Bourne Archive: FNQ: Hereward XXX

http://boar.org.uk/ariwxo3FNQsupXXX.htm      Latest edit 28 May 2010

 Web page © 2007 R.J.PENHEY     With thanks to Willoughby Memorial Library & Lincolnshire Library Service.


The Bourne Archive


FNQ

This thread begins with the title page


De Gestis Herwardi Saxonis.

XXX.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nec dum enim ibi tres dies commoratus, audivit quendam inimicum suum Herwardus in prædicta villa 1 fore, qui sæpe eum perdere et inimicis tradere temptaverat, licet dudum illi ex fide fracta [missing complement for fuissent]  fuissent, ubi ad explorandum cum his auditus tantum cum duobus viris processit, et agnito illo in via fugæ statim consuluit. Quem e vestigio repente sequutus est Herwardns 2 de domo ad domum, de horto ad hortum, cum nudo ense et ancile in manu, usque intro ad atrium magnum, ubi ad agapem3 multi ex comprovincialibus congregati sunt. Et quum non haberet ibi ubi se verteret, imminente semper super eum Herwardo, in interiorem domum fugiens discessit, ubi in foramine sellæ super latrinam caput imposuit4, misereri sibi exorans. Et liberalitate animi motus, sicut erat in omni suo opere liberalissimus, non eum ibi tetigit nec quicquid molestiæ in verbo nec in facto ei intulit, sed uti venerat, confestim per mediam domum rediens transibat. Nec enim aliquis ex convivantibus saltem mutire vel aliquid ei importune de eo stupefacti dicere audebant, et nihil præ manibus nisi cornua habentes et calices meri.


The Exploits of Hereward the Saxon.

XXX.

Hereward had not stayed there three days when he heard that an enemy of his would be in the aforesaid town1, a man who had often attempted to ruin him and deliver him to his enemies, although lately they had been faithless (?) ; whereupon to find out the certainty of what he had heard he set out with only two men, and when the man recognised Hereward on the road he immediately consulted his safety by flight. Hereward directly followed on his track, from house to house, from garden to garden, with his naked sword and a small shield in his hand, right into a great hall, where many men of his own district were assembled at a love-feast3. And when he had nowhere to turn, Hereward being ever close upon him, he fled into the inner part of the house, and there put his head through an aperture* 4 . . . and besought him to have mercy. Moved by generosity, as he was always most liberal in all his doings, he did not touch him there, nor did he inflict any damage in word or deed, but in the same way as he had come in he returned and passed out through the middle of the house. And no man of those that were feasting, all being stupefied, ventured even to grumble, or to say anything opprobrious to him about the occurrence, as they had nothing to hand except drinking-horns and wine-cups.


Commentary.

This chapter is a clear example of the disjointed style of the work as a whole, arising from Leofric the Deacon’s purpose of learning “of the deeds of the noble Hereward, of the race of the English, and his renowned men”, and of “his generous actions and doings”. Hugh was concerned with collecting “all the acts of giants and ancient warriors”. (See Chapter I, particularly note 3.)  He did not aim to produce a narrative history. Though, it is not possible to rule out the possibility that some of its fragmented and episodic nature arose from the lacunae formed by the fire damage of 1116. (See Chapter I, note 5.)

?        [The query is Sweeting’s insertion. He was clearly a little baffled by the obscurity of the Latin: ‘et inimicis tradere temptaverat, licet dudum illi ex fide fracta fuissent,’: The verb fuissent is missing a complement such as fallaces, dolosi or fraudulenti, meaning deceitful/false. This would give ‘who had often attempted to destroy him (Hereward) and betray him to his enemies, although recently they (the Normans) been deceitful in that they had broken their promise to him (Hereward’s betrayer)’. In other words, the man had given information about Hereward to a Norman and not received an expected reward for it.]

*          [Sweeting’s note] See the Latin.

The following notes owe much to FWP’s advice.

1.     Stamford (TF0307).

2.     This is a printer’s error; an inverted u rather than strictly, an n.

3.     Agape — love-feast: Sweeting’s translation may give a false impression. The Latin word used – agape, is one borrowed from the Greek. In that language, there are four words meaning ‘love’. They range from eros, from which the English ‘erotic’ is derived, to agape, ‘brotherly love’. When the New Testament was being translated from Greek into Latin, the word caritas was chosen to express the meaning of agape. In Medieval Latin, it is charitas. This comes through into English as ‘charity’, as in St. Paul’s ‘faith hope and charity’ (Bible: 1 Corinthians xiii 13), where ‘charity’ means active benevolence, kindness or well-wishing rather than the modern ‘gratuitous financial assistance’. In the New Testament, Christians are exhorted to exercise ‘agape’ towards one another and the word came to be used for the friendly communal meal, modelled on the Last Supper, which early Christians adopted, to express mutual support. In English, this is commonly called a ‘love-feast’ and Sweeting, the Anglican cleric has so translated agape here. Since everyone involved in transmitting the story, from Leofric, the Deacon to Sweeting, the Vicar was a churchman of some description, their minds may well have been attuned. This event in Hereward’s story saw a group of friends sharing a quiet meal, perhaps cementing their relationship as Christians, when Hereward and his quarry burst in.

4.     This is Sweeting, the Victorian vicar, applying the standards of decency of his day. He is being very delicate in not translating all the words ‘ubi in foramine sellæ super latrinam caput imposuit’: ‘where he put his head into the hole in the seat over the privy’. In other words, Hereward caught the informer in the act of investigating the possibility of hiding in the pit below the lavatory seat. Latrina is a Latin contraction of the word lavatrina which in turn, derives from lavare, to wash (OED). It is therefore much the same in derivation as well as meaning, as ‘lavatory’.

The absence of a chapter heading could be due to the same sense of decency, but without seeing Robert of Swaffham’s book, it is not possible to be sure whether the chapter ever had a summarizing heading. Bevis gives this chapter no title while the TEAMS-linked site heads it ‘How Hereward pursued an enemy and granted him mercy’, though there is no indication that this was not invented for the sake of uniformity.


Top of the text                        Top of the English text                      Contents         Chapter XXXI