GreatClarendonStreet,OxfordOX26DP

OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford.

ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship,

andeducationbypublishingworldwidein

OxfordNewYork

AthensAucklandBangkokBogotáBuenos

AiresCapeTownChennaiDaresSalaamDelhiFlorenceHongKongIstanbul

KarachiKolkataKualaLumpur

MadridMelbourneMexicoCityMumbaiNairobi

ParisSãoPauloShanghaiSingaporeTaipeiTokyo

TorontoWarsaw

withassociatedcompaniesinBerlinIbadan

OxfordisaregisteredtrademarkofOxfordUniversityPressin

theUKandincertainothercountries

PublishedintheUnitedStates

byOxfordUniversityPressInc.,NewYork

Text©JohnGillinghamandRalphA.Griffiths1984

Themoralrightsoftheauthorshavebeenasserted

DatabaserightOxfordUniversityPress(maker)

TextfirstpublishedinTheOxfordIllustratedHistoryofBritain1984FirstpublishedasaVeryShortIntroduction2000

Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmay

bereproduced,storedinaretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformor

byanymeans,withoutthepriorpermission

inwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,

orasexpresslypermittedbylaw,orundertermsagreed

withtheappropriatereprographicsrights

organizations.Enquiries

concerningreproductionoutsidethescopeoftheaboveshouldbesenttotheRights

Department,OxfordUniversityPress,at

theaddressabove

Youmustnotcirculatethisbookinanyotherbinding

orcoverandyoumustimposethissameconditiononany

acquirer

BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublication

DataDataavailable

LibraryofCongressCataloginginPublication

DataDataavailable

ISBN0–19–285402–X

3579108642

TypesetbyRefineCatch

Ltd,Bungay,SuffolkPrintedinSpainbyBookPrintS.L.,Barcelona

Very ShortIntroductionsavailablenow:

ADVERTISING •WinstonFletcher

AFRICAN HISTORY •John Parker andRichardRathbone

AGNOSTICISM •RobinLePoidevin

AMERICANPOLITICALPARTIES ANDELECTIONS • L.SandyMaisel

THE AMERICANPRESIDENCY •CharlesO.Jones

ANARCHISM • ColinWard

ANCIENTEGYPT•Ian

Shaw

ANCIENTPHILOSOPHY•JuliaAnnas

ANCIENT WARFARE•HarrySidebottom

ANGLICANISM•MarkChapman

THE ANGLO-SAXONAGE•JohnBlair

ANIMAL RIGHTS •DavidDeGrazia

ANTISEMITISM •StevenBeller

THE APOCRYPHALGOSPELS • PaulFoster

ARCHAEOLOGY •PaulBahn

ARCHITECTURE •

AndrewBallantyne

ARISTOCRACY •WilliamDoyle

ARISTOTLE • JonathanBarnes

ART HISTORY • DanaArnold

ART THEORY •CynthiaFreeland

ATHEISM • JulianBaggini

AUGUSTINE • HenryChadwick

AUTISM•UtaFrith

BARTHES • JonathanCuller

BESTSELLERS • JohnSutherland

THE BIBLE • JohnRiches

BIBLICALARCHEOLOGY •EricH.Cline

BIOGRAPHY •HermioneLee

THE BOOK OFMORMON • TerrylGivens

THE BRAIN • MichaelO’Shea

BRITISH POLITICS •AnthonyWright

BUDDHA • MichaelCarrithers

BUDDHISM • DamienKeown

BUDDHIST ETHICS •DamienKeown

CAPITALISM • JamesFulcher

CATHOLICISM •GeraldO’Collins

THE CELTS • BarryCunliffe

CHAOS • LeonardSmith

CHOICE THEORY •MichaelAllingham

CHRISTIAN ART •BethWilliamson

CHRISTIAN ETHICS •D.StephenLong

CHRISTIANITY •LindaWoodhead

CITIZENSHIP•RichardBellamy

CLASSICALMYTHOLOGY •

HelenMorales

CLASSICS • MaryBeard and JohnHenderson

CLAUSEWITZ •MichaelHoward

THE COLD WAR •RobertMcMahon

COMMUNISM • LeslieHolmes

CONSCIOUSNESS •SusanBlackmore

CONTEMPORARYART • JulianStallabrass

CONTINENTALPHILOSOPHY •SimonCritchley

COSMOLOGY • PeterColes

THE CRUSADES •ChristopherTyerman

CRYPTOGRAPHY •Fred Piper and SeanMurphy

DADA ANDSURREALISM •DavidHopkins

DARWIN • JonathanHoward

THE DEAD SEASCROLLS • TimothyLim

DEMOCRACY •BernardCrick

DESCARTES • TomSorell

DESERTS • NickMiddleton

DESIGN•JohnHeskett

DINOSAURS • DavidNorman

DIPLOMACY • JosephM.Siracusa

DOCUMENTARYFILM • PatriciaAufderheide

DREAMING • J. AllanHobson

DRUGS•LeslieIversen

DRUIDS • BarryCunliffe

THE EARTH • MartinRedfern

ECONOMICS • ParthaDasgupta

EGYPTIAN MYTH •GeraldinePinch

EIGHTEENTH-CENTURYBRITAIN

•PaulLangford

THE ELEMENTS •PhilipBall

EMOTION • DylanEvans

EMPIRE • StephenHowe

ENGELS • TerrellCarver

ENGLISHLITERATURE •JonathanBate

EPIDEMIOLOGY •RoldolfoSaracci

ETHICS • SimonBlackburn

THE EUROPEANUNION•JohnPinderand SimonUsherwood

EVOLUTION • Brianand DeborahCharlesworth

EXISTENTIALISM •ThomasFlynn

FASCISM • KevinPassmore

FASHION • RebeccaArnold

FEMINISM • Margaret

Walters

FILMMUSIC•KathrynKalinak

THE FIRST WORLDWAR • MichaelHoward

FORENSICPSYCHOLOGY •DavidCanter

FORENSICSCIENCE •

JimFraser

FOSSILS • KeithThomson

FOUCAULT • GaryGutting

FREE SPEECH • NigelWarburton

FREE WILL • ThomasPink

FRENCHLITERATURE•JohnD.Lyons

THE FRENCHREVOLUTION •WilliamDoyle

FREUD•AnthonyStorr

FUNDAMENTALISM•MaliseRuthven

GALAXIES • John

Gribbin

GALILEO • StillmanDrake

GAMETHEORY•KenBinmore

GANDHI • BhikhuParekh

GEOGRAPHY • JohnMatthews and DavidHerbert

GEOPOLITICS • KlausDodds

GERMANLITERATURE •NicholasBoyle

GERMANPHILOSOPHY •AndrewBowie

GLOBALCATASTROPHES •BillMcGuire

GLOBALWARMING•MarkMaslin

GLOBALIZATION •ManfredSteger

THE GREATDEPRESSION ANDTHE NEW DEAL •EricRauchway

HABERMAS • JamesGordonFinlayson

HEGEL•PeterSinger

HEIDEGGER •MichaelInwood

HIEROGLYPHS •PenelopeWilson

HINDUISM • KimKnott

HISTORY • John H.Arnold

THE HISTORY OFASTRONOMY •MichaelHoskin

THE HISTORY OFLIFE • MichaelBenton

THE HISTORY OFMEDICINE•WilliamBynum

THE HISTORY OFTIME • Leofranc

Holford-Strevens

HIV/AIDS • AlanWhiteside

HOBBES • RichardTuck

HUMAN EVOLUTION•BernardWood

HUMAN RIGHTS •AndrewClapham

HUME•A.J.Ayer

IDEOLOGY • MichaelFreeden

INDIANPHILOSOPHY•SueHamilton

INFORMATION •LucianoFloridi

INNOVATION • MarkDodgson and DavidGann

INTELLIGENCE • IanJ.Deary

INTERNATIONALMIGRATION •KhalidKoser

INTERNATIONALRELATIONS • PaulWilkinson

ISLAM • MaliseRuthven

ISLAMIC HISTORY •AdamSilverstein

JOURNALISM • IanHargreaves

JUDAISM • NormanSolomon

JUNG • AnthonyStevens

KABBALAH • JosephDan

KAFKA • RitchieRobertson

KANT•RogerScruton

KEYNES • RobertSkidelsky

KIERKEGAARD •PatrickGardiner

THEKORAN•MichaelCook

LANDSCAPES ANDCEOMORPHOLOGY•AndrewGoudieandHeatherViles

LAW•RaymondWacks

THE LAWS OFTHERMODYNAMICS•PeterAtkins

LEADERSHIP • KethGrint

LINCOLN • Allen C.Guelzo

LINGUISTICS • PeterMatthews

LITERARYTHEORY •JonathanCuller

LOCKE•JohnDunn

LOGIC•GrahamPriest

MACHIAVELLI •

QuentinSkinner

MARTIN LUTHER •ScottH.Hendrix

THE MARQUIS DESADE•JohnPhillips

MARX•PeterSinger

MATHEMATICS •TimothyGowers

THE MEANING OF

LIFE•TerryEagleton

MEDICAL ETHICS •TonyHope

MEDIEVAL BRITAIN•JohnGillinghamandRalphA.Griffiths

MEMORY • JonathanK.Foster

MICHAEL FARADAY•FrankA.J.L.James

MODERNART•DavidCottington

MODERN CHINA •RanaMitter

MODERN IRELAND •SeniaPaseta

MODERN JAPAN •Christopher Goto-Jones

MODERNISM •

ChristopherButler

MOLECULES • PhilipBall

MORMONISM •Richard LymanBushman

MUSIC•NicholasCook

MYTH • Robert A.Segal

NATIONALISM •StevenGrosby

NELSONMANDELA •EllekeBoehmer

NEOLIBERALISM •Manfred Steger andRaviRoy

THE NEWTESTAMENT •LukeTimothyJohnson

THE NEWTESTAMENT ASLITERATURE•KyleKeefer

NEWTON • RobertIliffe

NIETZSCHE • MichaelTanner

NINETEENTH-CENTURYBRITAIN• Christopher Harvie

andH.C.G.Matthew

THE NORMANCONQUEST •GeorgeGarnett

NORTHERNIRELAND•MarcMulholland

NOTHING • FrankClose

NUCLEAR WEAPONS•JosephM.Siracusa

THE OLDTESTAMENT •MichaelD.Coogan

PARTICLE PHYSICS •FrankClose

PAUL•E.P.Sanders

PENTECOSTALISM •WilliamK.Kay

PHILOSOPHY •EdwardCraig

PHILOSOPHY OFLAW • RaymondWacks

PHILOSOPHY OFSCIENCE • SamirOkasha

PHOTOGRAPHY •SteveEdwards

PLANETS • David A.Rothery

PLATO•JuliaAnnas

POLITICALPHILOSOPHY •DavidMiller

POLITICS • KennethMinogue

POSTCOLONIALISM •RobertYoung

POSTMODERNISM •ChristopherButler

POSTSTRUCTURALISM•CatherineBelsey

PREHISTORY • ChrisGosden

PRESOCRATICPHILOSOPHY •CatherineOsborne

PRIVACY • RaymondWacks

PROGRESSIVISM •

WalterNugent

PSYCHIATRY • TomBurns

PSYCHOLOGY •Gillian Butler andFredaMcManus

PURITANISM•FrancisJ.Bremer

THEQUAKERS • PinkDandelion

QUANTUMTHEORY•JohnPolkinghorne

RACISM•AliRattansi

THE REAGANREVOLUTION • GilTroy

THEREFORMATION•PeterMarshall

RELATIVITY • RussellStannard

RELIGION INAMERICA•TimothyBeal

THE RENAISSANCE •JerryBrotton

RENAISSANCEART •GeraldineA.Johnson

ROMAN BRITAIN •PeterSalway

THEROMANEMPIRE

•ChristopherKelly

ROMANTICISM •MichaelFerber

ROUSSEAU • RobertWokler

RUSSELL • A. C.Grayling

RUSSIANLITERATURE •CatrionaKelly

THE RUSSIANREVOLUTION • S.A.Smith

SCHIZOPHRENIA •Chris Frith and EveJohnstone

SCHOPENHAUER •ChristopherJanaway

SCIENCE ANDRELIGION • ThomasDixon

SCOTLAND • RabHouston

SEXUALITY •VéroniqueMottier

SHAKESPEARE •GermaineGreer

SIKHISM • EleanorNesbitt

SOCIAL ANDCULTURAL

ANTHROPOLOGY •John Monaghan andPeterJust

SOCIALISM • MichaelNewman

SOCIOLOGY • SteveBruce

SOCRATES • C. C.W.Taylor

THESOVIETUNION•

StephenLovell

THE SPANISH CIVILWAR•HelenGraham

SPANISHLITERATURE • JoLabanyi

SPINOZA • RogerScruton

STATISTICS •David J.Hand

STUART BRITAIN •JohnMorrill

SUPERCONDUCTIVITY•StephenBlundell

TERRORISM • CharlesTownshend

THEOLOGY•DavidF.Ford

THOMAS AQUINAS •FergusKerr

TOCQUEVILLE •HarveyC.Mansfield

TRAGEDY • AdrianPoole

THE TUDORS • JohnGuy

TWENTIETH-CENTURYBRITAIN•KennethO.Morgan

THE UNITED

NATIONS • JussiM.Hanhimäki

THEU.S.CONCRESS•DonaldA.Ritchie

UTOPIANISM •LymanTowerSargent

THE VIKINGS • JulianRichards

WITCHCRAFT •MalcolmGaskill

WITTGENSTEIN • A.C.Grayling

WORLD MUSIC •PhilipBohlman

THE WORLD TRADEORGANIZATION •AmritaNarlikar

WRITING ANDSCRIPT • AndrewRobinson

AVAILABLESOON:

LATE ANTIQUITY •GillianClark

MUHAMMAD •JonathanA.Brown

GENIUS • AndrewRobinson

NUMBERS • Peter M.Higgins

ORGANIZATIONS •MaryJoHatch

VERYSHORTINTRODUCTIONS

VERY SHORTINTRODUCTIONS are foranyonewantingastimulatingand accessible way in to anewsubject.Theyarewrittenby experts, and have beenpublished in more than 25

languagesworldwide.

Theseriesbeganin1995,andnowrepresentsawidevarietyof topics in history,philosophy, religion, science,and the humanities. The VSILibrary now contains over200 volumes-a Very ShortIntroduction to everythingfrom ancient Egypt andIndian philosophy toconceptual art and

cosmology-and will continuetogrowtoalibraryofaround300titles.

VERY SHORTINTRODUCTIONSAVAILABLENOW

For more information visitourwebsitewww.oup.co.uk/general/vsi/

MedievalBritain:AVeryShortIntroduction

JohnGillinghamandRalphA.Griffiths

MEDIEVALBRITAIN

AVeryShortIntroduction

Contents

ListofIllustrationsListofMaps

1TheNormanKings

2ThePlantagenetKings

3 Politics, Law, andReligion in the EarlyMiddle

Ages

4 The Economy in theEarlyMiddleAges

5 EnglandatWar,1290–1390

6Wealth,Population,andSocial Change in the LaterMiddleAges

7StillatWar,1390–1490

8TowardsaNation

FurtherReading

Chronology

Genealogies of RoyalLines

Index

ListofIllustrations

1AerialphotographofOldSarum

Courtesy of Universityof CambridgeCommittee for AerialPhotography

2 Indenturewith seals,1220s

Courtesy of The PublicRecordOffice

3Two scenes from thelifeanddeathofThomasBecket

Courtesy of The BritishLibrary

4Cauterizing awoundwith red-hotinstruments,twelfthcentury

Courtesy of The Deanand Chapter of DurhamCathedral

5 The battle ofBouvines (1214)(MatthewParis)

Courtesy of TheMasterand Fellows of Corpus

Christi College,Cambridge

6 Magna Carta, 1215and1217

CourtesyofTheMansellCollection(top)andTheDean and Chapter ofDurham Cathedral(bottom)

7 The building of the

abbey of StAlbans,thirteenthcentury(MatthewParis)

Courtesy of The BritishLibrary

8A typicalWelshman,as seen fromWestminstertowards the endofthethirteenth

centuryCourtesy of The PublicRecordOffice

9 The tomb of KingEdward II,c.1331

Courtesy of A. F.Kersting

10 A knightpreparing for

the lists, c.1340(LuttrellPsalter)

Courtesy of The BritishLibrary

11 A Kentishpeasant, c.1390(Register ofArchbishopWilliamCourtenay)

Courtesy of His Grace

The Archbishop ofCanterbury and theTrustees of LambethPalaceLibrary

12 A ‘lost village’:MiddleDitchford(Glos.)

Courtesy of Universityof CambridgeCommittee for AerialPhotography

13 John BallpreachingtotherebelhostledbyWatTyler

Courtesy of The BritishLibrary

14KingRichardIII,c.1512–20

CourtesyofTheSocietyofAntiquaries

The publisher and theauthor apologize for anyerrors or omissions in theabove list. Ifcontactedtheywill be pleased to rectifythese at the earliestopportunity.

ListofMaps

1TheAnglo-Normanrealm1066–1154

2 The ContinentaldominionsofHenryII

3 Main roads in

medieval EnglandandWales

4 English militaryenterprises inWestern Europe inthe later MiddleAges

5 The pre-ReformationdiocesesofEnglandand Wales(thirteenthcentury)

Chapter1TheNormanKings

1066andAllThat

On Christmas Day 1066Duke William of Normandywas acclaimed king ofEngland in WestminsterAbbey. Itwasanelectrifyingmoment. The shouts ofacclamation – in English aswell as in French – alarmedthe Norman guards stationedoutside the abbey. Believingthat inside the churchsomething had gone horriblywrong, they set fire to theneighbouring houses. Half a

centurylater,aNormanmonkrecalledthechaosofthatday.‘As the fire spread rapidly,thepeopleinthechurchwerethrown into confusion andcrowds of them rushedoutside, some to fight theflames, others to take thechance to go looting. Onlythemonks, thebishopsandafew clergy remained beforethe altar. Though they wereterrified, they managed tocarry on and complete the

consecrationof thekingwhowastremblingviolently.’

Despite his victory atHastings, despite thesurrender of London andWinchester, William’spositionwasstillaprecariousone and he had good reasonto tremble. It was to take atleastanotherfiveyearsbeforehecould feel fairlyconfidentthat the conquest had been

completed. There wererisings against Norman rulein every year from 1067 to1070: in Kent, in the south-west, in the Welsh marches,in the Fenland, and in thenorth. The Normans had tolive like an army ofoccupation, living, eating,and sleeping together inoperationalunits.Theyhadtobuild castles – strong pointsfromwhicha fewmencoulddominate a subject

population. There may wellhave been no more than10,000Normanslivinginthemidst of a hostile populationofoneortwomillion.Thisisnot to say that every singleEnglishman actively opposedtheNormans.Unquestionablythere were many who co-operated with them; it wasthiswhichmade possible thesuccessful Norman take-overof so many Anglo-Saxoninstitutions. But there is

plenty of evidence to showthat the English resentedbecoming an oppressedmajorityintheirowncountry.The years of insecurity wereto have a profound effect onsubsequent history. Theymeant that England receivednot just a new royal familybutalsoanewrulingclass,anew culture and language.ProbablynootherconquestinEuropean history has hadsuchdisastrous consequences

forthedefeated.

1.AerialphotographofOldSarum:agraphic

illustrationoftheproblemsfacingthefirstpost-

Conquestgeneration.The

Normancathedralhuddlesclosetothecastle,itselfbuilttodefendagroupofmentoosmalltoneedthefullextentoftheprehistoric

ramparts

Almostcertainly thishadnotbeen William’s originalintention. In the early daysmany Englishmen were ableto offer their submission andretain their lands. Yet by

1086 something had clearlychanged. Domesday Book isa record of a land deeplymarked by the scars ofconquest. In 1086 therewereonly four surviving Englishlords of any account. Morethan 4,000 thegns had losttheir landsandbeenreplacedby a group of less than 200barons. A few of the newlandlords were Bretons andmen from Flanders andLorraine but most were

Normans. In the case of theChurchwe can put a date toWilliam’s anti-Englishpolicy. In 1070 he had someEnglish bishops deposed andthereafter appointed noEnglishman to eitherbishopric or abbey. Inmilitarymatters, theharryingofthenorthduringthewinterof 1069–70 also suggestsruthlessnessonanewscaleatabout this time. InYorkshirethismeantthatbetween1066

and 1086 land values fell byas much as two-thirds. Butwhenever and however itoccurred, it is certain that by1086 the Anglo-Saxonaristocracy was nomore anditsplacehadbeen takenbyanew Norman elite. Naturallythisnewelite retained itsoldlands on the Continent; theresult was that England andNormandy,oncetwoseparatestates, now became a singlecross-Channel political

community, sharing not onlya ruling dynasty, but also asingle Anglo-Normanaristocracy. Given theadvantagesofwatertransport,theChannelnomoredividedEnglandfromNormandythanthe Thames dividedMiddlesexfromSurrey.Fromnow on, until 1204, thehistories of England andNormandy were inextricablyinterwoven.

Since Normandy was aprincipality ruled by a dukewhoowedhomagetothekingofFrancethisalsomeantthatfrom now on ‘English’politics became part ofFrench politics. But theFrench connection wentdeeper still. The Normans,being Frenchmen, broughtwith them to England theFrench language and Frenchculture.Moreover,wearenotdealingwithasinglemassive

input of ‘Frenchness’ in thegeneration after 1066followed by a gradualreassertion of ‘Englishness’.The Norman Conquest of1066 was followed by anAngevinconquestof1153–4;although this did not involvethe settlement of a LoireValley aristocracy inEngland, the effect of thearrival of the court of HenryII and Eleanor of Aquitainewas to reinforce the

dominanceofFrenchculture.

Whereasin1066lessthan30per cent of Winchesterproperty owners had non-English names, by 1207 theproportion had risen to over80 per cent, mostly Frenchnames like William, Robert,and Richard. Thisreceptiveness to Continentalinfluence means that at thistime it is the foreignness of

English art that is moststriking. In ecclesiasticalarchitecture, for example, theEuropean terms‘Romanesque’ and ‘Gothic’describe the fashionablestyles much better than‘Norman’ and ‘EarlyEnglish’. Although churchesbuilt in England, likemanuscripts illuminated inEngland, often contain somerecognizably Englishelements, the designs which

thearchitectsandartistswereadapting came from abroad,sometimes from theMediterranean world (Italy,Sicily, or even Byzantium),usuallyfromFrance.ItwasaFrench architect, William ofSens, who was called in torebuild the choir ofCanterbury Cathedral afterthe fire of 1174. SimilarlyHenry III’s rebuilding ofWestminster Abbey washeavily influenced byFrench

models. Indeed so great wasthepre-eminenceofFranceinthefieldsofmusic,literature,and architecture, that Frenchbecame a truly internationalrather than just a nationallanguage, a language spoken– and written – by anyonewho wanted to considerhimself civilized. Thus, inthirteenth-century England,French became, if anything,even more important than ithad been before. From the

twelfth to the fourteenthcentury a well-educatedEnglishman was trilingual.Englishwould be hismothertongue; he would have someknowledge of Latin, and hewouldspeakfluentFrench.Inthis cosmopolitan societyFrench was vital. It was thepracticallanguageoflawandestatemanagementaswellasthe language of song andverse, of chanson andromance. The Norman

Conquest, in other words,ushered in a period duringwhich England, like thekingdom of Jerusalem, canfairly be described as a partof France overseas,Outremer; in political terms,it was a French colony(though not, of course, onethat belonged to the Frenchking)untiltheearlythirteenthcenturyandaculturalcolonythereafter.

In western and northernBritain,beyondthebordersofconquered England, laypeoples and kingdoms thatretainedtheirnativeidentitiesfor much longer. Asindependentpeoples living inwhat were, by and large, thepoorer parts of the island,they remained true to theirold ways of life. Onlygradually, during the courseof the twelfth and thirteenthcenturies, did theWelsh and

the Scots come to share inthis French-led Europe-wideprocess of culturalhomogenization.Thetimelagwas to have profoundconsequences. By the 1120sFrench-speaking Englishintellectuals such as thehistorian William ofMalmesbury were beginningto describe their Celticneighbours as barbarians, tolook upon them as lawlessand immoral savages,

pastoralpeopleswholivedinprimitive fashion beyond thepale of civilized society butwho occasionally launchedhorrifyingly violent raidsacross the borders. A newcondescending stereotypewas created, one which wasto becomedeeply entrenchedinEnglishassumptions.

One of the ways in whichEnglish – and to a lesser

extent Welsh and Scottish –societychangedinthisperiodcreates special problems forthe historian. This is thetremendous proliferation ofwritten records whichoccurred during the twelfthand thirteenth centuries.Many more documents thanever beforewerewritten andmany more were preserved.Whereas from the whole oftheAnglo-Saxonperiodabout2,000 writs and charters

survive, from the thirteenthcentury alone there areuncounted tens of thousands.Of course the 2,000 Anglo-Saxon documents were onlythe tip of the iceberg; manymoredidnotsurvive.Butthisis true also of the thirteenthcentury. It has, for example,been estimated that as manyas 8 million charters couldhave been produced forthirteenth-centurysmallholders and peasants

alone.Evenifthisweretobea rather generous estimate, itwouldstillbetruethatwholeclasses of the population,serfs for example, were nowconcernedwithdocuments inwaysthatpreviouslytheyhadnot been. Whereas in thereign of Edward theConfessor only the king isknown to have possessed aseal,inEdwardI’sreignevenserfswererequiredbystatutetohavethem.Atthecentreof

this development, and tosomeextentitsmotor,laytheking’s government. The kingpossessed permanentlyorganizedwritingoffices, thechancery, and then theexchequer too: they werebecoming busier and busier.In Henry III’s reign, we canmeasure the amount ofsealing wax which thechancery used. In the late1220s it was getting through3.63 lbperweek;by the late

1260s the amount had goneup to 31.9 lb per week. Notonly was the governmentissuingmore documents thanever before; it was alsosystematicallymaking copiesand keeping them. Here thekeydateis1199.Inthatyearthe chancery clerks began tokeep copies, on rolls ofparchment, of most of theletters – and certainly of allthe importantones–sentoutunder the great seal. The

survival of the chanceryenrolments means that from1199 historians know a greatdealmoreabouttheroutineofgovernmentthaneverbefore.

These are developments offundamental importance. Theproliferation of recordsinvolved a shift fromhabituallymemorizing thingsto writing them down. Itmeant that the whole

population was now, in asense, ‘participating inliteracy’; even if they couldnot themselves read theybecameaccustomedtoseeingday-to-day businesstransacted through themedium of writing. Clearlythisdevelopmentofa literatementality is closely linkedwith the cultural movementcommonly known as thetwelfth-century Renaissance.At first the power-houses of

the new learning all layabroad in the towns andcathedrals of Italy andFrance;butbythelatetwelfthcentury there were someschools of higher learning inEngland and by the 1220stwo universities, first atOxford and then atCambridge, had beenestablished. At Oxford therewere schools where mencould learn severelypracticalsubjects such as

conveyancing,administration,and elementary legalprocedure. And throughoutEnglandthesignspoint toanincreasingnumberof schoolsatalllevels.

But are these profounddevelopmentsassociatedwithrevolutionary changes inother aspects of socialorganization? Clearly, theproductionofallthesewritten

recordsmeans that society isbecoming more bureaucratic,but does this mean that therelationships between classesare being conserved or beingaltered? Is the economicsystem changing? Is thepoliticalsystemchanging?Orare both merely being moreelaboratelyrecorded?

2.Indenturewithseals.Thisindenturerecordsan

agreementmadeinthe1220sbetweenalordandthemenofFreistonandButterwick(Lincs.).Thefiftyorso

villagerswhosesealsareattachedclearlylivedinasocietywhichwasalreadythoroughlyaccustomedto

usingwrittenlegaldocuments

These are not questionswhich it is easy to answer.The cumulative nature of theevidence tends to deceive.For example, a particularform of relationship betweenmen may first be clearly

documented in the thirteenthcentury. But does this meanthat the relationship itselforiginatedinthatcentury?Orthat these types ofrelationship were first fixedinwriting then?Or only thatthisistheearliestperiodfromwhichtherelevantdocumentshappen to have survived? Acase in point is the fact thatthe earliest known examplesofatypeofdocumentknownas the ‘indenture of retainer’

date from the thirteenthcentury. The indenturerecords the termsonwhichamanwasengagedtoservehislord; it would normallyspecify his wages and, if itwas a long-service contract,hisretainingfee.Onthebasisof these documents,historians have decided thatthe ‘indentured retainer’ andthe‘contractarmy’bothcameinto existence towards theendof the thirteenth century,

and that they werecharacteristic of the laterMiddle Ages, the period of‘bastardfeudalism’.Yetthereis clear, though indirect,evidence that both contractarmiesandretainersreceivingfee and wages were inexistence at least as early as1100. One furthercomplication. Because theproliferation of documentsoccurred earlier and on amuch greater scale in

England than in Wales andScotland, it is very mucheasiertowriteaninstitutionalhistory of government, law,church, and economy forEngland than for the otherpartsofBritain.Butitshouldalso be borne in mind thatthroughout this period by farthegreaterpartoftheisland’spopulation lived in England.Before going any further, itwill be useful to give a briefoutline of the main events,

concentrating on those thatwere of greatest concern tothekingsofEngland.

WilliamI(1066–87)

After 1071, William’s holdonEnglandwasfairlysecure.TheWelshandtheScotsgavehim little trouble.

Scandinavian rulerscontinued to look uponEnglandwithacquisitiveeyesbut the ever-present threat ofanother Viking invasionnever quite materialized.From 1071 to the end of hisreign most of William’sattentionwastakenupbywarand diplomacy on theContinent.Normandywashishomeland and far morevulnerable to sudden attackthanwashis islandkingdom.

Several of William’sneighbours were alarmed byhisnewpowerandtookeveryopportunitytodiminishit.Attheir head were King PhilipofFrance, andCountFulk leRechin of Anjou. Their bestopportunities were providedby William’s eldest sonRobert(b.1054).Recognizedas the heir to Normandy aslong ago as 1066, he hadnever been allowed to enjoyeither money or power, and

from 1078 onwards hebecame involved in a seriesofintriguesagainsthisfather.In quarrels between the kingof France and the duke ofNormandy the naturalbattlefield was the Vexin, adisputedterritorylyingonthenorth bank of the Seinebetween Rouen and Paris.The county ofMaine, whichWilliam had conquered in1063,playedasimilarroleinthe hostilities between

NormandyandAnjou.Mainewas to remain a bone ofcontention for the next twogenerations; the Vexin formuchlongerstill(until1203).Thus already in William’sreign it is possible to see thepoliticalpatternwhichwastodominate the next century:the intermingling of familydissension and frontierdispute. In this context thecircumstances of William’sdeath are revealing. The

garrison of the Frenchfortress of Mantes made araid intoNormandy.WilliamretaliatedandwhilehistroopssackedMantes(July1087)hereceived the injury fromwhichhedied.Robertwasinrebellion at the time andchose to remain at the courtof King Philip, while hisyounger brother Williamdutifully, and pointedly, wasto be found in attendance athis father’s bedside. On 9

September 1087, William Idied.HisbodywascarriedtohisgreatchurchofStStephenat Caen. Towards the end ofhislifehehadgrownveryfatandwhentheattendantstriedto force the body into thestone sarcophagus, it burst,filling the churchwith a foulsmell. It was an unfortunateending to the career of anunusually fortunate andcompetentking.

WilliamII(1087–1100)

Whatever William’s lastwishesmay have been, therewasastrongpresumptionthattheeldestsonshouldhavehisfather’s patrimony, that isthose lands which the fatherhimself had inherited. Thus,despite his rebellion, Robert

succeeded toNormandy. Butaman’s acquisition, the landhe himself had obtainedwhether by purchase,marriage, or conquest, couldmore easily be used toprovideforothermembersofhisfamily.ThusEngland,theConqueror’s vast acquisition,was used to provide for hisyounger son, William.Naturally,Robert objected tothisandperhaps,ifithadnotbeen for his rebellion, he

would have succeeded toEnglandaswell.

What is clear is that thecustoms governing thesuccessiontothethronewerestill flexible; they could –should – be bent in order totake account of politicalrealities, for example thecharacters of the rivalcandidates. Thus thoseinfluential men, Archbishop

Lanfranc of Canterburyamong them,whodecided toacceptWilliamRufusaskingof England, may well havejudged thathewouldmakeabetter ruler than his elderbrother. In view of Robert’srecord both before and after1087 thiswould have been areasonable judgement, yetwithin a few months of hisaccession Rufus foundhimself opposed by apowerful coalition of great

barons, the magnates.According to the Anglo-Norman chronicler OrdericVitalls, the rebels’ objectivewas to reunite England andNormandy,notforthesakeofsome principle ofconstitutionallawbutinorderto ease their own politicalproblems.Theirdilemmawassummed up in the wordswhich Orderic placed in themouthofthegreatestofthem,OdoofBayeux.‘Howcanwe

give proper service to twodistant and mutually hostilelords? If we serve DukeRobert well we shall offendhis brother William and hewill deprive us of ourrevenues and honours inEngland.OntheotherhandifweobeyKingWilliam,DukeRobertwilldepriveusofourpatrimonies in Normandy.’Thiswas an argumentwhichappealed to powerful vestedinterests and could very

easilyhaveunseatedRufus.Ifthereweretobejustonerulerof the joint Anglo-Normanrealmthentheelderbrother’sclaim was difficult to deny.Fortunately for Rufus, hisbrother’scasewentalmostbydefault: Robert stayed inNormandy, leaving hissupporters in the lurch.Nonetheless the 1088 revolt,despite its swift collapse,does reveal just howprecariouswasthepositionof

a king of England who wasnotalsodukeofNormandy.

Taking the 48 years (1087–1135) of the reigns ofWilliam II and Henry I as awhole, it can be seen that inEnglandtherebellions(1088,1095, 1101, 1102) cluster inthe two periods (some 15years in all) when the kingwasnotduke,thatis1087–96and 1100–6. Obviously, it

wasnot in theking’s interestthat England and Normandyshould be under separaterulers. But neither was it intheinterestofthearistocracy.As Odo of Bayeux’s speechmakes plain, they had toomuch at risk to welcomeinstability. Whenever thecross-Channel kingdom didbreak up into its constituentparts,thisusheredinaperiodof conflict which was onlysettledwhenonerulerousted

the other. Thus the primaryconcernofakingofEnglandwas to win and holdNormandy.

In 1089 Rufus laid claim tothe duchy. With Englishsilver he was able to buysupport and he campaignedtherewith some success.Buthis hold on England stillremainedinsecure;hefacedaconspiracyin1095.Nextyear

the tension was resolved, atany rate temporarily, in atotallyunforeseeablemanner.The astonishing success ofPope Urban II’s preachingtour created a climate ofopinion in which thousandsdecided to joinanexpeditionaimed at recoveringJerusalem from theMuslims.For Robert Curthose thisoffered an honourable andexciting way out of hisincreasingly difficult

domesticpoliticalposition.Inordertoequiphimselfandhisretinueforthelongmarch,hepawned Normandy toWilliamfor10,000marks.

Thenewduke’snexttaskwasto recover Maine and theVexin, lost during Robert’sslack rule.By 1099, this hadbeen successfullyaccomplished. Rufus hadrestoredhis father’skingdom

toitsformerfrontiers;indeedin Scotland, by installingEdgar on the throne in 1097,he intervened moreeffectively than even hisfatherhaddone.

One early twelfth-centuryauthor, Geoffrey Gaimar,looked upon William as amodel ruler. But Gaimarwrote in French.Unfortunately for William’s

reputation, it was historywritten by churchmen and inLatinwhichwas to carry thegreater weight. Serious-minded ecclesiastics,accustomed to theconventional piety and soberdiscretion of his father’scourt, were appalled byRufus’s, by its ostentatiousextravagance, by its gaiety,and by the new fashions –longhairforexample–whichseemed to them to be both

effeminate and licentious.Rufus never married.According to the WelshChronicle of Princes, ‘heused concubines and becauseof that diedwithout an heir’.He may have been scepticalof the claims of religion;undoubtedly he treated theChurch as a rich corporationwhich needed soaking. Hewas rarely in a hurry toappoint bishops and abbots,forduringvacancieshecould

help himself to the Church’srevenues. In carrying outthese profitable policiesRufusreliedontheingeniousaid of a quick-witted andworldly clerk, RanulfFlambard, whom heeventually made bishop ofDurham.

Above all Rufus’s reputationhassufferedbecausein1093,when he thought he was

dying, he appointed a saintlyscholar Anselm of Bec asarchbishop of Canterbury(after having kept the seevacant for four years). Whatmade this appointment sodisastrous from William’spoint of view was the factthat it occurred at a timewhen a European movementfor Church reform – theGregorian reform – hadcreated a controversialatmosphere in which holy

men were only too likely tobecome political radicals. In1095Williamcalledacouncilat Rockingham to deal withthe matters in disputebetweenhimandAnselm.Tothe consternation of all,ArchbishopAnselmappealedto Rome, arguing that asarchbishop of Canterbury hecould not be judged in asecular court.The rise of thePapacy in the second half ofthe eleventh century,with its

claim to the first loyalty ofprelates, had brought a newand disturbing element on tothe political stage. Ifchurchmen were to believethat their obligations toGod,as defined by the vicar of StPeter, were to override theirduty to the king, then thecustomary structure of theworld would have beenturnedupsidedown.

Anselm’scaseinfavourofanautonomous spiritualhierarchywasawellreasonedone; on his own premises hehad the better of theargument. But Rufus had agood case too; not only that,hehadpower–pittedagainstthe material resourcesavailable toamasterfulking,a scholarly archbishop ofCanterbury was in a veryweak position indeed.William continued to harass

the archbishop, and nevershowedanysympathyforhisattempts to reform theChurch. Eventually Anselmcould bear it no longer. In1097 he sailed from Dover,leaving the estates ofCanterbury to be taken intothe king’s hand. In the shortrunthekinghadgainedfromthe quarrel. In 1100 heenjoyedtherevenuesofthreebishoprics and 12 abbeys.Norwasthereasyetanysign

that the arguments hadundermined men’s belief inthe awesome powers of ananointed king. Even Eadmer,the Canterbury monk whowrote a Life of Anselm,remarked of Rufus that ‘thewind and the sea seemed toobey him’. Indeed, Eadmerwent on, ‘in war and in theacquisition of territory heenjoyedsuchsuccessthatyouwould think thewholeworldsmiling upon him’.Whether,

in reality, William II’spositionin1100wasquitesostrong is another matter; itsuited moralistic chroniclersto portray him as a self-confident, boastful king whowasstruckdownjustwhenheseemed to be at the verypinnacle of success. Duringthesummerof1100everyonemust have known that thepeaceful interlude of DukeRobert’s absence was aboutto end. The crusader was on

his way home, accompaniedbyarichwifeandbaskingintheprestigeduetoamanwhohad fought his way into theHoly City. When Curthosereclaimed his inheritance,who could tell what wouldhappen or what line theAnglo-Norman magnateswould take? As it happened,on 2 August 1100 a huntingaccident in the New Forestbrought the life of thisforceful and much-maligned

king to an abrupt end. Also,as it happened, William’syounger brother was in theNew Forest on the day thekingdied.

HenryI(1100–35)

As soon as he knew Rufuswasdead,Henrymoved fast.

He rode to Winchester andtook possession of thetreasury. Then he wentstraight on to Westminsterwhere he was crowned on 5August. This speed of actionhaspromptedspeculationthatHenry knew that his brotherwasgoing todie, thathehad‘arranged the accident’. Butno contemporary makes thecharge and if Henry hadplanned so cold-blooded acrime his timing is likely to

have been different. Theimpending war betweenRufusandCurthosecouldbeexpected to end with thedefeat and perhaps theeliminationofoneofthem.Inother words a delayedassassination would haveopenedup to theassassin theprospect of obtaining bothEnglandandNormandy.Asitwas,Rufus’sdeathinAugust1100meantthatHenryhadtoact with phenomenal speed

merelytoseizecontrolofjustone of the two parts of theAnglo-Normanrealm.Amancapableofwaitingforsolongbeforehestruckwouldsurelyhave waited a year or twolonger.

A few weeks later, Robertarrived back in Normandy.Henryhadtopreparetomeetthe inevitable invasion. Hispolicywas tobuysupportby

granting favours and wide-ranging concessions. Thiswas a policy proclaimed onthe day of his coronation,when he issued a charter ofliberties denouncing hisbrother’soppressivepracticesand promising goodgovernment. On the otherhand the urgent need toorganize his defences meantthatHenrycouldnotaffordtocause too much confusion.This was a time for gestures

andmanifestos,butitwasnotthe moment to overturn awhole regime. The reality ofthe situation was that hiselder brother had left him aready-made court andadministrationandHenryhadlittle choice but to take themover.

WhenDukeRobert landedatPortsmouth in July 1101,manyofthegreatestbaronsin

England, led by Robert ofBellme and his brothers,flocked to his side. ButRufus’s court circle, Robertof Meulan at their head,remained loyal to Henry; soalso did the English Church.Both sides drew back andnegotiated. Henry was tokeep England and pay hisbrotherapensionof£2,000ayear.

Having survived the crisis of1101, Henry set aboutensuring that it would notrecur. The essential first stepwas the overthrow of thehouse of Montgomery(Bellême). In 1102 hecapturedRobertofBellême’schief strongholds in theWelsh marches and thenbanishedhim.Twoyearslaterhe confiscated the lands ofWilliamofMortain.ButEarlsRobert and William, like

others in their position,possessed in their Normanpropertiesabase fromwhichto organize the recovery oftheir English lands. ByperpetuatingtheseparationofEngland and Normandy thetreaty of 1101 had ensuredthe continuance of politicalinstability. So in a rerun ofthe history of the previousreign we find a king ofEngland, first on thedefensive, thengoingover to

the attack. At the battle ofTinchebray (1106) the issuewas decided. Duke Roberthimself was captured andspent the last 28years of hislifeashisbrother’sprisoner.

Although in thefirstyearsofhis reign Henry waspreoccupied with Normanaffairs, hewas not as free toconcentrate on them as hewouldhaveliked.Traditional

royal rights over the Churchwere threatened by the newideas associated with theGregorian reformmovement.The reformers did not onlywish to purify themoral andspiritual lifeof the clergy; inordertodothis,theybelievedthat it was also necessary tofree theChurch from secularcontrol. The most hatedsymbolofthiscontrolwaslayinvestiture, a ceremony inwhichanewabbotorbishop

received the ringandstaffofoffice from the hands of thesecular prince who hadappointed him. Although thefirst papal decree against layinvestiturehadbeenissuedaslong ago as 1059 and moreprohibitions had beenpublished since, no one inEngland seems to have beenawareof their existenceuntilAnselm returned in theautumn of 1100. While inexile he had learned of the

papal attitude to layinvestiture.Thus although hehimselfhadbeen investedbyRufus in 1093, he nowrefused either to do homageto Henry or to consecratethose prelates whom Henryhad invested.Thisplaced theking in a difficult position.Bishops and abbots weregreat landowners and keyfigures in central and localadministration; he neededtheirassistanceandhadtobe

sure of their loyalty. On theother hand, unlike Rufus, hewas unwilling to provoke aquarrel,soforyearshefoundit more convenient topostpone the problem ratherthan try to solve it.Notuntil1107wasthemattersettled.

Henry renounced layinvestiture, but prelates weretocontinue todohomagefortheir fiefs. In practice, the

king’swishescontinuedtobethe decisive factor in themaking of bishops. To someextent, it can be said thatHenry gave up the form butpreserved the reality ofcontrol.WhenAnselmdiedin1109 he kept the see ofCanterbury vacant for fiveyears. Yet he had lostsomethingandheknewit. Inthe fiercewar of propagandawhich accompanied the‘Investiture Contest’ the

Gregorians had insisted thatthe king was a layman,nothingmore,andassuchhewasinferior toallpriests,forpriests were concerned withthe soul and the king onlywith the body. The Churchcould no longer tolerate theold idea that anointed kingswere sacreddeputiesofGod.In giving up lay investitureHenry was acknowledgingthe secular nature of hisoffice. It was an important

moment in the history ofkingship.

Map1.TheAnglo-Normanrealm1066–1154

Once Normandy had beenconqueredanda compromisesolution found to theinvestiture dispute, Henry’smainconcernwas toholdontowhat he had.Although hepromoted some ‘new men’,he knew that politicalstability depended on hiscultivation of good relations

with the aristocracy. InOrderic’s words, ‘he treatedthemagnateswithhonourandgenerosity, adding to theirwealth and estates, and byplacatingtheminthisway,hewon their loyalty.’ A directthreat to Henry’s positioncame from the claim ofCurthose’s young son,William Clito (b. 1102) thathe, not Henry, was therightful duke of Normandy.Thisrivalclaim,coupledwith

Normandy’s long landfrontier,meantthattheduchyremainedthemostvulnerablepartofhisempire.After1106Henry spent more than halfthe rest of his reign there inopposition to the traditionalenemies of the Normandukes, notably Louis VI ofFrance (king 1108–37), andFulk V of Anjou (count1109–28). He organized aprotective ring of alliances –no less than eight of his

illegitimate daughters weremarried to neighbouringprinces, from Alexander ofScotland in the north toRotroucountofPercheinthesouth.Thisdiplomaticpatternlends some slight credibilityto William of Malmesbury’sassertion that for Henry sexwas a matter not of pleasurebut of policy. The end resultof all this activity was thatHenry kept Normandy andforthisreason,sinceitturned

out to be a struggle whichonly maintained the statusquo,historianshavenotbeeninclined to take it veryseriously. But for Henry itwas a very serious businessindeed, a war for survivalwhichatleastonce,in1118–19, he came perilously closetolosing.

The preoccupation with thedefence of Normandy was a

seriousmatterinEnglandtoo,and not just for the greatlandowners who held estateson the Continent. Castles,garrisons,diplomacy,andwarallcostagreatdealofmoney.Theconnectionisspeltoutinthe Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’sentry for 1118. ‘King HenryspentthewholeofthisyearinNormandy on account of thewarwith the king of France,count ofAnjou and count ofFlanders … England paid

dearly for this in numeroustaxes from which there wasnoreliefallyear.’Theking’slong absences and his urgentneed for money were themotors behind the increasingelaborationandsophisticationof the machinery ofgovernment. While the kingwas away, England wasadministered by a vice-regalcommittee.Twice a year thiscommittee met ‘at theexchequer’, that is, it met to

audit the accounts of thesheriffs over the famouschequered cloth.Most of theroutine administrative work,inparticular thecollectionofrevenue, was supervised byRoger of Salisbury, a manwho, in contrast to theflamboyant Flambard, seemsto have been the archetypalbureaucrat, competent anddiscreet.

The death of William, hisonly legitimate son, in 1120in the wreck of the WhiteShip brought Henry’s wholecarefully contrived edificetumbling down. From thenon, the succession problemdominated the politics of thereign.Lessthanthreemonthsafter William’s death, Henrymarried a new wife but theheir sodesperatelyhoped forwas never born. So althoughHenry is said to have

acknowledged more thantwenty bastards, he wassurvived by only onelegitimate child, his daughterMatilda. When her husband,Emperor Henry V ofGermany, died in 1125,Henry recalled her to hiscourt and made the baronssweartoacceptherasheirtothe Anglo-Norman realm.Thenin1127Henryreceiveda fresh shock. William Clitowas recognized as count of

Flanders. If he were able toemploy the wealth ofFlanders in pursuit of hisclaim toNormandy, then theoutlook for his uncle wasblack indeed. At this criticaljuncture Henry approachedFulk V of Anjou with aproposal for a marriagealliancebetweenMatildaandFulk’ssonandheir,GeoffreyPlantagenet. In June 1128Matilda, somewhat againsther will, was married to the

14-year-old youth.Unquestionably, Count Fulkhad scored a diplomatictriumph:thefirstvitalstepintheAngevin take-over of theAnglo-Normanrealm.

By 1135 Henry I wasquarrelling openly andviolently with Geoffrey andMatilda. This had the effectof driving those magnateswhowereloyaltoHenryinto

opposition to the Angevins.Whentheoldkingdied,thesemagnates would inevitablyfind it difficult to come toterms with his designatedheirs. In this sense it wasHenryhimselfwhoprovokedthe succession dispute whichfollowed his death. Even atthe end of his life he stillwantedhisdaughterandson-in-lawtosucceed,buthehadbeen unable to bring himselfto take the measures which

would have enabled them todo so. Henry I had been anoutstandingly able andsuccessful king, the masterpoliticianofhisage,butevenhe failed to cope with thetensions of the successionquestion. It was for thisreason that Henry ofHuntingdon portrayed Henryasakinginapermanentstateof anxiety. ‘Each of histriumphs only made himworry lest he lose what he

had gained; therefore thoughhe seemed to be the mostfortunate of kings, hewas intruththemostmiserable.’

Stephen(1135–54)

When the news came thatHenry I lay dying, the oldking’s chosen heirs were in

theirowndominions,eitherinAnjou or in Maine. But hisnephew, Stephen of Blois,was in his county ofBoulogne.Fromthere, itwasbut a day-trip to the south-eastofEngland.ThisaccidentofgeographygaveStephenahead start. Having firstsecured the support of theLondoners, he then rode toWinchester, where hisbrother, Henry of Blois, wasbishop.WithHenry’shelphe

obtained both the treasury atWinchester, and Roger ofSalisbury’s acceptance of hisclaimtobeking.Thenallthatremainedwastopersuadethearchbishop of Canterbury toanointhim.Thiswasdonebyarguing that the oath toMatilda–which theyhadallsworn – was void because ithad been exacted by force,and by spreading a fictitiousstory about the old king’sdeathbedchangeofmind.On

22 December 1135, Stephenwas crowned and anointedkingatWestminster.

The political structure of theAnglo-Norman realm meantthat once Stephen had beenrecognized as king inEngland, he was in a verystrong position in Normandyas well. From then on, theNorman barons could givetheir allegiance to someone

elseonlyat theriskof losingtheir English estates. Aboveall, those with most to losefelt that they had to supportStephen. So, right from thestartoftheircampaigntowintheir inheritance, GeoffreyandMatildafoundthemselvesopposed by the mostpowerful magnates of theAnglo-Normanstate.

In the west the news of

Henry’s death precipitated agreat revolt against thosecolonizers who had beenturningWales into what onecontemporary called ‘asecond England’, but inEngland itself the first twoandahalfyearsofStephen’sreign passed peacefullyenough: indeed they wererather more trouble-free thantheopeningyearsofbothhispredecessors’ reigns hadbeen. The first serious blow

came in the summer of 1138when Robert of Gloucesterdecided to join his half-sister’s cause. Robert’sdefectionnotonlymeantthatStephen lost control of someimportant strong points inNormandy, it was also asignalthattheAngevinswereon the point of carrying thestruggle to England. AsStephen waited for the blowto fall he began to lose hisgrip on the situation, above

all in the north where KingDavidIofScotlandtookoverNorthumbria.

He offended his brotherHenryofBloisbynotmakinghim archbishop ofCanterbury; he arrested threeinfluential ‘civil service’bishops, including Roger ofSalisbury, and thus enabledHenry of Blois to claim thatecclesiastical liberties had

beeninfringed.Intheautumnof1139,whentheEmpress–as Matilda was commonlyknown – landed at Arundeland seemed to be inStephen’s grasp, he allowedher to go free to joinRobertofGloucesteratBristol.Fromnow on there were two rivalcourts in England. Had heimprisoned her, the cause ofher husband and sons wouldhavegainedyetmoresupport.The fact that Matilda was a

womanhadgivenStephenhisopportunity, but it also, in achivalrousage,presentedhimwithinsolubleproblems.

In February 1141 Stephenrashly accepted battle atLincoln, and fought onbravely when he might haveescaped. As a result, he wascapturedandput inprison inBristol. Henry of Blois, nowactingaspapallegate,openly

went over to the Empress’sside and in the summer shewasabletoenterLondon.Butshe spurned the peace termsworkedoutby the legateandoffended the Londoners byher tactless behaviour.WhenStephen’s queen, Matilda ofBoulogne, advanced towardsthe city, the Londoners tookup arms and drove theEmpress out. Thus, theplanned coronation atWestminster never took

place. Matilda never becamequeen of England. A fewmonths later Robert ofGloucester was captured andsincehewas themainstayofher party, Matilda had toagree to an exchange ofprisoners:StephenforRobert.The Empress had thrownaway a won position;England remained a dividedcountry.

In Normandy, events hadtakenaverydifferentcourse.Geoffrey of Anjou stayedbehind to maintain thepressureon theduchyand tolookafterhisowninterestsinAnjou.Aseriesofcampaignsfrom 1141 to 1144 endedwith the surrender of Rouenand Geoffrey’s formalinvestiture as duke. But thecount of Anjou’s single-minded concentration on theconquestofNormandy led to

him turning his back onEngland.

Here the civil war settleddown into a kind of routine.Neither side could makemuch headway at a timewhen theartofwar revolvedaround castles, and thedefenders generally held theadvantage. In October 1147Robert of Gloucester died.Disheartened, the Empress

left England early in 1148,nevertoreturn.

In 1150 Geoffrey of AnjouassociatedhissonHenrywithhim in the ruleof theduchy.Next year this arrangementwas legitimized when LouisVII (king of France 1137–80), in returnforconcessionsin the Vexin, decided torecognize Henry as duke. Atthis point, it must have

lookedasthoughtheoldlinkbetween England andNormandy had at last beenbroken. Yet neither sidewouldgiveup its claimsandthough there seemed to be astalemate in England, on theContinentthesituationturnedout to be remarkably fluid.Geoffrey of Anjou died, stillunder 40, leaving his eldestson in control of bothNormandy and Anjou. InMarch 1152 Louis VII

divorcedhiswife,EleanorofAquitaine. Eight weeks latershe married Henry, who inconsequence could now addcontrol of the vast duchy ofAquitaine to his otherContinentalpossessions.

Henry’smarriagewasagreatcoup – yet it also gave freshhope to Stephen. Louis VIIorganizedagrandcoalitionofallHenry’srivals.Asaresult,

the summer of 1152 sawHenryfightingonfour frontsat once – in Aquitaine, inNormandy, against rebels inAnjou,andagainstStepheninEngland. One well-informedNorman chronicler tells usthat the betting was thatHenrywould not survive.Atthis juncture, his decision tosail toEnglandandcarry thefight to Stephen impressedcontemporaries by its sheeraudacity. Even so there was

littleHenrycoulddotobreakthe stalemate inEngland andhis whole position was stillprecariously overextendedwhen the death of Stephen’sheir,Eustace,inAugust1153transformed everything.Stephen’s second son,William, had never expectedtobekingandsothewaywasopened for a negotiatedsettlement.

Thebaronsonbothsideshadlong been anxious for peace.Their landed estates madethem too vulnerable to theravagesofwarforthemtobein favour of protractedhostilities.At times they hadignored the wishes of thechief protagonists and madelocal truces of their own. Sothere was a general sense ofrelief when Stephen andHenrybowedtothewishesoftheiradvisers.

By the treaty ofWestminster(December 1153) it wasagreed that Stephen shouldholdthekingdomforlifeandthatheshouldadoptHenryashis heir. William was toinherit all Stephen’s baroniallands.This,inessence,wasarepeat of the peace termsproposed by Henry of Bloisin1141.Matilda’sinabilitytobe magnanimous in victory

had cost the country another12yearsofcivilwar.Nowatlast Stephen could ruleunchallenged, but he was atired man and did not livelong to enjoy it. On 25October 1154 he died andwasburiedby thesideofhiswife and elder son in themonastery they had foundedatFaversham.

Stephen had been a

competent army commanderand a brave knight – butperhaps too gallant for hisown good. He was a moreattractive character than anyoftheNormankings–buthelacked their masterfulness.Without it he was unable todominate either his court orhis kingdom. Moreover hespent very little time inNormandy; only one visit, in1137,duringhisentire reign.This stands in marked

contrast to the itineraries ofhispredecessorsand, inviewof the ‘cross-Channelstructure’ of the Anglo-Norman aristocracy, wascertainly a mistake. In thissensetherulerfromthehouseof Blois can be said to havefailed because he was too‘English’ a king to realizethatEnglandwas only a partofagreaterwhole.

Chapter2ThePlantagenetKings

HenryII(1154–89)

Henry took over withoutdifficulty; it was the firstundisputed succession to theEnglish throne for over ahundred years.As lord of anempire stretching from theScottish border to thePyrenees he was potentiallythe most powerful ruler inEurope, richer even than theemperor and completelyovershadowing the king ofFrance, the nominal suzerainof his Continental

possessions. AlthoughEngland provided him withgreatwealthaswellasaroyaltitle, the heart of the empirelay elsewhere, in Anjou, thelandofhisfathers.

InEngland his first taskwasto make good the lossessuffered during Stephen’sreign.By1158 thishadbeenachieved. The most dramaticexample came in 1157when

he used diplomatic pressureto force the young king ofScotland, Malcolm IV, torestore Cumberland,Westmorland, andNorthumbria to the EnglishCrown. In Wales, however,Henry found in Owain ofGwynedd and Rhys ofDeheubarth two well-established princes whom itwas impossible to browbeat.In 1157 and 1165, force ofarms proved equally

unavailing in the face of acombination of Welshguerrilla tacticsand torrentialsummer rain. After 1165Henry’sattitudetotheWelshprinces was much moreaccommodating. As early as1155 he had toyed with theidea of conquering Ireland.Not until 1169–70, however,didthemoveintoIrelandtakeplace, first by some lordsfrom the Welsh march andthen (in 1171–2) by Henry

himself. As the long delaymakes plain, in the king’seyesthereweremattersmuchmore urgent than the Irishquestion.

Out of the 34 years of hisreign, Henry II spent 21 onthe Continent. Socially andculturally England was a bitof a backwater comparedwith the French parts of theAngevin dominion. The

prosperous communitieswhich lived in the valleys oftheSeine,Loire,andGaronneriversystemswerecentresoflearning, art, architecture,poetry, andmusic. Aquitaineand Anjou produced two ofthe essential commodities ofmedieval commerce: wineand salt. These could beexchanged for English clothand this trade must havebrought great profit to theprince, who ruled over both

producersandconsumers.Asduke of Normandy, duke ofAquitaine, and count ofAnjou, Henry had inheritedtheclaimsofhispredecessorstolordshipoverneighbouringterritories. These claims ledto intervention in Nantes(1156)wherehe installedhisbrother, Geoffrey, as count;an expedition againstToulouse in 1159 whichresulted in the capture ofCahors and the Quercy; the

recovery of the NormanVexinin1160;andfinally,asa resultof repeated invasionsafter 1166, the occupation ofBrittany and the installationofhissonGeoffreyasduke.

Yetironicallyitisnotforhissuccesses that Henry is bestremembered, but for hisdubiouspartinthemurderofThomasBecket.InJune1162Becket was consecrated

archbishop of Canterbury. Inthe eyes of respectablechurchmen Becket, who hadbeen chancellor since 1155,did not deserve the highestecclesiasticalpostintheland.He set out to prove, to anastonishedworld,thathewasthe best of all possiblearchbishops. Right from thestart, hewent out of hiswayto oppose the king who,chieflyoutof friendship,hadpromoted him. Inevitably it

was not long before Henrybegan to react like a manbetrayed. In the mid-twelfthcentury Church–Staterelations bristled withproblemswhichcouldbe,andnormally were, shelved bymen of goodwill but whichcould provide a field-day formenwhoweredetermined toquarrel.

Map2.TheContinentaldominionsofHenryII

Henry chose the question of‘criminous clerks’ as theissue on which to settleaccountswithhisarchbishop.Like many laymen, Henryresented the way in whichclerks who committedfelonies could escape capitalpunishment by claiming trialinanecclesiasticalcourt.Ata

council held at Westminsterin October 1163 Henrydemanded that criminousclerksshouldbeunfrockedbythe Church and handed overto the lay courts forpunishment.Inopposingthis,Becket carried his episcopalcolleagueswithhimbutwhenPopeAlexanderIIIaskedhimto adopt a more conciliatoryline, Henry summoned acounciltoClarendon(January1164). He presented the

bishopswithaclearstatementoftheking’scustomaryrightsover the Church – theConstitutions of Clarendon –and required from them apromise to observe thesecustoms ingood faith.Takenbysurprise,Becketarguedfortwo days and then gave in.Butnosoonerhadtherestofthe bishops followed hisexamplethanBecketrepentedof his weakness. Thoroughlyexasperated, Henry now

decidedtodestroyBecket.Hesummoned him before theroyal court to answertrumped-up charges. Thearchbishop was found guiltyand sentenced to theforfeiture of his estates. In ahopelesspositionBecket fledacross the Channel andappealed to the pope. Bytaking a stand on principleand then wavering, Beckethad reduced the EnglishChurchtoconfusion.

3.TwoscenesfromthelifeanddeathofThomasBecket.(left)HenryII

listenstocomplaintsaboutBecket’scontinuing

intransigence.(right)The

archbishop’smurder

With Becket in exile Henryconcentrated on moreimportantmattersforthenextfive years: Brittany wasconquered and the Englishjudicial system overhauled.Then in1169 thequestionofthe coronation of the heir tothe throne, PrinceHenry, ledto the interminablenegotiations between king,

pope, and archbishop beingtreated as a matter ofurgency. In 1170 Becketreturned to Englanddetermined to punish thosewho had taken part in theyoung king’s coronation.HisenemieslostnotimeintellingHenry of the archbishop’sostentatious behaviour. ‘Willno one rid me of thisturbulent priest?’ Henry’sheated words were taken alltoo literally by four of his

knights. Anxious to win theking’sfavour,theyrushedoffto Canterbury; and there, on29 December 1170, Becketwas murdered in his owncathedral. The deed shockedChristendom and securedBecket’s canonization inrecord time. In popularmemory thearchbishopcametosymbolizeresistancetotheoppressive authority of theState, but in reality everyonewasbetteroffwithhimoutof

the way. Once the storm ofprotest had died down itbecame apparent that theking’sholdonhisvastempirehadinnowaybeenshakenbytheBecketcontroversy.Intheearly 1170s Henry stood attheheightofhispower.

By this date Henry II hadalready decided that after hisdeath his dominions shouldbe partitioned between his

three eldest sons. Henry wasto have his father’sinheritance, namely Anjou,Normandy, and England;Richard was to have hismother’s inheritance,Aquitaine; Geoffrey was tohavetheacquisition,Brittany.For the moment there wasnothing for John but later, in1185, he was granted hisfather’s other majoracquisition, Ireland. By thenHenryII’spartitionplanshad

already run into difficulties.The trouble was that theyaroused expectations which,while he retained all realpower in his own hands, hecould not satisfy. Thus from1173 onwards Henry wasplagued by rebellious sons.The rebels, moreover, couldalways count on a warmwelcome at the court of theking of France. After 1180this was a serious matter forin that year the mild-

mannered Louis VII wassucceededbyhissonPhilipIIAugustus, an unscrupulouspolitician determined todestroy the Angevin Empire.Thedeathsoftwoofhissons,the young King Henry in1183 and Geoffrey in 1186,ought to have simplifiedHenry’s problems, but thiswas offset by the old king’sobvious preference for John,a preference which alarmedRichard.Analliancebetween

Richard and Philip broughtHenry to his knees and,defeated, theoldkingdiedatChinonon6July1189.

Only in the lastweeksofhislifehad the taskof rulinghisimmense territories been toomuch for Henry. He rodeceaselessly from one cornerof his empire to another,almost giving an impressionofbeingeverywhereatonce–

an impression that helped tokeepmenloyal.Althoughthecentral government offices,chamber, chancery, andmilitary household travelledaround with him, the sheersize of the empire inevitablystimulated the furtherdevelopment of localizedadministrations which coulddeal with routine matters ofjustice and finance in hisabsence.Thus inEngland,aselsewhere, government

becameincreasinglycomplexand bureaucratic. Thisdevelopment, taken togetherwith Henry’s interest inrational reform, has led tohim being regarded as thefounder of the Englishcommon law, and as a greatand creative king, but in hisown eyes these weremattersof secondary importance. Tohimwhatreallymatteredwasfamily politics and he diedbelieving that he had failed.

But forover30yearshehadsucceeded.

RichardI(1189–99)

Richard’salliancewithPhilipAugustus meant that hisposition as heir to all hisfather’s rights anddominionswas unchallengeable. John

remained lord of Ireland; intime, Brittany would belongtoGeoffrey’sposthumoussonArthur, now two years old.The rest was at Richard’sdisposal.

But Richard had no wish tostaylonginEngland.HehadbeenmadedukeofAquitainein 1172 and since then hadspentmost of his life on theContinent. Even after he

became king of England hewaswell aware that he ruledmuchmore than England. Inconsequence he, like hisfather,hadwiderinterestsandgreater responsibilities. Oneaspect of this was theassistance he gave to thekingdom of Jerusalem, akingdom ruled by a daughterof the junior branch of thehouse ofAnjou nowmarriedto one of his Aquitanianvassals. In November 1187,

assoonasheheard thenewsof Saladin’s overwhelmingvictory at Hattin, Richardtookthecross.Delayedbyhisinvolvement in the familyquarrels at the end of hisfather’s reign, he was nowdetermined to leave for theEastassoonashehadraisedenough money and arrangedfor the secure government ofall his dominions during aprolongedabsence.

In July 1190 he and PhilipAugustussetoutontheThirdCrusade. Not until March1194 did Richard again setfoot on English soil. In themeantimehehadtakenbothafleetandanarmytotheotherend of the Mediterranean.Although unable to recaptureJerusalem, he achieved anastonishing amount against agreat opponent, Saladin. Oncrusade Richard tackled andsolved far greater logistical

problems than everconfronted other warrior-kings of England,William I,Edward III, orHenryV.Thetreaty of Jaffa which henegotiated in 1192 enabledthe crusader states to survivefor another century. Uniqueamong the kings ofEngland,Richard I played an activeleading role in the greateventsofworldhistory.

During his absence oncrusade there had been somedisturbances in England in1191 but his contingencyplans restored stablegovernment. King Philip,after his own return toFrance, tried to takeadvantage of Richard’scontinued absence, butwithout success. If Richardhad returned fromcrusadeashe expected in January 1193he would have found his

empireintact.

The damage was done whilehe was held captive inGermany.Hestayedinprisonfor more than a year(December 1192–February1194) and – for all anyoneknew in 1193 – might havehad to stay there muchlonger.

4.Cauterizingawoundwithred-hotinstruments,whichanassistantisseenheatinginthelowerpartof

thedrawing.(Fromatwelfth-centurymedicaltreatisegivenbyadoctor,MasterHerbert,toDurham

cathedralpriory.)

Even in these inauspiciouscircumstances Richard’sagents in England were able

to contain his youngerbrother’s treacherous revolt.Thereal lossesweresufferedontheContinent,inparticularin Normandy where Philipoverran the Vexin and cameclose to capturing Rouenitself.

Richard was released inFebruary 1194 after paymentof 100,000 marks, the firsttwo-thirds of the king’s

ransom.After a brief visit toEngland (March–May 1194)he returned to the Continentand devoted the next fiveyears to the hard grind ofrecovering the territory lostso rapidly while he was inprison. By the end of 1198Richard’s skilful diplomacy,fine generalship, and hisgreater resources meant thathe had succeeded inrecapturingalmosteverythingthat had been lost. Then, in

April 1199, Richard died astheresultofawoundsufferedat the siege of Chalus-Chabrol (near Limoges)where he was engaged insuppressingarebellionledbythe count of Angoulême andthe viscount of Limoges. Inthe Angevin–Capetianstruggle this was to be thedecisiveturning-point.

One of the marks of

Richard’s greatness had beenhis ability to chooseministers, above all, HubertWalter in England. Asjusticiar, archbishop ofCanterbury, and papal legateHubert Walter stood forharmonious co-operationbetweenking andChurch. InEngland, as in the otherprovinces of the AngevinEmpire, Richard’s longabsences meant thecontinuing development,

under Walter’s supervision,of an effective machinery ofcentralgovernment.Fromthepoint of view of Richard’ssubjects, this meantincreasingly heavy taxation,but there is no evidence tosuggest that the financialburdens of war had broughtthe Angevin Empire to thepointofeconomiccollapse.

John(1199–1216)

Richard left no legitimatechildren, and when he diedthe different parts of theAngevin Empire chosedifferent successors. Thebarons of England andNormandy opted for John;Anjou, Maine, and Tourainepreferred Arthur of Brittany,

now 12 years old; Aquitainecontinued to be held – onJohn’s behalf – by hismother,Eleanor(d.1204).ByMay 1200 John had oustedArthur and had establishedhimself as lord of all theAngevin dominions, thoughat a heavy price – heabandoned his allies and heceded the Vexin and Evreuxto King Philip (treaty of LeGoulet, January 1200). Laterthat year his first marriage

was annulled and hemarriedIsabellaofAngoulême.Therewere great strategicadvantagestobegainedfrommarrying the heiress toAngoulême and had Johngiven her fiancé, Hugh ofLusignan, adequatecompensation, all might yethave been well. As it was,thismarriage set inmotion atrain of events which led toHugh appealing to the courtof France and, in 1202, to

Philip’s declaration that allJohn’sContinentaldominions– the landswhich he held asfiefs of the king of France –were forfeit. By his tactlesstreatment of the leadingbarons of Anjou and PoitouJohn threw away all theadvantages he won when hecaptured Arthur at Mirebeau(July1202);thewell-foundedrumour that he wasresponsible for his nephew’smurder (April 1203) further

underminedanalready shakyreputation. In an atmosphereof suspicion and fear Johnfound it impossible toorganizeaneffectivedefence.In December 1203 he threwin the towel andwithdrew toEngland. Philip overranNormandy, Anjou, Maine,Touraine, and all of PoitouexceptforLaRochelle.Thesehumiliating military reversesearned for John a newnickname. ‘Lackland’ now

became‘Soft-sword’.

Until December 1203 John,like his father and brother,spentmostofhisreigninhisContinental possessions.Afterthatdatehebecame,byforce of circumstances, anEnglish king. Not sinceStephen’s reign had thecountry seen so much of itsruler, but there was littlepleasure or profit to be got

from a king who constantlysuspected that men wereplotting against him. Theweight of John’s presencewas even felt in the northwhere men were notaccustomed to visits fromkingsofEngland.The extentof their resentment can bemeasured by the number ofnortherners who opposedJohn in 1215–16.Undoubtedly he facedgenuine problems. He was

duty-bound to try to recoverhis lost inheritance, and theconquests of 1203–4 meantthattheFrenchkingwasnowa much more formidableopponent. Moreover, anunusually high rate ofinflation in theearlyyearsofJohn’s reign had tended toerode the real value of royalrevenues. As a result, Johnlevied frequent andunprecedentedly heavy taxesand tightened up the laws

governing the forest (aprofitable but highlyunpopularsourceofincome).

5.Adramaticmomentduringthebattleof

Bouvines(1214),asdepicted

bytheStAlbanschronicler,MatthewParis,probablythebest-knownEnglishartistofthethirteenthcentury.KingPhilipofFranceisunhorsed.IfhehadstayedonthegroundmanyofJohn’stroublesmighthavebeensolved.

Notethevarietyofweaponscarriedbytheheavilyarmedknights:sword,

lance,andbow

John also quarrelledwith theChurch. A disputed electionto the see of Canterbury in1205 led to a clash withInnocentIII.In1208Innocentlaid an interdict on Englandand Wales; all churchservices were suspended andremained so for six years. In1209 John himself wasexcommunicated. NeitherJohn nor lay society ingeneral seem to have beenvery worried by this state of

affairs; indeed since John’sresponse to the interdict wastoconfiscatetheestatesoftheChurchitevenhelpedtoeasehis financial problem.But in1212 a baronial plot andPhilip’s plans to cross theChannel served to remindJohnthatanexcommunicatedking was particularlyvulnerable to rebellion andinvasion. So he decided tomake peace with the Churchinordertohaveafreehandto

dealwithhismoredangerousenemies.Byagreeing toholdEngland as a fief of thePapacy in May 1213 hecompletely won overInnocent and assured himselfof the pope’s support in thecoming struggles. It did himlittlegood.

6.MagnaCarta.Althoughasapeacetreatythecharterof1215(top)

wasafailure,asastatementoflawitwasalwaystakenseriously.AfterJohn’s

deathitwasamendedandreissuedin1216,1217,and1225.Thereissueof1217wasaccompaniedbythepublicationofasecond,smallercharter(bottom)

dealingwithforestlaw,andsobecameknownasthe

largecharter,MagnaCarta

All now turned on theoutcomeofJohn’sattempt torecoverhislostlands.In1214heledanexpeditiontoPoitoubut the defeat of his allies atthe battle of Bouvines (July1214) entailed both thefailure of his Continentalstrategy and the onset ofrebellion in England. Butrebels had genuine problems

too.Leadershipwasnormallyprovided by a discontentedmember of the royal family.After the elimination ofArthur, John faced no suchrivals.Hisownsonsweretooyoung. The only possiblecandidate was Louis, son ofPhilip Augustus, but aCapetian prince was hardlyanattractiveanti-king.Sotherebels devised a newkind offocusforrevolt:aprogrammeofreform.InJune1215,after

they had captured London,the rebels forced John toaccept the terms laidout inadocument later to be knownasMagnaCarta.Inessenceitwasahostilecommentaryonsome of the moreobjectionable features of thelast60yearsofAngevinrule.As such it was clearlyunacceptable to John, whoregarded theagreementmadeat Runnymede merely as ameans of buying time.

Attempts to implementMagna Carta only led tofurther quarrels. In the endtherebelshadtoinviteLouisto take the throne. In May1216 he entered London.When John died, in October1216,shortlyafterlosingpartof his baggage train inquicksands in the Wash, thecountrywas torn in twobyacivil war which was goingbadlyfortheAngevins.

John possessed qualitieswhich have endeared him tosome modern historians. Hetook a close interest in thedetails of governmental andlegalbusiness,butinhisowndaythiscountedforlittle.Itisa mistake to see him as abusier king than hispredecessors.The survivalofchancery records from 1199onwardspermitshistorians tolook, for the first time, intothedailyroutineoftheking’s

government at work. As aresult they have sometimesgiven the impression thatJohn was unusuallycompetent. In fact he was avery poor king, incompetentwhere it really mattered, inthe management of his morepowerfulsubjects.

HenryIII(1216–72)

The minority council whichgoverned in the name ofJohn’s nine-year-old son,Henry, was soon vouchsafedthat success in war, both onland (the battle of Lincoln,May1217) and at sea (battleof Dover, August 1217),which had been denied hisfather. Under the impact ofthese defeats, support forLouis dwindled rapidly. In

September 1217 he acceptedthe treaty of Lambeth andwithdrew.

It was not until 1232 thatHenry began to rule in hisown right. Minorities tendedto be periods of unstablegovernment; but, on thewhole, the men, above allHubert de Burgh, who keptHenry in political tutelageuntil he was in his mid-

twenties, did remarkablywell. Most of the strugglesfor power took place in thecouncil chamber; appeals toarmswererareandverybrief.As part of a series ofconciliatory moves, MagnaCarta was amended andreissued. But while the lordsof the council concentratedon theirown rivalriesandoneventsinEnglandandWales,theywereunderstandablylessconcerned about the king’s

overseasinheritance.Noneofthem had estates in PoitouandGascony.In1224,duringone such domestic quarrel,their old Capetian enemy,nowKingLouisVIII,walkedinto Poitou, captured LaRochelle, and threatenedGascony. An expedition in1225 consolidated thepositioninGasconybutmadenoseriousattempt to recoverPoitou. Subsequentexpeditions, in 1230 and

1242, were on a moreambitious scale but endedingloriously.After1224,onlyGascony remained of thelands which Henry III’sancestors had once held inFrance.Theeffectofthiswasto reverse the territorialbalance of the twelfthcentury. Once England hadbeen one of the provinces inthe Angevin orbit; now itbecame the indisputablecentre of the Plantagenet

dominions.Eventually,bythetreaty of Paris (1259),Henrygave up his claims toNormandy, Anjou, andPoitou, and did homage toLouisIXforGascony.

Realistically speaking, thetreaty of Paris was HenryIII’sgreatestpoliticalsuccessbut he accepted the generousterms offered by Louis IXonly with great reluctance

andinthehopeofextricatinghimself from his otherdifficulties. Chief amongthese was the fact that asworn confederation of themost powerful magnates inthe country was threateningto take up arms against him.Henry had faced oppositionon and off since 1233. Timeand again, the bone ofcontention had been hischoice of friends andadvisers; thesewere themen

whoobtainedthelion’sshareofthepatronageattheking’sdisposal. The problem wasaggravated by the fact thatmany of his favourites werenot English – this at a timewhen English politics werebecoming increasinglyinsular. Henry was a goodfamily man, happily married(since 1236) to Eleanor ofProvence, and ready toprovide generously for hiswife’s relatives. Then, when

lifeinFrancebecamedifficultfor his half-brothers, theLusignans – his mother’schildren by her secondmarriage – he welcomedthem to England and from1247onwardstheyconstantlysouredtheatmosphere.

Equallycontroversialwastheking’s scheme for providingfor Edmund, his own secondson.In1252thepopeoffered

the kingdom of Sicily toHenry and in 1254 heaccepted on Edmund’sbehalf. Unfortunately, Sicilywas actually held byManfred, an illegitimate sonoftheHohenstaufenEmperorFrederick II. Not only didHenry agree that he wouldfinancetheisland’sconquest,he alsopromised tomeet thepope’s existing debts – andthe pope had already spent afortune,some135,000marks,

infightingManfred.Itwasanabsurd commitment and in1258itendedwiththebaronstaking thegovernmentoutofthe king’s hands andinitiating a far-reachingprogramme of reform: theProvisions of Oxford(October 1258) and theProvisions of Westminster(October 1259). But takingpoweroutof thehandsofanadult king, and handing it toan elected aristocratic

council, was a revolutionarystep. For the next five yearsEnglandteeteredonthebrinkof civil war. When, in thespring of 1264, war finallycame, the issues at stake hadbeen narrowed down to onequestion.Was,orwasnot,thekingfreetochooseforeignersto be his counsellors?Ironically, the man who hadbeen most adamant ininsistingthatinthelastresortit was the barons, acting in

the name of ‘the communityof the realm’, who shoulddecide, was himself born aforeigner,SimondeMontfort.Bythistime,Simonhadlongbeen a powerful member of‘the community’: earl ofLeicestersince1231,husbandof the king’s sister since1238. In 1264 Earl Simonwon the battle of Lewes, butnext year was himselfdefeated, killed, anddismembered at the battle of

Evesham. In the lastyearsofHenry III’s reign the fullrestoration of royal authoritywas combined with therecognition, in the statute ofMarlborough (1267), that the‘customs of the realm’including both Charters ofLiberties and even some ofthe Provisions ofWestminster, should beupheld. Feelinguncomfortable in thisatmosphere of moderation,

the victor of Evesham,Edward, the heir to thethrone, went off on crusade,leaving his father free toconcentrate on rebuildingWestminsterAbbey.

EdwardI(1272–1307)

In 1272 Edward I was inSicily, onhiswayback fromcrusade, when he heard thenews that his fatherhaddiedand that he had beenproclaimedking.Hereturnedhome at a leisurely pace. InParis, choosing his wordscarefully, he did homage toPhilip III for his lands inFrance:‘IdoyouhomageforallthelandswhichIoughttohold of you.’He then turnedsouth to Gascony where he

stayed in 1273–4. He visitedGasconyagainin1286–9.Hewas the last king of EnglandtoholdcourtatBordeauxandwhenhe left, in July1289, itmarkedtheendofanera.YetthehistoryofEnglish rule inGascony is by no means astraightforward story ofdecline.In1279,forexample,theFrenchatlasthandedoverthe Agenais, as they werebound to do under the termsof the treaty of Paris. The

Agenais was an importantwine-growing area and itscession further strengthenedthe rapidly developingcommercial links betweenBordeaux and London. TheBordeaux wine customs,farmed for only £300 a yearinthe1240s,wereworthover£6,000 sixty years later. Inreturn the Gascons importedEnglish cloth, leather, andcorn.Amutual interest in anexpanding trade riveted the

twocommunitiestogether.

In October 1274, soon afterhisreturntoEngland,Edwardlaunched an inquiry into theactivities of both royal andbaronial officials. Likesimilar earlier investigationsit uncovered an enormousnumberofgrievances, and intrying to remedy some ofthese, the king’s advisers,headed by his chancellor,

Robert Burnell, were led onto issue new laws on awiderangeofsubjects.Buteveninthe most prolific period oflegislation (1275–90) therewas no attempt to codifyEnglish lawin themannerofa Justinian and the statuteswere quite as muchconcerned with the rights ofthe king as with the libertiesofthesubject.

From1276to1284Edward’smainpreoccupationwaswithWales. Initially his plan wasto cut Llywelyn apGruffydddown to size and then handthe Welsh prince’s lands tohis brothers Dafydd andGruffydd. But after thevictorious campaign of 1277he imposed a peace treatywhich the Welsh foundhumiliatingandfailedtogiveDafydd the rewards he hadexpected. In 1282 theWelsh

rebelled.Inthewarof1282–3 Llywelyn was killed andDafydd captured. He wasthenputontrialandexecutedasatraitor,thefirstmansince1076 to forfeit his life forrebellion. Unlike thecampaignof1277,thewarof1282–3hadbeen intendedasa war of conquest; givenEdward’s enormouspreponderanceofresources,itwasnottoodifficultatask.

Whereas the conquest ofWales can be seen as theculmination of centuries ofwarfare,relationsbetweenthekingdoms of England andScotland were exceptionallygood for most of thethirteenth century. But in1286AlexanderIIIwaskilledby a fall from his horse andhis only granddaughter,Margaret, the ‘Maid ofNorway’, was recognized asheir to the throne. Edward I

proposed that she shouldmarry his own son and heir,Edward. The Scottishmagnates agreed to thisproposal (treaty of Birgham,July 1290) but at the sametime insisted that Scotlandshould retain its own lawsandcustoms.

Sadly, the six-year-oldMargaret died in Orkney(September 1290). Edward

seized the opportunity toassert his overlordship andhis right to adjudicatebetween the contenders forthe throne.Aftercomplicatedlegalargumentshedecidedinfavour of JohnBalliol; onStAndrew’sDay 1292 the newkingwasenthronedatScone.Up to this pointEdwardwasjustified in claiming that hisactions had helped tomaintain peace and order inScotland; but from now on

his domineering treatment ofthe Scots was to provoke alonganddisastrouswar.

Chapter3Politics,Law,andReligionintheEarlyMiddleAges

Walesandthe

Marches

Eleventh-century Wales wasa collection of smallkingdoms in a mountainouscountry. These werekingdoms without stableborders. They expanded andcontractedinaccordancewithlaw (the custom of sharingtheinheritancebetweensons)

and politics (the ambitionsand military fortunes ofindividual rulers). AlthoughEnglish kings traditionallyclaimedanoverallsupremacyhere, they had done little totransform that ill-definedoverlordship into lastingmilitary and administrativecontrol. At first it looked asthough the impetus of theNormanConquestofEnglandwould carry the newcomersright through Wales. The

Norman earls of Hereford,Shrewsbury, and Chesterwere, in effect, licensed totakewhatevertheycould.Butafter a period of rapidadvance in 1067–75, theyfound theirprogress impededby the nature of the terrain.As a result, their colonizingeffortswere longconfined tothe lowlands and rivervalleys, particularly in thesouth. Able Welsh princestook advantage of instability

in England after 1135 and atthe time of Magna Carta torecover the initiative andresume control of lands theyhadearlier lost.Notuntil thereign of Edward I was theNorman Conquest of Walescomplete. Thus throughoutthisperiodWaleswas a landof war, a land of castles.Welsh princes and Anglo-Norman marcher lords madewar and peace and boththerefore enjoyed what later

constitutional lawyers wouldcall‘sovereign’powers.

For most of this period theconquest was a piecemealaffair,undertakenandcarriedthroughby individualAnglo-Normanbaronialfamilies:theClares, the Mortimers, theLacys,theBraoses.Thelandswhich they conquered were,in effect, ‘private’ lordships,outsidethenormalframework

of English governance.Nonetheless, these familiesremainedsubjectsofthekingof England and occasionallythey were reminded of thisfact in summary fashion. In1102Henry I broke the sonsofRogerofMontgomery,earlof Shrewsbury, anddismembered their father’smarcher‘empire’.In1208–11John drove William deBraose to destruction. Thegroundwork of conquest and

colonization was left to themarcherlords,buttheoverallstrategy remained in royalhands. It was, for example,the kings who determinedwhatrelationswiththenativeprinces should be: a matterwhich became increasinglyvital as some Welshkingdoms were eliminatedand the surviving onesbecame increasinglyconsolidated.

By the second half of thetwelfth century the rulers ofDeheubarth, particularly theLord Rhys, and of Gwyneddwere outstanding. In thethirteenthcenturytwoprincesof Gwynedd, Llywelyn theGreat and his grandson,Llywelyn ap Gruffydd,managed, by force anddiplomacy, to bring all theother Welsh dynasties undertheirauthority. Indeed, in thetreatyofMontgomery (1267)

Llywelyn ap Gruffydd wasable to persuade a reluctantEnglish king, Henry III, toacknowledge both histerritorial gains and his newtitle,‘PrinceofWales’.

But eight years earlieranother treaty had sealed thefateofWales.In1259bythetreaty of Paris Henry IIIaccepted the loss of most ofhis Continental possessions.

PeacewithFrancemeantthatfor the first time a king ofEngland could, if he wantedto, concentrate his attentionon his British neighbours.There followed Edward’sconquest and a massiveprogrammeofcastlebuilding.By the statute of Wales(1284) the newly acquiredlandsweredividedintoshireson the English model: Flint,Anglesey, Merioneth, andCaernarfon. As for Welsh

laws and customs, Edwardannounced: ‘certain of themwe have abolished; somewehave allowed, somewe havecorrected, others we haveadded’. What this meant ineffect was that Englishcommon law had beenintroducedintoWales.

There were revolts in 1287and 1294–5 but the castlesproved their worth. Flint,

Rhuddlan, Aberystwyth,Builth, Conway, Caernarfon,Criccieth, Harlech, andBeaumaris – resoundingnames, and resoundinglyexpensive to build andmaintain. This was the highpremium Edward paid toinsure his conquests againstthefireofrebellion.

The contrast between, on theone hand, the piecemeal

conquestofthesouthandeastand,on theother, the suddendefeat which overwhelmedthe north and west left anenduring mark on thepoliticalgeographyofWales.The Edwardian conquestswere largely retained inCrown hands; the restremained divided into thenumerous large lordshipscollectively known as themarch of Wales. As forPrinceLlywelyn,killed inan

EnglishtrapatIrfonBridgein1282,hisfatewastobecomea cult figure for sometwentieth-century Welshnationalists.

Scotland

In contrast to fragmentedWales, in the eleventh

centurymuchofScotland, inparticularthesouthandeast–the wealthiest part – wasruledbyoneking,thekingofthe Scots. Whereas thePapacy accepted that Welshdioceses should come undertheauthorityofCanterbury,itsupported the independenceof the Scottish Church. Eversince Athelstan’s reign, theking of the Scots hadoccasionally recognizedEnglishoverlordship,butthat

was as far as the connectionwent – or was likely to go.On the one hand the king oftheScotswastoopowerfultohave much to fear from thekind of ‘private enterprise’invasions which marked theadvance of Anglo-Normanbarons into Wales and evenIreland.Ontheother,hislandwas too poor and he wasgenerally too distant a figureto be ofmuch interest to thekings of England. Besides,

although it might not be toodifficult to launch asuccessful expedition againsttheScots,thedualproblemofconqueringandcontrollingsoremote a country seemed –andprobablywas–insolubletokingswhoseownbaseslayin the Thames Valley andfurthersouth.

Nor were the Scots obsessedby the problem of the

English. Apart from atemporarysuccesswhenKingDavid (1124–53) tookadvantageof the civilwarofStephen’s reign to acquireNorthumbria(heldfrom1139to 1157), the border withEngland effectively remainedwhereithadbeenestablishedintheeleventhcentury.Muchmore significant was thekingdom’s extension toinclude the far north andmuchofthewesternseaboard

(Caithness, Ross, Moray,Argyll, Galloway). Theculmination of thisexpansionist policy camewhen the king of Norwayceded the Western Isles(treaty of Perth, 1266).Scottish advance here wasmaterially assisted by thestability and continuity ofleadership provided by threesuccessive kings: William I(1165–1214), Alexander II(1214–49),andAlexander III

(1249–86).

Territorial expansion in theHighlands was matched byinternal development in theLowlands. Here, burghs,abbeys, and cathedrals werefounded; castles were builtandroyalsheriffdomsformedin order to reduce thekingdom to manageableadministrative units; royalmoneyers began to mint

silver pennies (enjoyingparity with English sterling)and import duties werecollected. The marriagesmade by its rulers show thatin the twelfth and thirteenthcenturies Scotland wasincreasinglybecomingpartofa ‘European’ political scene.What was most remarkableabout all these developmentswas that they involved verylittle war. So long as noEnglish king conceived the

unrealistic ambition ofconquering Scotland, therewas no reason for that tochange.

EnglishGovernmentandtheKing’sHousehold

The most important

component of governmentwas the king himself. Hischaracter counted for morethananyothersinglefactor–as is obvious from thecontrast between Edward I’sreign and the reigns of bothhis father and son. Butnaturally the king could notgovern alone. Wherever hewent he was followed by agreat crowd: courtiers,officials, servants, traders,petitioners,andhangers-onof

everydescription.

At the centre of the crowdthat followed him was theking’shousehold. Inpart thiswas an elaborate domesticservice: cooks, butlers,larderers, grooms, tent-keepers, carters, packhorsedrivers, and thebearerof theking’s bed. There were alsothemenwholookedafterhishunt, the keepers of the

hounds,thehorn-blowers,thearchers. Then there were themen whose work waspoliticalandadministrativeaswell as domestic. Some ofthem had fairly well-definedfunctions.Thechancellorwasresponsiblefortheking’ssealand the chancery clerks.Treasurer and chamberlainslookedaftertheking’smoneyandvaluables.Constablesandmarshals were in charge ofmilitaryorganization.Butthe

household, like theking,wasomnicompetentandanygreathousehold officer, thesteward for example, waslikely to find himselfentrusted with essentialpoliticalandmilitarytasks.

Some of these officials wereclerks. Until the 1340s thechancellor and the treasureralways were. But many ofthem were laymen: the

chamberlains, the stewards,theconstables,themarshals–asalso,ata local level,werethe sheriffs. Medieval kingsof England did not dependexclusively, or evenprimarily,uponclerksfortheadministrative skillsnecessary to rule a country.Nordid they relyonagroupof royal officials whoseinterests were pitted againstthe interests of the greatlandholders, the magnates.

On the contrary, the king’shousehold normally includedsome of the most powerfulbarons.Servantsintheking’shousehold, they were alsolords of great estates andmasters in their own houses.Through their influence theauthority of the Crown wascarried into the localities.This informal power systemwas often reinforced by theappointment of members ofthehouseholdtolocaloffices.

Under Rufus, Hamo ‘thesteward’wassheriffofKent;Urse d’Abetôt was constableof the household and sheriffofWorcester.Throughoutthetwelfth and thirteenthcenturies household knightscontinued to be employed assheriffs.

Here,intheking’shousehold,lay the mainspring ofgovernment.Thisisastrueof

1279, the year ofEdward I’sHouseholdOrdinance,asitisof1136,theapproximatedateof the earliest survivingdescription of the king’shousehold, the Constitutiodomus regis. Moreover thereis no reason to believe thatthe household of theConstitutio was significantlydifferent from William I’shousehold, or indeed, fromCnut’shousehold.

Similarly the king’shousehold was the hub ofmilitary organization. It haslong been accepted that thearmies of Edward I’s reignwere essentially ‘thehousehold in arms’. Thehouseholdcavalryconstituteda professional task forcecapableofrespondingquicklyif trouble blew upunexpectedly. In theeventofamajorcampaign,itcouldberapidly expanded. Household

knights were often maderesponsible for mobilizingand commanding largeinfantry contingents. Thehousehold men, thefamiliares, were paid annualfees and then daily wagesaccording to the number ofdaystheyserved.This,itusedto be thought, was a far cryfrom the Norman periodwhen armies were basically‘feudalhosts’,madeupofthequotas of knights which

tenants-in-chief musteredwhen summoned to performtheir military service to theCrown.Butclosestudyofthemuch more fragmentaryevidence for the periodaround 1100 hasdemonstrated thatnotonly isit difficult to find the ‘feudalhost’ in action, but also thatall the essential features ofthe Edwardian system werealready in existence – theretaining fees, the daily

wages, the framework forplannedexpansion,theuseofhousehold troops both asgarrisons for key castles andas the main field armies(composed of knights andmounted archers), theemployment of householdknights as commanders ofsupplementary forces. Thereis no reason to believe thatthe tasks which Cnut’shousecarls were called uponto perform were

fundamentallydifferent.

For practical purposes therewasanupperlimitonthesizeof the royal household inpeacetime; transport andcateringproblemswerealonesufficient to see to that. Tosome extent, forwardplanningoftheroyalitineraryhelped; when they knew inadvancewhere thehouseholdwas going to be then

merchantscouldarrangetobethere with their wares. Butthe presence of the kingimposed a near-intolerableburden on any districtthroughwhichhepassed.Thedemands made by thehousehold had a dramaticeffectonlocalfoodstocksandprices; it created a situationwide open to abuse. This ishow Eadmer, a monk ofCanterbury, described thehousehold ofWilliamRufus,

a king of whom hedisapproved. ‘Those whoattended his court made apractice of plundering anddestroying everything; theylaid waste all the territorythrough which they passed.Consequentlywhenitbecameknown that the king wascoming everyone fled to thewoods.’ In Edward I’s reignthere is still the samecombination of planning andplunder. An official letter

announcing that he intendedto spend Easter atNottingham asked that localpeople should be comfortedbybeingassuredthatthekingwould go as fast as he hadcome.

Thus itwasbothforpoliticalreasons–inordertomakehispresence felt – and foreconomic reasons – to makehis presence no longer felt –

that the king travelledconstantly. The sheer size oftheirdominionsmeantthatinthisrespecttheAngevinshadto work harder than theirpredecessors, though John’spolitical failures did at leasthave the effect of easing histravel problems. After 1203the royal itinerary becameincreasingly confined toEngland and, in Edward I’scase, toNorthWalesaswell.After 1289 no king visited

Gascony. At the same timethe roads leading in and outof London became graduallymore important.By1300 theking’sitinerarywasnolongerdominated,asJohn’shadstillbeen, by the restless movefrompalace to hunting lodgein ‘central Wessex’, the oldheartland of theWest Saxonkings.

Yet while political and

economic considerationsmade the courtmobile, therewasanotherfeatureoftheagewhichpointedintheoppositedirection: the seeminglyinexorable development ofbureaucracy. Given thepractical limitations onhousehold size, what wouldhappen as the king’ssecretarial and financialofficers grew ever morenumerous? Inevitably not allof them could continue to

travel everywhere with theirlord. Some were bound tosettle down in a convenientplace. By 1066, indeed, thispoint had already beenreached.Therewasalreadyapermanent royal treasury atWinchester, a depository forfiscal records as well as forsilver, and this required apermanent staff to guard andoversee it. By 1290 therewere many more settledofficials, both clerks and

laymen, in the chancery andexchequer, and they weresettled at Westminster, notWinchester. But thisbureaucratic growth had notaltered the fundamentalpoliticalfactsoflife:thekingstill itinerated; he still tookwithhimaseal,asecretariat,andfinancialexperts–and itwaswithinthismobilegroup,not at Westminster, that themost important political andadministrativedecisionswere

taken.In1290,asin1066,thesaddleremainedthechiefseatof government, both in warand in peace. Therewas stillno capital but the king’shighway.

ThePowerofPatronage

Nor had bureaucratic growthaltered thebasic fact that thepoliticalstabilityoftherealmstill depended primarily onthe king’s ability to managethe small, but immenselypowerful, aristocraticestablishment – as is madeclear by the events of HenryIII’s and Edward II’s reign.On what terms did thetenants-in-chief hold theirestates from the king? Theywere expected – as they had

beeninAnglo-SaxonEngland– to serve and aid the king:essentially this meantpoliticalserviceand,intimesof war, military service; incertain circumstances theycould be asked to give himfinancial aid. In addition, atenant-in-chief’s heir had topayaduty,knownasarelief,in order to enter into hisinheritance, while if he – orshe–wereunderagethentheking took the estates into his

custody,todowiththemverymuch as he pleased (subjectto certain conventions). Inthese circumstances the kingcontrolled his ward’smarriage. If there were nodirect heirs, then afterprovision had beenmade forthe widow – whose re-marriage was also subject tocrown control – the kingcouldgrantthelandoutagaintowhomeverbepleased.Thisdegree of control over the

inheritancesandmarriagesofthe wealthiest people in thekingdom meant that theking’s powers of patronagewere immense. He not onlyhadofficesathisdisposal,healso had heirs, heiresses, andwidows. Thus, for example,whenRichardIgaveWilliamMarshal the heiress to theearldom of Pembroke, he, ineffect, made William amillionaire overnight. NopoliticalleaderintheWestern

world of today has anythingremotely approaching thepower of patronage in thehandsofamedievalking.Itisnot surprising that the king’scourt was the focal point ofthe whole political system, aturbulent, lively, tense,factiousplaceinwhichmen–and a few women – pushedand jostled each other indesperate attempts to catchthe king’s eye. Notsurprisingly it was a twelfth-

centuryliteraryconventiontodescribe a courtier’s life assheer hell – but standing atthemouth of hell there werehundreds only too keen toenter. In these circumstancespatronage was one of thestrongest cards in the king’shand. It mattered how heplayed it, and a king whoplayed it badly would soonfindhimselfintrouble.

The essential features of thispatronage system werealready in existence duringthe reign of William Rufus.This much is clear from theterms of the CoronationCharter issued byHenry I in1100. It is also clear that thesystem was still in existenceduringthereignofEdwardI.Magna Carta had clarified itand, to some extent, evenmodified it. After 1215, forexample,baronialreliefswere

fixed at a rate of £100.Nonetheless, the lawsgoverning inheritance,wardship,andmarriagecouldstill bemanipulated to suit aking’s personal predilections,whether itwas toprovideforhis own family, as withEdward I, or to enrichfavourites,aswithEdwardII.What is less clear iswhetherthe systemwas already therein 1066. Most historianswould probably say that it

was not. But it is surelysignificant that Cnut and,probably, Æthelred theUnreadywerealreadymakingpromises broadly similar tothosecontainedinthecharterof1100.

Patronagewaslucrative.Menoffered money in order toobtain what the king had tooffer: offices (from thechancellorship down),

successiontoestates,custodyof land, wardship, andmarriage – or even nothingmoreconcretethantheking’sgoodwill.Alloftheseweretobe had at a price, and theprice was negotiable. Herewas an area in which a kingcould hope to raise moremoney by consistentlydriving harder bargains. Inthese circumstances anydocumentwhichtoldthekinghow rich his tenants were

would naturally beimmensely valuable.DomesdayBookisjustsucharecord – and it showed thathalf the value of the wholecountry was in the hands offewer than 200 men. Byfining these men heavilywhen they were in politicaltrouble or by offering themwhattheywanted,thoughataprice, the king had found apractical method of soakingthe rich. Of course the

informationhadtobekeptupto date and throughout thetwelfth and thirteenthcenturies the Crown foundways of ensuring that itwas.For example, one of thesurviving documentsproduced by Henry II’sadministration is thedelightfully named ‘Roll ofLadies,boysandgirls’.Thusto a hostile observer likeGerald of Wales the kingappeared to be ‘a robber

permanently on the prowl,always probing, alwayslooking for the weak spotwhere there is something forhim to steal’. Gerald wastalking of the position underthe Angevins but it may bethatLucy,widowed countessof Chester, offering Henry I500marksfortheprivilegeofremaining single for fiveyears,wouldhaveconcurred.The fact that most of theinfluentialpeopleintherealm

were semi-permanently intheir debt gave kings apowerfulpoliticallever–andone which they regularlyemployed. In 1295, forexample, Edward I used thethreat of debt collection toforce a group of reluctantmagnatestogotoGascony.

The earliest survivingdetailed account of royalrevenues, the pipe roll of

1129–30, shows just howlucrative patronage could be.In this financialyearHenryIis recorded as havingcollected about £3,600 fromoffers of this kind. This isabout 15 per cent of hisrecorded revenue and morethanhegotfromtaxation.Butthearithmeticofthepiperolltellsusagooddealmorethanthis.In1129–30thetotalsumdueasaresultofoffersmadeinthisandpreviousyearswas

almost £26,000, so only 14per cent of the amount duewas actually collected.William de Pont de l’Arche,for example, had offered1,000 marks for achamberlainshipandin1129–30 he paid just 100 marks.This meant that if the kingweresatisfiedwithWilliam’sbehaviour, then payment offurther instalments might besuspended or pardoned. Theexpectation that the

exchequer would not presstoo hard had the effect ofencouraging men to bidhighly. But a man who felloutof favourwouldfind thathe had to pay up promptly –or get into even worsetrouble. This, for example,was the fate which befellWilliam de Braose in John’sreign. In other words,collecting only a smallproportionoftheamountduewas not an indication of

chronic governmentinefficiency but rather of afurther refinement of aninfinitely flexible system ofpatronage.

EnglishRoyalRevenues

Masterful kings always had

their hands in their subjects’pockets.EdwardIwasknownas Le Roi Coveytous just asWilliam I had ‘lovedgreediness above all’. At amore abstract level, as earlyas the twelfth century it wasasserted that royal powercould be measured infinancial terms. In thewordsof Richard FitzNeal, bishopof London, Treasurer ofEngland, and author of TheDialogueof theExchequer,a

work dating from the 1170s,‘the power of princesfluctuates according to theebb and flow of their cashresources’. The pipe roll of1129–30 – a record of theaccounts presented at theexchequer by sheriffs andother officials in that year –shows an exchequer systemalready working very muchalong the lines described inThe Dialogue. But thefinancial system itself

certainly pre-dated the piperoll.Inbroadoutline–annualrenders made by sheriffs tothe treasury– it isanAnglo-Saxon system. In 1066 and1086therendersproducedbysomelargeroyalmanorswerestillpaidinkind.By1129–30it is clear that a widespreadcommutation into moneyrents had taken place. Thiswas in line with generalEuropean development. Themore the sheriffs’ renders

were made in cash, thegreater theneedforaneasilyfollowedbutquickmethodofmaking calculations inpounds, shillings, and pence.Thus the chequered tablecloth (from which the wordexchequer is derived) servedas a simplified abacus, onwhich the king’s calculatordidsumsbymovingcountersfrom square to square like acroupier. The earliestreference to the exchequer

dates from 1110. Twice ayear a group of the mostpowerful and trusted men inthe realm met in order toaudit the sheriffs’ accounts.When the king was inNormandy they would meet,as the vice-regal committee‘at the exchequer’, in theking’sabsence.Presumablyasimilarly composedcommittee had met for asimilar purpose when CnutwasinDenmark.

But this is speculation. It isonlywhenwereach1129–30thatsomedegreeofprecisionis possible. Even here,however, we have to becareful.Anexchequerrecord,a pipe roll, tells almostnothing about those sumswhichwerepaidintoandoutof the chamber. Certainlythese sums cannot bequantified, though inviewof

thefactthatthechamberwasthe financial office of theitinerant household, it islikely that they were large.Forexampleitwasestimatedthat by 1187 Henry II hadpaid 30,000 marks into hisJerusalem bank account,thoughthereisnosignofthismoneyinthepiperollsofhisreign. In the absence oftwelfth-century chamberrecords, it is not easy toestimate total royal revenue.

Thus, the lowpipe roll totalsin the early years of HenryII’sreignmaybeverylargelyareflectionofthenewking’spreference for chamberfinance, a very naturalpreference for an Angevinprince, all of whoseforefathers had managedperfectly well without anexchequer. After all, when itcame to minting coins theAngevinsintroducedAngevinpractice into both England

andNormandy.But,whateverthedifficulties,analysisoftheonly surviving pipe roll ofHenry I’s reign isundoubtedlyrevealing.

In 1129–30, £22,865 waspaid into the treasury.Outofthis total almost £12,000constituted revenue derivedfrom lands held by theCrown. Just under £3,000camefromtaxation,nearlyall

of this (almost £2,500) fromthe geld or Danegeld, as theold Anglo-Saxon land taxwas now called. Another£7,200 can be described asthe profits of lordship andjurisdiction: this includedabout £1,000 fromecclesiastical vacancies;£2,400 from judicial fines;and the £3,600 from offersmentioned earlier. Thus overhalf the recorded revenuecamefromland;aboutathird

from lordship andjurisdiction; and only some13 per cent from taxation. Ifwe compare this with thestateof royal revenues in theearly years of Edward I’sreign then some significantdifferences emerge. In veryrough terms, land nowaccountedforaboutathirdofthe total; lordship andjurisdiction may well haveprovided less than 10 percent, while taxation

(including customs duties)accounted for over a half.Land, lordship, andjurisdictionbecamerelativelyless important; taxationbecame much moreimportant. Even allowing forthe likelihood that taxrevenue in 1129–30 wasrather less than usual(because the geld was theonlytaxleviedthatyear),thisbroad generalization wouldstillhold.

Though the royal lands wereimmensely lucrative in 1130,acomparisonwithDomesdayBooksuggeststhat theywerealready a declining asset. In1086 the total recordedvalueof the king’s lands andboroughs was almost£14,000,whileby1129–30ithad gone down to less than£10,700. It seems that thestock of royal lands was

dwindling faster than it wasbeing replenished byforfeitures and reversions tothe Crown (escheats). Kingshadtogrant landtopowerfulmen.Theydid so inorder toreward and encourageloyalty, particularly early intheir reigns when faced withthe problems of disputedsuccession. This processcontinued, but was to someextent offset by attempts tomanage the royal estates

moreefficiently.The successof these managerial reforms,begun under Hubert Walter,thencontinuedbyJohn’sandHenry III’sministers, can bemeasured by the fact thatEdward I was still able toenjoya revenuefromlandofsome £13,000 a year. (Inview of the inflation in theprevious150years,however,this means that real incomefrom this source was a gooddeal less than it had been in

1129–30. Equally, £20,000under Henry I was probablyworth more than £40,000underEdwardI.)

The geld, the hide – the unitoflandonwhichthegeldwasassessed – and the fiscalmachinery throughwhich thegeld was collected are allfurther examples of thoserights which the Normankings inherited from the

Anglo-Saxons. Even thoughat two shillings on the hidethe geld contributed only 10percentofHenryI’srecordedincome, it was clearly avaluable royal asset. By1129–30 it had become anannual tax and one whichcould occasionally be leviedat a higher rate (moreovergeld exemptions could begranted as political favours,adding yet another string tothe bow of royal patronage).

But the geldwas levied onlytwicebyHenryII, in1155–6and 1161–2. Instead hedeveloped other levies, theaid of knights (scutage:assessedonknights’fees)andtheaidofboroughsandcities(tallage: assessed on avaluation of movableproperty). By John’s reign,scutagesandtallagesbetweenthem constituted a more orless annual tax whichadequately compensated the

Crownforthewitheringawayof thegeld.But thegeldwasnot quite dead. Under a newname,carucage,andarevisedassessmentitwasrevivedandlevied four times between1194and1220.

By this date, however, thegovernmenthaddiscoveredanew and altogether moreproductive form of tax,assessed not on land but on

an estimate of a man’srevenues and movableproperty. Probably based ontheecclesiastical tithe, itwasinitially used in 1166, 1185,and1188forapiouspurpose– the financial supportof theHoly Land. John certainlyleviedthistaxonmovablesin1207, andmay have done soin 1203. An account of the1207 tax survives and thefigureswhich itdisclosesareastonishing.Leviedattherate

of 1/13, it produced no lessthan£60,000–asumfarandawayinexcessoftheyieldofother taxes.(Yet in1194thissame tax had been levied atthe rate of 1/4– theheaviestrateinthelonghistoryofthetax–inordertocontributetoRichard’s ransom.) In themid-1190s the first nationalcustoms system wasintroduced. Thesedevelopments suggest thatroyal revenues reached new

high levels during Richard’sand John’s reigns. By 1213–14 John had accumulatedsome 200,000 marks. Butthese large accumulationswere soon spent. Thesewereyears of war, of the ThirdCrusadeandofthedefenceofthe Angevin Empire. John’sfinal failure in 1214 usheredin a long period of relativepeace. Not until 1294 wouldthe English taxpayer onceagainfindhimselfpayingfor

amajorEuropeanwar.

In the meantime, however,there were two othersignificant thirteenth-centuryinnovations – thedevelopment of taxation ofthe clergy, and theestablishment of a customssystem. Since 1199 theChurch had been madesubject to an income taximposedbythepope.Initially

intended to finance crusades,itwaslaterusedforavarietyof‘goodcauses’–asdefinedby the pope. Thus in 1217Honorius III ordered bishopsand prelates to help out theboy-king Henry III. Fromthen on the Church wasfrequently required tosubsidize the king,particularly if he had takenthecross,asHenry IIIdid in1250 and Edward I did in1287. In 1291, for example,

Edwardreceivednolessthan100,000 marks out of theproceedsofapapalcrusadingtax. By the mid-thirteenthcenturyithadalreadybecomeclear that theEnglishChurchwaspreparedtogivefinancialaid to the king – though,naturally, assemblies ofclergy haggled over theamount and took theopportunity of their meetingto discuss other matterswhich they felt needed

remedying.Hardly surprisingthenthatHenryIIIshouldgoone step further in 1254 andask for a clerical grantwithout first seeking papalconsent. This precedent wasfollowedin1269,andthenonthree occasions by Edward I(1279/80,1283,and1290) intheyearsbefore1294.

The customs duty inRichard’s and John’s reigns

had been a war measure; itlapsed when John sought atrucewithPhilipAugustusin1206. The importance of theduty on wool exportsestablishedin1275wasthatitbecameapermanent additionto the Crown’s peacetimerevenue. Its yield variedaccording to the fortunes ofthewool tradebutat the rateagreedin1275,halfamark(6s.8d.)persack,itbroughtinbetween £8,000 and £13,000

perannumintheyearsbefore1294. These new measures,papal taxation of the EnglishChurchand thecustomsdutyonwool,werebothrelatedtothe presence of Italianmercantile and bankinghouses in England. On theone hand, it was theubiquitous Italianbusinessman that enabled thethirteenth-century Papacy tooperate as an internationalfinance corporation. On the

other, credit finance came toplay an increasingly largepart in government. EdwardI’s debt to the Ricciardi ofLucca for the years from1272 to 1294 totalled nearly£400,000;48per centof thisdebt was repaid out of thecustoms receipt from a tradein which the Italians wereincreasingly involved.Kings,of course, had borrowedbefore. In the 1250s, HenryIII owed the Ricciardi over

£50,000; in the1150s,HenryIIused loans fromaFlemishbusinessman, William Cade,to finance the making of theAngevin Empire. What wassignificant in the latethirteenth century was boththe scale of the operationsand the linkage betweencredit and customs.Compared with the sumsobtainable from these newsources, the amounts to bederived from traditional

levies, scutages, tallages, andfeudal aids, were hardlyworth the trouble ofcollecting and they graduallyfellintodisuse.

TheBeginningsofParliamentinEngland

The customs system of 1275had been granted inParliament after discussionbetween the king’s advisersand the merchants.Characteristic of all thesetaxeswasthatsomeoneelse’sconsent was required: eitherthepope’s,orthemerchants’,or the clergy’s, or thecountry’s. By contrast, land,lordship, and jurisdictionwere revenue-producingrights which did not require

meetingsofinfluentialmentoapprove their exploitation –indeed all influential menenjoyedsimilarrights(thoughon a smaller scale) andpresumably took them forgranted – so long as theywerenotabused.Whereas85percentofHenryI’srecordedrevenue came from land,lordship, and jurisdiction,theyprovidedlessthan40percent of Edward I’s. Thehigher the proportion of

crown revenue that camefromtaxation,thegreaterwasthe need for politicalmechanisms thatenabled thatconsent to be obtained. Thisis the process known as thegrowth of representativeinstitutions;inthecaseofthetax on movables it is thegrowthofParliament.

During the long years offreedom from foreign war

after 1214 the tax onmovables remained anoccasional resource of theCrown. War was infrequentand other acceptablejustificationsforthetaxwererare, so consent was onlyoccasionally forthcoming –certainly not as often asHenry III would have liked.But the growing potential ofthe tax was revealed by thelast of the seven leviescollected between 1208 and

1293: the assessed yield ofthe 1/15 of 1290 was over£116,000. How was consentto this extraordinary taxobtained?Theking’sadviserswould have had to make acase. Presumably, theypointedtotheexpensesofhisrecent stay in Gascony(1286–9) and of his futurecrusade; they may well havepointed out that in theinterestsofChristianpietyhewas sacrificing a lucrative

sourceofrevenueindecidingto expel the Jews – althoughby 1290 the Jewishcommunity had beensqueezed so hard by royalfinancial demands that it hadlittle more to give. But towhom did they make thecase? They made it to themen who represented ‘thecommunityoftherealm’and,in the first instance, thesewerethemagnates–thesortsof influential men who

always had attended majorpolitical assemblies, whetherAnglo-Saxon, Norman, orAngevin. The assembly of1290, ‘Parliament’ as it wasnowcalled,metfromApriltoJulyandinitsfirsttenweeksitgot throughagreatdealofbusiness, including someimportant legislation. Inmid-July another group of menarrived, knights of the shire.Less than a week laterParliament was dissolved.

Whyhad theknightsbeensobelatedly summoned toattend?Becausethemagnateswerereluctant toapprove thetax. They agreed to it but‘only insofar as they wereentitled to’.Yet theyhadnotbeen similarly reluctant todeal with other kinds ofparliamentary business,judicial, political, legislative.In other words the magnatesstill adequately represented‘thecommunityoftherealm’

inmostfields–butnotwhentaxation was on the agenda.Fromthe late twelfthcenturyonwards, kings had grownaccustomed to bargainingwith individual shirecommunities, so it was anobvious step to require theselocal communities to choosemen to speak for them onsome of those occasionswhen the king wanted tosummon an assembly torepresent the community of

the whole realm. Assembliesof magnates were beingreinforced in this way fromthe 1250s onwards andgradually the knights,yeomen, and burgesses whorepresented shires andboroughs – the Commons –were being accorded a moreprominent role. As theproceedingsoftheParliamentof 1290 make clear, it wasaboveallelsetheking’sneedfor taxationwhich stimulated

thisdevelopment.

Was the process also theresult of social change?Wasthere a thirteenth-century‘rise of the gentry’ whichmeantthattraditionalpoliticalinstitutions had to bereshaped?Didthegentrynowcount for more in thelocalities so that if kingswanted their needs widelyunderstood and their taxes

efficiently collected they hadto offer them a place in themain political forum of therealm? These are difficultquestions, so difficult indeedto answer in the affirmativethat some historians haveargued that, on the contrary,the thirteenth century was aperiod of crisis for theknightly class. One of theproblems is a familiar one:the growing volume ofevidence. We know much

more about the thirteenth-century gentry than we doabout their predecessors. Butdid Simon de Montfort andhis friends court the gentrymore assiduously in theperiod 1258–65 than Johnandtherebelbaronshaddonein 1212–15? Magna Cartacontainsclauseswhichappealto wider social groups thanthe barons, but so too doesHenryI’sCoronationCharter.To whom was Edward the

Confessorappealingwhen,in1051, he decided not tocollect the heregeld? Neitherin the twelfth century nor inAnglo-Saxon times didsocietyconsistonlyofbaronsandpeasants.Thesortofmenwhogotthemselveschosentobeknightsof the shire in thelate thirteenth century wereexactly the sort of men whoalwayshadattendedthegreatpolitical assemblies. True,they had come then in the

retinues of themagnates, butit was in their retinues thatsensiblemagnatesfoundtheirbest advisers – andpresumably they had listenedto them. The knights of thelate thirteenth century werenotcomingtothesemeetingsfor the first time; they weresimplycomingunder anotherguise. It may be that theevidenceofpoliticalchange–the more elaboraterepresentative institutions of

the thirteenth century, thelarger share of taxation incrown revenue – still has tobesetwithina frameworkofunderlyingsocialcontinuity.

LawandJusticeinEngland

From the reign of Henry II

onwards, royal judges beganto hold local sessions(assizes) so frequently that itbecomespossible tospeakofthe application over almostthe entire country of acommon body of customarylaw, the ‘common law’, thecustomof theking’scourtasdescribed in treatises such as‘Glanvill’and‘Bracton’.Theprevioussystemhadbeenoneinwhich,generally speaking,localcourtshadappliedlocal

custom.Kings,ofcourse,hadlong been held to beresponsibleforlawandorder;in particular they wereexpected todealwith seriousoffences, the pleas of theCrown, but until a regular,centrally directed machineryof justice was established,their activity in this fieldcouldonlybe sporadic.Theyintervened when influentialpeople were involved andthey launched occasional

drives against theft,especially cattle-rustling. Inthisrespect, theAnglo-SaxonsystemofjusticesurvivedtheNorman Conquest. Thechangecamein1166withtheAssize of Clarendon,reinforced in 1176 by theAssize of Northampton.These assizes introducedregularmeasures for the trialby royal judges of thosesuspected of serious crimes.At first Henry II’s judges

were simply men whom theking trusted – they might beearls,barons,bishops,abbots,orcounsellors from the royalhousehold,exactlythesortofpeople whom earlier kingshad sent out on specificcommissions of justice orinquiry – the biggest andmostfamousofsuchinquiriesbeing the Domesday survey.For men such as these,holdingcourtsoflawwasjustone of the many tasks,

administrative, diplomatic,and military, which theycarried out on the king’sbehalf. But the introductionof frequent circuitsmeant anever-increasing burden ofjudicialwork and by the endofthetwelfthcenturywecanidentifyagroupofmen,mostof them laymen, whospecialized in legal business,in effect professional judges.Therewere, of course, lowercourts dealing with less

serious offences, but the‘professional’ courtsincreasingly came todominate the field. For onethingthelowercourtshadnoauthority to innovate,whereas the king could, anddid, createnewoffences.Forexample the crime ofconspiracy was ‘invented’ in1279whenEdwardIorderedtheitinerantjudgestoinquireinto confederacies to defeatthe ends of justice. Since the

king’s courts dealt not onlywith crime but also withdisputesconcerningproperty,they were clearly felt to beperforming a useful service.MagnaCarta criticizedmanyaspects of royal government,but not this one. Indeed itasked that the king’s judgesshould visit each shire fourtimesayear,morefrequentlythanwasinpracticepossible.

Thejudgesweremenlearnedin the law; being learned,they naturally responded toshifts in attitudes and ideasprevailing within educatedopinion. One such shift wasin the direction of a self-consciouslyrationalapproachto intellectual problems – anapproach typified byAbelard’s dictum: ‘Bydoubtingwecometoinquiry,by inquiring we come toperceive the truth.’ When

appliedtothelaw,thiswasadictumwhichcouldhavefar-reaching implications. Forexample, if the guilt orinnocence of a suspect couldnot readily be determined, ithad for centuries beencustomary tosendhimto theordeal, usually the ordeal ofhot iron or the ordeal ofwater. This system workedwell enough while peoplebelievedinit–itreliedonthesamepsychologicalinsightas

themodern lie-detector–butwas highly vulnerable todoubt. If an innocent mancame to doubt the ordeal’sefficacy as the meanswhereby God would provehisinnocence,thenhewasallthe more likely to fail theordeal. Once raised, thesedoubtscouldnotbestilled.Atfirst they seemed shocking –as when voiced by WilliamRufus – but eventually theybecameconventional.Finally,

in 1215 Pope Innocent IIIforbade the participation ofpriests in the ordeal and, inEngland at least, this meantthat the system came to anabrupt end. After an initialperiod of confusion, trial byordeal was replaced by trialby jury: this was a methodwhich had already been usedwith somesuccess in settlingdisputes about possession ofland. In 1179 Henry II hadordered that, in a case

concerning property rights,the defendant might opt fortrial by jury rather than trialbybattle–themethodwhichhad been introduced intoEnglandby theNormansandtheefficacyofwhich,liketheordeal, was vulnerable todoubt. But this rule whenapplied to criminal justicemeant that there was a trialonlywhen the accused optedfor one. Obviously he cameunder great pressure. By a

statute of 1275 he wascondemnedtoa‘prisoneforteet dure’ until he did opt fortrial. In consequence, manymen died in prison, butbecause they had not beenconvicted, their propertywasnot forfeited to the Crown.Forthisreasonsomechosetodie rather than risk trial.Notuntil the eighteenth centurywasthisrighttochoosetakenaway.

At first, and particularly inproperty litigation, juries hadbeen called upon to settlestraightforward questions towhich theymight reasonablybe expected to know theanswer. But problems arosewhenmorecomplicatedcasescame before them and whentrial by jury replaced theordeal. For, unlike God, ajury was not omniscient. Soefforts were made to cutthrough the complexities of

anygivendispute inorder toisolate a specific questionwhichthejurycouldfairlybeexpectedtodecide.Buttodothiswell required specializedknowledgeandskill; inotherwords it needed professionallawyers.Andso,inthecourseof the thirteenth century, alegal profession developed,withitsownschools, itsownliterature, and its ownlanguage(lawFrench).

Despite all these changes, inmany fundamental respectsAnglo-Saxon attitudestowards justice continued toflourish. In the Anglo-Saxonand Anglo-Norman periods,serious offences had beendealt with under a procedurewhich ended with the guiltyparty being required to paycompensationtothevictimorhis family. The newmachinery of justiceestablished by the Angevins

tended to imposepunishmentwithout compensation. Inmany cases, homicide,wounding, and rape, forexample, this was felt to beintolerable, so despite theimpression given by writerssuch as ‘Glanvill’ and‘Bracton’whowouldhaveusbelieve that the newprinciples had effectivelydisplaced the old, it seemsthat in reality the oldprocedures survived; they

were adapted and grafted onto the new.What this meantwas that those who couldafford it escaped punishmentbut paid compensation to thevictimorhiskin,whilethosewho could not, suffered theconsequences.

ChurchandReligion

DomesdayBooksuggeststhatthevillagepriestwasusuallyreckoned to be a member ofthe peasant community. Hischurch belonged to the locallord.Ifanestateweredividedthen theprofitsof thechurchwhich went with that estatemightalsohavetobedivided.In many ways, the villagepriest shared the life-style oftheordinaryvillager.Hewasvery unlikely to be celibate;indeed, he was probably

married and may well haveinheritedhispositionfromhisfather. Given this basicsituation,onecanonlyadmirethe temerity of thoseeleventh-century reformerswhoaimedtoabolishbothlaycontroloftheChurchandthefamily life of the clergy.Under papal stimulus, thecampaign for reform reachedEngland in 1076. Insubsequent decades, it wasgradually stepped up and in

the long run it even had akind of success. By the latethirteenth century, marriedclergy were exceptional. Ontheotherhand,plentyofthem–includingsomeof themostpowerful–continuedtohavemistresses. Ranulf Flambardof Durham and Roger ofSalisbury had theircounterpartsalmost200yearslater in Walter Langton ofCoventry, who was accusedof strangling his mistress’s

husband, andRobertBurnell,EdwardI’schancellor,whomthe king twice tried to havetranslated from Bath andWells to Canterbury. As faras lay patronage and familyconnection were concerned,these two aspects of churchlife were hardly touched.‘The Lord deprived bishopsof sons, but the devil gavethemnephews.’

Yet even the limited successof the campaign againstclerical marriage isremarkable – given howineffective decrees on thissubject had been in the 700yearsfromthefourthcenturyonwards. It may well belinked with the generalimprovement in education inthe twelfth and thirteenthcenturies. If society at largebecamemoreliteratethentheclergy couldmore readily be

recruited from the laity; theydid not have to remain whattheyhadcomeclosetobeing,a hereditary caste. The morepeople went to school, themore they learned to know,and someof them to respect,theancientlawoftheChurch.Certainly there is reason tobelieve that in thirteenth-century England a higherproportion of the populationwascelibatethanhadbeeninthe eleventh century. Quite

simply, there were far morepeople who had taken vowsof chastity. Everywhere inEurope monasticismflourishedandBritainwasnoexception. In England, forexample, there were somefiftyreligioushousesin1066andperhaps1,000monksandnuns. By 1216 there wereapproximately 700 housesand some 13,000 monks,nuns,canons,andcanonesses.Acentury later, the totalwas

nearer900housesand17,500members of the religiousorders.Seeninthecontextofan overall tripling of thepopulation, these areimpressive figures. Even sothey fail to make plain theextent to which, throughoutBritain, religious life hadbecome diversified andenriched. In the eleventhcentury, all the houses wereBenedictine in type. By themid-thirteenth century not

only were there severalhundred Benedictine houses,there were also a number ofnewordersfromwhichamanor woman could choose –regular canons, Cistercians,Gilbertines (the onepeculiarly English order),Templars, Hospitallers,Carthusians, Dominicans,Franciscans, Carmelites, andAustin friars. Within thisframework, almost everyconceivable variety of

religious life, rural, urban,contemplative,ascetic,active,wasnowcateredfor.Whatismore, most of those whoenteredthereligiouslifenowdidsobecausetheychoseto.Whereas the old Benedictinehouses had recruited theirmonks largely from thechildren given by theiraristocratic parents to bebrought up in the cloister(oblates), from the mid-twelfthcenturyonwardsthose

whoenteredboththenewandthe old orders were adults.The Cistercians, whoestablished the new pattern,prohibited entry for anyoneunder the age of 16 andinsisted upon a year’snoviciate. Conscripts hadbeenreplacedbyvolunteers.

During the course of thetwelfth century, the EnglishChurch established the

diocesan and parochialorganization under which itwastoliveforcenturies.Thelast new dioceses to becreated were Ely (in 1108)andCarlisle(1133).Dioceseswere divided intoarchdeaconries, andarchdeaconries into ruraldeaneries. In the Normanperiod, as before, newparishes were created almostatwill– thewillof the locallord; but thereafter it became

much harder. The territorialorganization of the Churchbecame, as itwere, frozen inits twelfth-century state.Thiswas certainly not becausedemographic and economicexpansion was now levellingoff. On the contrary, newsettlements continued to befounded and the old onescontinuedtogrow.Whatwashappening was that thedevelopment of canon lawand of papal jurisdictionwas

tending to protectinnumerable vested interests.The rise of the lawyer, itselfthe result of change in onesphereof life,made itharderto change things in others.Where this created a realpastoral problem was in thetowns.Bishopswrestledwiththeproblembutmuchoftheireffort was frustrated by theproprietary interests ofpatrons,churchmenaswellaslaymen. The thirteenth

century found a solution, butit needed a radical departure,a new form of religious life,tomakeitpossible.Thisnewform was provided by themendicantorders, thefriars–mobile missionaries whoseinternational organization cutclean through diocesan andparochial boundaries. ThefirstfriarstocometoEnglandwere the Dominicans. Theyarrived in 1221 and headedforOxford.Threeyearslater,

the Franciscans arrived; theirearliest friaries were inCanterbury, London, andOxford. The Carmelites andAustin friars arrived in the1240s.By1300thefriarshadfounded some 150 houses inEngland, more than 20 inScotlandandnineinWales.

Thecomingofthefriars,likethegrowthofcanonlaw,isamovementwhichreflectsone

of thebasiccircumstancesofthe Church throughoutBritain.Althoughitsgrowingmaterial wealth was firmlyrooted in English, Welsh, orScottish soil, in its spiritual,intellectual,andcorporatelifeas a Church it wasincreasingly a part of LatinChristendom. This wasparticularlytrueoftheperiodfromthelateeleventhcenturyonwards, when both Latinand French became more

widely used than before inEngland as well as inScotland and Wales.ParticularlyimportantwastheGregorian reform movementand the associateddevelopment of canon lawand papal jurisdiction overthe entire Latin Church. Thereformers’ demand forlibertas ecclesiae, theprivileged freedom of theChurch,undeniablyhadsomedramaticconsequences;butin

the end it turned out to beunobtainable. While libertywaslinkedwithprivilegeandthe continued possession ofgreat corporatewealth, kingsand other secular patronscould not afford to renouncesomeof their crucialpowers,in particular the power toappoint, even though by thethirteenth century they werehaving to work through thelegal machinery of theRoman curia in order to

obtain their ends. The factwasthatthespiritualweaponsat the Church’s disposal,excommunication andinterdict, were ultimatelyinsufficient to deter thesecular power. They tended,moreover, tobecomebluntedthrough over-use. In areaswhich really mattered to thelayworld, not just patronagebut also war, tournaments,and business practice, theheroic days of the Gregorian

reform gradually, in thecourse of the twelfth andthirteenthcenturies,gavewayto a period ofaccommodation. But wherethe reformers did succeedwas in translating the theoryof papal headship of theChurch into the fact of acentralized system ofgovernment. To a quiteremarkable extent, the clergylearned to do what the popetold them to do. Thus when

Pope Innocent III, in pursuitofhisquarrelwithKingJohn,laid an interdict on England,the clergy obeyed. For sixyears,from1208to1214,thechurchdoorswereclosedandthe laity were locked out;they were denied thesacrament of the altar,solemnization of marriages,burial in consecrated ground.Even when the pope,beginning in 1199, orderedthe taxation of the Church,

the clergy grumbled but paidup. From 1228 onwards wecan trace a continuous seriesof resident collectors inEngland;theyborethetitleofnuncioandalmostallofthemwere Italians. Here too therewas accommodation. Itseemed realistic to win theking of England’s approvaland so, by 1300, it was theking who received the lion’sshareoftheproceeds.

Throughout this period,Catholic Christianityremained the unchallengedreligion. It was taken forgranted. When the churcheswere closed for six yearstherewashardlyamurmurofpublic protest – but neitherwas there an upsurge ofinterest in alternativereligions. In the twelfth andthirteenth centuries, heresywasnomoreof a threat thanithadbeenintheeleventh:in

this respect Britain wasdifferent frommany parts ofEurope. Throughout thisperiodafewnon-Christians–Jews – lived in towns as farnorthasNewcastleandasfarwestasBristol(i.e.notintheless urbanized Scotland andWales),buttheirpositionwasalways precarious, at timespainfullyso,andin1290theywere expelled. MostChristiansrejoiced.

Chapter4TheEconomyintheEarlyMiddleAges

The basic outline of theEnglish economy in 1086emergesveryclearlyfromthe

repetitive, laconic phrases ofDomesdayBook. Thiswas afundamentally agrarianeconomy.Over90percentofthe people lived in thecountryandearnedtheirdailybread and ale from theresources of the land. Thelandwas alreadywell settled–some13,000settlementsarenamed–andmuchcultivated.Asmuchas80percentofthearable acreage of 1914 hadbeen under the plough in

1086.Pasture,woodland,andfenwerealsoexploited.Mostmenwerefarmersandfishers.In highland Britain, beyondthereachofDomesdayBook,farmersgrewoatsandbarleyrather than wheat, and thereweremore cattle than sheep.Neither trade nor industrycould offer a majoralternative source ofemployment. Domesdaystatistics – though they haveto be used as cautiously as

anyotherstatistics–canhelpto fill out the picture. Peoplecalled villani comprised themost numerous class (41 percent of the total recordedpopulation). Their landholdingscametoabout45percentofall the land.Thenextlargest number (32 per cent)were the people known as‘bordars’ or ‘cottars’; theyheld only 5 per cent of theland. Thus, although therewere enormous individual

variations, it is clear that weare dealing with two distinctclasses: those who had asubstantialstakeinthevillagefields and those whopossessedhardlymorethanacottage and its garden. Inadditiontherewerethe14percent of the total who weredescribedeitheras‘freemen’or‘sokemen’.Sincetheyhelda fifth of the land they seemto belong, economicallyspeaking,tothesameclassas

thevillani.Finallytherewerethe slaves, 9 per cent of therecorded population, whoheldnoland.

Attheotherendofthesocialscalewerethekingandatinygroupofpowerfulmen,allofthem rentiers who lived instyleon therevenuesof theirgreat estates.Fewer than200laymen and roughly 100major churches (bishoprics,

abbeys, and priories) heldbetween them about three-quartersoftheassessedvalueof the whole country. Thesemen – in legal terminologythey were known as theking’s tenants-in-chief – hadtenants of their own. Awealthy baron like WilliamdeWarenne,forexample,hadgranted out holdings worthabout £540 out of an estatevalued at over £1,150. Someofthesesubtenantsweremen

describedasknightsandtheirtenancies as knights’ fees.(Although many of theknights were no richer thanthe richest villani the factremains that they lived incloser association with theirlords and therefore belongedto a different social group.)Therestofatenant-in-chief’sestates – usually between ahalf and three-quarters ofthem – were kept ‘indemesne’, and it was from

these demesne lands that alord drew the bulk of hisincomeandfood.Amonastichouse, with a fixed centre,needed regular supplies offoodstuffs, but other greatlandlords, who were moreperipatetic, would probablybemore interested inmoney.Most demesnes thereforewere leased – ‘farmed’ wasthe technical term– in returnforamoneyrent.Mostofthelesseescamefromexactlythe

samerangeofsocialranksasdid the holders of knights’fees;togethertheyconstituteda landowning ‘middle class’,agentry.

WhathappenedtotheEnglisheconomy in the 200 yearsafter1086?Evenoversolonga period as this it can beargued that, in manyfundamental respects, therewas little change. England

was no more urbanized in1286 than in 1086. True,there were more and largertowns but then there weremorepeoplealtogether.Therewere undoubtedly strikingimprovements in ship design– a continuing feature ofnorthern Europe from theeighth century onwards. Inthis period it meant, aboveall, the development of the‘cog’, a large, tubby bulk-carrier with a stern-post

rudder and a deep draught.This meant economies ofscale in the maritime tradewhich had long linked theeast coast with theScandinavian world and thewest with the Atlantic coastof France. Presumably thevolume of trade in wool,cloth, timber, salted fish, andwine was increasing andmerchants’ profits may wellhave been increasing too.EvensotherewasnoEnglish

commercial revolution, nodevelopment of banks andcredit facilities of the kindthat can be claimed forthirteenth-century Italy. Oneconsequence of this relativebackwardnesswas that in thethirteenth century anincreasingly high proportionof England’s foreign tradecame to be in Italian hands.Their reserves of liquidcapital enabled Italiancompanies to offer attractive

terms. They could not onlybuy an abbey’s entire woolclipforthecurrentyear;theycouldalsobuy it foryears inadvance. By lending largesums to Henry III andEdwardI,theyobtainedroyalpatronageandprotection.Inaveryrealsenselatethirteenth-century England was beingtreated as a partiallydevelopedeconomy.Muchofits import–export businesswas handled by foreigners

(Gascons and Flemings aswell as Italians). Its mainexportswere rawmaterials –wool and grain – rather thanmanufactured goods. Therehad been, in otherwords, noindustrialrevolution.

7.Royalbuilding.Royalpatron,architect,and

workmenareallportrayedinathirteenth-century

drawingofthebuildingoftheabbeyofStAlbans.

(FromMatthewParis’sVitaeOffarum.)

Throughout this period themajorindustriesremainedthesame ones: cloth, building,mining and metalworking,salt production, and seafishing.Moreover,despitetheclaims sometimes made forthe clothfulling mill, therewere no significant advancesin industrial technology. Nor

was there anything tocompare with the highlycapitalized development ofthe Flemish cloth industry inthe twelfth and thirteenthcenturies. On the other handgrowing Flemish demand forEnglish wool did help topreserve the favourablebalance of trade which,throughout this period,ensured an inflow of bullionsufficienttomaintaintheonecoin, the silver penny, at a

consistently fine standard.(Whereas in more rapidlydeveloping and more highlymonetized regions, peopleusedamuchdebasedcoinageto perform the economicfunction of small change. Inthis sense too the Englisheconomy saw comparativelylittlechange.)

Above all there was noagricultural revolution.

Despite the fact thatthirteenth-century experts onestatemanagement,mensuchasWalterofHenleyorHenryof Eastry, approached theirjobinarationalandscientificmanner, the technicallimitations under which theyworked meant that nosignificant increase in yieldswas possible, neither fromsheep in terms of weight offleece,norfromseedintermsofyieldofgrain.Though the

useof thehorseas adraughtanimal was spreading, thiswas of marginal importance.Themainproblemslaynotinploughing, but in sowing,reaping, andmaintaining soilfertility. Sowing and reapingby hand was wasteful andslow. Marl and most othertypesof fertilizerwere eitherexpensive or unobtainable.Only animal dung wasgenerallyavailableanditwaswidely and systematically

used. But the high costs offeeding flocks and herdsthroughthewintermeantthattherewereupperlimitstotheamountofdungthatcouldbeproduced. And unless therewere basic improvements inprimaryproduction–astherewere not – improvements atthe second stage ofproduction, for example theintroduction of windmillsaround1200,couldonlybeofmarginal economic

importance. Thus in manyrespects England remained astagnant economy. It canindeed be argued that, bycomparison with some of itsneighbours, especiallyFlanders and Italy, Englandwas less advanced in thethirteenth century than it hadbeenintheeleventh.Butthisis a modern perspective. Intwelfth- and thirteenth-century England people felttheylivedinacountrywhich

was economically advancedbycomparisonwiththelandsoftheirCelticneighbours.

PopulationGrowth

Having said all this, it mustbemadeclearthatinonevitalrespect there had beenconsiderable change. By the

late thirteenth century therewere far more people livinginBritainthantherehadbeenin1086–notwithstandingthefact that men and womenwere familiar with coitusinterruptus as a method ofbirth control. Exactly howmanypeople therewere, it isimpossible tosay.Estimatingthe English population at thetimeoftheDomesdaysurveyisanextremelydifficult task.Most historians would put it

at between 1.25 and 2.25millions. Estimating the latethirteenth-century Englishpopulation is yet morehazardous. Some historianswould go as high as 7millions; others would put itmuch lower, perhaps 5millions. Estimating thepopulations of Scotland andWales is even morehazardous still. Recentguesses suggest 0.5 to 1million for Scotland c.1300,

and about 0.25 million forWales. But most historiansagree that the populationmore than doubled in thisperiod. The hypothesis ofslow growth from theeleventh (or perhaps indeedfrom the tenth) century,followed by an accelerationfrom the end of the twelfthcenturyonwards,seemstobeaplausibleone.Butnotonlydid rates of growth vary(probably) over time; they

also varied (certainly) inspace.Thusthepopulationofthe North Riding ofYorkshire probably increasedsome twelvefold in the 200years after 1086; elsewhere,andparticularlyinthoseareaswhichwerealreadyrelativelydenselysettledbythetimeoftheDomesday survey, that isalong the south coast and insomepartsofEastAnglia,thegrowth rate was very muchsmaller, though it was

particularly high in the siltbeltaroundtheWash.

ExpansionofSettlementandCultivation

What were the economicconsequencesof this increaseof population? One was the

physical expansion ofsettlement and cultivation,especiallyintheCelticlands.Here,indeed,thereareplentyofsignsofwhatthecitizenofthemodernworld is inclinedto call progress. Coins werefirst minted in the lateeleventh century in Wales,and in the twelfth century inScotland. Moreover thetwelfth centurywitnessed thefirsttownfoundationsinbothWales (e.g. Monmouth,

Brecon, Cardiff, andPembroke)andScotland(e.g.Berwick,Edinburgh,Stirling,and Perth). In England, too,towns flourished. Theirmainfunction was to act as localmarkets.Whereweknowtheoccupations of theirinhabitants,thepredominanceof the victualling trades andofcraftsmen–shopkeepersinleather, metal, and textiles –is striking. Even for the bigtowns – and by European

standards England containedonlyonegenuinelybig town,London, assessed in 1334 atfour times the wealth of itsnearest rival, Bristol – long-distance and luxury traderemained less important. Anincreasing density of ruralpopulation meant that townsincreased both in size and innumber. Between 1100 and1300, some 140 new townswere planted and, if it is notjustatrickoftheevidence,it

would seem that the decadesbetween 1170 and 1250 sawthe greatest number:Portsmouth, Leeds,Liverpool, Chelmsford,Salisbury, for example.Mostlytheywerefoundedbylocal lords who expected tomake a profit out of themoney rents and tolls theyplannedtocollect.Someweresited where they could takeadvantageoftheexpansionofmaritimecommerce,aslarger

shipsmeantthatcoastalportssuchasBoston,King’sLynn,and Hull (all newfoundations) did better thanup-river ports such asLincoln,Norwich,andYork.

In the countryside, too, thehand of the planner issometimes visible,particularly in the regular-formvillageswhichwerelaidout in those northern areas

whichhadbeenlaidwastebythe Normans. Elsewhere, inalready densely settled EastAnglia for example, villagessometimes moved to newsites straggling along theedge of common land,presumably in order to freegood arable land from the‘waste’ of being built upon.But finding room to livewasone thing; growing enoughfoodtoliveonquiteanother.In general the expansion of

farmland took place not somuch through theestablishment of newsettlements as throughpiecemeal increase aroundexisting centres. Hugeacreagesofforest,fen,marsh,and upland were cleared,drained,andfarmed.Someofthis was on potentially goodsoil– the silt belt around theWashistheclassicexample–but much of it, like theclearings in the Sussex

Weald,would always remainpoor. This is ‘the journey tothemargin’–menmovedoutto the margins of cultivationand farmed land that wasindeed marginal: it producedreturns which were barelyworth the labour expended.So pressing was the demandforfood,breadaboveall,thatevenother‘necessities’–fueland building timber – werehaving to give way. OtherEnglish families travelled

west or north in search ofnew lands to settle. InScotland theygenerallycameby invitation. Enterprisingkings of Scotland welcomedtheEnglishassettlersintheirnew burghs. By contrast inWales and Ireland they wereinvitedandencouragedbythenew invaders, not by thenative rulers. In Ireland theytookovertheoldVikingportsof Dublin, Waterford, andLimerick,aswellasfounding

newtownsandvillages.

IneasternEnglandespecially,attempts were made to farmthe existing arable moreintensively. In the thirteenthcentury the three-field,instead of the two-field,system came to be morewidely adopted. This meantthat a third rather thanahalfof the land was left falloweachyear.Butmoreintensive

land use required acorrespondingly moreintensive application offertilizers if soil qualitywereto be maintained.Unfortunately, the expansionof arable was sometimes atthe expense of both pastureand woodland. The effect ofthis on livestock numberscould hardly have permittedincreased manure productionandmayhaveactually led toadecrease indroppings.This

in turncouldhave led to soilexhaustion and lower, ratherthan higher, yields. Whetheror not yields did declinetowards the end of thethirteenth century, one thingthatdoesseemclearisthat,ifthe physical limit ofcultivation were reached andpopulation still continued togrow, thenoneof two thingswouldhavetohappen.Eithermorefoodwouldbeimportedor the average standard of

living would have to fall.There is no evidence thatgrain imports rose. Ifanything the trend wasprobably in the oppositedirection. English graindealers took theirmerchandise in bulk-carryingships to regions such asFlanders, Gascony, andNorway, that is, to placeswhere industrialization orspecialization had reached ahigher pitch than in England

and where regionaleconomicsweregearedtotheimport of basic foodstuffs inreturn for cloth, wine, andforestproducts.Moreovertheabundant estate records ofthirteenth-century Englandmakeitclearthattheaveragesize of tenant holdings wasshrinking.Inthisperiodmorepeople means less land perhead.

TheFree,theServile,andthePoor

Despite this gloomy picture,many thirteenth-centuryvillagers may have beenbetter off than theirpredecessors at the time ofDomesday Book. They wererelatively free from thedevastation caused by war.

None of them was a slave.Slavery is a feature ofeconomies characterized bylabour shortage; aspopulation, and therefore thesupply of labour, rose, soslavery declined. True,manyof them were serfs (orvilleins)–perhapsasmuchashalf the total population –whereas the villani andcottagers ofDomesdayBook(three-quarters of the listedpopulation) were free. But

although the villani andcottagerswere free inasmuchas theywere not slaves, it isclear that theywere not veryfree – thus the existence ofthe much smaller Domesdayclass (only 14 per cent ofthose listed) called precisely‘free men’. What made lifedifficult for the villani andcottagerswas that their lordswere free too – free andpowerful. They were free tomanipulatecustominorderto

impose as many burdens astheycould,andinaperiodofrelativelabourshortagethisislikely tohavemeant aheavyregime of labour services: attimes like this lords wouldnot be content to pay wagesat levels set by the market.Only as supply rose wouldlords increasingly turn to thealternativeofwagelabour.Inthe twelfth century, manytenants found theirobligations converted from

labour service to payment ofa money rent. At this point,the development of thelegalistic outlook becomesimportant. In the decadeseither side of the year 1200,the king’s judges formulatedrules to determine who hadthe right to have theirdisputes heard in the royalcourtsandwhohadnot.Theydecided that those who hadthe right were ‘free’, whilethose who had not were

‘servile’. The effect of thisclassification of society intotwodistinctcategorieswastoenserf half the population: tomake them legally unfree.But what the lawyers tookwithonehandtheygavewiththe other. The moreeverything came to bedefinedandwrittendown,themore customary tenurestended to become ‘frozen’ inthat state inwhich theywerewritten down. It became less

easy to manipulate custom;more effectively than beforecustom tended to protect thestatusquo.Inthissense,evenunfree tenants in thethirteenth century were lessvulnerable to the arbitraryexactions of individual lordsthanmanyfreetenantsof theeleventh century had been.Thirteenth-century lords whotried to manipulate customoften found themselvesinvolved in long legalbattles

with well-organized villagecommunities.

But although customary lawmay have offered a poortenant some protection fromhis lord’s demands, it coulddo nothing to protect himfrom the grim realities ofeconomic change. In theyearseithersideof1200,halfthe villagers ofEnglandmayhave been enserfed, but this

mattered littlecomparedwiththe fact that poor villagersbecame still poorer. Thosewho really suffered towardsthe end of the thirteenthcentury were not serviletenants as such, but thosetenants, whether free orservile, who were poor andthosewhohadno landatall.We know something abouttenants.MortalityratesontheWinchester manors suggestthat from 1250 onwards the

poorertenantswerebecomingincreasingly ‘harvest-sensitive’ – a euphemisticphrase meaning that, witheach bad harvest, more ofthemdied,eitherofstarvationor of the diseases attendantupon malnutrition. Study oftheWestMidlandsmanor ofHalesowensuggeststhatpoortenantsthere–thesuccessorsofthecottagersofDomesday–hada lifeexpectancysometenyears less thanthebetter-

off tenants, the successors ofthe Domesday villani. Whathappened to the landless wecanonlyguess; thenatureoftheevidenceissuchthattheyrarely find themselvesmentioned in thirteenth-centuryrecords.Labourersongreat estates customarilyreceived not only cash butalso an allowance of grainsufficient to sustaina family.Butwhataboutthoselandlesslabourers who became

surplus to the economy?Presumablytheyalsobecame‘harvest-sensitive’.

ManagementofEstates

But the economic cloudswhichbroughtmiseryfor thepoor were nicely lined with

silverfortherich.Thegrowthof population meant anincreasing demand for food.Prices rose, particularlyaround 1200 and in the latethirteenth century. On theotherhand,aplentifulsupplyof labour meant that moneywage rates, both for piece-work and for day-work,remained stable throughoutthe century. Real wages, inother words, fell. In thesecircumstances, wealthy

landowners could do verywell. Selling their surplusproduce on the marketbrought increasing profits.Markets proliferated.Between1198and1483some2,400 grants of market weremade by the Crown and ofthese over half came in theperiodbefore1275.Equallyarising demand for tenanciesmeant growing rent-rolls. Totake just one example, thebishop of Ely’s net income

rose from£920 in 1171–2 to£2,550in1298.Butthisdoesnot quite mean that all thefortunatepossessorofagreatestatehad todowas sit backandletthelawsofsupplyanddemand do their work forhim.Inthetwelfthcentury,asbefore, most of the manorsbelonging to a wealthytenant-in-chief were in factheld by his tenants, either asknights’ feesor leasedout atfixed rents to ‘farmers’.At a

time of stability or gradualexpansion, this made goodsense;fromthelord’spointofview it kept hisadministrative costs down toa minimum. The stability ofthesystemisindicatedbythefact that long-term leases foralifeorforseveralliveswerecommon,andthattheselong-term grants tended to turnintohereditarytenures.

But the steep rise in pricesaround 1200 created severeproblems for the lord livingon fixed rents. If he, ratherthanhis tenants,weretotakeadvantage of the marketeconomy, then he had toswitch to direct managementofhismanors.Toabandonanage-old system was not easyand many lords encounteredfierce resistance from theirtenants, but gradually it wasdone. The most famous

descriptionoftheprocesscanbe read in Jocelin ofBrakelond’s account of thebusiness-like life of AbbotSamsonofBuryStEdmunds(abbot 1182–1211). Thelandlord took his estates intohis own hands, appointedbailiffs and reeves to runthem and sell the surplus onthe open market. Under thisnew regime, the lord’sexpenses and profits weregoing to vary from year to

year. This would have madeitveryeasyforhisofficialstocheat him unless a closecheck were kept on theiractivities.Soadetailedrecordof the manorial year wasdrawn up and then sent,together with similar returnsfrom the othermanors, to bechecked by auditors whorepresented the centraladministration of a greatestate. (The survival ofmasses of these accounts

means that we know a greatdeal about some aspects ofthethirteenth-centuryEnglishrural economy.)The auditorshad a policy-making as wellas a fraud-detecting role.They fixed targets for eachmanor, the levels ofproduction of grain andlivestock which had to bereached. They tookinvestmentdecisions,whetherto build new barns, whetherto buy fertilizers, and so on.

Inspired by these concerns awhole new literature wasborn, treatises on agricultureand estate management, ofwhich Walter of Henley’sHusbandry is the mostfamous. All these changespresupposed the existence ofwidespread practical literacy:withoutthisitwouldnothavebeen possible to carrythrough the managerialrevolution–forthatiswhatitwas – of the early thirteenth

century.

The whole point of the newsystem was to maximize thelord’sprofits,andtodosoinasrationalawayaspossible.Itseemsunlikelythatthiswasanapproachwhichwasgoingto concern itself with theproblemsfacingthepoor, thelame ducks of the economicsystem, nearly all of whomwere born lame. At a

manorial level there areinnumerable cases ofresistance to a lord’sdemands, both passiveresistance and direct,sometimes legal, action. Inthe towns, too, there isincreasing evidence of astruggle between rich andpoor. Despite the ‘safetyvalve’ of the opportunitiesprovided by migration intoCeltic lands, it looks asthoughbythe1290sEngland

was a country choked withpeople,atraditionaleconomyunable to cope with thestrainsofpopulationpressure,even perhaps a land on thebrinkofclasswarfare.

Chapter5EnglandatWar,1290–1390

To those who lived at thetime, and to many historianssince, the late Middle Ages,from c.1290, seemed adangerous, turbulent, and

decadent period. England’scivil and foreign wars –especially those in Scotland,France, and the LowCountries – lasted longer,extended further afield, costmore, and involved largernumbers of men than any ithad fought since the VikingAge.WithintheBritishIsles,Welshmenweredistrustedbythe English, despite EdwardI’s conquests; uprisingsculminatinginOwainGlynd

r’s rebellion (from 1400)seemedtojustifythisdistrustand recall prophecies thatforetold of the expulsion ofthe English from Wales.Celtic prejudice againstEnglishmen flourished withall the bitterness andresentment of which thedefeated or oppressed werecapable: ‘The tyranny andcruelty of the English’,claimed a Scot in 1442, ‘arenotorious throughout the

world, as manifestly appearsin their usurpations againstthe French, Scots, Welsh,Irishandneighbouringlands.’Famine, disease, and (from1348) plague drasticallyreducedEngland’spopulationbytheearlyfifteenthcentury,perhapsbyasmuchasahalf,and this severely disruptedEnglish society. Towards theend of the fifteenth century,Frenchstatesmenwerenotingwith disapproval

Englishmen’s habit ofdeposingandmurdering theirkings and the children ofkings (as happened in 1327,1399, 1461, 1471, 1483, and1485) with a regularityunmatched anywhere else inWestern Europe. Spiritualuncertaintyand the spreadofheresy led the cholericChancellor of OxfordUniversity, Dr ThomasGascoigne, to conclude thattheEnglishChurchofhisday

was decayed, and its bishopsand clergy failing in theirduty. One popular poet,writing about 1389, thoughtthat this seemingly decadentagewas all too appropriatelyreflected in the extravagantand indecent fashion forpadded shoulders, tightlydrawn waistbands, close-fittinghose,andlongpointedshoes.

Thereare,ofcourse,dangersin taking contemporaries attheir own estimation,particularly if they lived attimes of special tension orturmoil. It is now acceptedthatwarscanhaveacreativeside, in this case givingEnglishmen a sharper senseof national identity; thatfamine and disease need notutterly prostrate a society, oreconomic contractionnecessarily mean economic

depression;thatthegrowthofheresy and criticism ofreligious institutions mayspur men to greater personaldevotion; that, as with theevolution of Parliament,political crises haveconstructive features; and,finally, that literary andartistic accomplishments arerarely extinguished by civilcommotionorsocialferment.Fromthevantagepointofthebeginning of the twenty-first

century, the later MiddleAgesnowappearasanageofturbulence and complexity,sure enough, but also as anageofvitality,ambition,and,aboveall,fascination.

TheKing’sSovereignty

The king and his court, withthe royal family andhousehold at its centre, werethe focus and fulcrum ofEnglish government andpolitics. Central to both wasthe relationship between theking and his influentialsubjects: the barons ormagnates first and foremost,but also country knights andesquireswhooftenaspiredtojoin the baronial ranks,wealthy merchants, and the

bishops and talented clerks –all of whom soughtpatronage, position, andpromotionfromtheCrown.Asuccessfulkingwasonewhoestablished a harmoniousrelationship with all or mostof these influential subjects,for only then could politicalstability, effectivegovernment, and domesticpeacebeassured.Thiswasnosimple or easy task. Thegrowing emphasis on the

king’s sovereign authority inhis kingdom, reinforced bytheprinciple(from1216)thattheCrownshouldpass to theeldest son of the deadmonarchandbytheextensionof royaladministration in thehandsof anetworkofking’sclerks and servants, wasboundtobeattheexpenseofthe feudal, regional powerofthegreatlandowners.Yetthatvery principle of hereditarymonarchy, while it reduced

the likelihood of royalkinsmen squabbling over theCrown, made it more likelythatunsuitablekings(bytheiryouth, character, orincapacity) would sometimeswear it. Above all, thepersistent warfare of thefourteenth and fifteenthcenturies imposed heavierobligations on England’skings.FromEdwardI’sreignonwards,therewasnodecadewhenEnglishmenwerenotat

war, whether overseas or inthe British Isles. Everygeneration of Englishmen inthe later Middle Ages knewthe demands, strains, andconsequences of war – andmore intensely than theirforebears.

TheConquestofWales

After the civil war of HenryIII’sreign,asuccessfuleffortwas made to reconcileEnglandandrestoredomesticpeace whereby the king andhissubjectscouldre-establishastablerelationshipthatgavedue regard to the rights andaspirations of both. The newmonarch, Edward I (1272–1307), showed himself to becapable, constructive, and

efficient in his government,and also determined toemphasize his position assovereign.Buthisunrelentinginsistence on asserting hissovereignty in all theterritoriesoftheBritishIsles,even those beyond theborders of his realm, begantheeraofperpetualwar.

In Wales, he overwhelmedGwynedd, themost vigorous

and independent of thesurviving native lordships,and with Llywelyn apGruffydd’sdeath in1282 theconquest of Wales wassuccessfully completed after200 years of intermittentwarfare. The Crown therebyexpanded its territories inNorth and West Wales toform a principality thatcovered half the country; in1361 this was conferred onthe king’s eldest son as the

first English-born Prince ofWales. It was a notableachievement, if a costly one.Material damage had to bemade good; an imaginativeplan for future securityincluded a dozen new andhalf-a-dozen reconstructedfortresses, most of themcomplementedbynewwalledboroughs peopled by loyalimmigrants; and a permanentadministration was devisedfor theconquered lands.This

administration (announced inthe statute of Rhuddlan,1284) began as a militaryregime but soon establishedpeace and stability by ajudicious combination ofEnglishinnovationandWelshpractice. Firmness, temperedby fairness and conciliation,was thehallmarkof relationsbetween the new governorsand the Welsh population,andrebellionsin1287,1294–5, and 1316 were not

widespread or dangerousthreats. Yet the costs ofconquest were prodigious.Soldiers and sailors,architects, craftsmen, andlabourers were recruited inevery English county andbeyondtoserveinWales.Atleast £75,000 was spent oncastle-building between 1277and 1301 alone (when askilled mason earned lessthan 2s. a week), whilst thesuppression of the 1294–5

revolt cost about £55,000.Fortunately, royalgovernment inWales provedeminently successful: by themid-fourteenthcenturyitwasproducing a profit for theroyal exchequer and theWelsh gentry prospered inco-operation with an alienregime.

8.AtypicalWelshman,asseenfromWestminstertowardstheendofthethirteenthcentury:long

hair,plainhomespuncloak,oneshoe–andhisinvaluablelongbow

NosoonerhadLlywelynbeeneliminated than Edward Iturned to the lords of theWelshmarch (or borderland)–mostlyEnglishmagnates –

to establish his sovereignrights over them and theirsubjects too; and he broughtthe Welsh Church andbishops more directly underhis control. The wholeenterprise of Edwardianconquest showed animagination anddetermination and a grasp ofstrategy thatwent farbeyondthe military campaigns. Butthe feelings of bitternessamong the conquered, who

were ruled in Church andState by an alien hierarchy,could not easily be removed.IfEnglishdominationweretobecome oppressive, if theeconomic benefits of stablerule dried up, or if relationsbetween native andimmigrant deteriorated,serious problems would becreated for the English state,and colonial rule would bethreatened.

OverlordshipinScotland

Edward I was equally intenton exerting his superiorlordship over Scotland. Thiswas an exceptionallyambitious undertakingbecause Scotland, unlikeWales, had its ownmonarch(of the house of Canmore)

and Scotsmen’s sense ofindependence was fierce,especially in the remoterHighlands. But, as withWales, an opportunity toassertEngland’soverlordshiphad arisen in Edward’s reignin1286on thedeathofKingAlexander III and of hisgranddaughter and heiressfour years later. Edwardaccepted the invitationof theScottish ‘guardians of therealm’tosettlethesuccession

question, and he tookadvantage of this ‘GreatCause’ (1291–2) to securerecognition of himself as‘lord superior’ of Scotland.Scottish resistance andEdward’s efforts tomake hisclaimarealitybeganabarrenperiod of mutual hostilitybetween the two countriesthat lasted well into thesixteenth century. The ScotssoughtFrenchaid(1295)andpapal support, and they

generated a vigorouspatriotism indefenceof theirpolitical independence underthe leadership of WilliamWallace (executed 1305) andRobertBruce(KingRobertI,1306–29).AscoreofEnglishinvasions in the half-centuryafter 1296 succeeded inestablishing an uneasymilitary and administrativepresenceintheLowlands,butit was difficult to sustain inpoor and hostile country and

had to be financed largelyfrom England. Nor did theEnglish command thenorthern seas or subdue andcontrol thenorthandwestofScotland. Thus, the Englishhadnoneof theadvantages–or success – that attendedtheir ventures in Wales, andeven in battle (notably atBannockburn, 1314) theircavalry forces sufferedhumiliating defeat at thehands of more mobile

Scotsmen. The treaty ofNorthampton (1328), whichrecognized King Robert andsurrenderedtheEnglishclaimto overlordship, was quicklydisowned by Edward IIIwhenhetookpersonalchargeof the government in 1330.Anglo-Scottish relationsthereafter were a sadcatalogue of invasion, borderraids, unstable Englishoccupationofsouthernshires,Franco-Scottish agreements

that hardened into the ‘AuldAlliaunce’–eventhecaptureofKingDavidIIatNeville’sCross (1346). Scotlandproved a persistent andexpensive irritation afterEnglishclaimsandambitionswere thwarted by determinedand united resistance by theScots.

Ireland

After Bannockburn, Robert Itried to forestall furtherEnglish operations inScotland by exploiting thesituation in Ireland. During1315–18 his brother,EdwardBruce,securedthesupportofAnglo-Irish magnates andGaelicchiefs,andin1316hewas declared High King ofIreland. Soon afterwards,RoberthimselfvisitedIreland

and this may have beendesigned to stimulate a ‘pan-Celtic’ movement againstEdwardIIofEngland(1307–27). This Scottishintervention was a severeshock to the Englishgovernment and revealed theweakness of its regime inDublin. No English kingvisited Ireland between 1210and1394–not evenEdwardI,conqueroroftheWelshand‘hammer of the Scots’.

Instead, Edward I ruthlesslystripped the country of itsresourcesofmen,money,andsupplies, especially for hiswars and castle-building inWales and Scotland. Harshexploitationandabsenteeruleled in time to administrativeabuseandthedecayoforder,of which the Anglo-Irishmagnates and Gaelic chiefstook full advantage. Theking’s officials presided overan increasingly feeble and

neglected administration,whilst a Gaelic political andculturalrevivalhadtakenrootinthethirteenthcentury.Thiscontributed to the success ofEdwardBruce, duringwhoseascendancy Ireland, said acontemporary, ‘became onetrembling wave ofcommotion’. The Englishlordship never recovered andhenceforward was unable toimpose its authoritythroughouttheisland.Instead

ofbeinga financial resource,Ireland became a financialliability,with a revenue after1318thatwasathirdofwhatit had been under Edward Iand therefore quiteinadequate to sustainEnglishrule.Periodic expeditions ledby minor figures could dolittle to revive the king’sauthority and the area underdirect rule consequentlycontracted to the ‘pale’around Dublin. It was a

confession of failure whenthe government resorted toracialandculturalseparation,even persecution, by a seriesof enactments culminating inthe statute of Kilkenny(1366). The ‘lord of Ireland’hadaperfunctory lordship inthe later Middle Ages thatwascostly,lawless,hostiletoEnglish rule, and open toexploitationby theScots, theFrench, and even by Welshrebels.

Anglo-FrenchRelationsandtheHundredYearsWar

The recognition ofoverlordship which Englishmonarchs demanded of theWelsh, Scots, and Irish wasdenied to the French king in

Gascony, where these sameEnglish kings, as dukes ofAquitaine, had been feudalvassals of the Crown ofFrance since 1204. Gasconylay at the heart of Anglo-French relations both beforeand during the so-calledHundred Years War (1337–1453): it replaced Normandyand Anjou as the main boneof contention.At Edward I’saccession, this prosperous,wine-producingprovincewas

England’s only remainingFrench territory, and thepolitical link with Englandwas reinforced by aflourishing export trade innon-sweet wine which wascomplemented by thetransportofEnglishclothandcorn by sea toBordeaux andBayonne: in 1306–7 theduchy’s revenue was about£17,000 and well worthfightingfor.FrictionwiththeFrench king over Gascony’s

frontier and the rights ofGascons was graduallysubsumedinthelargerissuesof nationhood andsovereignty posed by anassertive, self-consciousFrench state bent ontightening its control over itsprovinces and vassals(including the English dukeof Aquitaine). For their part,Edward I and his successorswere reluctant to see Frenchroyal rights emphasized or

given any practical meaninginGascony.The resultwasaseries of incidents, peaceconferences, and ‘brushfire’wars inwhich French armiespenetrated Gascony and theduchy was periodicallyconfiscated, and Englishexpeditions – even a visit byEdwardIhimself(1286–9).

Relations between Englandand France might have

continued to fester in thisfashion had it not been fortwo other factors. TheEnglish government resentedthe Franco-Scottish alliance(from1295)andwasangeredby the refuge offered by theFrench(1334) to theScottishKing David II after EdwardIII had invaded Scotland.Even more contentious werethe consequences of theapproachingextinctionof theseniormalelineoftheFrench

royal house of Capet. Thedeaths,inrapidsuccession,offour French kings between1314 and1328, requiring theswearing of homage forGascony on each occasion,were irritating enough, butthe demise of the last Capetin1328raisedthequestionofthe succession to the Frenchthroneitself.Atthatpoint,thenewEnglishking,EdwardIII(1327–77),wasinnopositionto stake his own claim

through his French mother,Isabella, but in 1337, whenthe Gascon situation haddeteriorated further, he didso.Hisactionmayhavebeenprimarily tactical, toembarrass the new Valoismonarch, Philip VI, thoughforanEnglishkingtobecomeking of France would havethe undeniable merit ofresolving at a stroke thedifficult Gascon issue: thepolitical stability and

economic prosperity ofGascony would be assured.Thus, when a French fleetwas sighted off the Normancoastenroute(sotheEnglishbelieved) for Scotland in1337,warbegan–andwouldlastformorethanacentury.

England’s war aims wereneither constant norconsistently pursued.Especially in the fourteenth

century, its war diplomacywas primarily dictated by aseriesofimmediateproblems,notably, of how to maintainindependent rule in Gasconyand how to deter Scottishattacks across the northernborder in support of theFrench.EvenafterEdwardIIIclaimed theFrenchCrownin1337, he was prepared toransom John II, the Frenchkingcaptured at thebattleofPoitiers (1356), and to

abandon his claim in thetreaty of Brétigny (1360) inreturn for practicalconcessions. Nevertheless,dynasticties,commercialandstrategic considerations, evendiffering attitudes to thePapacy, which was installedat Avignon from 1308 to1378,combinedtoextendtheAnglo-French conflict to theLowCountries,toCastileandPortugal, as well as toScotland, Ireland, and even

Wales. To begin with, thewars(forthiswasadisjointedseriesofconflicts rather thanone war) were fought bysieges in northern France in1338–40; then there wasmore intensive campaigningbypincermovementsthroughthe French provinces ofBrittany, Gascony, andNormandy in 1341–7(resulting in the Englishvictory at Crécy and thecapture of Calais). This was

followed by boldmarches orchevauchées by Edward III’seldest son,Edward theBlackPrince, from Gascony in1355–6 (culminating in thegreat victory at Poitiers) andbythekinghimselfin1359toRheims, the traditionalcoronation seat of Frenchkings.The renewalofwar inCastile (1367) inaugurated aperiod of more modest andfitful campaigning inPortugal, Flanders, and

France itself,with both sidesgradually exhaustingthemselves.

Theadvantage in thewar layinitially with England, themore united and betterorganized of the twokingdoms. Its prosperity,based especially on woolproduction,anditsexperienceof warfare in Wales andScotland, were invaluable

foundations for larger-scaleoperations on mainlandEurope. The existence ofhighly independent Frenchprovinces dictated Englishstrategy. Edward III’scampaigns in the LowCountries in 1338–40 reliedon the support of the cloth-manufacturing towns ofFlanders which, thoughsubject to the French king,had vital commercial linkswithEngland. In the1340s a

successiondisputeinBrittanyenabled English forces tointervene there and even togarrisoncertaincastles;whileGascony, though far to thesouth, afforded direct accesstocentralFrance.

The wars within the BritishIsles gave the Englishgovernment a uniqueopportunity to develop novelmethodsofraisingsubstantial

forces. Supplementing andgradually replacing thetraditional feudal array, thenewer paid, contractedarmies, recruited byindentured captains, weresmaller, better disciplined,and more dependable andflexible than the looselyorganized and ponderousFrench forces. English men-at-arms and archers,proficient in the use of thelongbow and employing

defensivetacticsinbattle,hada decisive advantage whichbrought resounding victoriesagainst all the odds in theearly decades of the war(most notably at Crécy andPoitiers).Thewar at seawasa more minor affair, withnaval tactics showing littlenoveltyorimagination.Itwasusuallybeyond thecapabilityof fourteenth-centurycommanders to stage a navalengagement and the battle of

Sluys(whichtheEnglishwonin 1340) was incidental toEdward III’s expedition toFlanders. The English neverkept a fleet permanently inbeing, but the Valois,learningtheexpertiseoftheirCastilian allies, laterconstructed dockyards atRouen which in time gavetheman edge at sea (witnesstheir victory off La Rochellein1372).

English investment in theFrenchwarwasimmenseandunprecedented. Expeditionswere organized withimpressive regularity andwere occasionally very large(over10,000men in1346–7,for instance). The financialoutlay was prodigious andtolerated so long as the warwas successful; but as themargin of England’smilitaryadvantage narrowed after1369, so the government

resorted to newer and moredesperate expedients,includingpolltaxes.Shippingfor defence and expeditionscould not be supplied solelyby the traditional obligationof thesouthernCinquePorts,and hundreds of merchantvessels (735 for the siege ofCalais in 1347, for example)were impressed andwithdrawn from normalcommercial operations.Coastal defence against

French and Castilian raiders,who grew bolder after 1369,was organized by themaritime shires of the southandeast, supportedbyothersinland – but even this couldnot prevent the sacking ofWinchelsea (1360), Rye(1377), and other ports. Thecosts of war were indeedhigh.ItistruethatconqueredFrench estates were enjoyedby many a fortunate soldier,and ransoms were profitable

during the victorious years(KingJohnII’sransomalonewas fixed at £500,000). Butthe lives and occupations ofthousands of Englishmen,Welshmen, and Irishmenwere disrupted by warservice; supplies of food,materials, and equipmentwere diverted to operationsthatwereentirelydestructive;andthewoolandwinetradeswere severely hampered.What is remarkable is that

England was able to engagein these enterprises overseasfor decades without seriouspolitical or social strains athome,andatthesametimetodefend the Scottish border,keep the Welsh calm, andavoid Irish uprisings. Thisachievement owed much tothe inspiration, example, andleadership of Edward III andthe Black Prince, both ofwhomembodiedthechivalricvirtues vaunted by the

nobility and admired bysociety at large. To JeanFroissart, theHainaulterwhoknew them both and kept arecord of the most inspiringchivalricdeedsofhisage,theking was ‘gallant and noble[whose] like had not beenseen since the days of KingArthur’.His son appeared as‘this most gallant man andchivalrousprince’who,athisdeath in 1376, a year beforeEdwardIIIhimselfdied,‘was

deeplymournedforhisnoblequalities’. King Edwardpresided over a regime inEngland that was less harshthanEdwardI’sandfarmorecapablethanEdwardII’s.

FinancingWar,PoliticalReform,andCivilStrife

Thesewarswereacatalystofsocial change, constitutionaldevelopment, and politicalconflict in England whichwould otherwise haveoccurred more slowly.Moreover,alongwiththerestof Europe, England in thefourteenth centuryexperienced population andeconomic fluctuations thatincreased tension and

uncertainty. The resultwas aseries of crises whichunderlined how delicatelybalancedwas therelationshipbetween the king and hissubjects (especially hismagnates, who regardedthemselves as representingthe entire ‘community of therealm’) and how crucial to apersonal monarchy was theking himself. Able anddetermined–evenfar-sighted– Edward I and his advisers

mayhavebeen,buttheking’sobstinate and autocraticnature seriously strainedrelations with his influentialsubjects. Between 1290 and1297, the propertied classes,themerchants,andespeciallythe clergy were subjected toextraordinarily heavy andnoveldemandsfortaxes(fourtimes as frequently as in thefirst half of Edward’s reign)for the king’s enterprises inFrance and the British Isles.

There was resistance and aproperty tax of 1297produced only a fraction(£35,000) of what had beenanticipated. Further, armieshad been summoned by theking for prolonged serviceoutside the realm. Edward’sattempts to silence resistanceshocked the clergy andembittered the merchants.The leading magnates,including Welsh marcherlordswho resented Edward’s

invasion of their cherishedfranchises, reacted byresumingtheir time-honouredrole as self-appointedspokesmen of the realm, andthey presented grievances tothekingin1297andagainin1300. They deployed MagnaCarta as their banner againsttaxation without the payers’consent, and againstoppressiveandunprecedentedexactions.Yet,whenEdwarddied in the arms of his

attendants atBurgh-by-Sandson7July1307,justashewasabout to cross the SolwayFirth on his sixth expeditionto Scotland, the problems ofwartime remained. Hebequeathed to his son andsuccessor, Edward II (1307–27), an expensive war in thenorththatwasnowherenearavictorious conclusion, andpolitical unrest in Englandcompounded by a dwindlingoftrustbetweenmonarchand

subject. These twopreoccupations – politicalstabilityandwar–dominatedpublic affairs during thefollowing200yearsandhadaprofound effect on thekingdom’ssocialandpoliticalcohesionandonitseconomicprosperity. The new kingwouldneedexceptionaltactifa further crisis of authorityweretobeavoided.

Tact was not Edward II’soutstanding quality. Starvedofaffectionduringchildhood,ignored by his father inadolescence, and confrontedby unsolved problems at hisaccession, Edward II soughtadvice, friendship, evenaffection, from ambitiousfavourites such as PeterGavaston and HughDespenser who wereunworthy of the king’s trustand whose influence was

resented by many magnates.Thesefacts,togetherwiththedetermination of themagnates (led by Thomas,earl of Lancaster) to extractfromEdwardconcessionsandreformswhich Edward I hadbeen unwilling to confirm,turned the formidabledifficulties of ruling akingdom that was facingsetbacks inScotland, Ireland,Wales, and France into astruggle for political reform

and personal advancement.An extended and morespecific coronation oath(1308) bound the new kingmore firmly to observeEnglish law and custom, andordinances drawn up by themagnates in 1311 sought tolimit the king’s freedom ofaction; theseordinanceswereannounced in Parliament inorder to gain wide supportand approval. Edward II hadall the stubbornness of his

father (though without hisability) and Gavaston’smurder (1312) converted thisquality into an unshakeableresolve not to be dominatedby his friend’s murderers.Meanwhile, the burdens ofwaranddefenceontheking’ssubjects were scarcely lessheavy than they had beenduringEdward I’s conquests,and this at a time of severesocial distress and povertycaused by a succession of

disastrous harvests andlivestock diseases during1315–22.Civilwar (1321–2)and the king’s deposition(1326–7) were the fatefuloutcomeofthefailureofkingandgovernedtoco-operatetomutual benefit. Edwarddenounced the ordinances in1322, again in a Parliament(atYork),andafterthedefeatof his opponents atBoroughbridge in 1322, heexecutedLancaster.By1326,

Edward’s deposition infavour of his namesake sonand heir seemed the onlyalternative to a mean,oppressive, and unsuccessfulregime that engendered civilstrife. This awesome step,engineered with QueenIsabella’s connivance, theacquiescence of PrinceEdward, andwith substantialmagnate and other support,demonstratedinaParliament,was unprecedented: since the

Norman Conquest, noEnglish king had beendeposed from his throne. In1327, therefore, every effortwas made to conceal theunconcealable and justify theunjustifiable. Browbeaten,tearful, and half-fainting, thewretched king was forced toassent to his own abdication,and a meeting of Parliamentwas used to spread theresponsibility as widely aspossible. Although the

accession of Edward’s sonensured that the hereditaryprinciple remained intact, theinviolability of anointedkingshiphadbeenbreached.

EdwardIII’sRule

Although only 14 in 1327,EdwardIIIwassoonaparent

by1330andprovedfarmorecapable than his father andmore sensitive thanhe to theattitudes and aspirations ofhis magnates – indeed, heshared them, particularly inwarfare and in accepting thechivalric obligations of anaristocratic society. At thesame time, the new king’sgrandiose and popular plansinFranceraisedissuessimilartothoseposedbyEdwardI’senterprisesintheBritishIsles

and Gascony. Should theseplans ultimately proveunsuccessful,theimplicationsfor England might well besimilar to those that hadsurfacedinEdwardII’sreign.The outbreak of prolongedwar in 1337meant increasedtaxationatalevelevenhigherthan that of Edward I’s lastyears,andEdwardIIIshowedthesameruthlessnesstowardsmerchants, bankers, andlandowners as Edward I had

done.Moreover,theabsencesof the king on campaign, inthe thick of the fightingwhich he and his magnatesrelished, posed seriousquestions for a sophisticatedadministration normallyunder the personal directionof the king. Edward’sordinances(issuedatWalton-on-Thames, 1338) for thegovernment of England fromabroad caused frictionbetween the king and his

advisers in northern Franceon the one hand, and thosecouncillors remaining inEngland on the other. Someeven feared that, if the warwere successful, Englandmight take second place inKing Edward’s mind to hisrealm of France. Thus, in1339–43 another crisis arosein which magnates,merchants,andtheCommonsinParliament(nowtheforumin which royal demands for

taxationweremade)protestedto the king. Edward wasinduced to act morecircumspectly andconsiderately towards hismagnates, clergy, andsubjects generally. Theeventual reconciliation, andthe re-establishment of thetrust in the king that hadproved so elusive since the1290s, was possible becauseEdwardIIIwasasensibleandpragmatic monarch, with a

self-confidence that did notextend to arrogance. Heappointed ministersacceptable to his magnates,he pandered to the self-importance of Parliament,and he developed aremarkable rapport with hissubjects which sustained hisrule in England and hisambitions in France for aquarter of a century. Furthercrisis was avoided, despiteEngland’s involvement in its

mostmajorwaryet.

9.KingEdwardII,eldestsurvivingsonof

EdwardIandEleanorofCastile;marriedIsabellaofFrancein1308;deposedin1327andmurdered.The

finealabastertomb(c.1331)atGloucesterbecameaplaceofpilgrimage

10.Aknightpreparingforthelists,whichwereapreparationforwarandachivalricsport.SirGeoffreydeLuttrellisbeingarmed

byhiswifeanddaughter.(FromthefamousLuttrell

Psalter,c.1340.)

There was an enormouscontrast with the situation inthe1370sand1380s.For thegeneration of Englishmenalive then, the frustrations ofthe resumed war in France(from 1369) and ofdebilitating skirmishes inIreland and on the Scottish

border were unsettling; andrenewed taxation, after adecade when England hadenjoyedtheprofitsofwaranda respite from taxes, wasresented. Raids on south-coast ports were frequent,uncertainnavalcontroloftheChannel imperilled trade andupset the merchants, andexpensive chevauchées inFrance were occasionallyspectacular but rarelyprofitable. Yet the abrupt

reversal of English policy in1375,involvingahumiliatingtruce with France andpayments to the mistrustedpope, only served to affrontand exasperate Englishmen.Moreover, after the death(1369) of Queen Philippa, aparagon among queens,EdwardIII lapsedgentlyintoa senility that sapped hisstrength and impaired hisjudgement.TheBlackPrince,too, began to suffer from the

effects of his wartimeexertions; in fact, hepredeceasedhisfatherinJune1376. Yet the financial,manpower,andotherburdensonEngland’spopulationwerenot eased. Questions wereraised, especially by theCommons in Parliament,about the honesty as well asthe competence of the king’sadvisers and officials.Strengthened by a rising tideof anticlericalism in an age

when the reputation of thePapacy and the Church wasseverely tarnished, theoutcryhad swept Edward III’sclericalministers frompowerin 1371 and others wereaccused of corruption, eventreason. Another politicalcrisishadarisen.Inthe‘GoodParliament’ of 1376, thelongest and most dramaticassembly yet held, theallegedly corrupt andincapable ministers – even

the old king’s influentialmistress,AlicePerrers–wereaccusedbytheCommonsandtried before the Lords in anovel and highly effectiveprocedure (impeachment)which henceforward enabledpersons in high places to beheld publicly to account fortheirpublicactions.

TheAccessionof

RichardII

The crisis entered a newphase when King EdwardhimselfdiedinJune1377.Hewas succeeded by the BlackPrince’s only surviving sonand heir, Richard II (1377–99), who was ten years ofage. Englandwas facedwiththe prospect of only the

second royal minority since1066andthefirstsince1216.On the latter occasion therehad followed a period ofpolitical turbulence centringon the young Henry III; asimilar situation developedafter1377andplayeditspartin precipitating the Peasants’Revolt (1381) in eastern andsouth-eastern England (seeChapter 6). A series of polltaxes was imposed during1377–80 to finance the war.

These taxes were at a ratehigherthanwasusualandthetax of 1379 was popularlyknown as ‘the evil subsidy’.They sparked off violence inEast Anglia against the tax-collectors and the justiceswhotriedtoforcecomplianceon the population. But whatturned these irritations intowidespread rebellionwas theprolonged dislocation ofunsuccessful war, the impactof recurrent plagues, and the

anticlerical temper of thetimes. Hopes of remedyplaced by the rebels in theyoung King Richard provedtobevain,thoughheshowedconsiderable courage infacing the rebels in Londonduringthesummerof1381.

Richardwasstillonly14,andthearistocraticrivalriesintheruling circle continued, notleastamongtheking’suncles.

This and the lack of furthermilitary success in Francedamagedthereputationofthecouncil that governedEngland in Richard’s nameand even affected the king’sown standing in the eyes ofhis subjects. Richard, too,was proving a self-willedmonarch whose sense ofinsecurity led him to dependon unworthy favouritesreminiscent of Edward II’sconfidants.Ashegrewolder,

henaturallywantedtoexpandhis entourage and hishousehold beyond what hadbeen appropriate for a child.Among his friends andassociates were some whowerenew to the ranksof thearistocracy, and all weregenerously patronized by theking at the expense of those(including his uncleGloucester) who did notattract Richard’s favour. In1386 Parliament and a

numberofmagnates attackedRichard’s closest associatesand even threatened the kinghimself. With all thestubbornness of thePlantagenets,Richardrefusedto yield. This led to furtherindictments or appeals of hisadvisers by five leading‘appellant’ lords (thedukeofGloucester, and the earls ofWarwick, Arundel,Nottingham, and Derby, theking’scousin),andaskirmish

took place at Radcot Bridgein December 1387 when theking’s closest friend, the earlofOxford,wasrouted.Atthemomentous ‘MercilessParliament’ (1388), the kingwas forced to submit toaristocratic correction which,if it had been sustained,would have significantlyaltered the character of theEnglish monarchy. Onceagain, the pressures of war,the tensions of personal rule,

and the ambitions ofEngland’s magnates hadproduced a most seriouspolitical and constitutionalcrisis. The institution ofhereditarymonarchyemergedlargely unscathed after acentury and more of suchcrises, but criticism of theking’sadvisershadreachedanew level of effectivenessand broader sections ofopinion had exerted asignificant influence on

events. These were thepolitical and personaldimensions of more deep-seated changes that weretransformingEngland’ssocialandeconomiclifeinthelaterMiddleAges.

Chapter6Wealth,Population,andSocialChangeintheLaterMiddleAges

England’swealth in the laterMiddleAgeswasitsland,theexploitation of whichengaged most Englishmen:growing corn, producingdairy goods, and tendinglivestock. England’s mostimportant industry, textiles,was indirectly based on theland, producing the finestwool in Europe from oftenvery large sheep flocks: StPeter’s Abbey, Gloucester,owned over 10,000 sheep by

1300,when the total numberinEnglandisthoughttohavebeenintheregionof15to18millions. The wealthiestregions were the lowlandsandgentlyrollinghill-countryof the midland and southernshires, with extensions intothe borderland and southernlittoral of Wales. Otherindustries were lesssignificant in creatingwealthand employing labour, butCornish tin mining was

internationally famous andthe tin was exported to theContinent. Lead, iron, andcoal mining was quitemodest, though the coastaltraffic in coal from theTyneValley and theneighbourhood of Swanseareflected its growingdomestic and industrial use.As for financial andcommercial services, theeconomy gained little fromwhat became, in modern

times, one of the nation’sprimesourcesofwealth.FewEnglishmerchants–thedelaPoles of Hull were anexception – could competewiththeinternationalbankersof Italy, with their branchesin London, despite the factthatEdwardIandEdwardIIIwereslowtohonourtheirwardebts to these Italiancompanies. England’smercantile marine wasgenerally outclassed, except

in coastal waters, by foreignshipping; but the Gasconwine-run and woollenshipments to the LowCountries did fallincreasinglyintothehandsofEnglish merchants and intothe holds of English vessels.The thousand and moremarkets and fairs dottedabout the English andWelshcountryside–morenumerousby 1350 than in the past –served mainly their local

communities within a radiusof a score or somiles.Mostof these small towns andvillages – Monmouth,Worcester, and Stratfordamong them – wereintegrated with their ruralhinterland, whose well-to-doinhabitants frequently playedapartintownlife,joiningtheguilds, buying or rentingtown residences, and fillingurban offices. A smallnumber of towns, including

some ports, were larger andhad broader commercialhorizons: Shrewsbury’straders travelled regularly toLondon by the fifteenthcentury, and merchants fromthe capital and Calais (after1347) visited the Welshborderland in search of finewool. Bristol, with its vitallink with Bordeaux, wasrapidlybecomingtheentrepôtof late medieval Severnside;whilst York, Coventry, and

especially London werecentresofinternationaltrade.

Landowners,Peasants,andMerchants

From this wealth sprang theprosperity of individuals,institutions, and the Crown.

Thegreatestlandownerswerethe lay magnates (small innumber, like ‘skyscrapers ona plain’), bishops,monasteries, and otherreligious institutions. In1300these still benefitedhandsomely from a marketboom created by theexpanding population of thepreviouscentury.Priceswerebuoyant and landed incomessubstantial: after the earl ofGloucester died at

Bannockburn (1314), hisestates were estimated to beworthjustover£6,000ayear,whilstthoseofChristChurchPriory, Canterbury, producedin 1331 a gross annualincome ofmore than £2,540.Landowners thereforeexploitedtheirestatesdirectlyandtookapersonalinterestintheir efficient management.They insisted on their rightsas far as possible, squeezinghigher rents out of tenants

and carefully recording inmanor courts the obligationsattached to holdings. Suchlanded wealth was thefoundation of the political,administrative, and socialinfluence of the aristocracy,manyofwhomhadestatesinseveral counties as well asWalesandIreland:

Humphrey, earl of Herefordand Essex, for instance,

inherited property in Essex,Middlesex, Huntingdonshire,Hertfordshire, andBuckinghamshire,andalsoinBrecon,Hay,Huntington,andCaldicot in theWelshmarch.Landwasequallythebasisofthe gentry’s fortunes, albeiton a more local, shire level,whilst it gave ecclesiasticallandowners an earthlyauthority that complementedtheir hold on men’s mindsand souls. This wealth could

support pretensions andambitionsonamorenationalstage, as in the case ofThomas,earlofLancaster(d.1322), the richest earl in theEnglandofhisday.

The peasantry in 1300 wereliving in a world where landwas scarce and opportunitiesfor economic advancementwere limited by the tightcontrols of the landowners.

Prices were high – the priceof wheat after 1270 wasconsistentlyhigherthanithadbeen earlier in the century –and there was little cash tospareafterfood,clothing,andequipment had been bought.Wages in an over-stockedlabour market were low andreducedthepurchasingpowerofskilledandunskilledalike:a carpenter earned 3d. a day(withoutfood)andalabourer1d. or 1½d. Grumbles,

complaints, and spasms ofviolence were directed atlandowners and theirofficials, and rent strikes andrefusalstoperformcustomarylabour services were notuncommon.

Themerchantsof1300,mostnotablytheexportersofwooland importers of wine,thrived in an expandingmarket from the Baltic to

Spain, Portugal, and,especially after the openingof the sea-route from theMediterranean, to northernItaly. During 1304–11 woolexports averaged annually39,500sacks(eachcontainingat least250fleeces)andonly30–40 per cent of thesecargoes was shipped byforeigners. The risingantipathy towards alienmerchants in English tradereflects the self-confidence

and assertiveness of native(or denizen) merchants.Edward I legislated (1280s)in their interest, notably tofacilitate the recovery ofdebts at law, which wasessential to the expansion oftrade. But when war came,merchants were among thefirst to resist heavy taxation,especiallythemaltolt(or‘eviltax’) of 1294, and theimpressmentoftheirships.

Map3.MainroadsinmedievalEnglandand

Wales

Taxation,Wages,andEmployment

The king was the largestlandownerofall,evenbeforeEdward I acquired a

principality inWales and theestates of the house ofLancaster merged with theCrown’sin1399.Thegrowthof national taxation underEdward I and his successorsenabled theCrown to tap thewealth of private landownersandmerchants, too.Noteventhepeasantryescaped,aswaswell appreciated by thosewhosangthepopularlament,‘SongoftheHusbandman’,inEdward I’s reign. Then, in

1327, all who had goodsworth at least 10s. a yearwere required to pay 1s. 8d.in tax, and doubtless the lesswell-off had the burdenpassed on to them indirectly.The preoccupation with warmade the king heavilydependent on the wealth andforbearanceofhissubjects.Ifthatwealthceasedtogrow,orif the prosperity ofindividuals and institutionswere punctured, then the

king’s extraordinarycommitments mighteventually be beyond hismeans and his subjects’tolerance wear dangerouslythin.

By the mid-fourteenthcenturytheprosperousperiodof ‘highfarming’wasalmostover. Prices were falling,making cultivation for amarketlessprofitable.Wages

were rising, more so foragriculturallabourersthanforcraftsmen, and there was noadvantage in employingwomen, who were paid thesame as men – indeed, inbear-baiting they were paidmore! The principal reasonwhy large-scale farming waslosing some of its attractionwasthatthepopulationboomcametoanendandwent,fullthrottle, into reverse. As thepool of available labour

shrank, wages rose; as thepopulationdeclinedsodidthedemand for food andsupplies, and prices followedsuit.

Population,Poverty,andPlague

England’spopulationreached

its peak, perhaps over 4millions,abouttheendofthethirteenth century. At thattime, there was insufficientcultivable land to ensure thatall peasant families had anadequate livelihood. A highpopulation coupled with lowliving standards inevitablymeant poverty, famine, anddisease, and a mortality thatcrept upwards and broughtthe demographic boom to ahalt. The plight of those

living at or below thepoverty-linewasmadeworsebyaseriesofnaturaldisastersrelatedtoover-exploitationofthe land and exceptionallybad weather in the openingdecades of the fourteenthcentury. Poor harvests werecalamitous for a societywithout adequate storagefacilities:therewaslesstoeatandnocashtobuywhatnowcostmuchmore.Theharvestsof the years 1315, 1316,

1320, and 1321 wereexceptionally bad; cattle andsheep murrains wereespecially prevalent in 1319and 1321, and on the estatesof Ramsey Abbey (Cambs.)recovery took 20 years; andin 1324–6 parts of Englandhad severe floods whichdrowned thousands of sheepin Kent. Famine and diseasespread, and on HalesowenManor (Worcs.) 15 per centof males died in 1315–17.

Agricultural dislocation waswidespread, grain pricessoared (from 5s. 7¼14 d. to26s. 8d. per quarter inHalesowen during 1315–16),and wool exports collapsed.However, itwas a temporarycalamity and Englandgradually recovered duringthe 1320s; but thevulnerability of the poor inparticular had been starklydemonstrated.

11.AKentishpeasant,c.1390,forcedtocarry

barefootasackofhayandstrawpubliclyfromWinghamtothe

archbishop’spalacesixmilesawayatCanterbury.

Tenantsinthelatefourteenthcenturytriedtoavoidsuchhumiliatinglabourservicestotheir

lords.(FromtheRegisterof

ArchbishopWilliamCourtenay(1381–96),fo.

337v.)

Longer lasting and moreprofound were theconsequences of plague. Thefirst attack, known since thelate sixteenth century as theBlack Death but tocontemporaries as ‘the greatmortality’, occurred insouthernEnglandin1348;by

theendof1349ithadspreadnorth to central Scotland.Geoffrey le Baker, acontemporary Oxfordshirecleric, described its progressfrom the ports, where itarrived in rat-infested ships,and men’s helplessness indiagnosing its cause anddealingwithitseffects.

Andatfirstitcarried

off almost all theinhabitants of theseaports in Dorset, andthen those living inlandand from there it ragedso dreadfully throughDevon and Somerset asfar as Bristol and thenmen of Gloucesterrefused those of Bristolentrancetotheircountry,everyone thinking thatthe breath of those wholived amongst people

who died of plaguewasinfectious. But at last itattackedGloucester, yeaandOxfordandLondon,and finally thewhole ofEnglandsoviolentlythatscarcely one in ten ofeithersexwas leftalive.As the graveyards didnot suffice, fields werechosen for the burial ofthedead…Acountlessnumber of commonpeople and a host of

monks and nuns andclericsaswell,knowntoGodalone,passedaway.It was the young andstrong that the plaguechiefly attacked…Thisgreat pestilence, whichbegan at Bristol on [15August] and in Londonabout [29 September],ragedforawholeyearinEngland so terribly thatit cleared many countryvillagesentirelyofevery

humanbeing.Whilethisgreat calamity wasdevastatingEngland, theScots rejoicing thoughtthat they would obtainall they wished againstthe English … Butsorrow following on theheels of joy, the swordof the anger of Goddeparting from theEnglish drove the Scotsto frenzy … In thefollowingyearitravaged

theWelshaswellas theEnglish; and at last,setting sail, so to speak,for Ireland, it laid lowthe English living therein great numbers, butscarcely touched at allthe pure Irishwho livedamongst the mountainsand on higher ground,until the year of Christ1357, when itunexpectedly andterribly destroyed them

alsoeverywhere.

EconomicEffectsoftheBlackDeath

At a stroke, theBlackDeathreducedEngland’spopulationby about a third. By 1350,Newcastle uponTynewas in

desperate financial straits ‘onaccount of the deadlypestilenceasbyvariousotheradversities in these times ofwar’, and Carlisle was‘wasted and more thanusually depressed as well bythe mortal pestilence latelyprevalent inthosepartsasbyfrequent attacks’ (by theScots). Seaford (Sussex)wasreported even in 1356 as ‘sodesolated by plague and thechances of war that men

living there are so few andpoor that they cannot paytheir taxes or defend thetown’. Tusmore (Oxon.) wasanother victim of the plague:by 1358 permission wasgiven to turn its fields into apark because every villeinwas dead and the village nolonger had any taxpayers.Nevertheless, the BlackDeath’s effects were notimmediately or permanentlycatastrophic. The behaviour

of a Welshman living inRuthin was not uncommon:he ‘left his land during thepestilence on account ofpoverty’,butby1354hehadreturned ‘and was admittedby the lord’s favour to holdthe same land by the servicedue from the same’. In anycase, in a well-populatedcountry, dead tenants couldbe replaced and landowners’incomes over the next 20years were cut by no more

than 10 per cent. It was therecurrenceofplagueoverthefollowing century –particularly the attacks of1360–2, 1369, and 1375 –which had lasting effects,even if these outbreaks weremore local and urban. Thepopulation steadily declinedto about two and a halfmillions – or even less – bythemid-fifteenthcentury.

12.A‘lostvillage’among1,300andmoreintheMidlandsandeasternEngland.MiddleDitchford

(Glos.)wasprobably

abandonedinthemid-fifteenthcenturybecauseofdecliningpopulationand

theconversionofitsstreets,lanes,andopenfields(stillwellmarked,withridge-and-furrowcultivationinforeground)topastoral

farming

For those who survived anuglydeath,lifemaynothavebeen as wretched in the late

fourteenth and fifteenthcenturies as it undoubtedlywas before. For manypeasants, this became an ageofopportunity, ambition, andaffluence: Chaucer was ableto portray his pilgrims in theCanterbury Tales with good-humouredoptimism,notinanatmosphere of gloom anddespondency. The peasant ina smaller labour market wasoften able to shake off thedisabilitiesofcenturies,force

rents down, and insist on abetter wage for his hire; andwith the collapse in prices,his standard of living rose.The more successful andambitious peasants leasednew property, invested sparecash by lending to theirfellowsand,especially in thesouth and east, builtsubstantial stone houses forthe first time in peasanthistory.

Landowners, on the otherhand, were facing severedifficulties. Marketproduction in wheat, wool,and other commodities wasless profitable, the cultivatedarea of England contracted,and agricultural investmentwas curtailed. Wages andother costs climbed and itseemed advisable to abandon‘high farming’ techniques infavour of leasing plots toenterprising peasants. Entire

communitieswere deserted –the ‘lostvillages’ofEngland– and many of these wereabandoned as a result of thetwin afflictions ofdemographic crisis andprolonged war: among theEnglish regions with thehighest number of ‘lostvillages’areNorthumberland,close to the Scottish border,and the Isle of Wight, thegoal of enemy marauders.Only in the last decades of

the fifteenth century – fromthe 1460s in East Anglia –did England’s populationbegin to rise at allsignificantly, and it is likelythatthelevelof1300wasnotreached again until theseventeenthcentury.

England’s economy hadcontracted markedly in thelate fourteenthcentury,but itwas not universally

depressed.Aftermencametoterms with the psychologicalshock of the plaguevisitations, society adjustedremarkably well, though notwithout turmoil. Landownershad the most painfuladjustment tomake and theyreacted in several ways, notall of which were calculatedto preserve domestic peace.Some, including the moreconservatively mindedecclesiastical landlords such

as the abbot of St Albans,resorted to high-handedmeasures, even tooppressionand extortion, to preservetheir hold on their remainingtenants. Some exploited theirestates ruthlessly in order toconserve their incomes, andtheharshattitudesofmagnatefamilies such as theMortimers, with extensiveestates in Wales, may havehelped cause the Glynd rrebellion(1400).Others,such

as the dukes of Buckinghamlater in the fifteenth century,adopted more efficientmethods of management toimprove the profitability oftheir estates. Yet others sawthe enclosure of fields andcommons for pasture andcultivation as less costly andan alternative means ofbuttressing unsteady rent-rolls; enclosure gatheredspeed especially in the northandwestinthelaterfifteenth

century.Largeandsmall, thelandowners as a group acted‘to curb the malice ofservants, who were idle, andnot willing to serve after thepestilence, without excessivewages’. Edward III’sordinance (1349) to restorepre-plague wage levels anddiscourage mobility amongan emancipated labour forcewas quickly turned into aparliamentary statute (1351).Moreover, the well-placed

magnate or gentleman hadsupplementary sources ofwealthavailabletohim:royalpatronage in the form ofgrants of land, money, andoffice (as the Beaufortrelatives of King Henry VIwell knew); familyinheritance, which enabledRichard, duke of York (d.1460) to become the richestmagnate of his age; andfortunate marriage with awell-endowed heiress or a

wealthy widow. Othersprospered in the king’sservice, not least in war.Henry V’s spectacularvictories enabled the captureof ransomable prisoners andthe acquisition of estates innorthern France, and as lateas 1448 the duke ofBuckingham was expectingmore than £530 a year fromthe French county of Perche.Some invested the profits ofservice and war in the mid-

fifteenth century in thegrandest manner, buildingimposingandelegant castles:witness Sir John Fastolf’s atCaister (Norfolk), or theHerberts’ huge fortress-palace atRaglan (Gwent), orSir Ralph Botiller’s castle atSudeley (Gloucestershire).Suchmeansand resourcesasthese facilitated theemergence of aristocraticlines that were every bit aspowerful as those of earlier

centuries and often withentrenched regional positionslikethoseoftheNevillesandPercies in the north and theStaffords and Mortimers inthewest.

Similar adjustments weretakingplaceinEnglishtownsand trade. Wool-growingremained the main pastoraloccupation,butthepatternofits industry was transformed

duringthefourteenthcentury.Partly as a result of the warand its disruption of Flemishindustry,andpartlyasaresultof changes in English tasteand demand, clothmanufacture absorbedgrowing quantities of woolpreviously exported; anumber of the wool ports,such as Boston and Lynn ineastern England, began todecline. Leading cloth-manufacturingcentressuchas

Stamford and Lincoln wereovertakenbyahostofnewerones sited in villages andtowns near fast-flowingstreamsandriversthatranthefulling mills. York founditself upstaged by Leeds,Halifax,andBradford;furthersouth, East Anglia, the westcountry, and even Walesdeveloped a flourishing clothindustry, with Bristol as themain outlet in the west.Londonwas in a class of its

own: the only medievalEnglish town with apopulationprobablyinexcessof 50,000 in the latefourteenth century. It was anentrepôt for the kingdom, aterminal of the Baltic, NorthSea, and Mediterraneantrades;itattractedimmigrantsfrom the home counties andEast Anglia, and especiallyfrom the EastMidlands; anditssuburbswerecreepingup-river towards Westminster.

No less than in thecountryside, these changesunsettled life in a number oftowns, whose burgessoligarchiesstrovetomaintaintheir control in a changingworld. The landowners ofEngland thus strove tocounter the economic crisis,butitwasoftenatthepriceofstraining relations with anincreasingly assertivepeasantry and establishedurbancommunities.

ThePeasants’Revolt

The cumulative effect ofeconomic, social, political,and military strains infourteenth-centuryEnglandisseen most graphically in thePeasants’ Revolt (1381). Itwas exceptional in its

intensity, length, and broadappeal, but not in itsfundamentalcharacter,whichwas revealed in otherconspiraciesandinsurrectionsin the years that followed.Widespread violence wassparked off in 1381 by yetanother poll tax, this one at1s. a head, three times therateof1377and1379.Peopleresponded with evasion,violence towards thecollectors and the justices

who investigated, and,ultimately,inJune1381,withrebellion. Agriculturalworkers from eastern andsouth-eastern England werejoined by townsmen andLondoners; the grain andwool-growing countryside ofEast Anglia had felt the fullimpactofthecontractionanddislocation of the economyand the social contradictionsof an increasingly outmodedfeudal society.Moreover, the

rebels were disillusioned bythe political mismanagementof the 1370s and the recentdismal record in France, andthey feared enemy raids onthe coast. Although hereticsplayed no major role in therebellion, radical criticism ofthedoctrinesandorganizationof the English Churchpredisposed many todenounce an establishmentthatseemedtobefailinginitsduty.

Pressure on the governmentandanappealtothenewking(’WithKingRichard and thetrue-hearted commons’ wasthe rebels’ watch-word) heldout thebesthope for remedyof grievances, and thepopulaceofLondonofferedapool of potentialsympathizers. The rebelsaccordingly converged onLondonfromEssexandKent

(where Wat Tyler and aclerical demagogue, JohnBall, emerged as leaders).They threw prisons open,sacked the homes of theking’s ministers, ransackedthe Tower, and tried tofrighten Richard II intomaking far-reachingconcessions which, ifimplemented, would havebroken the remaining bondsofserfdomandrevolutionizedlandholding in Church and

State. But the rebellion waspoorlyplannedandorganizedand more in the nature of aspontaneous outburst offrustration. By 15 June therebels had dispersed to theirhomes.

13.JohnBall,thepriestlydemagoguewhoinspiredtherebellious

peasantsin1381,preachingtotherebelhostledbyWat

Tyler(leftforeground);bannersproclaimtherebels’loyaltytoKing

RichardII

Chapter7StillatWar,1390–1490

In1389,whenRichardIIwas22 years old, he declared: ‘Iam of full age to governmyhouse, and my household,and also my realm. For it

seems unjust to me that theconditionwhich Iamnow inshould be worse than thecondition of the least of mykingdom.’ The events of1386–8, when the appellantlords sought to dictate thechoice of the king’s friendsandministers and to regulatehis political actions, hadpoisoned relations betweenthe unforgiving king and hiscritics. Among these weresome of the most powerful

magnates in the realm, withestatesincentralandsouthernEnglandthattogetherrivalledinsizetheremoterfranchisesof the Crown in Wales,Cheshire,andCornwall.After1389, however, Richardcautiouslyassertedhimselfasking of England, and withintelligence and courage hetried to deal with theconsequences of hispredecessors’ ambitions andpolicies during the previous

century. In a period ofcomparative political calm,Richard carefully constructeda party of loyalists, based onhishouseholdand thedistantfranchises, particularlyCheshire and North Wales.The earl of Arundel’sforfeited lordships gave himan enhanced royal power inthe Welsh march, wherearistocratic lordships were attheir most independent. Thelarge and expensive

expedition to Ireland in1394–5, the first by anEnglishkingsince1210,wassuccessful in revitalizingEnglish rule and bringingGaelic and Anglo-Irish lordstoheelbyaskilfulmixtureoffirmness and conciliation;Richard may even have hadthe final and long-delayedconquest of the island inmind. This venture certainlystrengthenedhispowerinyetanother royal lordship and

demonstrated what hishousehold organization andresources could achieve,albeit temporarily. TowardsScotland, following theEnglish defeat at Otterburn(1388), Richard took themore traditional paths ofencouraging dissidentScottish magnates andplanning military campaigns;but in the 1390s he came toappreciate the benefits ofpeace.AtreatywithFrancein

1396 andRichard’smarriagetoIsabellaofValoishaltedanevenmoredebilitatingwar;ifthecessationofhostilitieshadrun its intended course (to1426),itwouldhaveprovidedthelongestperiodofpeaceinthe entire Hundred YearsWar. At home, the king wasable to concentrate onrestoring royal government,which had been so seriouslydamagedby thepersonalandpolitical weaknesses of the

1370sand1380s.Tothisend,ceremony and visualsymbolism were creativelyusedasroyalpropaganda.

Richard was imaginative,shrewd, andmasterful. Otherof his attributes were lessdesirable in a king. Hisupbringing and adolescentexperiences bred aninsecurity that led tooverconfidence, a lack of

proportion, and arbitrariness.Wilfully extravagant towardshis friends, he could becapricious, secretive, andharsh towards his enemies,and in 1397–8 he exiled theearl of Warwick, executedArundel, murderedGloucester, and then exiledDerby and Nottingham too.Ruthlessly deploying themonarch’s personal powers(‘He threw downwhomsoever violated the

Royal Prerogative’ was partof the inscription hecomposedforhisowntomb),Richard’slasttwoyearshavebeenjustlytermedtyrannous.The pope was induced tothreaten excommunicationagainstanyonewho‘attemptsanything prejudicial againstthe right of our Crown, ourregality or our liberty, ormaliciously defames ourperson’, while Richard’streaty with France promised

French aid against his ownsubjects should the needarise. His second visit toIreland in May 1399presentedHenryBolingbroke,earl of Derby and now dukeof Hereford and Lancaster,withtheopportunitytoreturnto England, retrieve hisposition, and recover theduchyofLancasterestatesofhis father that had recentlybeen seized by Richard. Theking’s methods had outrun

Englishlawandcustom–andthe tolerance of his greatersubjects. But his depositionlater in the year (29September) ended the mostcoherentattemptyettolifttheburden of war fromEnglishmen’sshoulders.

EnglandanditsNeighboursintheFifteenthCentury

ThedethronementofRichardIIwasamomentousdecision.Despite the precedent of1327, the situation in 1399was different in oneimportant respect. It was thefirst time since Richard theLionheart’s death that anEnglish king had ended hisreign without leaving a sonand heir, and the realm nowfaced the possibility of a

disputed succession. Customsince 1216 had vested thesuccession in theseniormaleline, even though that mightmean a child-king (as in thecaseofHenryIIIandRichardII himself). But therewas asyet no acknowledged rule ofsuccession should the seniormale line fail. In 1399 thechoice by blood lay betweenthe seven-year-old earl ofMarch,descendedthroughhisgrandmother from Edward

III’s second son, Lionel, andHenry Bolingbroke, the 33-year-old son of KingEdward’s third son, John.Bolingbroke seized theCrownafterbeingassuredofsupportfromthePercyfamilywhomRichardhadalienated.But in the extraordinarycircumstances created byRichard II’s dethronementand imprisonment, neitherMarch nor Bolingbroke hadobviously the stronger claim.

No amount of distortion,concealment, and argumenton Bolingbroke’s part coulddisguise what was a coupd’état. Hence, as in thetwelfthcentury,anelementofdynastic instability wasinjected into English politicswhich contributed todomestic turmoil, andencouraged foreign intrigueand intervention in thefollowingcentury.

England, meanwhile, couldnot escape the consequencesof its earlier attemptedsubjugation of the ‘Celtic’peoples in the British Isles.After the failure of RichardII’s imaginative policies, amore stable relationship wasneeded to ensure security forthe realm now that furtherconquest and colonizationwere patently beyond itsresources.Inpractice,Englishkings abandoned all serious

intention of implementingtheirclaimstooverlordshipinScotlandandmuchofIreland.In the fifteenth century, theywereonthedefensiveagainstthe Scots, partly because ofthe renewalofwar inFranceand partly because ofEngland’sinternaldifficultiesin Henry IV’s reign (1399–1413) and after 1450; theScots even sent substantialreinforcements to aid theFrench in 1419. For a brief

time (1406–24), the captivityin England of King James Ideterred major hostilitiesacross the border, butthereafter the Scots becamemore daring, hoping torecoverRoxburghCastle andalso Berwick, which theyachieved in 1460–1. Raids,sea skirmishes, and piracy,together with ineffectivetruces,combinedtoproduceastate of interminable ‘coldwar’. Only after the end of

the Hundred Years War(1453) and the establishmentof the Yorkist regime inEngland (1461) was there areallypurposefulsearchforamore stable relationship. AnAnglo-Scottish treaty wassealed in 1475, and a‘perpetual peace’ in 1502,despite misgivings in Franceand the occasional EnglishcampaigninScotland,suchasRichard,dukeofGloucester’sseizure of Berwick in 1482.

This marked a significantshift in relations between thetwo countries, althoughborder society continued tothrive on raids and disorderwasawayoflife.

The equilibrium reached inrelations with Ireland wasless satisfactory for EnglandthanfortheGaelicpopulationand the Anglo-Irish nobility.RichardII’sboldassertionof

royalauthorityhadfailed,andwas not repeated in theMiddle Ages. The king’slordship of Ireland, thoughheavily subsidized fromEngland, was consistentlyweak: the Gaels enjoyedindependence andcomparative prosperity, andthe Anglo-Irish cherishedtheirownpowerandcametoterms with their Gaeliccounterparts. The Englishgovernment’s main concern

was security (‘Ireland is abuttress and a post underEngland’, declared acontemporary in the 1430s),and only when this wasthreatened during the Welshrebellion(1400–9)and in the1450s was more interestshown in Irish affairs.Internal politicalfragmentation and separationfromEnglandweretheresult.The greater Anglo-Irishmagnates were the only

sourceofpoweronwhichthegovernment could rely topreserve some semblance ofits authority: mostEnglishmen were reluctanteven to go to Ireland,effective rule from Dublinwas impossible, and theresourcesforconquestsimplydid not exist. The real rulersof fifteenth-century Irelandwere magnates such as theearlsofOrmondandKildare;even if the government had

wanted to dislodge them, itcould not. An equilibrium inAnglo-Irish relations wasreached, but at the cost ofsurrendering effectiveEnglishcontrol.

In Wales, the heritage ofcompleteconquestbroughtitsown problems, notably aresentment which, in theunsettledeconomicclimateofthe late fourteenth century,

was focused on theAnglicized boroughs anddirected against officials inChurch and State who weremostly from the Englishborder shires or even furtherafield. This resentment waschannelled into rebellion byOwain Glynd r from 1400,and after this unpleasantexperience most Englishmenregarded Wales withsuspicion and fear. Onecontemporaryurged:

Beware of Wales,Christ Jesus mustuskeep,

That it make notour child’s child toweep,

Norusalso, ifsoitgothisway

By unwariness;since that many aday

Men have beenafraid of thererebellion….

Wales, then,posedasecurityproblemandonemuchcloserto hand. It not only provideda landfall for enemies from

overseas (as at the height ofGlynd r’s rebellion andrepeatedlyduringtheWarsofthe Roses), but was a landmarred by misgovernmentand disorder. Henry Vshowedfirmnesstemperedbyconciliation in dealing withWelshmen immediately afterthe rebellion collapsed, andmarcherlordswereorderedtoattend to their lordships. Butlater on, neither the Crownnor the marcher lords were

capable of sustainingvigorous rule, and theWelshsquirearchy, brothers-in-armsoftheEnglishgentry,showedless and less responsibility.YettheseWelshsquireswereneededbytheCrownandthemarcher lords to governWales,fortheCrownbecameimmersedincivilwarandbythe fifteenth century thesmallernumberoflordsweredeterred from living in theirlordships by falling incomes

and Welsh hostility. Thecountry,whichby1449‘dailyabundeth and increaseth inmisgovernance’,consequently presented aproblem of order – andtherefore of security – formuch of the century.Successive English regimes,fromHenryVItoHenryVII,sought to keep the Welshpeaceful, improve thequalityof government, and controlthelocalsquirearchy,foronly

then could the threat to theborder shires and to thestability of the kingdom belifted. In the first half of thecentury, the aim was totighten up the existingmachinery of lawenforcement,relyingonroyalofficers andmarcher lords tofulfil their responsibilities.Moreradicalandconstructivesolutions were eventuallyadopted, especially byEdward IV, who settled his

son, the Prince of Wales, atLudlow in the 1470s with asupervisory power in theprincipality of Wales, themarcher lordships, and theEnglish border shires. Thiswas a bold act of devolutionthat gave future princesresponsibility throughoutWales.

The territorial power of theEnglishmagnates(thebarons,

viscounts, earls, marquesses,anddukes inascendingorderof status) was crucial to thepeace of the realm and thesuccess of royal government.They became in the fifteenthcenturyastrictlydefinedandhereditary social group thatwas practically synonymouswith the parliamentarypeerage sitting in the HouseofLords.Themonarchcouldcreatepeers(asHenryVIandEdward IV readily did) and

couldelevateexistingonestohigher rank,while the king’spatronage was essential tomaintainmagnatewealth andinfluence.Monarchswhodidnot appreciate this riskedserious conflict with theirmagnates (as Richard II andRichard III discovered totheir cost). Though few innumber–atmost60families,and perhaps half that figureafter decades of civil war –they were vital not only

because of the independentlordshipswhichsomeofthemheld in theWelshmarch andthedominanceoftheNevillesand Percies in the north butalso because of their socialand political control of theEnglishprovinces.Theywerea more effective buttress ofthe Crown than its ownbureaucracy or civil service.Thiswas especially true in acenturywhen three dynastiesseized the Crown by force

and had formidable militarycommitments at home andoverseas to which themagnates made a notablecontribution. The humiliationof defeat in France and theloss of English territoriestherewas directly felt by themagnates andwas somethingwhichEdward IV andHenryVIIlaterstrovetoavoid.

These magnates had an

identity of interest with thegentryofEngland–the6,000to9,000gentlemen, esquires,and knights who sought the‘good lordship’ of themagnates and provided‘faithful service’ in return.Themagnatesgavefees,land,and offices, and the gentryadvice, support, and militaryaid: in 1454 the duke ofBuckingham gave his badgeto 2,000 of his retainers.Towns and townsmen were

part of this relationship ofmutual interest and servicewhich historians haveunflatteringly dubbed‘bastard feudalism’. Thebehaviour of the magnatesandthegentryandtownsmenin two distinct Houses ofParliament – the Lords andCommons – was anotheraspect of this interlockingrelationship.

The co-operation of themagnates and their clientswas especially vital to theusurping dynasties of thefifteenth century. TheLancastrianswerewellplacedbecause Henry IV inheritedthe network of interestscreatedbyhisfather,JohnofGaunt. At £12,000 a year,Gaunt was the richestmagnate in late medievalEngland and his extensiveestates and patronage were

now at the disposal of hisdescendants as kings ofEngland (1399–1461). TheYorkists (1461–85), as heirsof the earl of March, thealternativecandidatein1399,were less well endowed,except in the Welsh march.Their failure to enlist thesupport of most magnateswas a serious weakness in adynasty which survived forjust24years.HenryVII,whoinherited the estates,

territorial influence, andpatronage not only ofLancaster andYork, but alsoof Neville, Beaufort, andother casualties of civil war,establishedthefirmestcontrolof all over the Englishmagnatesandgentry.

RebellioninEnglandandWales

The first usurper, Henry IV,had the advantage ofdisplacing a king who hadalienated many and whosenoble sympathizers werediscredited. Henry’s drive,perseverance, and powers ofconciliation – not to say hisgenerosity – and hisLancastrian connectionsenabledhim toovercome themostdauntingcombinationof

enemiesthatanyEnglishkinghad faced. Richard II’s die-hardsupporterswerefoiledintheirplottoassassinateHenryand his sons at WindsorCastle, and these rebelswereapprehended and killed atCirencester(December1399).The danger from such‘Ricardians’ led to Richard’sown mysterious death inPontefract Castle soonafterwards.ThePercyearlsofNorthumberland and

Worcester, virtualkingmakers in 1399,were sodisenchanted by 1403 withtheking’saimtowinoverallshades of opinion that theyplotted several risings.Northumberland’s sonHotspur, while marching tojoin the Welsh rebels, wasdefeated and killed nearShrewsbury.APercyalliancewith Archbishop Scrope ofYork raised the north ofEngland, but Henry again

acted quickly and in 1405executed the prelate.Northumberland’s last strike,withScottishaid,collapsedatBramham Moor, where theearlwasslain(1408).

The Welsh rebellion haddeeper roots in the soil of acolonial society. The distressexperienced by a plague-ridden people, oppression byalien landowners bent on

maintaining their incomes, atendencytoclosethedoorstoopportunity against aspiringWelshmen, even resentmentat Richard II’s removal,combined to throw thecountry into revolt (1400).The variety of rebel motivesand the divisions in Welshsocietymeantthatthiswasnopurely national, patrioticrising. Yet it was the mostserious threat that Henry IVhad to face and the most

expensive to suppress. Fromhis estates in north-eastWales, Owain Glynd r laidwaste castles and Anglicizedtowns. He and his guerrillaforces exploited themountainous terrain toharassand exhaust the enemy andthen disappear ‘among rocksandcaves’.Theirsuccesscanbemeasuredby the lengthofthe rebellion, the absence ofdecisive battles, and thefruitlessness of royal

expeditions. Glynd r couldoccasionally muster 8,000men, and he sought aid fromFrance (1403) and fellow‘Celts’ in Scotland andIreland (1401). In‘parliaments’ in 1404 and1405, he produced grandschemes for an independentWales, with its ownecclesiastical organizationand universities (aims whichwere not finally realized foranother four centuries), and

his alliance with the Percieswas intended as a prelude tothedismembermentofHenryIV’srealm.

The English, led by the kingand his eldest son, PrinceHenry, conducted severalWelsh campaigns (1400–5),whose strategy was akin tothatadoptedinFrance–withpincer movements,destructive chevauchées, and

co-ordinated supply by landandsea.Theburdenfellmostheavilyandfrequentlyontheborder shires and the WestMidlands, which time andagain were ordered to arraymen for service in Wales.Thesearmiesweresubstantialones – 4,000 strong –especially when one recallsthatthearmiessenttoFrancerarely exceeded 5,000–6,000men. But service in Waleswasnothinglikeaspopularas

service in the lusher fieldsofFrance;therewasdifficultyinraising enough cash to paythe soldiers and garrisons,andinSeptember1403HenryIVwastoldthat‘youwillnotfind a single gentleman whowill stop in your saidcountry’.

Generally secure in thenorthandwest,Owainhadhisownproblems of manpower,

supply, and money, and thefailure of his march onWorcesterin1405causedhisstar to wane. He lost hisScottish ally when James Ifell into English hands(1406), and anAnglo-Frenchtruce was arranged in 1407.By1408,thegreatestdangersforHenry IV had passed: byperseverance, decisiveness,anda readiness to live in thesaddle, as he pursued hisenemies across England and

Wales and to Edinburghbeyond, Henry overcamethem all. By conciliation, heobtainedParliament’ssupportwithout surrendering anysignificant part of his royalpowers, and his four sons,Henry, Thomas, John, andHumphrey, were a maturingasset.Onlytwofurtherthreatsto the dynasty occurred afterhis death in 1413.When theanticlericalism of certaincourtiers turned toheresy the

following year, Henry V didnothesitate tocondemnevenhis old friend, Sir JohnOldcastle. The last revoltbefore1450tobejustifiedbytheusurpationof1399– thatinfavouroftheearlofMarchin1415–wassuppressedjustbefore King Hal left forFrance.HenryIVcouldclaimconsiderable success inestablishing his dynasty onfirm foundations.International acceptance was

wonbyalliancesinGermany,Scandinavia, Brittany, andBurgundianFlanders.

HenryVandtheWarwithFrance

Henry V inherited a realmthatwassufficientlypeaceful,loyal, and united for him to

campaign extensively inFrance (from 1415) and tospend half of the next sevenyears abroad. Withexperience of war andgovernment as Prince ofWales, he proved a capable,fearless, and authoritarianmonarch who abandoned thecareful ways of his father.Even during his absences inFrance,hiskingshipwasfirmand energetic, enabling himto wage a war that was as

much a popular enterprise asEdwardIII’searlycampaignshad been. His reign was theclimax of LancastrianEngland.

Henry prepared for war byconciliating survivingRicardians and renewingforeign alliances. Thecondition of France, with aninsane king and quarrelsomenobles, encouraged his

dreamsofconquest.By1415he felt able to demand fullsovereignty over territoriesbeyond Edward III’s visionand even to revive Edward’sclaim to the French Crown.Henry’s ambitions coincidedwith his subjects’expectations. Large armieswere raised under theleadership of enthusiasticmagnates and knights; therealm voted taxationfrequentlyandonagenerous

scale, and the king was ableto explain his aims publiclyso as to attract support. HeevenbuiltanavytodominatetheChannel.Thisenthusiasmhardly fadedat all beforehisdeath, though theparliamentary Commonsexpressed (1420) the sameunease about theconsequences for England ofa final conquestofFrance ashadtheirforebearstoEdwardIII.

Henry V’s strategy wasEdward’s – to ally withFrenchnoblestoexploittheirdivisions and press his owndynastic claim. Throughoutthe war, Burgundy’s supportwas essential to Englishsuccess.Quitesoon,however,the invader’s aimsbroadenedinto conquest andcolonization on anunprecedented scale. The

1415 expedition tested thewater and the victory atAgincourt strikinglyvindicated traditionalEnglishtactics.In1417–20,therefore,Henry set about conqueringNormandywhich, alongwithadjacent provinces, was themain theatre of war duringand after Henry’s reign. Thetreaty of Troyes (1420) withCharles VI made him regentof France and heir to theValois throne in place of the

Dauphin. This extraordinarytreaty dictated Anglo-Frenchrelations for more than ageneration. Though Henry VneverbecamekingofFrance(hepredeceasedCharlesVIin1422), his baby son, HenryVI of England and, to theAnglophiles, Henry II ofFrance, inherited the dualmonarchy. It would requireunremittingefforttomaintainit.

Map4.EnglishmilitaryenterprisesinWestern

EuropeinthelaterMiddleAges

Henry V and John, duke ofBedford, his brother andsuccessor as militarycommanderinFrance,pushedtheNorman frontier east andsouth during 1417–29 andthey defeated the Frenchsuccessively at Agincourt

(1415), Cravant (1423), andVerneuil(1424).Thiswasthehigh point of English powerin France. Under Bedford, a‘constructive balance offirmness and conciliation’sought to make both theconquered lands and furthercampaigns (southwards inAnjou and Maine) pay forthemselves. But the Frenchresurgence inspired by JoanofArc and the coronation ofCharlesVIIatRheims(1429)

foiled this plan, and theEnglish advance was haltedafter the defeat at Patay.Thereafter,theNormansgrewrestless under their foreigngovernors, England’s Bretonand Burgundian allies beganto waver, and the EnglishParliament had to find yetmore cash for the war innorthern France wheregarrison and field armieswere an increasingly heavyburden.TheEnglishwereina

militaryaswellasafinancialtrap–andwithout thegeniusofHenryVtodirectthem.

HenryVIandtheSearchforPeace

During the 1430s the searchfor peace became moreurgent, particularly in

England. The Congress ofArras (1435) and discussionsat Gravelines (1439) wereunproductive,largelybecauseEnglish opinion remaineddivided as to the desirabilityof peace and the wisdom ofsignificant concessions. Buttherecovery inCharlesVII’sfortunes,themountingcostofEnglishexpeditionstodefendLancastrian France,Bedford’sdeath in1435,andespecially the defection of

Burgundy were decisivefactors. The governmentfreed the duke of Orléans (acaptive in England sinceAgincourt) to promote peaceamong his fellow Frenchprinces(1440),thoughhedidnot have much success. In1445 Henry VI married theFrench queen’s niece,Margaret of Anjou, but eventhat only produced a truce,and a proposed meeting ofkings never took place.

Eventually, Henry VIpromised to surrender hard-wonterritoryinthecountyofMaine as an earnest of hispersonaldesireforpeace.Hisfailure to win the support ofhis subjects for this move –especiallythosemagnatesandgentry who had lands inFrance and had borne thebrunt of the fighting– led tothe exasperated FrenchattackingNormandy in1449.Theironslaught,supportedby

artillery,wassospectacularlysuccessful that the Englishwere defeated at Rouen andFormigny, and quicklyclearedfromtheduchybytheend of August 1450: ‘…never had so great a countrybeen conquered in so short aspace of time, with suchsmalllosstothepopulaceandsoldiery, and with so littlekilling of people ordestructionanddamagetothecountryside’, reported a

Frenchchronicler.

Gascony,whichhadseenfewmajor engagements underHenryV andHenryVI, wasinvaded by the triumphantFrencharmies,andaftertheirvictoryatCastillonon17July1453, the English territoriesinthesouthwestwereentirelylost. This was the mostshattering blow of all:Gascony had been English

sincethetwelfthcentury,andthelong-establishedwineandcloth trades with south-westFrance were seriouslydisrupted. Of Henry V’s‘empire’, only Calais nowremained. The defeated anddisillusioned soldiers whoreturned toEngland regardedthe discredited Lancastriangovernmentasresponsiblefortheir plight and for thesurrender of what Henry Vhadwon.Athome,HenryVI

faced the consequences ofdefeat.

Within three weeks ofCastillon, Henry VI suffereda mental and physicalcollapse which lasted for 17months and from which hemay never have fullyrecovered. The loss of hisFrench kingdom (and Henrywas the onlyEnglish king tobe crowned in France) may

havebeenresponsible forhisbreakdown, though by 1453otheraspectsofhisrulegavecause for grave concern.Those in whom Henryconfided, notably the dukesof Suffolk (murdered 1450)andSomerset(killedinbattleat St Albans, 1455), provedunworthy of his trust andwere widely hated. Thosedeniedhisfavour–includingRichard, duke of York andtheNevilleearlsofSalisbury

and Warwick – were bitterandresentful,andtheireffortsto improve their fortuneswereblockedbythekingandhis court. Henry’sgovernment was close tobankruptcy, and its authorityintheprovincesandinWalesand Ireland was becomingparalysed. In the summer of1450, there occurred the firstpopularrevoltsince1381,ledby the obscure but talentedJohn Cade, who seized

London for a few days anddenounced the king’sministers. The king’spersonal responsibility forEngland’s plight wasinevitablygreat.

TheWarsoftheRoses

Henry VI was a well-intentioned man withlaudable aspirations ineducation and religion; hesoughtpeacewithFranceandwished to reward his friendsandservants.Butnomedievalking could rule by goodintentions alone. Besides,Henrywasextravagant,over-indulgent, and did not havethequalitiesof a shrewdandbalanced judge of men andpolicies. He was intelligent

andwelleducated,buthewastheleastexperiencedofkingsand never shook off theyouthful dependence onothers which had been theinevitable hallmark of hislong minority (1422–36).Many of his problems wereadmittedly unavoidable. Thedualmonarchycreatedbyhisfathermadeheavierandmorecomplex demands than thoseplaced on a mainly militaryconquerorsuchasEdwardIII

orHenryV.Hisminoritywasa period of magnate rulewhichcreatedvestedintereststhat were not easilysurrendered when the kingcameofage–particularlybyhisuncle,Humphrey,dukeofGloucester, and his great-uncle, Henry Beaufort,cardinal-bishop ofWinchester. Moreover, afterGloucester’s death in 1447,HenrywastheonlysurvivingdescendantofHenryIVinthe

seniormaleline,afactwhichledhimtodistrustthedukeofYork, the heir of that earl ofMarch who had been passedover in 1399. There was,then, ample reason fordisenchantment with lateLancastrian rule, and inRichard of York there was apotential leader of thediscontented.

Despitetheking’sillness,the

birth of a son to his abrasivequeen in October 1453strengthened the Lancastriandynasty, but it hardlyimproved the immediateprospect for the realm or forRichard of York. AsEngland’s premier duke andHenry’s cousin, York wastwice appointed protector ofthe realm during the king’sincapacity (1454–5, 1455–6).But as such he aroused thequeen’sfiercehostilitywhich

erupted in the ‘battles’ ofBlore Heath and LudfordBridge (September–October1459), and in the subsequentParliamentatCoventrywhichvictimizedYork,theNevilles,and their supporters. Thisalienation of powerful menbyaregimewithadisastrousrecord at home and abroadledYork to claim theCrownin October 1460. After hisdeathatWakefieldsoonafter,his son Edward took it for

himself on 4 March 1461,with the aid of the earl ofWarwick. The period ofdynasticwarthatispopularlyknown as the Wars of theRoses was now well underwayamidconditionsthathadbeen ripening during the1450s.

The new Yorkist monarch,Edward IV, suffered from acardinal disadvantage: the

deposedking, his queen, andhis son were still at large.They thus provided a focusfor their adherents and theirScots and Frenchsympathizers,whowereonlytooeagertoembarrassaweakEnglish regime. AfterHenry’s capture in the north(1465), Edward felt moresecure, though even then theformer king was kept aprisoner in the Tower ofLondon and his queen and

son received shelter inScotland and then in France.More serious still wasEdward’s failure to gainbroad support from theEnglish magnates and theirclients. Furthermore, in thelate 1460s he graduallyalienated his powerful‘kingmaker’, the earl ofWarwick, who (likeNorthumberland after 1399)came to resent Edward’sgrowing independence.

Edwardwasalsodesertedbyhis feckless brother, George,duke of Clarence. Thesevariouselementscombinedtoplot rebellion (1469) and,with encouragement fromLouis XI of France, came toan uneasy agreement in July1470 with the exiledLancastrian Queen Margaret.Warwick, Clarence,Lancastrians, and dissidentYorkists returned to EnglandandsentEdwardIVfleeingto

his ally, the duke ofBurgundy. They promptlyrestored (or ‘readepted’)Henry VI, the first Englishking to have two separatereigns (1422–61, 1470–1).When Henry’s Parliamentassembled in November1470, the chancellor wasappealing beyondWestminstertothecountryatlargewhenhetookasthetextof his opening sermon,‘Return O backsliding

children,saiththeLord’.

ButthedeposedEdward,likeHenryVI before him,was atliberty and he was able toraiseaforcewithBurgundianhelp. Moreover, Henry’srestored regime wasundermined by a series ofconflicting loyalties andmutually exclusive interests.Thus,when Edward returnedtoEnglandinMarch1471,he

was able to defeat and killWarwick at Barnet beforemarchingwest tovanquishatTewkesbury the Lancastrianqueen and prince, who hadonly just returned fromFrance. At last Edward IVwas dynastically secure:QueenMargaretwascapturedafter Tewkesbury, her sonwasslaininthebattle,andonthe very night Edwardreturned triumphantly toLondon (21 May) Henry VI

died in the Tower, mostprobablymurdered.ThemainLancastrian royal line wasextinct. The Yorkistdissidents were either cowedordead,andClarence,thoughforatimereconciledwithhisbrother, was subsequentlyexecuted for furtherindiscretionsin1478.

The relativepolitical securitywhichEdwardenjoyedinthe

1470sallowedhimtoattempta period of constructive rule.He tried to repair England’sreputationabroadbyallianceswithBrittany,Burgundy, andScotland, and also byretracingthestepsofpreviouskings to France. Hisexpedition of 1475 was anear-disasterwhenhisBretonandBurgundianalliesprovedfickle, but in the treaty ofPicquignyLouisXI providedhim with a handsome

financial inducement to retireto England. Edward’sattempts to reorganize thegovernment’s financialadministration were on linessuggested during theLancastrian period. If hepleased Parliament bydeclaringhisreadinesstorulewithout special taxes, hisdesire to reward friends andattract political supportersmeant that he could embarkon no consistent programme

ofincreasinghisrevenues.Hecurriedfavourwithmerchantsand Londoners, participatingin trade on his own accountand maintaining goodrelations with Flanders andtheHanseLeagueofGermanports.Aboveall, the stabilityofhis lateryearsowedmuchtothecontinuityofserviceofseveralableandloyalofficersofstate.

Why, then, did the Wars oftheRosesnotcometoanendand why did not posteritycome to know of a Tudordynasty only among thesquirearchy of NorthWales?The Yorkists fell victim in1483–5 to two of the mostcommon hazards to afflict apersonal monarchy: aminority and a ruthlesslyambitious royal kinsman.When Edward IV died on 9April 1483, his son and heir,

Edward,was12.Hisminorityneednothavebeenlong,andin any case England hadweathered previousminorities without unduedifficulty. But thedegeneration of politicalbehaviour since the 1450s,especially theoftenarbitrary,ruthless,andillegalactionsofEdward IV, Warwick, andClarence, made Edward V’saccession particularlyperilous. The Yorkist

brothers, Edward, Clarence,andGloucester,seemtohavebeen unable to outgrowaristocratic attitudes toembrace the obligations ofkingship in the short timetheir dynasty was on thethrone. Edward relied on acircle of magnates, most ofthem linked with his own orhis wife’s Woodville family,to extendhis authority in thekingdom: Gloucester in thenorth, the Woodvilles in

Wales, and Lord Hastings intheMidlands. Itworkedwellenough while Edward lived,but in 1483 the dangers ofrelying on an exclusivefaction surfaced. Mistrust,particularly betweenGloucester and theWoodvilles, undermined theruling circle, and thoseoutsideit–notleastthelong-established Percies in thenorth and the duke ofBuckinghaminWalesandthe

West Midlands – saw theiropportunity.

In these circumstances, thecharacterandambitionofthesole remaining Yorkistbrother, the 30-year-oldRichard of Gloucester, ledhim to contemplate seizinghis young nephew’s Crownfor himself. He usurped thethrone on 26 June,imprisoned (and probably

murdered)EdwardVandhisbrother, ‘The Princes in theTower’, and executed thequeen’s brother and LordHastings.Hisonlyconcessionto customary rules ofinheritanceoftheCrownwashis unprincipled declarationthat Edward IV and his sonswerebastards;heignoredthechildrenofClarence.RichardIII’sactionsandmethods ledto a revival of dynasticwarfare.InOctober1483,the

duke of Buckingham, whowas descended from EdwardIII’s fifth son, Thomas,rebelled.Moresuccessfulwasthe landing from France inAugust1485ofHenryTudor,thoughhisclaimtothethronethrough his mother,representing the illegitimateBeaufort lineofEdwardIII’sson, John, was tenuous.Nevertheless, at BosworthField on 22 August 1485 hevanquished and slew King

Richard III. By then,Richard’s own royal lineseemed bankrupt: his wifeandhisonlysonwerealreadydead.

A number of factors enabledHenryVIItokeephisCrownafterBosworth.Aloneamongthe usurpers of the fifteenthcentury, he was fortunate tohave slain his childlesspredecessor in battle. The

support which he receivedfrom the disillusionedYorkists was crucial,especially that of EdwardIV’s queen. Also England’smagnates were war-weary:theirranksweredepleted,andin somecases their territorialpower was either weakenedor destroyed. As a result,attempts to dethrone Henrywere poorly supported inEngland and the Yorkistpretenders (such as Lambert

Simnel in 1487) failed tocarry conviction. The actualfightingduring1455–85mayhave amounted to only 15months, and the size of thearmiesinvolvedmaynothavebeen very large; but thesignificance of a battle needbear no relation to thenumbers engaged or thecasualties sustained. TheWarsoftheRosescamecloseto destroying the hereditarybasis of the English

monarchyandHenryTudor’sseizure of the Crown hardlystrengthened it. Henry posedas the representative andinheritor of both Lancasterand York, but in reality hebecameking,anddeterminedto remain king, by his ownefforts.

14.KingRichardIII,thirdsonofRichard,dukeofYork,andCecilyNeville;marriedAnneNeville1472;usurpedthethrone1483

andwaskilledatBosworth.Anearlyportrait(c.1512–

20),possiblyfromacontemporarylikeness

Chapter8TowardsaNation

RoyalAdministrationandParliament

English kings enjoyed amastery in their kingdomwhich French monarchsmight have envied, and theCrownembodiedtheunityofEngland. Its wearer was notasothermen.Thecoronationceremony stressed his semi-spiritual quality, whichseemedprovenbytheallegedpower of the royal touch tocuretheskindiseasescrofula.Richard II insisted that thosewho approached him should

bend theknee, and ‘Majesty’became the common addressinthefifteenthcentury.

The tentacles of royaladministration – enablingdecisions, grants of taxation,and legal pronouncements tobeimplemented–stretchedtothe extremities of the BritishIsles in every direction butthe north and west. Thefranchises of the bishop of

Durham and the earl ofChester stood outside theshire system of England andhad a special independence.But therewasnoquestionoftheir being beyond the reachoftheking’sgovernment:thebishops of Durham werealmost always the king’schoiceand,likeAnthonyBek(d. 1311) and ThomasLangley(d.1437),oftenroyalcouncillors;whilst after1301the earl of Chester was also

Prince of Wales and theking’s eldest son, and formostofthelaterMiddleAgesthe king administeredCheshire because there wasnoadultearl.

The king’s administrationwas a co-operative affair. Ineach county the sheriffs andthe newer justices of thepeace functioned best withthe aid of the nobility and

local gentry, whose interestsin turn were securely tied tothe monarch, the greatestsingle source of wealth andpatronage in the realm.Parliament, with itscommons’ representativesfrom counties and townsbetween Carlisle andCornwall, Shrewsbury andSuffolk, came to play anessentialpartinlatemedievalgovernment. By Edward I’sreign, war and domestic

upheaval had fortified theking’s need to consult hissubjects (’the community oftherealm’,ascontemporariestermed them) and to seektheir advice in reaching andimplementing decisionsaffectingtherealmatlarge.Italso seemedwise, from timeto time, to include localrepresentativesaswell as layand ecclesiastical lords in acentral assembly that wasParliament. The wish to tap

the wealth of townsmen andsmallerlandownersaswellasthe nobility; the need formaterial aid and expressionsofsupportinwarandpoliticalcrises;andtheadvisabilityofhaving the weight of arepresentative assemblybehindcontroversialornovelchanges in the law or ineconomic and socialarrangements – all thesefactors combined to giveParliament a frequency (it

met on average once a yearduring 1327–1437),distinctive functions, andestablishedprocedures,andtogive the commons’representatives a permanentroleinitfrom1337onwards.This institution, uniqueamong the parliaments ofmedieval Europe, discussedboth important matters ofbusiness and minor mattersraised by individuals. It wona monopoly of taxing

Englishmen; it was thehighestcourt intheland;andit made new law andmodifiedexistinglawthroughlegislation. Even thecommons’ representativeswon privileges forthemselves, not least freespeech and freedom fromarrest during parliamentarysittings. It remainedessentially an instrument ofgovernment at the king’sdisposal, but it could

sometimes criticize hispolicies and ministers (as inthe 1370s and 1380s and the1440s), though almost neverthe king himself. When thepractical needs that hadbrought Parliament intoexistence and encouraged itsdevelopment disappeared, itmet far less often: only oncein every three years onaverage between 1453 (theend of the Hundred YearsWar)and1509.

Communications,Propaganda,andGovernment

The commons’representatives had to beinformed, courted, andpersuaded before theyreturned home to their

constituents, considerablenumbers of whom desiredinformation about affairs. Itwas, after all, theywho paidtaxes, served in war anddefence,andwhowereaskedfor their co-operation andobedience. The governmentwas, therefore, well advisedtoweighcarefullythenewsittransmitted to the realm andthe opinions it hoped theking’s subjects would adopt.Well-developed methods of

communication andpropagandawereused to thisend.Thepreamblesofofficialproclamations couldpopularize a policy andjustify a practice: EdwardIV’s proclamation againstMargaret, queen of thedeposed Henry VI, mademuch of the memory ofArchbishop Scrope of York,who had been executed byHenry’s grandfather and hadsince taken on the aura of a

martyr. This was skilfulpropaganda to sustainopposition to the Lancastriandynasty, for proclamationswere sent to every shire forpublic reading and display.Songs and ballads reachedwideaudiencestoo,andsomethat were officially inspiredstressed the glories ofAgincourt out of allproportion. Sermonswere noless effective in mouldingopinion and mobilizing

support: in 1443 Henry VIrequested that good, stirringpreachers be sent throughevery diocese to reinforcefrom the pulpit royal appealsfor money for yet anotherFrench campaign.Coronations, royalprogresses, and the formalentries of kings and queensinto York, Bristol, andGloucester (as well asLondon) were occasions forlavish displays of official

propaganda, harnessingmythology, Christianity, andpatriotism. In1417,HenryVwasportrayedforalltoseeathis receptionbyLondonasasoldier of Christ returningfrom crusade against theFrench. If any citizenharboured lingering doubtsabout the justice of hisinvasion of France, this wascalculatedtoremovethem.

The circulation of letters toinform, persuade, and justifywas as near as the pre-printing age came topublication; such letters soonfound their way into popularchronicles.Inthisway,HenryVreportedtohissubjects theprogress of his Frenchcampaigns. Even fashionablewriters of the day becameofficial propagandists. In thefifteenth century, authorsrarely produced their works

unsolicitedly. ThomasHoccleve was a humblegovernment bureaucrat whowas paid by Henry V toproduce laudatory versesabout Agincourt and theEnglish siege of Rouen(1419). John Lydgate waspatronized by Henry VI andhis court over a long period,implanting in the popularmind all the jingoism thatcould be wrung out of thesuccessful defence of Calais

against Burgundian attack in1436.

The king, his court, and hisministers – the principalexploiters of these channelsof communication – residedmost often at Westminster,London, or Windsor. Theshrine of English monarchywasWestminsterAbbey, andParliament usually met atWestminster (all 31

Parliaments did so between1339and1371,andnonemetelsewhere after 1459). Thedepartments of governmentgradually settled intopermanent offices atWestminster or, to a lesserextent, London, which wasthelargestandwealthiestcityin the land. In the laterMiddle Ages, it became theundisputed capital of thekingdom in every sphereexcept the ecclesiastical

(where Canterbury remainedtheseatof theprimateofAllEngland). Along withWestminsterand thegrowingriverside suburb in between,London became theadministrative, commercial,cultural, and social focus forthe kingdom. Governmentincreased in extent,sophistication, and tempo inthe later Middle Ages,particularly in wartime:regular taxes had to be

collected and managed,frequent meetings ofParliament were held, thecustoms service wasdeveloped, the practicalitiesofwaranddefencehadtobeorganized, and lawandorderthroughoutthekingdomweresupervised there.Concentrated, co-ordinated,and sedentary governmentwas the result. York lost itsclaimsasa rivalcentrewhenthe persistent war with

Scotland in the first third ofthe fourteenth century wasovertaken by the muchgreater preoccupation withFrance. Moreover, theabsence of Edward III andHenryVoncampaignabroademphasizedthetrendtowardsa fixed, centralizedgovernmental headquartersthatcouldoperatewithouttheparticipation of the kinghimself. The crisis of 1339–41 brought home to Edward

III that he could no longertake the machine ofgovernment with him, asEdward I and hispredecessors had done. By1340 the exchequer hadreturned to Westminster,whichitneverleftagain.Thebureaucracy of the king’schancery,exchequer,andlawcourtsexpandedinthecapitaland, as a group of ambitioussmall landowners, in theneighbouring counties.

Magnates, bishops, andabbots acquired inns orhousesinornearthecity,andthe surnames of London’sinhabitants and the languagetheyspokesuggestthatmanyhumbler folk were migratingtothecapitalfromeverypartof the kingdom – and fromWalesandIrelandtoo.

Towardsan

AnglicizedChurch

The English character of theChurch in England was itssecond most significant andenduring quality in the laterMiddleAges.ItsfirstwastheCatholic faith and doctrinewhich it shared with otherLatin churches. But it waswidely accepted that this

universal Church, headed bythepopeinRomeasspiritualfather, was a family ofindividual churches, eachwith its own character andautonomy. The Englishnessof the Church in Englandbecame more pronounced inthe laterMiddle Ages as theecclesiastical dimension ofEnglish nationhood. Thisowed something to theEnglish language and theseparate experience of the

English people, and a gooddeal to English law andcustom,theframeworkwithinwhichEnglishmen (includingthe clergy) lived and whichthe king swore to uphold inhis coronation oath.Moreover, the Church ofEngland, including itsbuildings, had beenestablished, encouraged, andpatronized by English kings,noblemen, gentry, andtownsmen, giving them a

personal and family interestin individual churches andtheir priests. The bishopswere great landowners – thebishop ofWinchester had anannual income of £3,900 inthe mid-fifteenth century –who sat in Parliament andwere among the king’scouncillors. They, and lesserdignitaries too, were usuallypromoted because they weretrusted by, and useful to, theCrownandcouldberewarded

in theChurchwithoutcost tothe exchequer. There were,then, good practical reasonswhy Englishmen shouldcontrol the English Churchand mould its character andpersonnel. This seemed themore urgent during theFrench wars. In 1307 andregularly thereafter, thepope’s role in theorganization andadministration of the EnglishChurch, even in the

appointment of bishops, wasbitterly opposed. After all,most popes in the fourteenthcentury were French-born,and during 1308–78 theylivedatAvignon,where theywere in danger of becominglap-dogsof theFrench(orsoit was widely believed). Bycontrast, only one pope hadbeen an Englishman (in themid-twelfth century) andnone had ever visitedEngland–andnorwouldone

dosountil1982.

Map5.Thepre-ReformationdiocesesofEnglandandWales(thirteenthcentury)

The trend towards anAnglicized Church can beillustrated in several ways.Church law, based on thecodesoftheearlyFathersandreplenished by papallegislation, was received andgenerally applied in the

Church courts of England,and the pope’s ultimatejurisdiction in ecclesiasticalmatters was acknowledged.But in practice, Church lawwas limited by royalauthority, particularly whenclerksaccusedofcrimestriedto claim ‘benefit of clergy’.From Edward I’s day, thepope’s ability to tax theEnglish clergy was severelycurtailed and most papaltaxesfoundtheirwayintothe

king’s coffers instead offuelling the enemy’s wareffort (as many believed).More serious still were thelimitations on the pope’spowertoappointbishopsandother important members ofthe English Church from themid-fourteenth centuryonwards, and during theGreat Schism (1378–1417,when there were two,sometimes three, popessimultaneously claiming

Christendom’s allegiance),the pope whom Englandsupportedwas in no positionto resist. The anti-papalstatutes of Provisors (1351,reissued 1390) andPraemunire (1353, extended1393) were used by Englishkings to impose acompromise on the popewhereby the initiative inappointments rested with theking. As a result, very fewforeigners were appointed in

the English Church by thefifteenth century unless, aswithHenryVII’s nominationof three Italian bishops, theyhadthegovernment’sspecificapproval.

Few clergymen in Englandprotested at this state ofaffairs. The bishops did notdosobecauseofthementheywere and the way in whichthey were appointed. The

Church did not do socorporately because it fearedpapaltaxation.Theclergydidnot do so because Englishkings were the protectors ofthe faith against heretics anda buttress against anticlericalattack.In1433,evenanabbotof St Albans could declarethat ‘the king knows nosuperiortohimselfwithintherealm’.

DevotionalWritingsandLollardy

Predominantly English incharacter were twoexpressions of religiousfervour outside theinstitutional church of latemedieval England: thedevotional fashion wasstrictly orthodox in theology,

whereas the Lollardmovement inspired by JohnWycliffe was heretical. Thefourteenth century saw aburgeoning interest inmystical and devotionalwritings, most of them inEnglishfromthelatterpartofthecenturyandappealingtoagrowing literate public. Suchpeople took for granted theteachingsandpracticesoftheChurch but preferred apersonal, intuitive devotion

focusedonthesufferingsanddeath of Christ, the VirginMary,andtheLivesofSaints,collected in the GoldenLegend. The writers werefrequently solitary figurescommending thecontemplative life to theirreaders. By far the mostpopular devotional workswere by Richard Rolle, aYorkshire hermit, and, later,by the recluse,Dame Julianeof Norwich. The Book of

MargeryKempe, thespiritualautobiography of the wife ofa Lynn burgess, exemplifiedthevirtueswhichlaymenandwomen sought, and therevelations, visions, andecstasiesbywhichtheycameto possess them. Laymensuch as Henry, duke ofLancaster(whoin1354wroteadevotionalworkofhisownin French), and devoutwomen such as LadyMargaretBeaufort,motherof

Henry VII, turned to thisintense spiritual life as areaction to the aridtheological discussions ofscholars, though theydidnotstray into theunorthodoxyofLollardywhosespiritualrootswerenotdissimilar.

Lollardy (probably a namederived from lollaer, amumbler – of prayers) wasthe only significant heretical

movement to sweep throughmedieval England, andWycliffe was the onlyuniversity intellectual in thehistoryofmedievalheresy toinspire a popular hereticalmovement against theChurch. It was a largelyindigenousEnglishschemeofthought that laid great storeby books and reading.Though Wycliffe is unlikelytohavewritteninEnglish,heinspired a series of English

polemicalworksandalso thefirst complete translation ofthe Bible by 1396. To beginwith, he appealed to theanticlerical temper of histimes and gained reputationand support amongnoblemen, courtiers, andscholars for his criticism ofthe Church’s wealth and theunworthiness of toomany ofits clergy. But hisincreasingly radicaltheological ideas, placing

overwhelming confidence inHoly Scripture, led to hiscondemnation andwithdrawalfromOxford.Thesympathy which he hadreceivedfrominfluentialmenebbedawaywhenconfrontedwith the strict orthodoxy ofHenry IV (who addedburning in 1401 to thearmouryofthepersecutorsofheresy) and almostdisappeared when Lollardybecame tingedwith rebellion

inSirJohnOldcastle’srising.Deprived of its intellectualspring and its powerfulprotectors,Lollardybecameadisjointed, unorganized butobstinate movement ofcraftsmen, artisans, and poorpriests in the Welshborderland and industrialtownsof theMidlands.Theirbeliefs became more andmoredisparate andeccentric,but their basic hostility toecclesiastical authority, their

devotion to the Scriptures,and theirbelief inanEnglishBible prefigured theReformation and were to becentral convictions in laterEnglishProtestantism.

TheSpreadofLiteracyandtheEnglishLanguage

Thespreadofliteracyandtheincreased use of the Englishlanguage were twindevelopments of the latefourteenth and fifteenthcenturies. They weresymptomaticofEnglishmen’sgrowing awareness of publicaffairs,andreflectfeelingsofpatriotismandnationhood.

Itiseasiertobepersuadedofall this than to prove it indetail. There are nocontemporary estimates ofhow rapidly and how farliteracy spread; nor is itpossible for us to quantify itwith the data provided bylargely innumeratecontemporaries. A roughindex of its growth becomesavailable if the statutes of1351 and 1499 defining thelegal privilege of ‘benefit of

clergy’ (then the literateclass) are compared. In 1351it was stated that all laymenwho could read should beaccorded ‘benefit of clergy’.One hundred and fifty yearslater, the situation had sochangedthatadistinctionwasdrawn between mere layscholars and clerks in holyorders, and only to the latterwas‘benefitofclergy’nowtobe extended. Maybe theliterateclasshadexpandedto

thepointwhere‘clerical’wasa meaningless adjective toapplytoit,thoughthestatuteof 1499 attributed the needfor change to abuse ratherthantotheexpansionitself.

An equally generalizedindication is provided bycomparing the two popularrisings of the later MiddleAges – the Peasants’ Revolt(1381) and John Cade’s

rebellion (1450). In 1381 thecomplaints of the peasantryfromKentandEssexwere(asfarasweknow)presented toRichard II orally, and allcommunications with thekingduring the revolt appearto have been by word ofmouth; at the Tower ofLondon, Richard had to askthat the rebels’ grievances,hitherto roared at himby theinsurgents outside, be put inwriting for him to consider.

Compare this with 1450,when the demands ofCade’sfollowers, also drawn fromKentandthesouth-east,weresubmitted at the outset inwrittenformofwhichseveralversions were produced andcirculated. They are longdocuments, with a coherentandcomprehensiveargument,expressed in English,sometimes of a colloquialkind. The business ofpublishing manuscripts was

extending its range at thisvery time. John Shirley (d.1456) is known to have runhisbusiness fromfour rentedshops near St Paul’sCathedral and to haveproduced, for sale or loan,‘littleballads,complaintsandroundels’.Twentyyearslater,customs accounts documentthe importation of largequantities of manuscriptbooksthroughLondon–over1,300in1480–1alone.

Onemaycautiouslyintroducesome figures to indicate thatlatemedievalliteracywasnotconfined to the noble,clerical, or governmentalclasses.Aswas probably thecasewithCade’srebels,someartisans and craftsmen couldnow read and write. Elevenoutof28witnessesinalegalsuit of 1373 describedthemselves as literatus (or

capable of understandingLatin and therefore, onepresumes,Englishtoo);andamid-fifteenth century willprovideda similarproportionof‘literates’amongwitnesseswho included merchants,husbandmen, tailors, andmariners. There weredoubtless others whom,literate or not, one wouldneverdreamofemployingaswitnesses, but we areundeniably moving towards

Sir Thomas More’senthusiastic estimate at thebeginning of the sixteenthcenturythatmorethan50percent of Englishmen wereliterate.

If we cannot accept suchfigures with completeconfidence, we can at leastobserve literatemen – rarelywomen–atworkinavarietyof occupations. They filled

some of the highest politicaloffices in the land hithertoreserved for clerics: from1381, laymen frequentlybecameTreasurerofEngland,an office for which acommand of reading andwriting – if not of figures –wasanessentialqualification.Literate laymen wereemployed as clerks ingovernment service, a nichewhich the poet ThomasHoccleve occupied for over

35 years. It is also clear thatby 1380 tradesmen werekeeping written bills; soonafterwards country yeomenwere writing – certainlyreading – private letters, andeven peasants who served asreeve on their manor werefunctioning in anadministrative environmentwhose business wasincreasingly transacted onpaper and parchment. ByEdward III’s time, the rules

andregulationsofsomecraftguilds were insisting on arecognized standard ofliteracyfortheirapprentices.

Thereadinghabitsofat leastwell-to-do laymen reflect thesame thing. Readingchronicles was very popular,and not only in London; thesurviving manuscripts alonerun into hundreds and showsigns of being produced in

increasing numbers as thefifteenth century wore on,most of them in English.Merchantsandothers took toowning ‘commonplacebooks’, those personal,diminutivelibrariesofpoems,prophecies, chronicles, andeven recipes, through whichtheybrowsedatleisure.Theypossessedbooksandcarefullydisposed of them –particularly the religious anddevotional ones – in their

wills.

This literate world wasincreasingly an Englishworld. The facility to speakand understand French (andthereforetoreadandwriteit)wasinmarkeddeclinebeforethe end of the fourteenthcentury;evenforofficialandformal business ingovernment and privateorganizations, English was

becomingatleastascommon.Discussions in Parliamentwere taking place in Englishby themiddledecadesof thecentury, and the first writtenrecord of this dates from1362.Althoughonly a roughand ready guide, it is worthnotingthattheearliestknownproperty deed drawn up inEnglish is dated 1376, theearliest will 1387. Theproceedings of theconvocation of Canterbury

were conducted in Englishquiteoftenbythe1370s,andHenryIVspoketoParliamentin English in 1399 and hadhiswords carefully recorded.The reasons for this quietrevolution are complex, butamong them may benumbered the patriotismgeneratedby the longFrenchwar; the popularity ofLollardy, which set greatstore by English books andsermons; the lead given by

the Crown and the nobility;and, of course, the greaterparticipation of the English-speakingsubjectintheaffairsof the realm, not least inParliament. The triumph ofthe written language wasassured.

Before that happened, onemajor problem had to befaced: that of regionaldialects.Only then could the

full potential of English as awrittenandspokentongueberealized. It must be admittedthat in thisfirstcenturyorsoof popular, literate English,quaint Cornish, wilfullyforeign Welsh, and suchunintelligibilities as theYorkshire dialect could notbe fully absorbed into acommon idiom; but muchheadway was made. Thespreading tentacles ofgovernment helped,

developingandextending theuseof awritten language forofficial communicationthroughout the realm duringthe first half of the fifteenthcentury.A further factorwasthe emergence in thefourteenthcenturyofLondonas the settled capital of thekingdom, with York as asubsidiary administrativecentre and Bristol as thesecond commercialmetropolis, each evolving a

dialectthatinevitablybecamecomprehensible to the othersand gradually fused in astandardized English. Thisdialect was predominantlymidland English, whichtriumphedattheexpenseofacity-bound tongue; and forthis reason it was the moreeasilyadoptedinruralshires.Thatthevictorwasamidlanddialect was in large part duetothesubstantialmigrationofmidlanders and easterners to

London in thefourteenthandfifteenth centuries. Lollardywas partly responsible too,foritwasespeciallyvigorousin the Midlands and WestCountry, and most of itswrittenworkswereinvaryingformsof themidland tongue.By capturing London, thismidlanddialectinspeechandwriting captured thekingdom.

GeoffreyChaucerhadseriousmisgivings as to whether hiswritingswouldbeunderstoodacross England – and hewrote for a limited, charmedcircle.

And for there is sogreatdiversity

In English and inwriting of our

tongue

So pray I God thatnonemiswritethee,

Nor thee mismetrefor default oftongue.

And read wheresothou be, or elsesung

That thou be

understood, God Ibeseech.

Inalegalcaseof1426,itwasstated that words werepronounced differently indifferent parts of England‘andoneisjustasgoodastheother’. Half a century later,William Caxton could bemore optimistic that hisprinted editions of several

hundredswould,withcare,bequite comprehensible fromone shire to another. Herealized that ‘commonEnglish that is spoken inoneshire varieth from another’;but by using ‘English notoverrude,norcurious,but insuch terms as shall beunderstood by God’s grace’,heanticipatedlittledifficulty.The greater ease ofunderstanding,inbothspeechand writing, that had

developed meanwhile wascrucialtotheeffectivenessofcommunication, the commonexpressionofopinion,andtheforging of a sense ofnationhood.

English had become ‘thelanguage,notofaconquered,but of a conquering people’.The self-confidence of itswritersreachedtheheightsofgenius in Chaucer, and it

attracted patronage from thewealthiest and mostinfluentialintherealm–fromkings, noblemen, gentlemen,and townsmen.Englishproseinthefourteenthandfifteenthcenturieswasfaroutshone inquality and popularity byEnglishverseinallitsforms:lyric and romance, comedyand tragedy, allegory anddrama. Much of this poetryfell squarely in the northernEuropean tradition, and the

literary revival of the north-westand theMidlands in thefourteenth century wasmainly of alliterative,unrhymed verse. But it wassponsoredbylocalgentryandmagnatessuchastheBohuns(earls of Hereford) and theMortimers (earls of March),and could produce works ofconsiderable imaginativepower inSirGawainand theGreen Knight and PiersPlowman.Inthesameregion,

ritual Christian drama in theEnglish Miracle Play Cycleswas developed during thefourteenth century andachieved great popularity innortherntownssuchasYork,Beverley, Wakefield, andChester,wheretheplayswereorganized and performed bythetownguilds.

Atthesametime,inthesouthand east, a newer mode of

verse was appearing whichowed more to currentfashions of style and contentin French and earlyRenaissance Italian writing.Through the pen ofChaucer,and to a lesser extent hisfriendJohnGower, itcreatedmasterpieces of Englishliterature. These wereunequalled in their richnessof thought and vocabulary,their imagination and depthof human understanding, and

in theirsheerartistry.Troilusand Criseyde, written about1380–5, and especially theimmensely ambitious andcomplex panorama of TheCanterbury Tales (written1386–1400 but nevercompleted), decisivelyextended English literaryaccomplishment. Theydisplayed a wisdom,worldliness, andinventiveness, and a masteryof contemporary English

idiominallitsvariety,whichearnChaucerhisplaceas thegreatest English medievalwriter.

Gower, a Kentishman, waspatronizedbyRichardIIand,later, by Henry Bolingbroke.Chaucer, who came ofLondonmerchantstock,grewup in aristocratic and royalcircles,andhewasoneofthemost lionized and richly

rewarded poets of any age.This reflects both theextraordinary quality of hiswriting, and also therecognition which influentialcontemporaries wereprepared to give to theEnglish language which heenriched. If Chaucer’sdisciples, Hoccleve andLydgate, seemsecond-rate incomparisonwiththeirmaster,at least the royal, court, andcity patronage which these

authors received assured abright future for what wasessentially the Englishliteraryschoolofthecapital.

EnglishArchitecture

The same sources of wealthand taste were placed at thedisposal of England’s

architects and builders.Developing their ideas fromthe predominantGothic styleofmuchofEurope,ofwhichthepointedarchisthesymboland most characteristicfeature, they createdarchitectural styles whichhave a good claim to beregarded as distinctivelyEnglish. Since the nineteenthcentury, these have beentermed Decorated (moreaccurately free-flowing and

curvilinear) andPerpendicular (or rathervertical and rectilinear), andtheyarebest identifiedinthewindow and arch design ofEngland’s cathedrals, largerparishchurches,andcolleges.In so far as any newarchitecturaldevelopmentcanbeexplainedwithprecision,itis thought that reneweddiplomatic and crusadercontactswiththeMuslimandMongolworlds ofEgypt and

Persia towards theendof thethirteenth century transmittedknowledge of Easternbuildingstylesandtechniquesto the farWest. The delicatetracery and luxuriantnaturalistic motifs which area feature of the newDecoratedstyleappearonthethree surviving EleanorCrossesthatEdwardIerectedin the 1290s to mark thestages in the journey of hiswife’s body from Lincoln to

its burial at Westminster.Eastern influences have alsobeen observed in thehexagonal north porch anddoorway of St MaryRedcliffe, Bristol, datingfrom early in the fourteenthcentury. After only half acentury(1285–1335)of theseextravagant complexities,which were unparalleled inGothicEuropeandhavebeenhailed as ‘the most brilliantdisplayofsheerinventiveness

in the whole history ofEnglish medievalarchitecture’,areactionsetin.This reaction produced themostEnglish style of all, thePerpendicular. In an agewhen England was at war,thiswasrarelyimitatedontheEuropean mainland. Itssimpler, cleaner lines andlarger, lighter spaces mayhave appeared first in theroyal chapel of St Stephen,Westminster (destroyed

1834),orinthecitycathedralof St Paul (burned 1666).Eitherway, it quickly spreadto theWestCountry, throughcourtly influence focused onEdward II’s shrine atGloucester. It can still beadmiredonthegrandscaleinthe choir of GloucesterCathedral, dating from themid-1330s, as well as in thelater naves of Canterbury(from 1379) and Winchester(from 1394).Decorationwas

now concentrated English-style in roof vaulting,culminating in the fan vaultsof Hereford’s chapter house(now destroyed) and thecloistersatGloucester,whichwerebuiltafter1351.

YetPerpendicularbuilding isfoundmost frequently and atits best in the greater parishchurches of England such asCirencester, Coventry, and

Hull. Not even plague andwarfare, which may haveinhibited large-scale projectsfor a while in the fifteenthcentury, could deter clothiersand landowners in EastAngliaandtheWestCountryfrom lavishing their wealthon these monuments toEnglish taste and skill.Perpendicular architectureexperienced an exuberantresurgenceinthelatterpartofthe fifteenth century in some

ofthemostfamousofEnglishbuildings, most of themsponsored by the Crown –Eton College, St George’sChapel, Windsor (from1474), King’s CollegeChapel, Cambridge, andHenry VII’s Chapel inWestminster Abbey. It wasincontestably ‘the IndianSummer ofEnglishmedievalarchitecture’.

Incomparably English werethe Perpendicular towers oflate medieval parishchurches, ranging from thesturdy St Giles Church,Wrexham,tothesoaringshaftof St Botolph’s, Boston, andthe elegance of Taunton, StStephen’s, Bristol, and StJohn’s,Cardiff.So,too,werethecarvedtimberroofsofthefourteenth and fifteenthcenturies, beginningwith thetimber vault planned for the

chapter house at York after1291,and the replacementofthe tower of Ely Cathedral,whichcollapsedin1322,byatimber vault and lanterntower. This roof workculminated in the greathammer-beam oak roof ofWestminster Hall (1394–1400), commissioned byRichard II and judged to be‘the greatest single work ofart of the whole of theEuropean middle ages’.

Masons, carpenters, andarchitectswerepatronizedbykings, courtiers, noblemen,andothersfromthethirteenthcentury onwards, and notsimply for religiousbuilding;theyalsoworkedonroyalandprivate castles and manorhouses. Although forming aprofession largely based inLondon and connected withthe office of king’s works,these craftsmen wereassigned duties throughout

England and Wales. Theyplaced their expertise andexperience at the disposal ofnoblemen and bishops andthereby created a nationalstyletosuitnationaltastes.

EnglishNationhood

Englishmen’s sense of

nationhood and theirawareness of their ownEnglishness are not easilygauged. But they sometimescompared themselves – andwerecomparedbyothers–topeoples of different race,language,country,orculturaland political tradition. In thelater Middle Ages,Englishmen confronted,frequently violently, otherpeoples both in the BritishIslesandinmainlandEurope.

These confrontations were aforcing-house of nationhoodand self-consciousEnglishness. Suchexperiences gave rise to anumber of emotions, whichmade English people awareof their nature, unity, andcommon traditions andhistory.

SolongasEnglandwasruledbyNormandukesorAngevin

counts, and Anglo-Normanbarons held estates on bothsides of the Channel andothersdidsoinbothEnglandand Scotland, it wasimpossiblefortherulingeliteto think of itself asexclusively English. But thisbecame possible onceNormandy and Anjou wereoverrun by the French andformally surrendered to themin 1259, for the cross-Channel nobility had then to

decide where its primeallegiance lay. It becamemore likely, too, with thegrowing self-consciousnessof the Scottish kingdom,particularlywhenEdward I’swars made land-holdingacross the border a thing ofthe past. Thereafter, theseparateness of England wasidentified with its encirclingseas. In the mid-1430s apamphleteeradvised:

Keep then the seasaboutinspecial;

Which of Englandistheroundwall,

As though Englandwere likened to acity

And the wallenviron were thesea…

Englishkings fromEdward Iwere more truly English inupbringing and outlook thanany since King Harold.Indeed, Henry VI in his 39-year reign never visitedScotland or Ireland; he onlyoncesetfootinWales–adayat Monmouth – and neveragainwenttoFranceafterhiscoronation visit at the age ofnine.

As to foreigners, thedominance of Flemings andthen Italians in England’soverseas trade in thethirteenth century fosteredresentment of theircommercialsuccess.InHenryVII’s reign Englishmenweresaid to ‘have an antipathy toforeigners, and imagine thatthey never come into theirislandbuttomakethemselves

masterofitandtousurptheirgoods…’.Afterall,nativesofacountryatwarwithEnglandmight, like the alien prioriesattached to Frenchmonasteries, send money toan enemy, or, like theservantsofHenryIV’squeen,theduchessofBrittany,actasspies for France. Not fornothing did the king’s clerksscratch ‘Do not show toaliens!’onstatepapersat theoutset of the Hundred Years

War.

England’s wars, wagedsuccessfully by humblebowmen as well as knightsandnoblemen,createdamongall ranks a self-confidencethat warmed English hearts.A well-informed observersaidin1373that‘theEnglishare so filled with their owngreatness and have won somany big victories that they

have come to believe theycannotlose.Inbattle,theyarethe most confident nation inthe world.’ Pride in theirvictories seemed unbounded,and individual kingsembodied the achievements.UnderEdwardIII, ‘therealmof England has been noblyamended, honoured andenriched to a degree neverseen in the timeof anyotherking’, whilst Henry V’sreputationamonghissubjects

reached even greater heights.Englishmen’s belief in theirsuperiority–ashortstepfrompride and self-confidence –remained unshaken even inthe mid-fifteenth century, bywhich time England’sfortunes seemed far lessgolden. ThewildGaelsweretreatedas‘mereIrish’andtheFlemings in 1436 withundisguisedscorn:

Remembernow,yeFlemings, uponyourownshame;

When ye laid siegeto Calais, ye wererightstilltoblame;

For more ofreputation, beEnglishmen thanye,

And come of more

gentleblood,ofoldantiquity.

An Italian visitor around1500, when England’soverseas‘empire’wasallbutlost, could still report that‘the English are great loversof themselves and ofeverythingbelongingtothem.They think that there are noother men than themselves,

and no other world butEngland;andwhentheyseeahandsome foreigner they saythat “he looks like anEnglishman",andthat“itisagreat pity that he should notbeanEnglishman".’Feelingsofsuperiorityeasilyturnedtodisdain or even hate. Afterdecades of war with theFrench, Francophobia wascommon and matched onlyby the Anglophobia of theFrench, who came to regard

the English as ‘a race ofpeople accursed’.At no timewas this distaste for thingsFrench stronger than duringthereignofHenryV.Hemayhave claimed the Frenchcrown, but in England hediscouraged the use of theFrench language ingovernment and literatesociety.TheLondon brewerstook their cue from theiradmiredking, andwhen theywrote their ordinances in

English they noted that ‘ourmother tongue, to wit, theEnglish tongue, hath inmodern days begun to behonourably enlarged andadorned … and our mostexcellentlord,KingHenryV,hath procured the commonidiom … to be commendedbytheexerciseofwriting.’

Tales of a British past andpractical feelings of

insecurityhadcombinedwiththe vigour and ambition ofEnglish kings down toEdward I – perhaps EdwardIII – to take theEnglish intoScotland,Wales,andIreland.Their success in absorbingthese territories was limited;and try as they might toAnglicizetheWelshandIrishin culture, language, andhabit, the English with theirdependent dominions weredeniedpoliticalnationhoodin

the later Middle Ages. TheEnglish delegation to theChurch’s Council atConstance (1414–17)declared:

whether a nation beunderstood as a peoplemarked off from othersby blood relationshipandhabitofunity,orbypeculiarities of language

(the most sure andpositivesignandessenceofanationindivineandhuman law)… is a realnation…

But they spoilt their politicalcasebyadding thatScotland,Wales, and Irelandwere partoftheEnglishnation.

FurtherReading

General

F. Barlow, The FeudalKingdom of England1042–1216 (5th edn,London, 1999), an

excellentoutline.R. Bartlett, EnglandundertheNormanandAngevinKings,1075–1225(Oxford,2000).

M. Chibnall, Anglo-Norman England1066–1166 (Oxford,1986),judicious.

S. B. Chrimes, C. D.Ross, and R. A.Griffiths (eds.),Fifteenth-centuryEngland, 1399–1509:

StudiesinPoliticsandSociety (Manchester,1972; 2nd edn,Stroud, 1995), essaysoncentraltopics.

M.T.Clanchy,Englandand its Rulers 1066–1272(Glasgow,1983;2nd edn, 1998), athought-provokingcombination ofpolitical and culturalhistory, with a newepilogueonEdwardI.

R. R. Davies,Domination andConquest. TheExperienceofIreland,Scotland and Wales1100–1300(Cambridge,1990).

F. R. H. DuBoulay, AnAge of Ambition(London, 1970), astimulating look atthemes (e.g. class,marriage, sex) oftenneglected.

R. Frame, The PoliticalDevelopment of theBritish Isles 1100–1400(Oxford,1990).

A. Harding, England inthe ThirteenthCentury (Cambridge,1993).

J. R. Lander, Conflictand Stability inFifteenth-centuryEngland (3rd edn,London, 1977), anoverall (if gloomy)

viewofthecentury.R. Mortimer, AngevinEngland 1154–1258(Oxford,1994).

D. M. Stenton, EnglishSociety in the EarlyMiddle Ages 1066–1307 (2nd edn,Harmondsworth,1952), a brief socialsurvey.

A. Tuck, Crown andNobility, 1272–1461(London, 1985), a

clear and soundnarrative.

StudiesofSomeMajorThemes

J. Bellamy, Crime andPublic Order inEngland in the LaterMiddleAges(London,1973).

A. L. Brown, The

Governance of LateMedieval England,1272–1461 (London,1989).

R. G. Davies and J. H.Denton (eds), TheEnglishParliament inthe Middle Ages(Manchester, 1981),nicely integratedessays.

J. Gillingham, TheEnglish in theTwelfthCentury. Imperialism,

National Identity andPolitical Values(Woodbridge,2000).

B. Golding, ConquestandColonisation.TheNormans in Britain1066–1100 (London,1994).

A. E. Goodman, TheWars of the Roses(London, 1981), goodonmilitarymatters.

J. A. Green, TheAristocracy of

Norman England(Cambridge,1997).

R. H. Hilton, TheEnglish Peasantry intheLaterMiddleAges(Oxford,1975).

J.C.Holt,MagnaCarta(Cambridge, 1965;2nd edn, 1992),indispensable for thepolitical and socialcontextofthecharter.

J. Le Patourel, TheNorman Empire

(Oxford, 1976),magisterial. Thestarting-point for allfuture studies of thissubject.

K. B. McFarlane,Lancastrian Kingsand Lollard Knights(Oxford, 1972), twomajor themesexploredwithinsight.

K. B. McFarlane, TheNobility of LaterMedieval England

(Oxford, 1973),essays by a master-historian.

C. Platt, The EnglishMedieval Town(London, 1976), apleasant, illustratedbook.

N. J. G. Pounds, TheMedieval Castle inEngland and Wales(Cambridge,1990).

N. A. M. Rodger, TheSafeguard of the Sea.

A Naval History ofBritain. Volume One660–1649 (London,1997).

C.D.Ross,TheWarsofthe Roses (London,1976), wise and wellillustrated.

G.O.Sayles,TheKing’sParliament ofEngland (London,1975),adistillationof40 years of researchand argument by

Richardson andSayles.

V. J. Scattergood and J.W. Sherborne (eds),EnglishCourtCulturein the Later MiddleAges (London, 1983),expert essays on avarietyofthemes.

M. Strickland,War andChivalry. TheConduct andPerception of War inEngland and

Normandy, 1066–1217 (Cambridge,1996).

A. Williams, TheEnglish and theNorman Conquest(Woodbridge,1995).

RoyalBiographies

C.T.Allmand,HenryV(London,1992).

R. Barber, Edward,Prince of Wales andAquitaine (London,1978).

F. Barlow, WilliamRufus(London,1983),not just a life, also afine study of thetimes.

D. Bates, William theConqueror (London,1989).

D. A. Carpenter, TheMinority of Henry III

(London,1990).R. H. C. Davis, KingStephen (London1967; 3rd edn, 1990),livelyandstimulating.

J.Gillingham,Richard I(London,1999).

R. A. Griffiths, TheReign of King HenryVI (London, 1981;2nd edn, Stroud,1988), more than abiographyoftheking.

J.L.Kirby,Henry IVof

England (London,1970).

W. M. Ormord, TheReign of Edward III(London,1990).

D.D.R.Owen,Williamthe Lion. Kingshipand Culture 1143–1214 (East Linton,1997).

M. Prestwich,Edward I(London,1988).

C. D. Ross, Edward IV(London, 1974; 2nd

edn,London,1997).C. D. Ross, Richard III(London, 1981; 2ndedn,London,1999).

N. Saul, Richard II(London,1997).

E.L.G.Stones,EdwardI(Oxford,1978).

K.J.Stringer,TheReignof Stephen (London,1993).

W. L. Warren, KingJohn(Harmondsworth,

1961),seekstorescueJohn from thedamning verdict ofthirteenth-centurychroniclers.

W. L.Warren,Henry II(London, 1973),massivebutreadable.

OtherBiographies

F. Barlow, Thomas

Becket (London,1986),adetachedanddetailednarrative.

R. Bartlett, Gerald ofWales 1146–1223(Oxford, 1982), anexcellent study of anoriginal and troubledmind.

C. R. Cheney, HubertWalter (London,1967),alucidaccountof the career of themost powerful

churchmanoftheage.D. Crouch, WilliamMarshal. Court,Career and ChivalryintheAngevinEmpire(London,1990).

A.E.Goodman,JohnofGaunt (London,1992), a royal princeonaEuropeanstage.

G. L. Harriss, CardinalBeaufort (Oxford,1988), a princeof thechurch in politics and

war.J. R. Maddicott, Simonde Montfort(Cambridge,1994).

N. Vincent, Peter desRoches. An Alien inEnglish Politics1205–1238(Cambridge,1996).

ChurchandReligion

F. Barlow, The EnglishChurch 1066–1154(London, 1979), alively analysis of aradical andtumultuousage.

D. Knowles, TheMonastic Order inEngland 940–1216(2nd edn, Cambridge,1963), a scholarlyhistory ofmonasticism by ascholarmonk.

D. Knowles, TheReligious Orders inEngland, vol. I(Cambridge, 1962),important for thecomingofthefriars.

K. B. McFarlane, JohnWycliffe and theBeginningsofEnglishNonconformity(London,1952).

R. N. Swanson,Churchand Society in LateMedieval Britain

(London,1989).

Scotland

G. W. S. Barrow,Kingship and Unity.Scotland 1000–1316(London, 1981), aninvaluable briefsurvey.

J. Brown (ed.), ScottishSociety in the

Fifteenth Century(London, 1977),essays on centraltopics.

A. A. M. Duncan,Scotland.TheMakingof the Kingdom(Edinburgh,1975).

A. Grant, Independenceand Nationhood:Scotland, 1306–1469(London, 1984), acomprehensive andoftenoriginalsurvey.

Wales

R. R.Davies,Conquest,Coexistence andChange:Wales1063–1415 (History ofWales, vol. 2)(Oxford, 1987),economy,society,andpolitics: a majorstudy.

G. Williams, Recovery,

Reorientation, andReformation: Walesc.1415–1642 (Historyof Wales, vol. 3)(Oxford,1987).

Ireland

S. Duffy, Ireland in theMiddle Ages (Dublin,1997).

R. Frame, Colonial

Ireland 1169–1369(Dublin, 1981), anadmirablesketch.

J. F. Lydon, Ireland intheLaterMiddleAges(Dublin,1973).

Economy

J. L. Bolton, TheMedieval EnglishEconomy 1150–1500

(London, 1980), themost helpful generalintroduction.

A. R. Bridbury,Economic Growth:England in the LaterMiddleAges(London,1962).

R. H. Britnell, TheCommercialisation ofEnglish Society,1100–1500(Cambridge,1993).

C. Dyer, Standards of

Living in the laterMiddle Ages. SocialChange in Englandc.1200–1520(Cambridge,1989).

E.MillerandJ.Hatcher,Medieval England:Rural Society andEconomic Change1086–1348 (London,1978), a judicioussurvey of the ruraleconomy.

E.MillerandJ.Hatcher,

Medieval England:Towns, Commerceand Crafts, 1086–1348 (London, 1995),acompanionvolume.

S. Reynolds, AnIntroduction to theHistory of EnglishMedieval Towns (2ndedn, Oxford, 1982),the thinking person’sintroduction toEnglishurbanhistory.

G. A. Williams,

Medieval London:from Commune toCapital (London,1963), a vivid anddetailed account ofthirteenth- and earlyfourteenth-centuryLondon.

LanguageandLiteracy

M. T. Clanchy, FromMemory to WrittenRecord: England1066–1307 (London,1979;2ndedn,1993),a fascinating analysisof thedevelopmentofliteracy and theliteratementality.

A. Crawford (ed.),Letters of the Queensof England, 1100–1547 (Stroud, 1994),an often neglected

perspective.S. Medcalf (ed.), TheContext of EnglishLiterature: The LaterMiddleAges(London,1981), a rare attemptto integrate culturalandsocialhistory.

Art

J. Alexander and P.

Binski (eds), Age ofChivalry. Art inPlantagenet England1200–1400 (RoyalAcademy of Arts,London,1987).

T. S. R. Boase, EnglishArt 1100–1216(Oxford,1953).

P. Brieger, English Art1216–1307 (Oxford,1957).

J. Evans, English Art,1307–1461 (Oxford,

1949).T. Tatton-Brown, GreatCathedrals of Britain(London,1989).

G.Zarnecki,J.Holt,andT. Holland (eds),English RomanesqueArt 1066–1200 (ArtsCouncil,1984).

Chronology

1066

(January)DeathofKingEdward;EarlHaroldbecomesking

(September)

KingHaroldofEnglanddefeatsandkillsKingHaroldofNorwayatStamfordBridge

(October)DukeWilliamofNormandydefeatsandkillsKingHaroldof

EnglandatHastings

(December)Williamisconsecratedking

1067–70

Englishrebellions

1069–70

Theharryingofthenorth

1086

Domesdaysurveycarriedout

1087

DeathofWilliamI;accessionofWilliamIIRufus

1088

RebellioninsupportofRobertCurthose

1093

AnselmappointedarchbishopofCanterbury

Robertpawns

1096

NormandytoRufus

1100

DeathofWilliamRufus;accessionofHenryI

1101

InvasionofRobertCurthose

1106

BattleofTinchebray;Curthoseimprisoned;HenryItakesNormandy

1107

SettlementofInvestitureDisputeinEngland

1120

WreckoftheWhiteShip

1128

MarriageofEmpressMatildatoGeoffreyofAnjou

1135

DeathofHenryI;accessionofStephen

1139–53

CivilwarinEngland

1141

BattleofLincoln;Stephencaptured;laterexchangedforRobertofGloucester

1141–5

GeoffreyofAnjouconquersNormandy

1149

CessionofNorthumbriatoDavidofScotland

1152

HenryofAnjou(laterHenryII)

marriesEleanorofAquitaine

1153

HenryinvadesEngland;heandStephencometoterms

1154

DeathofStephen;accessionofHenryII

1157

HenryregainsNorthumbria

1162

BecketappointedarchbishopofCanterbury

CouncilandConstitutionsof

1164

Clarendon;Becketgoesintoexile

1166

AssizeofClarendon

1169–72

EnglishconquestofIrelandbegins

1170

Coronationoftheyoungking;murderofBecket

1173–4

RebellionagainstHenryII;William‘theLion’(kingofScotland)invadesthenorth

1183

Deathoftheyoungking

1189

DeathofHenryII;accessionofRichardI

1190–2

RichardIoncrusade

1193–4

RichardinprisoninGermany

1193–1205

HubertWalter,archbishopofCanterbury(justiciar1194–8,chancellor1199–1205)

DeathofRhys

1197

ofDeheubarth

1199

DeathofRichardI;accessionofJohn;establishmentofChanceryRolls

1203–4

PhilipAugustusconquersAnjou

andNormandy

1208–14

InterdictinEngland

1214

BattleofBouvines:Frenchvictory

MagnaCarta;civilwarin

1215

England;Louis(laterLouisVIII)invades;deathofJohn;accessionofHenryIII

1217

BattlesofLincolnandDover;Louiswithdraws

1221–4

ArrivalofDominicanandFranciscanFriarsinEngland

1224

LouisVIIIcompletesconquestofPoitou

Dismissalof

1232

HubertdeBurgh

1240

DeathofLlywelyntheGreat

1254

HenryIIIacceptspapalofferofthroneofSicily

1258

Baronstakeoverroyalgovernment;ProvisionsofOxford

1259

TreatyofParisbetweenEnglandandFrance

1264

BattleofLewes;HenryIIIcaptured;governmentofSimondeMontfort

1265

BattleofEvesham;killingofSimondeMontfort

1267

HenryrecognizesLlywelynapGruffyddasPrinceofWales

1272

DeathofHenryIII;accessionofEdwardI

1276–7 FirstWelshWar

1282–3

Edward’sconquestofWales

1286–9

EdwardIinGascony

1291EdwardIassertshisoverlordship

overScotland

1294

WarwithFrancebegins

1295

Franco-Scottishalliance

1296

EdwardIinvadesScotland;his

conflictwiththeChurch

1297

EdwardI’sconflictwithhismagnates;hisexpeditiontoFlanders

1306

RebellionofRobertBruce

1307

DeathofEdwardI;accessionofEdwardII

1314

ScottishvictoryatBannockburn

1315–16

Greatfamine

1321–2

CivilwarinEngland

1327

DepositionanddeathofEdwardII;accessionofEdwardIII

1330

EdwardIIItakesthereinsofgovernment

1337

TheHundredYearsWarbegins

1339–41

PoliticalcrisisinEngland

1346

EnglishvictoriesatCrécyand

Neville’sCross

1347

EnglishcaptureCalais

1348

FirstoccurrenceofplagueinEngland

1356 Englishvictory

atPoitiers

1361

Secondmajoroccurrenceofplague

1376

‘GoodParliament’meets;deathofEdward,theBlackPrince

1377

DeathofEdwardIII;accessionofRichardII

1381

ThePeasants’Revolt

1382

CondemnationofJohnWycliffe’s

works

1388

‘MercilessParliament’meets;battleofOtterburnagainsttheScots

1389

RichardIIdeclareshimselfofage

1394–5

RichardII’sfirstexpeditiontoIreland

1396

Anglo-Frenchtreaty

1397–9

RichardII’s‘tyranny’

1399

DepositionofRichardII;accessionofHenryIV

1400

RebellionofOwainGlyndbegins(to1410)

1403HenryHotspurdefeatedat

Shrewsbury

1405

ExecutionofArchbishopScropeofYork

1408

DefeatoftheearlofNorthumberlandatBramhamMoor

1413

DeathofHenryIV;accessionofHenryV

1415

EnglishvictoryatAgincourt

1419–20

EnglishconquestofNormandy

1420

Anglo-FrenchtreatyofTroyes

1422

DeathofHenryV;accessionofHenryVI

1435

DeathofJohn,dukeofBedford;Franco-

BurgundiantreatyofArras

1436–7

HenryVIcomesofage

1445

HenryVImarriesMargaretofAnjou

1449–50

FrenchoverrunNormandy

1450

MurderofthedukeofSuffolk;JohnCade’srebellion

1453

FrenchoverrunGascony;HenryVIbecomesill

1455

BattleofStAlbansbetweenRichard,dukeofYorkandtheroyalistforces

1459

DefeatofthedukeofYorkatBloreHeathandLudfordBridge

1461

DepositionofHenryVI;accessionofEdwardIV

1465

CaptureofHenryVI

1469

RebellionofRichard,earlofWarwickandGeorge,dukeof

Clarence

1470

DepositionofEdwardIV;returnofHenryVI

1471

ReturnofEdwardIV;deathoftheearlofWarwickatBarnet;deathof

HenryVI

1475

EdwardIV’sexpeditiontoFrance;Anglo-FrenchtreatyofPicquigny

1477

WilliamCaxton’sfirstprintedbookinEngland

1483

DeathofEdwardIV;accession,deposition,anddeathofEdwardV;accessionofRichardIII;rebellionofHenry,dukeofBuckingham

1485

DeathofRichardIIIatBosworth;accessionofHenryVII

GenealogiesofRoyalLines

Index

Page numbers in italics referto illustrations or captions.There may also be textualreferencesonthesamepage.

A

Abelard, Peter (1079–1142)61

Æthelred ‘the Unready’,king of England(c.969–1016)51

Agenais(France)39Agincourt, battle of(1415) 121–4, 124,135–6

agriculture71,74–5,78,104–6,107–8

Alexander I, king ofScotland (1078?

-1124)17Alexander II, king ofScotland (1198–1249)45

Alexander III, king ofScotland (1241–86)40,45,85

AlexanderIII,Pope27Anjou8, 19,22, 24, 25,28, 32, 33, 37, 87,124,150

Anselm, archbishop ofCanterbury (1033–1109)12,15

architecture 147–9,ecclesiastical

4; also 25; see alsocastles;

housingaristocracy 3, 81; also17–59

passim, 91–8 passim,100–1

army7–8,47,89,121Arras, Congress of(1435)125

Arthur,dukeofBrittany(1187–1203)29,33

Arundel, RichardFitzalan, earl of(1346–97)98,114

Arundel(Sussex)20Austinfriars64,65

B

Baker, Geoffrey le (fl.1350)105

Ball,John(d.1381)111Balliol, John, king of

Scotland (1249–1315)41

banking 99; Italianbankers56–7,99

Bannockburn, battle of(1314)85

Barnet(Herts.)128Beaufort, Edmund seeSomerset,dukeof

Beaufort family 109,119,130

Beaufort, Henry, bishopof Winchester(1375?–1447)127

Beaufort, Margaret,countessofRichmondand Derby (1433–1509)140

Becket see ThomasBecket

Bedford, John ofLancaster, duke of(1389–1435)125

Bek,Anthony,bishopofDurham(d.1311)133

Benedictines64‘benefit of clergy’ 139,141,142

Berwick (Northumb.)73,116

Beverley(Yorks.)146Birgham, treaty of(1290)40

BlackDeathseeplagueBlore Heath, battle of(1459)127

Bohun family, earls ofHereford146

Bordeaux39,87,100Boroughbridge (Yorks.)93

Boston (Lincs.)73,110;

StBotolph’sChurch149BosworthField,battleof(1485)130

Botiller, Ralph, LordSudeley(d.1473)109

Bouvines, battle of(1214)34

Bradford(Yorks.)110BramhamMoor(Yorks.)120

Brétigny, treaty of(1360)88

Bristol67,73,100,110,

145; also 20, 105,135; St MaryRedcliffe 148; StStephen’s149

Brittany 25, 28, 29, 88,89,122,129

Bruce, Robert seeRobertI

Buckingham,HumphreyStafford, 1st duke of(1402–60)129–30

Burgh-by-Sands(Cumbria)92

Burgundy125,129

Burgundy, Charles (‘theBold’), duke of(1433–77)128

Burnell, Robert, bishopof Bath and Wells,chancellor (d. 1292)40,63

C

Cade, John (d. 1450)126,143

Cade, William (d.1166?)57

Caen9Caister castle (Norfolk)109

Calais89,100,125,136,151;siegeof90

CambridgeUniversity6;King’s

CollegeChapel148Canterbury136;also28,63,65,104;Cathedral4, 148;ChristChurchPriory100

Cardiff 73; St John’sChurch149

Carlisle104;diocese65Carmelites64,65‘carucage’55Castillon, battle of(1453)126

castles 1, 17, 21, 42passim, 47, 89, 109,116,120

Caxton, William(1420?–91)145

Chalus-Chabrol,siegeof(1199)32

chancellorship51chancery 5–6, 29, 46,49,137

Charles VI, king ofFrance (1368–1422)124

Charles VII, king ofFrance(1403–61)125

Chaucer, Geoffrey(1340?–1400) 107,145–7

Chester46,142Chester,earlsof133Christian church 62–3,

65ChurchandState3,11–12, 14–15, 25–7, 32,33–4, 65–7, 84, 139–40

Gregorian reform 12,14–15

pre-Reformationdioceses138

taxation of 56–7; seealsomonasticism

CinquePorts90Cirencester (Glos.) 120;parishchurch148

Cistercians64Clarence, GeorgePlantagenet, duke of(1449–78)128,129

Clarendon:Assizeof60;Constitutionsof27Cnut, king of Denmarkand England (c.995–1035)48,49,53

coal-mining99coinage45,71Cornwall 113; tinmining99

Courtenay, Archbishop

William (1381–96)104

Coventry 100, 127;parishchurch148

Cravant,battleof(1423)124

Crécy, battle of (1346)88,89

Crusades 11, 29–30, 39,55

Curthose see RobertCurthose

customs and excise 55,56–8,136

D

Dafydd ap Gruffydd (d.1283)40

Danegeld54David I, king ofScotland (1084–1153)20,45

David II, king ofScotland (1324–71)85,87

Deheubarth (Welsh

kingdom)43Despenser, Hugh theyounger(d.1326)92

Domesday Book 68–9;also3,51,54,60,63,72–3,75

Dominicans64,65Dover,battleof37drama146Durham, bishops of 11,133;Cathedral31

E

Eadmer, monk ofCanterbury(d.1124?)12,48

East Anglia 73, 74, 97,108,110,148

Edgar, king of Scotland(1072–1107)11

Edmund ‘Crouchback’,son of Henry III(1245–96)38

Edward I (1239–1307)39–41, 82–4, 85, 91–2; also 5, 42–61

passim, 70, 86, 87,92–3,94,95,99,101,103,123,147–8

Edward II (1284–1327)92–3,94;also49,50,86,91–2,148

Edward III (1312–77)95–6;also30,85,85–9, 99, 109, 123, 129,136–7,151

Edward IV (1442–83)127–9; also 118–19,135

Edward V

(1470–c.1483) 118,130

Edward of York, Princeof Wales (1471–84)129

EdwardtheBlackPrince(1330–76)89–91,97

Edward ‘theConfessor’,King (1002/5–66) 5,59

Eleanor of Aquitaine,queen of Henry II(1122–1204)3,21,33

Eleanor of Castile,

queenofEdwardI(d.1290)94,147–8

Eleanor of Provence,queenofHenryIII(d.1291)38

Elizabeth Woodville,queen of Edward IV(1437?–92)38

Ely: Cathedral 149,dioceseof65

enclosure109English language 4,141–7,151–2

Englishnationhood149–

52EtonCollege148Eustace, count ofBoulogne (1130/1?–53)22

Evesham, battle of(1265)39

Evreux(France)33Exchequer 49–50, 52–3,137–9

F

Fastolf, Sir John(1378?–1459?)109

Faversham(Kent)22FitzNeal, Richard,bishop of London (d.1198)52

Flambard, Ranulf,bishop ofDurham (d.1128)11

Formigny, battle of(1450)125

France 3, 4, 6, 17, 24,28, 30, 33, 37–9, 43,

70,80,87–98passim,109, 110, 114, 116,118–19, 120–9, 130,135, 136, 150; also26, 123; see alsoAnjou; Brittany;Gascony; HundredYears War; Maine;Normandy;Poitou

Franciscans64Froissart, Jean (1337?–1410?)90

Fulk V, count of Anjou(1109–28)17,18

Fulk leRechin,countofAnjou(1043–1109)8

G

Gascoigne, Dr Thomas(1403–58)80–1

Gascony 37, 39, 48, 51,87–9,125

Gavaston, Peter (d.1312)92

Gawain and the Green

Knight,Sir146gentry 58, 59, 69, 84,101, 117, 119, 125,134,137,146

Geoffrey, count ofNantes(1134–58)25

Geoffrey, duke ofBrittany (1158–86)25,28–9

Geoffrey ‘Plantagenet’,count of Anjou(1113–50)18,20,21

Gerald of Wales(GiraldusCambrensis)

(1146–1223)51GiraldusCambrensisseeGeraldofWales

Gloucester 103, 131;Cathedral 94, 148; StPeter’sAbbey99

Gloucester, Thomas ofWoodstock, duke of(1355–97)114

Glynd r,Owain (Owainap

Gruffydd 1355?–1417?)80,108,117,120–1

Gower, John (1325?–

1408)146–7Gravelines125Gruffydd ap Gruffydd(fl.1280s)40

Gwynedd (Welshkingdom)43,82

H

Halesowen (Worcs.) 76,105

Halifax(Yorks.)110

Hastings,William, Lord(1430?–83)130

Henry I (1068–1135)13–19; also 10, 43,50–5passim,57,59

Henry II (1139–89) 22,24–9; also 4, 26, 27,51,53,54–5,57,60

HenryIII(1207–72)37–9;also4,5–6,43,49,54,56,57,70,82

Henry IV (HenryBolingbroke, earl ofDerby1367–1413)11,

115,116,120–2,141,144,147,150

Henry V (1387–1422)122–4;also 109, 117,121,136,151,152

Henry V, emperor ofGermany (1081–1125)18

Henry VI (1421–71)125–8;also 118, 136,150

HenryVII(HenryTudor1457–1509) 130; also118,119,139

Henry of Blois, bishopofWinchester (1129–71)19–20

HenryofEastry,priorofChrist Church,Canterbury (d. 1331)71

Henry of Grosmont,duke of Lancaster(1300?–61)140

Henry of Huntingdon(1080/5?–1155)141

Henry theYounger, sonofHenryII(1155–83)

28Herbert family, earls ofPembroke109

HerefordCathedral148Hereford, earls of seeBohun

Hoccleve, Thomas(1368?–1426) 136,143,147

Honorius III, Pope (d.1227)56

Hotspur see Percy,Henry

housing107–8,149

Hubert de Burgh,justiciar(d.1243)37

Hubert Walter,archbishop ofCanterbury (d. 1205)32

Hugh of Lusignan (d.1219)33

Hull 99, parish church148

Humphrey of Lancaster,duke of Gloucester(1390–1447)127

Hundred Years War

(1337–1453) 87–91;also 93–4, 109, 114,116,122–6

I

industry68,71,99,109–10

Innocent III, Pope(1160/1?–1216) 34,61,66

Ireland 74, 86–7, 106;

English conquest andoccupation 24–5,116–17, 123, 126,137,150,152

Isabella of Angoulême,queen of King John(d.1246)33

IsabellaofFrance,queenof Edward II (1292–1358)88,93,94

IsabellaofValois,queenof Richard II (1389–1409)114

IsleofWight108

J

Jaffa,treatyof(1192)30James I, king ofScotland (1394–1437)116,121

Jews58,67Joan of Arc, St (1412–31)124

JoanofNavarre,duchessof Brittany, queen ofHenry IV (1370?–

1437)150John II, king of France(1319–64)88,90

John,King (1167–1216)32–6,34,35;also28,43, 48, 52, 54, 55–6,66

John of Gaunt, duke ofLancaster (1340–99)114,119

Juliane of Norwich(c.1342–after 1413)140

justiceseelaw

K

Kempe, Margery (b.1364)140

Kildare, Fitzgeraldfamily, earls of 116–17

Kilkenny, statute of(1366)86–7

L

LaRochelle37,90Lambeth, treaty of(1217)37

Lancaster: dukes of seeHenry of Grosmont;JohnofGaunt;earlofseeThomas

landtenure51,69,75–7,100–1;also108–9

Lanfranc, archbishop ofCanterbury (1005?–89)9

Langley, Thomas,

bishop of Durham(1360?–1437)133

Langton,Walter, bishopofCoventry (d.1321)63

law and justice 7, 40,60–3,76

also29,134trialbyjury61–2trialbyordeal61Wales43–4layinvestiture14–15Le Goulet, treaty of(1200)33

Leeds110Lewes, battle of (1264)39

Lincoln 110; battle of(1217)37

LionelofAntwerp,dukeofClarence(1338–68)115

literacy6,7,141–9literature 4, 140–9; seealsodrama

Llywelyn ap Gruffydd(1225?–82)40,43,82

Llywelyn the Great,

ruler of Gwynedd(1173–1240)43

local government 46–7,133–4

Lollardy 140–1, 144,145

London 1, 19–20, 36,39,48,65,73,97,99,100,105–6,110,111,126, 128, 135, 136,137, 142–7 passim,152

‘lostvillages’108LouisVI,kingofFrance

(1078–1137)17Louis VII, king ofFrance(1120–80)21–2,28

Louis VIII, king ofFrance (1187–1226)37

Louis IX, St, king ofFrance(1214–70)37

LouisXI,kingofFrance(1423–83)128,129

Lucy, countess ofChester(fl.1129)51

LudfordBridge,battleof

(1459)127Ludlow (Shropshire)118

Luttrell Psalter (c.1340)95

Lydgate, John (1370?–1451?)136,147

Lynn(Norfolk)110

M

MagnaCarta35,36,37,

50,59,61,92Maine (France) 8, 11,33,125

Malcolm IV, king ofScotland (1141–65)24

Manfred(1233–66)38manors76–7Mantes(France)8–9March, earls of seeMortimerfamily

Margaret of Anjou,queen of Henry VI(1429–82) 125, 128,

135Margaret, ‘maid ofNorway’ (1283–90)40–1

markets73,77,100Marlborough, statute of(1267)39

Marshal, William, earlof Pembroke (1146?–1219)50

Matilda of Boulogne,queen of KingStephen (1103?–52)20–1

Matilda, Empress(1102–67)18,19,20–1

MiddleDitchford(Glos.)107

MiraclePlays146monarchy 15, 81–2, 91,92–3, 97–8, 133–7;royal household 44–52; royal patronage49–55

monasticism63–4Montfort, Simon de(1208?–65)39,59

Montgomery, treaty of(1267)43

Mortimer, Edmund, earlof March (1391–1425)115,119

Mortimer family, earlsof March 108, 109,146

N

Nantes25

navy and naval warfare89–90,122–4

Neville family109,118,119,127,131

Neville,Richard, earl ofSalisbury (1400?–60)126

Neville,Richard, earl ofWarwick (1428–71)126,128

Neville’sCross,battleof(1346)85

Newcastle upon Tyne106

Norfolk74Norfolk, ThomasMowbray,1stdukeofseeNottingham

NormanConquest1–4,2Normandy3,10,22,33,124–6,149–50

Northampton, Assize of(1176) 60; treaty of(1328)85

Northumberland108Northumberland, HenryPercy, 1st earl of(1341–1408)120

Northumbria 45Nottingham, ThomasMowbray, duke ofNorfolk, earl of(1366–99)114

O

Odo, bishop of Bayeux(1036?–97)10

Oldcastle, Sir John (d.1417)121–2,141

Orderic Vitalis(chronicler 1075–1143?)10

Orléans, Charles, dukeof(1394–1465)125

Ormond,earlsof117Otterburn, battle of(1388)114

Owain ap Gruffydd seeGlynd r

Owain of Gwynedd(1100–70)24

Oxford 105; Provisionsof (1258) 38;

University6Oxford,RobertdeVere,earlof(1362–92)98

P

papacy137–9Paris,Matthew(d.1259)34,70

Paris, treaty of (1259)38,43

Parliament57–9,81,92–

8 passim, 119, 121,122, 124, 125, 126,133,134,135–7,144

Parliaments: ‘Good’(1376)96;‘Merciless’(1388)98

parochial system 64–5;clergy63–4

peasantry5,59,63,100–1,104,108,110,142,143

Peasants’ Revolt (1381)97,110–11,142

Pembroke, earl of see

MarshalPercy family 109, 115,118,120–1,130

Percy, Henry (‘Hotspur’1364–1403)120

Percy, Thomas, earl ofWorcester (1343–1403)120

Perrers, Alice (d. 1400)96

Perth, treaty of (1266)45

Philip I, king of France(1052–1108)8,9

Philip IIAugustus, kingof France (1165–1223) 28–30 passim,33,34,56

PhilipIII,kingofFrance(1245–85)39

PhilipVI,kingofFrance(1293–1350)88

Philippa of Hainault,queen of Edward III(1314?–69?)96

Picquigny, treaty of(1475)129

PiersPlowman146

plague104–10Plantagenet, George seeClarence,dukeof

Plantagenet,RichardseeYork,dukeof

Poitiers,battleof (1356)88,89

Poitou33,36,37PolefamilyofHull99Pole, William de la,duke of Suffolk(1396–1450)126

Pontefractcastle120population 72–5, 104–7,

107Portsmouth14poverty75–7,104–6Praemunire, statute of(1353)139

pricesseewagesProvisors, statute of(1351)139

R

Radcot Bridge (Oxon.),

skirmishat98Raglancastle109RamseyAbbey(Cambs.)104

Rheims89Rhuddlan, statute of(1284)84

Rhys of Deheubarth(1130?–97)24,43

RichardI(1157–99)29–32; also 28, 49–50,55–6

Richard II (1367–1400)97–9, 111, 113–16;

also 116, 118, 120,133,142,147,149

Richard III, formerlyduke of Gloucester(1452–85) 129–30,131;also116

Richard, duke of YorkseeYork

RobertI(Bruce),kingofScotland (1274–1329)85

Robert Curthose, dukeofNormandy(1054?–1134)8–11,12–14

Robert de Beaumont,count of Meulan (d.1118)117

Robert, earl ofGloucester (1090?–1147)21

Robert of Bellême (fl.1098)14

Rockingham(Northants),councilat12

Roger, bishop ofSalisbury (d. 1139)18,19

Roger of Montgomery,earlofShrewsbury(d.1094)43

Rolle, Richard (1290?–1349)140

Rotrou III, count ofPerche(d.1144)17

Rouen, battle of (1450)125; siege of (1419)136

Roxburghcastle116Ruthin(Clwyd)106Rye(Sussex)90

S

Saladin(1137–93)30Salisbury, earl of seeNeville,Richard

Samson, abbot of BurySt

Edmunds(d.1211)78Scotland44–5;also150,152; England and 11,40–1, 85–6, 105–6,114,115–16,123

Scrope, Richard,archbishop of York(1346?–1405) 120,135

scutage55Seaford(Sussex)106sheriff47Shirley, John (1366?–1456)142

Shrewsbury120Shrewsbury, earl of seeRogerofMontgomery

Sicily38–9Simnel, Lambert (fl.

1487–1525)130Simon de Montfort seeMontfort

slavery69,75Sluys, battle of (1340)90

Somerset, EdmundBeaufort, duke of(1406?–55)126

StAlbansAbbey34,70,108,140

Staffordfamily109Stamford110Stephen, King (1096?–

1154)19–23Sudeleycastle109Suffolk,duke/earlofseePole

Swansea(Glam.)99

T

tallage55Taunton (Som.), parishchurch149

taxation17,54,91,103;

also 33, 93–4; geld54; maltolt (1294)101–3;Parliamentand134; poll tax 90, 97,110;seealso customsandexcise

Tewkesbury, battle of(1471)125

Thomas Becket,archbishop ofCanterbury (1118?–1170)25–8,27

Thomas, earl ofLancaster (1278?–

1322?)92,93,101Thomas of Lancaster,dukeofClarence, sonof Henry IV (1388–1421)121

tinmining99Tinchebray, battle of(1106)14

Toulouse25Touraine33townsand townlife64–5,66–7,69,73–4,78,100, 109–10, 119–20,134, 141, 146; see

alsomarketstrade 25, 39, 46, 56–7,68, 70–1, 73, 87, 90,96,101,109–10,125–6, 128, 143, 150; seealsomarkets

Troyes, treaty of (1420)124

Tusmore(Oxon.)106Tyler,Wat(d.1381)111TyneValley99

U

Urban II, Pope (1042–99)11

Ursed’Abetôt,sheriffofWorcester (d. 1086)47

V

Verneuil, battle of(1424)124

Vexin, the(France)8–9,

11,21,25,32,33

W

wages 103, 104, 107–8,109

Wakefield (Yorks.) 127,146

Wales8, 20,24, 34, 37,40, 42–4, 48, 66, 67,72–3, 80, 82–92passim, 99, 100, 102,

103, 108, 109, 113,117–22, 126, 130,137, 149–52;also 83,138;Englishconquestandoccupation123

Wallace, William(1272?–1305?)85

Walter of Henley (fl.1250)71,78

Walton-on-Thames(Surrey)94

Warenne, William de,earl of Surrey (d.1088)69

‘WarsoftheRoses’117,126–32

Warwick, earls of seeNeville

Warwick, ThomasBeauchamp, earl of(1339?–1401?)114

westcountry110,parishchurches147–8

WesternIsles45Westminster 49, 136;also83

Abbey 4, 13, 19, 39,136,148

Hall149Provisionsof (1259)38,39; St Stephen’schapel 148; treaty of(1153)22

William I (‘the Lion’),king of Scotland(1142?–1214)45

William I, duke ofNormandyandkingofEngland (c.1027–87)1–3,8–9,52

William II (‘Rufus’1056/60–?1100)9–13,

47,48,50,61WilliamAtheling,sonofHenryI(1103–20)18

William Clito, son ofRobert Curthose(1102–28)17,18

William de Braose (d.1211)43,52

William de Pont lel’Arche, chamberlain(fl.1229–30)52

William of Malmesbury(1090/6?–1143?)5,17

William of Mortain,

Count (1080?–1140?)14

William of Sens (fl.1175–9)4

William, son of KingStephen (1132/7?–59?)22

Winchelsea(Sussex)90Winchester 4, 19;bishops of 19, 137;Cathedral 148;treasury13,19,49

Windsor 120, 136; StGeorge’sChapel148

womeninsociety50,72,103,140,143

Woodville family 129–30;seealso ElizabethWoodville

wool trade 56, 70, 99,100,101,109–10

Worcester121Wrexham, St Gileschurch149

Wycliffe, John (1329?–84)140–1

Y

York136,144also93,135,146chapterhouse149commercial centre 98,110

York, RichardPlantagenet, duke of(1411–60) 109, 126–7,131

Expand yourcollectionof

VERY SHORTINTRODUCTIONS

Availablenow

1. Classics

2. Music

3. Buddhism

4. LiteraryTheory

5. Hinduism

6. Psychology

7. Islam

8. Politics

9. Theology

10. Archaeology

11. Judaism

12. Sociology

13. TheKoran

14. TheBible

15. Social and Cultural

Anthropology

16. History

17. RomanBritain

18. The Anglo-SaxonAge

19. MedievalBritain

20. TheTudors

21. StuartBritain

22. Eighteenth-Century

Britain

23. Nineteenth-CenturyBritain

24. Twentieth-CenturyBritain

25. Heidegger

26. AncientPhilosophy

27. Socrates

28. Marx

29. Logic

30. Descartes

31. Machiavelli

32. Aristotle

33. Hume

34. Nietzsche

35. Darwin

36. The EuropeanUnion

37. Gandhi

38. Augustine

39. Intelligence

40. Jung

41. Buddha

42. Paul

43. Continental

Philosophy

44. Galileo

45. Freud

46. Wittgenstein

47. IndianPhilosophy

48. Rousseau

49. Hegel

50. Kant

51. Cosmology

52. Drugs

53. RussianLiterature

54. The FrenchRevolution

Visitthe

VERY SHORTINTRODUCTIONS

Website

www.oup.co.uk/vsi

Information aboutallpublishedtitles

News offorthcomingbooks

Extracts from thebooks, including

titles not yetpublished

Reviewsandviews

Links to other websitesandmainOUPwebpage

Information aboutVSIsintranslation

Contacttheeditors

Order other VSIson-line

VERYSHORTINTRODUCTIONS

Derived from thebest-sellingOxford Illustrated History ofBritain, the followingBritishhistory titles are nowavailable in the Very ShortIntroductionsseries:

RomanBritainPeterSalway

TheAnglo-SaxonAgeJohnBlair

MedievalBritainJohn

Gillingham&RalphA.Griffiths

TheTudorsJohnGuy

StuartBritainJohnMorrill

Eighteenth-CenturyBritainPaulLangford

Nineteenth-CenturyBritainChristopherHarvie&H.C.G.Matthew

Twentieth-CenturyBritainKennethMorgan

HISTORY

A Very ShortIntroduction

JohnH.Arnold

History: A Very ShortIntroduction is a stimulatingessay about how weunderstandthepast.Thebook

explores various questionsprovoked by ourunderstandingofhistory, andexamineshowthesequestionshave been answered in thepast.Using examples of howhistorians work, the bookshares the sense ofexcitementatdiscoveringnotonly the past, but alsoourselves.

‘A stimulating andprovocative introductionto one of collectivehumanity’s mostimportant quests -understanding the pastand its relation to thepresent. A vivid mix oftelling examples andclearcutanalysis.’

DavidLowenthal,UniversityCollege

London‘Thisisanextremely

engaging book, lively,enthusiastic and highlyreadable,whichpresentssomeofthefundamentalproblems of historicalwriting in a lucid andaccessible manner. Asaninvitationtothestudyof history it should bedifficulttoresist.’

PeterBurke,EmmanuelCollege,

Cambridge

www.oup.co.uk/vsi/history

ARCHAEOLOGY

A Very ShortIntroduction

PaulBahn

This entertaining Very ShortIntroduction reflects theenduring popularity ofarchaeology-asubjectwhich

appeals as a pastime, career,and academic discipline,encompasses the wholeglobe, and surveys 2.5millionyears.Fromdesertstojungles, from deep caves tomountain tops, from pebbletools tosatellitephotographs,from excavation to abstracttheory, archaeology interactswith nearly every otherdiscipline in its attempts toreconstructthepast.

‘very lively indeedand remarkablyperceptive … a quitebrilliant and level-headed look at thecurious world ofarchaeology’

BarryCunliffe,UniversityofOxford‘It is often said that

well-written books arerare in archaeology, butthis is a model of goodwriting for a general

audience. The book isfull of jokes, but itsserious message - thatarchaeology can be arich and fascinatingsubject - it gets acrosswithmore panache thananyotherbookIknow.’

SimonDenison,editorofBritish

Archaeology

www.oup.co.uk/vsi/archaeology

SOCIAL ANDCULTURALANTHROPOLOGY

A Very ShortIntroduction

John MonaghanandPeterJust

‘If you want to know whatanthropology is, lookatwhat

anthropologistsdo.’

This Very ShortIntroduction to Social andCultural Anthropologycombines an accessibleaccount of some of thediscipline’s guidingprinciples and methodologywith abundant examples andillustrations ofanthropologistsatwork.

Peter Just and JohnMonaghan begin bydiscussing anthropology’smost important contributionsto modern thought: itsinvestigation of culture as adistinctly ‘human’characteristic, its doctrine ofcultural relativism, and itsmethodology of fieldworkand ethnography. They thenexamine specific ways inwhich social and culturalanthropology have advanced

our understanding of humansociety and culture, drawingon examples from their ownfieldwork. The book endswith an assessment ofanthropology’s presentposition, and a look forwardtoitslikelyfuture.

www.oup.co.uk/vsi/anthropology