See also:BATTLE See also:ABBEY See also:ROLL
.
This is popularly supposed to have been a See also:list of See also:- WILLIAM
- WILLIAM (1143-1214)
- WILLIAM (1227-1256)
- WILLIAM (1J33-1584)
- WILLIAM (A.S. Wilhelm, O. Norse Vilhidlmr; O. H. Ger. Willahelm, Willahalm, M. H. Ger. Willehelm, Willehalm, Mod.Ger. Wilhelm; Du. Willem; O. Fr. Villalme, Mod. Fr. Guillaume; from " will," Goth. vilja, and " helm," Goth. hilms, Old Norse hidlmr, meaning
- WILLIAM (c. 1130-C. 1190)
- WILLIAM, 13TH
William the Conqueror's companions preserved at See also:Battle See also:Abbey, on the site of his See also:great victory over Harold: It is known to us only from 16th See also:century versions of it published by See also:Leland, See also:Holinshed and See also:Duchesne, all more or less imperfect and corrupt
.
Holinshed's is much the fullest, but of its 629 names several are duplicates
.
The versions of Leland and Duchesne, though much shorter, each contain many names found in neither of the other lists
.
It was so obvious that several of the names had no right to figure on the See also:roll, that See also:Camden, as did See also:Dugdale after him, held them to have been interpolated at various times by the monks, "not without their own See also:advantage." See also:Modern writers have gone further, See also:Sir See also:Egerton See also:Brydges denouncing the roll as "a disgusting See also:forgery," and E
.
A
.
See also:Freeman dismissing it as " a transparent fiction." An See also:attempt to vindicate the roll was made by the last duchess of See also:Cleveland, whose Battle Abbey Roll (3 vols., 1889) is the best See also:guide to its contents
.
It is probable that the See also:character of the roll has been quite misunderstood
.
It is not a list of individuals, but only of See also:family surnames, and it seems to have been intended to show which families had "come over with the Conqueror," and to have been compiled about the 14th century
.
The compiler appears to have been influenced by the See also:French See also:sound of names, and to have included many families of later See also:settlement, such as that of See also:Grandson, which did not come to See also:England from See also:Savoy till two centuries after the See also:Conquest
.
The roll itself appears to be unheard-of before and after the 16th century, but other lists were current at least as See also:early as the 15th century, as the duchess of Cleveland has shown
.
In 1866 a list of the Conqueror's followers, compiled from Domesday and other See also:authentic records, was set up in Dives See also:- CHURCH
- CHURCH (according to most authorities derived from the Gr. Kvpcaxov [&wµa], " the Lord's [house]," and common to many Teutonic, Slavonic and other languages under various forms—Scottish kirk, Ger. Kirche, Swed. kirka, Dan. kirke, Russ. tserkov, Buig. cerk
- CHURCH, FREDERICK EDWIN (1826-1900)
- CHURCH, GEORGE EARL (1835–1910)
- CHURCH, RICHARD WILLIAM (1815–189o)
- CHURCH, SIR RICHARD (1784–1873)
church by M
.
See also:Leopold See also:Delisle, and is printed in the duchess' See also:work
.
Its contents are naturally sufficient to show that the Battle Roll is worthless
.
See Leland, Collectanea; Holinshed, See also:Chronicles of England; Duchesne, Historic Norm
.
Scriptores; Brydges, Censura Literaria; See also:Thierry, Conquete de l'Angleterre, vol. ii
.
(1829); See also:Burke, The Roll of Battle Abbey (annotated, 1848) ; See also:Planche, The Conqueror and His Companions (1874); duchess of Cleveland, The Battle Abbey Roll (1889) ; See also:Round, The Companions of the Conqueror " (Monthly See also:Review, 1901, iii. pp
.
91-11r)
.
(J
.
H
.
End of Article: