take possession as he could. That is to say, of two parties in a
local quarrel, one hoped to strengthen itself by making use of
William's name. And William thought that it would strengthen his
position to let at least his name be heard in every corner of the
kingdom. The rest of the story stands rather aloof from the main
history. Copsige got possession of the earldom for a moment. He
was then killed by Oswulf and his partisans, and Oswulf himself was
killed in the course of the year by a common robber. At Christmas,
1067, William again granted or sold the earldom to another of the
local chiefs, Gospatric. But he made no attempt to exercise direct
authority in those parts till the beginning of the year 1069.

All this illustrates William's general course. Crowned king over
the land, he would first strengthen himself in that part of the
kingdom which he actually held. Of the passive disobedience of
other parts he would take no present notice. In northern and
central England William could exercise no authority; but those
lands were not in arms against him, nor did they acknowledge any
other king. Their earls, now his earls, were his favoured
courtiers. He could afford to be satisfied with this nominal
kingship, till a fit opportunity came to make it real. He could
afford to lend his name to the local enterprise of Copsige. It
would at least be another count against the men of Bernicia that
they had killed the earl whom King William gave them.

Meanwhile William was taking very practical possession in the
shires where late events had given him real authority. His policy
was to assert his rights in the strongest form, but to show his
mildness and good will by refraining from carrying them out to the
uttermost. By right of conquest William claimed nothing. He had