Page:Englishhistorica36londuoft.djvu/620

 612 SHORT NOTICES October sharply enough between the Robert of legend and the Robert of history, and she made little use of the charters. This latter defect is excusable enough ; she had not even the invaluable Calendar of Dr. Round at her disposal, for this was only published in 1899. Mr. David is more fortunately situated, and he has made excellent use of the Norman and English charters to supplement and to control the chroniclers. His book is of course intimately connected with the researches of Dr. Haskins, and has been prepared with the assistance of that scholar. But Mr. David has wisely confined himself to the work of a biographer, without digressing into the field of institutional research. By this specialization he has secured space and leisure for the careful discussion of chronological points, and it is perhaps in chronology that he has rendered his chief service to his subject. The career of Robert crosses that of more important personages at so many points that the dating of his movements sometimes throws light on questions of more general interest. A case in point is that of Robert's relations with his father. He went into exile twice in the latter half of the Conqueror's reign, and with the help of the charters Mr. David is able to fix the dates. The first exile began after 13 September 1077, and ended shortly before Easter 1080, that is to say about a year after the siege of Gerberoy (pp. 19-29). The second exile began in or shortly after 1083 and was continued till September 1087. In this connexion Mr. David challenges the date of 1084 which, in common with Dr. Round, I have assigned to a charter of confirmation in favour of Lessay, granted by King William and attested by Odo of Bayeux and Henry filius regis. Mr. David objects that Odo of Bayeux could not have attested a charter of William I in 1084, and suggests that the grant was made by William II in 1091. I cannot agree that Odo's presence at court in 1084 was im- possible ; but I am more impressed by the fact, on which Mr. David rightly insists, that there is no other evidence of Robert being with his father after 1083 (pp. 30, 35-6). In an appendix Mr. David gives a useful list of Robert's companions on crusade (pp. 221-9), which, however, would be still more useful if it included those who like Hugh Bunel (p. 112) attached themselves to Robert in the course of his campaign. I cannot help feeling that Mr. David is somewhat arbitrary in his criticism of Orderic's well-known account of the capture of Laodicea by English pilgrims, among whom he gives the chief place to Edgar Atheling. William of Malmesbury seems to know nothing about Edgar's peregrination, except that he had a companion Robert, son of Godwin, who fell at Ramleh in 1102 ; while Orderic is particularly well informed about events at Laodicea in 1098 and 1099. The adventures of the English crusaders at Laodicea are related in the most confused way by the authorities ; but there seems to be no real difficulty, chronological or otherwise, in accepting the state- ment that Edgar was with them and that he induced his companions to hand over the city to Duke Robert. H. W. C. D. Mr. R. Withington has now completed his English Pageantry : An Historical Outline (Cambridge, Massachusetts : Harvard University Press. 1920) by a second volume, in which he deals with the Lord Mayor's Show from the earliest times to 1919 ; Survivals and Revivals, under