Exile In The Middle Ages Selected Proceedings

From The International Medieval Congress

University Of Leeds 811 July 2002 Laura Napran
Elisabeth Van Houts download
https://ebookbell.com/product/exile-in-the-middle-ages-selected-
proceedings-from-the-international-medieval-congress-university-
of-leeds-811-july-2002-laura-napran-elisabeth-van-houts-6670882

Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

Exile In The Middle Ages Selected Proceedings From The International

Medieval Congress University Of Leeds 811 July 2002 Laura Napran
Editor

https://ebookbell.com/product/exile-in-the-middle-ages-selected-
proceedings-from-the-international-medieval-congress-university-of-
leeds-811-july-2002-laura-napran-editor-50329360

From England To France Felony And Exile In The High Middle Ages Pilot
Project Ebook Available To Selected Us Libraries Only William Chester
Jordan

https://ebookbell.com/product/from-england-to-france-felony-and-exile-
in-the-high-middle-ages-pilot-project-ebook-available-to-selected-us-
libraries-only-william-chester-jordan-51949496

From England To France Felony And Exile In The High Middle Ages
William Chester Jordan

https://ebookbell.com/product/from-england-to-france-felony-and-exile-
in-the-high-middle-ages-william-chester-jordan-7116626

Mystics And Heretics In Italy At The End Of The Middle Ages New Mile
Gebhart

https://ebookbell.com/product/mystics-and-heretics-in-italy-at-the-
end-of-the-middle-ages-new-mile-gebhart-37734980
Edward Saids Concept Of Exile Identity And Cultural Migration In The
Middle East Rehnuma Sazzad

https://ebookbell.com/product/edward-saids-concept-of-exile-identity-
and-cultural-migration-in-the-middle-east-rehnuma-sazzad-50225130

Edward Saids Concept Of Exile Identity And Cultural Migration In The

Middle East Rehnuma Sazzad

https://ebookbell.com/product/edward-saids-concept-of-exile-identity-
and-cultural-migration-in-the-middle-east-rehnuma-sazzad-22509700

Devils On Horses In The Words Of The Anzacs In The Middle East 191619
Terry Kinloch

https://ebookbell.com/product/devils-on-horses-in-the-words-of-the-
anzacs-in-the-middle-east-191619-terry-kinloch-38073224

Middle Eastern Minorities And The Arab Spring Identity And Community
In The Twentyfirst Century Kenneth Scott Parker Editor Tony Emile
Nasrallah Editor

https://ebookbell.com/product/middle-eastern-minorities-and-the-arab-
spring-identity-and-community-in-the-twentyfirst-century-kenneth-
scott-parker-editor-tony-emile-nasrallah-editor-50343664

Exile In The Maghreb Jews Under Islam Sources And Documents 9971912
Paul B Fenton

https://ebookbell.com/product/exile-in-the-maghreb-jews-under-islam-
sources-and-documents-9971912-paul-b-fenton-6794404
Ordernr. 041162 KATERN 1

EXILE IN THE MIDDLE AGES

Page 1
Ordernr. 041162

INTERNATIONAL MEDIEVAL RESEARCH

Volume 13

Editorial Board
Axel E. W. Müller, Alan V. Murray, Peter Meredith, & Ian N. Wood
with the assistance of the IMC Programming Committee

Page 2
Ordernr. 041162

EXILE IN THE MIDDLE AGES

Selected Proceedings from

the International Medieval Congress,
University of Leeds, 8–11 July 2002

Edited by

Laura Napran
and
Elisabeth van Houts

Page 3
 Ordernr. 041162

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

International Medieval Congress (2002 : University of Leeds)

Exile in the Middle Ages : selected proceedings from the International Medieval
Congress, University of Leeds, 8–11 July 2002. – (International medieval
research ; 13)
1.Exile (Punishment) – Europe – History – To 1500 – Congresses 2.Exiles –
Europe – History – To 1500 – Congresses 3.Exiles – Europe – History – Social
conditions – Congresses 4.Civilization, Medieval – Congresses 5.Exiles in
literature – Congresses
I.Title II.Napran, Laura, 1961– III.Van Houts, Elisabeth M. C.
305.9'06914'094'0902

ISBN 2503514537

© 2004, Brepols Publishers n.v., Turnhout, Belgium

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,

stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,
without the prior permission of the publisher.

D/2004/0095/60
ISBN: 2-503-51453-7

Printed in the E.U. on acid-free paper

Page 4
Ordernr. 041162

Contents

List of Abbreviations vii

Preface xi
ELISABETH VAN HOUTS

Introduction: Exile in Context 1

LAURA NAPRAN

Part One: Exile in the Secular World

The Vocabulary of Exile and Outlawry in the North Sea Area 13
around the First Millennium
ELISABETH VAN HOUTS

The Process of Norman Exile into Southern Italy 29

EWAN JOHNSON

Gruffudd ap Cynan and the Reality and Representation of Exile 39

C. P. LEWIS

Like Joseph in Egypt? Exile Experiences of Royal Women 53

MIRIAM SHERGOLD

Marriage and Excommunication: The Comital House of Flanders 69

LAURA NAPRAN

Page 5
 Ordernr. 041162

Part Two: Exile in the Ecclesiastical World

The Concept of peregrinatio in Saint Augustine and its Influences 83
MANUELA BRITO-MARTINS

Exile, Sanctity, and Some Scandinavian Rulers of the Late Viking Age 95
HAKI ANTONSSON

The English Exile of Archbishop Øystein of Nidaros (1180–83) 109

ANNE J. DUGGAN

Expulsio, Proscriptio, Exilium: Exile and Friendship in the Writings 131

of Osbert of Clare
BRIAN BRIGGS

Exclusion as Exile: Spiritual Punishment and Physical Illness 145

in Normandy c. 1050–1300
LEONIE HICKS

Exile in the Lives of Anselm and Thomas Becket 159

MICHAEL STAUNTON

Exile in the Life and Correspondence of John of Salisbury 181

LYNSEY ROBERTSON

Exile and Peace: Saint Arnulf of Oudenburg, Bishop of Soissons (d. 1087) 199
RENÉE NIP

Arnold of Brescia in Exile: April 1139 to December 1143 213

– His Role as a Reformer, Reviewed
ROMEDIO SCHMITZ-ESSER

Subject Index 233

Name Index 237

Page 6
Ordernr. 041162

Abbreviations

AASS Acta sanctorum quotquot tot orbe colunteur, 114 vols

(Antwerp: Société des Bollandistes, 1643–1996)
ANS Anglo-Norman Studies
BL British Library, London
BN Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris
CCCM Corpus Christianorum, Continuatio Medievalis
CSEL Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latinorum
CTB The Correspondence of Thomas Becket Archbishop of
Canterbury 1162–1170, ed. and trans. by A. Duggan,
2 vols (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000)
DB, ed. by Farley Domesday Book seu Liber Censualis Wilhelmi primi regis
Angliae, ed. by A. Farley, 2 vols (London: Eyre and
Strahan, 1783)
EHD I English Historical Documents, vol. I, c. 500–1042, ed.
and trans. by D. Whitelock (New York: Oxford Univer-
sity Press, 1955)
EHR English Historical Review
Gilbert of Mons Gilbert of Mons, La Chronique de Gislebert de Mons, ed.
by Léon Vanderkindere, Commission Royale d’Histoire
(Brussels: Librairie Kiessling, 1904)
GND The Gesta Normannorum Ducum of William of Jumièges,
Orderic Vitalis and Robert of Torigni, ed. and trans. by

Page 7
 Ordernr. 041162

viii Abbreviations

E. M. C. van Houts, 2 vols (Oxford: Clarendon Press,

1992–95)
HGC The History of Gruffydd ap Cynan, ed. by Arthur Jones
(Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1910)
HGK Historia Gruffud vab Kenan, ed. by D. Simon Evans (Car-
diff: University of Wales Board of Celtic Studies, 1977)
HN Eadmer, Historia novorum in Anglia, ed. by M. Rule,
RS, 81
JMH Journal of Medieval History
Letters of John of Salisbury
The Letters of John of Salisbury, ed. by E. Millor and
C. Brooke, 2 vols, Oxford Medieval Texts (Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1979–86)
MGH Monumenta Germaniae Historica
SRG Scriptores Rerum Germanicarum
SRM Scriptores Rerum Merovingicarum
SS Scriptores (in folio)
MPW A Mediaeval Prince of Wales: The Life of Gruffudd ap
Cynan, ed. by D. Simon Evans (Lampeter: Llanerch, 1990)
MTB Materials for the History of Archbishop Thomas Becket,
ed. by J. C. Robertson and J. B. Shepherd, RS, 67, 7 vols
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History
Orderic Vitalis, The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic
Vitalis, ed. and trans. by Marjorie Chibnall, 6 vols, Ox-
ford Medieval Texts (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1969–80)
Osbert of Clare, Letters Osbert of Clare, The Letters of Osbert of Clare, ed. by
E. W. Williamson (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1929)
PL Patrologia Latina, ed. by J.-P. Migne, 221 vols (Paris:
[n. pub.], 1844–1903)
PRS Pipe Roll Society
Ralph of Diceto Ralph of Diceto, Ymagines historiarum, ed. by William
Stubbs, RS, 68
RHDFE Revue historique de droit français et étranger

Page 8
Ordernr. 041162

Abbreviations ix

RHF Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France, 24 vols

(Paris: [n. pub.], 1734–1904)
RS Rolls Series: Rerum Britannicarum medii aevi scriptores,
ed. by W. Stubbs and others, 99 vols (London: Her
Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1858–1911, repr. Wiesbaden:
Kraus Reprint, 1964–65)
VA Vita Anselmi, ed. by R. W. Southern (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1962; repr. with corrections, 1972)
VGC Vita Griffini filii Conani: The Medieval Life of Gruffudd ap
Cynan, ed. by Paul Russell (Cardiff: University of Wales
Press, forthcoming)

Page 9
Ordernr. 041162

Page 10
Ordernr. 041162

Preface

ELISABETH VAN HOUTS

E
xile or banishment in the Middle Ages took many different forms. As a liter-
ary theme it has had a long tradition from the classical period right up to the
Renaissance. Yet the question as to what extent fiction, if that is what the lit-
erary theme represented, reflected reality has remained elusive. The historical and
legal phenomenon of exile is still a largely unexplored territory. In the medieval sec-
ular world it usually meant banishment of a person by a higher authority for political
reasons. As a result, the exile left his lands and family for a shorter or longer period.
Sometimes an exile did not wait to be expelled but left of his or her own accord.
Leaving home to go on pilgrimage or, in the case of women, to marry someone
abroad could also be experienced as a form of exile. In the ecclesiastical sphere two
forms of exile stand out. Monasticism was experienced as a form of spiritual (perma-
nent) exile from the secular world. Excommunication was a punishment exercised by
the Church authorities in order to eject persons (often only temporarily) from the
community of Christians. Banishment in its various guises as a form of social
punishment is therefore the central theme of this volume on Exile in Middle Ages.
The book covers the period of the central Middle Ages from c. 900 to c. 1300 in
Western Europe, though some chapters have a wider remit. Geographically, the
focus is on Europe with special attention paid to the North Sea area in the widest
sense, Scandinavia, and Italy. About half the chapters are devoted to bishops in exile,
who travelled the length and width of Europe. The sources consulted by the contrib-
utors range widely from Latin and Greek texts across several vernacular languages,
as well as representing the major genres of medieval narrative and documentary
texts. Considerable attention, too, is paid to the fact that exile and banishment had
repercussions for the exile’s close kin and distant relatives (male and female). Hence
gender forms an important tool in the study aimed at exploring and understanding
the causes and effects of banishment in our period.
The book was conceived as a result of the International Medieval Congress at
Leeds in 2002, where the majority of the present chapters, in early and raw versions,

Page 11
 Ordernr. 041162

xii Preface

were presented as papers. The editors are deeply indebted to the guidance received
from Axel Müller, director of the International Medieval Congress at Leeds, and
Simon Forde from the publishers at Brepols. They are most grateful to the two anon-
ymous readers of the collection, whose comments and advice have been invaluable.
The execution of the editorial stage of the work benefited from the support given to
the editors by their Colleges. They would like to take this opportunity to express
their gratitude to the Master and Fellows of Emmanuel College, Cambridge, and the
Master and Fellows of Pembroke College, Cambridge.

Page 12
Ordernr. 041162

Introduction: Exile in Context

LAURA NAPRAN

E
xile has been a consistent aspect of human life throughout history, as seen by
political, sociological, and literary evidence. In our own times, Rowan Wil-
liams, archbishop of Canterbury, has eloquently explored the cultural concept
of the individual’s exile as a lost soul within modern society.1 The focus of the pres-
ent volume is exile in the medieval period. Exile or banning was a widespread cus-
tomary practice in the Middle Ages, as a type of social punishment, correction, or
coercion. It could take the form of enforced physical removal from a particular
region, spiritual excommunication, or other sorts of social exclusion. Banishment
could be a permanent expulsion or a more temporary measure dependent on local
political circumstances.
The importance of exile within religious life has been a topic of study, especially
in respect to voluntary separation from the secular community and the issue of sanc-
tuary for outlaws. While even a cursory overview of the vast scholarship on monasti-
cism is impossible within the scope of this introduction, it is relevant to draw atten-
tion to some recent works on the more extreme type of monastic withdrawal from
society, that is, asceticism. An excellent collection of papers has been assembled on
this topic, covering a wide chronological range, examining the views of many reli-
gions, and including approaches concerning gender.2 A notable collection deals more
exclusively with the male experience of monks and hermits, including the medieval
period, while another recent work focuses on the Egyptian desert ascetics.3 In respect
1
R. Williams, Lost Icons: Reflections on Cultural Bereavement (London: T & T Clark,
2000).
2
Asceticism, ed. by V. L. Wimbush and R. Valantasis (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1995).
3
Monks, Hermits and the Ascetic Tradition, ed. by W. J. Sheils, Studies in Church History,
22 (Oxford: Blackwell, 1985); J. E. Goehring, Ascetics, Society, and the Desert: Studies in
Egyptian Monasticism (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1999).

Page 13
 Ordernr. 041162

2 LAURA NAPRAN

to sanctuary and the Church, the origins of asylum in churches in the fourth and fifth
centuries have been examined, noting that the idea of sanctuary for refugees and
social outcasts was championed by the likes of Basil of Caesarea (329–79), Saint
Ambrose (c. 339–97), John Chrysostom (d. 407), and, particularly, Saint Augustine
of Hippo (354–430).4
There is considerable scholarship devoted to the theme of exile in the literary
tradition for both the classical and medieval periods. Of particular interest are studies
on the theme of exile in the works of the Roman poet Ovid (43 BC–AD 17), himself a
victim of banishment when, in AD 8, he was exiled to Tomi on the Black Sea. It has
been suggested that Ovid is responsible for the creation of the ‘myth of exile’, giving
it a universal psychological dimension.5 Ovid’s verse letters Tristia and Epistulae ex
Ponto have been specifically analysed as exile poems.6 Classical exile literature is,
of course, not confined merely to Ovid, but also includes works by Cicero (106–43
BC), Dio Chrysostomus (c. 40–c. 120), Seneca the younger (4 BC–AD 65), and
Boethius (c. 480–524), in which literature is used as a means for expressing social
and political isolation.7
Ovid’s influence on vernacular literature of exile in the Middle Ages is apparent.
His works have been used by the Carolingian poets Theodolph, bishop of Orléans
(d. 821), and Ermoldus Nigellus (early ninth century), while he was also a source of
inspiration for Dante Alighieri (1265–1321).8 Exile as a literary device in Dante has
recently been particularly highlighted in scholarship, as has the importance of exile
writing in Italian literature, specifically in the poetry of Cino da Pistoia (1270?–

4
A. Ducloux, Ad ecclesiam confugere: naissance du droit d’asile dans l’églises (IVe–milieu
du Ve s.) (Paris: De Boccard, 1994); Ducloux, ‘La Violation du droit d’asile par “dol” en
Gaule, au VIe siècle’, Antiquité tardive, 1 (1993), 207–19; Ducloux, ‘L’église, l’asile et l’aide
aux condamnés d’après la constitution du 27 juillet 398’, RHDFE, 69 (1991), 141–76.
Ducloux’s work builds on and advances earlier scholarship, such as that by F. Martroye,
‘L’asile et la législation impériale du IVe au VIe siècle’, Mémoire de la société des Antiquaires
de France, 5 (1919), 159–260; and E. Herman, ‘Zum asylrecht im Byzantinischen Reich’,
Orientalia Periodica, 1 (1935), 204–23.
5
G. D. Williams, Banished Voices (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994).
6
R. J. Dickinson, ‘The Tristia: Poetry in Exile’, in Ovid, ed. by J. W. Binns (London:
Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1973), pp. 154–90; B. R. Nagle, The Poetics of Exile: Program
and Polemic in the Tristia and Epistulae ex Ponto of Ovid, Collection Latomus, 170 (Brussels:
Latomus, Revue d’Études Latines, 1980).
7
J.-M. Claassen, Displaced Persons: The Literature of Exile from Cicero to Boethius
(London: Duckworth, 1999).
8
D. M. Robathan, ‘Ovid in the Middle Ages’, in Ovid, ed. by Binns, pp. 191–209; J. L.
Smarr, ‘Poets of Love and Exile’, in Dante and Ovid: Essays in Intertextuality, ed. by M. U.
Sowell, Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 82 (Binghamton: State University of
New York at Binghamton, 1991), pp. 139–51.

Page 14
Ordernr. 041162

Introduction 3

c. 1337).9 The extent to which the literature of exile reflects contemporary issues in
society is a hotly debated point. For Italy, it has been argued that we cannot divorce
literary expressions of exile (for example in Dante, Giovanni Quirini (d. after 1327),
and Petrarch (1304–74)) from political conflicts and landscapes of exile.10 Such
work raises an important question in relation to exile studies, that of the causal link
between the literary theme of exile and the political circumstances of the time of
writing. Whereas in Italy the city states used exile as temporary punishment on a
large scale with the result that exiles can frequently be found in neighbouring cities,
the appearance of exiles in an earlier period demands another explanation. The rela-
tively sudden appearance of a cluster of exile literature for the period under review
in this volume (c. 900–1300) concentrated on heroic outlaws, both real and legen-
dary (such as Hereward the Wake, El Cid, Eustace the Monk, Fulk fitz Warin, and
Robin Hood).11 They are mostly exiled mercenaries of one type or another who were
sent away, not from cities, but from much larger and less defined territorial areas,
usually for relatively short periods of time. The exact administrative ‘rules’ for exile
are not well known.
Indeed, for the most part, there has been a relative lack of historical and legal
studies for the phenomenon of exile in Western Europe, particularly for our period of

9
C. Keen, ‘The Language of Exile in Dante’, Reading Medieval Studies, 27 (2001), 79–
102; K. Biddick, ‘Coming Out of Exile: Dante on the Orient(alism) Express’, American
Historical Review, 105.4 (2000), 1234–49; C. Keen, ‘Images of Exile: Distance and Memory
in the Poetry of Cino da Pistoia’, Italian Studies, 55 (2000), 21–36.
10
R. Starn, Contrary Commonwealth: The Theme of Exile in Medieval and Renaissance
Italy (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982).
11
A sampling of publications relating to outlaws and literature: Gesta Herewardi incliti
exulis et militis, in Lestorie de Engles solum la translacion Maistre Geffrei Gaimar, ed. by
T. Hardy and C. T. Martin, RS, 91, I, 339–404; T. S. Jones, ‘Fighting Men, Fighting Monsters:
Outlawry, Masculinity, and Identity in the Gesta Herewardi’, in Marvels, Monsters, and Mira-
cles: Studies in the Medieval and Early Modern Imaginations, ed. by T. S. Jones and David A.
Sprunger (Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute Publications, 2002), pp. 182–201; Li Romans de
Witasse le moine: Roman du treizième siècle, ed. by D. J. Conlon, Studies in Romance Lan-
guages and Literature, 126 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1972); M. Keen,
The Outlaws of Medieval Legend, new edn (New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 2000);
Robin Hood: An Anthology of Scholarship and Criticism, ed. by S. Knight (Cambridge:
Brewer, 1999); J. C. Holt, Robin Hood, rev. edn (London: Thames and Hudson, 1989); Fouke
le Fitz Waryn, ed. by E. J. Hathaway and others (Oxford: Anglo-Norman Text Society, 1975);
The World of El Cid: Chronicles of the Spanish Reconquest, trans. by S. Barton and
R. Fletcher (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2000); E. Falque Rey, Historia
Roderici vel Gesta Roderici Campidocti, in Chronica Hispana Saeculi XII, Pars I, ed. by E.
Falque and others, CCCM, 71 (Turnhout: Brepols, 1990). It should also be noted that the
theme of exile in Beowulf and Old English elegies has been the subject of studies such as S. B.
Greenfield, Hero and Exile: The Art of Old English Poetry, ed. by G. W. Brown (London:
Hambledon Press, 1989).

Page 15
 Ordernr. 041162

4 LAURA NAPRAN

the High Middle Ages, even though there have been a number of regional studies
which have provided useful and thought-provoking information on banishment and
exile in the period before 1200, particularly for north-western Europe. Outlawry has
been set in the context of English legal process, including excommunication as a
form of spiritual outlawry.12 Another important study focuses on Anglo-Saxon out-
lawry and its development from the Germanic tradition, highlighting ‘loss of peace’
(Friedlosigkeit) as a basic legal concept of punishment.13 In a larger study of English
criminal procedure, three discrete categories of outlawry have been distinguished,
with the argument that Norman and Anglo-Saxon outlawry have considerable resem-
blance, just as the Merovingian and Carolingian legal systems have similarities to
that of England.14 A more recent study has examined the king’s pardon in relation to
fugitives in England, particularly for the thirteenth century.15 This pardon was neces-
sarily obtained through an intermediary, and specific procedures evolved to deal
with particular circumstances such as manslaughter and excusable homicide.
The law of exile in Normandy in the eleventh century has been explored, suggest-
ing that the roots of exile in this region are found in both the Frankish and Scandina-
vian past.16 While banishment was one of the causes for Norman emigration to Italy
and Spain, it was by no means the most important factor. Nonetheless, such exiles
did comprise an important source for mercenary troops in Italy. The question of exile
did occupy an important place in Norman ducal law during the eleventh century, but
lost much of its significance in the subsequent century. A recent study on Anglo-
Norman exile in the eleventh and twelfth centuries emphasizes that the majority of
cases of banishment were temporary situations which provided time and space for
offended and offending parties to cool off and reconsider their positions. The
possibility of return precluded the need for vengeance by family members, as
reconciliation was frequent.17
12
F. Pollock and F. W. Maitland, The History of English Law before the Time of Edward I,
2nd edn, 2 vols (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1898; repr. 1968), esp. I, 476–80;
II, 449–51, 459, 461, 578–84, 593–94.
13
F. Liebermann, ‘Die Friedlosigkeit bei den Angelsachsen’, in Festschrift für Heinrich
Brunner zum siebzigsten Geburtstag dargebracht von Schülern und Verehren (Weimar:
Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1910), pp. 17–37.
14
J. Goebel, Jr, Felony and Misdemeanor: A Study in the History of English Criminal
Procedure, Vol. 1 (New York: Columbia University School of Law, 1937), esp. pp. 44–61.
15
N. D. Hurnard, The King’s Pardon before AD 1307 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969).
16
L. Musset, ‘Autour des modalités juridiques de l’expansion normande au XIe siècle: Le
Droit d’exil’, in Autour du pouvoir ducal Normand Xe–XIIe siècles, ed. by L. Musset, J.-M.
Bouvris, J.-M. Maillefer, Cahier des Annales de Normandie, 17 (Caen: Centre d’Etudes
normandes de l’Université de Caen, 1985), pp. 45–59.
17
E. van Houts, ‘L’exil dans l’espace Anglo-Normand’, in La Normandie et l’Angleterre
au Moyen Âge, 4–7 Octobre 2001 Colloque Cerisy-la Salle, ed. by V. Gazeau (Turnhout:
Brepols, 2003), pp. 75–85.

Page 16
Ordernr. 041162

Introduction 5

For the later Middle Ages, scholarship on exile in Italy provides innovative ap-
proaches. The political implications of exile in thirteenth- through fifteenth-century
society has been examined, with examples drawn particularly from Florence and
Genoa, as well as a collection of papers on the subject which span the period from
the twelfth through the sixteenth centuries in Italy.18 Extending past the medieval
period, a recent study analyses the politics of exile for Renaissance Italy, with
particular concentration on Siena, emphasizing the persistent fragmentation of Italian
public life and the disunity of political elites as major factors in the realities of
exile.19 Interestingly, these works refrain from using secular medieval literature, such
as that mentioned earlier when we discussed Ovid’s legacy in Italy.
Another aspect of the study of exile, for which scholarship is yet scarce, is the
anthropological and sociological view. A valuable contribution in this respect is a
work on medieval Iceland, in which the ‘wild’ elements which conflicted with the
strong concept of law within Icelandic society are examined.20 Most notably, this
work discusses the danger which men who lived outside the norms posed for a
peaceful society, and the perceived relationship between anti-social elements, the
spirit world, and untamed nature. The question of outcasts and social ties in early
medieval Iceland has also been examined.21 The author argues that the situation of
outlawry reflects the increasing social stratification in the period from 900 through
1300. Expulsion included not only geographic exclusion, but also degradation by im-
poverishment, which directly affected the socio-economic status of the outlaw.

In this volume on exile, the most exciting aspect is the vast range of varieties of
exile, and the considerable fluidity in contemporaneous understanding of the mean-
ing of this state of being. In the introduction to his paper, Chris Lewis splendidly
highlights the manifold types of exile, and points out that the medieval perception of
exile may not always correspond with a modern interpretation of events. Anne Dug-
gan opens with a view of the long tradition of varying forms of exile in the Latin
West, pointing out that exile was not inevitably a bad circumstance, but could
provide an opportunity for the broadening of experience and contacts. A startling
viewpoint on exile is seen in Brian Briggs’s article on Osbert of Clare, prior of

18
J. Heers, L’esilio, la vita politica e la società nel medioevo (Naples: Liguori, 1997); Exil
et civilisation en Italie XIIe–XVIe siècles, ed. by J. Heers and C. Bec (Nancy: Presses Universi-
taires de Nancy, 1990).
19
C. Shaw, The Politics of Exile in Renaissance Italy (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2000).
20
K. Hastrup, Culture and History in Medieval Iceland: An Anthropological Analysis of
Structure and Change (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985), esp. pp. 136–56.
21
A. Breisch, Frid och fredlöshet: Sociala band och utanförskap på Island under äldere
medeltid, Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Studia historica Upsaliensia, 174 (Uppsala: Uppsala
University Press, 1994).

Page 17
 Ordernr. 041162

6 LAURA NAPRAN

Westminster (d. c. 1160), who held the perception that the English people were
exiled in situ while being ruled by a Danish king, suggesting that the mental concept
of exclusion was more important than geographic displacement. Michael Staunton
also notes an instance of exile within one’s own land, when Herbert of Bosham
accuses those English bishops who did not accompany Thomas Becket (c. 1118–70)
into France of having fled in spirit to the enemy. John of Salisbury (c. 1120–80)
writes of a sort of internal exile in respect to his brother who suffered public disgrace
while remaining in England.
The number of papers which analyse the vocabulary of exile stresses the need to
examine source texts critically to achieve a fuller understanding of the concept.
Elisabeth van Houts traces the transmission of the Scandinavian terminology for
‘outlaw’ into Anglo-Saxon and Norman legal thinking as a result of the increasingly
ethnic mix in England and Normandy through invasion and immigration. Yet this
Scandinavian influence on vocabulary did not displace Latin exilic vocabulary, nor
did it result in unity of perception concerning the concept of exile in the Anglo-
Norman world or even in Scandinavia itself. She also notes that Icelandic evidence
contains vocabulary which defines the types of outlawry more specifically than in
other Scandinavian sources, and that the Icelandic vocabulary reflects this difference
in the absence of loanwords. Ewan Johnson points out that the concept of exile in
Normandy had a virtually metaphorical meaning, ranging from legal banishment to
the exile from earth to heaven caused by death. Manuela Brito-Martins further
expands the medieval concept of exile by drawing in the vocabulary of pilgrimage,
peregrinatio, a concept which would have been known to medieval authors through
classical works and Saint Augustine’s writings. The notion of pilgrim as exile, both
physically and spiritually, would have meshed well with the metaphorical use of the
word ‘exile’ in Normandy, and would have been particularly appropriate during the
crusading era. It is hardly surprising that the vocabulary of pilgrimage figures so
strongly in the works of Abbot Bernard of Clairvaux (1090–1153), a strong propo-
nent of the Second Crusade. Likewise, amongst bishops, John of Salisbury refers to
his own pilgrimage, and Thomas Becket’s exile was most often termed a peregrina-
tio, suggesting their experiences were paths to spiritual development. The image of
the traveller and classical allusions figure in Osbert of Clare’s letters, who called
himself a ‘stranger and visitor’ in his exile, as well as proscriptus, a word echoed by
John of Salisbury in the use of proscriptio to describe his own banishment. Yet both
Osbert and John also exhibit metaphorical turns, like that suggested by Johnson in
the Norman sources, Osbert likening his exile to biblical examples, while John (of
English origin) represents his student life as a type of exile because it involved en-
forced residence in France, and humankind’s entire life on earth as exile from God.
And, lest we become too involved in the interpretation of specific wording, Lewis
examines a Welsh source concerning Gruffudd ap Cynan (d. 1137) which describes a
period of banishment by specific avoidance of exilic vocabulary, relying instead on
implicit inferences, demonstrating that the medieval perception of exile was not
limited by choice of words.

Page 18
Ordernr. 041162

Introduction 7

Exile was not a gender-specific experience, although Miriam Shergold’s article on

royal women observes that marriage brought about a sort of ‘exile’ that necessarily
affected only women, as it was usual for women, rather than men, to relocate to their
spouse’s home. However, voluntary exile into religious life was a choice made by
both genders. Certainly political banishment could devolve on women as well as
men, as in the case of Richildis of Hainaut (d. 1086). The experience of excommuni-
cation affected both men and women, particularly in respect to priests and their
concubines, when the priests’ sins were visited on the women and their children.
Johnson has also noted that banishment of a man affects not just the individual, but
his entire family.
While the idea of exile conjures visions of coerced banishment, flight often was a
voluntary matter of choice. Elisabeth van Houts notes that, after the Battle of Hast-
ings (1066), some English chose to leave their homeland to serve under foreign
princes (such as the Byzantine emperor) rather than remain in a conquered land.
Lynsey Robertson points out that, in the case of John of Salisbury, his departure
appeared to be voluntary as he applied for royal licence to depart. Monastics figure
prominently in a number of essays in this volume, and the choice of a cloistered life
can be seen as a sort of exile from secular life. Miriam Shergold cites comments of
Goscelin of St Bertin (d. after 1107), the Flemish hagiographer active in England, on
the exilic situation of nuns, while Briggs notes Osbert of Clare’s view that Edburga
chose the convent as a place of self-exile. However, Edburga’s entry to religious life
as an infant draws out the point that monastic life was often begun in childhood, rais-
ing the question of whether the choice of vocation was made freely or not. Leonie
Hicks cites instances of women who wished to leave convents, claiming never to
have taken vows, and of apostate religious who had a change of heart. Apparently, in
some cases, the free choice of vocation had been influenced by family and social
pressures or by circumstances such as fears for safety in times of military conflict.
Laura Napran’s paper highlights the mid-twelfth-century case of Laureta of Flanders
who, after choosing the exile of flight to escape an unhappy marriage, later opts for
the self-banishment of the veil to avoid the punishment of excommunication. Her
personal situation, although it involved choice, was limited strictly to the options of
different types of exclusion. Ewan Johnson also notes that personal circumstances
affected choice in exile. Some persons, after experiencing temporary banishment,
might choose to remain in their new home, thus making their banishment a perma-
nent situation. Sometimes a person can be a sort of ‘double exile’. Renée Nip argues
that Saint Arnulf (d. 1087) was both a voluntary exile, as a religious man and pauper,
and a judicial exile enforced by political authority.
Voluntary exile came with certain dangers. Both Ewan Johnson and Lynsey
Robertson point out that a voluntary journey from the homeland may not result in a
corresponding opportunity to return freely, as in the cases of Robert II of Grand-
mesnil and John of Salisbury. The apostate religious opting for the pleasures of the
secular life were, theologically speaking, leaving the spiritual life for the life of the
damned. Staunton’s contribution on Archbishops Anselm (1093–1109) and Thomas

Page 19
 Ordernr. 041162

8 LAURA NAPRAN

Becket highlights the danger of adverse contemporary opinion, when both archbish-
ops were accused of cowardice and of deserting their flocks. When there was not
clear evidence of physical danger from violence or pursuit, their flights could be
seen as abandonment of duty for personal reasons.
However, the situation of these archbishops leads us to the question of whether exile
could be a beneficial experience for those concerned. Supporters of Anselm and
Thomas Becket claimed that their self-imposed banishment resulted in inner devel-
opment and spiritual purification during the period. Anselm is said to have continued
to share his people’s pain in his spirit, while only his body was absent, suggesting that
he also was cleansed by suffering. In retrospect, Thomas Becket’s time in France
came to be seen as a necessary preparation for his eventual role as martyr and saint.
Likewise, Haki Antonsson notes that the period of exile of King Haraldr Bluetooth of
Denmark (c. 958–86) was an essential step on his road to sanctity and martyrdom as a
result of religious revelation. Viewing self-banishment as a case of submission to God,
rather than to man, raised the affairs to the realm of religious obedience. The actions
of the exiled ecclesiastics could also be beneficial to those in foreign lands, and be-
came a means of spreading the effects of their piety. While the exile of Archbishop
Øystein (ON Eysteinn) of Nidaros (1157 [cons. 1161]–88) from Iceland/Norway was
enforced rather than voluntary, his situation still illustrates the benefits conferred on
his hosts by his active participation in ecclesiastical life in a foreign land (England).
Renée Nip’s article on the Flemish Saint Arnulf stresses that his status as an outsider
in France contributed significantly to his ability to act as a peacemaker both in
France and in Flanders. Arnold of Brescia (1100–55), banished from France, found
fruitful ground for his opinions on Church reform in Zürich and Rome.
Without question, some bishops or other ecclesiastics feature prominently in the
papers in this volume, highlighting the significance of religious exile. Saint Thomas
Becket, archbishop of Canterbury, appears with considerable frequency in these dis-
cussions, representing an almost archetypical figure of ecclesiastical exile. Saint
Anselm, archbishop of Canterbury, and Øystein of Nidaros, archbishop of Trondheim,
also appear in more than one paper. Briggs notes the long tradition of the exiling of
bishops within Christianity. This situation raises the issue of the association of ban-
ishment with sanctity, and the contrast between exile as a punishment for bad deeds
and exile perceived as part of a divine purpose. Certainly, we see its nature as a po-
litical punitive measure in the contributions of van Houts, Johnson, Nip, and Lewis.
Likewise, its use as a corrective measure in the case of excommunication is shown in
those of Hicks and Napran. However, John of Salisbury viewed the Thomas Becket/
Henry II conflict not simply as strife between secular and ecclesiastical purposes, but
as nothing less than a battle between Good and Evil. This cosmic struggle, played
out on earth, is not confined merely to ecclesiastics, as shown by the perception of
King Haraldr’s exile as a necessary component of his sanctity. The concept of the
‘just’ exile is further illustrated by the willingness of other ecclesiastics to aid ban-
ished churchmen, particularly in the cases of Øystein of Nidaros and Thomas
Becket. However, the question of spiritual ‘justness’ was not always clear-cut among

Page 20
Ordernr. 041162

Introduction 9

churchmen, as seen in Schmitz-Esser’s evaluation of Bernard of Clairvaux’s persis-

tent persecution of another ecclesiastic, Arnold of Brescia. It is apparent that not
everyone agreed with Bernard’s opinion, as there was reluctance among Church
authorities to arrest Arnold in Paris, and Bernard’s correspondence with the Bishop
of Constance suggests that Arnold was seen by others as a worthy man.
The assistance and warm welcome given to banished ecclesiastics highlights the
universal use of exile throughout Europe and its instant recognition by others. Dug-
gan’s work draws attention to the fact that economic ties between countries were
often an advantageous factor in the reception of banished persons. In the case of the
Norman exiles in Italy, the commitment of some of these men to their new land, as
evidenced by their choice to remain there, would have strengthened economic and
familial ties with the homeland. Shergold notes the ease with which married women,
who were sent away from their husbands’ lands, managed to reintegrate into their
natal kin, emphasizing the continuing bond of familial connections. In the cases of
churchmen, the international ties between monastic foundations effectively created a
bond which transcended political boundaries. The respect for certain high-profile
bishops, such as Thomas Becket and Anselm, assured their good reception by many
laymen as well as by ecclesiastics. And, in respect to both lay and ecclesiastical
exiles, one person’s enemy became another’s friend, particularly if they bore particu-
lar knowledge or skills, such as the politically experienced Thomas Becket or the
Normans who could sell their military skills as mercenaries.
Ultimately, the goal of this collection on exile is not simply to raise new ideas on
the subject, but to elicit dialogue and discussion. As there is wide scope for continuing
research on all facets of this topic, we can engage in our own metaphoric journey of
exile, a pilgrimage through the sources to achieve a better understanding of the exile,
the outlaw, and the outsider in medieval life and society. The illustration on the
cover of this volume, of the exile of Thomas Becket, archbishop of Canterbury (and
his family), brings us back to a reconsideration of the exploration of modern exile by
another Archbishop of Canterbury, as cited at the beginning of this introduction.22
Our attempt to understand ‘the Other’ in society is a quest which does not cease.

22
Illustration: ‘The Becket Leaves’, BL Loan MS 88, fol. 1, on loan from J. Paul Getty,
KBE.

Page 21
Ordernr. 041162

Page 22
Ordernr. 041162

Part One
Exile in the Secular World

Page 23
Ordernr. 041162

Page 24
Ordernr. 041162

The Vocabulary of Exile and Outlawry in the

North Sea Area around the First Millennium

ELISABETH VAN HOUTS

O
ne of the many manifestations of exile in the Middle Ages is outlawry, a
form of banishment with primarily legal connotations. The word outlawry,
as is well known, is a Scandinavian loanword deriving from utlaga, meaning
‘outside the law’. That it entered medieval vocabulary in the run-up to the first millen-
nium in the North Sea area of Western Europe is also well known. The reason why it
did so, however, remains relatively unexplored and is in need of reassessment.
The fundamental study and point of departure for any new research remains
Liebermann’s masterful study on ‘Die Friedlosigkeit bei den Angelsachsen’ pub-
lished almost one hundred years ago, in 1910.1 It was written as a reaction to
Frederick Pollock who, arguing backwards from the thirteenth century, devoted a
rather meagre section to outlawry. About its origin he wrote: ‘Outlawry developed in
the Danish period. [. . .] it is thoroughly characteristic of archaic legal systems in
general. Nothing is peculiarly English, not much is peculiarly Germanic.’2 Clearly
Liebermann felt this peculiarly unhelpful, and he set out what he thought were its
origins and development. Unlike Pollock, he discussed outlawry exclusively in the
Germanic tradition, that is to say in its Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian manifesta-
tions. Although he pointed out, what Pollock never did, that outlawry was neither a
new concept nor a new institution, he discussed it in terms of Friedlosigkeit.
Literally this means ‘loss of peace’, which had been hailed by his teacher Brunner as
the most fundamental Germanic legal punitive concept. Loss of peace was a state

1
F. Liebermann, ‘Die Friedlosigkeit bei den Angelsachsen’, in Festschrift für Heinrich
Brunner zum siebzigsten Geburtstag dargebracht von Schülern und Verehren (Weimar: Her-
mann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1910), pp. 17–37.
2
F. Pollock and F. W. Maitland, The History of English Law before the Time of Edward I,
2nd edn, 2 vols (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1898), I, 43.

Page 25
 Ordernr. 041162

14 ELISABETH VAN HOUTS

acquired by a fugitive from justice, for at the moment he took flight he would lose
the protection of his kin and community. It normally followed the most serious
crimes, called unemendable crimes, that is, crimes that could not be bought off by
fines. Neither the type of crime nor the legal procedure changed the ‘loss of peace’.
Despite the fact that Liebermann recognized the Scandinavian etymology of the
word utlaga and that it was a new label put on the existing punitive measure of ban-
ishment, he described outlawry increasingly as a Scandinavian legal custom adapted
to Anglo-Saxon circumstances. Liebermann’s work remained unchallenged until
1937 when Julius Goebel published his Felony and Misdemeanor: A Study in the
History of English Criminal Procedure.3 As the title already suggests, Goebel was
particularly interested in the procedural aspects of keeping law and order. It comes
therefore as no surprise that he rejected Liebermann’s work in one of the longest
footnotes in legal historiography — it covers two densely printed pages.4 He argued
that instances of outlawry needed careful distinction in terms of context and vocabu-
lary indicating a flight, imposing a death sentence, loss of royal favour or some sort
of process or judicial sentence. Rearranging Liebermann’s evidence, he proposed to
distinguish three different manifestations of outlawry: 1) the process upon flight,
2) exile as punishment, and 3) loss of the king’s grace. He concluded that Anglo-
Saxon outlawry was not that different from what was common in Normandy and that
for that reason after 1066 the Normans mostly accepted the English procedure. But
where Goebel made the most significant advance, compared with Pollock and
Liebermann, was his recognition of similarities between, on the one hand, the Mero-
vingian and Carolingian legal tradition and, on the other hand, the Anglo-Saxon one.
His emphasis on legal procedure derived from his observations that the Frankish
systems had been heavily influenced by Roman procedure. What he did not consider,
however, was the Scandinavian aspect of the outlawry problem. And this is the
question that I consider fundamental for a historical understanding of the relatively
sudden appearance of the Scandinavian loan words laga (law) and utlaga (outlawry),
and their variants, in England and, I suggest, in Normandy in the last quarter of the
tenth century. In the following sections an attempt will be made to set this phenome-
non in the context of the North Sea area around the first millennium and to suggest
that an answer might be found in the interaction of groups of Scandinavian merce-
naries with the rulers of England and Normandy.

Pollock and Liebermann agreed on the Scandinavian etymology of the word

‘outlawry’. Pollock dated its origin, as we have seen, vaguely to ‘the Danish period’,
whereas Liebermann dated it from shortly after 922.5 Goebel and others after him

3
J. Goebel, Jr, Felony and Misdemeanor: A Study in the History of English Criminal
Procedure, Vol. 1 (New York: Columbia University School of Law, 1937).
4
Goebel, Felony and Misdemeanor, pp. 57–58 n. 132.
5
Liebermann, ‘Friedlosigkeit’, p. 18.

Page 26
Ordernr. 041162

The Vocabulary of Exile and Outlawry 15

have long based their discussions on the emergence of the Scandinavian loanwords
to the Danish period that started in the early tenth century. The early date derives
from the understandable assumption that the first occurrence of the word utlah
appeared in the so-called ‘Treaty of Edward and Guthrum’, c. 6, 6, which was dated
towards the end of King Edward’s reign (899–924).6 However, Dorothy Whitelock’s
discovery in 1941 of this text as a ‘forgery’ of Archbishop Wulfstan II of York
(1002–23) has been well recognized in Anglo-Saxon legal circles, but as yet has not
been explicitly applied to the discussion surrounding the Scandinavian loan vocabu-
lary of outlawry.7 A chronological inventory of the occurrences of laga, the Scandi-
navian loanword for ‘law’, and its cognates utlah/utlagu/utlaga would show that the
word entered the written language in c. 970 and that it rapidly rose to a peak during
the 990s and early eleventh century, after which it became the dominating vocabu-
lary for outlawry though never entirely replacing the indigenous vocabulary of
fliema (fugitive) or adrifen (banning). Until the middle of the tenth century the ver-
nacular word for exile, fugitive, or outlaw was flyma or its variant; these are in-
stances that are generally considered to be outlaw cases avant la lettre: Alfred’s law
book, commonly dated to the 880s, uses the word afliemed, while the first case of an
outlaw (flyman) is Helmstan in an early tenth-century document dated to between
900 and 924.8 The document is known from a tenth-century copy describing him as a
flyman. Later copies too kept this word.
Lagu, the Scandinavian loanword for ‘law’, was first used in IV Edgar, the so-
called ‘Wihtbordestan’ collection, issued c. 970 by King Edgar (957/59–75) to regu-
late the relationship between the English and the Danes in the Danelaw.9 Its signifi-
cance lies, as has been pointed out by many, in the fact that laga is used in reference
to the Danes. Clearly therefore laga as the word to denote the customs by which the

6
Die Gesetze der Angelsachsen, ed. by F. Liebermann, 3 vols (Halle: Max Niemeyer,
1903–16), I (1903), 128–35 (pp. 132–33 where some manuscripts add vel exlex), and Councils
and Synods with Other Documents Relating to the English Church, vol I, A.D. 871–1204, part
1, 871–1066, ed. by D. Whitelock, M. Brett and C. N. L. Brooke, 2 vols (Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1981), I, no. 47, pp. 302–12 (p. 309).
7
D. Whitelock, ‘Wulfstan and the So-called Laws of Edward and Guthrum’, EHR, 56
(1941), 1–21, and P. Wormald, The Making of English Law: King Alfred to the Twelfth Cen-
tury, vol. I, Legislation and its Limits (Oxford: Blackwell, 1999), pp. 389–91.
8
Af. 1, 7: Gesetze, ed. by Liebermann, I, 15–89 (pp. 48–49), and EHD I, no. 33, p. 374;
Anglo-Saxon Charters: An Annotated List and Bibliography, ed. by P. Sawyer (London: Royal
Historical Society, 1968), no. 1445; A Hand-Book to Land-charters and Other Saxonic Docu-
ments, ed. by J. Earle (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1888), pp. 162–65; cf. P. Wormald,
‘A Handlist of Anglo-Saxon Lawsuits’, in his Legal Culture in the Medieval West: Law as
Text, Image and Experience (London: Hambledon Press, 1999), pp. 253–87 (p. 266, no. 25).
9
IV Edgar 2a1 and 12 in The Laws of the Kings of England from Edmund to Henry I, ed.
and trans. by A. J. Robertson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1925), pp. 28–39 (pp.
32–33 (lagum) and pp. 36–37 (laga)); cf. Wormald, The Making, I, 317–20, esp. p. 319.

Page 27
 Ordernr. 041162

16 ELISABETH VAN HOUTS

Danes lived was known by the Danes and the English. Laga also crops up in
legislation, known as the Wantage lawbook, issued in 997 by King Aethelred (978–
1016) for the Five Boroughs and the Danelaw.10 Thus the two codes containing the
earliest instances of the word laga in legal compilations were mostly concerned with
the Danish inhabitants of England.
The word utlah for outlaw and utlaga for outlawry date from a slightly earlier
time (they could be as early as 966) and originate in two records of writing from
Peterborough, the town situated in the heart of Danelaw territory.11 A third record
dealing with an exchange of lands, one estate of which went to Peterborough abbey,
dates from between 971 and 975. The son of a widow accused of witchcraft fled and
became an outlaw (utlah).12 However, all three cases immediately raise one unsur-
passable methodological problem, namely that their earliest surviving manuscript
evidence is late and dates from mid-twelfth-century Peterborough. We cannot be
certain, therefore, as to whether the Peterborough scribes faithfully copied what they
found in their Old English exemplar, or whether they used utlah because it was the
common word to use in their own time. That scribes altered technical words and
used their preferred contemporary vocabulary is already clear from a case dating to
King Aethelred’s time in 997. In Aethelred’s first law book, where Aethelstan’s law
is copied, the word utlah is used instead of the original fliema, that is if we can
accept the twelfth-century copies, which are the only evidence for Aethelred’s early
legislation, at face value.13 In fact, we see this process all through the written sources
right up to the post-conquest period. Fliema and its variants are used almost indis-
criminately with utlah and its derivatives. One early twelfth-century Anglo-Norman
translator of the Instituti Cnuti glossed the Old English flema (fugitive) of II Cnut
13,2 as exulem quem Angli uocant utlaga (‘exile which the English call outlawry’).14
Yet, there is no doubt that the first concentration of the utlah vocabulary, in
writing, comes from King Aethelred’s reign and that the concentration is most pro-
nounced, as we have seen, in secular legal texts that have some preoccupation with
the cohabitation of English and Danes in England. To the same context belongs King

10
III Atr. rubric in The Laws of the Kings, ed. and trans. by Robertson, pp. 64–65.
11
Wormald, ‘Handlist’, p. 267, nos 50 and 51.
12
Wormald, ‘Handlist’, p. 267, no. 43, can be found in print in Anglo-Saxon Charters, ed.
by A. J. Robertson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1939), no. 37 and p. 68. For a
translation, see EHD I, no. 112. The dating comes from Susan Kelly’s revised edition of
Anglo-Saxon Charters: An Annotated List and Bibliography, ed. by P. Sawyer (unpublished
revision Cambridge, 1994), no. 1377.
13
I Atr. 1, 9a (The Laws of the Kings, ed. and trans. by Robertson, pp. 54–55) with II As. 2,
1/8 (Gesetze, ed. by Liebermann, I, 150–67 (pp. 152–53); EHD I, no. 35, p. 382); for a
comparison between the texts, see Wormald, The Making, I, 320–24.
14
The Laws of the Kings, ed. and trans. by Robertson, pp. 180–81; Gesetze, ed. by
Liebermann, I, 316–17; and Liebermann, ‘Friedlosigkeit’, p. 18.

Page 28
Ordernr. 041162

The Vocabulary of Exile and Outlawry 17

Aethelred’s treaty with Olaf Tryggvason and his associates dated to 994. Here too
we find the utlah vocabulary in an Anglo-Scandinavian context.15 It would be a mis-
take to conclude, however, that in all texts concerning Anglo-Scandinavian relations
references to ‘fugitives’ or ‘outlawry’ are expressed exclusively in Scandinavian
loan words. For example, Aethelred’s Wantage code of 997, the text that contains
more Scandinavian legal vocabulary than any, as has been expertly discussed by
Charlotte Neff, in III Aethelred 10, uses flyma where one might have expected utlah.16
Moreover, other texts besides legal ones betray an increased use of the word in
writing. The homilist Aelfric uses utlah frequently in his homilies, but also in his
grammar composed in c. 998, where a contemporary gloss gives exlex.17 The first
use in historical narrative comes from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle where manuscripts
C, D, and E show it under the year 1014, significantly again in the specific context of
relations with the Danes.18 From then on throughout the eleventh century and well
into the twelfth century, the utlah vocabulary occurs regularly as a synonym for the
indigenous terminology and occasionally predominates.19 Unlike the period around
the millennium it does not predominantly occur in Danish contexts. The late
eleventh- and early twelfth-century historians and lawyers use Old English and
Scandinavian loan words indiscriminately, it seems. It must be pointed out, however,
that amongst the historians John of Worcester is the only one who uses the verb
elegere for utlagu and exlex for utlah in his Latin rendition of the Anglo-Saxon
Chronicle.20 Others, like Henry of Huntingdon, William of Malmesbury, or in
Normandy Orderic Vitalis, prefer a more classical Latin (exulare or exul) and do not
strive to translate ‘literally’.

15
II Atr. 1,2 (utlah) and II Atr. 7,1 (utlage) (The Laws of the Kings, ed. and trans. by
Robertson, pp. 56–57 and 60–61). Compare Wormald, The Making, I, 321.
16
III Atr. 10: aelc flyma beo flyma on aelcum lande the on ánum sy (‘everyone who is an
outlaw/fugitive in one district shall be an outlaw/fugitive everywhere’, The Laws of the Kings,
ed. and trans. by Robertson, pp. 68–69). C. Neff, ‘Scandinavian Elements in the Wantage
Code of Aethelred II’, The Journal of Legal History, 10 (1989), 285–313.
17
An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary Based on the Manuscript Collections of the Late Joseph
Bosworth, ed. by T. Northcote Toller (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1898), p. 1146, where also
other examples can be found.
18
Two of the Saxon Chronicles Parallel with Supplementary Extracts from the Others: A
Revised Text, ed. by C. Plummer and J. Earle, 2 vols (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1892–99),
I (1892), 145 (E: utlagede) and n. 4 (CD: utlah).
19
Between 1017 and 1097 the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle manuscripts contain (with variants)
the words utlah eight times, fliema twice, and adrifen six times.
20
The Chronicle of John of Worcester, ed. by R. R. Darlington and P. McGurk, trans. by
J. Bray and P. McGurk (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), II, 502 (1017: exlegauit), 506 (1020:
exlegauit), 576 (1042x65: exlegauit), 574 (c. 1051: exlegauerunt), 592 (c. 1042x65: exle-
gantes), 598 (1065: exlegeuerunt).

Page 29
 Ordernr. 041162

18 ELISABETH VAN HOUTS

What can we conclude from this evidence? It seems to me beyond doubt that the
introduction of the laga/utlaga terminology was in some ways connected with the
regulations of the cohabitation of English and Danes in England. The semantic evi-
dence, however, does not support the notion, implied by Liebermann, that it reflects
the introduction of a new institution or even a new concept. The seeming inter-
changeability of the words flyma and utlah suggests that Danes and English people
used both as synonyms for banishment and outlawing people as punitive measures. It
is, therefore, not a case of one people, the Danes, imposing a new set of rules called
utlaga on another people, the English. Having banished the notion of the Scandinavian
origin of outlawry to the land of myths, how do we explain why the Scandinavian
loanword gained prevalence over the indigenous terminology?
An answer may be found in one of Patrick Wormald’s recent suggestions. Faced
with the Scandinavian contents of IV Edgar, the Wihtbordestan code, III Aethelred,
the Wantage code, and Wulfstan’s ‘Edward and Guthrum’ treaty, Wormald suggests
that these legal texts were addressing local situations in areas heavily populated by
Danes, and they were not meant for ‘national’ consumption.21 Therefore, he sug-
gests, the laws incorporated Danish customs as much as they incorporated English
customs. The laws did not replace one set of rules by another, but the codes fused
two sets of customs that were in use regionally. This would explain the simultaneous
use of the Old English flyma and the Danish laga in the Wantage code. So far, so
good. If, however, we think this through more carefully we are faced with a problem,
especially where banishment is concerned. By equating vocabulary with customs,
Wormald implies — but we must note that he never says so explicitly — that the
Scandinavian loanwords indicate customs or institutions alien to the English ones. A
further implication presents itself, for the only way in which the Scandinavian loan-
words, representing Scandinavian customs, could have become the dominant form in
England would be as a result of either amalgamation of two sets of customs of which
the Scandinavian custom dominates (as the survival of the words would be sug-
gesting), or as a result of the imposition of one set of (Scandinavian) customs over
another set of (English) customs. I doubt that the implications along the line
sketched here represent in any way what happened historically. The Danes, like the
English, and like most other people in Europe, knew, as we shall see below, banish-
ment as a punishment. It is difficult to believe that one form of banishment would in
practice be very different from another form of banishment. There may have been
differences in procedure, but we do not know that for sure. Let me suggest another
way out of this problem.
The period around the first millennium saw an increase in roaming Viking groups
in the North Sea area. Not only the English, but also the Normans were increasingly
concerned with the influx, temporarily or permanently, of marauding Scandinavians.
Many were for rent as mercenaries. Scandinavian mercenaries, as Simon Keynes has

21
Wormald, The Making, I, 328–29.

Page 30
Ordernr. 041162

The Vocabulary of Exile and Outlawry 19

pointed out, were first engaged in England in any numbers in 994. They proved
unreliable fellows and easily changed sides.22 When loyal they received moveables
and land; when disloyal they were banned. In a time of heightened tension between
old inhabitants and their descendants and newcomers and their offspring when land
was under attack and alliances continuously changed, banishment would have been a
probably unsuccessful but recurring attempt (failing the St Brice’s Day murders in
1002) to punish disloyalty, disobedience, and desertion. And, I would suggest, might
it not have been likely that those who were hit by banishment were mostly the
Scandinavian mercenaries? And might they have come to be known under their
Scandinavian label of utlah? And could not the frequency of such labelling have led
to the label utlah being stuck to the pundits and the label utlaga to the measure of
banishment? If such a tentative scenario can be accepted, it might explain that such
measures were recorded in English legal texts issued in Wessex (Woodstock,
Wantage), plagued by mercenaries away from the Danelaw, but clearly, as we have
seen, destined to be put into practice there to discourage the long established Danes
in that area from imitating the newcomers. If such an explanation would hold for the
English North Sea area, we might explore if it could equally be applied to Nor-
mandy, where the rise of an equivalent vocabulary in the same period might lead to a
similar explanation.

There has been discussion on the origin of early Norman exile and outlawry vocabu-
lary similar to that for Anglo-Saxon England. The vernacular word for exile or
outlawry is ullac, which is a clear variant of the Scandinavian word utlah. It occurs
only once in a charter of William the Conqueror from 1050, which has survived only
in an early thirteenth-century cartulary.23 Thereafter, it occurs sporadically in legal
literature and is incorporated in the late twelfth-century Norman legal compilation
the Très Ancien Coutumier de Normandie. Ullac was not the only Scandinavian
loanword. The 1050 charter also contains the word hamfara, while two Cotentin
documents of 1063/66 and 1056/66 contain the Scandinavian vocabulary of vareck

22
S. Keynes, ‘The Vikings in England, c. 790–1016’, in The Oxford Illustrated History of
the Vikings, ed. by P. Sawyer (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), pp. 48–82 (pp. 77–
78). For the interesting suggestion that Edgar had already invited many foreigners including
Danes, see now S. Jayakumar, ‘Some Reflections on the “Foreign Policies” of Edgar “the
Peaceable”’, Haskins Society Journal, 10 (2001), 17–37.
23
Recueil des actes des ducs de Normandie de 911 à 1066, ed. by M. Fauroux, Mémoires
de la Société des Antiquaires de Normandie, 36 (Caen: Caron, 1961), no. 121, p. 286: ‘Eodem
anno quo in conjugium sortitus est Normannorum marchio Willelmus nomine Balduinus [sic]
comitis filiam dedit Sancto Petro Pratelli consuetudines quas habebat in quadam terra que
Wascolium uulgo uocatur, scilicet hainfaram, ullac, rat, incendium, bernagium, bellum. Pro
quibus abbas ejusdem loci Anffridus nomine ei dignam dedit pecuniam ide est .X. libras
denariorum et orationes loci Pratelli.’

Page 31
 Ordernr. 041162

20 ELISABETH VAN HOUTS

(right of wreckage).24 There is agreement amongst scholars as to the Scandinavian

etymology for the word ullac, but they are divided about the date by which it became
known in Normandy. An early introduction in c. 910 by Rollo, the first Viking
leader of Rouen, has been suggested on the grounds that Dudo of St-Quentin, writing
around 996–1015, says that he implemented new laws.25 One could object to this
suggestion by pointing out that Rollo might have had little leeway in imposing new
laws on the Franks, particularly if we see him as a temporary caretaker-count of the
Carolingian king Charles the Simple in Rouen. A more attractive proposition con-
cerns the suggestion of a late tenth-century introduction, possibly via immigrants
from the Danelaw in England.26 Instead of thinking in terms of laws being imposed
by Rollo, one could argue the case of intensification of use of the Frankish practice
of exile and outlawry by the Norman ruler, specifically targeted at Danish immi-
grants who at times were troublesome.27 A Danish context may have led to the use of
the Scandinavian loan word. As in England, the cohabitation of Franks and Danish
newcomers may have led to disturbances calling for punitive measures that were
known to both peoples but that became increasingly known under the Danish name.
The Norman evidence for such a process, if it can be identified as such, left much less
trace than in England. Exile and banishment are known from Carolingian France,
and from Neustria in particular, and they survived under the Norman dukes.28 The
Scandinavian legal terminology for Normandy, far less abundant than the English
anyway, certainly does not support the notion of a Scandinavian origin for outlawry
or exile as a new institution. Instead, I would like to argue that around the first
millennium in England and Normandy a relatively new (Scandinavian) vocabulary is

24
Recueil des actes des ducs de Normandie, ed. by Fauroux, no. 224 (for Notre Dame de
Cherbourg) (p. 431 last line werec); no. 214 (for Notre Dame de Coutances) (p. 406 ejectivi
quod in ilis finibus dicitur verefc).
25
J. Yver, ‘Les Premières Institutions du duché de Normandie’, in I Normanni e la loro
espansione in Europa nell’alto medioevo 18–24 aprile 1968, Settimane di studio del Centro
Italiano di studi sull’alto medioevo, 16 (Spoleto: Presso la sede del Centro Italiano di studi
sull’alto medioevo, 1969), pp. 299–366 (pp. 316–23), where he does not mention ullac but
concentrates what may have constituted Rollo’s legislation. God’s Peace and King’s Peace:
The Laws of Edward the Confessor, ed. by B. R. O’Brien (Philadelphia: University of Penn-
sylvania, 1999), pp. 20, 22.
26
L. Musset, ‘Autour des modalités juridiques de l’expansion normande au XIe siècle: Le
Droit d’exil’, in Autour du pouvoir ducal Normand Xe–XIIe siècles, ed. by L. Musset, J.-M.
Bouvris, and J.-M. Maillefer, Cahiers des Annales de Normandie, 17 (Caen: Centre d’Etudes
normandes de l’Université de Caen, 1985), pp. 45–59 (pp. 56–59).
27
The treaty of 991 between King Aethelred and Duke Richard I regulated the sheltering by
both rulers of each other’s (Viking) enemies. Referring to events in the year 1003 (or 1013),
William of Jumièges refers to Danes finding shelter in Norman harbours (GND, II, 18–19).
28
Musset, ‘Autour des modalités’, pp. 53–55, and Goebel, Felony and Misdemeanor, pp.
80–122.

Page 32
Ordernr. 041162 KATERN 2

The Vocabulary of Exile and Outlawry 21

increasingly being used because of specific problems relating to groups of Scandina-

vian mercenaries who might have been settlers or newcomers wishing to settle, but
who caused problems by changing allegiance in both countries. They were regularly
sent away or banned, probably by using processes that were well established in both
countries. The process of banishment, as we have seen, was well known on either
side of the Channel, and as a temporary measure in particular it was an ideal way to
get rid of troublemakers. Since the troublemakers were Scandinavians, the vocabu-
lary to ban them was Scandinavian, and as a result a banned man became known as
utlah and the custom by which he was banned became known as utlaga.

The third geographical area we need to consider in our exploration of the vocabulary
for exile and outlawry is Scandinavia, and Iceland in particular. Iceland was colo-
nized by Norse immigrants, some of whom were exiles from Norway.29 They estab-
lished themselves in their new country, unusually without a king. Their guides were
the laws devised and implemented in a series of meetings in the 920s, 960s, and late
990s before the decision was taken to put the laws into writing in 1116/17.30 None of
this material has survived in contemporary manuscripts, and only late thirteenth-
century material, collectively known under the name Grágás, is available.31 Al-
though most historians would agree that some of the Icelandic legal customs are very
old and presumably go back to the tenth century, we cannot be sure which ones they
are. Moreover, this precarious tradition also makes it very difficult to decide what
measures were directly borrowed from Norse law and what was innovation or adap-
tation to Icelandic circumstances. Norwegian law as well as Swedish and Danish
lawcodes all post-date the Icelandic material. The latter therefore provides us with a
snapshot of legislation that is the nearest approximation to legal conditions in Scan-
dinavia c. 1000. Finally, the Icelandic Grágás constitute the most detailed regula-
tions on exile and outlawry from anywhere in medieval Europe.32
The first thing that strikes the historian interested in the Scandinavian vocabulary
of exile and outlawry is that Iceland has two completely different terms for outlaws.

29
J. Byock, Viking Age Iceland (London: Penguin, 2001), pp. 5–24.
30
Byock, Viking Age Iceland, pp. 170–84, 308–15.
31
Laws of Early Iceland: Grágás. The Codex Regius of Grágás with Material from Other
Manuscripts, trans. by A. Dennis, P. Foote, and R. Perkins, University of Manitoba Icelandic
Studies, 3 (Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 1980).
32
Grágás, I, 7–8; Byock, Viking Age Iceland, pp. 231–32, and J. Byock, ‘Outlawry’, in
Medieval Scandinavia: An Encyclopedia, ed. by P. Pulsiano (New York: Garland, 1993), pp.
460–61. For more extensive studies, see A. Breisch, Frid och fredlöshet: Sociala band och
utanförskap på Island under äldere medeltid, Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Studia historica
Upsaliensia, 174 (Uppsala: Uppsala University, 1994), pp. 133–42; English summary, pp.
166–73, esp. pp. 170–72. For an anthropological analysis, see K. Hastrup, Culture and History
in Medieval Iceland: An Anthropological Analysis of Structure and Change (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1985), pp. 136–45.

Page 33
 Ordernr. 041162

22 ELISABETH VAN HOUTS

The law distinguished lesser outlawry, called fjörbaugsarðr, from the full outlawry,
called skóggangr (literally ‘forest going’). The word utlah was known but with a
quite different meaning of ‘fine’ or ‘liable to pay a fine’. It only occurs twice in the
Grágás and always in specific reference to Norse law.33 This has led scholars to
believe that utlah may have been used originally in its meaning of fugitive or outlaw,
but that it was overtaken by two words that reflected the specific Icelandic circum-
stances better. The concept and institution of exile and outlawry is again very similar
to that in the rest of Europe, but we know about its procedures in much greater
detail. Cases of lesser outlawry outnumbered the cases of full outlawry and this is
certainly the picture we get from elsewhere. Lesser outlawry forced the outlaw (fjör-
baugsmaðr) to leave the country and stay away for three years after which his goods
were restored to him and he could continue living as if nothing had happened. While
he was away his dependants, and in particular his wife and children, were looked
after with some of the income from his possessions set aside for this purpose. The
full outlaw (skógarmaðr) was outlawed for life, lost his legal status and persona, and
was doomed to live a life as if a wild animal in the forest. His goods and lands were
forfeited, and he was not allowed any contact with others. Punishment of support for
a full outlaw in turn consisted of full outlawry.
The significance of the Icelandic evidence for the purpose of this essay lies in the
fact of the negative evidence it provides for the Scandinavian loanwords in use in
England and Normandy. It seems highly unlikely to me that the development of
Icelandic outlawry vocabulary had any linguistic link with those in England and
Normandy. What link there is consists of hints that lesser outlawry lasted three
years, a period that seems to have been recognized as the standard period within
which reconciliation with the ruler was likely and normally expected. The evidence
from eleventh-century Normandy is striking in this respect, for Orderic Vitalis gives
various cases of eleventh-century Norman exiles being away for precisely that
number of years.34 For England, the evidence is less clear-cut, though a few cases of
reconciliation within a period of three years are certainly known (see below). For
both countries, however, the evidence for full outlawry (as defined by Icelandic law)
is very difficult to establish due to the historical circumstances. For Normandy full
outlawry has been identified as being intimately linked with the emigration of
Norman outlaws to Italy.35 One might argue, however, that the attractions of Italy

33
Hastrup, Culture and History, pp. 139–40.
34
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 90–91, 106–07, 124–25 (Arnold d’Echauffour), 120–
21 (Robert de Vitot), VI, 46–49 (Hubert de St-Suzanne), 332–35 (William de Roumare); and
my ‘L’exil dans l’espace Anglo-Normand’, in La Normandie et l’Angleterre au Moyen Age,
4–7 Octobre 2001 Colloque Cerisy-la-Salle, ed. by V. Gazeau (Turnhout: Brepols, 2003), pp.
75–85 (pp. 78–79).
35
For further discussion of Norman outlaws and emigration to Italy, see Ewan Johnson’s
essay in this volume.

Page 34
Ordernr. 041162

The Vocabulary of Exile and Outlawry 23

(availability of land, mercenary opportunities, and moveable wealth) formed a stronger

attraction for Normans to stay than to return to the home country and seek reconcili-
ation with the duke. In England the political upheavals under two sets of foreign
kings (Danish between 1014/16 and 1042, and Norman from 1066) created unique
circumstances under which outlaws, who normally might have attempted to seek rec-
onciliation, might have decided for their own sake to stay away, particularly if their
lands had been confiscated. For Englishmen after 1066 it was difficult enough to
hold on to their lands; for outlaws it must have been even more difficult. Domesday
Book offers interesting, if often incomplete, information in this respect. It also offers
unambiguous evidence that by 1086 the Scandinavian loanword for outlawry had
overtaken the use of the indigenous vocabulary or its Latin literal translation.

Domesday Book, compiled in 1086, provides more promising material.36 Domesday

Book is the single most useful source for the history of English exiles in the reigns of
Edward the Confessor (1042–66), Harold (1066), and William the Conqueror (1066–
87). As for the pre-conquest period, most of the references concern named men who
had to flee the country, forfeited their lands, and left their home. Few of the entries
hint at reasons. In the case of Hereward the Wake, the most famous exile, Domesday
Book twice explicitly mentions his departure, without however using any of the
common outlawry vocabulary. Earl Godwine and Harold are mentioned in connec-
tion with their outlawry in the early 1050s.37 Godwine’s son Tostig is not mentioned
in this connection, but his own exile in 1065 is alluded to by the words that ‘he left
[the country]’.38 Several other named men are Spirites, the canon at Bromfield;39
Eadric of Laxfield, who was outlawed but then reconciled with King Edward;40
Eadric the steersman of St Benet’s Holme, who is mentioned twice as outlaw;41 and
several anonymous outlaws whose forfeited lands were given to others, for example

36
DB, ed. by Farley; Domesday Book: A Complete Translation, Alecto Historical Edition,
ed. by A. Williams and G. H. Martin (London: Penguin, 2002) gives the folio numbers. I will
also include references to R. Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law: Society and Legal
Custom in Early Medieval England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998).
37
DB, ed. by Farley, I, fol. 186r; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 746 (erant exulati).
38
DB, ed. by Farley, II, fol. 200v; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 2430 (exiit); cf. also DB,
ed. by Farley, I, fol. 133r; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 770; DB, ed. by Farley, I, fol. 217v;
Fleming, Domesday Book, nos 54 and 56.
39
DB, ed. by Farley, I, fol. 252v; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 1319 (fuisset exulatus);
Wormald, ‘Handlist’, p. 270, no. 97.
40
DB, ed. by Farley, II, fols 310v–311r; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 2834 (udlagauit);
Wormald, ‘Handlist’, p. 270, no. 101.
41
DB, ed. by Farley, II, fols 312v–313r; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 2839 (utlagisset);
DB, ed. by Farley, II, fols 310v–311r; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 2834 (rediret).

Page 35
 Ordernr. 041162

24 ELISABETH VAN HOUTS

at Thurne,42 at Brackwell Quay,43 and at Mundon.44 The cities of Chester, Shrews-

bury, and Lincoln and Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire all refer to outlawry as a
punishment that could be proclaimed by king and sheriff, but all add that only the
king can offer reconciliation and inlaw the culprit.45 This is presumably the meaning
of II Cnut 13 where it is said that the king alone has power to grant the outlaw
security.46 York is exceptional in that it repeats the royal pardon but then adds that
earl or sheriff can recall any outlaw they have expelled and offer him peace.47 Per-
haps there is a remnant here of an older (Scandinavian) practice? York after all is far
removed from the centre of Wessex royal authority, and relying exclusively on a
royal pardon for penitential outlaws would not be practical. Thus before 1200
initially outlawry was proclaimed at local level only, namely by the hundred or the
shire court, in which case the appropriate officers were the sheriff as well as the
earls.48 The king could also outlaw his enemies, and there is some discussion as to
whether he could do so of his own volition or only in conjunction with his court as
part of a formal process.49 There is also ambiguous evidence for others. Domesday
Book contains at least one case where a certain Aethelwig [of Thetford] is said to
have outlawed a freeman whose land at Thurne ended up in the hands of Roger
Bigot.50 In what capacity Aethelwig did so is unknown. As for the permanency of
the banishment, the cases of the Godwines in 1051/52 and Eadric of Laxfield at an
unknown time illustrate that relatively quick (within three years) reconciliation with
the king was possible.
For the post-conquest period the most famous case of outlawry concerns the fate
of the earls after the earls’ revolt in 1075 when Ralph de Gael, earl of East Anglia,

42
DB, ed. by Farley, II, fol. 277v; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 2721 (fuit exlex, fecit
illegem).
43
DB, ed. by Farley, II, fol. 24r; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 1861 (udlagauit).
44
DB, ed. by Farley, II, fol. 49v; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 1930 (utllagauit).
45
DB, ed. by Farley, I, fol. 262v; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 253 (Chester: utlah); DB,
ed. by Farley, I, fol. 252r; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 1307 (Shrewsbury: utlagus); DB, ed.
by Farley, I, fol. 336v; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 981 (Lincoln: exulatus); DB, ed. by
Farley, I, fol. 280v; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 1244 (Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire:
exulatus). The customs of Worcester say that the king has all the forfeitures, including those
of outlawry, except in the lands held by Westminster Abbey which King Edward had given
them (DB, ed. by Farley, I, fol. 172r; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 1640 utlaghe).
46
The Laws of the Kings, ed. and trans. by Robertson, pp. 180–81.
47
DB, ed. by Farley, I, fol. 298v; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 1703 (exulatus).
48
Fleming, Domesday Book, pp. 44–45.
49
Wormald, ‘A Handlist’, p. 259.
50
DB, ed. by Farley, II, fol. 277v; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 2721 (fuit exlex, fecit
illegem).

Page 36
Ordernr. 041162

The Vocabulary of Exile and Outlawry 25

and Roger of Breteuil, son of William FitzOsbern, rebelled against King William.51
Earl Waltheof, an indigenous nobleman, was implicated as well. He was captured
and after one year imprisonment executed for treason. Roger was also captured, but
spared, even though he spent the rest of his life in a Norman prison. Ralph was sent
into exile and returned to his Breton lands; he later went on crusade. Amongst Earl
Ralph’s followers the only likely suspect also to have been outlawed is Walter of
Dol, whose lands were forfeited.52 The fate of the lands of Earl Ralph and Walter of
Dol can be followed in the pages of Domesday Book for Norfolk in particular.
Lesser known exiles were the anonymous English fighters who left after the defeat at
Hastings and presumably chose voluntary exile. Some of them ended up as body-
guards of the Byzantine emperor.53 Other post-conquest outlaws are mentioned in
Domesday Book very much in the same way as the casual references to their pre-
conquest contemporaries. Not surprisingly, many Englishmen were outlawed by the
new king after 1066, presumably on the grounds that they had broken the king’s
peace. In effect, any act of subversiveness may have been interpreted as such. The
circumstances must have inspired many an Englishman to continue to fight, offer
resistance, or otherwise sabotage the newcomers. Skalpi, housecarl of Harold, ini-
tially held his land but forfeited it when he went to York, where he died in outlawry.
With Ann Williams we may hazard a guess that Skalpi had joined the English re-
sistance against the Conqueror in the years 1068/69 and was outlawed perhaps as a
result of his active participation.54 Other references to English outlaws come mainly
from East Anglia, the North of England, and the Welsh march, fringe areas where
local resistance to the Conqueror was strongest. Wulfweard based near Gloucester
was made an outlaw and his land went to one of the Conqueror’s cooks;55 Vighlah
lost his lands and left the country, a very probable sign of exile from the South
Riding of Yorkshire as a result of participation in anti-Norman fighting;56 and Tonni,

51
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 310–23; English Lawsuits from William I to Rich-
ard I, ed. and trans. by R. C. van Caenegem, Publications of the Selden Society (London:
Selden Society, 1990–91), I (1990), 16–22. Fleming’s index, Domesday Book, p. 450, under
Earl Ralph Wader, lists all lands he lost.
52
Fleming, Domesday Book, nos 2809, 2850–51, 2962, 3053; A. Williams, The English
and the Norman Conquest (Woodbridge: Boydell and Brewer, 1995), p. 63.
53
J. Godfrey, ‘The Defeated Anglo-Saxons Take Service with the Eastern Emperor’, ANS,
1 (1987), 63–74.
54
DB, ed. by Farley, II, fol. 59r; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 1951 (in utlagaria);
Williams, The English, pp. 34–35.
55
DB, ed. by Farley, I, fol. 162v; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 512 (utlag factus est).
56
DB, ed. by Farley, I, fols 375r and 375v; Fleming, Domesday Book, nos 1049 (terram
exiuit) and 1071 (a case of forfeiture).

Page 37
 Ordernr. 041162

26 ELISABETH VAN HOUTS

too, may have lost his lands for similar reasons.57 Godwine was outlawed in Norfolk
and so was Eadric, the captain of St Benet Holme’s ship, who fled to Denmark.58
Beorhtsige was outlawed in Essex.59 Azur was outlawed in the Pershore Abbey
area.60 Amongst the English outlaws is Abbot Aethelsige of St Augustine who spent
some time in Denmark, perhaps on account of his involvement as interim adminis-
trator of Ramsey Abbey.61 His outlawry is confirmed by a Canterbury charter of
1077 which refers to him as the Conqueror’s fugitive.62 The case of Rainer the Dea-
con in the North Riding serves as a warning that not everyone listed in Domesday
Book as leaving the country did so as a result of outlawry. Although Fleming in-
cludes him in her list of outlaws, it is more likely that, based in enemy territory,
Rainer preferred to leave the country and lose his lands rather than stay and presum-
ably be faced with hostile Englishmen.63 At most this might be a case of unauthor-
ized departure, that is, the abandonment of estates without the lord’s permission,
which was normally punished with forfeiture, but not with outlawry. The effect,
however, of voluntary departure and outlawry, in the form of loss of lands, may have
been the same.
The ethnic mix of the population in England before and after the conquest led to
some specific outlawry rules established to punish acts of guerrilla warfare and ter-
rorism. Long before the conquest, King Aethelred had issued legislation that, in case
of multiple murder by a Viking (Dane), the murderer(s) shall be treated as outlaws
by their own people and by the English.64 The ethnic differentiation applied to the
Danelaw as well as to the rest of England.65 This law was maintained by the Danish
kings and the Norman kings. At some stage, probably relatively early in his reign in
England, William the Conqueror legislated on exculpation and treated, interestingly,

57
DB, ed. by Farley, I, fol. 375r; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 1050 (no mention of
outlawry, only capture and desertion).
58
DB, ed. by Farley, II, fols 273v–274r; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 2649 (Godwine:
utlagauit); DB, ed. by Farley, II, fol. 200r; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 2428 (Eadric: exlex).
59
DB, ed. by Farley, II, fol. 48r; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 1927 (utlagauit).
60
DB, ed. by Farley, I, fol. 64v, fol. 175r; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 1666 (factus est
utlagh).
61
DB, ed. by Farley, I, fol. 208r; Fleming, Domesday Book, no. 851; Williams, The
English, p. 35.
62
Regesta regum Anglo-Normannorum: The Acta of William I (1066–1087), ed. by
D. Bates (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998), no. 83.
63
DB, ed. by Farley, I, fols 375v, 375v–376r, 376r; Fleming, Domesday Book, nos 1083,
1085, 1087, and 1097 (all have exiuit).
64
II Atr. 7.1, The Laws of the Kings, ed. and trans. by Robertson, pp. 60–61.
65
G. Garnett, ‘Franci et Angli: The Legal Distinctions between Peoples after the Con-
quest’, ANS, 8 (1985), 109–37 (p. 127 n. 141); note that Liebermann in Gesetze, III, 83 n. 6,
argues that the ordinance applied only to the Danelaw.

Page 38
Ordernr. 041162

The Vocabulary of Exile and Outlawry 27

cases of outlawry in a separate clause.66 In all charges of outlawry against English-

men, they could only exonerate themselves through the ordeal of the iron. The impli-
cation is that oathtaking or trial by battle was not allowed. Presumably supporting
oaths would have been unacceptable on the grounds that English oath helpers would
be fellow countrymen inclined to help the accused.67 If an Englishman brought a
charge of outlawry against a Frenchman the latter could clear himself through battle.
Thus the conquerors are allowed to use arms to settle outlawry accusations, whereas
the English, and perhaps the Danes, were not.68 As George Garnett has observed, the
procedure advantaged the French not the English.69 This is nowhere more clear than
in the subsequent clause which states that if an Englishman did not wish to do battle
against the Frenchman (namely in the scenario sketched above of an Englishman
bringing a charge of outlawry against a Frenchman), the Frenchman could clear him-
self (not by trial by combat, but) by a comprehensive oath. That is an oath that does
not depend on formulaic exactitude, something that might have been too difficult if a
Frenchman were to clear himself with a precise rendition in English of some legal
formula. Throughout William the Conqueror’s reign it is difficult to see, however,
how any Englishman could have been in a position to charge one of the continental
conquerors with a charge of outlawry that could have been executed.

The lengthy excursus into the evidence provided by Domesday Book for the purpose
of understanding the vocabulary of exile and outlawry at the beginning of the elev-
enth century has shown that by the late 1080s the Scandinavian loanword utlah and
its variants vastly outnumbered the indigenous and classical Latin vocabulary. I have
argued that for the period around the millennium it was the frequency with which
exile and outlawry hit the Scandinavian mercenaries, harassing areas in England and
Normandy, which may have caused the linguistic association between the Scandina-
vian word for banning and the Scandinavian mercenaries. As a result of this lin-
guistic association embedded in a Scandinavian context, the Scandinavian loan
vocabulary became the dominant one in cases of exile and banning in England, and
was used for a while in a legal context in Normandy as well. I have also tried to
show that a comparison between these two areas and Scandinavia, and in particular
Iceland, does not help so much with the linguistic evidence since the utlah vocabu-
lary is not used in Iceland. However, the practice of exile and outlawry there does
show interesting parallels, suggesting that any future study of exile and outlawry in
Europe, even though I have concentrated here on England and Normandy, benefits
from the comparative approach. For the practice of banning in these areas is emphat-
ically not a Scandinavian custom introduced there by Scandinavian leaders, be they

66
Regesta, ed. by Bates, no. 130, pp. 445–48.
67
Garnett, ‘Franci et Angli’, p. 130–33.
68
Regesta, ed. by Bates, no. 130.
69
Garnett, ‘Franci et Angli’, p. 133.

Page 39
 Ordernr. 041162

28 ELISABETH VAN HOUTS

Rollo in Normandy or local Scandinavian kings in England. It is my suggestion that

the custom of banning was well known in all areas under observation. What was new
was the relatively sudden use of a Scandinavian loanword utlah by Anglo-Saxon
kings and Norman dukes from the late tenth century onwards in their dealings
specifically with Scandinavian troublemakers. The label of utlah was given to them
and subsequently used for the English and to a lesser extent for the Normans in cases
of banishment that had nothing to do with Scandinavians. This then had as a result
that, within the space of one century, the utlah vocabulary could become the pre-
dominant word for exile and outlawry in Domesday Book.

Page 40
Ordernr. 041162

The Process of Norman Exile into Southern Italy*

EWAN JOHNSON

O
ver the course of the eleventh century small groups of Northern European
knights, a large proportion of whom came from Normandy, came to occupy
the highest positions in the societies of Southern Italy.1 This displacement of
a large part of the previous ruling elite was accomplished gradually and without any
single organizational force, and involved not just military conquest but an accom-
modation with local interests, which for many meant marriage with the Lombard
women who had helped to, and continued to, maintain these interests.2 The gradual
nature of this process has raised historiographical interest in the extent and timing of
the Normans’ assimilation into the societies, especially the Lombard ones, they

*
I would like to thank the Arts and Humanities Research Board and the Leverhulme Trust
for providing financial support over the period in which this paper was written.
1
The standard history is F. Chalandon, Histoire de la domination normande en Italie et en
Sicile, 2 vols (Paris: Protat Frères, 1907). D. Matthew, The Norman Kingdom of Sicily (Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), provides an overview in English, although has no
footnotes. L.-R. Ménager, ‘Inventaire des familles normandes et franques émigrées en Italie
mériondale et en Sicile (XIe–XIIe siècles)’, in Roberto Guiscardo e il suo tempo (Relazioni e
communicazioni nelle prime giornate normanno-sveve, Bari, maggio 1973) (Rome: Il centro
di ricerca, 1975), pp. 259–390, demonstrates that the majority of such men came from
Normandy. G. A. Loud, The Age of Robert Guiscard (Harlow: Longman, 2000), pp. 60–66,
stresses the variety of Norman groups.
2
G. A. Loud, ‘How “Norman” was the Norman Conquest of Southern Italy?’, Nottingham
Medieval Studies, 25 (1981), 13–34, discusses the issues broadly. On individual cases of inter-
marriage, see G. A. Loud, ‘Continuity and Change in Norman Italy: The Campania in the
Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries’, JMH, 22 (1996), 314–43; P. Skinner, Family Power in
Southern Italy: The Duchy of Gaeta and its Neighbours 850–1139 (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, 1995); H. Taviani-Carozzi, La Principauté lombarde de Salerne (IXe–XIe siècle):
Pouvoir et société en Italie lombarde méridionale (Rome: École française de Rome, 1991).

Page 41
 Ordernr. 041162

30 EWAN JOHNSON

encountered.3 Such studies have, rightly, focused on evidence from Italy and have
not differentiated greatly between the reasons for different Normans’ presence in
Italy, partly because it remains evidentially difficult to be certain of the motives most
individuals had for leaving Normandy. Yet the process which brought individuals from
Normandy, and their motivations in leaving, had an obvious impact on their actions
in Southern Italy. In general, the account is one of small, loosely bound groups of
Norman knights who took service with existing power groups and used the oppor-
tunities presented to consolidate claims to land.4 As Norman leaders with land and
wealth emerged, newcomers from Normandy in turn took service with them. The
suggested motivation is always financial enrichment through money or land, and the
means of recruitment seems to have been sending word to Normandy or binding those
already present to you through gifts. Individuals who voluntarily left Normandy in
this way, and who were successful, had an obvious motivation for settling in Italy
and severing political ties with Normandy, and rapidly adapted to Italian conditions.
Those who were driven out through the political actions of the Duke of Normandy
represent a distinct group, however, both because the politicized nature of their
departure makes their motivation for leaving Normandy apparent, and because it
affected the links they maintained with Normandy on arrival.5 In this essay I hope to
examine how the process of exile, and exiles’ understanding of it, could help shape
their relationship with Normandy whilst in Italy, and hence their identities as ‘Nor-
mans’. The main body of the essay, however, concerns itself with what such an

3
E. Cuozzo, ‘À propos de la coexistance entre normands et lombardes dans le royaume de
Sicile: La Révolte féodale de 1160–2’, in Peuples du Moyen Age: Problèmes d’identification,
ed. by C. Carozzi and H. Taviani-Carozzi (Aix-en-Provence: Université de Provence, 1996),
pp. 45–56; J. H. Drell, ‘Cultural Syncretism and Ethnic Identity: The Norman “Conquest” of
Southern Italy and Sicily’, JMH, 25.3 (1999), 187–202, are explicit, although consideration of
the subject is impossible without the studies listed in note 2 above.
4
For the beginnings of Norman activity, see J. France, ‘The Occasion of the Coming of the
Normans to Italy’, JMH, 17 (1991), 185–205; H. Hoffmann, ‘Die Anfänge der Normannen in
Unteritalien’, Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken, 49
(1969), 95–144; E. Joranson, ‘The Inception of the Career of the Normans in Italy – Legend
and History’, Speculum, 23 (1948), 353–96; and Loud, Robert Guiscard, pp. 81–91. Loud and
Hoffman sensibly account for variations in source material by pointing out the disparate and
wide-ranging nature of Norman activity.
5
Loud, Robert Guiscard, pp. 81–91, suggests that the timeframe and overwhelmingly Nor-
man nature of the conquest of Southern Italy would support extending exile caused by
political instability as a more general motivation. This is a different understanding of exile
than ‘banishment by the duke’ which, despite the fact that such power (derived from the
Scandinavian ullac) was unique to Normandy within France, could not account for such
extensive emigration. I am sceptical, without evidence of the extent to which movement
occurred within France, that Normandy was necessarily producing more exiles than
elsewhere. To talk of individuals exiled as one group is difficult, since it includes both those
who have a chance of return and those who do not.

Page 42
Ordernr. 041162

The Process of Norman Exile into Southern Italy 31

understanding of exile might be, because this is both necessary and of more general
relevance to the concerns of this volume. The key features of such an understanding
are that the process of exile was tenurially rather than legalistically perceived and
that it was potentially reversible.
I will concentrate here on those sources which tell us most about those who were
driven from Normandy and the process by which they were expelled. Most informa-
tion is given by sources from Normandy itself, since they describe events which
were of interest there but which mattered much less when explaining events in
Southern Italy. I have not limited myself solely to cases where the individual ended
up in Italy, since this would seem to unduly limit an understanding of how the pro-
cess of exile was perceived in Normandy, and to introduce a distinction between the
eventual destination in exile which is not there in the source material. I will con-
centrate particularly on the works of Orderic Vitalis, an English-born monk of St-
Évroult, who interpolated the classic work of Norman history, the serial biography of
the dukes now known as the Gesta Normannorum Ducum, at some point before 1109
and then, over a thirty-year period, wrote a broader history of the world he knew,
misleadingly called the Ecclesiastical History.6 The works, the Ecclesiastical His-
tory in particular, provide a treasure trove of information on the lives and attitudes of
mid-ranking nobility in the Duchy of Normandy, in particular the Giroie family,
whose donations both founded and sustained St-Évroult.7 In 1058 Roger of Mont-
gomery persuaded Duke William to exile the heads of two Giroie houses: Arnold of
Echauffour and Hugh of Grandmesnil.8 In fact their exile was rather a misnomer, for
although Arnold nominally decamped across the border, he spent three years
pillaging lands in the Lieuvin before he eventually left for Italy.9 His period outside
Normandy was also short, and he was able to return before his death in 1064 and
purchase the Duke’s pardon.10 Hugh had actually left for Italy but had returned to
fight for Duke William before 1064.11 Another member of the Giroie family,
Robert II of Grandmesnil, was at the time Abbot of St-Évroult. Although it is unclear
whether his initial departure was forced or undertaken voluntarily to seek papal help
for his kin, Robert ended up in Southern Italy along with at least eleven of his monks

6
GND and Orderic, Ecclesiastical History.
7
On the Giroies generally, see P. Baudin, ‘Une famille châtelaine sur les confins
normanno-manceaux: Les Géré (Xe–XIIIe siècle)’, Archéologie médiévale, 22 (1992), 309–56,
and J.-M. Maillefer, ‘Une famille aristocratique aux confins de la Normandie: Les Géré au XIe
siècle’, in Autour du pouvoir ducal Normand Xe–XIIe siècles, ed. by L. Musset, J.-M. Bouvris,
and J.-M. Maillefer, Cahier des Annales de Normandie, 17 (Caen: Centre d’Etudes normandes
de l’Université de Caen, 1985), pp. 175–206.
8
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 90.
9
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 92, 106.
10
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 106, 122.
11
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 106.

Page 43
 Ordernr. 041162

32 EWAN JOHNSON

and was unable to return to Normandy until 1077.12 Exile therefore plays a promi-
nent part in Orderic’s attempts to explain the past and present of both his monastery
and Normandy in general.
Although the works give much information about exile, they give very little infor-
mation about any legal process which might be expected before it could be demanded.
There is, indeed, no distinction between those whose departure was specifically de-
manded by authority, and who might therefore have some specific legal status as
‘exiles’, and those forced to leave Normandy due to political losses or because they
had committed an act which made it difficult to remain or return. There is no sugges-
tion that terminology such as exilium carried specific legal meanings. The Ecclesiasti-
cal History is so rich in allusion to exile that some uses might be seen as a metaphoric
extension of such legal meanings. Orderic uses them, for example, to describe his
own retreat to St-Évroult aged twelve and the exile of a dead man to heaven.13 Yet
other examples suggest that these terms could be used non-metaphorically, yet with-
out distinction between those who fled and those whose departure was demanded.
When Robert of Grandmesnil, the Giroie Abbot of St-Évroult who had fled with his
kin in 1058, eventually returned to Normandy, King William, according to Book
Five of the Ecclesiastical History, asked Robert’s pardon for driving him into an
unjust exile, an exilium iniuste.14 The description of Robert’s flight in Book Three,
however, makes no mention of any formal process or sentence being pronounced
upon Robert and states only that he fled of his own volition aware that the Duke
might harm him.15 The language reflects this, and throughout Book Three the Latin
text refers to Robert’s exile without using the term exilium.16 Two killers who fled
after their crimes and cannot return are described in the Ecclesiastical History, one
as an exile and one not. Hugh Bunel appears at the siege of Jerusalem and is de-
scribed as exiled for murder (exulantem homicidam), whilst Osmund Drengot, who
likewise fled the Duke’s anger after committing murder, is described merely as
having fled (aufugit).17 Furthermore, the description elsewhere of Hugh Bunel’s kill-
ing of Mabel of Bellême and subsequent flight makes no mention of exile but states
simply that he fled out of fear and left Normandy behind him.18 The only point in the

12
GND, II, 152–54; Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 90, 94–96; III, 158–60.
13
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, III, 146; VI, 552; IV, 310.
14
Lucien Musset, ‘Autour des modalités juridiques de l’expansion normande au XIe siècle:
Le Droit d’exil’, in Autour du pouvoir ducal Normand, ed. by Musset, Bouvris, and Maillefer,
pp. 45–59 (p. 50), makes a similar point about the lack of judicial procedure. For Robert’s
return, see Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, III, 158.
15
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 90, 94–96.
16
Terminology is pateretur, Galliam expetiit (Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 90), and
fugatus (p. 94).
17
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, V, 158; II, 56.
18
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, III, 137.

Page 44
Ordernr. 041162

The Process of Norman Exile into Southern Italy 33

work at which a duke specifically orders someone to leave Normandy does not use
the term exile and is clearly not a set-piece, formal statement. Robert, abbot of St-
Pierre-sur-Dives, is told simply ‘Traitor, flee from my land’ after his involvement in
an assassination attempt on the king.19 Given the somewhat arbitrary nature of ducal
punishment of his heroes the Giroies, Orderic would surely have differentiated be-
tween the Giroies and other exiles if he had felt their status to be different from these
others. I find it extraordinary that Orderic would be so indiscriminate in his lan-
guage, both between and within cases, if he perceived ‘exile’ as an important term
which conveyed a specific legal status or process. It is unlikely that this represents a
cloistered misunderstanding of the actual process of exile, rather than a common per-
ception of the time, even if we allow that Orderic’s own foreign origin and sources
of information might make the importance he attached to exile unrepresentative of
Normandy as a whole.20 Orderic could not have been so uncertain about the tech-
nical process behind the exilium of his own abbot if a pronouncement by the Duke
was perceived as important in changing Robert’s status legally, particularly since he
was clearly aware of Duke William’s response to the controversy over the status of
Robert’s successor.21 Orderic was also aware, as part of his role in copying and
maintaining St-Évroult’s records, that the monastery was in legal dispute with the
kin of at least one returning exile, Robert of Vitot, who wished to receive back land
confiscated on his exile and granted to St-Évroult in his absence.22 If the precise
nature and process of his exile had any legal bearing on the dispute, Orderic would
therefore have been aware of it and likely to mention it.
There is also no evidence from Orderic’s texts, therefore, that expressions of ducal
anger which produced flight need have been the culmination of a specific legal process
which involved any kind of formal trial or pronouncement of guilt. With this in
mind, it is perhaps not unsurprising that there is no evidence that it was deployed in a
systematic way to punish any particular crime. Ralph of Tosny, Arnold of Echauffour,
and Hugh of Grandmesnil were not the only figures described as exiled for supposed
offences against the authority of the Duke.23 William Busac, son of William, count
of Eu, was exiled for supposedly claiming the duchy for himself.24 William Werlenc,
count of Mortain, was perhaps more unfortunate to be exiled for plotting rebellion at
some point after 1055.25 Yet at other times exile can be used to describe a punish-
ment for a non-political crime, such as murder in hot blood. It was this that led

19
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, VI, 82.
20
See also the essay by Chris Lewis in this volume.
21
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 94, 108–14.
22
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 120.
23
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 90.
24
GND, II, 128.
25
GND, II, 126.

Page 45
 Ordernr. 041162

34 EWAN JOHNSON

Osmund Drengot to flee, for his victim had openly boasted of seducing Osmund’s
daughter.26 Neither is there any suggestion that banishment can be rendered invalid
because it is a disproportionate punishment for a given act. Orderic describes his
abbot’s exile as unjust because he disputes that Robert, or any Giroie, committed a
certain act, not that the act was not one for which banishment was acceptable.27 Sim-
ilarly, Geoffrey of Neufmarché is described as expelled for trivial offences, although
with no suggestion that the Duke exceeded his powers in doing so.28
To study how Norman exiles in Italy understood the conditions of exile, therefore,
it is necessary to understand exile not as some formalized legal process, but rather as
any process by which fear of authority might drive someone from Normandy. The
most obvious process by which exile could be forced is disinheritance, which would
deprive an individual of political, and indeed material, sustenance within Normandy.
Not only is this the case, but the idea of disinheritance and exile are closely enough
linked to suggest that exile was seen predominantly as a tenurial matter in late
eleventh- and early twelfth-century Normandy.
Orderic is clear that exile and disinheritance often coincide, so that, for example,
Duke William is stated to have both disinherited Arnold of Echauffour and Hugh of
Grandmesnil and driven them into long exile.29 So closely were the two punishments
linked that at times there is no need to distinguish between them. When William the
Conqueror’s death was made known in Calabria and Rome some Normans there, ac-
cording to Orderic, returned to Normandy.30 These would seem to be classic exam-
ples of exiles: driven away by one duke and deprived of land. Yet the Latin refers to
them simply as the disinherited, exheredatis. At other times, disinheritance and exile
stand as a pair in opposition to other sanctions. Henry I is reported to have fined
some traitors but disinherited and exiled those he considered more serious threats.31
The perceived connection is confirmed by the fact that full restoration of lands was
socially expected if an exiled individual was pardoned, even if the legal status of the
land was far from clear. It is this that lies behind Orderic’s claims that Robert Vitot’s
kin maintained a claim to land confiscated at exile.32 At other points it is clear that
the force of exile can only extend to areas where disinheritance is also possible.
Ralph de Gael, a Breton, was exiled for his part in the rebellion in England in 1077.

26
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 56.
27
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 90, suggests Mabel of Bellême and her husband,
Roger of Montgomery, fabricated the charges and that there was no proof of guilt.
28
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 130.
29
Exhereditauit [. . .]. exulare coegit: Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 90.
30
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, IV, 102.
31
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, VI, 12.
32
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 120. See above.

Page 46
Ordernr. 041162

The Process of Norman Exile into Southern Italy 35

He was disinherited in England but made for Brittany, where the English king could
not confiscate Ralph’s patrimony.33
The close linkage between disinheritance and exile might go some way to ex-
plaining how exile, seen as a ducal prerogative, is a power seemingly exercised by so
many in Orderic’s texts. Once the idea of exile as a formal legal status endorsed by
ducal authority is dispensed with, anyone who had the power to control land in a
certain area could also be said to have the power of banishment. Mabel of Bellême is
said to have forcibly disinherited many and driven them ‘to beg their bread in
foreign lands’.34 The terminology is more specifically that of exile for those whom
Robert of Bellême had expelled from their paternal lands due to their support for
Henry I, and whom Henry restores.35 There is no difference in terms of the terminol-
ogy used between these cases and those in which exile was caused by ducal actions,
only an acceptance that a different political process is necessary to reverse them. It
is, perhaps, this linkage between the power to control tenure and to exile that ac-
counts for the perception that the Norman dukes alone preserved the right to punish
through banishment. Clearly, they would jealously guard the right to control tenure
within Normandy. No duke with practical power within Normandy would have
allowed disinheritance and exile without his sanction. Indeed, the instances given
above where others force exile are precisely those where ducal power is weak, as in
Henry’s conflict with Robert of Bellême, or where dukes are portrayed as manipulated
into sanctioning exile, such as Mabel of Bellême’s campaign against the Giroies.36 It
is also obvious that at a practical level the dukes, as the only figures with a supposed
competence over the whole of Normandy, were the only figures who could impose,
even at a theoretical level, banishment from Normandy as a whole.
One consequence of the looser understanding of effective banishment which I
have argued operated in Normandy is that periods of exile from Normandy, because
not legally defined, need not have been very lengthy if ducal policy changed.
Changes in outlook by the duke could drive people to exile. William Werlenc of
Mortain, for example, seems to have been exiled as part of an ongoing ducal policy
to entrust border castles, such as Mortain, to Duke William’s kinsmen. Yet shifts in
ducal policy could also recall from exile those now seen as needed. Book Three of
the Ecclesiastical History states that it was because he was faced with a conflict be-
tween the Normans and their neighbours in Maine and Brittany in 1062 that William
recalled important exiles, notably from Orderic’s point of view Ralph of Tosny and
Hugh of Grandmesnil.37 There is also evidence that this was used as an occasion for
ducal fundraising. One exile, Arnold of Echauffour, travelled to Apulia and returned

33
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 318.
34
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, III, 136.
35
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, VI, 180.
36
See above, notes 27 and 28.
37
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 104–06.

Page 47
 Ordernr. 041162

36 EWAN JOHNSON

with huge wealth and a costly mantle, which he presented to the Duke.38 It can be no
coincidence that the Giroies, as capable commanders who held castles on the borders
with Maine, were allowed to return to their lands at this point. The change in politi-
cal circumstance which produced a recall from exile could also take a more drastic
form. The shift in power from Robert of Bellême to Henry was what allowed Henry
to recall those exiled from Robert’s land.39 The death of a duke was also a point at
which exiles might be expected to return, so that in practice banishment was a
process specific to the duke as a person, rather than the duke as an office. Hence, as
mentioned above, William the Conqueror’s death brought about the return from Italy
of many he had banished.40 Henry I likewise included exiles in his deathbed pardon
and allowed them to return to their ancestral lands.41
The imprecise nature of banishment also meant that its effects were felt beyond
the individuals who suffered directly. Orderic describes the Giroie family as a whole
as concerned that they would be banished in 1061, and it was this fear that led Rob-
ert, abbot of St-Évroult, to flee.42 Judith and Emma, sisters of Abbot Robert, went to
Italy and married there, despite having taken the veil in Normandy.43 William Wer-
lenc, count of Mortain, is stated to have left for Apulia accompanied by only one
squire.44 Yet three men using Mortain as a toponym, Godfrey, Richard, and Peter, all
witness comital charters in Southern Italy between 1089 and 1102.45 It would not be
too imaginative to think them his sons. Certainly William took children with him, for
Roger I, Norman count of Sicily and Calabria, married William’s daughter, Erem-
burga.46 Others took unidentified followers with them, since Ralph of Tosny and
Hugh of Grandmesnil were accompanied by such followers at departure and when
they returned.47
How, then, might the perception of exile argued for above have affected our
understanding of how exiled individuals behaved in Southern Italy? The fact that
banishment from Normandy was, for at least some, non-permanent must have

38
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 106, 122.
39
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, VI, 180.
40
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, IV, 102.
41
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, VI, 448.
42
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 90.
43
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 102. Marjorie Chibnall’s note (Orderic, Ecclesiastical
History, II, 76 n. 3) and Leonie Hicks’s essay (this volume) suggest that they also initially took
the veil because of the Duke’s wrath towards their family.
44
GND, II, 126.
45
See Ménager, ‘Inventaire’, pp. 330–31 and n. 1, p. 331, for a summary of the evidence.
For reasons of space in the footnotes I have not included Ménager’s citations here.
46
Ménager, ‘Inventaire’, p. 330.
47
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 90, 106.

Page 48
Ordernr. 041162

The Process of Norman Exile into Southern Italy 37

affected their integration into Italian society. In certain cases, although exile ac-
counted for the presence of individuals in Italy, it may also have accounted for their
lack of lasting impact. Some, such as Arnold of Echauffour, clearly remained centred
on regaining their Norman territory and spent only a short time in Italy, in which it
was used as little more than a source of wealth with which to buy ducal favour. The
persistence, and eventual demise, in the use of titles from Normandy to identify
themselves or others suggests that other Normans too remained aware of the pos-
sibility of return, even if they were never able to return to Normandy. A Norman
named Robert witnessed several charters at Palermo, as son of William, count of Eu,
before 1096. At that date his family rebelled in Normandy, and Count William was
blinded and castrated. The next charter identifiably witnessed by Robert, in 1100,
fails to use the toponym from Normandy, a change Ménager plausibly suggests may
be due to the impossibility of recovering the comital title in Normandy.48 The use of
the toponym Mortain in Italy likewise died out once the three individuals named
above had died, although there is no clear evidence that they changed it over their
lifetimes. Since individuals in Italy continued to use place names in Normandy to
identify themselves throughout the twelfth century, these titles cannot have been
abandoned simply because Normandy was a distant memory, but rather because the
titles were now worthless. There does, then, seem a link between the point when the
identification was abandoned and the point when holdings in Normandy clearly
became unrecoverable.
It is uncertain how far less prominent individuals might also have been engaged in
similar activity. The county of Eu, and to a lesser extent the Giroies’ holdings near
Maine, were sizeable border territories of particular concern to the Norman duke.
There was therefore a clear motivation to return if ducal policy would be changed,
and some chance that it might. The critical point when Normandy ceased to be a use-
ful political option therefore occurred only when there became no realistic hope of
changing ducal policy, at which point these families stopped using titles from Nor-
mandy. Other exiles must have faced the same dilemma, and some clearly saw return
as a best option, for the death of Duke William saw them leave Italy and return to
seek pardon.49 Others, however, clearly saw Italy as a better option, which brought
greater rewards at less political cost. This is true of the exile that most concerned
Orderic, Abbot Robert, who could probably have returned permanently in 1077 but
instead stayed in Italy and accepted the status and wealth inherent in being Abbot of
Sant’Eufemia.50 For many who left for reasons not directly connected to ducal
policy, the decision was weighted heavily by what they had given up in Normandy,

48
For a summary of the diplomatic evidence, see Ménager, ‘Inventaire’, p. 312.
49
Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, IV, 102.
50
On perceptions of Sant’Eufemia’s wealth, see Orderic, Ecclesiastical History, II, 100–02.
Robert had already made his decision by ceasing to agitate for a return to St-Évroult: Orderic,
Ecclesiastical History, II, 112–14.

Page 49
 Ordernr. 041162

38 EWAN JOHNSON

either selling their land or mortgaging it and not returning.51 Others may have had
less to give up in the first place.52 It is interesting that there was no real attempt to
have connected holdings in both Italy and Normandy and that the two remained
politically distinct even if individual Norman families occasionally exploited links
with Italy. Some of those exiled, or descended from exiles, might have made the
break from Normandy later down the line than those who had few opportunities in
Normandy itself, but once it was made they were able to integrate into Italian
political society. The true exceptions are the Giroies and other prominent exiles
about whom Orderic tells us so much, who never lost enough in Normandy to truly
settle in Italy. Orderic’s own understanding of exile might, it seems, therefore give
us vital information about how unrepresentative those he tells of are in their links
with Normandy whilst in Italy.

51
For example, Radulfo filio Aveniae who sold land before 1040 in exchange for campaign
goods: Ménager, ‘Inventaire’, p. 299. Radulfus Malregart mortgaged his land. See L. Musset,
‘Actes inédits du XIe siècle’, Bulletin de la Société des Antiquaires de Normandie, 56 (1961–
62), 5–41 (p. 28), and Ménager, ‘Inventaire’, p. 343.
52
Roger Bigot reportedly wanted to leave Normandy for Italy because he was ‘oppressed
by poverty’: GND, II, 126.

Page 50
Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content
Zóra could not reply. With the drink of water her senses had revived,
and the agony of her position became more and more clearly
realised. She did not lose her presence of mind; but the impossibility
of escaping from so many active and unencumbered men was not to
be thought of for a moment. All she could do was to commend
herself to the merciful Alla, who alone could effect her deliverance.
Strange to say, she had still hope, which her faith served to increase;
and if she sobbed and wept almost unceasingly, there yet seemed to
be something whispering at her heart, "Fear not, for I, the Lord, am
with thee!"
Presently the men took up the litter and moved on, but more slowly
than before. They were unaccustomed to carry such a burthen, and
already some were complaining of chafed shoulders. Would they put
her down and disperse? Then daylight broke; but the rain did not
cease, and the fields of corn and cotton, through which they held
their way, grew muddy and soft, and the men could proceed with
difficulty.
"We must seek for some shelter," said a voice, which appeared to
have authority among the gang. "We are now on the lands of
Kohutnoor, and we may find a shepherd's hut somewhere; and two
of you run to Hippurgah and see if some of our people will come, for
we must go on again at nightfall."
After this speech Zóra found her litter put down, and the opening of
the covering was untied; then she was taken out, and carried into a
rude field hut and laid on the ground, but the bandages were not
loosened. There we must leave her for the present, and relate what
had befallen her grandfather.
 CHAPTER XIII.
Deliverance.
As we have already stated, there was no alarm at the gate of the
village when the Syud was struck down. Of the two watchmen, one
was dead, the other senseless from loss of blood. Ahmed and old
Mamoolla were, however, now anxious about their master and Zóra,
and Ahmed went to the village Chaoree to ask if they had passed
that way. "Yes," said the watchmen on duty for the night; "we heard
them singing a long time ago, and supposed they had gone home,
as the singing ceased all at once; but we will come and look—some
one has doubtless asked them to remain." But they could not be
found or heard of, and all were in much fear and perplexity. Could
Zóra have stepped incautiously into a well, and drawn her
grandfather after her? But no, there were only two wells in the
village, and though lights were lowered into them nothing was seen.
At last a cry was heard near the gate, and then someone, who had
wished to go out to his field, gave the alarm that murder had been
done; and Ahmed and the rest ran with lighted torches, saw the two
bodies of the watchers, and looking about, found the old Syud, lying
where they supposed he had fallen, near the wall. At first, as blood
had issued from his head, they all thought he had died, and they
took him up reverently and carried him to his lodgings, where they
discovered signs of life; still he had no perception of anything, and
was not able to speak. The barber, who had been summoned, said
the wound was slight, but that the blow had caused insensibility, and
fomentation must be continued.
So the night passed, and the whole of the village was disquieted and
alarmed. The idea of so holy a person as Luteef Shah Wallee, the
new saint, being killed in the place, and his granddaughter carried
off, was almost beyond belief. Several parties of the villagers,
accompanied by the Gulburgah escort, went out to search in the
fields, but returned. What could be done in the darkness and rain
among the tall heavy crops? They must wait till morning; and in the
morning consciousness came to the old man, though it seemed to
those around him that it would have been more merciful if he had
died. Who could console him? Who could satisfy him about Zóra?
Who had taken her, and why? Not for her ornaments, for she had
put on only those she usually wore, of small value, all the rest were
packed up. When the day dawned some light was thrown on the
affair by the tracks of a number of men in the corn-fields, and by
broken stems of the corn, and they continued as far as the boundary
of the next village, through which they evidently went; but it was no
concern of the watchmen of that village to trace the thieves unless
they were well rewarded; and who was to pay them?
Meanwhile the old man raved, and called on Zóra without
intermission. At times he even became frantic, and with difficulty
could be restrained from attempting to proceed on foot. "Take me to
Zóra! Take me to the child! Take me to Almella! Lay me at the feet of
Chand Beebee, she will give me justice for my child. Oh, Abbas
Khan! she watched by thy side; go to her, save her, and give her into
my arms. Am I not Luteef Shah Wallee now? and my blessing or my
curse are at least powerful. Yea, I will bless thee!"
"It is no use keeping him here," said the barber; "his case is beyond
my skill. They have a surgeon and a doctor with the soldiers at
Almella, take him thither;" and the litter was soon made ready, and
the sad procession departed. It was nearly evening when it reached
Almella, where it was met by a crowd of people who had heard of
the outrage; and a comfortable lodging had been prepared, where
the old man was reverently deposited. He was now calmer, but grief
lay heavy on him, very heavy; and what could console him? When
he could think coherently, he accused himself of neglect of his vows;
he accused himself of incautiousness; and if she returned not, he
prayed for death, Here, whence the Lord had taken him in his
prosperity to blindness and poverty, would be the fitting place for
him to die. Towards evening he became calmer, and asked if any of
the people of Almella were present, and the Patell, and the Putwari,
and the Moolla of the mosque came to him.
"Are any of ye old?" he asked; "as old as I am?"
"No!" replied the Moolla; "but my grandfather, who is very old, can
be sent for."
"Ay, that will be Sheykh Oomur, perhaps; yes, send for him." They
wondered why the name should be remembered, but sent for him.
When he arrived, the Syud, taking his hand, said, "If thou art
Sheyhk Oomur, thou wilt not have forgotten Syud Ahmed Ali."
"Syud Ahmed Ali, the physician!" cried the Moolla, peering into the
other's face, for he was nearly blind himself. "Yes, it is he! it is he!
Oh, master! I, thy pupil, have not forgotten; and to see thee here,
and in this sore plight. Ah! it is the Lord's will."
"Tell them all—all," cried the old Syud, with fresh vigour, "that I am
here once more. God, the Highest, hath brought me to recover my
child and my honour. Go! arouse all to bring Zóra back to me or I
shall die."
"It is the Syud, surely," said many old people who looked on the
aged features with compassion, and well remembered them; and the
authorities of the little town and of the detachment of soldiers sent
out parties in search, one of which found the track, many hours old,
as they knew from the state of the broken herbage and corn, and
returned unsuccessful. And the old Syud, becoming hopeless in his
grief, though relieved of much of his pain by the doctor who had
been summoned, was, they thought, going to turn his face to the
wall and die. But still he had not asked for the prayers for the dying
to be recited, and was constantly crying out, "He will not take her to
shame or death; he will restore her to me. Zóra! Zóra! come soon,
else I die; and I have told thee nothing." Once he said to the Moolla
and others who sat nigh him, "Oh, friends, if I die, bury me here;
but take my child to the Court, lay her at the feet of Queen Chand,
and say I, Luteef Shah Wallee, sent her for justice." Then, as if he
had no more to say, he turned on his side and appeared to sleep.
Just as day was breaking he sat up suddenly, but with vigour, and
putting his hands to his ear, said, in a strong voice, "I hear a
Beydur's horn; I hear the Beydurs' drums; and they bring me my
Zóra! Oh, my child, come quickly, lest I die of joy!" At first those who
heard him—the kind doctor, Ahmed, old Mamoolla, and others—
thought what he had said was part of his delirium; but Ahmed
rushed out, ran to the top of the house, and looking southwards,
saw the blaze of torches and about fifty dusky forms approaching at
a rapid pace, while the creaking of the gate of the town showed that
it was being opened. As the procession approached nearer, the
sonorous drums of the Beydurs beat a joyful march, their horns blew
a victorious blast; and Ahmed ran down again to the apartment, and
cried out, "It is true! it is true! Rejoice!" and fled forth to meet the
lost girl, weeping like a child. And onwards came the body of men
encircling a good palanquin, and the town musicians had mingled
with the Beydurs, and the din and clamour were deafening. Then, as
they put down the litter at the steps of the house, Zóra stepped
from it, and standing erect on the highest, cried out, "The Lord bless
ye all, friends, for I am safe. By your aid ye have saved me from
dishonour and from death." But she could hardly speak, and her
cheeks were wet with tears, which glistened in the torchlight. In an
instant more she had crossed the little courtyard, reached her
grandfather's bed, and exclaiming, "Abba! Abba! God has saved me,
and brought me to you again when I had no hope left!" But the old
man could not speak coherently; indeed, the revulsion from a dim
hope to a blessed reality had almost cost him his life.
They sat together the whole day, Zóra scarcely stirring from his side,
and only urged by pressing hunger to leave him at all; for Mamoolla
had said, "Poor dove, they only fed it with green corn and milk, and
that was not food fitted for her; and the best I can cook shall be
hers and the master's, who, after all, has only a broken head; but
then he is not a wrestler or a sword-player." Zóra's story was not a
long one. When she was put into the hut with only two men to
guard her, the rest of the gang dispersed into the corn-fields to hide
themselves, as the husbandmen would soon be abroad. Now the hut
was nearer to Kokutnoor than Hippurgah, and a shepherd boy who
had been watching sheep all night had seen the procession, and saw
where something, he could not tell what, had been deposited. Over
night a large body of Beydurs, on their road from the King's camp by
Sholapoor to their homes, had put up at Kokutnoor; and the lad,
well knowing their habits, went to the leader and told him that
Dacoits had halted in the fields and hidden their booty in a solitary
hut. "They are Káikarees and Jutts," said the lad, "and the brother of
Kulloo Naik, who was killed at Kukeyra, is their leader."
The Beydur chief who was in command of the party was soon
aroused, and among his men were some of Runga's and some of
Burma Naik's people; and it was at once determined that the Dacoits
should be surprised and their booty captured. So, through the cover
of the tall grain fields, they were guided by the lad until they came
close to the hut. The two men who guarded it were speared without
mercy, and, said Zóra, "I expected no less than death, when several
of the men who had served at Juldroog found me, bound as I was,
and were distraught with joy. They took me into the air, unbound
me, and chafed my arms and my legs. They carried me into
Kokutnoor; then bearers were sent for from Hippurgah, and I was
fed, and had milk to drink, and I am quite well, and it is like a new
birth to see your dear face once more."
What could he reply? What more could Zóra say? And so they sat
without speaking much till the day waned, and the fatehas they had
ordered were ready, when Zóra arose to distribute the money
offerings to the poor, and the alms that had been in the wallet were
part of her liberal donation.
The next day, the Beydurs having remained as their guests, and
enjoyed a great feast, all those that belonged to Runga and Burma's
divisions declared they would attend the Syud to Beejapoor. Runga
would never forgive them if they did not; and there was no hurry
about moving, as the King was yet detained north of the river. In the
evenings, then, as the old Syud sat in the porch of the house, under
pretence of begging, for he was weak still, and could not walk, the
Beydurs came and told him tales of the war, and how Abbas Khan,
Runga Naik, and his men had carried by storm the great battery of
Ahmednugger guns, and Runga had been made a noble on the spot,
while the blood was yet wet upon his sword. Poor Zóra! how her
heart swelled at the narration, and how hope was revived, which for
a time had appeared dead.
When the time came they moved from Almella, and reached Allapoor
the day before the King was to enter the city. Thousands were
passing on horseback, thousands were going to meet friends long
absent, and no one noticed the blind old man and a girl, dressed in
pilgrims' clothes, who, as they entered the gate of the great city,
kneeled down, and gave thanks to God. The old Syud's face beamed
with gratitude and joy. As to Zóra, the splendour of what she saw
almost overpowered her; but she led her grandfather forward in the
direction of the citadel, and on a piece of close green sward, near
the open road by which the King would pass, they spread their
sheet, and began at intervals to sing the best of their holy chants;
and passers-by threw alms to them liberally and freely, begging the
old man's blessing. Gradually the booming sound of the King's
kettledrums, and the huge pair which were carried by the standard
elephant, were heard, and the old man remembered them, and said
to Zóra, "They are near now; let Ahmed keep the sheet, dear, and
you will see the King." Not long afterwards the people on the towers
of the gates, the bastions, and in every available place they could
get to, began to shout and wave scarves; and every house within
sight hung out costly shawls, cloth of gold, and rich garments out of
windows and over the parapets of their houses, till the city was like
a garden of tulips. Following the procession were hundreds of war
elephants, dressed in their richest caparisons, their bells jangling
with a strange clamour, and the music of the nobat playing a march
of victory.
These, however, were of little interest in comparison with the King's
own circle, which occupied nearly the centre of the procession, and
having entered the gate, advanced more slowly. In the midst rode
the young King, wearing, like the Queen, a tunic of dazzling white
cloth of gold, and a morion with a crown of flashing jewels. He was
smiling, as he greeted the people with constant waves of his hand,
while his beautiful horse caracoled beneath him. Near him rode
Abbas Khan, and other officers of rank; and Zóra could see Runga
Naik in his new uniform of cloth of gold. The horses pranced and
curvetted, tossing their heads and neighing; and the King, drawing
rein for a moment, pointed out the Syud and Zóra, asking apparently
who they were, when Abbas Khan, who now saw them also, dashed
up to the King, and said, "It is Syud Ahmed Ali, of whom I spoke." At
the same moment the old man, who had been standing, rushed
forward over the sheet, and with a loud cry of "Daad! Daad!"
tottered and fell on his face, nearly across the Royal path.
"Bring him on with you, Abbas," cried the King; and the young man
turned at once to his old friend, throwing a glance at Zóra, which
rested on flashing eyes bedewed with tears of joy, and cheeks
burning with excitement, as he cried to her, "Zóra! is it thus we
meet? Fear not now, for all will be well!"

End of the Second Volume.

Spottiswoode & Co., Printers, New-street Square, London.

 Transcriber's Notes
Obvious errors of punctuation and diacritics repaired.
Hyphen removed: waist-band (p. 14), waist-belt (p. 231), white-washed (p. 226).
Hyphen added: horn-blower (p. 72).
P. 7: "chesnut" changed to "chestnut" (a big chestnut horse).
P. 28: "obesiance" changed to "obeisance" (making an obeisance to the Queen).
P. 47: "to" changed "too" (that she had done too herself).
P. 69: "irrruption" changed to "irruption" (resist any irruption of marauders).
Pp. 75-76: "Shekh" changed to "Skeykh" three times.
P. 139: "a" added (might have been a matter of accident).
P. 160: "seiges" changed to "sieges" (through several separate sieges).
P. 186: "villany" changed to "villainy" (undertake any villainy).
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A NOBLE QUEEN: A
ROMANCE OF INDIAN HISTORY (VOLUME 2 OF 3) ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in
these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it
in the United States without permission and without paying
copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of
Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything
for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as
creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research.
Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given
away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with
eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject
to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free

distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree
to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund
from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in
paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be

used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people
who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a
few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic
works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.
See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with
Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law
in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do
not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing,
performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the
work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely
sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated
with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this
agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached
full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge
with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the
United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the
terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying,
performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this
work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes
no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in
any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™
work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears,
or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is
accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
 This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived

from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a
notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright
holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the
United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must
comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted

with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted
with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning
of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a
part of this work or any other work associated with Project
Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this

electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you
provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work
in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in
the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or
expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or
a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original
“Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must
include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in
paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing

access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive
from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
 about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt
that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project
Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or
destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
Project Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™

electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe
and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating
the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may
be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to,
incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a
copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer
codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for

the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3,
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the
Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim
all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR
NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR
BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH
1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK
OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL
NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT,
CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF
YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving
it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must
return the medium with your written explanation. The person or
entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide
a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may
demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted
by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation,

the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation,
anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with
the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the
following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or
any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission

of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.
It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and
donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a
secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help,
see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,

Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can
be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the
widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many
small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to
maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating

charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and
keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in
locations where we have not received written confirmation of
compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of
compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where

we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no
prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in
such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make

any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of
other ways including checks, online payments and credit card
donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About

Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how
to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

ebookbell.com