident and Godwin's exile, Robert travelled to Rome to recieve his bishop's pallium from the Pope. Some Norman sources state that he sought out Duke William in Normandy on his way back and was opening negotiations up on Edward's behalf to strengthen ties between Edward and William. If he could get the Duke on side, Edward could save the cost of manning and maintaining the warships necessary to ward off raids from Vikings  launching their attacks from ports in Normandy. In return for William's support some say that Champart, acting on Edward's behalf offered William the heirdom to the crown of England. There is no evidence to say that William had any part in the plot to oust Godwin, but if Champart truly did indeed visit William at this time, he might well have learned of the man's unpopularity  from Robert. Whether Eustace of Boulogne was at William's court at this time is not known but the events that followed the Dover Incident and subsequent exiling of Godwin seem very coincidental indeed.
The only one of the Anglo Saxon chronicle to report William's visit to Edward's court was the D Chronicle:

" Then soon Earl William came from beyond the sea with a great troop of French men and

the King recieved him and as many of his companions as suited him, and let him go again."   

This was also reported by Florence. Strangely one can only wonder why such an important visit was not recorded in any of the other chronicles.  Some historians, such as Ian Walker, have expressed their belief that the visit never took place and that it was Norman propaganda that inserted the comment at a later date after 1066. As we do not know for sure that Champart went to Normandy at that time, I think it is safe to say that the visit could well have happened. And William did not pluck the claim that Edward had offered him the crown of England out of the air. Something must have happened or been said in order for the seed to have been planted within the Duke's mind all those years ago. Why else would he embark on such a major mission to wrest his crown from Harold Godwinson years later in 1066?

So a series of consequences has emerged, we see Godwin gradually becoming more and more out of favour with the King; whisperings of treason about Godwin in Edward's ear by the Earl's number one enemy, Robert Champart; the possibility of Champart  talking  with William of Normandy about the succession to the English throne; then Eustace of Boulogne causes a fracas in Dover that most likely went worse than he thought it would (men dying on both sides) and the consequent exiling of a  recalcitrant Earl Godwin. Following on from that, we have a youthful William of Normandy cross the seas as if he has been summoned by the King who lets "him go again." Contrived? Perhaps. The evidence does not confirm this solidly, however one could be forgiven for the conjecture that from these events, something was afoot in the court of Edward in 1051 that was not favourable to the Godwins. Or perhaps it was nothing more than a series of coincidences, in any case, whatever it was, it gave Edward a brief interlude from Godwin's control.

For 9 months or so Edward was free from the Yoke of Godwin. In that time, he put aside his wife in a nunnery, most likely on the advice of Champart. Edith's Encommium states that she was sent away with an escort for  her own safety and given consideration as to her comfort, however another source states that she was stripped of all her lands and wealth and sent packing with only her maid for company. It is also possible that Edward may have been considering a new marriage alliance urged on by the Normans who were now counselling him. If this was so, there does not seem to have been any moves made towards this. Either Edward was not in a hurry to wed another woman having just got rid of one, or he was simply paying lip service to those around him. Champart might have been dissapointed at the pace of change, however he was about to have a rude awakening in the form of Godwin's return.

In the next episode we see what happened on Godwin's return

Apart from the sources mentioned references are from:

Barlow F (1997) Edward the Confessor (2^nd ed) Yale University Press, US.  

Stenton F (1971) Anglo Saxon England (3^rd Ed) Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Swanton M (2000) The Anglo Saxon Chronicles (2^nd ed) Phoenix Press, London.

The Story: Scene 3

Interpreting The Tapestry: Scene by Scene

Scene 3



Harold's ship leaves Bosham after he and his companions have feasted and rested. The here shows Harold and his men leaving his manor and wading into the sea to the prepared ship. Harold his carrying his dog and a hawk as does the fellow next to him. They are either gifts for the Duke of Normandy or he brings them because he is eager to hunt during the journey.

H

Next we see Harold's boat sailing out with around 14 men aboard. these were obviously Harold's handpicked men, his bodyguard, the well-trained huscarles. They are obvioulsy not expecting trouble for they bear no armour or arms. It appears that there may have been another boat load of men with him, for the boat in front is very different from the boat behind, although this is pretty consistent with theTapestry's habit of changing the style and colour of the same image. However there is also a boat that carries Harold and his men to the shore at Ponthieu that appears not to have a sail so he may have brought more than one boat with him.

According to the Norman sources, as we know, Edward has sent Harold on a journey to Normandy, to meet with Edward's second cousin, William, Duke of that land. Harold's mission was allegedly to confirm that the English crown would belong to the Duke upon the King of England's death.

Eventually they reach Ponthieu, the tapestry gives no indication that they have been blown of course, however if Normandy was there destination then perhaps they have. Sailing in the 11thc relied on engaging a sail with the wind and it was not uncommon for boats to get blown off course, though Harold was an experienced sailor having commanded Edward's Royal fleet in his youth. Interestingly, the borders of the Bayeux Tapestry are said to be a guide for the main piece but there doesn't seem to be any relevance in the imagery until we see the men with swords, indicating that as Harold and his men were alighting their ship, a fight ensued with Guy of Ponthieu's men on the shore.

William de Jumièges was a contempory chronicler and man of the Duke's. He stated that Harold landed in Ponthieu and was taken prisoner by Count Guy. The Bayeux Tapestry appears to reflect this and Harold is seen being manhandled as a man on a horse gives orders.

Ponthieu is a state to the north of Normandy. It was never part of the land that was handed over to the founders of the duchy and they are at this time, very proud of the fact that they successfully resisted any attempt to make them such. Their many songs and poems pay testimony to their wars with the Pagan invaders, then the religion of the ancestors of the Christian Normans. Guy of Ponthieu, or Wido, as he is referred to on the Bayeux Tapestry, had succeeded his brother Enguerrand in 1053 as count. Enguerrand had been married to Adelaide, William of Normandy's sister but around 1050, the marriage was anulled on the grounds of consanguinity. Another alliance had been forged between William of Talou, who was half uncle to William, and Enguerrand's sister. William of Talou challenged his nephew's right to the dukedom but the younger William had the backing of his great uncle Robert, powerful Archbishop of Rouen. As he was a brother-by-marriage to the Ponthieu brothers, they backed him in his rebellion. Of course this did not endear the brothers to William in the 1050s. It is interesting to note here as an aside, that the earliest surviving account of the Battle of Hastings was written by the brothers' uncle, Bishop Guy de Amiens. In 1053, William of Talou built the Castle of Arques and holed himself up there whilst William of Normandy sent an army to lay seige to it, allowing him and the rest of his army to be able to deal with other problems elsewhere on his borders, such as the French King. His loyal brother-in-law, Enguerrand was killed coming to the aid of Talou. Henry, the French king withdrew and William of Talou surrendered Arques and was sent into exile. This is when Guy took over as comites in Ponthieu.
In 1054, Henry decides to march into Normandy to bring his errant vassal to heel. His brother leads another army that contains Guy and his younger brother Waleran who is killed and Guy captured when they are ambushed.Guy spends two years imprisoned in Normandy whilst his uncle, the Bishop of Amiens sees to the running of his county. King Henry I of France was again defeated for the last time.
In 1056, Guy is released. William has been merciful, however, Guy is now his vassal and would have sworn an oath of allegiance to his new master. So why did Guy de Ponthieu take Harold prisoner when the Englishman, probably washed off course, lands on his beachhead;  especially when he knew what it was like to be held against his will.
According to a custom dating back to the 9thc, the counts of Ponthieu were able to ransom any persons, ships or property that landed upon their shore. The two men would have already met in 1056 at St Omer when they both bore witness on a charter for Eustace of Boulogne. Harold was a well travelled man who was thought to have been visiting Europe at that time on his way to meet with the nephew of King Edward, known as Edward the Exile, whom he may have been charged with bringing back to England. It is of course not known whether or not the men had discourse with one another. We can speculate that perhaps they did not like each other, or Guy did not like Harold, but most people spoke well of Harold. He was amiable, witty, intelligent, well read and could speak many languages. He may have been very charming to the women and no doubt many women would have admired these qualities. It might have had nothing to do with whether or not Guy disliked Harold; he was money as far as the greedy Count was concerned and whether or not he liked him was by the by. 

By 1064 (we cannot be sure of the exact date but most historians agree it was in this year) when Harold arrived on Ponthieu's shore, Guy might well have been an embittered man by this time. He had spent two years in a Norman dungeon, was humiliated and taught a harsh lesson by the Duke; his brothers had been killed in wars with Normandy and his own county reduced to a client-state of William's. Now here comes along a nice treasure for him, the wealthy Earl of Wessex. Many may have heard that Harold Godwinson was the power behind King Edward's throne. Next to the King he was the richest man in the land.And likely much richer than Guy de Ponthieu. Harold had land holdings all over England. His wife, Eadgyth Swanneck also had lands a plenty. Guy was well known for gaining funds through seizing shipments that came to his lands. Now here was the biggest prize of all.

References

Bates D (2004) William the Conqueror, The History Press.

Barlow F (2003) The Godwins: The Rise and Fall of a Noble Dynasty (The Medieval World), Longman.

Bridgeford A (2006) 1066: The Hidden History in the Bayeux Tapestry, Walker & Co.

 

A Tale of a King, an Archbishop and an Earl: Part 3

The Background to the Tapestry: A King, an Archbishop and an Earl, Part 3.

In which the relationship between the three men completely breaks down.

In the first two episodes of this series, we have looked at the backgrounds of each men and they're relationship to each other. When Edward arrived back in England to take the crown after his half brother Harthacnut's demise, he was a mature man probably in his late thirties and most likely by this time quite an embittered man. He despised his mother for her abandonment of him and his siblings in favour of the man who brought about the downfall of his father Aethelred's regime and he must have already heard the rumours that Godwin, the Earl of Wessex had been responsible for his brother Alfred's death earlier, which would have coloured his opinion of the man already. At this time, Robert Champart, the King's close  friend and Norman advisor, appeared to be viewing Godwin as a rival. Godwin wanted a closer relationship to the King and was pressing for Edward to marry his daughter Edith from the outset of his crowning, I would imagine. Edward dallied over this marriage and one can imagine Godwin's forbearance and patience as Edward played the waiting game until he finally agreed to marry Edith Godwinsdottor in1045.
It was around 1046 that we see Robert Champart witnessing documents for the first time as Bishop of London. Around the early 50's, Robert and Godwin's enmity toward each other was becoming evident as Champart began accusing Godwin of misappropriating church land and they began having public rows. Robert was starting to whisper poison about Godwin in the King's ear that he had got rid of Alfred, his brother, and now he was hoping to get rid of him. So Edward was cultivating  his dislike of Godwin  with the help of his Norman counsellors and to increase Godwin's frustration at Edward's reliance on the Norman camp in his court, Edward made Robert Archbishop of Canterbury.
There were two important issues that exasperated the situation between the two men further; the behaviour of Swegn, Godwin's eldest son and the Dover Incident. Swegn's insubordinate behaviour did nothing to improve relations between the King and his father and the Dover Incident was to bring things to a mighty head as we shall see:

Swegn Godwinson - Bad Boy of Wessex
Swegn was the black sheep of the Godwin family. His crimes were mainly a) allying himself with the Welsh Gruffydd of Gwynedd who was a natural enemy of the Mercian ruling house b) kidnapping the Abbess Eadgifu of Leominster when he was refused permission to marry her, possibly to gain her lands, and keeping her for a year before returning her to her Abbey c) tricking his cousin Beorn into helping him and then murdering him dumping his body in the sea and d) accusing his mother of adultery and claiming that Cnut was his real father. Countess Gytha had to swear her innocence before a council of important women. Fathers were meant to be responsible for the good behaviour of their offspring. Poor Godwin must have had one hell of a headache on his hands. And having a family full of boys must have taken its toll on him over the years. Harold certainly did not seem to approve of Swegn's behaviour for he refused to support his plea to the King to return to his lands and I have to wonder how well he got on with Tostig when in the end they betrayed each other so devastatingly. Godwin must have loved Swegn despite his son's denial that he was his father, for he petitioned Edward for his son's return from exile, even  after Swegn had killed his cousin Beorn, younger brother of Swein Estrithson, then ruler of Denmark. Godwin it seems had a soft heart when it came to his family, but I have a feeling of relief  for him that he did not live to see the terrible infighting that tore his surviving sons apart later in their lives. For whatever his reasons, Edward did allow Swegn to return to England in 1050 and Swegn seems to have shown a desire to reform for he caused no more trouble after that until he died around a couple of years later on a pilgrimage.
The Dover Incident: The Plot to Oust Godwin
It was in the 1051's that, according to Edith's Vita Edwardi, Godwin's dispute with Champart came to a head and the Dover incident occurred. Champart, it is believed, had begun counselling Edward that Godwin had been responsible for killing his brother Alfred and was now hoping to be rid of him as well. It appears that Edward  allowed himself to be drawn into a plot to oust the Godwins from power, even the country. It was clear that the newly appointed Archbishop of Canterbury wanted to be rid of Godwin. He had been accusing him of misapropriation of Canterbury's churchlands and the two men had openly argued about it. As  Barlow (2002), citing Walter Map's late 12thc document The Trifles of Courtiers,  in his book The Godwins, he had got Bosham by trickery. He evidently had said to the Archbishop of Canterbury (probably not Champart but his predecessor) who owned the land, "Lord, do you give me Bosham?" The Archbishop was apparently so startled that he replied in surprise, "I give you Bosham?" The Earl and his men promptly fell at the Archbishop's feet and thanked him profusely for the gift! Walter's amusing collection of stories are riddled with doubtful evidence so one cannot be totally sure of the veracity of this tale. However Godwin does have a reputation for using cunning to acquire lands and if the Vita can be anything to go by, despite its pro-Godwin theme, there was a quarrell between Champart and Godwin about alleged misappropriation of Canterbury's lands. But the Anglo Saxon Chronicle makes no mention of Robert Champart's part in Godwin's downfall and puts the blame on the Dover Incident. One day, in 1051, it states that Eustace of Boulogne, second husband of the King's sister Goda, popped over for a visit to his brother-in-law Edward. According to the Chronicle, he stayed awhile, spoke with the King what he wanted, then left. Let us look at what happened following the Count taking leave of the King to go home.
Eustace and a party of his men, most likely numbering around 40-50 men or so, are traveling to Dover to leave for Boulogne. They decide to stop the night in the burh, high up on a cliff and ringed by a defensive wall. But The Frenchmen appear to have left their manners behind with the King and are said to have put on their coats of maille before entering the burh and demanded to board with some townsfolk in their homes who, understandably not very happy at this intrusion, put up resistance and a fight ensued. The result was the death of 20+ inhabitants of Dover and 19 Frenchmen. An outraged Eustace escapes with what is left of his men and rides back to the King to protest at this abhorrent indignity served upon them by the people of Dover. Edward is of course outraged and calls upon Godwin to answer for his townsmen. Dover was in Kent which was then part of his jurisdiction of Wessex. Godwin refuses to punish his men as the King has demanded, perhaps after hearing first hand from his surviving Doverian thegns  what has happened there.
What followed was that the King, now buoyed on by his new found confidence and encouraged by  the counsel of his Norman friends, was furious that Godwin had refused to act on his orders to punish Dover by razing it to the ground. He called the Great Council of nobles, the Witan, to meet on the 8th of September. Godwin met his sons Harold and Swegn and all their own men at his manor of Beverstone, 15 miles south of Gloucester where Edward was holding court. With Edward was Earls Leofric, his nephew Ralph and Siward and their armies. It was a very dangerous time and for the first time in years, England was on the brink of a civil conflict.
With this fractious state of affairs, the King's party thought it wise to suggest that Godwin give  hostages to the King and then meet up later on the 21st of September in London when charges against Godwin could be heard with cooled tempers. It was then that most likely, Godwin's youngest son Wulfnoth and Swegn's son Hakon was thought to have been transferred to the King's household to provide surety for their father's good behaviour. This temporary lull in the storm shows one of two things, either that few men on the King's side really wanted to go to war with Godwin, or that the Earls, believing that this time Godwin had gone too far, gave them time to muster their full forces. Champart, newly returned from Rome with his pallium must have been gloating.
 Godwin's position was now quite fragile.He was not without support, he had the whole of Wessex on his side, however this was about to change. As Godwin and his family set out to attend the court in London he lost some men who had decided that although they supported their Earl, they did not want to go against their rightful annointed King. The King had refused Godwin safe conduct and the  reciept of  hostages from the Earls  to ensure safe passage to court. It was not looking good for Godwin and his supporters, especially when arriving at Godwin's manor at Southwark across the Thames, the King demanded that he handed over all the King's thegns that were with him.Thegns made up the bulk of the middle status society. They could either be very wealthy, holding important offices or hold the minimum requirement of 5 hides of land and lesser services. If they held land from the king, they would be 'king's thegns' however if their land fell in an Earl's jurisdiction, it might be that they owed their allegiance to the earl rather than the king, which it looks that in the case here of Godwin, that was how it was.
 And so Godwin, having lost a vast amount of men already was caught betweeen a rock and a hard place. In Ian Walker's book Harold, the Last Anglo Saxon King, he states that all the thegns of Harold returned to the King, suggesting that as Harold had only been lord over his East Anglian Earldom for 7 years, he had not had time to build  bonds between him and his men fully sufficient enough warrant such risk-taking, especially when the King's forces now lay close to the homes of Harold's men. The Godwins had lost all credibility.
 On the otherside of the River, Edward and his supporters were in a far better position. Edward announced that Swegn was now outlawed and demanded that Godwin and Harold appear before the King to answer all the charges brought against them. Godwin sent messages back to ask for guarantees that no harm should come to them. A more confident Edward than had ever shown himself before to be, refused his plea. He wanted Godwin dealt with. Sending Bishop Stigand as an intermediary, according to the Vita Edwardi, Stigand wept as relays the King's message to Godwin. "You may have the King's peace when you return his brother alive to him, with all his men and all their possessions that had been taken from them." If true, the King was referring to the charge that Godwin had been the cause of Alfred, his brother's death.Amongst the other charges Edward would put before Godwin would be the charge of plotting to kill the King as he had done his brother. Godwin had confirmed this by attepting to act with force against the King.  Presumably Stigand, a long standing friend of Godwin's, was weeping because this was an impossible request. Godwin knew that it was the end of the road for him now. According to the Vita, Godwin pushed the table, got up and rode away.
The family now refused to attend the court; without terms they knew they were in danger. The only option was to flee. Edward declared them all outlaws in October 1051 and gave them 5 days to leave the country. After that they could be subject to threats to end their lives if they were found to still be at large. Edith Godwinsdottor, the King's wife, was to be sent into a nunnery some time later. She too, although loyal to Edward throughout, it seems, was to suffer for being a Godwin.

Edward had managed to at last achieve a show of strength and power that had alluded him for the last 9 years of his reign. Robert Champart had helped to engineer the ousting of the Godwins, paving the way clear for him to have the King's ear to himself. A chance for more Normans to advance unhindered in the King's regime. And not long after, it is said that a certain duke was to visit with the King and plant the seeds of a Norman takeover. Was the downfall of Godwin planned or just an opportunity arisen for the King and Champart? See what you think as we explore the events that followed the Gowins flight.

The Story: Scene 2

Interpreting The Tapestry: Scene by Scene

Scene 2

A

And so Harold and his men arrive at Bosham. As previously discussed in my first post examining the BT scene by scene, Harold is off to Normandy to pay the Duke a visit and discuss terms for the release of his kin, however if we are looking at it from the Norman's point of view, Harold was on a misssion, sent by King Edward, to confirm his succession to the English crown upon Edward's death. Edward had been playing fools advocate for years it would seem, dangling the crown in front of various contenders. At the time of Harold's trip to Normandy, the Earl was at the height of his power, a man in his early forties, well experienced in diplomacy and administration as well as campaigning against the Welsh. He had recently put an end to King Gruffydd's harrassment of English lands along the borders by embarking on an invasion of Wales of the like he had not attempted before. In a joint enterprise with Tostig, his brother, Earl of Northumberland, he marched his army into the stonghold of Rhuddlan, forcing Gruffydd to flee into the wilds of Snowdonia whilst Harold, harrying the Welsh until they themselves murdered Gruffydd, sending his head to Harold as proof.
 I personally prefer to follow the story that Harold crossed the sea to Normandy with the sole intention of bringing home his relatives, Hakon and Wulfnoth. Mainly because this seems the most feesible rationale for him going and Eadmer, albeit a later chronicler, confirms it. I do not think that Edward had decided to send Harold on a mission to pass on his blessing and offer him the crown at all. Why would he endow his great nephew Edgar with the title of Atheling if he had intended William for the crown all along. And William was never referred to as Atheling or the heir to the English throne prior to his taking it. So imagine Harold arrives at the court of Normandy only to find that the Duke has ideas about his arrival there of his own.

So why did William believe he was the King of England's heir? He was not of the line of the Kings of Wessex and there were others who might have been more qualified after all. Edward had his nephews, Ralph who died in 1057 and would have been out of the running by the 1060's, and Walter de Mantes who dies in the captivity of the Duke of Normandy along with his wife. Young Edgar the Atheling, grandson of Edward's older brother Edmund Ironside. Edgar would have had a far better claim than William. A clue, in fact, lies in the Anglo Saxon chronicle. Chronicle D claims that in the entry for 1051, Duke William came with a large contingent of 'French' men and was recieved by King Edward. It says no more than a few cursory words and says nothing about discussing the succession  with him. Historians have been known to wrangle over the validity of this claim as it is only mentioned in Chronicle D and not any of the others. Some have suggested that this possibly never happened and was a late entry to help promote William's actions as justifiable. It has been noted that there were reasons to believe that this visit did not take place: one of them is that it was likely that William's difficulties in Normandy at this time would have made it impossible for him to come to England and it is curious as to why contemporary Norman sources made no note of it either.  However later, it was claimed that in this meeting, (as goes the Norman propaganda machine) that the offer of an heirdom took place. So, if we look at the previous events, it is plausible to imagine that scenario did take place and let's face it,William cannot have plucked the idea out of thin air. There  must have  been some basis for it.    

So what did happen before William's visit to his second cousin in 1051? This is the back-story according to the Anglo Saxon Chronicles: At mid-lent, 1051, as there was now a vacancy for the Archbishop of Canterbury's job, Edward called his council-meeting in London and advised them of his wish that his great friend and advisor, Robert Champart, former Abbot of Jumieges, should be given that post. It seems that Robert Champart may have put some noses out of joint when he came back from Rome with his pallium, because when Bishop Spearhavoc, whom Edward had promoted to Robert's see of London, approached him with the King's writ, Robert refused to consecrated him stating that the Pope had refused to let him do this. Spearhavoc was an outstanding artist whose engravings and paintings had brought him to the attention of the Godwins and the King. He may have been closely allied with the Queen. Why the Pope was against him being consecrated seems to be unknown and Robert was not about to go against the Pope in this just after recieving his pallium.

What follows appears to be a chain of events that may well be linked together. Count Eustace of Boulogne, brother-in-law of King Edward for his marriage to Goda, Edward's sister, came across the sea to visit with Edward. Chronicle E states that he

           ".....he turned to the king and spoke with him about what he wanted, and
                 then turned homeward....when he was some miles or more this side of Dover,
                 he put on his mail coat   and all his companions and went to Dover."

This sounds like Eustace was looking for trouble. He was and it was to have consequences thereafter for Godwin Earl of Wessex and his family. The men of Dover took a dislike to the way that Eustace and his followers demanded hospitality from them and when one of his men wanted to lodge at the house of a man against his will, the Frenchman attacked and wounded him. He found himself at the end of the householder's rage and the Englishman killed him. A fight in the town ensued after the householder was then killed by Eustace and his men and the French killed 20 townsmen and they themselves lost 19 of their own.

Eustace and his men rode out of Dover to report to the King of the indignities that had been inflicted upon them. Edward was apparently aflame with anger. Now Dover was in the jurisdiction of Earl Godwin and Earl Godwin was a thorn in the King's side. He ordered Godwin to punish Dover by ravaging their homes and Godwin, most likely having heard the side of the townsfolk, refused. Does this actually sound like the pious, gentle Confessor we later know him as?
Edward rallied all his loyal thegns and earls to him and Godwin and his sons did also. There was a standoff and still Godwin refused to punish the men of Dover. Eventually, some of his men deserted him and went over to Edward, probably because they did not wish for there to be a civil war in the country. The Godwins were given a few days to leave. Godwin and his sons Swein,Tostig, Gyrth and his wife Gytha, fled to Bruges. Harold went with his younger brother Leofwine to Bristol and took  Swein's ship to Ireland after a storm cost them the lives of some of their follwers. It was around this time that the Godwin boys Hakon and Wulfnoth were most likely handed over to the King as hostages.  

This event would also have a negative consequence for the Queen, (who was also a Godwin) and perhaps the priestly goldsmith, Spearhavoc. The Queen was stripped of all her wealth and banished to a nunnery, although she had evaded this for awhile.  Robert most likely urged him to put her away for being a Godwin, and urged the King to look elsewhere for a wife. As for Spearhavoc, it could be that Robert knew something about his character that others didn't, for after carrying out his duties in the see for months with Edward's permission and without consecration, according to the Chronicle E, Spearhavoc was then driven out of the bishopric; but not before, according to the Historia Ecclesie Abbendonensis, he gathered all the gold and jewels he had been comissioned with from the King to fashion some regalia for him, in many bags and made off abroad with them never to be seen again.  Perhaps his patrons Godwin and Queen Edith had argued with Robert Champart against expelling Spearhavoc from the bishopric and this might have annoyed the King immensely, stuck in the middle between them and his great friend Robert. He already had no particular liking for Godwin, for he still held Godwin responsible for the death of his brother Alfred over 15 years ago. When Eustace arrives  back to the scene, perhaps they concocted an elaborate plot to stir Godwin into defiance and give the king a good reason to be rid of him at last.



Please feel free to ask any questions of me and my theories.

Hope you have enjoyed the journey through the Bayeux Tapestry so far and will continue through this amazing journey.

A

A

The Story

Interpreting The Tapestry Scene by Scene: Scene 1

                

This is scene one of the embroidery. It starts with King Edward, shown resplendent in his palace speaking with two men. One of the men is obviously Harold, probably the taller because the tapestry seeme to show men of lower status as much smaller so perhaps Harold is with his most faithful huscarle or servant. Further on, 6 men are riding out with their hunting animals and the Latin text in the top of the border reads Harold, Duke of England: and his soldiers ride to Bosham.
From what we know of the tale of the embroidery, the Norman sources tell us that Harold was sent to Normandy on a great mission by his brother-in-law the King to convey his good wishes to Duke William and confirm him in the succession. As I have said in my previous post, the English account written by Eadmer tells a different story altogether. It would have us believe that Harold (very much his own man) informs King Edward that he is going on a journey to Normandy to meet with Duke William and negotiate the release of his brother and nephew who have been hostages in Normandy for several years. Edward advises against this mission and tells Harold that only harm can come of it, but Harold takes his leave despite Edward's advice. Either story can be represented in the scene.
Whichever theory you believe, the next scene can have no double meaning. It simply shows Harold and his men riding toward Bosham where he will embark on his journey in one of his ships. He most likely wanted to ride to Bosham to collect some gifts for William. If he was going to Normandy to get his brothers, he would need to make it worth his while.
Bosham was Harold’s father’s manor estate, granted to him by Cnut. It is said that Cnut’s daughter is buried in the church when she slipped and fell into the millstream. This was also where Cnut was said to have proved to his subjects that he was not all powerful by putting his throne on the edge of the beach to show them he couldn’t hold back the tide.  Godwine, Harold’s father, made it his family home and most likely the Godwin brothers and sisters grew up there. You can imagine the youngsters playing in the courtyard of their father’s longhall. I can almost hear Swegn, Harold and Tostig arguing amongst themselves, an omen of what was to come later.
Swegn was to grow up to be the black sheep of the family and Tostig would eventually go on to be betrayed by his brother Harold and then he in turn would betray Harold by attempting an invasion with Harald Hardrada. Tostig was killed alongside Hardrada at Stamford Bridge, playing his part in the downfall of Anglo-Saxon England.
                                                       

Bosham

A Tale of Two Boys

The tapestry shows the tale of Harold's journey to Normandy, his imprisonment by Guy de Ponthieu and his subsequent release into the hands of William of Normandy and his adventures there until he is coerced to take an oath to promise to be William's man and when the time comes, assist him to the throne of England. He is released back to England where he is shown accepting the crown himself after the death of Edward. What follows is the great preperation William undertakes to make a large fleet of boats to invade England with, the battle of Hastings and the demise of Harold and defeat of the English. There it stops abruptly but the final scenes are thought to have been damaged and probably concluded with the coronation of the victorious conqueror.

The Norman slant on this story is that Harold was comissioned by Edward to visit William with gifts and offerings to confirm his intention of naming him as heir. The English version was very different. Harold went on a mission to visit William with the sole purpose of negotiating the release of his brother Wulfnoth and nephew Hakon, against the advice of the King who told him that nought would come of it but trouble. This was Eadmer's version, a monk of Canterbury. It seems that Harold eventually returns to England with only one of the men he wanted to release, Hakon. Wulfnoth was to stay in Normandy presumably until William was crowned king. Hakon most likely died with his uncle the King at Hastings. 

The two men do not appear in the tapestry by name but in a certain scene, where Harold stands before William, who is seated on his throne as his guest is gesticulating and pointing to the man who stands behind him sporting a beard and an English hairstyle. Because most of the men in the tapestry are either English or Franco/Norman, the distinction between the two races are often marked by such differences as cropped hair above the ears and clean shaven faces for the Normans and moustaches and full heads of hair for the English. Iconography exists quite often in the tapestry to signify a certain point that the artist is making. The chap that Harold appears to be pointing to is standing very much apart from the otherNorman knights behind him. He carries his shield under his arm and Bridgeford 2004 states that the shield is not dissimilar to the one that the Bayeux Tapestry shows Harold holding in the battle scenes. He goes on to make the claim that this is most likely Wulfnoth Godwinson, Harold's brother, the kinsman that it is said he came to plead for his freedom.

So, we have the dilemma. Which version do we believe? The Norman's justification for invading England was that Edward had sent Harold to Normandy with the explicit purpose of confirming William as the heir to his throne. Eadmer, who had access to people who might have known the full truth about Harold's journey, states otherwise and that Harold's sole reason for his journey to Normandy was to release his kinsmen. The images in the tapestry seem to follow Eadmer's version but without contradicting the Norman view. In the first scene, Harold is shown in a secret meeting with King Edward. If we are to follow Eadmer's version, we can interpret Edward listening to Harold explain his plans to visit William of Normandy to negotiate with him the release of his kinsmen. However, if we wanted to, we could also follow the Norman. Edward is discussing his request for Harold to visit his second cousin accross the sea to bestow his good wishes and confirm his heirship. Neither tale can be contradicted in the images.

So despite the different opinions that historians give, Harold returned with one of the men only. Hakon, who could have been around 16-17. He is believed to have died at Hastings, whatever the case nothing appears to be heard of him after that date. Wulfnoth has to stay until William is crowned and then he shall be released. However, as Harold defaults on his oath to smooth the way for William to take the throne, Wulfnoth is never released. He remains in captivity for the rest of his life freedom evading him for the second time when due his release upon the death of the Conqueror, William's successor William Rufus reneges on his father's promise to free him.
                                                                              

                                                                               

                                                                   

The Bayeux Tapestry: A Tale of Two Men

As we know, the tapestry is an embroidered work, created in the 11thc to convey the story of the events that led to the Norman Invasion of 1066. The main characters of this saga are Harold Godwinson and William, Duke of Normandy. It is a tale of two halves, the first half appears to be from Harold’s perspective and the second is more from William’s. Before their fateful meeting in 1064, there does not seem to be any recorded documentation that they ever met prior to this. William is only recorded in one English source as ever having been to England, as stated by Douglas (1953) and Harold was at this time, in Ireland in exile.

William, known as the Bastard and later known as the Conqueror, was born in Normandy around 1027, the baseborn result of his father, Duke Robert of Normandy's liaison with Herleva, the daughter of a tanner. Robert never married William's mother, although he may well have had some regard for her, for she also bore him a daughter, Adelaide. Because of her status, he would not have been permitted to marry her and eventually put her aside, finding a husband for her, one of his barons Herluin de Conteville. Herleva went on to give birth to two sons, Odo, Bishop of Bayeux and Robert the Count of Mortain and another daughter whose name is not recorded.

William was said to have been around 5ft 10 according to an examination of his femur bone, quite a tall man for his day. He was also said to have been strong, broad-shouldered and a strong bowman (Bates 2001). His voice was said to have been gruff and he seems to have had little in the way of culture. He was said to have not been able to read or write, in contrast to Harold who was a very well educated man. During his later years, he became very corpulent. Perhaps this was to compliment the avaricious reputation he had earned for himself.

                                                        Harold Godwinson


Harold Godwinson was born somewhere between 1022-24. He was the second son of Godwin, Earl of Wessex. His sister was Queen Edith, wife of the Confessor.The chronicler, Orderic Vitalis, says that he was very tall and handsome, possessed with great physical strength and charm, knowledge and courageous. The Vita Edwardi describes him as handsome, graceful and strong (Walker 1997). His strength and valour may be proven in the scene of the Bayeux Tapestry where he pulls to safety two drowning men. But Orderic finishes his flattering depiction of Harold by saying“But what were these gifts to him without honour, which is the root of all good? " Most likely in reference to Harold’s so-called perjury and oath-breaking.

He started his career as Earl of East Anglia. When his father got into trouble with the King over the Dover incident, Harold rallied to his father’s side with all his men. Unfortunately, the thegns and nobles were not willing to involve themselves at that time in a civil war and Godwin and his family was forced to flee into exile. Harold and his younger brother Leofwine went to Ireland to drum up support there, whilst the rest of his family fled across the sea to Flanders, to the protection of William of Normandy’s father-in-law, Count Baldwin. A year later, they were all back and restored to favour, convincing Edward to rid the country of those Norman’s in his retinue who had badly counseled him. Then when his father died, he was granted his Earldom of Wessex in 1053.

William was said to have coveted the English crown and it is quite likely that he visited England in 1051 when it was said that Edward had promised to make him his heir. The Norman's were to base William's claim on this fact when it was necessary to drum up support for William's venture to England to wrest the crown from Harold. William was to accuse Harold of perjury and breaking his oath as his 'vassal' to support his claim. In the autumn of 1064, Harold was to travel to Normandy. Strangely, the Anglo Saxon chronicle does not record this visit, but an English monk, Eadmer, writing in his Historia Novorum in Anglia, states that Harold wanted to gain the release of his brother and nephew, Wulfnoth and Hakon, who were hostages at William's court. Eadmer might have had access to the Godwin's through Harold's uncle Aelfric who was a cleric. It may have been from him that he got the information (Bridgeford).

Harold, Eadmer says, sailed for Normandy with a crew and was blown of course, ending up  on the shores of Ponthieu. The rogue count of Ponthieu, Guy, held him and his men captive and stole all the wealth that Harold had brought to secure his kinsmen's release. Fortunately, one of Harold's men escape and alerts the Duke who then sets about rescuing Harold, demanding his release from Guy. Guy is obviously intimidated by the Duke and Harold is handed over into William's care.

Imagine William's  delight to have the famous Harold Godwinson in his clutches? This was a chance for him to secure the support of the leading man of England. The fact that Harold had come for an entirely different purpose was by the by. Imagine Harold trying to explain that he was not there to confirm William with the heirdom without greviously incurring the dispeasure of his host who, on his home turf, would have had the upper hand. Harold might even try to explain that Edward had appointed Edgar as the atheling. Perhaps William would dismiss this stating that surely a young boy would not come before a man like he? No, Edward had promised him the crown and as far as he was concerned a promise was a promise. Harold would have heard of William's ruthless and brutal nature and most likely would have felt concerned for his and his men's safety.

Imagine Harold's horror when he realised he had made a dreadful mistake, one that was going to change the course of history forever.....

Aelfgyva, the mystery woman of Bayeux: Part One, 2nd ed.

Tuesday, 3 May 2011

Aelfgyva, the mystery woman of Bayeux: Part One, 2nd ed.

Aelfgifu, or as it was sometimes spelt Aelfgyva, must have been a popular name and one of some significance, for when Emma of Normandy was espoused to Aethelred, the witan insisted that she be called Aelfgifu, which incidentally had been the name of a couple of Aethelred's previous consorts, though none of those women had been given the title of queen unlike Emma. Perhaps they had been so used to referring to their king’s women by the same name they thought it more expedient to refer to Emma as Aelfgifu too, lest they forget themselves and mistakenly call her Aelfgifu anyway. I say this tongue in cheek, but it is unclear as to why the name Emma was objectionable to them, after all, it was not unlike the English version of Ymma. But changing a queen's name is not an un heard of phenomenon; later Queen Edith, great-granddaughter of Edmund Ironside, was sneered at for her Saxon name and was forced to become Queen Mathilda when she wed Henry the first.

There were so many Aelfgyvas/ Aelfgifus amongst the women of the 11thc that it must have become quite confusing at times. Even Cnut's first consort was called Aelfgifu, mother of Cnut's sons Harold and Sweyn. She was known as Aelfgifu of Northampton whose father had been killed during Aethelred’s reign. So one can see that if anyone called Emma, Aelfgifu, by mistake, it would not have mattered as they could be referring to either of them! Even Cnut would not have been caught out by this one.

There was a story about Cnut's Aelfgifu, that she had been unable to produce her own off-spring and involved a monk to help her pass off a serving maid's illigitemate babies as her sons by Cnut. In another version, it was said that the monk himself had fathered them himself. Were they a monk's children fathered on a serving maid so that Aelfgifu could present them as hers and Cnut's? Or, were they lovers themselves, the monk and Aelfgifu? These are questions that, after reading the evidence, I am pondering upon. However, Emma, it is said, hated Aelfgifu and the two women were at odds with each other for many years until Aelfgifu died. It would not be implausable that these tales, rumours, chinese whispers if you may, could have been put about by the Queen to destroy her rival's reputation.

Which leads me now to the mystery of Aelfgyva on the Bayeux tapestry. Aelfgyva is the same name as Aeflgifu only a different spelling, much like Edith and Eadgyth. For centuries people must have pondered over this scene, where a slim figure, clad in what would appear to be the clothing of a well-bred woman stands in a door way, her hands are palm upwards as if she could be explaining something to a monk, apparently behind the door. He is reaching out to touch the side of her face whilst his other hand rests on his hip in a stance of dominance and he looks as if he might be touching her face in a fatherly way, perhaps admonishing her for some misdeed, or perhaps he is slapping her? On the other hand he could be caressing her face. The text sewn into the tapestry merely states ‘where a priest and Aelfgyva...’ and the onlooker is left with no more than this to dwell on. So just what is the author alluding to? Why did he/she not finish the sentence? Perhaps they were referring to a well known scandal of the time and they had no reason to describe the events because everyone would have known about it anyway. Who knows what the truth is? It seems the answer to the questions of the lady’s identity and the relevance the scene has to the story of the downfall of Harold Godwinson, died with the creators of the tapestry long ago. Those who presented it to the owner must have given a satisfactory explanation to him about the scene. One can only wonder as to what it might have been and was it a truthful explanation, or did it have a hidden story?

This brings me to my burning question. Was this scene depicting the scandal of Aelfgifu of Northampton and the monk and if so why and what did it have to do with the tapestry? What was its creator alluding to? Or had someone woven them into the tapestry, mistakenly confusing Cnut's Aelfgifu/Aelfgyva with a similar story that did have some legitimacy with the story of the conquest? I have an interpretation, but it is just that, and most likely the fanciful ramblings of my imagination, although it could perhaps be close. I will attempt to explain my theory further sometime in part two soon. Watch this space as the mystery unfolds!

More about this post on my Sons of the Wolf blog

http://paulalofting-sonsofthewolf.blogspot.com/2011/06/aelfgyva-mystery-woman-of-bayeux-part_14.html
http://paulalofting-sonsofthewolf.blogspot.com/2011/06/aelfgyva-mystery-woman-of-bayeux-part_14.html
http://paulalofting-sonsofthewolf.blogspot.com/2012/02/aelfgyva-mystery-woman-of-bayeux.html

Welcome to My New Blog

Welcome to my new blog, THREADS TO THE PAST about the mysteries and tales embroidered into the Bayeux Tapestry. My name is Paula Lofting Wilcox and I am the author of Sons of the Wolf which is my novel set in the 11thc about the fortunes of Domesday man, Wulfhere of Horstede. I started posting various snippets of factual events, people and stories on my Sons of the Wolf blog and thought it may be more of interest to people if I created a seperate blog for the Bayeux Tapsetry aftert I started my posts about the mystery lady, Aelfgyva on the BT. I had intended to make these posts into three parts but the more I investigated the mystery, the longer the threads became. Then I realised that there was a lot more interesting tales illuminated in the threads of this amazing embroidery and felt compelled to create a blog that would be solely dedicated to the history stitched into the fabric of life as it was in  11thc Englalond.

Please join me as I begin the journey and come with me to meet characters like Edward the Confessor, his wife Edith Godwinsdottir, her brother Harold and his arch rival William of Normandy and his brother Odo, the bishop of Bayeux and Eustace of Bologne and many more. You can also learn what facts my investigations into the mystery woman Aelfgyva have turned, learn who she might have been and about what was her role in the story of Harold's fateful mission to Normandy.

I look forward to having your comapny on what I am sure will be an exciting ride.

                               
 Link to my blog Sons of the Wolf  http://www.paulalofting-sonsofthewolf.blogspot.com