Further remarks on the revolutionary effects of the conquest throughout the whole kingdom as well as at Lynn—Catalogue of bishops who formerly bore rule in this Town.
The mighty change effected in this country by the conquest must have been felt at Lynn in common with all other places of a similar description. The great and opulent were doubtless the people who felt it most. [342] As to the middle classes, (if such there were that might properly be so denominated,) it must have affected them much less, and the lower orders very little, or perhaps, not at all. The latter were all slaves before, and most unfeelingly treated by their masters and proprietors; and they could but be slaves still; nor is it likely that they met with worse treatment from their new masters. What might not be hoped from the virtue or justice of the Normans, might yet be expected from their policy; for in that quality they seem not to have been deficient; and it may be reasonably supposed that it would induce them to use the numerous slaves they found here no worse than they had been used by their former proprietors. Thus a great part of the nation, and perhaps the greatest part of it, might not be so very materially affected, or injured, by the Norman conquest, as some would be apt to imagine—if indeed it did not prove, on the whole, a benefit rather than detriment to them. [343]
We must not however imagine or suppose that this revolution bore any resemblance to that which took place in this country above six hundred years afterwards, and which has been justly the fond and proud boast of our countrymen ever since. They were scarcely in any thing alike, except in the names of their respective authors. But William of Normandy must not be compared with William of Nassau; for they were two men of very different and opposite characters: the former came over to subdue and enslave the nation, the latter came as the champion and guardian of its rights and its freedom—one came to rob and destroy, the other to succour and to save—one merited the detestation and execration, the other the esteem, the gratitude, and the benediction of mankind.
Of all the English grandees, who were ruined by the conquest, none were more completely undone than the three great proprietors and lords of Lynn. One of them as has been already observed, was king Harold: of his downfall we need say no more. The other two were archbishop Stigand, and his brother, bishop Ailmar. The former seems to have been the elder brother and head of the family, and was probably of noble birth, and of Danish extraction, as the bulk of his vast possessions lay in East Anglia. Carte says, that it appears from the Domesday book, that he had the best estate of any man in England, except Harold and Edwin: there can be little doubt therefore of his being the head of one of the first families in the kingdom. He was lord of Rising, and of the Hundreds of Freebridge and Smithdon, and also, of divers other extensive districts. He is represented as a man of no great learning, but of eminent natural parts, improved by reflection, exercise, and experience, and directed by a clear head and solid judgment. He had the reputation of being endowed with uncommon capacity for business; and we also hear that he was a person of very great weight and power in the country, of which no doubt can be entertained when his immense wealth is considered, and the vast influence, arising from both his temporal and spiritual dignities. That such a man should be marked out as one of the victims of the Norman revolution, was naturally to be expected: his being an Englishman, and so very opulent and powerful, were sufficient temptations to sacrifice him. But he seems to have conducted himself so warily at that critical juncture, that the Conqueror for sometime appeared at a loss how to proceed against him. At last some frivolous or pretended ecclesiastical misdemeanor was found out, for which he was deprived of his spiritual dignity, under the sanction of the papal authority, by two popish legates, at a council held at Winchester in 1070. This appeared a hard and severe measure: but William, as a politic prince, laid the whole blame or responsibility of it on the then Pontiff, Alexander II. Yet he immediately seized on Stigand’s vast estates in East Anglia and elsewhere, and confined him in prison on a very scanty allowance, where it is said he died, of want, in the course of the same year, and so did not long survive his disgrace, or rather his downfal. His great possessions, in and about Lynn, the Conqueror bestowed on his half brother Odo, bishop of Bayeux, in Normandy, whom he created Earl of Kent, and, who then became one of the new masters and lords of Lynn. [346a]
Stigand’s brother, bishop Ailmar, who had still greater power in this town, is supposed to have been deprived, at the same time, and by the same council. It is likely that he too was then immured in a prison, and never released from it to his dying day. Such has often been the fate of men who had attained the highest honours and preferments among their countrymen.—Ailmar was succeeded in the see of Elmham, and in his jurisdiction and possessions at Gaywood and Lynn, by Herfast, one of the conqueror’s chaplains, as Rapin says.—Here it may not be improper, or unacceptable to the reader, to subjoin a List of the names of all the bishops that preceded and succeeded Ailmar, as masters and lords of Lynn, from Felix the Burgundian, first bishop of the East Angles, to Richard Nykke, or Nix, 31st. bishop of Norwich, [346b] who surrendered into the hands of Henry VIII. his authority or dominion over this town, when the name of it was changed from Bishop’s Lynn to King’s Lynn, which it has retained ever since.—Those bishops were,
1. Felix the Burgundian. He was the apostle of the East Angles, among whom his ministry was attended with eminent success, and issued in the conversion of the whole nation: schools were consequently instituted, and numerous places of worship erected throughout the whole country. He was consecrated their bishop in 630, and fixed his seat first, it seems, at Soham in Cambridgeshire, and then at Silthestow, afterwards called Domnoc, and since Dunwich, in Suffolk. He has been represented as very learned and pious. The fame of his uncommon sanctity was so great, that after his death, which happened in 647, he was canonized as a saint, and his festival stands on the 8th of March, in the Romish calendar. (See more of him above at p. [242].)—His immediate successor was Thomas, who had been trained up under the famous Paulinus archbishop of York, to whom he had been appointed deacon. On the expulsion of that metropolitan from his see, Thomas served the same office under Felix, till his death. After presiding five years he died, in 653, and was succeeded by Boniface, who also sometimes goes by other names. He was a native of Kent, a priest of Canterbury, whose archbishop consecrated him, in 653; and dying in 669, he was succeeded by Bisus, or Bosa, who was consecrated by Theodore, archbishop of Canterbury. In his time the diocese was divided into two sees, one of which remained at Dunwich, and the other was fixed at North Elmham, in Norfolk, among whose possessions the demesne or lordship of Lynn and Gaywood was included.—The bishops of Elmham, according to the best account we have met with, were the following,
I. Bedwinus, or Baldwinus. He has been spoken highly of as a man of profound learning and exemplary virtue, and author of numerous works (now lost) which confirmed many in the christian faith. 2. Northbertus, or Northbert, succeeded sometime after 679.—(3) Hedulacus, or Hadulac, filled this see in 731; when Bede completed his ecclesiastical History.—(4.) Edelfridus, or Ethelfrith.—(5.) Lamferthus, or Lameferd.—(6.) Athelwalfus, or Ethelwolph, occupied this see in 811.—(7.) Ulfertus, or Alberth: said to attend at the council of Cloveshoe, in Berks, where King Offa proposed erecting a new bishopric at Lichfield.—(8.) Sibba, or Sibban: he sat in 816.—(9.) Hunferth, or Hunferd: was living in 824.—(10.) Humbert, or Humbrit: it was he who crowned king Edmund, or St. Edmund, in 856, with whom he perished in 870, or 871, in opposing the Danes. He too was canonized.—(11.) Wybred, Wyred, or Wilbred: He was set over the two sees of Dunwich and Elmham, which occasioned their being then reunited: the seat was fixed at Elmham.
Bishops of Elmham after the union of the sees.—(1.) Theodred I. He is reported to have been an eye witness of St. Edmund’s corpse being found uncorrupt, 70 or 80 years after his death.—(2.) Theodred, II. surnamed the Good: He was first bishop of London, and then of Elmham; both of which he held till he died, sometime after 962.—(3.) Athulf, or Adulf: succeeded in 966; or, as some think, earlier.—(4.) Alfric or Alfrid: was one of those who signed and confirmed king Edgar’s charter to the abbey of Croyland. He died in 975, at the close of Edgar’s reign.—(5.) Athelstan, Edelstane, or Elstane: He was consecrated the latter part of 975.—(6) St. Algare, or Algarc: he had been Confessor to St. Dunstan archbishop of Canterbury, and promoted to this see in 1012. He afterwards resigned, and retired among the monks of Ely, where he died in 1021.—(7.) Alfwin, or Elfwin, succeeded the same year. He had been keeper or guardian of the body or remains of St. Edmund, and afterwards removed the same from Bury to London. He was also a violent stickler for the monks, or Regulars, in their furious squabbles with the Seculars. He resigned in 1032.—(8.) Alfric II. succeeded, and died in 1038; and was succeeded by—(9.) Alfric III. surnamed the Little, who is said to die in 1139. [349]—(10.) Stigand; (afterwards archbishop) he had been chaplain to king Harold Harefoot; but having obtained this see by simony, which his vast wealth would enable him easily to do, he was afterwards ejected by king Hardicanute, in 1040.—(11.) Grinketel: he held it in commendam with the bishopric of the South-Saxons, during the rest of Hardicanute’s reign. Under the Confessor, Stigand was restored to favour, and promoted to Winchester, and last to Canterbury.—(12.) Egelmar, Ailmar, of Almar: of whom an account has been given already, as well as of his brother Stigand.—(13.) Arfast, or Herfast, chaplain to the Conqueror. He succeeded at Easter, 1070. In compliance with an order of a council held by Lanfranc, that all episcopal sees should be removed from villages to the most eminent cities or towns in the respective dioceses, Herfast translated the see of Elmham to Thetford. He was by birth a Norman, in great favour with the Conqueror, and chancellor of England. He died in 1084; and in 1085 was succeeded by (14.) William Galsagus, de Bellafago, or Beaufo. He also was one of the Conqueror’s favourites, had been his chaplain, and became chancellor of England. He was, like most of that monarch’s great favourites, a person of immense wealth; which at his death, in 1091, was, by his will, divided between his family and see: and this must have contributed not a little to augment the large possessions that were formerly attached to this bishopric. In his time the celebrated survey, called Domesday, was made, in which, at folio 145, is contained an enumeration of the estates then belonging to the bishopric; and at folio 148, is an account of the lands of the said bishop, either in fee or inheritance. As many of the latter were bequeathed to the bishopric, the revenues of the see at that period may nearly be ascertained. All these were alienated in the exchange made by Henry VIII. [350]—After this bishop’s death the see was removed from Thetford to Norwich.
Bishops of Norwich.—1. Herbert Lozinga, who having, through the favour of Roger Bigod, Earl of Norfolk, obtained, by grant and purchase, certain lands, called Cowholm, commenced the execution of his favourite plan of building a magnificent cathedral, the first stone of which was laid by him in 1096. He erected a palace also for his residence, on the north side, and a monastery on the south side, which he furnished with 60 monks, all which doings were sanctioned by Pope Paschal II. Herbert was also abbot of Ramsey, and lord Chancellor of England; and moreover a most notorious simoniac, for which the pope imposed upon him some heavy penances, in the doing of which he very notably acquitted himself, and gave good proof how well he was cut out for that kind of business.—Besides the large edifices he erected at Norwich, he also built the two great churches at Yarmouth and Lynn; the latter he dedicated to St. Margaret the Virgin, or, as some say, to St. Mary Magdalen, St. Margaret, and all the maiden saints. A priory was also built by him on the south side of this church. These he is said to have undertaken at the request of the people of Lynn; and yet it seems as if those same people were not otherwise very forward in their encouragements to him; for he was obliged to have recourse to a very ungraceful expedient in order to induce them to hasten their contributions:—to all who would subscribe or contribute towards these erections he offered and granted an indulgence, for forty days; [351] or, in other words, a Licence to commit with impunity any species of wickedness, or all manner of sin and villany, for the space of forty days! It is supposed that this expedient fully answered the bishop’s purpose; for the buildings were soon finished, in a style of superior magnificence. It reflects no credit on the memory of our townsmen of that day, that in order to do some good, or contribute liberally towards the erection of religious edifices in the town, they must be indulged with a licence to commit all manner of crimes. It shews that they were much more attached to evil than good, and liked sin far better than holiness. How much the present population of Lynn excels them, is a question that will not here be discussed.—Bishop Herbert died in 1119 and was buried before the high altar of his new cathedral.
2. Eborard, or Everard, succeeded Herbert, after a vacancy of almost three years. In his time the Jews, as we are told, crucified a boy, named William, who being considered a martyr, and canonized, brought no small gains to the church, by the numerous pilgrimages and offerings made annually on this occasion. Though the truth of this shocking crucifixion story seems more than doubtful, yet the monks managed to procure it general belief, and to get the poor boy (real or fictitious) canonized, under the name of Saint William. Their main object no doubt was to bring grist to the mill; and as that end was amply obtained, it may be said that they received their reward, and did not labour (or rather invent the tale) in vain. This bishop was the founder of the hospital and church of St. Paul in Norwich; and a great benefactor to the monastery which had been endowed by his predecessor. He was deposed, or resigned about 1146, and died at Fountain’s Abbey in Yorkshire, in 1149, and was succeeded by