Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 16.djvu/317

 matters connected with the church. Eadmer shows a strong national feeling, and asserts the rights and privileges of the English church. The ‘Life of St. Anselm’ was first printed at Antwerp in 1551. It was reprinted with the chief editions of Anselm's works, and has been edited, together with the ‘Historia Novorum,’ in the Rolls Series (1884), by Mr. Martin Rule. Eadmer composed many other biographical and ecclesiastical pieces, the manuscripts of which are in the collection of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. Of these the following have been printed by Henry Wharton in the second part of the ‘Anglia Sacra:’ 1. A ‘Life of St. Dunstan,’ written, according to Mr. Wright (Biog. Lit.), at the beginning of the twelfth century. This had been previously printed by Surius in an imperfect form. It has appended to it, in Wharton, some very curious correspondence as to the body of St. Dunstan. 2. A ‘Life of St. Bregwin, Archbishop of Canterbury 759–63.’ This was written after the death of Archbishop Ralph, which took place in 1122. 3. A ‘Life of St. Oswald, Archbishop of York.’ This, says Mr. Wright, ‘appears to be little more than an abridgment of a life written by a monk of Ramsey in the time of Archbishop Ælfric, and preserved in Cotton MS. Nero E.’ There is also a ‘Life of Wilfrid’ by Eadmer, printed by Mabillon in the ‘Act. Ord. Bened.’ This he professes to have compiled partly from Bede and partly from a ‘Life of Wilfrid’ by Odo, archbishop of Canterbury, which is perhaps the same as the metrical life by Fridegode. Lists of other minor works of Eadmer will be found in Wharton and in Bale. In 1120 this monk, who had become widely known both by his writings and also by his close companionship, first with Archbishop Anselm, and then with Archbishop Ralph, was selected by Alexander, king of Scotland, for the archbishopric of St. Andrews, which had been for some time vacant (cf. Historia Novorum, books v. and vi.) Alexander sent a deputation to Archbishop Ralph to ask for his monk Eadmer, who had been highly recommended to him for the primatial see. Upon this the archbishop wrote to King Henry, who was at Rouen, and obtained his consent. He then despatched Eadmer into Scotland, but with strict orders not to agree to anything as to his consecration which should compromise the dignity of the see of Canterbury. This was the time of the most bitter rivalry between the northern and southern primates. Eadmer was duly elected by the chapter of St. Andrews, but a difficulty at once arose as to his consecration. The Scotch king would not agree to either of the English primates consecrating. Eadmer maintained that the jurisdiction of Canterbury extended over the whole island, and that he must be consecrated by Archbishop Ralph. This utterly untenable claim Alexander would not allow, and after a time Eadmer returned to Canterbury without any arrangement as to his consecration. After remaining a year and a half in the monastery without a settlement being arrived at, Eadmer sent a letter to the king of Scotland resigning all claims to the see. Gervase, a monkish historian of Canterbury of a little later date, often quotes Eadmer, and describes him as the cantor or precentor of the church. He has sometimes been confused with Elmer, who was prior of the Christ Church monastery about the same time. Pits, in the strangely inaccurate account which he gives of him, makes him a Cluniac monk and abbot of St. Albans. The death of Eadmer is usually assigned to 1124.

[Eadmeri Monachi Cantuarensis Historia Novorum, ed. Selden, London, 1623; Anglia Sacra, pt. ii., London, 1691; Wilhelmi Malmesburiensis De Gestis Pontiff. Angl., London, 1870; Bale, De Scriptt. Britann., Basel, 1557; Collier's Eccl. Hist. vol. ii., London, 1845; Wright's Biographia Literaria, Anglo-Saxon Period, London, 1862.] 

EADNOTH (d. 1067), staller, or master of the horse, under Eadward the Confessor (, Codex Dipl. 845), Harold ( ii. 3), and William the Conqueror (A.-S. Chron., sub ann. 1067), appears to have held large estates, especially in the west country, and in one case to have taken advantage of Harold's favour to gain land at the expense of the church, and in another probably of the favour of the Conqueror to do so at the expense of a private landowner (Norman Conquest, ii. 548, iv. 758). When Harold's sons invaded England in 1067 with a Danish fleet from Ireland, and, after having been beaten off from Bristol by the burghers, ravaged the coast of Somerset, Eadnoth met them with a local force and fought a battle with them, in which, according to Florence of Worcester, the invaders gained the victory, while William of Malmesbury says that they were defeated, and it may be inferred from the ‘Chronicle’ that the issue was doubtful. Eadnoth was slain, and ‘many good men on both sides’ (A.-S. Chron.) Eadnoth left a son named Harding who was alive when William of Malmesbury wrote. There is no reason to doubt that he was the father of Robert FitzHarding, the founder of the second and present house of the lords of Berkeley [see, family of]. 