This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: re few important passages of the English history liable to so great uncertainty. I have followed the account, which appeared to me the most consistent and probable. It does not seem likely, that Edward ever executed a will in the duke’s favour, much less that he got it ratified by the states of the kingdom, as is affirmed by some. The will would have been known to all, and would have been produced by the Conqueror, to whom it gave so plausible, and really so just a title; but the doubtful and ambiguous manner in which he seems always to have mentioned it, proves, that he could only plead the known intentions of that monarch in his favour, which he was desirous to call a will. There is indeed a charter of the Conqueror preserved by Dr. Hickes, vol. i. where he calls himself rexhereditarius, meaning heir by will; but a prince, possessed of so much power, and attended with so much success, may employ what pretence he pleases: It is sufficient to refute his pretences to observe, that there is a great difference and variation among historians, with regard to a point, which, had it been real, must have been agreed upon by all of them. Again, some historians, particularly Malmsbury and Matthew of Westminster, affirm that Harold had no intention of going over to Normandy, but that taking the air in a pleasure-boat on the coast, he was driven over by stress of weather to the territories of Guy count of Ponthieu: But besides that this story is not probable in itself, and is contradicted by most of the ancient historians, it is contradicted by a very curious and authentic monument lately discovered. It is a tapestry, preserved in the ducal palace of Roüen, and supposed to have been wrought by orders of Matilda, wife to the emperor: At least it is of very great antiquity. Harold is there represented as taking his departure from king Edward in execution of some commission, and mounting his vessel with a great train. The design of redeeming his brother and nephew, who were hostages is the most likely cause that can be assigned; and is accordingly mentioned by Eadmer, Hoveden, Brompton, and Simeon of Durham. For a farther account of this piece of tapestry, see Histoire de l’Academie de Litterature, tom. ix. page 535. [y]Spelm. in verbo Belliva. PLL v5 (generated January 22, 2010) 345 http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/695 Online Library of Liberty: The History of England, vol. 1 [z]G. Pict. p. 196. Ypod. Neust. p. 436. Order. Vitalis, p. 492. M. West. p. 221. W. Malm. p. 93. Ingulf, p. 68. Brompton, p. 957. Knyghton, p. 2339. H. Hunt. p. 210. Many of the historians say, that Harold was regularly elected by the states: Some, that Edward left him his successor by will. [a]Order. Vitalis, p. 492. [b]W. Malm. p. 99. Higden, p. 285. Matth. West. p. 222. De Gest. Angel. incerto auctore, p. 331. [c]Gul. Gemet. lib. 7. cap. 30. [d]Gul. Pictavensis, p. 198. [e]Gul. Gemet. lib. 7. cap. 33. [f]Gul. Pict. p. 198. [g]Baker, p. 22. edit. 1684. [h]Camden. introd. ad Britann. p. 212. 2...
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 02/12/2011 for the course CHIN 101 taught by Professor Dr.yu during the Spring '08 term at University Of Southern Mississippi .
- Spring '08