We visit Hastings and find the remains of an old castle, and we see high hills on the north and none on the south. Herein we see some corroboration of the history. But now some one shows that there is no evidence that any battle ever was fought at Hastings, and the oldest manuscripts sustain the objection, and show that the battle of the conquest was fought at a place called Senlac.
This now throws a doubt upon the whole history. There is contradiction, perhaps error. We go back to the study of the manuscripts and we find that a more recent collator of the history of the conquest, writing with a view to readers of his own times, introduced the new name, “Hastings,” as better understood than another name, Senlac, and all subsequent copyists followed his manuscript.
But the early name, “Senlac,” is found nowhere, while it still remains true that no battle was fought at Hastings. Additional doubt shadows the whole history. But now in a monastery an old manuscript is found, written centuries ago, describing some of the old abbeys, among which one is mentioned named “Battle Abbey,” followed by a short explanation, stating that it is located at the village called “Battle,” quite near Hastings. The last part is an interpolation in the manuscript, and evidently written many years after the writing of the original manuscript, and both authors are unknown.
We now visit the village of Battle, near Hastings, and find local traditions handed down in connection with an old abbey still remaining and built upon the spot where Harold fell. Arrow-heads and fragments of battle-axes are found and are shown to us; the former are found scattered over the hills only on one side. This corroborates another statement, that the Normans used bows and arrows, while the Anglo-Saxons used only battle-axes.
All these discoveries strengthen the links in the chain of evidences between facts and their history, until all doubts are cleared away and even the “validity of doubt itself is doubtful.”
=14. Just such a course= of research, of discovery, and of success in final vindication has attended almost every historical announcement in Scripture.
=15. At the close= of the Canonical period, whatever books made up the Canon were so rigidly guarded ever afterwards in every way, by memorizing, by commentary and paraphrase, by increasing the copies in manuscripts, and by numbering letters and words, that it is impossible that any material difference exists between them and the books which make up the Old Testament of the present day. These books have not been changed in any important respect during the 2,200 years which have transpired since the close of the Canon.