The Normans; told chiefly in relation to their conquest of EnglandJewett, Sarah Orne
History
The Normans; told chiefly in relation to their conquest of England
Jewett, Sarah Orne
Great Britain -- History -- Norman period, 1066-1154; Normans
Godwine grew more and more angry, and his determination to show that
England could do without the crowds of interlopers who were having
every thing their own way worked him disaster for a time. There was
a party of the king's friends journeying homeward to Normandy, who
stopped overnight in the city of Dover and demanded its hospitality
in insolent fashion. The Dover men would not be treated like slaves,
and a fight followed in which the Frenchmen were either killed or
driven out of the town. Eadward of course sided with his friends,
and was very indignant; he sent orders to Earl Godwine, who was
governor of the region, to punish the offenders, but Godwine refused
squarely unless the men should have been fairly tried and given a
chance to speak for themselves. This ended in a serious quarrel, and
the king gained a victory without any battle either, for there was a
sudden shifting of public feeling in Eadward's favor—Godwine's own
men forsook him [Pg190] and were loyal to the crown, and the great
earl was banished for conscience sake, he and all his family, for the
king even sent away his own wife, though he kept all her lands and
treasures, which was not so saint-like and unworldly as one might
have expected. One of Godwine's sons had proved himself a very base
and treacherous man, and the earl had shielded him; this was one
reason why his defence of English liberty was so overlooked by his
countrymen, but the Normans had a great triumph over this defeat, and
praised the pious king and told long stories of his austere life, his
prayers, and holy life. After he was canonized these stories were
lengthened still more, but while he was yet without a halo some of his
contemporaries charge him with laziness and incapacity. He certainly
was lacking in kingly qualities, but he gained the respect and love
of many of his subjects, and was no doubt as good as so weak a man
could be. After his death Englishmen praised him the more because they
liked William the Conqueror the less, and as for the Normans they
liked anybody better than Harold, who had been a much more formidable
opponent in his claim to the English crown. Mr. Freeman says: "——————
The duties of secular government ... were ... always something which
went against the grain. His natural place was not on the throne of
England, but at the head of a Norman abbey.... For his virtues were
those of a monk; all the real man came out in his zeal for collecting
relics, in his visions, in his religious exercises, in his gifts to
churches and monasteries, in his desire to mark his [Pg191] reign as
its chief result, by the foundation of his great abbey of Saint Peter
at Westminster. In a prince of the manly piety of Ælfred things of
this sort form only a part, a pleasing and harmonious part, of the
general character. In Eadward they formed the whole man."
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account