DID THE CONQUEST MATTER?. Did one warrior aristocracy simply replace another without broader...
-
Upload
juniper-parrish -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
0
Transcript of DID THE CONQUEST MATTER?. Did one warrior aristocracy simply replace another without broader...
Did one warrior aristocracy simply replace another without broader influence on England’s government, economy, church and society?
SO WHAT!?
All change in England after the conquest not simply a consequence of Conquest
Late 11th century was a time of great religious, economic, political and social change throughout Western Europe
England would not have stood still
A BIG ISSUE
The best place to look for change is in those areas that would have concerned William most!
LAND OWNERSHIP, GOVERNMENT, WAR, AND LAW AND…
Respect for traditionEnglish government relatively sophisticatedSimply took over the existing system of shires
and hundredsUsed hidage system to collect taxCoinage system remained intactEngland and Normandy retained separate
governmentsEngland NOT remade in Normandy’s image
Government
The most obvious changes were personnel changes
Normans dominated royal administration at its highest ranks
Form and nature of royal documents remained intact BUT language changed. After 1070 only Latin used
TIME FOR CHANGE
Large regions set aside as royal forests. Areas included cultivated regions
Royal forests as much to do with revenue raising as hunting
FINES for privileges and offensesRemember Robin Hood as indication of
unpopularity of forest laws
FOREST LAWS
Normans built on existing structureDid not radically alter governmentIncreasing bureaucracy, literacy and numeracy
were features of the periodEXCHEQUER: new accounting system based
on abacus appeared under Henry I (owed more to the importation of Arabic and Chinese knowledge than Norman Conquest)
THE IMPACT OF THE NORMAN CONQUEST ON GOVERNMENT WAS SURPRISINGLY LIMITED
KING CONTINUITY
THE NORMANS BROUGHT FAR GREATER CHANGES IN GEOPOLITICS THAN TO THE MECHANICS OF GOVERNMENT
Geowhat???
GEOPOLITICS
Northern separatism removed and north more firmly incorporated into the realm
Crushing of rebellions, construction of castles, lordships (Carlisle!)
Borders with Scotland become relatively fixed through warfare and deals. Henry I marries Edith (Matilda), daughter of King Malcolm
‘True’ slow conquest of Wales beginsScandinavian relationships become far less importantRelations with France become more close. The King of
England ends up with more of France than the King of France!
THE NORMAN CONQUEST PROFOUNDLY EFFECTED ENGLAND’S RELATIONS WITH ITS NEIGHBOURS
GEOPOLITICS
The Normans brought important military innovations to England such as dragon slaying
THE CASTLE – even here there is continuity;Simple Motte and Bailey not altogether a
revolutionary break from the lightly fortified Anglo -Saxon noble residence
Castles had important non-military role similar to Anglo-Saxon lordly hall –places of residence, administration and lordship
Some castles were built on places of lordship
BLOOD AND GUTS - MILITARY
HOWEVER… Castles brought a new revolutionary dynamic
England fortified in far greater depthTowns controlled by castlesBalance of warfare shifted from battles to
siegesBuilding in stoneEnglish resources went into castle building at
the expense of the fleet. Naval strength went into decline
CASTLES
Main change was heavily armoured cavalryDid not adopt battle axe because it was not a cavalry
weaponBayeux Tapestry reveals both sides used similar
armour and some of the same weapons – swords, spears and bows ( though Normans introduced crossbows but not the revolutionary weapon the longbow would become)
THE SUPERIORITY OF THE MOUNTED NORMAN KNIGHT TO THE ANGLO-SAXON WARRIOR HAS SOMETIMES BEEN EXAGGERATED BUT CHANGE IN THE MILITARY FIELD WAS NONETHELESS EXTENSIVE
CAVALRY
Norman lust for land and determination to break the English aristocracy after 1070 produced a revolution in landholding.
The change was more than the replacement of English landholders by Norman ones!
However, the impact was far less than its potential for change…
LANDHOLDING
Domesday reveals the BALANCE of landholding within the elite changed
Edward had been the greatest individual landholder but the collective wealth of the Godwines outstripped his
Other earls had vast landholdingsWilliam doubled the king’s share of lands in England
collecting roughly 17% of revenues recorded in DomesdayThough William rewarded his followers richly none
approached what the Godwine family had ownedTHE BALANCE OF LANDED WEALTH THEREFORE SHIFTED
GREATLY BETWEEN THE KING AND THE LEADING NOBLES GREATLY ENHANCING THE POWER OF THE CROWN.
The 25% of English land owned by the church remained largely unchanged
DOMESDAY AGAIN
William’s successors gave huge amounts of landBy 1300 royal lands accounted for only 2% of landed
incomeBy 1086 the great noble had already granted out
more than half their estates!Initially knights who obtained this land remained
closely attached to their benefactor but over the generations they became like independent landholders and recreated the late Anglo-Saxon phenomenon of a very large lesser aristocracy
What did not appear for centuries was a ‘Godwine type’ which could challenge royal power on their own
CHANGE NOT PERMANENT
Late Anglo-Saxon Estates tended to be scatteredNorman tended to have compact lordshipsVarious mechanisms for the transfer of land including
making Normans ‘heirs’ to Saxon landholdersCreation of compact lordships in militarily sensitive areas
had greatest impact on ‘consolidation’ of land. Lordship in the Welsh Marches and the north gained unusual political weight as a consequence
HOWEVER, descendents often gave out grants of land and rebellious noble would have their lands broken up, so…
THE REVOLUTION IN LANDHOLDING HAD LESS LONG-TERM THAN MEDIUM-TERM CONSEQUENCES FOR THE STRUCTURE OF ARISTOCRATIC POWER AND PROPERTY OWNERSHIP
NATURE OF LANDHOLDING