A HISTORY OF CUMBERLAND 



Uhctred, and in 1068 he fled to Scotland 1 after the rebellion of Edwin 

 and Morcar, in which he was probably implicated. It can scarcely be 

 disputed that the appointment of Robert Cumen " was an attempt to 

 supersede Gospatric in the earldom. Malcolm seized the occasion of 

 Gospatric's disgrace and took possession of Cumberland. But his name 

 was still a power in the land. As a counter-move in the game Gospatric 

 submitted to King William in 1070," and immediately turned his wrath 

 on King Malcolm for the betrayal of his interests by harrying Cumber- 

 land in turn, 4 and no doubt recovering its possession. Events proved how- 

 ever that the Conqueror was aware of the political situation in the north, 

 for on his return after the invasion of Scotland in 1072 he deprived Gos- 

 patric of his earldom on charges which he had hitherto overlooked. 6 The 

 exiled earl again sought refuge in Scotland and made common cause with 

 the Scottish people against Norman power. Malcolm gave him Dunbar 

 and the adjacent land in Lothian till better days dawned and Gospatric 

 recovered his lost possessions. 8 At this date the curtain falls on Cumbrian 

 affairs, and is not again uplifted till the conquest by William Rufus in 

 1092. 



The time was at hand when political affairs in the north-western 

 district were destined to take a fresh turn and the limits of the Scottish 

 kingdom to be settled beyond dispute. Hitherto the northern nation 

 had shown a tendency to advance rather than to recede. The Scots 

 were restless in their efforts to obtain an enlargement of their territories 

 towards the south. But William Rufus was determined to check their 

 aggressions and to secure a natural frontier between the two nations. 

 With this view, there can be little doubt, as we read in the Anglo-Saxon 

 Chronicle^ King William went north to Carlisle with a large force in 

 1092, restored the town and built the castle ; and drove out Dolfin who 



1 Symeon, Hut. Regum, ii. 186 ; Hoveden, Cbnnica, \. 117. Gospatric with other Northum- 

 brian nobles accompanied Edgar the ^Etheling, Agatha his mother, and Margaret and Christine, his 

 sisters, in their flight to Scotland. 



J This happened in 1069 when Earl Gospatric with the whole host of Northumbria joined the 

 Danes in resisting the advance of the Normans. Robert Cumen was slain before the gates of Durham 

 (Symeon, ii. 187, ed. Arnold). 



3 ' Reconciliati sunt Guallevus presens, et Caius-Patricius absens, sacramento per legates exhibito ' 

 (Orderic VitaRs, bk. iv. c. 5). It is significant that Gospatric did not commit himself to the king's 

 power by personal attendance : he made his submission by deputy. In 1071, the following year, he 

 was deputed by order of King William to meet Bishop Walcher at York and conduct him to Durham 

 (Symeon, ii. 195 ; Hoveden, i. 126). 



Symeon, ii. 191-2 ; Hoveden, i. 121-2. Symeon states that Gospatric, having wasted Cumber- 

 land ' atroci depopulatione,' retired with much plunder ' in munitionem Babbenburch firmissimam,' 

 from which he harassed the forces of the enemy by frequent forays, for Cumberland was at that time 

 under the dominion of Malcolm, not possessed of right but subjugated by force. Mr. Hodgson Hinde, 

 in view of his belief in the effectiveness of Scottish sovereignty over Cumberland from 945, has rejected 

 the authority of Symeon's text on the mutual reprisals of Malcolm and Gospatric (Symeon of Durham, 

 xxviii-xxx. 86-8). If the present text is corrupt and untrustworthy, it has not altered to any appre- 

 ciable extent since 1291, for the canons of Carlisle told the same story to Edward I. (Palgrave, Docu- 

 ments and Records, p. 70). The atrocities committed on both sides may be incredible on Mr. Hinde's 

 hypothesis, but the incredibleness disappears when the political necessities of Gospatric's position are re- 

 cognized. 



5 Symeon, ii. 196 ; Hoveden, i. 126. Gospatric was charged with aiding and abetting the murder 

 of Robert Cumen and his men at Durham, though he had not been present in person, and that he had 

 been on the side of the enemy when the Normans were slain at York. 



6 Symeon, ii. 199 ; Hoveden, i. 59. 



236 



