« AnteriorContinuar »
and characteristics disclose the bias of his thoughts. It is evident that he considered Henry II. a great king, and he manifests a probably sincere sympathy for him in the numerous afflictions, caused to him by the unprincipled conduct of his sons, Henry, Richard, and Geoffrey. After the accession of Richard, Hoveden seems to hint that boundless sensuality was his great failing, and, though in words he does not say so, lie affords sufficient grounds for the conclusion that treachery, meanness, and avarice, were in his opinion the striking features of the character of king John. His history does not come down to the time of the death, or "disappearance," as Roger of Wendover thinks proper to call it, of Arthur, duke of Brittany. He evidently dislikes the crafty and unprincipled Philip Augustus, king of France; and the zest with. which he relates, on numerous occasions, how that monarch. turned his back in flight before the prowess of Richard is highly amusing.
"We may remark, in conclusion, that among the most interesting portions of the work, may be reckoned the following; the account of the contests between king Henry and Thomas a Becket; the first persecution of the Albigenses; the Assizes of Clarendon and Northampton; the Laws* of William the Conqueror, as re-enacted by Henry II.; the Coronation of Richard I. ; the Journal of that king's voyage to the Holy Land, and of his adventures during his stay in Sicily; the contest between Hugh, bishop of Coventry, supported by the other prelates, and the chancellor, William, bishop of Ely; and the lengthened disputes between Geoffrey, archbishop of York, and his dean and chapter; which latter are not yet brought to a conclusion, when the work somewhat abruptly ends.
* Here the text is in such a corrupt and mutilated state that it entirely defies successful management. The Translation has therefore been made from the more correct text of the same Laws, which is found in the " Leges Anglo-Saxonicae" of Dr.Wilkins. London, 1721.
The following remarks, relative to this Chronicler, are extracted from the Introduction to the "Monumenta Britannica," commenced by the late Mr. Petrie, and recently published under the care of Mr. Hardy:
"Hoveden's Annals extend from A.d. 732 to A.d. 1201. Pars Prima: from A.d. 732 to A.d. 1154. From the commencement to the death of Egbert, in 837, his history is taken from Simeon of Durham, sometimes literally transcribed, at others condensed. Occasionally, however, Hoveden changes the collocation, and makes slight verbal alterations. He then returns to 751,* and takes up Henry of Huntingdon, who is followed, with a few verbal changes, to the death of Ethelred I., in 872. Then follows a recapitulation f of the history of the West Saxon Kings from Cerdic, continued to Henry I.; not always, however, agreeing with Huntingdon's History. He then returns to the year 849, J and again transcribes or abridges Simeon of Durham to the year 1122,§ making a few insertions from other sources. From 1122 to 1148, Huntingdon's History is again resorted to, abridged or transcribed, with a few additions. From 1148|| to 1154 Hoveden's History is very brief and confused, and that part of it relating to Scotland is apparently derived from the same source as the Chronicle of Melrose.
"Pars Secunda: from A.d. 1154 to A.d. 1201. From 1154^[ to 1164** it is of the same character: thence to 1170 ft it
* See p. 20 of this Volume, where he seems to revert to the year 749 in taking up Henry of Huntingdon. This change of the text will account for the apparent oversight noticed in p. 20, n, 68. According to Simeon of Durham's text, Hoveden makes Egbert to reign thirty-six years and six months, while, following Henry of Huntingdon, he gives him a reign of forty years, representing him as dying in 840 or 842.
t See p. 39 of this Volume. J See p. 40. § See p. 216.
|| See p. 250. If See p. 253. ** See p. 259. ft See p. 325.
chiefly relates to a Becket, inserting twenty-eight of his epistles, three of -which are not found in Lupus's edition. From Christmas 1169 to 1192, Hoveden either abridges or transcribes Benedictus Abbas, or had access to the same materials. When. he abridges, it is by compression, or by changing the order of the transaction, relating the events belonging to the same transaction connectedly; whereas Benedictus Abbas, by observing a stricter chronological arrangement, frequently separates them. Hoveden, however, has inserted entire many letters and charters which are either omitted or abridged by Benedictus Abbas; and when he gives the journal of the expedition of Richard the First's fleet to Messina, he appears to have had the original document before him, as his account is fuller than that of Benedictus Abbas. He also speaks in the first person, as if he were transcribing the narrative of one that was present, which is not the case with Benedictus Abbas. Hoveden has also exclusively several particulars relating to Spain, Portugal, and Scotland. Under the year 1192 he gives an account of Richard the First's captivity and deliverance, with a journal of his transactions from his return to England in March, to his landing in France in the following May. From that period to the conclusion, his History is very diffuse, containing many papal bulls and letters, chiefly Ecclesiastical, relating, as might have been expected, to the province of York, or to the Northern parts of England, regulations for courts of law, &c.
"* Some persons have thought that Hoveden continued his History to the year 1226; but this mistake seems grounded on the continuation which has been ascribed to Walter of Coventry, who borrowed both from Hoveden and Benedictus Abbas, and yet refers to Hoveden alone.
* This appears in the "Monumenta" as a Note to the above extracts.
"It is remarkable that Benedictus Abbas should twice (pp. 93, 108) mention Hoveden, and that Hoveden, although he appears to transcribe or abridge Benedictus, should omit all mention of himself."
H. T. E.
ROGER DE HOVEDEN.
At the beginning of this work, I propose to trace the genealogical line of the kings of Northumbria,* down to the times of those, who, coming after the death of the most venerable Bede, have not hitherto been treated of.
Ida held the sovereignty twelve years Rafter whose death Glappa reigned one year. He was succeeded by Adda, whose reign lasted eight years; on whose decease Ethelric became king, and reigned seven years. Theoderic succeeded him, and, after a reign of four years, lost his life and left the kingdom to Fridubuld. He, having reigned one year, was succeeded by Huscus,2 who, after a reign of seven years, lost his kingdom and his life. Ethelfred, the most distinguished for valour among these kings, was the eighth in succession, and reigned for a period of twenty-eight years. He was succeeded by King Edwin, who having embraced Christianity, as king and martyr ascended to heaven, after a reign of seventeen years. After him, Oswald, a most Christian king, reigned over Northumbria for a period of seven years. He having ascended to the mysterious realms of heaven, Oswy succeeded him as king, and held the government twenty-eight years. He being
* It is worthy of remark, that the account here given of the Northumbrian kings, differs very materially from that of Bede, William of Malniesbury, and the Anglo- Saxon Chronicle.