Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 8.djvu/303

Rh THE DANISH KINGS.] ENGLAND 289 the partition. He had in some sort begun it in his life time. His sons had been sent to reign as under-kiugs in Denmark and Norway. As his successor in England he named Harthacnut, his son by Emma, who at his death was under-king in Denmark. But the succession to the English crown was disputed. Godwine and the West- Saxons asserted the claims of Harthacnut, according to his father s will. Mercia and Northumberland declared fur Cnut s doubtful or illegitimate son Harold. A civil war might have been looked for ; but a decree of the AVitan divided the kingdom between the two candidates. Hartha cnut, now king of the West-Saxons, tarried in Denmark, and left his English kingdom to the care of Emma and Godwine. Now, and not under Cuut, the West-Saxon realm seemed to be dealt with as a province of Denmark. The ofi ended subjects of Harthacnut voted the deposition of their non resident king, and the crown of the whole realm passed to Harold. Since that day England has been an united kingdom. Its crown has often been disputed and struggled for in arms ; but every claimant has been a claimant of the whole kingdom. The division of England between two kings has never been seriously proposed since the deposition of Harthacnut. The very thought of such a thing had altogether passed out of men s minds before the end of the century with which we are now dealing. Vgnsof The divided reign of Harold and Harthacnut was (uts marked by an event which is told in as many and as con tradictory shapes as any event in our early history. But it is certain that Alfred, the elder of the two ^Ethelings who were living in banishment in Normandy, came over to England to make an attempt on the crown. The case is an exact parallel to the coming of the two Stewart pre tenders seven hundred years later. As ^E If red landed on the south coast, his immediate design must have been on the kingdom of Harthacnut ; but he came, in some way or other, into the power of Harold. His Norman companions were put to cruel deaths ; the yEtheling himself was blinded, and died soon after. Such dealings are quite contrary to either the English or the Norman practice of the age. It shows that the son of Cnut, unlike his father, retained the full spirit of a Scandinavian pirate. That Earl Godwine had a share in the crime was rumoured in his own day ; but, as the tale is commonly told, it is absolutely impossible. If his guilt was asserted by some, it was carefully denied by others ; he was tried on the charge, and was solemnly acquitted; and, in the state of our evidence on the subject, be is entitled to the benefit of that acquittal. The reign of Harold was short. On his death in 1040, Harthacnut was chosen to the whole kingdom. A son of Emma, therefore a half brother of the surviving ^Etheling Ead- ward, he sent for that prince to his court. But Hartha cnut proved as worthless and brutal as Harold, and his reign, like Harold s, was short. On his death in 1042, the English nation were thoroughly tired of Danish rule. The memory of Cnut could not outweigh the infamy of his two sons. There was still a Danish party, whose candi date was Swegen, the nephew of Cnut through his sister Estrith, a prince who afterwards ruled Denmark with consummate prudence. But the English people had made up their minds to go back to the old kingly stock of the West-Saxons. In two distinct elections the nation chose the yEtheling Eadward, an unwilling candidate, recom mended by his birth. But at such a moment English and kingly birth outweighed every other consideration. &quot; It should be also remarked that Eadward, like so many other kings, was chosen over the head of a nephew, who, according to modern ideas, was the direct heir. This was another Eadward, the son of his elder brother Eadmund Ironside. But he was far away in Hungary and none thought of him. The election of Eadward was in some sort the beginning of the Norman Conquest. The English nation had chosen Eadward, who seemed an Englishman, rather than Swegen, who seemed a foreigner. But Eadward was in truth far more of a foreigner than Swegen. Born in England, but taken to Normandy in his childhood, he was in speech and feeling far more Norman than English. His monastic virtues won him the reputation of a saint and the title of Confessor, but no man could have been less fitted to wear the crown of England in such an age. His reign falls into two parts. Elected mainly by the influence of Godwine, Eadward married his benefactor s daughter, and raised his sons to earldoms. But the greatness of the West-Saxon earls was looked on with more or less jealousy by central and northern England, or at least by the earls who ruled over them. According to the division of Cnut, Northumberland was ruled by the Danish Siward, Mercia by Leofric, seemingly a descendant of the ancient kings of Mercia. Leofric himself was, as a party leader, eminently moderate and conciliatory ; but the rivalry between his house and the house of Godwine formed a marked feature in the reign. Meanwhile the king himself filled every place that he could with Norman favourites, who plotted against English men of every district and party. Above all, the king was under the influence of the Norman Robert, a monk of Jumicges, whom he raised successively to the bishopric of London and the archbishopric of Canterbury. The influence of strangers was now at its height ; so was their insolence. Against the king s foreign favourites no justice could be had. Godwine and his sons took up arms in the cause of the nation (1051). He was induced to abide by the decision of a national assembly, by which he and his sons were banished. The power of the strangers now seemed secure. William, duke of the Normans, a kinsman of Eadward through his mother, visited Eadward ; and it was most likely now that Eadward made to him that promise of the succession to the crown on which William afterwards founded his claim to succeed him. It seemed as if the Norman conquest of England had been already brought about without slash or blow. The king was Norman in feeling; he was surrounded by Norman courtiers ; Normans and other men of French speech held high offices and great estates. The peaceful succession of the Norman duke to the English crown seemed far from unlikely. But all this was only on the surface. It is needless to show that a king of the English had no right to bequeath his crown. The utmost that he could do was to recommend a candidate to the Witan, and their choice was, under all ordinary cir cumstances, confined to the royal house. William. himself might doubtless see through all this ; but his kindred to Eadward, j;he bequest of Eadward in his favour, worthless as either was in point of English law, were advantages which he well knew how to turn to his own purposes. A peaceful conquest of this kind, had such a thing been possible, would have been an unmixed evil. When the actual Norman Conquest came, its final results were on the whole for good. But that was because the violent overthrow of our national freedom did in effect breathe a new life into the nation. It called forth the spirit of Englishmen, and step by step we won back more than we had lost. But had the Normanizing schemes of the Confessor been carried out, the ancient freedom would have been under mined rather than overthrown ; there would have been less to call forth the full strength of antagonistic feelings, and England might, without knowing it, have sunk to the level of continental states. It is therefore not only in the patriotic view of the moment, but in the longest-sighted view of general history, that we set down the roturn of Godwine and his sons in the year after their banish- VIII. -37 Eadward the Con fessor. Banish ment of Godwine. Schemes of Wil liam of Nor mandy.&quot;