The Battle of Hastings (27 page)

31
.  Wace, ed. Taylor, p. 175; Wace, ed. Holden, ii, pp. 173–4, ll. 7767–8.

32
.  The quotations use either my own translations, or that from Thorpe (ed.),
The Bayeux Tapestry
, pp. 32–55. William of Poitiers, ed. Foreville, the battle account is pp. 186–204, only key quotations will be footnoted separately.

33
.  John of Worcester, eds Darlington and McGurk, p. 604, though trust is destroyed by the fact that he gets the date wrong.

34
.  Orderic Vitalis, ed. Chibnall, ii, p. 172.

35
.  William of Malmesbury, ed. Giles, p. 276; William of Malmesbury, ed. Stubbs, ii, p. 302; Wace, ed. Taylor, pp. 155–6; Wace, ed. Holden, ii, pp. 156–7, with slight variant spellings, e.g. ‘drincheheil’. This passage could illustrate Round’s contention that Wace borrowed information on Hastings from Malmesbury.

36
.  William of Jumièges, ed. van Houts, p. 168.

37
.  William of Malmesbury, ed. Giles, p. 277; William of Malmesbury, ed. Stubbs, ii, p. 302.

38
.  William of Poitiers, ed. Foreville, p. 184;
Carmen
, eds Morton and Muntz, has crossbowmen too. John of Worcester, eds Darlington and McGurk, p. 604, adds slingers to the Norman infantry.

39
.  Whitelock
et al.
(eds),
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
, D, p. 143; Cubbins (ed.),
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
, p. 80: ‘
Wyllelm him com ongean on unwear, ær his folc gefylced wære
’.

40
.  Whitelock
et al.
(eds),
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
, D, p. 143; Cubbin (ed.),
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
, p. 80; John of Worcester, eds Darlington and McGurk, p. 604: many left the battle line and the few with constant hearts stayed.

41
.  
Carmen
, eds Morton and Muntz, p. 24;
Chronicle of Battle Abbey
, ed. Searle, p. 38: the English ‘on foot’; William of Malmesbury, ed. Giles, p. 276: ‘all were on foot’; William of Malmesbury, ed. Stubbs, ii, p. 302; Wace, ed. Taylor, p. 238: ‘the English knew not how to joust nor bear arms on horseback’; Wace, ed. Holden, ii, p. 206,ll. 8603–4: ‘
Engleis ne saveient joster/ ne a cheval armes porter
’.

42
.  Wace, ed. Taylor, p. 183, his brother Gyrth answers: ‘he is a fool who believes in luck’; p. 191, the battle cries: ‘
Dex aie
’ and ‘
Ut
’; Wace, ed. Holden, ii, p. 179, l. 7923: ‘
"Fols est", dist Guert, "qui en sort creit"
’; p. 184, ll. 8057–8: ‘
Normant escrient "Deus aïe!"/La gent englesche "Ut!" escrie
’; William of Jumièges, ed. van Houts, p. 168.

43
.  Orderic Vitalis, ed. Chibnall, ii, p. 174;
Carmen
, eds Morton and Muntz, pp. 22–6. Baudri de Bourgueil,
Oeuvres Poétiques
, ed. P. Abrahams, Paris, 1926, p. 197, l. 409, also has crossbows: ‘
atque balistis
’.

44
.  
Bayeux Tapestry
, pl. 57–61,

45
.  
Bayeux Tapestry
, pl. 61–2.

46
.  
Bayeux Tapestry
, pl. 64–7.

47
.  Wace, ed. Taylor, pp. 175–6; Wace, ed. Holden, ii, p. 174, ll. 7784–5.

48
.  
Bayeux Tapestry
, pl. 67.

49
.  
Bayeux Tapestry
, pl. 68.

50
.  
Carmen
, eds Morton and Muntz, p. 30.

51
.  Wace, ed. Taylor, p. 249; Wace, ed. Holden, ii, p. 210, ll. 8717–26.

52
.  Lemmon, ‘ Campaign’, p. 109; others to doubt the flight include Glover, ‘English warfare’, p. 12; Wright,
Hastings
, p. 93: ‘extremely unlikely’.

53
.  Apart from Poitiers, the feigned flight appears in Orderic Vitalis, ed. Chibnall, ii, p. 174, who recognises it as a ‘hazardous stratagem’;
Carmen
, eds Morton and Muntz, p. 28;
Chronicle of Battle Abbey
, ed. Searle, p. 38; William of Malmesbury, ed. Giles, pp. 276–7; William of Malmesbury, ed. Stubbs, ii, p. 303; Baudri de Bourgueil, ed. Abrahams, p. 208; Wace, ed. Taylor, pp. 198–200: the Normans call ‘
Dex aie
’ as the signal to stop and turn, and ‘like fools they broke their line’; Wace, ed. Holden, ii, pp. 189–92. See also B. Bachrach, ‘The feigned retreat at Hastings’,
Medieval Studies
, xxxiii, pp. 344–7.

54
.  
Carmen
, eds Morton and Muntz, p. 28.

55
.  
Bayeux Tapestry
, pl. 64.

56
.  S. Morillo, ‘Hastings: an unusual battle’, in S. Morillo (ed.),
The Battle of Hastings, Sources and Interpretations
, Woodbridge, 1996, pp. 220–30, p. 224.

57
.  
Carmen
, eds Morton and Muntz, p. 30.

58
.  William of Jumièges, ed. van Houts, p. 168: ‘
Heroldus etiam ipse in primo militum congressu occubuit uulneribus letaliter confossus
’; is followed by Orderic Vitalis, ed. Chibnall, ii, p. 176; F.H. Baring,
Domesday Tables for the Counties of Surrey, Berkshire, Middlesex, Hertford, Buckingham and Bedford and the New Forest
, London, 1909, p. 220, suggests
progressu
for
congressu
, but this is speculation.

59
.  William of Poitiers, ed. Foreville, p. 194.

60
.  
Bayeux Tapestry
, pl. 68–70.

61
.  Bradbury,
Medieval Archer
, p. 26. The idea of shooting high comes from later sources: Henry of Huntingdon, ed. Greenway, p. 394, and Wace, ed. Holden, ii, pp. 188–9, ll. 8145–59, 8161–4; Wace, ed. Taylor, p. 197: they ‘shot their arrows upwards into the air’, and is still accepted by Wright,
Hastings
, p. 97.

62
.  
Chronicle of Battle Abbey
, ed. Searle, p. 38: ‘their king was laid low by a chance blow’.

63
.  
Carmen
, eds Morton and Muntz, pp. 34–6,116–20, appendix D, where the identification of the four is discussed. The editors’ belief that the heir of Ponthieu in the source is called Hugh is accepted, though others have differed. William of Malmesbury, ed. Stubbs, ii, p. 303; Wace, ed. Taylor, p. 169; Wace, ed. Holden, ii, p. 167, l. 7605: ‘
Veez mon chief blanc e chanu
’.

64
.  
Bayeux Tapestry
, pl. 71.

65
.  
Bayeux Tapestry
; Wace, ed. Taylor, p. 198; Wace, ed. Holden, ii, p. 189,ll. 8161–8, is one source who follows this: an arrow ‘struck Harold above his right eye, and put it out’, though he survived to pull it out. He says that ‘an arrow was well shot’ became a saying among the English to the French; and ed. Taylor, pp. 252–4; ed. Holden, pp. 213–14: ‘sorely wounded in his eye by the arrow’, after which an armed man beat him down and cut through his thigh. He also says the duke struck him, but that he may already have been dead: ‘I know not who it was who slew him’. A strong point which Brooks and Walker, ‘Authority and interpretation’, p. 32, make is that the standard bearer is also shown twice: standing and falling.

66
.  D. Bernstein, ‘The blinding of Harold and the meaning of the Bayeux Tapestry’,
ANS
, v, 1982, pp. 40–64.

67
.  William of Malmesbury, ed. Giles, p. 277: Harold ‘fell from having his brain pierced by an arrow’; William of Malmesbury, ed. Stubbs, ii, p. 303; Baudri de Bourgueil, ed. Abrahams, p. 209, l. 463, an arrow from the sky: ‘
perforat Hairaldum
’.

68
.  Wace, ed. Taylor, p. 197; Wace, ed. Holden, ii, p. 187, l. 8132: ‘
fu si deça, fu si dela
’.

69
.  
Bayeux Tapestry
, pl. 72–3.

70
.  William of Malmesbury, ed. Giles, p. 277; William of Malmesbury, ed. Stubbs, ii, p. 303, has the incident in the middle of the battle, but his account is dependent on other sources and this seems to be an error; Wace, ed. Taylor, pp. 193–4; Wace, ed. Holden, ii, pp. 185–6, who may have been following Malmesbury, speaks of a fosse in the middle of the battlefield, which the Normans crossed and then fell back into; he also, ed. Taylor, p. 255, ed. Holden, pp. 215–16, has English during flight falling into water when a bridge breaks, but this seems to be when entering London.

71
.  R.A. Brown, ‘Hastings’ in Strickland (ed.),
Anglo-Norman Warfare
, p. 180, suggests that the Malfosse legend may have grown from an incident during the battle, associated with the ‘hillock’ on the Tapestry, possibly as a result of the feigned flights. We have preferred to stick with Poitiers, but do not discount the possibility of the legend growing by misuse of the earlier sources. Incidentally, the mid-battle incident, with a site of ditches and so on, would fit better with Caldbec than Battle.

72
.  William of Jumièges, ed. van Houts, pp. 168–70: ‘
sequenti nocti
’.

73
.  Orderic Vitalis, ed. Chibnall, ii, pp. 176–8; William of Malmesbury, ed. Giles, p. 277; William of Malmesbury, ed. Stubbs, ii, p. 303, has a deep ditch and a short passage, possibly meaning a causeway over the ditch.

74
.  
Chronicle of Battle Abbey
, ed. Searle, pp. 38, 15–16.

75
.  Lemmon, ‘Campaign’, p. 97; Chevallier, ‘Malfosse’, p. 3.

76
.  Chevallier, ‘Malfosse’; Lemmon, ‘Campaign’, pp. 111–12.

77
.  Orderic Vitalis, ed. Chibnall, ii, p. 178.

W
illiam of Poitiers wrote: ‘once he had completed his victory, the duke rode back to the battlefield to survey the dead. It was impossible to contemplate them without being moved to pity … the flower of English youth and nobility littered the ground far and wide.’ As darkness drew on and night fell upon the battlefield, William could begin to appreciate what had happened on that day. The English king and two of his brothers had died. With Harold Hardrada killed at Stamford Bridge, the throne now awaited him.

William was a shrewd and generally cautious man and the invasion of England was the riskiest project he ever undertook. He knew that all was not over. The English had been beaten, but many had escaped. A lengthy pursuit was not wise, William needed his troops to stay close at hand, and he called them back. There were others of significance in the kingdom who had not been at Hastings, and whose attitude to him was not yet clear, including Edgar the Aetheling, who was the obvious figurehead for rebellion with the best claim to the throne by descent, and the northern earls, Edwin and Morcar. William of Poitiers says he proceeded with moderation.
1

On first arriving, William had not rushed inland against a major town, and he was prepared to take his time again. His strategy soon emerged, with two main objectives: first, he wanted to secure his base on the coast; second, he wanted to take London. But before any of that, there was a certain amount of clearing up to be done. William camped for the night on the battlefield, the traditional manner of demonstrating victory. On the morrow, he returned to base at Hastings.

Scavengers and relatives came to search among the dead. No doubt some of the Normans joined in. The Tapestry shows men ripping off armour, which was clearly of tunic design rather than trousered, and good weapons would be searched for.
2
Relatives would seek the bodies of their loved ones for burial, though there must also have been a mass burial – possibly at the Malfosse. William arranged for the burial of his own dead, and left the English to see to theirs. Poitiers says their bodies were left to the vultures and the wolves, though William allowed the English to bury whom they wished.
3

The main question for William in this was how to deal with the body of his rival. There is the story of identifying the body. It was said that Harold was so disfigured that he could not be recognised. Only by bringing his mistress, Edith, to the field, could the body be known. She identified him by certain hidden marks that only she (and perhaps his wife) could know. William of Poitiers gives some credence to this tale: ‘Harold was recognised not by any insignia which he wore and certainly not from his features, but by certain distinguishing marks’, but he says nothing of Edith Swanneck.
4

We can assume from what we know that William had no wish to make much of Harold’s burial or his burial-place, and that he feared some sort of cult in support. He refused Harold’s family possession of the body, even when offered payment by the dead king’s mother. This story may be accepted as it is in William of Poitiers. Orderic, who says she offered her son’s body weight in gold for the corpse, bemoans that poor lady’s position, with five of her seven sons now dead.
5

It was said that William gave orders for Harold to be buried secretly by the shore. Poitiers tells us that William Malet was given the task to complete: ‘and they said jokingly that his body should be placed there to guard the sea-shore and the sea, which in his fury he had formerly blockaded with arms’. We probably need not imagine him being buried on the beach, but at some point near to Hastings.
6

Later, there grew up a tradition at Harold’s own foundation of Waltham Abbey, that his body had been returned there for final interment, and possibly this occurred. It was a tradition recorded by a monk in 1177, based on hearsay from the 1120s. But we may be more sceptical of the stories of Harold’s survival after Hastings, like a second Arthur to fan the hopes of Old English recovery. One Waltham story was that Harold had been thrown to the ground among the dead, but was stunned and not killed. He was found, still breathing, by certain women, who bound his wounds and carried him off to a nearby cottage. He was taken to Winchester and hidden in a cellar for two years before recovering and going to Germany.
7