times harsh, and unfair. The only charge of spoliation against him which can now be investigated is that he despoiled the church of Wells [see under Gisa] ; the story has been much exaggerated, and there is no proof that he acted illegally. It may, however, fairly be held that Harold, like other great men of his day, did not scruple to enrich himself at the expense of religious foundations, and that he was more or less avaricious (cf. Will. Malm. Gesta Regum, ii. 190 ; Norman Conquest, iii. 632). In speech and manner he was frank and courteous, and would sometimes talk too unreservedly to those whom he counted his friends, though when he chose he could dissemble so craftily as to deceive men as to his real purpose. He was also occasionally rash and heedless, and acted and spoke without due consideration. He was a better and a nobler man than his father, or probably than any other lay Englishman of his time. He was a brave soldier and a skilful general. While earl he had a mistress named Eadgyth (or Edith) Swan-neck, who was probably the mother of some of his children, and he is described by William of Poitiers (p. 126) as a man of evil life ; this may, however, only refer to his relations with Eadgyth, and to his subsequent marriage contract and actual marriage. From the date of his father's death he was the head of the national party, and, half Dane as he was by descent, showed himself worthy of the affection of the English people (for English estimates of his character see Vita Eadwardi, pp. 408-10 ; A.-S. Chron. Worcester and Abingdon, an. 1065 ; Flor. Wig. i. 224). He cannot have opposed the influx of Normans which took place during the later years of the reign. At the same time, no attempt was made, as in his father's days, to give them positions which conferred political power (Norman Conquest, ii. 358). The appointment of two Lotharingians to English sees probably proves that in this respect he followed out his father's policy [see under Godwine], while the elevation of Aldred to the see of York may also be taken as pointing to his approval of the system of canonical life observed in Lorraine, which Aldred partially introduced into his church. It seems unfair to blame him (as in Green, Conquest of England, p. 584) for the continuance of the Canterbury schism. There is reason to believe that he did what he could to obtain the pope's approval of Stigand's appointment, and it was not to be expected that Harold would desert his cause for that of the foreigner Robert, the bitter enemy of his house. At the same time he recognised the fact that Stigand was not a canonical archbishop. His general policy has been characterised as lacking in genius, a 'policy of mere national stagnation' (ib. p. 585). Certainly England had no part in continental affairs during the period of his administration.
The probably unjust banishment, in 1055 of Ælfgar, earl of the East Angles, the son of Leofric of Mercia, must have been the work of Harold ; it certainly increased his power, for the house of Mercia was a formidable rival of his own. Late in the year Harold was sent from Gloucester with an army against the combined forces of Ælfgar and Gruffydd ab Llewelyn [q. v.], the Welsh prince, who had sacked Hereford and done much damage to the neighbouring country, defeating an army under Ralph the earl. The enemy refused to meet him in the field, and retreated into South Wales. He disbanded the greater part of his forces and fortified Hereford. A truce was made, during which Harold met Ælfgar and GrufFydd at Billingsley in Shropshire, and arranged a peace. After a fresh invasion of the Welsh, which took place in 1056, he and Earl Leofric brought about a reconciliation between Gruffydd and the English king. In the course of the next year Eadward the aetheling arrived in England ; he had been sent for by the king, who intended to make him his heir. Nevertheless it was contrived that the king should not see him, and the aetheling died soon afterwards. If Harold was then hoping to succeed to the throne, he may well have prevented a meeting between the king and the oetheling (as Lappenberg, ii. 259, thinks he did). But there is no proof that he had then begun to aspire to the succession. In any case there is no ground for the insinuation (Palgrave, Normans and England, iii. 289) that he caused the setheling's death (Norman Conquest, i. 413). That event must have caused both him and the nation to look upon his succession as at least possible, for no adult male heir of the royal house remained. His position was further strengthened in the following year by the deaths of Leofric of Mercia and Ralph, earl of Herefordshire, the king's French nephew. In addition to the government of Wessex, he received Ralph's earldom, then a specially important charge, owing to the alliance between GrufFydd and yElfgar, the new earl of Mercia, who had lately given his daughter Aldgy th [q. v.] in marriage to the Welsh prince. Against Harold's claim to the succession was the promise which the king had almost certainly made to William of Normandy that he should succeed him, while, on the other hand, it was possible that the king's life might be prolonged until the setheling's son Edgar or Eadgar [q. v.] had grown up,
