Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.

X

History Of The British Isles Ii Notes

History Notes > History of the British Isles II: 1042-1330 Notes

This is an extract of our History Of The British Isles Ii document, which we sell as part of our History of the British Isles II: 1042-1330 Notes collection written by the top tier of Oxford University students.

The following is a more accessble plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our History of the British Isles II: 1042-1330 Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:

University of Oxford Final Examinations HISTORY OF THE BRITISH ISLES II, 1042-1330 REVISION NOTES: CONTENTS Topic 1: The Norman Contest Page 1 Topic 2: Gender Topic 3: National Identity Page 24 Topic 4: Literature and the Arts Page 38 Topic 5: Religion Topic 6: Angevin queenship Page 44 Topic 7: Plantagenet kingship Page 48

Page 19

Page 40

Colour coding: Blue = Historiography Orange = key facts/evidence Topic 1: The Norman Conquest.

1. Why was the Norman Conquest a success?
? England had a long history of invasion:
? Emphasised by E John: "Eng was a polit community whose structure had been greatly impaired by the stresses and strains of 300 yrs of Viking raids". o Edmund Ironside, brother of EtC and son of Aethelred nicknamed 'Unraed' ('ill-counselled') - lost Eng to Viking invasions 1016 (Canute). These invasions "in certain respects, foreshadowed the NC" (Thomas).
? Cross-over with Normandy: o Aethelred's marriage to Emma, from Normandy, 1002.
? EtC grew up in Normandy. o Then when Aethelred died, Canute married Emma - she was still on the scene. o Clash between Godwines and Normans: dispute in Dover in 1051 - clash between Normans and locals.
? Godwine ordered by king to lay waste to Dover, but refused.
? Godwines temporarily exiled. o "No-one could afford to ignore Normandy" (E John). o The Normans obv did not have to deal with this problem.
? England was a rewarding country to invade: o Domesday showed richness

e.g. tens of thousands of herrings paid in rent every year to landlords who owned coastal fisheries; 10s of thousands of eels from inland fisheries.
? Also non-agricultural: >6000 water mills. Winchester had streets named for butchers, goldsmiths, shoemakers, shield makers, wood sellers, tanners.
? Wills show wealth of nobility - weapons with precious metals, jewelry, gold crucifixes, cloth died purple.
? Eng "a tempting target" (Hugh Thomas). of clear succession: Emphasised by E John: "chronic dynastic instability". Canute's death, 1035, caused confusion for 7 years.
? Exacerbated noble tensions.
? Harold I was the illegit son of Canute. After Canute's death, he tried to take power.
? Emma opposed Harold, along with Godwine - they both supported Harthacanute (Emma and Canute's son).
? Eventually Harold I won and made peace with Godwine - ruled until 1040.
? 1040: Harthacanute challenges Harold with Danish fleet. However, Harold dies from illness just before his arrival.
? Harthacanute rules for 2 years, bringing mother Emma and her son Edward the Confessor (EtC) over.
? Harthacanute dies 1042 - EtC succeeded peacefully. Edward the Confessor's death, 1066, without issue.
? Had two grandnephews - Edgar Atheling, and Harold. Both were children.
? Had nominated - apparently - both Harold Godwineson and William of Normandy.
? "succession to EtC was wide open upon his death" (Hugh Thomas).
? Led to Godwineson dominance:
? Godwinesons "dominated England" (E John).
? Harold Godwineson took throne on EtC's death.
? Harold's father Godwine was a favourite of king Canute - earl with responsibility for Wessex.
? When Harold I succeeded, Godwine had helped him, selling out his original favourite (Harthacanute).? Lacko

o

?

When Harthacanute arrived, Godwine claimed he had only acted previously under force. Gifted him a great warship with 80 warriors.
? When EtC succeeded, Godwine presented him with a huge ship with purple sails and arranged his marriage to his daughter Edith.
? Godwine's two sons Swein (rubbish) and Harold (good) became earls.
? Robert Fleming emphasises wealth - estimated that if Godwine's children could collect all of their estates' rents, they would have had >2 mill silver pennies per year. 3 tonnes of silver.
? Strengths of William the Conqueror (WtC): o Important followers: Half-brothers Robert count of Mortain and Odo bishop of Bayeux; Roger of Montgomery. o Grant given by EtC?
? No source records, but AS Chronicle records WtC coming to Eng while Godwine was in exile. o Weak enemies:
? King of France weak - Henry I had died 1060, leaving a young son.
? Just had success in Brittany. o Had rep as strong lord and warrior. Thomas emph's his personal impact on persuading people to undertake conq. o Had many ships built. o Huge army gathered from August. Seem quite wellorganised: didn't do significant damage to duchy in this time.
? Note logistical challenge of feeding and cleaning - emph'd by Bernard Bachrach. o Harold didn't know when WtC would strike - stationed forces along south coast, but had to disband on 8th Sept

1066. o One of the first things WtC did was build a motte-andbailey castle at Hastings. o Still, invasion was risky - "a breathtaking gamble" (Thomas).
? Many leading men claimed Norman resources weren't strong enough.
? Other threats to Harold: o Some threats from brother Tosti:
? Then went to Norway and allied with Harald Hadrada. 20 Sept: fought Edwin and Morcar in the north. Harold went to meet, at Stamford Bridge on

25th Sept - success in travelling v quickly (although many killed). o Harold travelled so quickly from Stamford Bridge that some sources say he would have gathered more forces going slower. Even some historians agree e.g. R Allen Brown.
? Thomas disagrees.
? Lands were being ravished - had to act quickly to prevent this and maintain English support.
? Could have wanted to take by surprise.
? Note difficulty of determining accurate numbers.
? Historians originally said about 10000 each, based on ability to feed.
? William's biographer said 60,000.
? Michael K Lawson reassessed. o Said gov'ts were better than we thought at looking after. o Partly based on Bayeux Tapestry.
? Battle tactics: o Harold takes high ground, packs troops densely - meant Norman cavalry inept, allowed English to use long axes. o Thomas argues this encouraged Normans to fight better. o William had initiative on when to attack. o Norman archers could continue fight while soldiers rested. o "the battle was a long, hard-fought, and v even struggle" (Thomas). o At one point, rumour spread that WtC was dead - army started to flee. Tapestry shows Odo of Bayeux rallying them back; also WtC raising helmet to show he was alive. o When Norman cavalry fled in fear, some of Harold's troops pursued them. They could then turn back and kill them. William's men started pretending to flee. o Eventually, Harold was killed.
? William's post-battle tactics were strong. o Still felt insecure: note at coronation on 25th Dec 1066, some lords swore oaths to W in English, and guards outside thought they were rebelling and set fire to houses. o Killed some of Harold's supporters nearby. o Went to Canterbury - religious importance. o Then Dover - key port. o W's troops then laid waste to West and North London - trying to intimidate gov't. "the trickle of surrenders turned into a flood" (Thomas).

? How big were the threats to William, post-Conquest?
o Lack of powerful Enlishg lords:
? Many killed at Hastings, as well as followers.
? All heirs to greatest families = young.
? Edgar Aethling didn't really have a personal power base. o Many revolts were minor and easily put down:
? 1068 in Exeter - soon made terms.
? Eadric the Wild and Welsh alliance caused probs on that border. o Bigger prob = north.
? Made Edgar Atheling leader - his sister was married to the king Malcolm of Scot.
? Destroyed Norman detachments at Durham and York.
? Had Danish alliance. o 1071: Edwin and Morcar rebelled. Edwin betrayed by followers, but Morcar escaped to Ely and joined Hereward the Wake. W did manage to capture. o William largely acted so quickly that he nipped these in the bud. o Also v ruthless - frequently devastated countryside e.g. harrying of the north 1069-70. o William's shift away from AS nobility was v slow and savvy. o "Norman rule was basically secure by 1071" (Thomas).
? Common inheritance of English and French:
? A Williams' point.
? See areas like language, architecture.
? Eased assimilation through things like intermarriage (William of Malmesbury saw as common).
? Hard to see: few remaining sources as many marriages unlikely to be recorded.

2. How strong was the English government before the Conquest?
? Wealth: See above.
? English gov't was quite sophisticated pre-Conquest: o Local reps - earls; shire reeves (Eng divided into shires/counties; then into hundreds/wapentakes); estate managers; bishops/church officials. o Control of church brought power and service - in return had to protect and support. o Key development = hides - specific units of military org. Normally 120 acres - each could be expected to do something, like every 5 hides prod a fully armoured warrior.

o Note danegeld = reg tax by end of AS period. Was a levy on the hides. o One advantage = used spoken language. o Debate: how sophisticated?
? Not much evidence - esp because most records discarded as they were in Old Eng.
? Contrast with pipe rolls of C12th.
? Coinage, hide system "suggests a sophisticated system of written bureaucracy" (Hugh Thomas).
? Odd docs have survived, e.g. list of men for coast watch, lists of payments of danegeld - probably were more once.
? Normans may well have used existing structures when carrying out Domesday.
? Normans did adapt some AS docs e.g. the writ.
? AS kings were v wealthy and powerful - must have worked to an extent.
? Wilfrid Lewis Warren in 'The Myth of Norman Admin Efficiency' argues that the Norman gov't didn't match that of the AS.
? Note fact that gov had to move around inevitably ltd it.
? One method of control = laying waste to kingdom
- does suggest lack of more sophisticated ways.

3. What was the impact of the Norman conquest?
? Landholding o "The Norman Conquest brought a revolution in landholding" (H Thomas). o Biggest change = king becomes biggest landholder. Before, EtC had been wealthiest INDIVIDUAL, but Godwinesons' lands outstripped his, Church also held about 1/4.
? King's share doubled to 17% revenues collected in Domesday. No chief followers approached Godwine or Harold's levels of wealth.
? Wasn't permanent:
? By 1300 royal lands were 2% landed income.
? Management of these lands didn't really change: Idea of devolving responsibility for management of royal lands to sheriff = "inherited from the AS kings" (Huscroft). o More compact estates (not scattered around country), akin to Normandy. E.g. whole county of Cheshire ? one lord (sensitive). Studied by Robin Fleming (spare territories lumped together under one lord). o Shifts in the teneurial system:

George Garnett's key argument: "the most potent and neglected consequence of the Conquest".
? "The Norman Conquest... gave rise to the unique role of the king in England" (Emma Mason).
? New system centred on William's claim to be the direct inheritor of EtC.
? Other tenures based on this relationship.
? Undermined longstanding agreements based on inheritance.
? Rights of lords also changed - e.g. if a tenant died leaving an underage son, lord gained wardship.
? Emphasised dependency on king.
? 'Everything, divine and human alike, waited on his nod' (Eadmer).
? Before the Conquest, men would often swear oaths of loyalty that didn't depend on land holding. DID THE NORMANS BRING FEUDALISM TO ENGLAND?
o Thomas highlights the controversy over what exactly constitutes feudalism.
? Term came from early modern lawyers' description of certain types of land tenure.
? Some, like Adam Smith and Karl Marx, apply it to the relation between lords and peasants.
? Some use it to describe relations among the upper classes (e.g. holding land from king in return for military service).
? Richardson and Sayles described feudal and feudalism as one of 'the most regrettable coinages ever put into circulation to debase the language of historians'. o Norman military changes did contribute to a more feudal system.
? R Allen Brown emphasises this.
? More connection between military service and landholding - because so much land had been seized from the English; also most new lords settled with their military followers.
? Samuel Thorne and S F C Milson also emphasise importance of service: say was like tenure at a university (based on life holding as long as you do job).
? More systematic king-lord-tenant pyramid, because of destruction of old aristocracy.
? Quota system/Honors - lands held directly by a noble. Each honor had a quota of knights, which would be owed to the king. Also non-military functions - lords would hold courts held by the vassals in their honor.?

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our History of the British Isles II: 1042-1330 Notes.