BoAr: FNQ: Hereward I

                http:// boar.org.uk/ariwxo3FNQsupI.htm              Latest edit 28 Aug 2008.   

Web page & commentary © 2007 R.J.PENHEY With thanks to the trustees of the Willoughby Memorial Library


The Bourne Archive


FNQ

This thread begins with the title page


De Gestis Herwardi Saxonis1.

I.

Incipit præfatio cujusdam opusculi de gestis Herwardi incliti militis2.

Nonnullis apud nos scire desiderantibus opera magnifici Anglorum gentis Herwardi et inclytorum ejus et auribus percipere magnanimitates illius ac gesta3 : nuper nostræ parvitati vestra insinuavit fraternitas4, interrogans si  aliquid in illo loco ubi degebat de tanto viro conscriptum aliquis reliquerit. De quo enim quum nos quodam in loco audisse modicum Anglice conscriptum professi fuimus, subito coegit vestra dilectio illud ad præsens perquiri, et mox in Latinam linguam transferri, subjungens etiam et ea quæ a nostris audire contigerit, cum quibus conversatus est, ut insignis miles magnanimiter vivens. Quibus quidem vestris desideriis satisfacere cupientes, multis in locis perquirendo manus convertimus, et penitus nihil invenimus, præter pauca et dispersa folia, partim stillicidio putrefactis at abolitis et partim abscisione divisis5. Ad quod igitur dum stilus tantumdem fuisset appositus, vix ex eo principium a genitoribus ejus inceptum et pauca interim expressimus et nomen ; videlicet primitiva insignia præclarissimi exulis Herwardi, editum Anglico stilo a Lefrico Diacono ejusdem ad Brun presbyterum. Hujus enim memorati presbyteri erat studium, omnes actus Gygantum et bellatorum ex fabulis antiquorum, aut ex fideli relatione, ad edificationem audientium congregare, et ob memoriam Angliæ literis commendare6. In quibus vero licet non satis periti aut potius exarare deleta incognitarum literarum7, ad illum locum tamen de illo usque collegimus ut in propriam et ad pristinam domum reversus fratrem occisum invenerit : vestræ prudentiæ rudi stilo relinquentes crudam materiam vel alicujus exercitati ingenii studio ; minus dialecticis et rethoricis enigmatibus compositam et ornatam. Nihil enim de his amplius exarare curavimus, semper majora expectantes et necdum penitus aliquid invenientes. Quos tandem vana spes diu delusit, sicut ab initio a quibusdam dicentibus quod in illo et illo loco magnus liber est de gestis ejusdem. Ad quem mittentes quæ promissa fuerant nunc8 comparuerunt. Propterea quidem tunc omnino illud relinquentes, opus inceptum abscondimus. At tandem a quibusdam nostrorum vobis diu latere non potuit, illud principium saluti vobis non denegari ex insperato nobis subito vestra mandavit benignitas. Tunc ergo quod imperfectum nostrum viderant oculi vestri, curæ nobis fuit iterum, licet non magni ingenii ope fretis, ad hoc in eo stilum convertere, et vobis iterum in morem ystoriæ libellulum retexere, de his quæ a nostris et a quibusdam suorum audivimus, cum quo a principiis illius conversati sunt, et in multis consortes fuerunt. Ex quibus sæpe nonnullos vidimus, viros videlicet statura proceri et magni et nimiæ fortitudinis. Et ipsi etiam duos spectabiles formæ viros ex illis, ut a vobis audivimus, vidistis, videlicet Siwate frater, Broter, de Sancto Edmundo et Lefrico Niger, milites ejusdem9, licet a suis membris propter invidiam dolo orbitati speciem artuum per inimicos amiserint. Siquidem de his et de aliis, quos ipsi in multis probavimus et vidimus, si non aliter satis nobis daretur intelligi quantæ virtutis dominus illorum fuerit, et majora esse quæ fecit quam ea quæ de illo professi sunt. Propterea namque, ut existimamus, ad magnanimorum operum exempla et ad liberalitatem exercendam profectum erit Herwardum scire, quis fuerit, et magnanimitates illius audire et opera, maxime autem militiam exercere volentibus. Unde monemus, aures advertite, et qui diligentius gesta virorum fortium audire contenditis mentem apponite, ut diligenter tanti viri relatio audiatur : qui nec in munitione, nec in præsidio, sed in seipso confisus, solus cum suis, regnis et regibus bella intulit, et contra principes et tyrannos dimicavit quosque nonnullos devicit. De quibus etiam a genitoribus ejus inceptum cuncta per capitula inserta sunt, ut leviter possit retineri relectum quod distincte continetur expositum.


The Exploits of Hereward the Saxon1.

I.

Here begins the preface of a certain work concerning the exploits of Hereward the renowned knight2.

Some of us desiring to know of the deeds of the noble Hereward, of the race of the English, and his renowned men, and to hear with our ears his generous actions and doings3, the brethren of your house4 have assisted our ignorance by enquiring if any man had left anything in writing about so great a man in the place where he used to dwell. For when we declared that we had heard in a certain place that a short account had been written about him in English, forthwith your kind attention had that writing immediately sought for, and before long translated into Latin, adding also those things which we had happened to hear from our own people, with whom he was intimate, living nobly as a famous soldier. Desiring therefore to satisfy these desires of yours, we applied ourselves to enquiring in many places, and yet in truth found nothing, except a few scattered leaves, partly rotten by damp, and decayed, and partly damaged by tearing.5 And when the pen had been taken in hand we have with difficulty extracted from it his descent from his parents and a few things and his character ; that is to say the early achievements of the very famous outlaw Hereward edited in English by Leofric the Deacon, his priest at Bourne. For the intention of this well known priest was to collect all the acts of giants and ancient warriors from stories, or from trustworthy narration, for the edification of his hearers, and for their remembrance to commit them to the English language6. And although not sufficiently skilled in this, or rather incompetent to decipher what is obliterated of the unfamiliar language7, yet we have gathered concerning him that on his return to that place and to his own ancestral home he found his brother slain. And we leave this raw material, written in rude style, to your care, and to the zeal of some man’s trained ability, to be composed and explained in simpler and plainer language. For we have been able decipher nothing further of this, ever hoping for greater results but as yet finding nothing thoroughly. For they, whom for a long time a vain hope deluded, derived from some who said that in such and such a place there is a great book of his exploits from the beginning, found nothing of what they had been led to expect, although they sent to the place.* Wherefore abandoning altogether the search, we have put away the work which had been begun. But from some of our men it would not long be hidden from you ; and unexpectedly you have kindly directed that that commencement at least should not be denied to you. It was then an object of care to us, though not relying on the help of great ability, that your eyes might see our incomplete work, to take up the pen once more, and again to unfold to you a little book after the manner of a history, concerning these things which we have heard from our own men, and from some of his, with whom they associated from the beginning of his career, and were in many things his comrades. Of whom we have often seen some, men (that is to say) tall in stature and huge, and of exceeding courage ; and you yourselves have seen also two men of them conspicuous for their form, as we have heard from you, namely, Siwate, Broter [sic] of S. Edmund, and Leofric Niger, his knights9, although they lost the beauty of their limbs by enemies, being bereft of some members by trickery, through envy. And indeed of these and others, whom we in many things have proved and seen, if no otherwise, it were sufficiently given you to understand of what valour their lord was, and how much greater were the things that he did than what they reported of him. For besides, as we think, it will conduce to the example of noble deeds, and to the practice of liberality, to know Hereward, who he was, and to hear of his achievements and deeds, and especially to those who wish to undertake a soldier’s life. Wherefore we advise you, give attention, and ye who the more diligently strive to hear the deeds of brave men, apply your minds to hear diligently the account of so great a man : for he, trusting neither in fortification, nor in garrison, but in himself, alone with his men waged war against kingdoms and kings, and fought against princes and tyrants, some of whom he conquered. Concerning which things, beginning with his parents, everything has been inserted by chapters, that what is here distinctly set down may be easily remembered.


Commentary

*      [Sweeting’s footnote] The Latin here seems quite corrupt. In many places, as will be observed, the grammar is inaccurate: this is probably the fault of the scribe.

          [RJP’s note] The story was originally written in Old English, by Leofric the Deacon, early in the twelfth century. Having reached a decayed state, this document was translated into Latin, collated and augmented by Hugh Candidus a little before 1170. The copy shown in the frontispiece was made by or under the instruction of Robert of Swaffham in around 1260 and that was transcribed by S. H. Miller, in around the 1880s. Miller’s transcription was translated into modern English by W. D. Sweeting in about 1894. Miller’s and Sweeting’s work was set for printing in 1895, under the supervision of Sweeting and I have transcribed this printed version in 2007. During this long process, errors will have appeared. My brother, whose acquaintance with Latin is much closer than mine, is kindly working through a further proof-reading and I have quietly corrected errors of mine which he has found, so far as his work has yet progressed. His other queries are noted as seems appropriate in each case and their source acknowledged by the inclusion of his initials, FWP.

Sweeting has done a good job in striking a balance between following the Latin and providing a comfortably idiomatic English translation. [FWP]  There are indeed, several grammatical errors in the Latin. Some of these are likely to be scribes’ errors, while others are, more probably, interesting examples of the slide from classical to low Latin. [FWP] 

While Sweeting is not at fault in this, it is important to be aware when dealing with a text like this one, in considering the writer’s grammar but particularly, with some aspect of the narrative, that there is a constant danger of saying in effect, ‘I don’t understand this, therefore it is nonsense.’ In general, we are likely to obtain better enlightenment if, rather than dismissing those things which we do not understand, we set them aside for consideration in the light of what we learn later, from the text or from study generally.

1.     This is the general title adopted by Sweeting, in both the Latin text and its English translation. So far as can be detected without actually seeing it, in the original document, there is no general title and the chapter headings are in reality, not titles in the modern sense but brief summaries of their contents. Nowhere in the text is the concept of Saxon ethnicity introduced, except in describing a man against whom Hereward fought (Chapter XXXII).

2.    Insofar as this Hereward text has an authentic title, this is it. Sweeting translates it as ‘Hereward the renowned knight’ and as ‘The Exploits of Hereward the Saxon’ but the text never refers to him as a Saxon. He was of the ‘anglorum gentis’. It is reasonable to interpret this as his belonging to the race of the English. Writing in a post-Conquest, Norman ambience, Hugh could well have had this in mind. The ‘them and us’ dichotomy of that time would have been between the Norman and the English but the phrase is consistent with an interpretation specifically as ‘of the Anglian people’. This would fit with the reasonable deduction from other evidence, that his father was earl of the Anglian, former-kingdom of Mercia.

3.     Already, we have the key to understanding the whole text. The aspect of the text which seems to give people trouble is that it is a relation of one daring deed after another. Here, we are told what the writer’s brief is. This is a book written so that we can hear of Hereward’s deeds, generous acts and exploits (opera ...Herwardi ...  magnanimitates illius ac gesta). It does not claim to be anything such as a general history of his times. The fact that it subsequently sticks to its brief is not one about which we can reasonably complain.

The story is presented as a series of episodes and the linking narrative, which would give an impression of the time between them, is treated very briefly or not at all. If we are to date events referred to in the text, we need to bring in information from outside sources.

4.    This is Hugh Candidus addressing the abbot of Peterborough in the later twelfth century (ca. 1160-70).

5.     In making a translation from, say Latin to English, since each word may have several possible meanings, the translator has to take a view of the intended meaning of the passage as a whole as well as of the words within it. While Sweeting’s translation is valid, it is possible to take another view, which might offer the chance of a different insight. Using meanings given by Langenscheidt, ‘.. folia, partim stillicidio putrefactis at abolitis et partim abscisione divisis’ is reasonably translated as ‘.. leaves, partly rotten by damp, and decayed, and partly damaged by tearing’ but it might be translated as ‘.. folios, partly softened by dripping water and moreover, removed; and partly divided, by breaking off.’ The first example’s use of ‘rotten’ seems influenced by the use of  putrefacio in English and the modern word derived from it, putrefy. The Latin verb means ‘to make rotten’ but it also means ‘to soften’. The word translated here as ‘removed’ is written as referring to the leaves (the folios) but Hugh may have been thinking more, of the writing on them. If so, it sounds as though the ink had run, making parts of the text illegible.

The document will have been of parchment so in the second view, we have a picture of a skin which has had water dripping onto it so that part has been lost by the consequent weakening of its structure or by the running of the ink. But there has been other damage, perhaps because the edges of the skin have become brittle by exposure to heat. This would be consistent with the possible presence of the document at the time of the Peterborough fire of 1116 (Higham p. xviii). The water damage is consistent since much fire damage comes not from the flames but from attempts to put them out. (Stillicidium means not damp conditions of storage but dripping water.) If there had been exposure to heat, the loss by detachment needs little further explanation. Instead of having the loss caused by prolonged neglect, as we may have thought from the first interpretation, we have it resulting from sudden disaster. It was this fire which caused the need to rewrite the Peterborough Chronicle from other sources (Wikipedia), so the independent continuation begins only in 1122. According to Savage, p. 12., it was a version from Canterbury, which was copied at Peterborough up to this stage, and given local interpolations.

While this is not proof, it is consistent with the view that Leofric the Deacon wrote his account of Hereward’s character in about 1110, that it was in the abbey’s library at the time of the fire, in 1116 and that its damaged remains were there in around 1170, when Hugh Candidus used them as the basis of his account.

6.    This is an example of the use of English as a written language in the early twelfth century. Two writers associated with Bourne, Orm in the twelfth century and Robert Mannyng in the early fourteenth, each wrote in the English of his time. Here we have Leofric Deacon doing so, rather earlier than either. Leofric himself, played a part of the story (Chapters XIX, XXIII and XXXV). He was therefore in a position to know something of the truth of the matter. He may still have written it with a bias but at least, his social and political assumptions should be detectable. Those in turn, should tell us something of his time.

7.     Hugh Candidus, who according to Miller, was the compiler of the story in its present form, acknowledged here that he is not fully au fait with English. This may be because he was of the Norman French culture, or perhaps, because he wished to appear so. That it was the former is possibly indicated by his misunderstanding of the Wide Mere name in chapter XXVI.

8.    This looks like a printer’s error. It makes better sense if nunc is read as non. [FWP]

9.     The previous phrase mentions two men but Sweeting names three. It is possible in medieval Latin, for the genitive of personal names to end in –e, so given that the nominative is ‘Siwart’, Siwarte seems to mean ‘of Siward’. Thus we would have ‘namely Boter of St Edmund’s, brother of Siward, and Leofric the Black, knights of his’. The punctuation of the Latin, as edited for printing is consistent with this. [FWP]


Top of the text                        Contents         Chapter II