Harold (42 page)

9.
ASC
C 1046,
JW
1049,
Hemingi Chartularium ecclesiae Wigorniensis
, ed. T. Hearne (1723), Volume i, pp. 275–6, Barlow,
Edward
, p. 91 and K.L. Maund,
Ireland, Wales and England in the Eleventh Century
(Woodbridge, 1991), pp. 126–30.
DB Herefordshire
, 1: 14 and 38 n. 1, 10a for her lands in 1066,
EHD I
, No. 49, p. 463 where Cnut’s laws lay down penalties for the abduction of nuns.
ASC
E 1047,
JW
1049,
ASC
D 1049 for Swein’s exile.

10.
ASC
C/D/E 1049 for the division of Swein’s lands between Harold and Beorn.

11.
ASC
D 1047,
JW
1049,
ASC
D 1049,
AB
, p. 108 and Jones,
Vikings
, p. 401 for Swein of Denmark’s defeat.

12.
ASC
E 1046, Barlow,
Edward
, p. 97, Stafford,
Unification
, pp. 117–18,
ASC
C/D/E 1049, D. Nicholas,
Medieval Flanders
(London, 1992), p. 50.

13.
ASC
C/D/E 1049.

14.
ASC
C/D/E 1049,
JW
1049.

15.
ASC
C/D/E 1049, P.G. Foote and D.M. Wilson,
The Viking Achievement
(London, 1970), p. 426 for Scandinavian use of this sentence, and R.I. Page,
Chronicles of the Vikings
(London, 1995), p. 145 for record of a similar act of
nithingswerk
on a Swedish rune-stone of this period.

16.
ASW
, p. 570 and A. Williams, ‘The King’s Nephew: The Family and Career of Earl Ralph of Hereford’ in C. Harper-Bill
et al.
,
Studies
, pp. 330–8. Ralph appears as earl in diplomas dated to 1050 before the exile of Godwine and his family. Appendix Two for the earldoms at this time.
ASC
C 1052 for Swein’s pilgrimage.
ASC
C/E 1050 for Swein’s return.
JW
1049, Cooper,
York
, p. 25 and King, ‘Ealdred’, p. 127 for Ealdred’s role in this.
ASC
D/E 1051 for the disputes between the foreigners of Hereford and Earl Swein.

17.
VER
, p. 27, P. Stafford,
Queens, Concubines and Dowagers
(London, 1983), p. 82, Stafford,
Unification
, p. 92 and Cutler, ‘Edith, Queen of England’, pp. 222–31.

18. John, ‘Edward the Confessor’, p. 248 for Edward’s celibacy. This suggestion is dismissed by Barlow,
Edward
, pp. 81–5. Edward himself may have been impotent but if so, why did he marry Edith, and Godwine consent to this? Clearly they both anticipated the birth of an heir.
The Leofric Missal
, ed. F.E. Warren (Oxford, 1883), p. 9a and
VER
, p. lxxv for Leofric’s benediction. Sawyer,
A-S Charters
, Nos 1007–13 for Edith as witness, but Nos 1014 onwards for Edith’s absence until No. 1026 of 1055 when she reappears.
ASC
C/E 1050 for the fleet, which had intervened on behalf of Harold ‘Harefoot’.

19. Barlow,
English Church
, pp. 85–6.

20.
ASC
C/D/E 1050 and E 1051,
VER
, p. 31 and Barlow,
Edward
, p. 104.

21.
ASC
E 1051, and Barlow,
English Church
, pp. 47–8 for Spearhafoc. C. Morris,
The Papal Monarchy
(Oxford, 1991), p. 87, Barlow,
English Church
, p302 and
ASC
E 1050 for Ulf. M.F. Smith, ‘Archbishop Stigand and the Eye of the Needle’,
Anglo-Norman Studies
, XVI (1994), pp. 202, 208 for Stigand’s support for Spearhafoc and the lack of any definite connection between the former and Godwine respectively.

22.
VER
, p. 33, N. Brooks,
The Early History of the Church of Canterbury
(Leicester, 1984), p. 304, Barlow,
English Church
, pp. 47–8. He may have even suggested that Godwine was plotting to kill King Edward himself.

23.
ASC
E 1051, H.J. Tanner, ‘The Expansion of the Power and the Influence of the Counts of Boulogne Under Eustace II’,
Anglo-Norman Studies
, XIV (1992), pp. 264–8, Douglas,
William
, pp. 391–2 for the date of this Norman-Flemish alliance through Duke William’s marriage to Mathilda of Flanders.

24.
ASC
E1051 and
VER
, p. 35.
JW
1041 for the attack on Worcester in which Godwine participated.

25.
ASC
D/E 1051,
VER
, p. 39, i.e. September 1051. Tanner, ‘Eustace II’, pp. 264–8.

26.
ASC
D 1051 for Ralph supporting the king.
ASC
D 1051, and
JW
1051 for Eustace still in England in September when Godwine demanded his surrender.
ASC
D/E 1051 and
VER
, p. 35 for Leofric and Siward at Gloucester, the Chronicles state in support of King Edward.

27.
ASC
D/E 1051,
JW
1051 and
VER
, p. 35, the last for a milder account but
ASC
D 1051 perhaps, reveals better Godwine’s assessment of the strength of his position at this point.

28.
ASC
D/E 1051 reveal the tensions of this period, although these were resolved by negotiation.

29.
ASC
D/E 1051,
JW
1051,
WP
, p. 32 (20) fails to name them, noting them only as the ‘son and grandson of earl Godwine’ but
Eadmer – Historia Novorum in Anglia
, tr. G. Bosanquet (London, 1964), p. 6 identifies them as Wulfnoth and Hakon. This is also suggested by F. Barlow,
William Rufus
(London, 1983), p. 66 which speaks of Wulfnoth’s captivity beginning when still a boy.
ASC
C/D/E 1067 (recte 1068) for Harold’s sons, both Godwine and Edmund were probably born before 1051.

30.
ASC
D/E 1051,
VER
, p. 35,
JW
1051. Clarke,
English Nobility
, pp. 93–4.

31.
ASC
D/E 1051,
JW
1051,
VER
, p. 35.

32.
ASC
C/D/E 1051,
JW
1051,
VER
, pp. 35–7.

33.
ASC
D/E 1051,
VER
, pp. 37, 39–41. This account is to be preferred to that of the more distant Chronicle D, which names Thorney as their point of departure.

34.
ASC
D/E 1051,
JW
1051,
VER
, p. 41. The latter for King Diarmait since the Chronicle fails to name him.
The Annals of Ulster to
AD
1131
, ed. S. MacAirt and G. MacNiocaill (Dublin, 1983), 1052 for Diarmait’s seizure of Dublin.

35.
ASC
D/E 1051, Williams, ‘King’s Nephew’, p. 338 and Appendix Two.
DB Herefordshire
, 19: 3 records the gains of the Frenchmen of the castles at this time. Campbell, ‘Norman Occupation’, pp. 21–31.

36.
ASC
D/E 1051,
VER
, pp. 37, 45,
JW
1051.
The Vita Eadwardi
is closest to Queen Edith and should know the truth. It is possible the Chronicle accounts which have her sent to Wherwell reflect where she was sent first, before moving to Wilton. Stafford,
Unification
, p. 92. for Edward’s divorce plans.

1.
ASC
D 1052.

2.
ASC
D 1051, Brown,
Normans
, p. 121, for this connection but Douglas,
William
, p. 169 and Bates,
William
, p. 34, for its refutation.

3.
WJ
, p. 159,
WP
, p. 30 (20).
ASC
1051 for Robert’s promotion to the archbishopric and Barlow,
Edward
, p. 126 for the date of his death.

4. Brown,
Norman Conquest
, p. 2 and p. 17 for the purpose of these writers.
WJ
, p. 159 and
WP
, pp. 30–2 (19–20), 100 [4], 174–6 [11] for the basis of the claim.
WP
, pp. 174–6 [11] for Stigand’s part. Barlow,
English Church
, p. 78 for Stigand’s actual status. He did not become Archbishop of Canterbury until 1052, after Archbishop Robert fled into exile. Barlow,
Edward
, p. 108 for this as a simple error by William of Poitiers.

5. Douglas,
William
, p. 168, Bates,
William
, pp. 59–60 and Barlow,
Edward
, pp. 107–9.

6.
ASC
D/E 1051,
JW
1051, Barlow,
Edward
, p. 108.

7. A. Williams, ‘Some Notes and Considerations on Problems Connected with the English Royal Succession 860–1066’,
Proceedings of the Battle Conference on Anglo-Norman Studies, 1977
(1978), pp. 144–67 for English succession practices.

8. Douglas,
William
, pp. 76–8, 391–5 and Bates,
William
, p. 100 for William’s marriage. Douglas,
William
, p. 380 for Adelaide and Ibid., p. 419, Table 2 for Enguerrand’s death in 1053. Douglas,
William
, pp. 58–69 for the Norman crisis of 1051–4.

9. Williams, ‘King’s Nephew’, p. 327 for Ralph, Douglas,
William
, p. 418, Table 1 for William. Tanner, ‘Eustace II’, p. 263, Eustace of Boulogne had no claim since his first wife Godgifu, Edward’s sister, died before 1049 without issue by him.

10. Barlow,
Edward
, pp. 28–53 and S. Keynes, ‘The Aethelings in Normandy’,
Anglo-Norman Studies
, XIII (1991), pp. 173–205 for Edward’s early years.

11.
WJ
, p. 159 and
WP
, p. 30 (20) for the motivation for Edward’s action. Douglas,
William
pp. 31–7 for these Dukes. Keynes, ‘Aethelings’, pp. 193–4, Barlow,
Edward
, pp. 51–2 and Bates,
William
, p. 59 for Robert’s invasion plan.
ASC
C/D/E/F 1041,
JW
1041,
EER
, p. 35,
WJ
, p. 107 and
WP
, p. 12 for Hardecnut inviting Edward to England. At this time William was in the midst of his difficult minority and in no position to assist anyone. Bates,
William
, p. 59 and Barlow
Edward
, p. 52 dismiss any suggestion of Norman aid. Keynes, ‘Aethelings’, pp. 173–205, Douglas,
William
, pp. 166–7 and Brown,
Normans
, pp. 111–16 for an alternative view.

12.
ASC
C/D/E 1052, JW 1052.

13.
VER
, pp. 39–41.

14.
Brut y Tywysogyon – Red Book of Hergest Version
, tr. T. Jones, 2nd edn (Cardiff, 1973),
VER
, p. 41,
ASC
E 1052. MacAirt and MacNiocaill,
Ulster
1052.
The Annals of Tigernach
, tr. Whitley Stokes (Lampeter, 1993), 1052. M.T. Flanagan,
Irish Society, Anglo-Norman Settlers, Angevin Kingship
(Oxford, 1989), pp. 57–8. Maund,
Ireland
, p. 165. P.F. Wallace, ‘The English Presence in Viking Dublin’ in M.A.S. Blackburn (ed.),
Anglo-Saxon Monetary History
(Leicester, 1986), pp. 204–5 for the English earls as the inspiration behind Diarmait’s conquest.
ASC
D 1052 for Gruffydd. Ralph was absent on duty with the fleet.

15.
ASC
C 1052,
JW
1052.

16.
ASC
C/D/E 1052, Stafford,
Unification
, p. 86, Barlow,
Edward
, pp. 101–2,
ASC
E 1049 for Godwine, Harold, Swein and Tosti as captains of ships.
VER
, p. 41,
ASC
C/D/E 1052.

17.
ASC
C/D/E 1052,
VER
, pp. 41–3, Hooper, ‘Some Observations’, p. 206.

18.
ASC
C/D/E 1052,
VER
, pp. 41–3.

19.
ASC
E 1052.

20.
ASC
C/D/E 1052,
JW
1052,
VER
, pp. 43–5, Stafford,
Unification
, p. 92.

21. Barlow,
Edward
, pp. 114–15 and Appendix Two for the earldoms of Odda and Ralph, E. Okasha,
Handlist of Anglo-Saxon Non-runic Inscriptions
(Cambridge, 1971), pp. 63–4 and Barlow,
Edward
, p. 125 for their retention as earls.

22. Barlow,
English Church
, pp. 77–81, Brooks,
Canterbury
, p. 305 and Smith, ‘Stigand’ for Stigand.

23.
ASC
D/E 1058 Stigand consecrated Aethelric and Siward. He also consecrated Bishop Remigius in 1067 under King William but otherwise his actions were carefully restricted.

24.
ASC
C 1053 and
ASC
E 1050, Barlow,
English Church
, pp. 215–6 for Wulfwig.

25. Stafford,
Unification
, p. 92, Barlow,
Edward
, p. 303, Barlow,
English Church
, p. 126, Brooks,
Canterbury
, p. 307.

26.
WJ
, p. 159,
WP
, pp. 30–2 (20), Stafford,
Unification
, p. 92, Douglas,
William
, p. 169, Bates,
William
, p.59, Brown,
Normans
, p. 122, Barlow,
Edward
, pp. 106–9 and Loyn,
Norman Conquest
, p. 57, all date it to 1051. Barlow,
Edward
, p. 126 and
WP
, p. xxv for Robert’s death sometime between 9 January 1053 and 1055, perhaps closer to the former.

27. Barlow,
English Church
, p. 86,
WJ
, p. 159 and
WP
, pp. 30–2 (20),
WJ
, pp. xlvi, liii for the dating of this passage in William of Jumieges.

28.
ASC
C 1052,
JW
1052,
ASC
C/D/E 1053,
JW
1053.

1.
WP
, p. 156 (27).

2. This chapter relies substantially on the essential groundwork on Domesday Book carried out by the following: R.H. Davies, ‘The Lands of Harold, Son of Godwine, and their Distribution by William I’, unpublished ma dissertion (Cardiff, 1967); Williams, ‘Land and Power’; Fleming,
Kings and Lords
; R. Fleming, ‘Domesday Estates of the King and the Godwines: A Study in Late Saxon Politics’,
Speculum
, 58 (1983); and Clarke,
English Nobility
. I have not always followed the interpretation of the evidence by these writers but have drawn significantly on the data they have assembled.

3. Fleming,
Kings and Lords
, pp. xv–xvi, Whitelock,
Beginnings
, pp. 64–6 for the importance of land. Clarke,
English Nobility
, pp. 205, 220, Williams, ‘Land and Power’, pp. 171–3, Fleming
Kings and Lords
, pp. 58–71, Hill,
Atlas
, pp. 100–5 and J. Campbell,
The Anglo-Saxons
(London, 1991), pp. 216–17 for landholdings.
EHD II
, No. 172, p. 877 for the costs of feeding a slave-woman.