In return for such backing by the three earls, and by Godwine in particular, King Edward issued rewards of land and authority and many of these naturally fell to Godwine’s family. Among these were earldoms for two of Earl Godwine’s sons, Swein and Harold, the future king, and for his nephew, Beorn. The seal was set on this alliance between the king and his great earl when King Edward married Earl Godwine’s eldest daughter, Edith, on 23 January 1045. In this year Earl Godwine was at the height of his power and influence. He was father-in-law of the king, he was Earl of Wessex, the richest earldom in England, and members of his family held a further three small earldoms.47
TWO
HAROLD, SON OF GODWINE
His eldest – and also his wisest – son Harold, . . . wielded his father’s powers even more actively, and walked in his ways.1
Earl Godwine had survived this crisis period between 1035 and 1042 and emerged, as a result of his new alliance with King Edward, with enhanced power and influence. As part of this triumph his elder sons, royal brothers-in-law, entered public affairs, including his second son, Harold, the later king, who became Earl of East Anglia. Harold witnessed several royal diplomas, dated to 1044 and 1045, as nobilis or ministri but he first appears as earl at the head of the Norfolk witnesses in the will of Thurstan, son of Wine, which has been dated to 1044. This apparent confusion may arise from differing dates for the start of the year, but what is clear is that from 1045 onwards, Harold is styled dux or earl in all surviving royal diplomas.2
There had been no earl in East Anglia since Cnut removed Earl Thorkell in 1021. The main reason for Harold’s appointment here and at this time probably lay in the renewed threat from Scandinavia at the start of King Edward’s reign. Cnut had needed no earl to defend this region after 1021, when he himself had controlled Denmark and dominated Norway thereby neutralizing any potential Viking threat. In contrast, King Edward was faced with an active threat from Magnus of Norway, who now also controlled Denmark, and he needed a trustworthy subordinate in this area. Indeed, Harold may have led ships from his earldom to Sandwich that same year of 1045 to defend the country against the threat of Magnus of Norway.3
The appointment brought Harold, still a young man of around twenty-five years and a younger son at that, into the mainstream of English administration. He was now the local representative of the king addressed in royal writs, with wide powers to act on his behalf in witnessing wills and land transactions, making legal judgements in local courts and leading the men of his earldom in war or emergency. The royal office of earl also carried with it wide lands in Norfolk, Suffolk and Essex. Harold succeeded to the authority and perhaps some of the lands of his predecessors, Ulfkell Snilling and Thorkell the Tall in East Anglia, and Ealdorman Byrthnoth in Essex. He may have gained lands from Gunnhild, the widow of Earl Thorkell’s son Harald, when she was exiled in 1044. By 1066, he was certainly in possession of estates at Colne in Essex previously held by Byrthnoth’s wife. These and other grants of lands provided Harold with a local power base and allowed him to dispense patronage and wield influence in the area. He quickly began to receive bequests, including half a mark of gold in the will of Thurstan, son of Wine, and land at Fritton in Norfolk in the will of Lady Wulfgyth, intended to secure his support for the bequeathers’ other provisions.4
Harold’s elevation to an earldom also introduced him to a by now rather exclusive group of royal officials. In 1042 King Edward inherited a kingdom with only three great earls, Godwine, Leofric and Siward, each of whom controlled large areas, namely Wessex, Mercia and Northumbria respectively. These men had wielded power in these regions under four different kings and so had become, in a real sense, representatives of these ancient regions and former kingdoms, and in particular of the political views of their nobility before the king. Harold and his brother, Swein, were inserted into this existing framework as relatives of the king and Earl Godwine. They would need to work hard to consolidate their own authority and forge a similar relationship with the men of their new earldoms and with the king.
A useful short cut in securing local support was to form links with those families already wielding power in the area. It was probably for this reason that Harold appears to have married Edith ‘Swan-neck’ around this time. She was apparently the heiress to extensive lands and influence in Cambridgeshire, Suffolk and Essex, and these provided a solid support for Harold’s new position in the area. Further details concerning Harold’s marriage and the lands he gained at this period will be found in Chapters Eight and Four respectively.
As earl, Harold would have divided his time between attendance on the king at the royal court and undertaking duties as the king required in the wider realm, and performing his duties as earl in East Anglia. Typically, Harold would have attended on the king on a regular basis, particularly at the major Christian festivals of Easter and Christmas, where he would witness royal diplomas. He would have performed royal services as required, for example, military service with the fleet as he did in 1049. He would have attended shire courts in East Anglia, and in this role, would have been the recipient of royal writs ordering him, for example, to supervise the transfer of lands between landholders.5
During the early years of Harold’s new appointment, King Edward began to oust many Danes of Cnut’s following, perhaps fearing they might support Magnus of Norway or perhaps simply to replace them with his own supporters. Thus Gunnhild, niece of Cnut and wife of Harald, son of Thorkell the Tall, and her sons were banished in 1044 and the prominent local thegn Osgod Clapa followed in 1046. This policy was not opposed by Godwine and his fellow earls, since it did not directly affect them and may have removed significant local rivals. Gunnhild’s sons were grandsons of Earl Thorkell, and might have sought similar honours in competition with the sons of Godwine and the other earls. Indeed, their father, Harald, who had been slain by order of Magnus of Norway on 13 November 1042, is called earl by John of Worcester. Osgod Clapa was a prominent East Anglian magnate and royal servant under Cnut, who also witnessed many of Edward’s early diplomas, often in a leading position among the ministri. Harold was not responsible for either of these exiles, although he may have gained from their downfall. In 1066 his mother, Gytha, held an estate at Wroxall on the Isle of Wight, which Osgod may once have held. Certainly Earl Harold, as part of his official duties, would have supervised the seizure of the lands and goods of such exiles.6
At the same time as removing Cnut’s men, King Edward sought to promote men who had entered his service during his period of exile on the Continent. These included the priests Robert of Jumieges (Bishop of London from 1044), Hereman (Bishop of Ramsbury from 1045), and Ulf (Bishop of Dorchester from 1049), as well as laymen like Earl Ralph and the stallers Robert Fitzwimarch and Ralph. This policy was one which ultimately proved less acceptable to Godwine but for reasons which have been obscured by the suggestion that Edward pursued a policy of promoting Normans as a sort of fifth column, intended to help secure the later succession of William of Normandy.7
If we leave aside the question of the Norman succession, from which this suggestion seems largely to derive, it is in fact far from clear that King Edward had such a policy. For a start, the number of foreigners introduced by Edward was actually fairly small and, secondly, it has still to be proved that many of them were ‘Normans’ at all. Proven Normans represent only three out of Edward’s seven foreign bishops, and none of Edward’s four or five foreign nobles. In addition, the Frenchmen of the Herefordshire castles, Osbern ‘Pentecost’, and Hugh and Richard Fitzscrob, would appear, as followers of Earl Ralph, much more likely to have come from the latter’s native county of the Vexin than Normandy proper.
A further factor in undermining the theory of a ‘Norman’ fifth column arises from the location of the landholdings provided to them by King Edward. The strategic significance of Earl Ralph’s lands in Hereford and the East Midlands, and the lands provided for the Bretons Ralph and Robert in Lincolnshire and East Anglia can hardly be sustained in
terms of securing a Norman invasion or landing. It would surely have been more important to have such potential infiltrators based in Kent, Sussex or Hampshire where any Norman invasion would be likely to attempt to land, and indeed where such an invasion eventually occurred. Although the Norman Robert of Jumieges eventually succeeded to the archbishopric of Canterbury, the Norman William held the bishopric of London, the Norman priest Osbern held the church at Bosham, and the Norman Abbey of Fecamp received land at Steyning in Sussex none of these were warriors with their own military followings. They could hardly be expected to provide armed support for any Norman landing or occupation. The main role of all these Frenchmen in the relations between the king and Earl Godwine was to be that of potential and actual rivals for power and influence in England rather than as a ‘Norman’ fifth column. In the absence of a ‘Norman’ policy on the part of the king, the situation, for the moment, appeared very favourable for Harold and his family, but within a year a shadow was to fall over their good fortune.8
In 1046 Harold’s elder brother, Earl Swein, was raiding in South Wales in alliance with Gruffydd of North Wales, probably in order to prevent Welsh raids on Herefordshire, which was part of his earldom. This successful raid was part of his normal duties as an earl on the Welsh border and even the alliance with Gruffydd was just an example of the customary policy of playing the Welsh princes off against each other. However, what Swein did on on the way home with his victorious forces was beyond the pale. As the Chronicle relates, ‘he ordered the abbess of Leominster to be brought to him and kept her as long as it suited him’. John of Worcester names the lady concerned as Edith, and states that Swein actually wished to marry her. This suggests that her abduction may not have resulted from a simple infatuation but perhaps had a deeper cause. It should be noted that abbesses were commonly noblewomen and Swein may, like Harold, have been seeking an alliance or lands by his action but if so he chose the wrong lady. Even though he was the eldest son of Godwine, and whatever his intentions, Swein’s behaviour could not be tolerated. Eventually, almost a year later, he was persuaded to release the woman, possibly under threat of excommunication. Thereafter he went into exile, initially to Bruges in Flanders over the winter, and then to Denmark the following summer (1048). Even Earl Godwine could not save his son from this fate, despite his power and influence, though he may have delayed it for a year and tempered its severity.9
This episode is important for several reasons. First, it provided Earl Harold with an unexpected extension to his power, as he and his cousin, Beorn, were apparently each given a share of Swein’s forfeited earldom. This arrangement was perhaps intended to mollify Godwine for the expulsion of his eldest son. More importantly, it revealed not only that there were limits to Godwine’s apparently wide powers, but also that his own wishes could be overruled by the consensus of opinion among the English nobility. This requirement for consensus was to have a bearing on subsequent events in the careers of both Godwine and his son Harold, and would also reveal important differences between them. Meantime, Swein’s outrage also set in motion the erosion of Godwine’s personal alliance with King Edward. Godwine had undoubtedly supported his eldest son in spite of his behaviour, and this interference with the royal enforcement of justice must have annoyed the king. It was to be the first of a number of incidents which would lead to an estrangement between the two men, and over them all would gradually loom the spectre of Edward’s childless marriage to Edith.10
Another dispute arose in 1047, when Swein Ulfson of Denmark, Godwine’s nephew, sent ambassadors to England to seek help to defend his kingdom against Magnus of Norway. Godwine advised King Edward to provide his nephew with fifty ships, but he was opposed by Earl Leofric of Mercia and others, and the king decided in the end to refuse him help. This might appear unusual since Edward had an interest in distracting Magnus from plans for an invasion of England, but he may have feared retaliation if Swein was defeated. Indeed, perhaps as a result of Edward’s failure to assist him, Swein of Denmark swiftly lost his kingdom to Magnus of Norway. This failure to help his nephew may have rankled with Godwine, coming as it did after the expulsion of his own son Swein, and probably further undermined his relationship with Edward. Indeed Godwine may have decided to aid his nephew on his own account since his exiled son subsequently journeyed to Denmark in 1048 and may have taken a force of ships with him. Certainly Swein Godwineson would return from his exile in Denmark with seven or eight ships in 1049, which suggests that he may have been sent with a military force to aid his Danish cousin but, if so, his assistance was not appreciated.11
Meanwhile, Godwine’s second son, Earl Harold, was busy defending his own earldom and was probably among those who sailed with the English fleet from Sandwich against some German raiders in 1048. He is not specifically mentioned on this occasion but he is known to have commanded a ship in the fleet the following year. The fact that the German pirates were able to ravage Essex unopposed, seizing booty and prisoners, suggests the earl’s absence, probably with the fleet. The policy of Baldwin V of Flanders, to harbour such pirates and English exiles and supply them with vessels and crews with which to raid the English coast, had become a significant problem for Edward. He had been freed from the Scandinavian threat by the recent death of King Magnus in 1047 and the subsequent outbreak of war between Swein of Denmark and Harald of Norway, and he was now in a position to act against Baldwin. His opportunity came in 1049 when the German Emperor Henry III sought the aid of an English fleet against Baldwin, who was in rebellion against him, and Edward duly brought the English fleet to Sandwich, including a ship or ships commanded by Harold, and remained there until Baldwin accepted terms from the Emperor.12
It was in the midst of this campaign that Godwine’s prodigal son Swein returned from Denmark, where he had apparently managed to outstay his welcome having ‘ruined himself with the Danes’. He came seeking to make peace with Edward in return for the restoration of his lands and earldom, only to be opposed by his own brother, Harold, and cousin, Beorn. They refused to surrender anything that the king had granted to them, probably including their shares of Swein’s former earldom. Here we see Harold for the first time acting independently of his father. Godwine probably wanted his eldest son reinstated, judging by his past and future actions, but Harold opposed his father’s wishes and those of his brother, in order to safeguard his own position. Under these circumstances of division within the Godwine family, King Edward felt safe in rejecting Swein’s overtures. He gave him only four days’ safe conduct in which to leave England again, and Swein, temporarily blocked, withdrew to his ships at Bosham.13
At this point, King Edward received news of enemy shipping movements and ordered Godwine to move westward into the Channel to counter this threat. Godwine accordingly sailed with forty-two ships, including one commanded by Earl Beorn and others commanded by Earl Harold and his younger brother, Tosti, to Pevensey, where they became weather-bound. Soon afterwards Swein arrived there; perhaps his ships were weather-bound at nearby Bosham, but it seems more likely that he had refused to leave the country without a last attempt at reinstatement. He persuaded his cousin, Beorn, to change his mind and accompany him to intercede with the king on his behalf. They rode together to Bosham, presumably in order to travel thence by sea to King Edward at Sandwich. However, once there Swein had Beorn, who had taken only three men with him, bound and taken aboard his ship. He then sailed away, perhaps initially intending to use Beorn as a hostage in further negotiations. Instead, for some unknown reason, Swein killed his captive and defenceless cousin at Dartmouth and buried him in an unmarked grave. Perhaps Beorn had refused to speak to the king on Swein’s behalf or to return him his lands – this would hardly be surprising after Swein’s illtreatment of him.14
Again, Swein had breached the bounds of acceptable behaviour, and this heinous betrayal and killing of a kinsman outraged both the king and the men of the fleet. They declared Swein nithing in the Viking manner, indicating someone utterly and irre
parably disgraced. Swein’s own sailors perhaps felt the same, as immediately afterwards six of his eight ships deserted him, forcing him to flee to Bruges. He could hardly return to Denmark after his behaviour there the previous summer. Meanwhile, Harold recovered the body of his murdered cousin and had it buried at Winchester beside his uncle, Cnut. Once again Swein’s erratic behaviour, in sharp contrast to that of his brother, Harold, had brought him to exile in Flanders and damaged the prestige of his family. Godwine’s somewhat ambivalent attitude during this affair further weakened his position with King Edward. He appeared to sympathize with his son, but as opinion was already against him he was unable to stand by him openly either. On the other hand, Harold probably emerged with his personal relationship to the king enhanced because of his opposition to his brother’s return. Even if this was initially done for the selfish motive of retaining his share of Swein’s forfeited earldom, it had proved amply justified by Swein’s subsequent conduct.15
Nevertheless, Godwine had still not given up on his eldest son and over the winter he worked on King Edward, attempting to persuade him to permit once more the return of his beloved Swein. He must have exerted considerable pressure to achieve this and Edward cannot have been happy about the situation. Harold himself was perhaps more inclined to accept the proposal because the redistribution of the deceased Beorn’s earldom meant that he would not now lose by Swein’s return. Similarly, Edward’s nephew Ralph, who had gained Herefordshire from Swein’s fall, could also be accommodated with some of Beorn’s former earldom. In return, Swein must also have made concessions, perhaps undertaking to go on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem in penance for his crime, which he did in 1052. Whatever the specific arrangements, Swein’s malign influence returned to England in 1050 under the escort of Ealdred, Bishop of Worcester, who was returning from a synod in Rome. Swein’s restoration is confirmed by his appearance among the witnesses to a royal diploma, confirming Papal dispensation for the removal of Bishop Leofric’s see to Exeter and dated 1050. It undoubtedly increased the tension in England as Swein and Ralph uneasily disputed control over the lands of the earldom of Hereford, which had just been transferred between them. This would probably be the source of the accusations made by Swein in 1051 against the Frenchmen of the castle. The confusion and scope for contention resulting from Swein’s exile, Ralph’s appointment, and Swein’s reinstatement must have been considerable.16
Harold Page 5
