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
After some time Louis was persuaded again that Normandy desired
nothing so much as to call him her feudal lord and sovereign. Bernard
de Senlis [Pg077] assured him, for the sake of peace, that they were
no longer in doubt of their unhappiness in having a child for a ruler,
that they were anxious to return to the old pledge of loyalty that
Rolf gave to the successor of Charlemagne. He must be the over-lord
again and must come and occupy his humble city of Rouen. They were
tired of being harried, their land was desolated, and they would do
any thing to be released from the sorrows and penalties of war. Much
to our surprise, and very likely to his own astonishment too, we find
King Louis presently going to Rouen, and being received there with all
manner of civility and deference. Everybody hated him just as much as
ever, and distrusted him, and no doubt Louis returned the compliment,
but to outward view he was beloved and honored by his tributaries,
and the Norman city seemed quiet and particularly servile to its new
ruler and his bragging troops. Nobody understood exactly why they had
won their ends with so little trouble, and everybody [Pg078] was on
the watch for some amazing counterplot, and dared not trust either
friend or foe. As for Louis, they had shamed and tormented him too
much to make him a very affectionate sovereign now. To be sure he
ruled over Normandy at last, but that brought him perplexity enough.
In the city the most worthless of his followers was putting on the
airs of a conqueror and aggravating the Norman subjects unbearably.
The Frenchmen who had followed the golden eagle of Charlemagne so
long without any reward but glory and a slender subsistence, began
to clamor for their right to plunder the dukedom and to possess
themselves of a reward which had been too long withheld already.
Hugh, of Paris, and King Louis had made a bold venture together for
the conquest of Normandy, and apparently succeeded to their heart's
content. Hugh had besieged Bayeux; and the country, between the two
assailants, had suffered terribly. Bernard the Dane, or Bernard de
Senlis either, knew no other way to reëstablish themselves than
by keeping Louis in Rouen and cheating him by a show of complete
submission. The Normans must have had great faith in the Danish
Bernard when they submitted to make unconditional surrender to Louis.
Could it be that he had been faithless to the boy-duke's rights, and
allowed him to be contemptuously disinherited?
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