The Mystery of the Papal Banner

Hello, dear readers! You've met today's guest before. Paula Lofting is a good friend and fellow Pen & Sword author, so I'm pleased to welcome her once again with a brilliant post highlighting one of the many mysteries regarding the year 1066.

Welcome, Paula!

~ Samantha

The Mystery of the Papal Banner

Guest Post by Paula Lofting

‘The duke, seeking the favour of this pope, whom he had informed of the business in hand, received a banner (vexillum) from him with his blessing, as though he had received the backing of St Peter, by following which he might attack his adversary with greater confidence and safety.’ William of Poitiers.

For many years now, William of Poitiers has been regarded as a credible source that Pope Alexander had willingly sponsored the Norman invasion, despite being the sole primary document to mention that there was a banner given by the pope to William of Normandy in recognition of his support of the invasion of England. Few historians have ever questioned the legitimacy of this story, which you think they would have in light of the fact that the two major sources written before Poitiers’ Gesta Guillelmi Ducis Normannorum, did not even mention papal approval let alone a banner.

William of Poitiers was the duke of Normandy’s Chaplain and would have known Duke William well. What was lacking in William de Jumièges account of the duke’s life and the battle of Hastings that that Poitiers had to embellish the tale with the story of a banner that was not in the former accounts of the battle written by de Jumièges and Guy of Amiens?

Dan Armstrong, drawing on the earlier work of Catherine Morton and Hope Muntz, has written a strong argument against the papal banner being present at the Battle of Hastings as a symbol of Pope Alexandrer’s approval of the invasion and killing of an anointed king. He answers some pertinent questions, such as why were the earliest sources quiet about the banner that Poitiers claimed was given to William, where is the proof that Pope Alexander gave William his support, and why did Poitiers feel such a story was worth telling long after the battle was over?

Shared with kind permission by Matthew Ryan

Below is an excerpt from Searching for the Last Anglo-Saxon King which discusses a new date for the banner, and a new story of how it came about.

The Second Coronation

Just like William’s fight to consolidate his power in Normandy, his fight for England would not come easily. The struggle went on for several years before he was comfortably established. William was beset by several rebellions from 1067 onwards but between 1069–1070 the rebellions were prolific. William was putting out one conflagration after another, and his position in England was regarded as precarious, despite supposedly receiving the pope’s acceptance post-conquest. Still desperate for acceptance from the beleaguered English, he turned again to the pope, requesting further affirmation. Alexander agreed. This time it came in the form of a papal delegation. According to Orderic, William was crowned in Winchester by two cardinals, and papal legate, Ermenfrid of Sion, sent by Pope Alexander, without the burning of buildings as happened in London at the first coronation. We can surmise it was in the year 1070, as it was around this time that Stigand was deposed at Winchester during Easter, an event corroborated by John of Worcester. Vita Lanfranci, (The Life of Lanfranc) also states that at this ceremony he was confirmed as king. During this second coronation, the pope at last gave official approval with the gift of a banner, seen in the image of the ceremony of William, enthroned between the two papal legates, whilst holding a crude version of a papal standard. The crowning ceremony at Winchester was the time for him to establish himself with God’s approval and it fits that he should have acquired the banner, not in 1066 when Harold was still alive and the anointed king of England, but after he had been dead for some time and could not speak for himself.

But why did Poitiers choose to be economical with the truth? It seems that a banner granted in 1070 would have had far less impact than one granted in 1066, a sanction of the proposed invasion that was due to occur that same year. William’s reputation in Europe had taken some stick, invading England and slaughtering her king was not a popular achievement among the Continentals. He needed some better publicity, and Poitiers was just the man to do it. Whether or not William commissioned Poitiers to resume his chronicle in the 1070s, we have no way of knowing, though some historians believe the archdeacon did so in order to win William’s favour. Finding earlier attempts to defend William’s right to invade unsatisfactory, Poitiers, using Jumieges earlier work as a framework, took it upon himself, to rewrite, outrageously embellish, and fictionalise the story. Thus, he used the papal banner as a tool to sanction the invasion and shut the nay-sayers up for good.

As expected with works of this kind, everything Poitiers says about William praises him, leaving the reader in no doubt that his purpose was to ensure that William came out of his investigation squeaky clean. Harold, however, is the murdering, perjuring, tyrant whom everyone, including the papacy, and Poitiers were glad to see the back of. It is interesting that as time progressed from the victory over the English at Hastings until William died and beyond, the stories became more and more blatantly imaginative with each chronicler, and Harold’s reputation wholly demonised. The Penitential Ordinance which Bates reports as being issued sometime in 1067, was distributed by the Norman bishop, Ermenfrid Sion backed by Pope Alexander, setting out the requirement of atonement to be performed by William’s soldiers. William, as stated already, was not mentioned in the Ordinance. According to Garnett, even the eleventh-century Flemish chroniclers were scathing in their condemnation of the conquest, despite their fellow countrymen fighting on William’s side. Did they believe that they had been hoodwinked by William?

In any case, it seems that the new Norman king of England, sought help from the pope to restore his reputation. Poitiers assisted in this mission by creating a monster out of Harold so horrific, it made anything William did look holy. It was not until 1071when the revolt of Hereward in Ely was put down could he relax and concentrate on the new troubles in Normandy.

Many thanks to Samantha for hosting me on your blog!

Connect with Paula

Paula was born in the ancient Saxon county of Middlesex in 1961. She grew up in Australia hearing stories from her dad of her homeland and its history. As a youngster she read books by Rosemary Sutcliff and Leon Garfield and her love of English history grew. At 16 her family decided to travel back to England and resettle. She was able to visit the places she'd dreamt about as a child, bringing the stories of her childhood to life. It wasn't until later in life that Paula realised her dream to write and publish her own books. Her debut historical novel Sons of the Wolf was first published in 2012 and then revised and republished in 2016 along with the sequel, The Wolf Banner, in 2017. The third in the series, Wolf's Bane, will be ready for publishing later this year.

In this midst of all this, Paula acquired contracts for nonfiction books with the prestigious Pen & Sword publishers. Searching for the Last Anglo-Saxon King, Harold Godwinson, England’s golden Warrior is now available to buy in all good book outlets, and she is now working on the next non-fiction book about King Edmund Ironside. She has also written a short essay about Edmund for Iain Dale's Kings and Queens, articles for historical magazines. When she is not writing, she is a psychiatric nurse, mother of three grown up kids and grandmother of two and also re-enacts the Anglo-Saxon/Viking period with the awesome Regia Anglorum.

Connect with Paula on Instagram, Facebook, Threads, X (Twitter), Bluesky, or her website.