Baring-Gould’s sources: Gallican Martyrologies. Venerated on this day at Rouen. Authorities:—Dudo of S. Quentin (1002), William of Jumifcges (1137), Wace (1171), “Chronique des Dues de Norm.,” and “Le Roman de Rou.”] William Longsword was the son of Rollo, duke of Normandy, by his mistress Papia. William married the daughter of Robert, count of Vermandois. He succeeded Rollo on the death of the latter in 93 1. William possessed none of the great qualities of his father. He had been educated by the priests, and was more attached to a monastic life — though not to its morals — than a military career. The Normans, who prized personal courage as the highest of virtues, despised the pacific temper of William, and they reproached him with being more French than Norman, on account of the partiality he showed to his wife's countrymen. This imprudent prince gradually excluded the old warriors of his father from the ducal councils, replacing them by Frenchmen, and the Norman barons began to apprehend that he would despoil them of their lands and privileges. Rioulf, earl of the Cotentin, loudly expressed his displeasure, and became the leader of a formidable party. The confederates mutually guaranteed to each other the secure possession of their properties, and insisted on the duke giving them possession of all the country between the Seine and the Rille, as a protection against his encroachments. This demand William refused, and the confederates took up arms, crossed the Seine, and marched to Rouen. The feeble mind S. William Longsword.

…of William was alanned at this movement, and he consented to yield the land between the rivers, but Rioulf, still more emboldened, insisted on his retiring with his wife to Vermandois, and threatened in the event of his refusal to take Rouen by storm.

The courage of S. William now entirely forsook him; his popularity was sunk to the lowest ebb, and he was abandoned by all his barons, except three staunch friends of his father, Hanlet, Bernard, and Boto. Boto openly reproved him for his cowardice, and Bernard told him that if he did not defend his inheritance with the sword, he would make a voyage to Norway, and return with a chief worthy of ruling the Normans. At these reproaches the slumbering fire of his ancestors was kindled into flame; accompanied by his three faithful barons and three hundred horsemen, William sallied forth from the gates of his capital, surprised the rebels, who had calculated too securely on the cowardice of their duke, and utterly routed them.

Immediately after this victory, William received intelligence that his mistress, Sprota, whom he had sent to Fecamp during the siege of Rouen, had been delivered of a son, who was afterwards Duke Richard I. These two events occurred in 933.

When Charles the Simple was expelled from the throne of France, the sceptre was seized by Raoul, duke of Burgundy. The usurper died without issue, leaving a brother, Hugh, count of Paris, the most powerful baron of the realm, and called Hugh the Great, on account of the extent of his possessions. He might easily have seized the vacant throne, but knowing the difficulty of retaining it in those turbulent times, he contented himself with securing the peaceable possession of Burgundy. During the captivity of Charles the Simple, his queen had sought refuge in England with their young son Louis, known in history by the title of “ Outremer.” This child, then sixteen years old, Hugh determined to proclaim king of France, and he despatched the archbishop of Sens to London, to prevail on the queen to return with the youthful Louis; and this, after some hesitation, she did, though entertaining great fears that treachery was meditated against the last living scion of the Carolingian race. She was, however, inspired with confidence by the promises of the duke of Normandy, who offered his protection, agreeing to do homage to Louis, as Rollo had done to his father; and she was still more encouraged by the pardon he extended to her friend Alain, then a refugee in England, to whom he generously restored the earldom of Nantes, which had been confiscated on account of the rebellion of the count William Longsword met the queen and her son at Boulogne, where they landed, and he then took the oath of fealty along with several of the French barons. The authority of the young king, thus placed on the throne by an exclusive party, and unsupported by the national will, was but little respected. He was soon embroiled with his principal barons, who razed his castles and conspired against his crown.

Hugh of Burgundy gave him but doubtful assistance, husbanding his resources to retain Burgundy, and seeking to act as umpire between the sovereign and the discontented nobles. Louis applied for aid to Otho, emperor of Germany, who refused to interfere, unless with the approbation of William Longsword. On which the king of France went to Rouen, and, after some interviews, a triple alliance was concluded between the three princes. Shortly after this transaction, the duke of Normandy stood godfather to the son of Louis, bom at Laon, in 941, who was named Lothair. When William returned to Rouen he was received by his subjects with the loudest demonstrations of joy. The imDec. pressions of his early education soon rose again in his mind, now unoccupied with foreign war or civil commotion. He rebuilt the abbey of Jumifeges, and expressed a wish to pass the remainder of his days in that sacred asylum, ready, if only the privilege might be accorded him of spending the rest of his days in ease from the burden of state affairs, to separate himself from his wife, for whom he did not care, and from his mistress, to whom he was devoted. The abbot resolutely refused his request; he doubted, perhaps, the rigid abstention of the duke, as monk, from all commerce with Sprota; and William would neither eat nor drink, and fell dangerously ill from exhaustion. When reduced to this state, William summoned his most attached barons, and repeated his desire to be allowed to receive the cowl in the abbey of Juraifeges. The barons, however, firmly objected; but, at his request, they acknowledged his bastard, Richard, as his successor, and swore homage and fealty to the young prince. We now come to those events which led to the death, or, as the martyrologists call it, the martyrdom, of this heroic and pure-living saint.

Herloin, the second of that name, Earl of Ponthieu and Montreuil, was brother-in-law of the duke of Normandy, by his marriage with Alice of Vermandois. Amulf, the first earl of Flanders, was the bitter enemy of Herloin, and had seized the castle of Montreuil in Picardy, near the river Canche, about eight miles from Boulogne. Unable to recover this fortress from his too powerful adversary with his own forces, Herloin applied for aid to Hugh, count of Paris, who was his over-lord. It was refused, Amulf being the friend of Hugh, who, however, told Herloin that he would not take offence if he obtained assistance from another quarter. He then sought to interest the king of France in his favour, but with like unsuccess. Thus disappointed, he next solicited the protection of the duke of Normandy, who, compassionating his misfortunes, summoned his barons, and prepared to lay siege to Montreuil.

The Flemings made every preparation to resist the army of William, but the contest was short and decisive. The duke harangued his soldiers, and assigned to the Cotentinois the post of honour, and personally led them to the assault Eager to merit the praise of their sovereign, they rushed on the enemy with irresistible impetuosity, and quickly obtained possession of the town and castle. William generously offered to restore Montreuil without any indemnification, but Herloin begged him to retain it for himself, saying that he was too feeble to defend it with his own troops. The Norman duke, however, insisted on giving back the place, and promised again to assist his friend, should the Flemings venture to attack him. He then returned to Normandy, and repeated his wish to become a monk, and pass the remainder of his days at Jumifeges; but his barons still refused their consent.

The count of Flanders nursed his revenge against William for having aided Herloin in the recovery of the castle of Montreuil; but being aware that he could not prevail by an appeal to arms, he contrived a scheme for his assassination. Amulf sent deputies to Rouen to solicit a treaty of peace, and requested the duke to meet him at Amiens, there to settle the terms, pretending that he was unable to travel on account of the gout To these overtures the unsuspicious William consented, and repaired to the appointed place. On his arrival at Amiens he received a message from the perfidious Amulf, stating that he was at Pequigny, a small town on the river Somme. In the middle of this river there is a small island, and thither the treacherous Fleming decoyed the confiding Norman. The duke landed on it, accompanied by twelve attendan ts. He was received with every semblance of esteem by the count of Flanders, who personally begged a S. William Longsword.

treaty of perpetual peace, which William granted. He then made the most solemn protestations of fidelity, and took his leave.

William was about to embark in another boat, when one of the conspirators ran down to the shore, and, pretending that he had some important intelligence to communicate privately, induced the duke to return alone. No sooner was he separated from his companions than the assassins rushed on their victim, and clove his head in twain, and the duke sank dead on the ground, without uttering a word. Alain and Berengar of Brittany, who had accompanied William on this fatal journey, saw the murder perpetrated from the bank of the river, where they were awaiting the duke’s return. The murderers escaped to the opposite shore, and fled; but the body of the prince was recovered, taken to Rouen, and buried in the cathedral The assassination took place, according to Dudo of S. Quentin, on December 20, 943, but, according to William of Jumifeges, on December 17, and according to the second epitaph on the duke’s tomb, on December 18. As December 17 is the day on which he is commemorated at Rouen, it is probable that this was the exact date of the murder.

William Longsword reigned twenty-five years. In person he was tall and robust His countenance was remarkable for mildness of expression — in less courtier-like terms, for feebleness. Disliking a military career, he yet showed courage when forced to draw the sword. His piety was sincere, it his morals were not irreproachable. He kept his promises with inviolable fidelity, excepting his marriage vow.1 • Duncan, "The Dukes of Normandy,” London, 1839.