Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Preface
- Contents
- PART I TERRITORIAL STUDIES
- PART II HISTORICAL STUDIES
- NORMANS UNDER EDWARD THE CONFESSOR
- MR. FREEMAN AND THE BATTLE OF HASTINGS
- MASTER WACE
- NOTE ON THE PSEUDO-INGULF
- REGENBALD, PRIEST AND CHANCELLOR
- THE CONQUEROR AT EXETER
- THE ALLEGED DESTRUCTION OF LEICESTER (1068)
- ELY AND HER DESPOILERS (1072–75)
- THE LORDS OF ARDRES
- EARLY IRISH TRADE WITH CHESTER AND ROUEN
- WALTER TIREL AND HIS WIFE
- WALDRIC, WARRIOR AND CHANCELLOR
- A CHARTER OF HENRY I. (1123)
- THE ORIGIN OF THE NEVILLES
- THE ALLEGED INVASION OF ENGLAND IN 1147
- THE ALLEGED DEBATE ON DANEGELD (1163)
- A GLIMPSE OF THE YOUNG KING'S COURT (1170)
- THE FIRST KNOWN FINE (1175)
- THE MONTMORENCY IMPOSTURE
- THE OXFORD DEBATE ON FOREIGN SERVICE (1197)
- RICHARD THE FIRSTS CHANGE OF SEAL (1198)
- COMMUNAL HOUSE DEMOLITION
- THE CINQUE PORT CHARTERS
- ADDENDA
- INDEX
THE ALLEGED DESTRUCTION OF LEICESTER (1068)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 October 2010
- Frontmatter
- Preface
- Contents
- PART I TERRITORIAL STUDIES
- PART II HISTORICAL STUDIES
- NORMANS UNDER EDWARD THE CONFESSOR
- MR. FREEMAN AND THE BATTLE OF HASTINGS
- MASTER WACE
- NOTE ON THE PSEUDO-INGULF
- REGENBALD, PRIEST AND CHANCELLOR
- THE CONQUEROR AT EXETER
- THE ALLEGED DESTRUCTION OF LEICESTER (1068)
- ELY AND HER DESPOILERS (1072–75)
- THE LORDS OF ARDRES
- EARLY IRISH TRADE WITH CHESTER AND ROUEN
- WALTER TIREL AND HIS WIFE
- WALDRIC, WARRIOR AND CHANCELLOR
- A CHARTER OF HENRY I. (1123)
- THE ORIGIN OF THE NEVILLES
- THE ALLEGED INVASION OF ENGLAND IN 1147
- THE ALLEGED DEBATE ON DANEGELD (1163)
- A GLIMPSE OF THE YOUNG KING'S COURT (1170)
- THE FIRST KNOWN FINE (1175)
- THE MONTMORENCY IMPOSTURE
- THE OXFORD DEBATE ON FOREIGN SERVICE (1197)
- RICHARD THE FIRSTS CHANGE OF SEAL (1198)
- COMMUNAL HOUSE DEMOLITION
- THE CINQUE PORT CHARTERS
- ADDENDA
- INDEX
Summary
THIS question was raised and discussed by Mr. Freeman in his “History of the Norman Conquest” (iv. 196–7). We there read as follows:–
Is it possible that in the case of Leicester, at least, no power was left either to follow or to resist? While we have no evidence either way on which we can rely with confidence, one of those secondary and local records, which sometimes contain fragments of authentic tradition, suggests, in a perfectly casual way, that a doom fell upon Leicester which might, doubtless, with some exaggeration, be spoken of as utter destruction. And this incidental hint may perhaps draw some indirect confirmation from the highest evidence of all [Domesday] … and it may be that Leicester earned its overthrow by a defence worthy of a borough which was to give its name to the greatest of England's later worthies.
The “record” referred to is quoted in a footnote, and is a history of the foundation of Leicester Abbey, one of a class of narratives notoriously inaccurate and corrupt:–
Robertus Comes Mellenti, veniens in Angliam cum Willelmo Duce Normanniæ, adeptus consulatum Leycestriæ, ex dono dicti Ducis et Conquestoris Angliæ, destructa prius civitate Leicestriœ cum castello et ecclesia infra castellum tempore praedicti Conquestoris, reædificavit ipsam æcclesiam Sancta Mariæ infra castellum.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Feudal EnglandHistorical Studies on the XIth and XIIth Centuries, pp. 456 - 458Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2010First published in: 1895