Harold Harefoot - Death

Death

Harold died at Oxford on 17 March 1040, just as Harthacnut was preparing an invasion force of Danes, and was buried at Westminster Abbey. His body was subsequently exhumed, beheaded, and thrown into a fen bordering the Thames when Harthacnut assumed the throne in June 1040. The body was subsequently recovered by a fishermen, and resident Danes reportly had it reburied at their local cemetery in London. The body was eventually buried in a church in the City of Westminster, which was fittingly named St. Clement Danes. A contradictory account in the Knýtlinga saga (13th century) reports Harold buried in the city of Morstr, alongside his half-brother Harthacnut and their father Cnut. While mentioned as a great city in the text, nothing else is known of Morstr. The Heimskringla by Snorri Sturluson reports Harold Harefoot buried at Winchester, again alongside Cnut and Harthacnut.

The cause of Harold's death is uncertain. Katherine Holman attributes the death to "a mysterious illness". An Anglo-Saxon charter attributes the illness to divine judgment.Harold had reportedly claimed Sandwich for himself, thereby depriving the monks of Christchurch. Harold is described as lying ill and in despair at Oxford. When monks came to him to settle the dispute over Sandwhich, he "lay and grew black as they spoke". The context of the event was a dispute between Christchurch and St Augustine's Abbey, which took over the local toll in the name of the king. There is little attention paid to the illness of the king. Harriet O'Brien feels this is enough to indicate that Harold died of natural causes, but not to determine the nature of the disease. The Anglo-Saxons themselves would consider him elf-shot (attacked by elves), their term for any number of deadly diseases. Michael Evans points out that Harold was only one of several youthful kings of pre-Conquest England to die following short reigns. Others included Edmund I (reigned 939–946), Eadred (reigned 946–955), Eadwig (reigned 955–959), Edmund Ironside (reigned 1016), and Harthacnut (reigned 1040–1042). Evans wonders whether the role of king was dangerous in this era, more so than in the period after the Conquest, or whether hereditary diseases were in effect, since most of these kings were members of the same lineage, the House of Wessex.

It is unclear why a king would have been buried at the Abbey. The only previous royals reportedly buried there were Sæberht of Essex and his wife Æthelgoda. Emma Mason speculates that Cnut had built a royal residence in the vicinity of the Abbey, or that Westminster held some significance to the Danish Kings of England, which would also explain why Harthacnut would not allow a usurper to be buried there. The lack of detail in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle implies that, for its compilers, the main point of interest was not the burial site, but the exhumation of the body. Harriet O'Brien theorises that the choice of location might simply reflect the political affiliation of the area, the area of Westminster and nearby London being a powerbase for Harold.

A detailed account of the exhumation appears in the writings of John of Worcester (12th century). The group tasked with the mission was reportedly led by Ælfric Puttoc, Archbishop of York and Godwin, Earl of Wessex. The involvement of such notable men would have a significance of its own, giving the event an official nature and avoiding secrecy. Emma Mason suspects that this could also serve as a punishment for Godwine, who had served as a chief supporter of Harold, and was now tasked with the gruesome task.