Harold Godwinson in Normandy

What was Harold doing on the continent?

This inexplicable visit is not mentioned in any English sources (had they any knowledge of it?) as the ASC was totally and strangely silent for the year entry 1064.
As the Norman sources were written after the events of 1066, their interpretation of what may have happened are therefore suspect, probably twisted out of all proportion with propaganda designed to airbrush Harold from history.

Certainly Harold seemed to be on a personal mission- Edward didn't have the power to order him to stop (though in the Bayeux Tapestry a crestfallen Harold is afterwards seen lowering his head to Edward, as if to say "I told you so"?).
Harold set out to sea from his manor at Bosham and is seen in the Bayeux Tapestry boarding his ship with hunting birds etc, but was shipwrecked on the treachorous coast at Ponthieu in a storm, despite the expertise of the English seamen.

* Was Harold hoping to visit Baldwin of Flanders to help negotiate with William in order to secure the release of his brother(Wulfnoth) who was later moved to England on William's orders & kept in close custody and freed upon his death in 1087 only to be in chains during William II's reign? Maybe Wulfnoth died a free man at Winchester priory? Harold's nephew Hakon (Sweyn Godwinson's son)- was also held by the duke since Jumieges kidnapped them in 1052 and may also have been the purpose of Harold's voyage? But if so, why had Harold waited this long to free them?

* Was Harold intending to visit various European leaders (ie. The Norman 'puppet' Pope or The Holy Roman Emperor- as in the late 1050's)? Was Harold sailing to arrange a political marriage between one of his sisters- Elgiva?(d.1066, was she the mysterious Elgifu in the Bayeux Tapestry?) and a nobleman in Flanders/Ponthieu/France or other European nation, building an alliance against William?

Guy of Ponthieu (who captured Harold and his retainers on the shipwrecked coast) and Harold were previously acquainted- in 1056 on the continent in the presence of Baldwin V... and only the Normans say that Harold was in any danger!!!
Another noted Englishman- a certain Hereward (not ‘the Wake’ but exiled son of a king's thegn) similarly fell into the hands of one of Guy's neighbours (Manasses of Guines). When he established his identity, he was released and treated honourably.

Blown off-course in a storm & wrecked upon the coast notorious for this- Local Count Guy (William's former foe but now his vassal since the vicious battle of Mortemer in the 1050's) claimed all booty- as permitted from wrecks- from such "accidents" and so maybe Harold et al were victims of the false harbour lanterns that deliberately enticed ships to their doom?
Harold & his advisor/huscarl/servant retainers were fettered by Guy's men (the brutal types who would not normally even blink at torturing a hostage to exact higher ransoms) & led off to a gaol at Guy's castle at Beaurain.

But one escaped to find the ambitious & greedy William who, seeing a golden chance for personal gain(Ransom? Succession issue? Sizing up his rival?) he immediately raced to Guy and ordered his vassal to hand them all over- or maybe 'dire events' would ensue.
William had them taken to his Norman capital Rouen as his honoured "guests", where they met William's own family, watched tournaments and ate lavishly etc. It suited William to be shown as Harold's rescuer (obligation to him) and tie the powerful earl to him by even knighting him!
Harold was possibly even flattered by William's praise of his recent Welsh 'conquests' in order to win him over?
Maybe William browbeat him into more than one Brittany campaign with the Duke (wanting to witness his man's battle strengths & weaknesses for a later date?).

William used a rebellion in Brittany's east to advance to Dol, Rennes and to Dinan (to punish Count Conan II for recent raids into Normandy's Western frontier, where Conan submitted). Harold distinguished himself valiantly- once pulling two drowning Norman troops out of marshes.

William and Harold had both got the measure of their 'opposite' numbers (strengths, weaknesses, battle-prowess and character) and maybe only superficially exchanged pleasantries for a time they both by now must have inwardly known would soon drastically change?

Back at the scheming duke's main hall in Rouen(?), William then secretly had some holy relics hidden in a chest beneath a sheet...with an "oath" from Harold in mind...

1065: Revolt against Earl Tostig of Northumbria

October

A huge and efficiently-organised Northumbrian revolt arose directly against earl Tostig's rule, led by powerful thegns from Yorkshire, Mercia and Northumbria, but earl Tostig himself was in Wiltshire hunting with Harold...coincidence?

Had Harold covertly colluded with this concerted, huge rising of powerful thegns (who as a feuding earldom, had never before allied themselves together) as Tostig later accused Harold of, in 'revenge' for Tostig's suspected collusion in Gruffydd ab Llewelyn's attacks on Harold's own castle at Portskewet years before? 

Did Harold willingly sacrifice his brother for a secure northern alliance?

Tostig’s personal piety- and his Flemish wife Judith’s are beyond doubt. They had bestowed lavish gifts upon the church of St Cuthbert (also York, Beverley, Hexham and Ripon?).

Judith commissioned the Gospels of Countess Judith (now in Pierpont Morgan library in New York), written by English scribes and artists to record her generosity. This contained exquisite illuminations by the gifted artists that flourished in pre-1066 England.

Tostig had spent much of his early ten-year tenure establishing a close relationship with the thegns and churchmen of the northern earldom. He also made the wise decision of using a local man, Copsi, as his deputy. 

The Northern noble’s grievances against Tostig were;-

·        Tostig’s “enormous taxes which he had unjustly levied upon Northumbria”  These were much higher under him than traditionally in Wessex- not normal, as southern king’s wanted to sweeten the less agriculturally fertile and less financially wealthy North (for compliance) with lower taxes. Tostig had thus angered all of tax-paying Northumbria.

·        Due to Tostig’s retainer’s sacrilege, he had alienated himself from the community of St Cuthbert,

·        He had ruled too harshly and also skimmed off some profit from his treacherous dealings (“He oppressed the nobles with the heavy yoke of his rule because of their deeds…and was accused of punishing wrong-doers more from a wish to confiscate their property than for love of justice”) But then, ‘severe’ justice could simply mean efficient rule that stopped nobles guilty of the same crimes from benefiting?

·        The rebels demanded “a return to the laws of Canute”  which were now seen as a yardstick for good and just government.

In his later years, however, it seems he spent too much time attending to the affairs of King Edward, and left the running of Northumberland to his deputy Copsig ( lowly Yorkshire thegn) and secured by his Huscarl bodyguard. He had also, after the Welsh campaign, become drawn into local politics. 

The involvement in local Northumbrian noble blood feuds, which until then he had avoided, came to a head when he had two notable thegns, Gamal Ormson and Ulf Dolfinson, killed in his own chamber whilst they were under a safe conduct.

Tosti was also said to be behind the murder of Gospatric Uhtredson  (youngest son of the slain Uhtred) at the court of King Edward(Xmas 64) alledgedly with sister Queen Edith's connivance, or orders? 

Tosti had in his entourage another Gospatrick (Maldredson), a kinsman of King Edward and King Malcolm of Scots.

This Gospatric, who had acted valiantly during an attack on Tosti's party whilst returning from a visit to Rome in 1061/2, was the head of a rival family to that of his namesake.

Both were descendants of Ealdorman Waltheof of Northumberland (not the later Waltheof- the son of Earl Siward of Northumberland, though he was related). These killings were used as the main reason by the northern thegns when they rebelled. 

Tostig had also arrested a local brigand, Aldan-Hamel and imprisoned him at Durham, but he escaped and fled to the sanctuary of St Cuthbert’s church. Tostig’s retainers chased him and paused. Their leader, Barcwith, shouted out in anger  to break down the doors, and was about to do so when he was struck down by “an arrow from on high” He died in agony 3 days later.

What horrified the Northumbrians was the sacrilege- a grave crime and in English eyes the kind of thing that the Scottish raiders did.

But there was another underlying reason: money.

The northern shires had been subjected to a lower tax regime than those in the south. Tosti made the mistake of trying to redress this anomaly. The result was a revolt that involved 'all the thegns of Yorkshire' so the various versions of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle tell us.

The reason for Tosti increasing the tax yield may well have been his need to refurbish his coffers after the expense of the joint 1063 Welsh Campaign with Harold, against Welsh 'king' Gruffydd ab Llewelyn (the Earl kept 1/3 of the take, the king got the rest).

Tosti may well have felt that he would be able to weather any local opposition as in his 10 year rule he had considerably reduced lawlessness in the earldom, curbed the power of local landholders and through intrigue and craft, neutralised the Scots. He seriously miscalculated. 

The tax, and the fact that his men were using arbitrary justice to enforce collection led that autumn to the thegns of Yorkshire and many others from throughout Northumberland to seize and occupy York and they slayed all 200 of Tostig's huscarls-  including Amund and Ravenswort- (the latter held lands near the estates of the rebels).

Now, their following snowballed into a full rebel army, and the next day they won what appears to have been a pitched battle. Against whom?

Having sacked the treasury and taken back what they deemed their's by right, the northern thegns then declared Tosti outlaw and sent for Morcar, the young brother of Earl Edwin of Mercia, to be the new earl. Their choice of an outsider, with no Northumberland connection and little Norse blood, appears to have been dictated by a need to avoid splitting the rebels by picking from the local powerful families with their long running blood feuds.

It would also have been influenced by the fact that Tosti was a favourite of King Edward and his brothers ruled most of England. Proclaiming Morcar earl would ally them with the next most powerful family in the land. Declared deposed by this odd alliance.

King Edward was so enraged (Tostig apparently being his favourite) that he(and his Norman advisors) was all for war, but Harold himself wasn't- again not wanting a crippling civil war to leave England open to foreign invasion.

Other earls and nobles felt likewise- as in 1051/2, and the campaigning season was hit by worsening weather.

Morcar led the massive rebel army south, killing, enslaving, plundering, terrorising, sacking &  raping through Lincoln and Derby. 

Joined by Mercian Earl Edwin (Morcar's brother), they were rebuffed for support by the townspeople at Nottingham, so Morcar allowed his men to run amok with vile atrocities (Maybe present were some of Gruffydd's disaffected warlike Welshmen still burning to avenge 1063? or local Northumbrian/Welsh mercenaries?).

They raided the local countryside for cattle & food, killing or enslaving all who would not support them- according to many sources the ravaging continued even after Tostig's deposition was endorsed.

Harold led a Royal army north to speak on the king's behalf- met them several times for discussions, often wild and heated- Tostig accusing Harold of complicity (though he swore an oath denying such charges at Northampton when reporting on negotiations) .

The rebels now moved to Oxford.

But finally, maybe to conceal his own possible complicity in ousting his brother,ceded to rebel demands(Tostig was overthrown and laws of Cnut's taxes revived) at Oxford on Oct 28th. 

Edward had meanwhile summoned the Witan in London to discuss the crisis, again hoping(as in the crisis of 1051-2) that support for the rebels would dissolve if he dragged his feet. 

It didn't, and Edward was so apoplectic that he had a series of strokes and was taken ill to his bed.

A few days later, a frustrated and embittered former earl, Tostig, his wife Judith and their children and retainers crossed the Channel for the winter under the protection of Judith’s brother Count Baldwin V of Flanders..

Earl Harold's "oath" of 1064

No witnesses were ever named for this 'oath'- was it a public oath- and in the open air? (as in the Bayeux Tapestry)?

English custom was that they were always sworn on a gospel book, (Normans say Harold swore manibus junctis- feudal fashion) so was it 'under duress' or procured by deceit, which would render it worthless anyway, certainly outside of Normandy?

William of Jumieges never went as far as stating that Harold had sworn what later they said he did.

Normans had a voracious reputation for chicanery and inventing outrageous claims- Dudo of St.Quentin- historian of the early dukes- had the gaul to state that William Longsword and Richard the Fearless reigned over "half the world".

Was William's daughter -Adeliza- 'promised' betrothal to Harold? A way of binding him to the duke, whatever, this fell through (did Harold refuse?) or was one of Harold's sisters proposed to a Norman noble?

The Normans state that Harold coveted the crown himself – even if true, why would Harold willingly and freely swear this oath, thereby ruling HIMSELF out of the succession as the most qualified candidate?

But instead a storm blew his embassy off-course and unluckily into William hands (eventually) and, knowing all too well his gaoler's track record of assassinations, grim gaols that meant a death sentence and penchant for brutality- especially poisonings,(a nephew of King Edward, earl Ralf's younger brother, Walter, Count of Mantes, and his wife, died prisoners this year in William gaols- poisoning rumours. But the two nobles were never seriously considered by Edward as successors)

And William powers were such that he could simply 'take over' a noble's castle when he wanted, and take hostages from them- usually sons, brothers or nephews.

William’s father Robert ‘the Devil’ had been suspected of poisoning his own brother Richard, after all?

Harold went along with the deed whilst as a Norman "guest" for his own 'safety' and that also of the hostages Wulfnoth & Hakon etc, knowing how worthless the "sworn oath" meant in English eyes and how he could easily shrug it off when back home?

Only the King & Witan could decide the succession- not some half-baked Norman oath- esp under duress, thus invalid in English eyes!

Maybe also Harold, having seen his Norman rivals in action in Brittany, decided how strong they were and realised that the 'true heir' Edgar Aetheling(a boy of 14 -whose father had died in 1057[murdered?]he had backed for the throne only recently?) was too weak & inexperienced to resist such formidable and organised foes, so he must seize the throne himself? (Until Edgar reached maturity, or forever?)

All major powers near Normandy had either been coaxed into an alliance or crushed -

• Count Eustace of Bologne (who had supported William's own rebel uncle, William of Arques) was now an ally to the east, and also near him the buccaneering warrior Count of Amiens & Valois had ended his alliance with French Kings, becoming William's friend.
• Anjou was still ripped apart by civil war and so unable to pose danger.
• Count Guy of Ponthieu was now a vassal.

Harold returned to England with Hakon, but without his brother, Wulfnoth. Shortly after that King Edward had a prophetic dream of the tree of England being 'split asunder, not to be rejoined' (retrospective post-1066 Normanism?)