p. 243, [note 1]. It is rather odd that exactly this same phrase of “callidus senex,” here applied to Robert of Meulan, should be also applied to the old Roger of Beaumont in the story told in vol. i. p. 194. We must remember that our present “callidus senex” had been married, seemingly for the first time, only two years before (see vol. i. p. 551), and that he lived till 1118.
[p. 250, l. 8]. This is doubtless true, but the specially strange guise, described in the passage of William of Malmesbury referred to in the note, was not put on till William of Aquitaine had come back from the crusade. See above, [p. 113].
p. 252, [note 2]. See above, [p. 178], and the correction just above, [p. 175.]
p. 260, [note 3]. See at the end of the chapter, [p. 302], and [note 1].
[p. 290, l. 2 from bottom]. Yet see the piece of Angevin scandal quoted in [p. 609].
[p. 312, l. 10], for “both Rogers, the Duke of Apulia and the young Count of Sicily, to be one day the first and all but the most famous of Sicilian kings,” read “both Rogers, the Duke of Apulia and the Count of Sicily, now drawing near to the end of his stirring life.” The elder Roger was still alive, though he did not live long after.
[p. 343, l. 1]. The abbey of Saint Alban’s was not vacant at this time, see [p. 666]; and for “thirteen” and “twelve” read “twelve” and “eleven,” see [note].
p. 347, [note 2]. Orderic is rather full on the circumstances of the election than on the election itself; see [p. 680].
[p. 359, l. 11], for “thirteen” read “eleven.”
p. 360, [note 1]. It must have been at the same time that Abbot Odo of Chertsey was restored to his abbey. See vol. i. p. 350.