BoAr:
FNQ: Hereward XXXII
http://boar.org.uk/ariwxo3FNQsupXXXII.htm Latest
edit 30 Nov 2007
Web page © 2007 R.J.PENHEY With thanks to Lincolnshire
Library Service.
The Bourne Archive
FNQ
This
thread begins with the title
page
De Gestis Herwardi Saxonis.
XXXII.
Quomodo quemdam præclarissimum militem solitarie
pugnantes devicit.
Ubi bene iter ageret apud Brunneswald, quendam
Saxonicum militem obvium habuit, virum magnæ fortitudinis et statura eminentem,
nomine Letoltus. Hic ergo ex militia et fortitudine satis in multis regionibus
notus erat et valde laudatus. Quem statim Herwardus ut erat liberalissimus,
prius salutando quis ipse fuerit interrogavit et dignitatem et cognationem.
Cujus verbis et interrogationibus in bono non suscipiens superbe respondit,
fatuum eum et rusticum vocans. Unde in ira commoti armis in fine aggressi sunt.
Et non solum ipse sed et milites eorum simul coierunt, ex parte memorati
militis quinque et ex parte Herwardi tres, silicet Geri, Wenochus, et Matelgar.
Quibus dimicantibus Geri miles suum repente prostravit consortem alium
aggrediens. Alii equidem duo milites ejusdem adversantes simul postea cito
superaverunt. Inter hæc autem ille memoratus præclarissimus eques contra
Herwardum superpræliare licet suis superatis non cessavit. Attamen a nullo
suorum Herwardus adjuvari sibi permisit, indignum dicens tunc, sicut et semper,
aliquem suorum com alio vel cum ipso duos præliare contra unum, sed solitarie
pugnare aut succumbere. Et illis duobus diu post dimicantibus inter dubiam fortunam
duelli illorum duorum, ut non sui superabant, Herwardi gladium ex capula
disrupit, unde hæsitans qua attonitus stabat alius semper, interim super galeam
cedens. Cui statim quidam miles ipsius Geri, quia adversus socium sermonem hunc
intulit, cur ea quæ latus juxta habuit in tam gravi necessitate oblitus fuerit,
additque se velle locum sibi cedere contra illum, unde valde confortatus ensem
alium quem oblitusfuerat a vagina excipiens, socium acrius aggressus est et in
primo ictu dum in caput conferri æstimaretur, tibiam3 illius in medio percussit, tamen
super genua sese ille miles interdum diu protexit et nullo modo dum in eo vita
fuerit se velle reddere nec victum videri asseruit. Quod videns Herwardus
admirando virtutem illius et fortitudinem laudavit, ac illum ulterius debellare
desiit ab eo discedens et in viam suam secedens. Addiditque de
illo ad suos Numquam talem virum inveni, nec fortitudine parem ullum
unquam pertuli, nec in tanto periculo contra aliquem pugnavi, nec tam gravi
labore neminem vici.
The Exploits of Hereward the Saxon.
XXXII
How Hereward overcame a certain very eminent knight in
single combat.
When Hereward was quietly walking at Brunneswold1 he met a certain Saxon2
soldier, a man of great courage and very tall, by name Letoltus. He from military
skill and courage was well known in many regions and much praised. Hereward,
most courteous as he always was, first saluted him and asked him his name,
dignity and family. Not taking his words and questions in good part, Leoltus
answered haughtily, calling him a simpleton and a boor. So in the end in anger
they came to blows. And not only these two, but their soldiers also at the same
time engaged, on the part of the warrior aforesaid five, and on the part of
Hereward three, namely Geri, Wenochus and Matelgar. And as they fought Geri
soon laid low his opponent, and attacked another of his mates. The other two
soldiers also soon afterwards overcame their adversaries. But meanwhile the
eminent knight before mentioned did not cease fighting with Hereward, though
his men were overcome. But Hereward did not allow any to help to be given him
by any of his men, saying then as always, when any man was fighting with one of
his men or with himself, that it was an unworthy thing for two to fight against
one, and that a man ought to fight with one man only, or else surrender. And as
those two were long fighting, the result of the combat being still in doubt,
contrary to all expectation, Hereward’s sword broke off at the hilt, and after
turning round where the other was standing in astonishment, at last fell down
over his helmet.* Immediately one of Hereward’s
soldiers, Geri, because he addressed the above saying to one of his fellows,
asked him why he had forgotten what he had close by his side at such an
emergency, and added that he wished he would yield to him the post against the
foe ; at which, much comforted, Hereward drew from its sheath another sword
which he had forgotten, and attacked the fellow more sharply, and at the very
first blow, while he was supposed to be attacked on the head, he pierced the
middle of his thigh bone3 ; and yet the
warrior for some time defended himself on his knees, and declared that as long
as life was in him he would never be willing to surrender or seem conquered,
Seeing which Hereward in admiration praised his valour and courage, and ceased
attacking him, leaving him and going on his road. And he further said about him
to his men, “I have never found such a man, nor did I ever meet with his equal
in courage, nor have I ever been in such peril when fighting against any man,
nor have I ever had so much trouble in conquering a man”.
Commentary.
* [Sweeting’s note] This may be the meaning. The original is perfectly
hopeless.
1. Bromswold, the forest between the
rivers Ouse and Nene in Northamptonshire. See Chapter XIX.
2. Although Sweeting’s title for his
publication of the text calls Hereward a Saxon, the text itself does not do so
and this opponent is the only person
given that description. The modern mind tends to associate the word ‘Anglian’
with the narrow concept of ‘East
Anglia’ but it is the adjective describing the cultural group, the Angles who settled in all of eastern
Britain from Edinburgh to Ipswich and spread inland to Gloucestershire and Cheshire. The text associates
Hereward with the people of the Angles (he was Anglorum gentis
- of the nation or tribe of the Angles). Though this is often translated as
‘English people’, it was only as a result of the Scandinavian raids and
settlements that the Angles and the Saxons began to grow towards being one
people. It looks as though by the 1070s, that process was still incomplete and
that despite his descent on his mother’s side, from Danish parentage, and his
father’s advancement by close association with the Danish king, Canute, Hereward was
associated in the mind of the writer, with the Anglian culture of eastern and
central England rather than that of the Saxons of the south, which remained
somewhat distinct. This view is supported by consideration of the huge rivalry
between his father,
from the Anglian midlands and
Godwin’s
family, from the Saxon south.
It was the external king, Canute whose even-handed policy with regard to the
Angles and Saxons led to the advancement of both the Anglian Leofric, who
married into the Danish culture and the Saxon Godwin who similarly married into
the Danish culture. Harold and Tostig Godwinson and Hereward Leofricson each
had a mother of Danish extraction.
3. The translation indicates that though on
this occasion, the weapon is a sword rather than a lance, again, the successful
attack was made at the thigh of the opponent. It seems that the Hauberk he will have been
wearing left the man vulnerable, presumably because of the vents necessary for
leg movement and for mounting a horse. However, inspection of the Latin text
shows that it was the lower leg which was first hit – he struck him against the middle of
his shin (tibiam illius in medio percussit). Nevertheless, sometimes on the knees, that soldier defended himself for a long time (tamen super genua sese ille miles interdum diu protexit). There is no mention of a blow on the
thigh. This is one of a few examples of error in Sweeting’s translation. He has
taken the modern medical use of the word tibia,
meaning ‘shin bone’ so introducing the word ‘bone’ into his translation. At the
same time, he has mistaken the tibia
for the femur, the modern ‘thigh
bone’ or Latin ‘thigh’.
As I know from presenting these pages, it is hard to get
everything right. Sweeting was acting as a journalist with a paper to publish
and a day job as vicar of Maxey to attend to. Nonetheless, it is clear that
others have relied on his translation, (for example, compare the present
passage in Bevis). It was
to enable the clarification of such questionable translation, some examples of
which may for all I know, be more significant than this one, that I have
presented Miller’s transcription of the Latin text. Any effort of mine in this
direction would make much use of dictionary and grammar book and be very slow. RJP