HISTOIRE - SOMMAIRE


France : Azincourt
France : Azincourt Family Chronicle
France : Le Pont d'Ouve - fortification in lancastrian normandy
France : Dives - Compagnons de Guillume le Conquérant
France : Tapisserie de Bayeux

Australie : Journey to Sydney 1790

Canada : Colonel Fortescue Duguid
Canada : Lawrence Fortesque

Etats-Unis :

G.B. : Companions of Duke William
G.B. - Domesday book
G.B. - Invasion of England, 1066
G.B. - Legend
G.B. - The Battle of Hastings
G.B. - The norman Invasion
G.B. - William the Conqueror

Indes : Analysis of the 1857 war of Independence

Australia's Second Fleet
A second fleet of six ships left England - Guardian, Justinian,
Lady Juliana, Surprize, Neptune, Scarborough. The Guardian struck
ice, and was unable to complete the voyage. She was stocked with
provisions. Only 48 people died in the first group of ships, but
this time 278 died during the voyage. This time transporting the
convicts was in the hands of private contractors.
_____________________________________________________

From the "SYDNEY COVE CHRONICLE", 30th June, 1790

At last the transports are here
DIABOLICAL CONDITION OF THE CONVICTS THEREON
278 died on the fearsome journey to Sydney Cove

-----" The landing of those who remained alive despite their
misuse upon the recent voyage, could not fail to horrify those
who watched.
As they came on shore, these wretched people were hardly able
to move hand or foot. Such as could not carry themselves upon
their legs, crawled upon all fours. Those, who, through their
afflictions, were not able to move, were thrown over the side of
the ships; as sacks of flour would be thrown, into the small
boats.
Some expired in the boats; others as they reached the shore.
Some fainted and were carried by those who fared better. More
had not the opportunity even to leave their ocean prisons for as
they came upon the decks, the fresh air only hastened their
demise.
A sight most outrageous to our eyes were the marks of leg irons
upon the convicts, some so deep that one could nigh on see the
bones. ----
----- We learn that several children have been borne to women
upon the Lady Juliana, the cause for which were the crews aboard
African slave ships which met up with the transport at Santa
Cruz.--- "
------" So the Guardian is lost and with it our provisions.
What, in the name of Heaven, is to become of us ? ----- "

A LIST OF THE CONVICTS WHO SET SAIL FROM OLD ENGLAND'S SHORES
Hereunder our Readers will find the names of convicts who were
to have sailed, or did sail, in the transports Neptune, Surprize,
Scarborough and Lady Juliana.
The information was compiled by our Correspondent in London and
is complete in so far as it lists all the convicts who were
recently landed upon our shores. It also, howso ever, gives the
names of convicts who, for various reasons of death &c., did not
travel with the Fleet to New South Wales. Unhappily, we find
ourselves at this time unable to indicate who sailed and who did
not.
We look to our Readers for their indulgence to involuntary
errors, though will find no omissions, and trust general
attention will secure us from trespassing on their kindness too
often.


NAME, Where Sentenced Term
...
FORTESCUE, William, Herts - - - - - - - - 7
...

Acknowlegement. Newspaper article transcribed in 1992 by Barbara Turner


The Sydney Cove Chronicle of 30 June 1790 is a fictitious newspaper which appeared as a four-page "composite newspaper" in the Sydney Daily Mirror on Monday 3 March 1969 . In the article which announced the publication, the Mirror stated that the newspaper, one of a series of two covering the Second and Third Fleets, was "written and compiled by Cirrel Greet, in the style of that time with the assistance of the Public Library of NSW and particularly its Archives Department" (now State Records (NSW)).

Companions of Duke William at Hastings

A combination of all the known Battell Abbey Rolls, including Wace, Dukes, Counts, Barons, Seigneurs who attended William at Hastings.
These were the commanders. They were the elite who had provided ships, horses, men and supplies for the venture. They were granted the Lordships.
The list does not include the estimated 12,000, Standard bearers, Men at Arms, Yeomen, Freemen and other ranks, although some of these were granted smaller parcels of England, some even as small as 1/8th of a knight's fee.

• A

• Ours d'Abbetot

• Roger d'Abernon

• Ruaud d'Adoube (Musard)

• Engenoulf de l'Aigle

• Richard de l'Aigle (de Aquila)

• Herbert d'Aigneaux

• Guatier d'Aincourt

• Guillaume Alis

• Guillaume d'Alre

• Archard d'Ambrieres

• Robert d'Amfreville

• le Sire de Anisy

• Guillaume d'Anneville

• Guatier d'Appeville

• Guillaume L'Archer

• Norman D'Arcy

• Arnoul d'Ardre

• David d'Argentan

• Le Sire d'Argouges

• Robert d'Armentieres

• Guillaume d'Arques

• Osbern d'Arques

• Bagod d'Arras

• Roger Arundel

• Geoffroi Ascelin

• Hugh L'Asne

• Gilbert d'Asnieres

• Raoul d'Asnieres

• Guillaume d'Aubigny

• Le Sire d'Aubigny (Roger)

• Guillaume d'Audrieu

• Gilbert d'Aufay

• Fouque Aunou

• Le Sire d'Auvillers

• Richard Vicomte d'Avranches

• B

• Guaillaume Bacon Sire de Molay

• Le Sire de Bailleul

• Guineboud de Balon

• Hamelin de Balon

• Robert Banastre

• Osmond Basset

• Raoul Basset

• Robert Le Bastard

• Endes, Eveque de Bayeux

• Hugue de Beauchamp

• Guillaume de Beaufou

• Robert de Beaufou

• Robert de Beaumont

• Gautier du Bec

• Geoffroi du Bec

• Hugue de Bernieres

• Guillaume Bertram

• Robert Bertram, le Tort

• Le Sire de Beville

• Avenel des Biards

• Richard de Bienfaite et d'Orbec

• Guillaume Bigot

• Robert Bigot, Seigneur de Maltot

• Gilbert Le Blond

• Robert Le Blond

• Robert Blouet

• Blundel

• Honfroi de Boho

• Hugue de Bolbec

• Le Sire de Bolleville

• Le Sire de Bonnesboq

• Guillaume de Bosc

• Le Sire de Bosc-Roard(Simon)

• Raoul Botin

• Eustach, Comte de Boulogne

• Hugue Bourdet

• Robert Bourdet

• Herve de Bourges

• Guillaume de Bourneville

• Hugue de Bouteillier

• Le Sir de Brabancon

• Guillaume de Brai

• Raoul de Branch

• Le Seigneur de Brecey

• Robert de Breherval

• Brian de Bratagne, Comte de Vennes

• Roger de Breteuil

• Anvrai Le Breton

• Gilbert de Bretteville

• Dreu de La Beuvriere

• Guillaume de Briouse

• Adam de Brix

• Guillaume de Brix

• Le Sire de Brucourt

• Robert de Buci

• Serion de Burci

• Michel de Bures

• C

• Guatier de Caen

• Maurin de Caen

• Guillaume de Cahaignes

• Guillaume de Cailly

• Le Sire de Canouville(Gautier)

• Hugue Carbonnel

• Honfroi de Carteret

• Eudes, Comte de Champagne

• Robert de Chandos

• Guillaume Le Chievre

• Le Sire de Cintheaux

• Gonfroi de Cioches

• Hamon de Clervaux

• Le Sire de Clinchamps

• Robert de Cognieres

• Gilbert de Colleville

• Guillaume de Colombieres

• Geoffroi de Combray

• Robert de Comines

• Amfroi de Conde

• Alric Le Coq

• Guillaume Corbon

• Hugue Corbon

• Aubri de Couci

• Roger de Courcelles

• Richard de Courci

• Robert de Courson

• Geoffroi, Eveque de Coutances

• Le Sire de Couvert

• Gui de Craon

• Gilbert Crispin

• Guillaume Crispin

• Mile Crispin

• Hamon Le Seneschal, Sir de Crevecoeur

• Robert de Crevecoeur

• Ansger de Criquetot

• Le Sire de Cussy

• D

• Roger Daniel

• Rober le Despensoer

• Henri de Domfront

• Gautier de Douai

• Le Sire de Driencourt

• E

• Richard de'Engagne

• Le Sire d'Epinay

• Etienne Erard

• Le Sire d'Escalles

• Auvrai d'Espagne

• Herve d'Espagne

• Raoul L'Estourni

• Richard L'Estourni

• Robert d'Estouteville

• Robert Count d'Eu

• Gautier Le Ewrus(Roumare or Rosmar)

• Guillaume, Count d'Evreux

• Roger d'Evreux

• F

• Alain Fergant, Count de Bratagne

• Guillaume de Ferrieres

• Mathieu de la Ferte Mace

• Guatier Fitz Autier

• Fitz Bertran de Peleit

• Adam Fitz Durand

• Robert Fitz Erneis

• Alain Fitz Flaald

• Guillaume Fitz Osberne

• Robert Fitz Picot

• Robert Fitz Richard

• Toustain Fitz Rou

• Eudes Fitz Sperwick

• Guatier Le Flamand

• Raoul de Fourneaux

• Le Sire de Fribois

• G

• Le Sire de Gace

• Raoul de Gael

• Gilbert de Gand

• Berenger Giffard

• Gautier Giffard, Count de Longueville

• Osberne Giffard

• Le Sire de Glanville

• Le Sire de Glos

• Ascelin de Gournay

• Hugh de Gournay

• Guillaume de Gouvix

• Anchetil de Gouvix

• Hugue de Grentiemesnil

• Robert de Grenville

• Robert Guernon, Sire de Montifiquet

• Hugue de Guidville

• Geoffroi de la Guierche

• H

• Gautier Hachet

• Eudes le Seneschal, Sir de la Hale

• Errand de Harcourt

• Herve de Helion

• Hugue d'Hericy

• Tithel de Heron

• Robert Heuse

• Hugue d'Houdetot

• I

• Jean d'Ivri

• Roger d'Ivry

The Battle of Hastings
1066 and much more
A brief of the events that led to our great heritage.

Duke William of Normandy left St.Valery in Normandy with about 600 ships and 10-12,000 men on Sept 27th in 1066.
William and his barons had been recruiting and preparing the invasion of England since early spring of that year. He was a seasoned general and master tactician, using cavalry, archers and infantry and had fought many notable battles. Off Beachy Head, his ship, the Mora, arrived ahead of the fleet.. William waited and ate a hearty breakfast. As his fleet straggled into place behind him they moved eastward to the first sheltered bay to provide protection for his armada. Pevensey and Bulverhythe were the villages on each promontory. Pevensey, to the west, was protected by an old Roman Fort and behind the fort there was much flat acreage to house his large Army. To suggest this landing was not pre-planned, is not in keeping with the preparatory time taken by William, or his track record. There had been much intelligence gathering in the past few months.

The bay, wide enough for maneuverability of this large fleet, was flat shored. William is said to have fallen on the beach, grasped the sand, and declared "This is my country" or words to that effect. Next, the ships were disembarked without resistance. They included 2,500 horses, prefabricated forts, and the materiel and equipment was prepared for any contingency. The ships shuttled in and out of the bay with the precision of a D Day landing. A Fort was built inside Pevensey Roman Fort as an H.Q, while the army camped behind it. William and FitzOsborn scouted the land He was unhappy with the terrain but it had proved to be a satisfactory landing beach. Taking his army around Pevensey Bay he camped 8 miles to the east, north of what is now known as Hastings all of which was most likely pre-planned. He camped to the east outside the friendly territory of the Norman Monks of Fecamp who may have been alerted and were waiting for his probable arrival. William waited. Perhaps he was waiting to know of the outcome of the battle to the north. In those two weeks William could have marched on London and taken it. He was obviously waiting for something?
Harold, far to the north in York at Stamford Bridge, was engaged in a life and death struggle against his brother who had teamed up with the Viking King Hadrada to invade England. Whether this was a planned Norman tactic, part of a pincer movement north and south, is not known, but students of Norman and Viking history might find it very feasible. The timing of each invasion was impeccable, and probably less than coincidental. Harold managed to resist the invasion to the north and killed both commanders. He was advised of the landing to the south by William.
Bringing the remnants of his Army south, Harold camped outside London at Waltham. For two weeks he gathered reinforcements, and exchanged taunts, threats and counterclaims to the Crown of England with William. Finally he moved his army south to a position about six miles north of where William waited.
Perhaps one of the most devastating events preceeding the battle was Harold's sudden awareness that he had been excommunicated by the Pope, and that William was wearing the papal ring. It is most likely this had been arranged by fellow Norman Robert Guiscard who had conquered most of southern Italy and was patron of the Pope who was indebted to him for saving the Vatican. Harold's spirit flagged. William was leading what might perhaps by called the first Crusade. The whole world was against Harold.
William moved up to Harold's position and set up in what was then the conventional European style. Archers, infantry and cavalry in the rear. A set piece, each assigned to their own duties. .
Harold waited. He and his brother Gyrth arranged a mass of men along a high ground ridge 8 deep, 800 yards long . A fixed corridor of tightly wedged humanity. Strategically, given the relative equipment of each side, it was hopeless from the start. To William it was almost a formality. Harold's men were hemmed in by their own elbows. William, with total mobility, held his Breton, Maine and Anjou contingents to the left of the line, the Normans the main thrust, the Flemish and French to his right. The flanking movements paid off. How long the battle took has varying estimates. Some say as little as two hours. Some as long as six hours. The latter seems more reasonable simply because of the numbers involved.
This battle would later be called Senlac, a river of blood. It demolished most of the remnants of the Saxon fighting men of the Island at very little cost to William.
It is very doubtful if Harold was shot in the eye with an arrow from over the ranks of his front line. He was probably run through by William's lance, accompanied by three others who were in at the kill, and who savaged him brutally.
Thus began a three century Norman occupation of England, Wales and Scotland, and later Ireland. It all started at Pevensey.

Chapter Two The Causes Of The Rebellion
Maj (Retd) AGHA HUMAYUN AMIN from WASHINGTON DC gives a brilliant analysis of the 1857 war of Independence

The events of 1857 were unique both in terms of historical precedence and in terms of the socio-political sphere as far as India was concerned. India as a region has known foreign invaders more frequently than any other region in world history. The reason for it does not lie in the docility or weakness of the Indo-Pak people but in the peculiar geographical position of India by virtue of being bounded in the north by a vast inhospitable and unproductive region which starts from beyond the Indus valley and stretches far north into the steppes of central and eastern Asia. It is an irony of history that the east Asian tribes and races forced the west Asian nomads of Mongol and Turk origin to seek their barbaric design for plunder westwards and these central Asian people repeatedly invaded India. In the process these central and north east Asian nomadic people conquered and colonized China also but also extended their sway in South Asia as well as West Asia.
...
Sir Charles Napier, the Commander-in-Chief of Bengal Army was also convinced that the Bengal Army was the most serious threat to EEIC rule. In 1849 he wrote that it was apparent to him and to all officers on the spot who were conversant with Native and Sepoy habits and feelings, that a widely spread and formidable scheme of mutiny was in progress, and great danger impending 82.'
Whatever historians may state now a cursory glance at the situation in 1857 makes one thing very clear that without the Bengal Army there would have been no rebellion, but this is only one aspect. The other aspect is that without the Bengal Army or for that matter the Madras or the Bombay armies there would have been no EEIC's conquest of India. So the 'Bengal Army Factor' works both ways, it was instrumental in EEIC's success in the first place and it was instrumental in the rebellion also. But the Bengal Army's alienation was a slow process. Mutinies started right from 1757 but these were over administrative, financial and caste matters and not to overthrow EEIC's rule. The transition of rebellion or a bid for independence is always a slow and subtle process. It is in this regard that the British argument that 1857 was just a soldier's mutiny is baseless. The Bengal Army did fight for EEIC for hundred years but by 1857 it was no longer the force that it was in 1757. We will examine the salient aspects which brought this change of perception in the Bengal Sepoy :- (1) The prime motivation of the Bengal Army soldiers in joining the army was economic. Just like the Irishmen of 18th, 19th or 20th centuries. It is true that the British were masters in making other races fight their wars through a subtle system based on regimental pride, motivation, resolute leadership espirit de corps etc. But the essential fact was that the Bengal Sepoy was an Indian and a subject. It is true that the British treated their native soldiers much better than most native soldiers were treated by native rulers. But race is a very rigid barrier and is made more rigid by difference of religion. Man's basic needs are food, water and air, but once these are fulfilled he strives for higher needs and ideals like freedom and independence. The racial barrier which made it impossible for a native to ever be an officer was a major factor in producing alienation. (2) The Bengal Army was composed of 80% Hindu Brahman and Rajputs. Their daily rituals were complicated and conflicted with demands of military life. Slowly and steadily it increased their hatred of their officers and EEIC not because of any personal reason but simply because they belonged to an alien race who they perceived as bent upon damaging their religious sensitivities. Two aspects were important in this regard i.e. travel across sea which was regarded by the high caste Hindus and Rajputs of that time as something which would soil and pollute the purity of their caste. The second was going across the Indus westwards which again in their opinion polluted the purity of their caste. Thus once the First Afghan War started the Bengal Army was deployed west of Indus. This had a serious effect on the morale of the Hindu Brahmans for the reasons : (1) Once the Brahmans crossed the Indus their caste was rendered impure and on return to India they had to spend heavy sums of money on the rituals through which they had to undergo in order to be readmitted to their high caste83. (2) West of Indus they had to eat food which they considered impure and this also soiled their caste. (3) In Afghanistan due to cold climate the Hindus could not carry out the rituals of bathing etc. This was the major reason for the post 1841 rapid decline in the Hindu soldiers morale and not the initial reverses suffered in the First Afghan War. (4) The Muslim troops employed in the First Afghan war were demoralised because they were deployed after a long time against the Muslims. The last time they were deployed against a Muslim state was in 1774 during the Rohilla war. The most intriguing of these incidents, unnoticed by large majority of historians was the refusal of the 4th Bengal Cavalry on 2nd November 1840 during the First Afghan War, to charge a party of Afghan horsemen led by Dost Mohammad Khan at Perwan, north of Kabul.The British historian John Fortescue had no answer for the reason why the 2nd Bengal Light Cavalry fell back and fled from the battle field. Fortescue thus said about this incident that; 'And then followed one of those incidents which after endless explanation remain always mysterious. The 2nd Light Cavalry was a good corps with good officers; but such misconduct could not be overlooked and the regiment was with ignominy disbanded'84. The British did not understand why 2nd Light Cavalry had behaved like that. There was another likely explanation for this behaviour which had a deep connection with 2nd Light Cavalry's history. The 2nd Light Cavalry was raised from Afghans of Kandhari origin settled at Lucknow in 1788 by the Nawab Vizier of Oudh. It became the 2nd Bengal Light Cavalry only in 179685. It is possible that their peculiar Afghan origin may have played a part in their reluctance to charge the Afghans at Perwan!
...
But the introduction of the Greased Cartridges in 1857 was the final and decisive blow. These cartridges which the sepoys thought contained cow or swine's fat was a definite attack on the religion of both Hindus and Muslims. These cartridges gave a simultaneous common ground to both to rationalize their hatred of the EEIC European. The dispersion of British troops and their being outnumbered overwhelmingly in 1857 was the final blow. 'Petty parsimony on part of supreme government in matters of allowances provoked a number of small mutinies in 1843 and 1844.'88 This is the verdict of Sir John Fortescue, the official historian of the British army. Fortescue went further, he noted that 'the same cause amounting to positive injustice brought a number of Bengal Regiments to the verge of revolt in 1849'89. In this case, Sir Charles Napier the Commander-in-Chief of the Company's Bengal Army's confrontation and subsequent resignation was a decisive event. There were two mutinies in the two respective regiments of Bengal Army over stoppage of allowances. Sir Charles Napier disbanded one and restored the allowances for the second. Lord Dalhousie censured him and revoked his orders. Dalhousie was a civilian and a young man. He did not understand the demoralizing effect which this action had on the soldiers of Bengal Army. Sir Charles Napier resigned and went back to Britain in 185090. Sir John Fortescue's opinion on this episode is worth quoting, 'The sepoys thus saw the chief, who had observed equity on their behalf, rewarded by public disgrace'.91

...

Notes and References

43. Page-140 & 428-J.W Fortescue-Op Cit.
84. Page-138- A History of the British Army-Volume-XII-1839-1852-Hon J.W Fortescue-Macmillan and Company Limited, London-1927.
86. Page-230-J.W Fortescue-British Army-Volume-XII Op Cit.
88. Page 238- A History of the British Army-Volume-XIII-1852-1859- Hon J.W Fortescue-Macmillan and Co-London-1930.

91. Pages-234 to 238-J.W Fortescue-Vol-XIII-Op Cit.

Invasion of England, 1066

King Edward of England (called "The Confessor" because of his construction of Westminster Abbey) died on January 5, 1066, after a reign of 23 years. Leaving no heirs, Edward's passing ignited a three-way rivalry for the crown that culminated in the Battle of Hastings and the destruction of the Anglo-Saxon rule of England.

The leading pretender was Harold Godwinson, the second most powerful man in England and an advisor to Edward. Harold and Edward became brothers-in-law when the king married Harold's sister. Harold's powerful position, his relationship to Edward and his esteem among his peers made him a logical successor to the throne. His claim was strengthened when the dying Edward supposedly uttered "Into Harold's hands I commit my Kingdom." With this kingly endorsement, the Witan (the council of royal advisors) unanimously selected Harold as King. His coronation took place the same day as Edward's burial. With the placing of the crown on his head, Harold's troubles began.
Across the English Channel, William, Duke of Normandy, also laid claim to the English throne. William justified his claim through his blood relationship with Edward (they were distant cousins) and by stating that some years earlier, Edward had designated him as his successor. To compound the issue, William asserted that the message in which Edward anointed him as the next King of England had been carried to him in 1064 by none other than Harold himself. In addition, (according to William) Harold had sworn on the relics of a martyred saint that he would support William's right to the throne. From William's perspective, when Harold donned the Crown he not only defied the wishes of Edward but had violated a sacred oath. He immediately prepared to invade England and destroy the upstart Harold. Harold's violation of his sacred oath enabled William to secure the support of the Pope who promptly excommunicated Harold, consigning him and his supporters to an eternity in Hell.
The third rival for the throne was Harald Hardrada, King of Norway. His justification was even more tenuous than William's. Hardrada ruled Norway jointly with his nephew Mangus until 1047 when Mangus conveniently died. Earlier (1042), Mangus had cut a deal with Harthacut the Danish ruler of England. Since neither ruler had a male heir, both promised their kingdom to the other in the event of his death. Harthacut died but Mangus was unable to follow up on his claim to the English throne because he was too busy battling for the rule of Denmark. Edward became the Anglo-Saxon ruler of England. Now with Mangus and Edward dead, Hardrada asserted that he, as Mangus's heir, was the rightful ruler of England. When he heard of Harold's coronation, Hardrada immediately prepared to invade England and crush the upstart.
Hardrada of Norway struck first. In mid September, Hardrada's invasion force landed on the Northern English coast, sacked a few coastal villages and headed towards the city of York. Hardrada was joined in his effort by Tostig, King Harold's nere-do-well brother. The Viking army overwhelmed an English force blocking the York road and captured the city. In London, news of the invasion sent King Harold hurriedly north at the head of his army picking up reinforcements along the way. The speed of Harold's forced march allowed him to surprise Hardrada's army on September 25, as it camped at Stamford Bridge outside York. A fierce battle followed. Hand to hand combat ebbed and flowed across the bridge. Finally the Norsemen's line broke and the real slaughter began. Hardrada fell and then the King's brother, Tostig. What remained of the Viking army fled to their ships. So devastating was the Viking defeat that only 24 of the invasion force's original 240 ships made the trip back home. Resting after his victory, Harold received word of William's landing near Hastings.
Construction of the Norman invasion fleet had been completed in July and all was ready for the Channel crossing. Unfortunately, William's ships could not penetrate an uncooperative north wind and for six weeks he languished on the Norman shore. Finally, on September 27, after parading the relics of St. Valery at the water's edge, the winds shifted to the south and the fleet set sail. The Normans made landfall on the English coast near Pevensey and marched to Hastings.
Harold rushed his army south and planted his battle standards atop a knoll some five miles from Hastings. During the early morning of the next day, October 14, Harold's army watched as a long column of Norman warriors marched to the base of the hill and formed a battle line. Separated by a few hundred yards, the lines of the two armies traded taunts and insults. At a signal, the Norman archers took their position at the front of the line. The English at the top of the hill responded by raising their shields above their heads forming a shield-wall to protect them from the rain of arrows. The battle was joined.
The English fought defensively while the Normans infantry and cavalry repeatedly charged their shield-wall. As the combat slogged on for the better part of the day, the battle's outcome was in question. Finally, as evening approached, the English line gave way and the Normans rushed their enemy with a vengeance. King Harold fell as did the majority of the Saxon aristocracy. William's victory was complete. On Christmas day 1066, William was crowned King of England in Westminster Abbey.

The Bayeux Tapestry

The Bayeux Tapestry (actually an embroidery measuring over 230 feet long and 20 inches wide) describes the Norman invasion of England and the events that led up to it. It is believed that the Tapestry was commissioned by Bishop Odo, bishop of Bayeux and the half-brother of William the Conqueror. The Tapestry contains hundreds of images divided into scenes each describing a particular event. The scenes are joined into a linear sequence allowing the viewer to "read" the entire story starting with the first scene and progressing to the last. The Tapestry would probably have been displayed in a church for public view.
History is written by the victors and the Tapestry is above all a Norman document. In a time when the vast majority of the population was illiterate, the Tapestry's images were designed to tell the story of the conquest of England from the Norman perspective. It focuses on the story of William, making no mention of Hardrada of Norway nor of Harold's victory at Stamford Bridge. The following are some excerpts taken from this extraordinary document.

King Edward sends Harold on a Mission

The Tapestry's story begins in 1064. King Edward, who has no heirs, has decided that William of Normandy will succeed him. Having made his decision; Edward calls upon Harold to deliver the message.
This at any rate, is the Norman interpretation of events for King Edward's selection of William is critical to the legitimacy of William's later claim to the English crown. It is also important that Harold deliver the message, as the tapestry explains in later scenes.
In this scene King Edward leans forward entrusting Harold with his message. Harold immediately sets out on his fateful journey.

Harold Swears an Oath to William

Pursuing his mission, the Tapestry describes how Harold crosses the English Channel to Normandy, is held hostage by a Norman count and is finally rescued by William.
Harold ends up in William's castle at Bayeux on the Norman coast where he supposedly delivers the message from King Edward. At this point the Tapestry describes a critical event. Having received the message that Edward has anointed him as his successor; William calls upon Harold to swear an oath of allegiance to him and to his right to the throne. The Tapestry shows Harold, both hands placed upon religious relics enclosed in two shrines, swearing his oath as William looks on. The onlookers, including William, point to the event to add further emphasis. One observer (far right) places his hand over his heart to underscore the sacredness of Harold's action. Although William is seated, he appears larger in size than Harold. The disproportion emphasizes Harold's inferior status to William. The Latin inscription reads "Where Harold took an oath to Duke William."

The Death and Burial of Edward the Confessor

The Tapestry describes Harold's return to England after swearing his oath to William and his report to King Edward. The story then advances forward two years to 1066 and the death of Edward.
The death and burial of King Edward is presented in three scenes whose chronological order is reversed. The first image (1) depicts Westminster Abbey. This is followed by Edward's funeral procession (2) and then his death (3).

The Death of Edward

In this scene (3) Edward is presented as both alive and dead. In the top portion of the panel Edward converses with those gathered at his bedside. The Latin inscription reads "Here King Edward addresses his faithful ones." At the foot of his bed sits Edward's wife who is also Harold's sister. At the side of the bed stands Stigand, the archbishop of Canterbury who performs a religious ceremony. The dying king addresses Harold who kneels in front of him. It is here that Edward supposedly anointed Harold as his successor giving legitimacy to Harold's claim to the crown.
In the lower panel Edward is prepared for burial. The bishop performs last rites while the embalmers go about their work. The Latin inscription reads "And here he died."

The Procession

Edwards' body, wrapped in linen, is carried to the church for burial (2). The Latin inscription reads "Here the body of King Edward is carried to the Church of St. Peter the Apostle." Edward's burial took place on January 6, 1066.
In its entry for the year 1066, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle describes Edward's death as follows: "In this year was consecrated the minster at Westminster, on Childer-mass-day. And King Edward died on the eve of Twelfth-day; and he was buried on Twelfth-day within the newly consecrated church at Westminster. And Harold the earl succeeded to the kingdom of England, even as the king had granted it to him, and men also had chosen him thereto; and he was crowned as king on Twelfth-day."

Westminster Abbey

Edward's funeral procession completes its journey at Westminster Abbey (1). King Edward began work on the abbey in 1050 and construction was completed shortly before his death. The pious Edward was awarded the distinction "the Confessor" for his effort. Unfortunately, the King fell ill on Christmas eve and was unable to attend the abbey's consecration.
The Tapestry conveys the newness of the abbey by the workman affixing the weather vane atop the roof to the left. God's blessing upon the consecrated structure is represented by the hand appearing from the clouds above.

A Bad Omen: the Appearance of Halley's Comet

Harold is crowned king on January 6. In the spring, near Easter, a comet appears in the sky. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle describes the event: "Easter was then on the sixteenth day before the calends of May. Then was over all England such a token seen as no man ever saw before. Some men said that it was the comet-star, which others denominate the long-hair'd star. It appeared first on the eve called 'Litania major', that is, on the eighth before the calends of May; and so shone all the week."
We now know that the comet-star in the sky was Halley's Comet making one of its 76-year cyclical appearances. In the Tapestry, an attendant rushes to tell Harold of the celestial happening as he sits upon his throne. The comet appears at the upper left. The portrayal acquires a sense of foreboding as empty long boats appear below the scene. These no doubt presage the invasion fleet William will employ to cross the Channel. The Tapestry implies that the appearance of the comet expresses God's wrath at Harold for breaking his oath to William and assuming the throne. Retribution will be found in the invasion fleet.

William Launches His Invasion

Upon hearing the news of Harold's coronation, William immediately orders the building of an invasion fleet. The Tapestry describes in detail the construction of the fleet and preparations for the invasion providing insight into eleventh century building techniques. With preparations complete, William waits on the Normandy shore for a favorable wind to take him to England.
The favorable wind arrives on September 27, and the fleet sets sail, its ships loaded with knights, archers, infantry, horses and the lumber necessary to build two or three forts. This scene shows William's ship as the fleet approaches Pevensy on the English shore. A cross adorns the top of the ship's mast. Below the cross, a lantern guides the way for the rest of the fleet. Shields line the ship's gunwales, reminiscent of the practice of the Norman's Viking ancestors. A dragon's head sits on the ship's prow and a bugler blows his horn at the ship's stern. A ship laden with horses sails along side William's craft. The fleet lands on September 28 and the invasion army makes its way to Hastings.

The Battle

This is one of many scenes depicting the ferocity of the battle. Wielding his battle-axe, a Saxon deals a death-blow to the horse of a Norman. This was the first time the Normans had encountered an enemy armed with the battle-axe. For the Saxons, this was the first time they had battled an enemy mounted on horseback. This scene probably describes the later stages of the battle when the Norman knights had broken through the Saxon shield wall. At the bottom of the scene lay the dead bodies of both Normans and Saxons.

The Death of Harold

King Harold tries to pull an arrow from his right eye. Several arrows are lodged in his shield showing he was in the thick of the battle. To the right, a Norman knight cuts down the wounded king assuring his death. At the bottom of the scene the victorious Normans claim the spoils of war as they strip the chain mail from bodies while collecting shields and swords from the dead. Scholars debate the meaning of this scene, some saying that the man slain by the knight is not Harold, others contesting that the man with the arrow wound is not Harold, others claiming that both represent Harold. The Latin inscription reads "Here King Harold was killed." The Tapestry ends its story after the death of Harold.
William ruled England until his death in 1087. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle recalls the Norman King in its entry for that year: "But amongst other things is not to be forgotten that good peace that he made in this land; so that a man of any account might go over his kingdom unhurt with his bosom full of gold. No man durst slay another, had he never so much evil done to the other; and if any churl lay with a woman against her will, he soon lost the limb that he played with. He truly reigned over England; and by his capacity so thoroughly surveyed it, that there was not a hide of land in England that he wist not who had it, or what it was worth, and afterwards set it down in his book."
References:    Bernstein, David, The Mystery of the Bayeux Tapestry (1987); Howarth, David, 1066 the Year of the Conquest (1978); Ingram, James (translator), The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (1823); Wood, Michael, In Search of the Dark Ages (1987).
Resources on the Web:    Battle of Hastings, 1066    Bayeux Tapestry

Welcome to the royal Genealogy information held at University of Hull .
William I the Conqueror, King of England

Born: 1028, Falaise,Normandy,France
Acceded: 25 DEC 1066, Westminster Abbey, London, England
Died: 9 SEP 1087, Hermentrube, Near Rouen, France
Interred: St Stephen Abbey,Caen,Normandy
Notes:
Reigned 1066-1087. Duke of Normandy 1035-1087. Invaded England defeated and
killed his rival Harold at the Battle of Hastings and became King. The Norman
conquest of England was completed by 1072 aided by the establishment of
feaudalism under which his followers were granted land in return for pledges
of service and loyalty. As King William was noted for his efficient if harsh
rule. His administration relied upon Norman and other foreign personnell
especially Lanfranc Archbishop of Canterbury. In 1085 started Domesday Book.
Father: Normandy, Robert II the Devil of, Duke of Normandy 6th, b. CIR 1008
Mother: , Herleva (Arlette), Officer of the Household, b. CIR 1012
Married 1053, Cathedral of Notre Dame d'Eu, Normandy to , Matilda of Flanders
Child 1: , Robert II Curthose, Duke of Normandy, b. 1054 Child 2: , Richard, Duke of Bernay, b. ABT 1055 Child 3: , Cecilia of Holy Trinity, Abbess of Caen, b. 1056 Child 4: , Adeliza, Nun, b. 1055 Child 5: , William II Rufus, King of England, b. 1056/60 Child 6: , Constance, b. ABT 1066 Child 7: , Adela, Countess of Blois, b. ABT 1067 Child 8: , Agatha, b. ABT 1064 Child 9: , Matilda Child 10: , Henry I Beauclerc, King of England, b. ABT SEP 1068

With his victory at the Battle of Hastings, William became known as William "the Conquerer." Prior to this, he was known as William "the Bastard" because he was the result of his father's affair with a tanner's daughter.
Before the battle, William vowed that if granted victory, he would build an Abbey on the battleground with its altar at the spot where Harold's standards stood. William was true to his word and Battle Abbey stands today at the site of the battle.
During the later years of his reign, Edward withdrew from many of his kingly responsibilities. Harold filled this void and became virtual ruler of England.
William was made Duke of Normandy at age seven. His ascension ignited a civil war lasting 12 years.

Battle, East Sussex

It is said that at the Battle of Hastings, now preserved in the place name Battle, the flag raised by King Harold was painted with a golden dragon. This is almost certainly true, for this dragon appears twice on the famous Bayeux Tapestry, which was embroidered to commemorate this historic fight that so influenced the future history of Britain. This dragon is sometimes called 'The Golden Dragon of Wessex', because it was said to have been carried by Cuthred of Wessex at the battle of Burford in AD 752, yet it appears to have been originally used by Saxon tribes on the Continent. It seems that when the West Saxons invaded Britain in AD 495, they carried a golden dragon as their standard. The dragon appeared on the standards of at least four of William's successors, and in his account of the crusade undertaken by Richard I, the chronicler Ricard of Devizes mentions 'The terrible standard of the dragon...borne in front unfurled'. According to the records, the dragon on the standard of Henry III was made of red silk, 'sparkling all over with gold', its tongue like burning fires, and its eyes made of 'sapphires or some other suitable stones'. It was a dragon of this descent which was unfurled to witness the English victory at Agincourt, though it is not the same dragon which is nowadays mis-called a 'griffin' on the shield of the city of London. There are many myths and legends attached to the Battle of Hastings, almost all of them elaborations. The most famous tells how Richard le Fort, seeing William in danger, threw his own shield in front of him, thereby saving him from being killed. For this reason, it is claimed, Fort was permitted to add to his name 'escue' ('shield'), hence the modern name for the family, as Fortesque. The story is almost certainly apochryphal, though the family's motto is a pun on their name, reading in Latin 'Forte scutum salvus ducum' (A strong shield is the leader's safety).

DOMESDAY (Continued)








PLATE 12
The lower fort/first meal

Next follows the serving of the first meal after the erection of the wooden fort that they are reported to have bought with them. This plate shows the first fort that they built as two towers connected by a roof that could be constructed from parts of the dismantled ships. This would support Wace's claim that the ships were dismantled. It would clearly be a logical thing to do as the timbers from so many ships would form a readily accessible timber source with which to build a fort. These defences can be seen with what may be the oar ports intact, exactly as portrayed earlier (Plate 9 and Plate 10) as white holes in black timber.
Placing the foot of the tower upon the base of the Tapestry leads me to believe this site to be at the bottom of the hill described in the Chronicle of Battle Abbey and Wace's Roman de Rue. The coloured curved strips, seen behind the fort, could also indicate a hill. These strips being a diagrammatic way of showing the way that farmers sowed crops across fields to facilitate ploughing by oxen. This seems a logical explanation but does not satisfactorily explain the existence of a projection at the top of the curve. Whilst not apparent on most reproductions in print it is very obvious when viewed in person at the Bayeux gallery.

THE SECRETS OF
THE NORMAN INVASION©
BY NICK AUSTIN
PART 1 THE LANDING SITE

It is the intention of this document together with the one currently under research to bring to the attention of the reader new evidence concerning the events of the Norman Invasion. The evidence in this text relates purely to establishing the correct site of the Invasion and Norman camp from the examination of authentic manuscript documents of the time, in conjunction with geographical and archaeological evidence, that has never before been available. I shall show that where descriptions in one manuscript might be considered contradictory to statements in another, the actual events of the time can be explained in a rational and logical way once the correct site is known. It is the intention to show the reader in a detailed manner evidence that rewrites our previous understanding of history concerning what is considered by many to be the most important singular event in English history - the Norman Invasion.
This document relates solely to those matters relevant to the landing of the Norman Invasion fleet and the circumstances concerning the period up until the Norman army left to fight the Battle of Hastings. Having established the authentic landing and camp site, where the Norman army was based, many more questions are raised concerning the events of the day of the Battle of Hastings. These too have remained a mystery to those who have studied the fine details and I propose to be the first to answer all of the outstanding questions leaving no matter unresolved. However, due to the recent decision by the Department of Transport to build a major trunk road through the centre of the landing site, I have no alternative but to publish my initial findings now. The alternative could be the loss of a site of national historical and archaeological importance, which would be wholly unacceptable. In consequence and in the interests of all concerned I propose to deal with these further matters in a second volume, titled THE BATTLE OF HASTINGS, at a later date.



MANUSCRIPT EVIDENCE

It is necessary to look initially at what the written historical record tells us about the events of the time. I have therefore only taken into account those manuscripts that are believed to originate within 150 years of the date of the Battle and that can throw light on the events of the landing. It is not my intention to prove or disprove the authenticity of the writings contained in the texts examined. It is my belief that all of them reported the events of the time, in an honest manner, to the best of their ability. The discrepancies that occur in consequence of seeking to apply the substance of these texts to the wrong landing site are studied in detail and instead of supporting the argument that any of the documents are unreliable, effectively endorses their accuracy when applied to the correct site. Thus all the manuscripts examined have a thorough consistency valid to only one landing site.

THE SECRETS OF
THE NORMAN INVASION©
BY NICK AUSTIN
PART 1 THE LANDING SITE

It is the intention of this document together with the one currently under research to bring to the attention of the reader new evidence concerning the events of the Norman Invasion. The evidence in this text relates purely to establishing the correct site of the Invasion and Norman camp from the examination of authentic manuscript documents of the time, in conjunction with geographical and archaeological evidence, that has never before been available. I shall show that where descriptions in one manuscript might be considered contradictory to statements in another, the actual events of the time can be explained in a rational and logical way once the correct site is known. It is the intention to show the reader in a detailed manner evidence that rewrites our previous understanding of history concerning what is considered by many to be the most important singular event in English history - the Norman Invasion.
This document relates solely to those matters relevant to the landing of the Norman Invasion fleet and the circumstances concerning the period up until the Norman army left to fight the Battle of Hastings. Having established the authentic landing and camp site, where the Norman army was based, many more questions are raised concerning the events of the day of the Battle of Hastings. These too have remained a mystery to those who have studied the fine details and I propose to be the first to answer all of the outstanding questions leaving no matter unresolved. However, due to the recent decision by the Department of Transport to build a major trunk road through the centre of the landing site, I have no alternative but to publish my initial findings now. The alternative could be the loss of a site of national historical and archaeological importance, which would be wholly unacceptable. In consequence and in the interests of all concerned I propose to deal with these further matters in a second volume, titled THE BATTLE OF HASTINGS, at a later date.



MANUSCRIPT EVIDENCE

It is necessary to look initially at what the written historical record tells us about the events of the time. I have therefore only taken into account those manuscripts that are believed to originate within 150 years of the date of the Battle and that can throw light on the events of the landing. It is not my intention to prove or disprove the authenticity of the writings contained in the texts examined. It is my belief that all of them reported the events of the time, in an honest manner, to the best of their ability. The discrepancies that occur in consequence of seeking to apply the substance of these texts to the wrong landing site are studied in detail and instead of supporting the argument that any of the documents are unreliable, effectively endorses their accuracy when applied to the correct site. Thus all the manuscripts examined have a thorough consistency valid to only one landing site.

DOMESDAY (Continued)

PLATE 12
Part Twenty-one

PLATE 12
The lower fort/first meal

Next follows the serving of the first meal after the erection of the wooden fort that they are reported to have bought with them. This plate shows the first fort that they built as two towers connected by a roof that could be constructed from parts of the dismantled ships. This would support Wace's claim that the ships were dismantled. It would clearly be a logical thing to do as the timbers from so many ships would form a readily accessible timber source with which to build a fort. These defences can be seen with what may be the oar ports intact, exactly as portrayed earlier (Plate 9 and Plate 10) as white holes in black timber.
Placing the foot of the tower upon the base of the Tapestry leads me to believe this site to be at the bottom of the hill described in the Chronicle of Battle Abbey and Wace's Roman de Rue. The coloured curved strips, seen behind the fort, could also indicate a hill. These strips being a diagrammatic way of showing the way that farmers sowed crops across fields to facilitate ploughing by oxen. This seems a logical explanation but does not satisfactorily explain the existence of a projection at the top of the curve. Whilst not apparent on most reproductions in print it is very obvious when viewed in person at the Bayeux gallery.

This “nipple”, as I shall call it, makes further inference to the fact that the strips may not have been meant to be interpreted as a hill but some form of roof. The fact that it matches the planking on the invasion boats may be just co-incidence. All that is certain is that the designers wished to draw this particular item to our attention.
There then follows a meal where two sets of people are dining.

The first, on the left, are using their shields as a table raised above the normal ground level, illustrating the resourceful use of materials bought with them. The second dining scene appears to be at a similar elevation but this time in a circular room. It has been suggested that the presentation is of a circular table. I do not believe this is the case, as the artist is showing an important scene which took place on the day of the landing, confirmed by Wace's manuscript. It illustrates a number of stages of the same meal in one picture, demonstrating the skill of the originators, to save time in production and achieve the maximum impact. The fact that the table is tapered indicates that it has been specifically designed to show some form of perspective, which in turn means in my view that the room was round, rather than the table.
The man in front is a servant with hand basin and towel for hand washing. Bishop Odo is the dominant figure blessing the food. The duke sits at the right of the Bishop with one hand in a dish taking the meal. The man the other side of Odo is signalling that the meal is over and it is time to leave. There is only one implement on the table and that is a knife, the only eating implement of the age.
An important aspect of this section of the Tapestry is that the landing sequence, when seen in total, is a continuous event up to this point. Bishop Odo is shown with a fish on the table, together with fish in front of one or possibly two of the other guests. This provides almost conclusive evidence that these events took place on a Friday, when clerics abstained from meat. The 29th September was the Friday in question, the day of the landing, therefore this meal must have been taken in the Norman camp on the first day or night of the Invasion. The Saxon Chronicles, which we shall look at in the next chapter, provide very little evidence about the Invasion, other than confirming that the Normans left St Valery on the night of Thursday 28th September. This is also confirmed by the Carmen where it states
"The feast of St Michaell was about to be celebrated throughout the world when God granted everything according to your desire".
The Bayeux Tapestry provides us with a unique detail that could easily be over looked. There was not enough time or tide for the invaders to have landed in the morning at Pevensey and then sailed or marched on to Hastings to arrive there on the same day as the landing (which was the Friday). The reason for showing the bishop eating fish, whilst the other men ate provisions, was to confirm the bishop's position as spiritual leader. In many respects the picture in the tapestry takes on the spiritual aspirations of the last supper, with Bishop Odo occupying the leading roll. The meal was a significant event since Wace reports the same supper. It was known to everyone, at the time, that this took place on the day of the landing and this was a Friday. Hence the requirement for a fish at the table of the bishop. The consequence of this analysis is that contrary to previous historical thinking the Bayeux Tapestry provides further unexpected and incontrovertible proof by virtue of the logistics of the day that Hastings was the landing site.

LIST OF THOSE ACCOMPANYING WILLIAM THE CONQUEROR
ON HIS INVASION OF ENGLAND

1066

This list is taken from the plaque in the church at Dives-sur-Mer, Normandy, France, where William the Conqueror and his knights said mass before setting sail to invade England in 1066.
It lists all the knights who took part in the invasion. Care needs to be taken in using this list:
1) In the first place, it is ordered by Christian name, not by surname.
2) Secondly the concept of surnames as we know them was not very well-developed. In most cases, they either took the names of the villages whence they came (this would generally be the case for those those starting with a "de"), or else the surname was a sort of nickname, depicting certain characteristics e.g. Alain le Roux (Alain of the red hair), Raoul Vis-de-Loup (Raoul wolf-face) etc.
And then of course we have poor Robert Le Bastard....
In other cases, it could be the father's name, in the format "fils de...." (= son of..... ). This in later years became"Fitz....", as in such names as "Fitzjohn" etc.
3) The spellings were often different then. For example, the family name Bunker comes from French Bon-Coeur ("Good-Heart). This would have been written "Cor-bon" in Norman French. Also, the bishop of Bayeux, who is normally known by the name of "Odo", is listed under the French spelling of "Eude".
4) Please remember that these names would have been copied, recopied and miscopied several times, so errors could well creep in. Handwritten "u"s and "n"s would tend to get confused, as might "e"s and "a"s.

Achard d'Ivri
Alevi
Altard de Vaux
Alain le Roux
Ansure de Dreux
Anquetil de Cherbourg
Anquetil de Grai
Anquetil de Ros
Anscoul de Picvini
Ansfroi de Cormeilles
Ansfroi de Vaubadon
Ansger de Montaigu
Ansger de Senarpont
Ansgot
Ansgot de Ros
Arnould de Perci
Arnould d'Andre (Arnould d'Andri)
Arnould de Nesdin
Aubert Greslet
Aubri de Couci
Aubri de Ver
Auvrai le Breton
Auvrai d'Espagne
Auvrai Merteberge
Auvrai de Tanie
Azor
Bavent
Beaudouin de Colombieres (Beaudouin de Colombihres)
Beaudoin le Flamand
Beaudoin de Meules
Berenger Giffard
Berenger de Toeni
Bernard d'Alencon (Bernard d'Alengon)
Bernard de Neufmarche
Bernard Pancevolt
Bernard de Saint-Ouen
Bertran de Verdun
Beugelin de Dive
Bigot de Loges
Carbonnel
Daniel
Danneville
David d'Argentan
D'Argouges
D'Auvay
D'Auvrecher d'Angerville
de Bailleul
de Briqueville (*)
de Canouville
De Clinchamps
De Courcy
de Cugey
de Fribois
d'Hericy
d'Houdetot
de Mathan
de Montfiquet
d'Orglande
du Merle
(* This name is duplicated - not clear whether there were two)
de Saint-Germain
de Sainte-d'Aignaux
de Tilly
de Touchet
de Tournebut
de Venois
Drew de la Berviere (Drew de la Bervihre)
Drew de Montaigu
Durand Malet
Ecouland
Engenouf de l'Aigle
Engerrand de Rainbeaucourt
Erneis de Buron
Etienne de Fontemai
Eude Comte de Champagne
Eude Eveque de Bayeux (Eude Evjque de Bayeux)
Eude Cul de Louf
Eude le Flamand
Eude de Fourneaux
Eude le Senechal (Eude le Sinichal)
Eustache Comte de Boulogne
Foucher de Paris
Fouque de Libourg
Gautier de l'Appeville
Gautier le Bouguignon
Gautier de Caen
Gautier de Claville
Gautier de Douai
Gautier Giffard
Gautier de Grancourt
Gautier Hachet
Gautier Hewse
Gautier d'Incourt
Gautier de Laci
Gautier de Mucedent
Gautier d'Ornontville
Gautier de Riebou
Gautier de Saint-Valeri (Gautier de Saint-Valiri)
Gautier Tirel
Gautier de Vernon
Geoffroi Albelin
Geoffroi Bainard
Geoffroi du Bec
Geoffroi de Cambrai
Geoffroi de la Guierche
Geoffroi le Marechal
Geoffroi de Mandeville
Geoffroi Martel
Geoffroi Maurouard
Geoffroi de Montbrai
Geoffroi Comte du Perche
Geoffroi de Pierrepont
Geoffroi de Ros
Geoffroi de Runeville
Geoffroi Talbot
Geoffroi de Tournai
Geoffroi de Trelli
Gerboud le Flamand
Gilbert le Blond
Gilbert de Blosbeville
Gilbert de Bretteville
Gilbert de Budi
Gilbert de Colleville
Gilbert de Gand
Gilbert de Gibard
Gilbert Malet
Gilbert Maminot
Gilbert Tibon
Gilbert de Werables
Gilbert de Wissant
Gonfroi de Cioches
Gonfroi Mauduit
Goscelin de Corneilles
Goscelin de Douai
Goscelin de la Riviere (Goscelin de la Rivihre)
Goubert d'Aufai
Goubert de Beauvais
Guernon de Peis
Gui de Craon
Gui de Raimbeaucourt
Gui de Rainecourt
Guillaume Alis
Guillaume d'Angleville
Guillaume l'Archer
Guillaume d'Argues
Guillaume d'Audrieu
Guillaume de l'Aune
Guillaume Basset
Guillaume Belet
Guillaume de Beaufou
Guillaume Bertran
Guillaume de Biville
Guillaume le Blond
Guillaume Bonvalet
Guillaume de Bosc
Guillaume du Bosc-Roard
Guillaume de Bourneville
Guillaume de Brai
Guillaume de Briouse
Guillaume de Bursigni
Guillaume de Canaigres
Guillaume de Cailli
Guillaume de Cairon
Guillaume Cardon
Guillaume de Carnet
Guillaume de Castillon
Guillaume de Ceauce
Guillaume la Cleve
Guillaume de Colleville
Guillaume de Paumera
Guillaume le Despensier
Guillaume de Durville
Guillaume d'Ecouis
Guillaume Espec
Guillaume d'Eu
Guillaume Comte d'Evreux
Guillaume de Falaise
Guillaume de Fecamp (Guillaume de Ficamp)
Guillaume Folet
Guillaume de la Foret
Guillaume de Fougeres (Guillaume de Foughres)
Guillaume Froissart
Guillaume Goulaffre
Guillaume de Letre
Guillaume de Loucelles
Guillaume Louvet
Guillaume Malet
Guillaume de Malleville
Guillaume de la Mare
Guillaume Maubenc
Guillaume Mauduit
Guillaume de Moion
Guillaume de Monceaux
Guillaume de Noyers
Guillaume fils d'Olgeanc
Guillaume Pantoul
Guillaume de Parthenai
Guillaume Peche
Guillaume de Perci
Guillaume Pevrel
Guillaume de Piquiri
Guillaume Poignant
Guillaume de Poillei
Guillaume le Poitevin
Guillaume de Pont de l'Arche
Guillaume Quesnel
Guillaume de Reviers
Guillaume de Sept-Meules
Guillaume Taillebois
Guillaume de Tocni
Guillaume de Vatteville
Guillaume de Vauville
Guillaume de Ver
Guillaume de Vesli
Guillaume de Warenne
Guimond de Blangi
Guimond de Tessel
Guineboud de Balon
Guinemar le Flamand
Hamelin de balon
Hamon le Senechal (Hamon le Sinichal)
Hardouin d'Escalles
Hascouf Musard
Henri de Beaumont
Henri de Ferrieres (Henri de Ferrihres)
Herman de Dreux
Herve le Berruier (Hervi le Birruier)
Herve d'Espagne (Hervi d'Espagne)
Herve d'Helion (Hervi d'Hilion)
Honfroi d'Ansleville
Honfroi de Biville
Honfroi de Bohon
Honfroi de Carteret
Honfroi de Culai
Honfroi de l'ile
Honfroi du Tilleul
Honfroi Vis-de-Louf
Huard de Vernon
Hubert de Mont-Canisi
Hubert de Pont
Hugue l'Ane
Hugue d'Avranches
Hugue de Beauchamp
Hugue de Bernieres (Hugue de Bernihres)
Hugue du Bois-Hebert (Hugue du Bois-Hibert)
Hugue de Bolbec
Hugue Bourdet
Hugue de Brebeuf
Hugue de Corbon
Hugue de Dol
Hugue le Flamand
Hugue de Gournai
Hugue de Grentemesnil
Hugue de Guideville
Hugue de Hodenc
Hugue de Hotot
Hugue d'Ivri
Hugue de Laci
Hugue de Maci
Hugue Maminot
Hugue de Manneville
Hugue de la Mare
Hugue Mautravers
Hugue de Mobec
Hugue de Montfort
Hugue de Montgommeri
Hugue Musart
Hugue de Port
Hugue de Rennes
Hugue de Saint-Quentin
Hugue Silvestre
Hugue de Vesli
Hugue de Viville
Ilbert de Laci
Ilbert de Toeni
Ive Taillebois
Ive de Vesci
Jasce le Flamand
Jumel de Toeni
Lanfranc
le Vicomte
Mathieu de Mortagne
Mauger de Carteret
Maurin de Caen
Mile Crespin
Murdac
Niel d'Aubigni (Niel d'Aubigni)
Niel de Berville (Niel de Berville)
Niel Fossard (Niel Fossard)
Niel de Gournai (Niel de Gournai)
Niel de Munneville (Niel de Munneville)
Normand d'Adreci
Osberne d'Arques
Osberne du Breuil
Osberne d'Eu
Osberne Giffard
Osberne Pastforeire
Osberne du Quesnai
Osberne du Saussai
Osberne de Warci
Osmond
Osmont de Vaubadon
Oure d'Addetot
Oure de Bercheres
Picot
Pierre de Valognes
Rahier d'Avre
Raoul d'Aunon
Raoul Baignard
Raoul de Bans
Raoul de Bapaumes
Raoul Basset
Raoul de Beaufou
Raoul de Bernai
Raoul Blouet
Raoul Botin
Raoul de la Bruiere (Raoul de la Bruihre)
Raoul de Chartres
Raoul de Colombieres (Raoul de Colombihres)
Raoul de Conteville
Raoul de Courseume
Raoul de l'Estourmi
Raoul de Fougeres (Raoul de Foughres)
Raoul de Framan
Raoul de Gael
Raoul de Hauville
Raoul L'ile
Raoul de Lanquetot
Raoul de Linesi
Raoul de Marci
Raoul de Mortemer
Raoul de Moron
Raoul d'Ouilli
Raoul Painel
Raoul Pinel
Raoul Pipin
Raoul de la Pommeraie
Raoul du Quesnai
Raoul de Saint-Sanson
Raoul du Saussai
Raoul de Sauvigni
Raoul Taillebois
Raoul du Theil
Raoul de Toeni
Raoul de Tourlaville
Raoul de Tourneville
Raoul Tranchant
Raoul fils d'Unepac
Raoul Vis-de-Loup
Ravenot
Renaud de Bailleul
Renaud Croc
Renaud de Pierrepont
Renaud de Saint-Helene (Renaud de Saint-Hilhne)
Renaud de Torteval
Renier de Brimou
Renouf de Colombelles
Renouf Flambard
Renouf Pevrel
Renouf de Saint-Waleri
Renouf Vaubadon
Richard Basset
Richard de Beaumais
Richard de Bienfaite
Richard de Bondeville
Richard de Courci
Richard d'Engagne
Richard L'Estourmi
Richard Fresle
Richard de Meri
Richard de Neuville
Richard Poignant
Richard de Reviers
Richard de Sacquerville
Richard de Saint-Clair
Richard de Sourdeval
Richard Talbot
Richard de Vatteville
Richard de Vernon
Richer d'Andeli
Robert d'Armentieres (Robert d'Armentihres)
Robert d'Auberville
Robert d'Aumale
Robert de Barbes
Robert Le Bastard
Robert de Beaumont
Robert Le Blond
Robert Blouet
Robert Bourdet
Robert de Brix
Robert de Buci
Robert de Chandos
Robert Corbet
Robert de Courcon (Robert de Courgon)
Robert Cruel
Robert le Despensier
Robert Comte d'Eu
Robert Fromentin
Robert fils de Gerould
Robert de Glanville
Robert Guernon
Robert de Harcourt
Robert de Lorz
Robert Malet
Robert Comte de Meulan
Robert de Montbrai
Robert de Montfort
Robert Comte de Mortain
Robert des Moutiers
Robert Murdac
Robert d'Ouilli
Robert de Pierrepont
Robert de Pontchardon
Robert de Rhuddlan
Robert de Romenel
Robert de Saint-Leger
Robert de Thaon
Robert de Toeni
Robert de Vatteville
Robert des Vaux
Robert de Veci
Robert de Vesli
Robert de Villon
Roger d'Aubernon
Roger Arundel
Roger d'Auberville
Roger de Beaumont
Roger Bigot
Roger Boissel
Roger de Bosc-Normand
Roger de Bosc-Roard
Roger de Breteuil
Roger de Bulli
Roger de Carteret
Roger de Chandos
Roger Corbet
Roger de Courcelles
Roger d'Evreux
Roger d'Ivri
Roger de Laci
Roger de Lisieux
Roger de Meules
Roger de Montgommeri
Roger de Moyaux
Roger de Mussegros
Roger de Ouistreham
Roger d'Orbec
Roger Picot
Roger de Pistres
Roger le Poitevin
Roger de Rames
Roger de Saint-Germain
Roger de Somneri
Ruaud l'Adoube
Seri d'Auberville
Serlon de Burci
Serlon de Ros
Sigan de Cioches
Simon de Senlis
Thierri Pointel
Toustain
Turold
Turold de Grenteville
Turold de Papelion
Turstin de Gueron
Turstin Mantel
Turstin de Saint-Helene (Turstin de Saint-Hilhne)
Turstin fils de Rou
Turstin Tinel
Vauquelin de Rosai
Vital
Wadard



Companions of Duke William at Hastings
A combination of all the known Battell Abbey Rolls, including Wace, Dukes, Counts, Barons, Seigneurs who attended William at Hastings.
These were the commanders. They were the elite who had provided ships, horses, men and supplies for the venture. They were granted the Lordships.
The list does not include the estimated 12,000, Standard bearers, Men at Arms, Yeomen, Freemen and other ranks, although some of these were granted smaller parcels of England, some even as small as 1/8th of a knight's fee.

• • A

• Ours d'Abbetot

• Roger d'Abernon

• Ruaud d'Adoube (Musard)

• Engenoulf de l'Aigle

• Richard de l'Aigle (de Aquila)

• Herbert d'Aigneaux

• Guatier d'Aincourt

• Guillaume Alis

• Guillaume d'Alre

• Archard d'Ambrieres

• Robert d'Amfreville

• le Sire de Anisy

• Guillaume d'Anneville

• Guatier d'Appeville

• Guillaume L'Archer

• Norman D'Arcy

• Arnoul d'Ardre

• David d'Argentan

• Le Sire d'Argouges

• Robert d'Armentieres

• Guillaume d'Arques

• Osbern d'Arques

• Bagod d'Arras

• Roger Arundel

• Geoffroi Ascelin

• Hugh L'Asne

• Gilbert d'Asnieres

• Raoul d'Asnieres

• Guillaume d'Aubigny

• Le Sire d'Aubigny (Roger)

• Guillaume d'Audrieu

• Gilbert d'Aufay

• Fouque Aunou

• Le Sire d'Auvillers

• Richard Vicomte d'Avranches

• B

• Guaillaume Bacon Sire de Molay

• Le Sire de Bailleul

• Guineboud de Balon

• Hamelin de Balon

• Robert Banastre

• Osmond Basset

• Raoul Basset

• Robert Le Bastard

• Endes, Eveque de Bayeux

• Hugue de Beauchamp

• Guillaume de Beaufou

• Robert de Beaufou

• Robert de Beaumont

• Gautier du Bec

• Geoffroi du Bec

• Hugue de Bernieres

• Guillaume Bertram

• Robert Bertram, le Tort

• Le Sire de Beville

• Avenel des Biards

• Richard de Bienfaite et d'Orbec

• Guillaume Bigot

• Robert Bigot, Seigneur de Maltot

• Gilbert Le Blond

• Robert Le Blond

• Robert Blouet

• Blundel

• Honfroi de Boho

• Hugue de Bolbec

• Le Sire de Bolleville

• Le Sire de Bonnesboq

• Guillaume de Bosc

• Le Sire de Bosc-Roard(Simon)

• Raoul Botin

• Eustach, Comte de Boulogne

• Hugue Bourdet

• Robert Bourdet

• Herve de Bourges

• Guillaume de Bourneville

• Hugue de Bouteillier

• Le Sir de Brabancon

• Guillaume de Brai

• Raoul de Branch

• Le Seigneur de Brecey

• Robert de Breherval

• Brian de Bratagne, Comte de Vennes

• Roger de Breteuil

• Anvrai Le Breton

• Gilbert de Bretteville

• Dreu de La Beuvriere

• Guillaume de Briouse

• Adam de Brix

• Guillaume de Brix

• Le Sire de Brucourt

• Robert de Buci

• Serion de Burci

• Michel de Bures

• C

• Guatier de Caen

• Maurin de Caen

• Guillaume de Cahaignes

• Guillaume de Cailly

• Le Sire de Canouville(Gautier)

• Hugue Carbonnel

• Honfroi de Carteret

• Eudes, Comte de Champagne

• Robert de Chandos

• Guillaume Le Chievre

• Le Sire de Cintheaux

• Gonfroi de Cioches

• Hamon de Clervaux

• Le Sire de Clinchamps

• Robert de Cognieres

• Gilbert de Colleville

• Guillaume de Colombieres

• Geoffroi de Combray

• Robert de Comines

• Amfroi de Conde

• Alric Le Coq

• Guillaume Corbon

• Hugue Corbon

• Aubri de Couci

• Roger de Courcelles

• Richard de Courci

• Robert de Courson

• Geoffroi, Eveque de Coutances

• Le Sire de Couvert

• Gui de Craon

• Gilbert Crispin

• Guillaume Crispin

• Mile Crispin

• Hamon Le Seneschal, Sir de Crevecoeur

• Robert de Crevecoeur

• Ansger de Criquetot

• Le Sire de Cussy

• D

• Roger Daniel

• Rober le Despensoer

• Henri de Domfront

• Gautier de Douai

• Le Sire de Driencourt

• E

• Richard de'Engagne

• Le Sire d'Epinay

• Etienne Erard

• Le Sire d'Escalles

• Auvrai d'Espagne

• Herve d'Espagne

• Raoul L'Estourni

• Richard L'Estourni

• Robert d'Estouteville

• Robert Count d'Eu

• Gautier Le Ewrus(Roumare or Rosmar)

• Guillaume, Count d'Evreux

• Roger d'Evreux

• F

• Alain Fergant, Count de Bratagne

• Guillaume de Ferrieres

• Mathieu de la Ferte Mace

• Guatier Fitz Autier

• Fitz Bertran de Peleit

• Adam Fitz Durand

• Robert Fitz Erneis

• Alain Fitz Flaald

• Guillaume Fitz Osberne

• Robert Fitz Picot

• Robert Fitz Richard

• Toustain Fitz Rou

• Eudes Fitz Sperwick

• Guatier Le Flamand

• Raoul de Fourneaux

• Le Sire de Fribois

• G

• Le Sire de Gace

• Raoul de Gael

• Gilbert de Gand

• Berenger Giffard

• Gautier Giffard, Count de Longueville

• Osberne Giffard

• Le Sire de Glanville

• Le Sire de Glos

• Ascelin de Gournay

• Hugh de Gournay

• Guillaume de Gouvix

• Anchetil de Gouvix

• Hugue de Grentiemesnil

• Robert de Grenville

• Robert Guernon, Sire de Montifiquet

• Hugue de Guidville

• Geoffroi de la Guierche

• H

• Gautier Hachet

• Eudes le Seneschal, Sir de la Hale

• Errand de Harcourt

• Herve de Helion

• Hugue d'Hericy

• Tithel de Heron

• Robert Heuse

• Hugue d'Houdetot

• I

• Jean d'Ivri

• Roger d'Ivry

Pont d'Ouve

Department: Manche.
Administrative district: Arr. Carentan
Geographic situation: Bridge fortification over the river Douve, situated at the neck of the Cherbourg peninsular.
Type of defence: Fortified bridge and castle.
Dates: Unknown.
Archaeological remains: Low-lying site making use of the marshland that surrounds the site. Various earthworks now heavily overgrown and difficult to interprete. No above ground evidence.
History 1417-50:
17 March 1418: Surrender of castle.
Archaeological remains, 1417-50: None.
Sources:
BN MS Fr. 26044 no. 5711: 23 March 1422 n.s.: 60 l.t. paid for repairs to the roofing.
BN MS Fr. 26066 no. 3836: 15 August 1439: 75 s.t paid for the recutting of the corbels situated on the 'grosse tour et danjon' as well as other minor works.
BN MS Fr. 26066 no. 3837: 16 August 1439: 7 l. 15 s.t. for lime and sand delivered to the castle and destined for the repairs.
BN MS Fr. 26066 no. 3866: 2 October 1439: Work in the grosse tour, the basse cour and other various works costing 23 l. 12 s.t.

the state of fortification in lancastrian normandy, 1417-50
 
fortification index

Carentan

Cherbourg

Department: Manche.
Administrative district: Ch.-l. Arr.
Geographic situation: Strategic port at the head of the Cotentin peninsular. One of the best fortified places in Normandy.
Type of fortification: Castle and town defence. Castle dominated a fortified port and was integral to the town fortifications. The latter were made up by a powerful enceinte, furnished with mural towers and strong gatehouses. The whole was considered by contemporaries as one of the most powerful fortifications found in Normandy.
Dates: The origins of Cherbourg probably date from the Roman period. Castle redesigned in the period immediately prior to the Lancastrian invasion, 1360+
Archaeological remains: None.
History 1417-50:
22 August 1418: Fell to English.
12 August 1450: Cherbourg recaptured, the last fortification to fall to the French.
Archaeological remains, 1417-50: None.
Sources:
BN MS Fr. 26045 no. 5901: n.d.: Roofing, plastering and the delivery of chaux and nails for repairs to the castle.
Bodl. Foreign Ch. 249: 21 October 1418: Order to carry out repairs on the walls of the castle and town.
PRO E101/187/14 memb. 25 dors: 1419: Repairs to the walls of the castle.
BN Pièces Orig. 3049 doss. Westby: 21 July 1419: Repairs to castle?
BN MS Fr. 26047 no. 296: 17 July 1424: Work of roofing between the room of the captain and the Tour du Colombier (Galleries).
BN MS Fr. 26047 no. 305: 6 August 1424: Certificate showing that work at the Tour du Colombier had been achieved.
Arch Dép. M.: 1429?: Repairs to the castle.
BN Nouv Acq. Latin 2210 no. 4?: 1429: Repairs to castle.
BN MS Fr. 26049 no. 659: 20 November 1426: Various works at the castle.
BN MS Fr. 26049 no. 665: 17 December 1426: Works on the Porte de la Rigolle, on the galleries and roofing.
BN MS Fr. 26049 no. 684: 18 February 1427 n.s.: Various works associated with BN MS Fr. 26049 nos. 659 and 665.
BN MS Fr. 26049 no. 722: 19 May 1427: Delivery of chaux for unknown purposes.
Bodl. Foreign Ch. 270: 25 May 1427: 100 s.t. paid for the fetching of materials for the rebuilding of Cherbourg.
BN MS Fr. 26051 no. 972: 26 October 1428: Fenestration, railings on walls, repairs to a corbel and various other carpentry works.
BN MS Fr. 26051 no. 973: 26 October 1428: Ropes, cost 28 s.t.
BN Pièces Orig. 1203 doss. Fortescu 17: 1 September 1429: Work on ditches.
BN Nouv Acq. 1482 no. 123: 12 December 1432: Various repairs and the grant of 500 l.t. to be used in the refortification of Cherbourg.
BN MS Fr. 26060 no. 2707: 5 January 1436 n.s.: Detailed account of delivery of wood to the castle of Cherbourg.
PRO PR 438 memb. 7 dorso: 25 January 1436: Repairs to town.
BN MS Fr. 26062 no. 3184: 26 May 1437: Masonry and carpentry at the town and castle. Gunports at one of the town gates.

THE ANNUAL MEETING
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS by Lawrence J. Burpee

In opening this second annual meeting of the Canadian Historical Association, it is my purpose merely to put before you, as briefly as possible, some of the matters that have engaged our attention since the last annual meeting.

OUTLINE LECTURES IN CANADIAN HISTORY

.....

DECEASED MEMBERS

On the other hand, we must lament the loss of several of our old members, who were loyal friends and who all took a keen interest in the work of the association. Notable among these was E. C. Whitney, one of our life members, a man who had earned the respect of everyone both because of his generous support of all good causes and because he was in best possible sense a good citizen. We have also lost Sir Edmund Walker, who was not only eminent as a banker and publicist, but also as a student of Canadian history; Dr. Otto Klotz, astronomer, an authority on Canadian boundary questions, and a most kindly gentleman; J. Castell Hopkins, a well known writer on historical and other questions, and editor of that invaluable annual, the Canadian Annual Review; James Hope, the veteran Ottawa bookseller; Lawrence Fortesque, who was a mine of information on the early history of the west and the Mounted Police; and H. C. Mott, of Brooklyn, N.Y., a warm friend of the association. The usual resolutions will, I presume, be submitted to you.

Le drapeau canadien

Description

1. Le drapeau est rouge et blanc, couleurs officielles que le roi Georges V a désignées pour le Canada en 1921, avec une feuille d'érable stylisée à onze pointes en son centre.

1. Deux de longueur sur un de largeur.

La naissance du drapeau canadien

C'est en 1925 qu'on commença sérieusement à chercher un nouveau drapeau canadien. Un comité du Conseil privé fut alors chargé d'étudier divers modèles, mais ne put terminer son travail.
Plus tard, en 1946, une commission parlementaire spéciale reçut un mandat semblable. Elle invita des experts et des citoyens à lui soumettre des propositions. Cependant, aucun des 2 600 dessins qui lui furent proposés ne fit l'objet d'un vote au Parlement.
Au début de 1964, le premier ministre Lester B. Pearson fit part à la Chambre des communes du désir du gouvernement d'adopter un drapeau national distinctif. La célébration du centenaire de la Confédération du Canada approchait vite. C'est ainsi qu'un comité mixte du Sénat et de la Chambres des communes a de nouveau demandé qu'on lui soumette des propositions.
Le pays entier était attentif. Le comité tint 46 séances. Il écouta, pendant des heures, de multiples témoignages d'experts en héraldique, d'historiens et de citoyens ordinaires. Il fut inondé de propositions : on lui fit parvenir plus de 2000 dessins. Des milliers de Canadiens soumirent des esquisses de drapeaux, ornées tantôt de castors rongeant des bouleaux, tantôt d'aurores boréales se reflétant dans les eaux de l'océan Arctique.
En octobre 1964, après avoir écarté diverses esquisses, le comité n'en retint que trois : un Red Ensign portant la fleur de lis et l'Union Jack, un dessin comprenant trois feuilles d'érable entre deux bordures bleu ciel, et un drapeau rouge orné d'une feuille d'érable rouge stylisée sur un carré blanc (M. Pearson lui-même préférait le trifolié).
Deux experts en science héraldique ont joué un rôle prépondérant dans la sélection de notre drapeau : Alan Beddoe, capitaine de marine à la retraite et héraldiste conseil de la Marine royale du Canada, et le colonel Fortescue Duguid, héraldiste et historien. Tous deux cependant étaient partisans d'un trifolié.
Les noms de MM. John Matheson et George Stanley sont bien connus dans l'histoire de l'évolution du nouveau drapeau du Canada. M. Matheson, député ontarien à la Chambre des communes, fut peut-être l'un des plus ardents partisans de l'adoption d'un nouveau drapeau et a joué un rôle consultatif clé dans ce processus. Quant à M. Stanley, il était doyen des arts au Collège militaire royal de Kingston et c'est lui qui a fait observer aux membres du comité le fait que le drapeau du commandant du Collège, une feuille d'érable sur un carré rouge et blanc, était très attrayant.
Il reste qu'on ne peut attribuer la conception du drapeau national du Canada à aucune personne en particulier. Au contraire, le modèle choisi repose sur la prise en compte de l'histoire canadienne et résulte de la collaboration de plusieurs Canadiens. Les couleurs rouge, blanc et rouge avaient été employées pour la première fois sur la Médaille du service général créée par la reine Victoria. Par la suite, en 1921, le rouge et le blanc ont été proclamés couleurs nationales du Canada par le roi Georges V. Trois ans plus tôt, le major-général sir Eugene Fiset (qui reçut le titre honorable par la suite) avait recommandé comme emblème pour le Canada une feuille d'érable rouge sur un carré blanc (symbole porté par tous les athlètes olympiques du Canada depuis 1904).
M. Jacques Saint-Cyr a conçu l'un des éléments clés du drapeau national, la feuille d'érable stylisée, tandis que M. Georges Bist, un vétéran de la Seconde Guerre mondiale, a défini les proportions du drapeau, et les couleurs définitives ont été déterminées par M. Gunter Wyszechi. Pour ce qui est de la décision finale quant à tous les aspects du nouveau drapeau, elle a été prise par les quinze membres du comité parlementaire, auquel la conception est officiellement attribuée.
À la fin, le Comité décida de recommander l'unifolié, et ce dernier fut adopté par la Chambre des communes dès le 15 décembre 1964 et par le Sénat le 17 décembre 1964. La proclamation fut signée par Sa Majesté la reine Elizabeth II, reine du Canada, et est entrée en vigueur le 15 février 1965.
Le drapeau national du Canada est donc né près de 100 ans après la création du Dominion du Canada en 1867.


La confection du premier drapeau canadien
Vers la fin de l'automne 1964, par un vendredi après-midi, Ken Donovan reçut sur son bureau une demande urgente du premier ministre Lester B. Pearson. M. Donovan était alors directeur adjoint du service des achats de la Commission des expositions du gouvernement canadien, qui, plus tard, a été intégrée au ministère des Approvisionnements et Services.
Le Premier ministre désirait apporter à sa résidence de Harrington Lake, le lendemain matin, les différents prototypes présentés en vue de l'adoption du nouveau drapeau. Parmi les trois propositions soumises se trouvait le dessin de la feuille d'érable.
M. Donovan et son équipe ne disposaient que de dessins de papier. Alors, ils entreprirent de faire l'impossible : en quelques heures à peine, ils confectionnèrent les prototypes du drapeau. Les graphistes et artisans au pochoir de soie Jean Desrosiers et John Williams furent appelés à travailler ce vendredi soir. Comme il n'y avait pas de couturière sur les lieux, on demanda à la jeune Joan, fille de Ken Donovan, d'assembler et de coudre les drapeaux.
Joan O'Malley (née Donovan) a raconté cet événement lors d'une cérémonie célébrant le 30e anniversaire du drapeau;

1. «Je ne savais pas du tout ce qui m'attendait, quand j'ai reçu ce coup de téléphone de mon père, en 1964. Je pensais juste lui donner un coup de main, et non participer à un événement historique. Je vous dirai que je n'ai rien d'une Betsy Ross. Et il n'a pas été facile de coudre ce drapeau. Je n'étais pas couturière de profession - il m'était juste arrivé de confectionner quelques-uns de mes vêtements. Ma machine à coudre n'avait pas été conçue pour un tissu si épais. Mais, peu à peu, le drapeau a pris forme.
   À l'époque, j'avais beaucoup mieux à faire de mes vendredis soirs. En fait, mon père était bien plus emballé que moi de toute cette aventure: c'est lui qui allait livrer les prototypes à la résidence de M. Pearson.
   Je me rendais peu compte de l'importance de ce qu'on m'avait demandé de faire; mais j'étais heureuse de coudre les prototypes du drapeau. On ne reçoit pas une telle requête tous les jours.»
   

Birth of the Canadian flag

The search for a new Canadian flag started in earnest in 1925 when a committee of the Privy Council began to research possible designs for a national flag. However, the work of the committee was never completed. 
Later, in 1946, a select parliamentary committee was appointed with a similar mandate, called for submissions and received more than 2,600 designs. Still, the Parliament of Canada was never called upon to formally vote on a design. 
Early in 1964, Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson informed the House of Commons that the government wished to adopt a distinctive national flag. The 1967 centennial celebration of Confederation was, after all, approaching. As a result, a Senate and House of Commons Committee was formed and submissions were called for once again. 
In October 1964, after eliminating various proposals, the committee was left with three possible designs -- a Red Ensign with the fleur-de-lis and the Union Jack, a design incorporating three red maple leaves, and a red flag with a single, stylized red maple leaf on a white square. (Pearson himself preferred a design with three red maple leaves between two blue borders.) 
Two heraldry experts, who both favoured a three-leaf design, played a decisive role in the choice of our flag: Alan Beddoe, a retired naval captain and heraldic adviser to the Royal Canadian Navy, and Colonel Fortescue Duguid, a heraldist and historian. 
The names of Mr. John Matheson and Dr. George Stanley are well known in the story of the evolution of a new Canadian flag. Mr. Matheson, a Member of Parliament from Ontario, was perhaps one of the strongest supporters of a new flag and played a key advisory role. Dr. Stanley was Dean of Arts at the Royal Military College in Kingston, and brought to the attention of the committee the fact that the Commandant's flag at the College -- an emblem, i.e. a mailed fist, on a red and white ground -- was impressive. 
Dr. Stanley's design is based on a strong sense of Canadian history. The combination of red, white and red first appeared in the General Service Medal issued by Queen Victoria. Red and white were subsequently proclaimed Canada's national colours by King George V in 1921. Three years earlier, Major General (later the Honourable) Sir Eugene Fiset had recommended that Canada's emblem be the single red maple leaf on a white field - the device worn by all Canadian Olympic athletes since 1904. 
The committee eventually decided to recommend the single-leaf design, which was approved by resolution of the House of Commons on December 15, 1964, followed by the Senate on December 17, 1964, and proclaimed by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada, to take effect on February 15, 1965. 
In due course the final design of the stylized maple leaf was established by Mr. Jacques St-Cyr, the precise dimensions of red and white were suggested by Mr. George Best, and the technical description of precise shade of red defined by Dr. Gunter Wyszchi. 
The national flag of Canada, then, came into being, credit to those eminent Canadians: the Right Honourable Lester B. Pearson, who wanted a distinctive national flag as a vehicle to promote national unity; John Matheson, who established the conceptual framework for a suitable flag, then sought out and combined the appropriate components to create it; and Dr. George Stanley, who provided the seminal concept - the central concepts of red-white-red stripes with a central maple leaf - in this process.

 
This is the chapter entitled, Flags of National Defence, from the book,
The Flags of Canada, by Alistair B. Fraser.
This work is copyrighted. All rights reserved.
 
The Nation Chap VI:

THE FLAGS OF
NATIONAL DEFENCE
Better, forty times better, my banner than my sword. Joan of Arc (at her trial in 1431)
http://www.fraser.cc/FlagsCan/Nation/NatDefence.html

 
Introduction
It is difficult to imagine the military without flags. In earlier times, flags served to impose order upon battlefield chaos:
.....

Upon entering the Second World War, Canada wanted its army to be distinguishable among the great mass of British troops, and so provided it with, not the Canadian Red Ensign, but a new battle flag. Designed by Colonel A. Fortescue Duguid, Director of the Historical Section, National Defence Headquarters, Ottawa, the flag of the Canadian Active Service Force, generally known as the Battle Flag of Canada, was approved by the War Cabinet on December 7, 1939. In the words of Colonel Duguid:
In the second world war, Canadian units did not carry flags or colours. Just before they proceeded overseas I was ordered to produce a suitable flag for the First Canadian Division. I first decided that the most important thing was to make sure of the national colours of Canada and the national device because it seemed to me that they were obviously the main items for any such flag. On looking at the armorial bearings of Canada, the other obvious item was that there were two flags showing, one of which was the Union Jack and the other a blue flag with three fleur-de-lis. So I placed on the white flag with the three maple leaves a Union Flag on the upper corner next to the staff, which was one seventh of the area of the whole flag. Then I wondered how to include the three fleur-de-lis on the blue ground and I found that a proper heraldic method of introducing such a device was to put a circle in the fly. So I put blue circle in the upper fly with three gold fleur-de-lis. I had that made and I handed it to general McNaughton just as he was boarding the train to go overseas with the First Division. That flag was flown, so the record has it, from the merchant ship on which the headquarters of the First Division proceeded overseas. While on board it was blessed and consecrated. On the other side, it was flown in the Headquarters of the First Canadian Division.

When His Majesty the King came to review the First Canadian Division, that flag was flying and the general Officer Commanding the First Canadian Division had a small flag on the cap of his radiator on his car. He had one made very similar to that, a small flag, and presented it to the King who accepted it and I think expressed approval.15
The Battle Flag not only appeared on the Canadian headquarters overseas, it appeared on all manner of promotional material on the home front: pins, postcards, posters, magazine covers, and advertisements. Sometimes it appeared alone, sometimes with the Union Flag to emphasize our solidarity with Britain, and sometimes with the flags of the other services, the RCAF ensign and the White Ensign of the RCN, to tell of our many-sided support for the war.

....

15. The testimony of Colonel Archer Fortescue Duguid to the 1964 Parliamentary flag committee, as quoted by John Ross Matheson, Canada's Flag: A Search for a Country (Boston: G.K. Hall, 1980), pp. 106-107. Also see Duguid's article, "The flag of the Canadian Active Service Force," The McGill News (Montréal: McGill, Spring 1940). Duguid's design for the 1939 Battle Flag was not new. In 1924, he had submitted it as a proposed national flag during the flag controversy. See, the National Archives of Canada: RG 24, Vol. 24, File HQC 50-1-39.
.....

20. A letter from A. Fortescue Duguid, dated September 29, 1926, and found in the National Archives of Canada, RG 24, Volume 1764, File DHS 12-10.
.....

This is the chapter entitled, Flags of National Defence, from the book,
The Flags of Canada, by Alistair B. Fraser.
This work is copyrighted. All rights reserved.
 

Alistair B. Fraser | alistair@fraser.cc



The Red Ensign

The Red Ensign was created in 1707 as the flag of the British Merchant Marine. A form of the Red Ensign, with quartered arms of Canadian provinces (later the shield of the Arms of Canada), gave rise to the Canadian Red Ensign , various forms of which were flown for approximately 1870 to 1965, as well as the Union Jack.

THE FLAG DEBATE: The debate over the proposed new Canadian flag opened in the House of Commons June 15, 1964 and ended by closure Dec. 15, 1964. Canada's official flag from 1867 had been Britain's Union Flag, although the Red Ensign with the Canadian badge was regularly flown for qualified purposes.

In 1925 Prime Minister Mackenzie King appointed an armed services committee to investigate possible designs, but it did not report. In 1946 a committee of both Senate and Commons presented a design with the Red Ensign charged with a golden maple leaf but it was not adopted. The issue was raised again by Lester Pearson, as leader of the Opposition in 1960 and as prime minister in 1963.

John Matheson MP sought strict adherence to the colours, red and white, and the maple leaf emblem authorized by George V on 21 November 1921 as advocated by A. Fortescue Duguid. Alan B. Beddoe added two blue bars to what became known as the "Pearson pennant. " This proposal for design, three maple leaves on a white centre square with blue bars on each side, was introduced to Parliament in June 1964. The ensuing controversy raged not over whether there should be a new flag, but on its design. The French Canadian members followed with keen interest a debate wherein feelings ran high among many English-speaking Canadians. John Diefenbaker demanded that the flag honour the "founding races," with the Union Jack in the canton of honour. Pearson insisted on a design denoting allegiance to Canada devoid of colonial association.

After prolonged, rancorous debate the issue was referred to a 15-member all-party committee which recommended a design inspired by the Royal Military College flag theme, red-white-red, but with one red maple leaf in a white squared centre.

Debate in the House continued until LŽon Balcer, a prominent Conservative MP from QuŽbec, invited the Liberals to invoke closure, which would limit speeches to 20 minutes and force a vote. After some 250 speeches, a vote was taken Dec. 15, 1964 at 2 a.m. and the committee's recommendation was accepted 163 to 78. Senate approval followed on Dec. 17. The royal proclamation was signed by Her Majesty 28 January 1965 and the national flag was officially unfurled Feb. 15 1965.

FLAG ETIQUETTE: There are certain rules on how some flags are used. The following are a few of the most common questions about the use of our national flag:

Is it okay to leave the Canadian flag flying at night?

Answer: Yes

Is it okay to let the Canadian flag touch the floor or ground, or use it as a table drape or cover?

Answer: No

May it be used to unveil a picture, plaque, monument, and so on?

Answer: Yes, but remember, the flag must not touch the floor.

It is it okay to display or fly another flag, banner or pennant above the Canadian flag?

Answer: No. Also, flags flown together should be of about the same size and flown from separate staffs at the same height.

When the Canadian flag is not flown on a staff or flag pole, how should it be displayed?

Answer: It may be hung horizontally or vertically. If hung horizontally on the wall at the back of a platform, the flag should be behind and above any person who is speaking from the platform. If hung vertically against a wall, the top of the maple leaf should be on the left and the stem to the right as seen by the spectators.

In a parade, procession or mounted ride, where should the Canadian flag be displayed?

Answer: In the position of honour at the marching right or centre front.

What are some other rules that apply to "the position of honour"?

1. When two or more than three flags are flown together, the Canadian flag should be on the left as seen by the spectators located in front of the flags; when a number of countries are represented, the Canadian flag may be flown at each end of the line of flags.

2. When three flags are flown together, the Canadian flag should be in the centre position, with the other flags in alphabetical order, as seen by the spectators viewing the flags.

3. When more than one flag is flown, and it is impossible to raise or lower the flags at the same time, the Canadian flag should be raised first and lowered last.

Source: The Canadian Encyclopedia Plus and the federal Department of Canadian Heritage

Submission to The Historic Sites and Monuments Board 18 October 1991
Dr. Calvin Ruck, Chair Black Battalion Committee

Many military historians and writers in general have consistently ignored the roles played by black servicemen in the numerous wars and conflicts that have occurred during the past two centuries or more.
The contribution of blacks to World War I has been virtually unknown or quickly forgotten.
In 1938, under the authority of the Minister of National Defence -- Colonel A. Fortesque Duguid, Director of the Historical section, general staff, wrote the official history of World War I.
In his 596-page work, the author tersely and erroneously described black enlistment in four words: "Black volunteers were refused." (29)
We are of the opinion that a permanent nationally recognized memorial to the No. 2 Construction Battalion will assist in the unit acquiring some long overdue status in Canadian history.
If Canada (God forbid) should go to war tomorrow, Black Canadians would still be proud and eager to line up in front of recruiting stations waiting to enlist.
Blacks also experienced problems in enlisting in all three Services during the early years of World War II. However, that is another story we are presently pursuing.
Dr. Calvin Ruck

Les six livres du Souvenir sont gardés dans la Chapelle du souvenir de la tour de la Paix au Parlement. Ensemble, ils commémorent les noms de 114 710 Canadiens qui, depuis la Confédération, ont perdu la vie au combat au cours de conflits armés à l'extérieur du Canada. Le Livre du Souvenir de la Première Guerre mondiale est le plus volumineux et le premier qui a été réalisé. Il contient 66 655 noms. Le deuxième plus volumineux est le Livre du Souvenir de la Seconde Guerre mondiale qui contient 44 893 noms. C'est le 1er juillet 1917 que le premier ministre Sir Robert Borden a dédié un lieu au Parlement, qu'il a décrit comme « un monument à la mémoire de nos ancêtres et du courage de ces Canadiens qui, pendant la Guerre mondiale, ont combattu pour défendre les libertés du Canada, de l'Empire et de l'humanité. » Deux ans plus tard, le prince de Galles posait la pierre angulaire de « la tour de la Victoire et de la Paix » comme on l'avait d'abord nommée. Originalement, l'intention était de graver tous les noms des soldats canadiens sur les murs de la Chapelle du souvenir. Mais on a finalement constaté qu'il n'y avait pas assez de place pour contenir plus de 66 000 noms. Il a fallu songer à d'autres solutions. C'est le colonel A. Fortesque Duguid, DSO, qui a suggéré l'idée des livres. Le plan a été accepté et des modifications mineures ont dû être effectuées dans la Chapelle pour y installer les livres. Le prince de Galles est retourné le 3 août 1927 pour dévoiler l'autel, un cadeau du gouvernement britannique, sur lequel repose le Livre du Souvenir de la Première Guerre mondiale.

The six Books of Remembrance lie in the Memorial Chamber in the Peace Tower on Parliament Hill. Together they commemorate the lives of 114,710 Canadians who lost their lives while serving their country in battle outside Canada since Confederation. The first one created, and the largest of the Books, is the First World War Book which contains 66,655 names. This book is followed by the Second World War Book which contains 44,893 names. It was on July 1, 1917 that Prime Minister Sir Robert Borden dedicated a site in the Centre Block of the Houses of Parliament. He said the new structure would be a "memorial to the debt of our forefathers and to the valour of those Canadians who, in the Great War, fought for the liberties of Canada, of the Empire, and of humanity." And so it was two years later that the Prince of Wales laid the corner stone of "The Tower of Victory and Peace" as it was originally known. The intention was for all the names of the Canadian soldiers to be engraved on the walls of the chamber, but it was soon realized that there would not be enough space on the walls to contain more than 66,000 names. So began the process of brainstorming for a solution, which came from Colonel A. Fortesque Duguid, DSO, who is credited with suggesting the idea for a Book of Remembrance. The plan was accepted and minor alterations were made to the chamber to accommodate the Books. The Prince of Wales returned on August 3, 1927 to unveil the altar; a gift from the British Government upon which the Book of The First World War would rest.

1st Canadian Troop Convoy

Canada's Answer by Norman Wilkinson

Detail of HMSPrincess Royal

The original, some 215cm x 368 cm, is held by the Canadian War Museum in Ottawa. Princess Royal has three signal pendants hoisted from her starboard yardarm: '2', '6' and then one with a blue cross on a white background. The latter may be a mistake: a red cross on a white background was '3'. Also hoisted, but difficult to make out even on the original, is the red flag flapping directly in line with the mast: that is the Canadian Red Ensign.



Contributed by David Kelly (dhkhiyou@mars.ark.com)
This is a list of the ships of the WW1 convoy (October 1914), in alphabetical order (ie not the way they lined up for sailing in the actual convoy). The source is Colonel A. Fortesque Duguid's Official History of the Canadian Forces in the Great War (King's Printer, Ottawa, 1938).

La Bataille d’Azincourt (1415)

• http://www.familychronicle.com/agincort.htm

Liste des morts français à AZINCOURT 25/10/1415

Cette liste de 436 noms est tirée du livre "AZINCOURT" par Gérard BACQUET 1977 et complétée par d'autres.

On estime le nombre de morts Français entre 3 000 et 10 000 contre 600 pour les Anglais!






AILLY (Baudoin d') Vidame d'Amiens
ALBRET (Charles d') Connétable de France depuis 1402,
fils de Marguerite de Bourbon
ALENCON (Jean 1er, duc d') Neveu du roi Philippe de Valois
ALOYER (Pierre)
AMBOISE (Hugues d') Chambellan du roi
AMBRINES (Eustache d')
AMBRINES (Jean d')
ANDELOT (...d')
ANVERS (Comte d')
ANVIN de HARDENTHUN (Jean d')
ANVIN de HARDENTHUN (Oranglois d')
APPLAINCOURT (le sire d')
APPLAINCOURT (Jacques, son fils)
ARGIES (Dreux d')
ARGIES (Pierre d')
ARSY (Gallois d')
ASSE (le sire d')
ASSONVILLE (Maillart d')
AUDREGNIES (Arnould d')
AUMALE (le Comte d')
AUMONT (Jean d'; dit le Hutin)
AUSNE (Richard d')
AUSTEULX (Hue des)
AUTHIEULLE (Jean d';seigneur de Wavrans)
AUXY (David d' ; Sire et Ber d')
AUXY (Philippe d') Seigneur de Dampierre, Bailli d'Amiens
AUXY (...d') son fils
AUXY (Réginald d')
AUXY (Guilbert d')
AUXY (Alain d')
AUXY (Jean)
AUXY (Renaud d')
AUXY-ROUGEFAY (Boissart d')
AVERHOULT (Guillaume d')
AZINCOURT (Renaud) Seigneur d'
AZINCOURT (Wallerand d';don fils)
AZINCOURT (...d')

BAILLEUL (Jean de)
BAISIEUX (le Seigneur de)
BAISIEUX (...de) son frère
BAR (Duc Edouard III de)
BAR (Jean de) Sire de Puisaye
BAR (Robert de) Comte de Marle et de Soissons
BAUFFREMONT-en-CHAMPAGNE (le Seigneur de)
BEAUFORT (Antoine de) Seigneur d'Avesnes, maître d'hôtel du roi
BEAUMONT-sur-LOIRE (Jean Sire de)
BEAURAIN (Jean de Lorris Seigneur de)
BEAUSSAULT (Louis de)
BEAUVAL (Yvain de)
BEAUVERGER (Antoine de)
BEAUVOIR (Pierre de) Bailli du Vermandois
BEAUVOIR-sur-ANCRE (le Seigneur de)
BELLAY (Hugues du)
BELLEVAL (Baudoin de) Chambellan du Duc d'Orléans
BELLIÈRE (Vicomte de la)
BELLOY (le Baudrain de)
BELLOY (Bertrand de)
BERNIEULLES (Adrien de)
BEQUIGNY (Charles de)
BÉTHENCOURT (le Seigneur de)
BÉTHUNE (Jean de) Seigneur de Mareuil-en-Brie
BÉTHUNE (Colart de) son fils
BEUIL (Jean de) Chambellan du Duc d'Anjou
BEUVRIÈRE (Baugeois de la)
BEUVRIÈRE (Gamant de la) son frère
BIEZ (Jean du)
BLAISEL (Jean du)
BLAMONT (Comte de)
BLONDEL (Jean) Seigneur de Joigny, Canteleu, Méry,
Douriez et Langvillers
BLONDEL (Charles) son fils
BOIS-d'ANNEQUIN (le Seigneur du)
BOISSAY (le Seigneur de)
BOISSY (Henri de)
BONNAY (Robert de)
BONNEBAULT (Jean de)
BONNEVAL (Jean de)
BOUCICAUT (le Maréchal)
BOURBON (Louis) fils du Seigneur de Préaulx
BOURBOURG (le Seigneur de)
BOURDON (Louis de)
BOURNONVILLE (Aléaume de)
BOURNONVILLE (Bertrand de)
BOURNONVILLE (Gaviot de)
BOURNONVILLE (Enguerrand de) dit Garriot
BOURS (Vitard de)
BOUSINCOURT-en-SANTERRE (le Seigneur de)
BOUSSY (Louis de)
BOUTERY (Charles de) vicomte de Maisnières
BOUTRY Rasse seigneur de Courcelles, avec son frère
BOVE (Seigneur Golbert de la)
BRABANT (Antoine Duc de) frère du Duc Jehan de Bourgogne,
fils de Philippe le Hardi, Duc de Bourgogne et de Marguerite,
Comtesse de Flandre, petit-fils du roi Jean le Bon
BRÉTIGNY (le Seigneur de)
BROUILLY (Antoine de)
BRUCAMPS (Grenier de)
BRUGES (Roland de) Sire de la GRUUTHUSE
BRUN (Jacques) Seigneur de Palaiseau
BUAT (Jean de)
BUEIL (Guillaume de)


CANTELEU (Agnieux de)
CAUROY (le Seigneur de)
CAUROY (...de) son frère
CAYEU (Jean de) dit le Bègue
CAYEU (Payen de) son frère
CAYEU (Mathieu de) dit Payen
CERNY-en-LAONNAIS (le Seigneur de)
CHABANNES (Robert de)
CHALONS (Robert de)
CHALUS (Robert de)
CHAMBOIS (le Sire de)
CHAMVILLERS (Adam de)
CHARTRES(Antoine de) dit le Jeune, Grand Maître des eaux et
fôrets de Picardie, maître d'hôtel du roi
CHARTRES (...de) son frère
CHARTRES (...de) son second frère
CHASTELET (Michel du)
CHASTELET (Robert du) son frère
CHATEAUGIRON (le seigneur de)
CHATILLON (Jacques de) Seigneur de Dampierre, amiral de France
CHATILLON (Charles) Chambellan du roi, Seigneur de Saint
CHATILLON (Hugues de)
CHATILLON (Gaspard de)
CHATILLON (Robert de)
CHAULE (Jean de)
CHAVENCY (le Seigneur de)
CHEPOY (Louis de)
CHIN (le Seigneur de)
CLARY (Lancelot de)
COETQUEN (Jean de)
COMBOUCHES (le Seigneur de)
COMBOURG (le Seigneur de)
CORBIE (Arnaud de)
COUCY (Lancelot de)
COULONCHES (Sire de)
COURCY (le Seigneur de)
COUDUN (Jean de)
CRAMAILLES (Yvain de)
CRAON (Amaury de) Seigneur de Briolé
CRAON (Jean de) Sire de Montbason, Grand Echanson de France
CRAON (Antoine de) Seigneur de Beauverger, panetier de France
CRAON (Simon de) Sire de Clacy
CRÉQUY (Raoul, Sire de) dit l'Etendard
CRÉQUY (Renant de) Sire de Contes
CRÉQUY (Philippe) son fils
CRÉQUY (Jean de) dit le Jeune, Seigneur de Molliens
CRÉVECOEUR (le Seigneur de)
CRITE (le Seigneur de la)
CROY (Jean de) grand bouteiller de France
CROY (Archambaut de) son fils
CROY (Jean) son fils
CRUSSOL (Jean de)


DARCHERER (... de)
DREUX (Jean de) Seigneur de Houlbec
DREUX (Gauvain de) Sire d'Esneval
DOMART (le Vicomte de)


ECUELLE (Jacques de l')
EPAGNY (le Seigneur d')
ERIN (Guillaume d')
ESCAUSSINES (Alemand d')
ESCLAIBES (Jean II d')
ESCLAIBES (Fatré d') son fils
ESNE (le Baudrain d')
ESNE (Sausset d')
ESQUESNES (le Vicomte d')
ESTOUTEVILLE (Jean d')
ESTOUTEVILLE (Colart d')
ESTOUTEVILLE (Colart d') Seigneur de Torcy
ESTOUTEVILLE (Charles d') Seigneur de Blainville
EU (le sénéchal d')


FAUQUEMBERGUES (Wallerand de Raineval, Comte de)
FAY (Thiébaut de)
FERRIÈRES (Raoul de)
FIENNES (Robert de)
FIEFFES (le Seigneur de)
FIEFFES (...de) son fils
FLANDRES (Raoul de)
FOLIE (Guillaume de la)
FOLLEVILLE (Jean de) Echanson du Duc de Guyenne
FONTAINES (Enguerrand de)
FONTAINES (Charles de ) seigneur de la Neuville, son frère
FORTESCU (Guillaume)
FOSSEUX (Colart de)
FOSSEUX (Christophe de)
FOSSEUX (Philippe de)
FOUGIÈRES (Gallois de) Prevôt des Maréchaux de France
FOUQUEROLES (Seigneur de)
FRÉCHENCOURT-en-THIÉRACHE (le Seigneur de)
FRETEL (Brunel)
FRIGNOLES (le Seigneur de)
FROMESSENT (Lancelot de)


GALIGNY-en-CHAMPAGNE (le Seigneur de)
GAMACHES (... de)
GAPENNES (Aléaume de)
GARANCIÈRES (... de)
GAVRE ( Henri de) frère de l'évêque de Cambrai
GAULES (le Sire de)
GAYENCELLES (Jean)
GENEVIÈRES (Hervé de) capitaine au Château du Crotoy
GHISTELLES (Louis de)
GOUGEUL (Pierre) dit MORADAS, Seigneur de Rouville,
Chambellan et Maître d'hôtel du roi
GOURLÉ (Guy)
GOURLÉ (Jean) son frère
GOURNAY (Maillet de)
GOURNAY (Pons de) son frère
GRAMMONT (... de)
GRANDPRÉ (Comte de)
GRÉS (Jean des)
GRIBOVAL (Baugeois de)
GRIBOVAL (Gilbert de)
GRIBOVAL (le Poultre de)
GRIBOVAL (Renaut de)
GRIESME (Burian de)
GUÉRAMES (Burel de)
GRIESME (Burian de)
GUICHARD-DAUPHIN Grand Maître d'hôtel du roi


HAM (Jacques de)
HAMAIDE (le Sire de la)
HAMES (Robert de)
HANGART (Carnel de)
HANGEST (Jean de) Chambellan du roi, Capitaine de Boulogne
HARCOURT (Robert d') Baron de Beaumesnil, descendant d'Alix,
soeur de Philippe Auguste et d'un frère de St Louis
HARCOURT (Gérard d')
HAUCOURT-en-CAMBRÉSIS (le Seigneur d')
HAVRECH (Simon de)
HAVRESIS (Guérart de)
HAYE (le Sire de la)
HEILLY (Jacques de) Maréchal de Guyenne
HEM (Jacques de)
HERBAUMES (Gérard de)
HERLIN (Jean d')
HERTAING ( Michel de) Chevalier flamand
HEUQUEVILLE (... de)
HEUSE (le Seigneur de la)
HEYNE (le Seigneur de la)
HONDSCHOOTE (Thierry le Seigneur de)
HORN-et-D'ALTENA (Guillaume, Comte de) Grand Veneur,
héréditaire de l' empire
HUMIÈRES (Mathieu de)
HUMIÈRES (Jean de) son frère


ILE-BOUCHART (le Sire de l')
ILE-GOMORT (le Sire de l')
IVRY (le Seigneur d')
IVRY (Charles d') son fils


JEUMONT (le Seigneur de)


KESTERGAT (Engelbert de)


LALANDE (Henri de)
LAMETH (Baudoin de)
LAON (le Vidame de)
LANNOY (Jean de) dit LAMONT
LANNOY (Jean de)
LENS (Christophe de) en Hainaut
LENS (Henri de)
LENS (Philippe de)
LICHTERVELDE (Jacques de)
LIEDEKERQUE (le Sire de)
LIERNE D' AUVERGNE (le Sire du)
LIGNE (... de)
LON GUEV AL (le Sire de)
LONGUEV AL (Alain de)
LONGROY (Jacques de)
LONGUEIL (Raoul de)
LON GUEIL (Guillaume de) Gouverneur de Dieppe et Caen
LONGUEIL (Robert) son fils
LONGUEIL (Denis) un 2e fils
LONGVILLIERS (Jean de) bâtard d'Engontsend, Seigneur de Bréxent
LORRAINE (Ferry de) Comte de Vaudémont
LULLY (Jean de)
LULLY ( Griffon de) son frère


MAGNICOURT (Hector de) Seigneur de Werchin
MAILLY (Colart de) dit Payen
MAILLY (Colart de) son fils, Seigneur de Inchy
MALDIN GHEN (Lionel de)
MALDINGHEN (Brunelet de)
MALET (Pierre)
MALESTROIT ( Jean de)
MAMETZ (Pierre de)
MAMETZ (Lancelot de) son frère
MAMETZ (Raoul de)
MANGNY (... de)
MAREUL en Brie (Seigneur de)
MARLE (le Comte de)
MARQUETES (le Seigneur de)
MARQUOY (Palamède de)
MARTEL ( Guillaume de) Sire de Bacqueville
Porte-oriflamme de France et ses deux fils dont Jean (de)
MARTEL, Chambellan du roi
MESBRES (Aubert de)
MELUN ( Guillaume de) Comte de Tancarville,
Grand Bouteiller de France
MONCHAUX (Simon de)
MONTAIGU (Jean de) Archevêque de Sens
MONT AIGU (Charles de) Chambellan du Duc de Guyenne
MONTBERT AUT (Colart de)
MONTCAVREL (Jean de)
MONTCAVREL (Rasse de)
MONTEJAN (le Sire de)
MONTENAY (Jean de)
MONTGOGIER (le Sire de)
MONTHOLON (... de)
MONTIGNY-en-HAINAUT (Charles de)
MONTIGNY (Robert de)
MONTMORENCY (... de)
MORAINVILLIERS (Simonet de) ancien Bailly de Chartres
MOREL (Jean)
MOREVIL (Floridas de)
MORVILLIERS (Yvon de)
MOULIN (Pierre du)
MOY-en-BEAUVOISIS (le Seigneur de)
MOY-en-BEAUVOISIS (Tristande) son fils
MOY (Arthus de)


NEDONCHEL (Enguerrand de)
NESLE (Guy de) Sire d'0ffémont, Conseiller et
Chambellan du roi
NESLE (Raoulquin de) son fils
NEUFVILLE (Topinet de la)
NEUFVILLE (le Seigneur de)
NEUFVILLE (... de) son fils
NEVERS (le Comte de) frère du Duc ]ehan de Bourgogne
et d' Antoine de Bourgogne, petit-fils du roi ]ean le Bon
N0AILLES (le Borgne de)
N0UYANT (Sire de)
N0YELLES-sous-LENS (]ean de)
N0YELLES-sous-LENS (Pierre de) son frère
N0YELLES-sous-LENS (Lancelot de) son 2e frère


0 (Sire d')
0FFREVILLE (le Sire d')
0NGNIES (Estourdi d')
0NGNIES (Bertrand d') son frère
0NGNIES (Dreux d')
0RGEM0NT (Pierre d') Chambellan du roi,
Échanson du Duc de Bourgogne
0RNAY (Henri d')


PAYNEL (Bertrand)
PETIT H0LLANDE (fils du Bailly de Rouen)
P0ITIERS (Philippe de)
P0NT (le Marquis du)
P0NTEAUDEMER (Robert de)
P0RTE (Colart de la )Seigneur de Bellincourt
P0TES (le Seigneur de)
P0UQUÈS (Heylard de)
P0UTRAINES (Girard de)
PRÉAULX (]acques Seigneur de) Grand Chambellan de France
PROUVILLE (Godefroy de)
PRUNELÉ (Guillaume de) dit le ]eune,
Chambellan du Duc d' 0rléans
PUISIEUX (Bridaul de)


QUEN0ULLES (le Bègue de)
QUESNES (]ean de)
QUESN0Y (le Sire du)
QUIÉRET (Hutin)
QUIÉVRAIN (Georges de)
QUIÉVRAIN (Henri de) son frère


RACHIE (le Sire de la)
RAINEVAL (]ean de)
RAMBURES (David de) Maître des arbalétriers
et ses 3 fils
RAMBURES (]ean de)
RAMBURES (Hughes de)
RAMBURES (Philippe de)
RASSE (le Seigneur de)
RASSE (Colart de)
RAULEQUIN (Messire)
REEC0URT (Gérard de)
REGNAUVILLE (le Sire de)
REGNAUVILLE (Pierre d' Amiens, Seigneur de)
RÉMY (Pierre de)
RENTY (0udard de)
RENTY (Foulques de) dit le Galois
RENTY (]ean de) dit Castelet
RIQUEB0URG (Perceval de)
RIVIÈRE (le Seigneur de la) et de Tybauville
R0CHE-GUY0N (Guy de la) Conseiller
et Chambellan du roi
R0CHE-GUY0N (Philippe de la) son frère
R0CHES (le Seigneur des)
R0HAN (Bertrand de) Sire de Montauban,
Chambellan du Duc de Guyenne
R0NQ (le Seigneur de)
R0SIMB0S (Pierre de) Grand Écuyer du Duc de Bourgogne
R0SIMBOS (N... de) son frère
ROUCY (]ean VI Comte de... et de Braine)
ROUEN (le fils du Bailly de)
R0U GEF AY (Boissart de)
R0UVROY (Mathieu de) Seigneur de Saint-Simon, dit le borgne
ROUVR0Y (]ean de) son frère, dit Gallois
RUBEMPRÉ (Lancelot de)


SAINS (le Bon de)
SAINT-BRICE (le Sire de) Drieu de Mello
SAINT-CLER (Pierre de)
SAINT-CRÉPIN (le Sire de)
SAINT-GILLES (Bertrand de)
SAINT-HEREN (... de)
SAINT-MARC (Godefroy de)
SAINT-PIERRE (le Seigneur de)
SAINT -RÉMY (Raoul de) Chambellan du Roi et du Duc d' 0rléans
SAINT-TR0N (le Seigneur de)
SAINTE-BEUVE (le Seigneur de)
SALMS (Comte de)
SALUCES (Pons de) Gouverneur du Comté
SARDONNE (Ferry de)
SAUVAGE (Robert le) Écuyer du Duc d'Alençon
SAVEUSES (Guillaume de) Sire d'Inchy
SCHONVELDE (le Seigneur de)
SEMPY (Colinet de)
SEMPY (]ean de)
SOISSONS (]ean de) Sire de Moreuil,
Chambellen du Roi et Capitaine de Compiègne
SOLRE (le Sire de)
SOLRE (Briffaut de) son frère
SOUICH (Floridas du)
SOYECOURT (Charles de) Chambellan du Roi,
Capitaine du château de Creil


TENCQUES (le Seigneur de)
THIENNES (le Sire de)
TIGNONVILLE (le Seigneur de)
TORBIS (Lionel)
TORCY (le Seigneur de)
TOUR-en-AUVERGNE (Anne de la) Seigneur d'Oliergues,
Chambellan du Duc de Berry
TOUR (Ponchon de la)
TOURNELLE (]ean de la)
TOURZEL (Pierre de) dit d'Alègre en Auvergne
TRAMECOURT (]ean de) de Réthel
TRAMECOURT (Renaud de)
TRAMECOURT (.,. de)
TRÉMOUILLE (Georges de la)
TRET (le Seigneur du)
TYREL (]ean) Seigneur de Brimeu, Sire


VALENCOURT (]ean de)
VENEUR (]ean le)
VER (Guillaume le)
VERCHINS (Louis de)
VER (Guillaume le)
VERCHINS (Louis de)
VICOMTE (]ean le) Seigneur du Tremblay
VERNEUIL (le Seigneur de)
VIEUXPONT (Yves de)
VILLAINES (Pierre de)
VILLERS (Guillaume de)
VILLERS (Renaut de) Seigneur de Verderonne


WALHUON (Martel de)
WAENCOURT (Robinet de)
WANDONNE (Alain de)
WARLUZEL (le Seigneur de)
WAUDRINGHEN (Arnould de)
WAUDRIPONT (Gilles de)
WAVRIN (Robert de) Sénéchal de Flandres
WAVRIN (... de) son fils
WERCHIN (]ean de) Sénéchal de Hainaut
WISSOC (Philippe de)

The Agincourt Honor Roll


http://www.familychronicle.com/agincort.htm

As dawn broke on the morning of 25 October 1415, the prospects for the English army camped around the village of Maisoncelles in northern France could hardly have seemed worse.
Ten weeks previously, England's 26-year-old King Henry V had landed an expeditionary force in Normandy where he planned to take Harfleur on the Seine estuary before marching on Paris. Henry shared with his forefathers the ambition to add France to his domains; in fact England had been at war with France intermittently since 1340. Today we know this series of conflicts as the Hundred Year's War.

Harfleur
The citizens of Harfleur were unimpressed with Henry's ambitions and put up a spirited defense despite being heavily outnumbered. To add to this problem, the English besiegers were camped in swampland and disease ravaged the camp.
Finally, after six weeks, Harfleur fell but at a serious cost. Of Henry's original army of 10,000, 2,000 had died and a further 2,000 wounded and sick had to be returned to England. Henry realized he no longer had the strength to march on Paris and instead decided on a cheveauege, a march through enemy territory designed to annoy the enemy but avoid battle. He would take his remaining troops 100 miles along the coast to the English enclave of Calais at the narrowest point on the English Channel. The 5,700-man army expected to reach it quickly and took provisions for only seven days.
Their route included just one obstacle, the River Somme, but on reaching it, they found French troops guarding the crossings, forcing them to march further inland to find a safe crossing. The locals were eager to help with advice, not out of support for Henry but because the last thing they wanted near their villages were several thousand hungry troops. Eventually an unguarded crossing was found. Unfortunately this involved a 50 mile diversion, doubling the time of the planned march. The journey was further slowed by heavy rains that turned the roads to mud. Once the Somme was safely crossed, the army continued its journey towards Calais. The consequences of the delay now became apparent. The army was short of food but worse, the French had managed to raise a huge army and assemble near the village of Agincourt, blocking the English path to Calais.

Agincourt
Sources vary greatly on the size of the French army: the lowest estimates put it at 30,000 but figures as high as 150,000 are quoted, the lower estimates are probably closer to the truth. Henry tried to avoid battle, offering to return Harfleur and the prisoners taken there. The French replied in addition he must renounce his claim to the French throne in order to pass unharmed. This Henry refused to do and battle became inevitable. The French, supremely confident of victory on the following day because of their enormous numerical superiority, spent the night carousing, taunting the English across the lines and dicing for the captives they were sure they would take.
To offset their miserable condition, the English had a number of things in their favor. Henry had planned his expedition carefully and his army was not typical of the times. Throughout Europe it was normal for an army to be made up of a number of knights, who regarded warfare as almost sport, and as many peasants as the local feudal levy could raise. In contrast, Henry's army was specially recruited; his men were well paid, well trained and disciplined. Most of his army comprised expert archers using the English longbow. Henry preferred a small, professional army to a large untrained force. In addition, Henry was a charismatic commander, popular with his men and able to motivate his troops. One of the most famous speeches in Shakespeare's plays is Henry's address to his men prior to the battle.
Some of the real conversation prior to the battle has come down to us. One of his commanders, Sir Walter Hungerford, regretted that "they had not but one ten thousand of those men in England who do no work today". Henry replied, "Wot you not that the Lord with these few can overthrow the pride of the French?" Shakespeare's version of this sentiment is more elegant:

If we are marked to die, we are enough,
To do our country loss; and if to live,
The fewer men, the greater share of honor.

The French Army
The French had the numbers and the confidence but they lacked the organization. France's King Charles VI, weak and mentally ill, was quite unfit to lead his army, this role falling to Charles D'Albert, Constable of France, and Boucicault, the Marshal. Both were experienced soldiers, but their rank was not considered high enough to deserve respect from the snobbish French nobles who largely ignored their commands.





The Battlefield





The huge French army had chosen the field of battle poorly. Near Agincourt the road to Calais passed between two thick forests, 1,300 yards apart at the northern (French) end but narrowing towards the English lines.
Henry arranged his troops carefully with his archers taking up positions on the flanks and between the men-at-arms. Despite the French advantage in numbers, they refused to attack. At 11 o'clock on what was St Crispin's Day, Henry, tired of waiting, gave the order "In the name of God Almighty and of Saint George, Avount Banner in the best of the year, and Saint George this day be thine help". With a cry of "Hurrah! Hurrah! Saint George and Merrie England" the English advanced to within 300 yards of the French lines. There they planted sharpened stakes angled to check any cavalry charge. When this was done, they loosed the first of their arrows.
In the longbow, the English had perfected an extraordinary weapon. A trained archer could shoot six aimed arrows a minute which could wound at 400 yards, kill at 200 and penetrate armor at 100 yards. The English had separate arrowheads for penetrating armor while others were designed to kill or maim horses.
The French had arranged themselves in three dense lines flanked by the forests; in fact they were so crowded that their crossbows and cannons could not be fired effectively. Despite these problems, the French charged.
As they advanced, the knights were forced into each other by the narrowing front formed by the two forests: the converging mass made movement very difficult. As the heavily armored knights advanced, they turned the rain-saturated ground into deep mud; all but the first ranks slipped and stumbled. The front ranks of the French cavalry who were able to advance received the full effect of English archers.
Even as the front ranks were killed by the deadly hail of arrows, the cavalry behind, unaware of what was happening up ahead, pressed forward through the mud, piling up on the dead and wounded at their front. Those who did reach the front had to climb a wall of dead and dying men and horses before they in turn were slain. Taking advantage of this confusion, the English slung their bows and laid into the confused mass with their swords.
To make matters worse, the French sent in a second wave, crushing their own men. The English grabbed some 1,700 prisoners from the mess - rich pickings in an age when noble prisoners could yield a substantial ransom - and sent them to the rear to be guarded with the baggage train.
The local French villagers, loath not to profit from the events of the day, took advantage of the poorly guarded baggage train to help themselves to whatever they could find. When Henry learned of this disturbance, he took it as an attack from the rear and ordered that the prisoners be killed to prevent their escape. At first the guards refused, not from any humanitarian principle but because of the loss of potential ransom. Henry even had to withdraw 200 archers from the battle to threaten his own men. The slaughter began and only ceased when the truth became known. But by this time most of the prisoners had been killed, only the most illustrious were spared.
As the battle progressed, the French became aware of the scale of the disaster. As the word spread the French army started to slip away into the countryside and this quickly became a rout. One of the few consolations for the French was that the English were too tired and too few in numbers to make chase.

The Aftermath
Figures vary greatly for the English losses. Shakespeare gives the English dead as four nobles and 25 regular troops. Some estimates go as high as 500 or even 1,000 but the most widely accepted figure is 100-200 English dead. French losses are better known; the French themselves estimated these at between 8,000 and 11,000 of whom 1,200-1,800 were slaughtered prisoners. A generation of French nobles had been destroyed: there was hardly a French noble family who did not lose someone and countless family lines came to the end on the field of battle.
The English troops collected so much loot on the battlefield that the army simply could not move. Henry ordered almost all of it to be placed in a local barn along with the English dead and this was then set ablaze.
Henry, a deeply religious man, refused to accept credit for the victory, ascribing it to God alone. The immediate consequences were excellent for the English. Although the army returned to England, further expeditionary forces won battle after battle until in 1420 Charles VI agreed that on his death Henry would acquire the title King of France and gave his daughter Catherine in marriage to Henry. But the glory did not last. Henry died of dysentery in 1422. A few years later France produced her own hero, Joan of Arc, who began the reverse of English fortunes, eventually leading to the loss of all Henry's territories in France except Calais.
Shakespeare's Henry V contains perhaps the best known description of the battle which forms a major part of the play. Shakespeare's version of Henry's pre-battle oration is one of the most stirring passages of English literature.
Agincourt was a brilliant flash of English glory but had little effect on long term history and does not qualify as a world changing event.

BARONS, KNIGHTS, ESQUIRES, SERVITEURS, AND OTHERS THAT WER WITHE THE EXCELLENT PRINCE HENRY THE FIFTE, AT THE BATTELL OF AGINCOURT

The list is the complete index of the Battle of Agincourt Honor Roll. The listings comprise about 1,200 names of the 5,700 participants. In recreating the list, we have been as true to the original as possible. We have maintained the organization and spelling of the original document, and replicated the original's system of Roman numerals. To see if you had a namesake look carefully at the alphabetical listings, and use your imagination. Spelling at this time was casual -- even apparent brothers have their names spelled differently in adjacent listings. The names are also a good demonstration of the adoption of surnames in England. The majority have conventional names but a few have "de" (meaning "of"), some of the last vestiges of identifying people from their place of origin.

This article originally appeared in the March/April 97 issue of Family Chronicle (information on ordering back issues is available online).