[1032] Ib. A. “Fama sapientiæ hujus didascoli per totam Latinitatem divulgata est, et nectare bonæ opinionis ejus occidentalis Ecclesia nobiliter debriata est.”

[1033] See Appendix Y.

[1034] See Appendix Y.

[1035] See Appendix Y.

[1036] See N. C. vol. iv. p. 366.

[1037] There is something amusing in the picture of the two in the Life of Gundulf, Anglia Sacra, ii. 275. “Anselmus, quia in scripturis eruditior erat, frequentior loquebatur. Gundulfus vero, quia in lacrimis profusior erat, magis fletibus rigabatur. Loquebatur ille; plorabat iste. Ille plantabat; iste rigabat. Divina ille proferebat eloquia; profunda iste trahebat suspiria. Christi vices ille, iste gerebat Mariæ.” There are not a few letters of Anselm addressed to Gundulf. See Appendix Y.

[1038] Among these was one of the men named Osbern—​there would seem to be more than one—​who play a part in the life of Anselm. There is the Osbern mentioned in the Life, i. 2. 13, 14, as first the bitter enemy and then the chosen friend of Anselm. He seems to live and die at Bec, and after his death he appears to Anselm and tells him how the old serpent thrice rose up against him, but the Lord’s bearward, “ursarius Domini Dei” (comp. N. C. vol. ii. p. 26), saves him. Then there is the Osbern mentioned in the Letters, i. 57, 58. This last Osbern is demanded by Lanfranc for his monastery at Canterbury (“domnus Osbernus quem ad se reduci auctoritas vestra jubet”), and he is sent to Prior Henry at Christ Church with a letter of recommendation from Anselm. In this are the words, “domnus Osbernus vester, qui ad vos redit, pristinæ vitæ perversitatam sponte accusat et execratur.” This and a good deal more would exactly suit the Osbern of the Life, yet it is hardly possible that they can be the same. But this second Osbern may be the same as the one who writes the most remarkable letter to Anselm (iii. 2), on which see Appendix Y. Osbern, Osbiorn, is one of those names which are both English—​or at least Danish—​and Norman. That the second Osbern at least was English seems clear from Epp. i. 60, 65, where we hear of “domnus Hulwardus [Wulfward] Anglus, consobrinus domni Osberni.” Did Lanfranc claim all English monks anywhere?

[1039] Domesday, 69 b. “Totum manerium valet xii. libras; valebat xv. libras vivente Mathilde regina, quæ dedit eidem ecclesiæ.” There were six hides and a half in demesne, and one hide held by the church of the place.

[1040] Domesday, 159 b. “Valuit xl. solidos; modo lx. solidos. Hæc terra nunquam geldum reddidit.” This exceptional privilege, designed or casual, might become a ground of disputes.

[1041] Domesday, 34 b. “Sancta Maria de Bech tenet de dono Ricardi Totinges…. T. R. E. et modo val. c. solidos; cum recepit xx. solidos.” On these possessions of Bec in England during the reign of the Conqueror, see N. C. vol. iv. p. 440.