The Death of William II.
fell without a word or groan, vainly trying to pull out the arrow, which broke short in his hand.
Thus perished William the Red. Tiril leapt on his horse. Henry galloped to Winchester, and the other nobles to their houses. One exception was there. William of Breteuil, following hard upon Henry to Winchester, honourably declared the rights of the absent Robert, to whom both Henry and himself had sworn fealty. William's body was brought on a cart to the cathedral, the blood from his wound reddening the road.[1] There the next morning[2] he was buried, unlamented, unknelled, and unaneled.[3]
- ↑ Malmesbury, as before, p. 509. The additions that it was a charcoal-cart, as also the owner's name, are merely traditional.
- ↑ The Chronicle. Ed. Thorpe, vol. i. p. 364.
- ↑ Vitalis, as before, p. 752. Neither William of Malmesbury nor Vitalis, who go into details, mentions the spot where the King was killed. The Chronicle and Florence of Worcester most briefly relate the accident, though Florence adds that William fell where his father had destroyed a chapel. (Ed. Thorpe, vol. ii. p. 45). Henry of Huntingdon (Historiarum, lib. vii., in Saville's Scriptores Rerum Anglicarum, p. 378) says but little more, dwelling only on the King's wickedness and the supernatural appearance of blood. Matthew Paris brings a bishop on the scene, as explaining another dream of the King's, and gives the King's speech of "trahe arcum, diabole" to Tiril, which has a certain mad humour about it, as also the incident of the tree, and the apparition of a goat (Hist. Major. Angl. Ed. Wats., pp. 53, 54), which are not to be found in Roger of Wendover (Flores Hist. Ed. Coxe, tom. ii., pp. 157-59), and therefore open to the strongest suspicion. Matthew of Westminster (Flores Hist. Ed. 1601, p. 235) follows, in most of his details, William of Malmesbury. Simon of Durham (De Gestis Regum Anglorum, in Twysden's Historia Anglicanæ Scriptores Decem, p. 225), as, too, Walter de Hemingburgh (Ed. Hamilton, vol. i. p. 33), and Roger Hoveden (Annalium Pars Prior, in Saville's Rerum Anglicarum Scriptores, pp. 467, 468), copy Florence of Worcester. So, too, in various ways, with all the later writers, who had access to no new sources of information. Peter Blois, however, in his continuation of Ingulph (Gales's Rerum Anglicarum Scriptores, tom. i. pp. 110, 111; Oxford 1684) is more
95
