Master Wace, His Chronicle of the Norman Conquest From the Roman De Rou

by Wace

In the orthography of the proper names, that of Wace has been strictly observed in the translator's text; his notes generally giving what is conceived to be the proper or more modern version of each. The necessity for this precaution is abundantly shown by the confusion and mistakes that have arisen from modernizing names, (of the true relation or derivation of which a translator is sometimes scantily informed,) without supplying at the same time the opportunity of correction, by a faithful quotation of the original. The translator here begs to express his fear lest he has in one respect violated his own rule, by the use he has made of FITZ as a prefix. It is right the reader should bear in mind, that throughout the original the term used is filz,—such as 'le filz Osber de Bretuil,' &c.; and it might have been better, by a literal translation, to have avoided the appearance of an anachronous use of the patronymic form afterwards so common.

The proper completion of the notes would consist in tracing the identity and possession of the fiefs, from the Red book roll of the exchequer down-wards, to the lists formed, after the general confiscation of the estates of king John's adherents, by Philip Augustus. The translator has only had access to the former, as to which a few words may be said. It is a beautiful transcript from a roll, a portion of which still exists, according to the report of Mr. Stapleton, in the Hotel Soubise at Paris. Ducarel has printed, though very incorrectly, a transcript from our exchequer record.[2] The roll itself was probably completed between the twentieth and thirtieth years of Hen. II.; but that part of it which relates to the fees of the cathedral church of Bayeux is an abstract of an inquest of an earlier date, namely, of about 1133, taken on the death of Richard Fitz-Samson the bishop, and lately printed in the 8th vol. of the Mémoires des antiquaires de Normandie.' This circumstance creates anachronisms in the roll, that are still more apparent in the one published—also incorrectly—in Duchesne's Scriptores, from a MS. now in the King's library at Paris. The roll of Hen. II. is only the basis of Duchesne's; which was obviously compiled after the confiscations of Philip Augustus; to whose era, and the then existing state of things, the entries are made to conform. Some who have not examined into the minutise of these records, have supposed that the list, with which they close, of men who neither appeared nor made any return, refers to those who adhered to John; instead of its being, as the fact is, a mere record of defaulters under Hen. II.

There are historical traces of attempts under that monarch, to form a sort of norman Domesday, for purposes, no doubt, of revenue. It would seem that this design was resisted, and perhaps was only imperfectly executed in the form we find the existing roll. Philip Augustus afterwards caused much more complete registers of the Fœda Normannorum to be formed. Transcripts of these are in the King's library, and at the Hotel Soubise, and partially in the Liber-niger of Coutances which M. de Gerville quotes. The 'Fœda Normannorum' in Duchesne seems part of a document of this later period.

While this volume was in progress, and after the notes had been prepared, the 7th and 8th vols, of the 'Mémoires des antiquaires de Normandie' reached the translator. They contain a calendar and analysis of a vast number of charters to religious houses within the department of Calvados, and furnish a perpetual recurrence of the names of the early owners of the principal fiefs in that district.

Another great addition has at the same time been made to the stock of materials for the illustration of Wace, in the publication at Rouen of the first vol. of the 'Chroniques Anglo-Normandes,' comprising such portions of Gaimar, of the Estotre de Seint Ædward le Rei, of the continuation of Wace's Brut d'Angleterre, and of Benoit de Sainte-More, as relate to the norman conquest. They had all been previously resorted to in MS. and more copious extracts would have been added, if they had not been made so accessible by the publication referred to. Its continuation will add other valuable historic documents relative to the period in question.

For the graphic illustrations of the volume recourse has been had to a few of the illuminations of the beautiful Cambridge MS. of the Estoire de Seint Ædward le Rei. Several other subjects, that appeared appropriate, have been added from various sources. But the principal storehouse of the illustrations has been that noble and exquisite relic of antiquity, the tapestry of the cathedral of Bayeux. To this series of pictures the chronicle of Wace, (a prebend of that church, as already observed,) would almost seem to have been intended as what, in modern times, would be called the letter press. The controversies long carried on, as to the age of this interesting piece of workmanship, and as to the identity of the Matilda to whom it may owe its origin, need not be reviewed here. The reader will find in Ducarel, in the observations of M.H.F. Delauney annexed to the French translation of Ducarel, in the Archæologia, in Mr. Dawson Turner's Letters, Dr. Dibdin's Tour, and other modern works, ingenious and ample discussions upon what is known or conjectured on the subject.

Speculations have been hazarded, with the view of testing the era of the tapestry by Wace's supposed want of agreement with the story of the former. It seems assumed that this variance would not have occurred, had the tapestry been in existence when he wrote. It is not clear, however, that there is any material variance; but if there be, it is surely somewhat hasty to assume on that account, either that Wace preceded, or that he was unacquainted with the worsted chronicle. He obviously sought his authorities in various quarters; and he might very well have known and rejected the testimony of the tapestry, on any matter of fact regarding which there were conflicting accounts. It is very curious that two such monuments of antiquity should be connected with the same church; but it is left to others to speculate whether this was accidental, or what influence, if any, the work of either party had on that of the other.

Lastly, a small map of Normandy has been added, for the illustration of Wace's work and of the accompanying notes. With the exception of the leading monastic establishments, (which were considered a convenient addition, though many of them were founded at a later period), little is shown upon the map beyond the towns and fiefs introduced by Wace; and these are laid down so far as the means of knowledge or probable conjecture presented themselves. In the execution of this little map, no pretension is made to strict geographical or even chronological accuracy; neither has uniformity been preserved in the language of the names; but such as it is, it will probably be found sufficiently full and precise to answer the general purpose for which it is designed.

[1] The list in the printed 'Chronique de Normandie,' though very inaccurately given, is based upon Wace's. It may be found much more correctly in the fine MS. Chronicle of Normandy, (which ought to be printed.) in the British Museum, Bibl. Reg. 15 E. vi. fol. ccccx.