Norman Consolidation of Post Conquest England - Essay Example

Norman Consolidation of Post-Conquest England Background Information The history of Normans can be traced back in 911, when King Charles the second, who was the then leader of France, offered a considerable portion of the northern French region to the Viking Chief Rollo and his men as a sign of the peace. Upon settling on the region, and for the subsequent three hundred years, the Chief, his men as well as their ensuing generations embraced the French way of life including their language and culture (Warren 1987, pg. 14). The European region enjoyed a period of peace and development until January 1066, when King Edward the then leader of England passed on. Following King Edward’s death, a council of influential men commonly known as Witan settled on Harold Godwin to take charge of England. This decision did not augur well with several people including William, who was the then King of the Normans and Harold’s brother Tostig. William particularly took issue with the fact that Edward had promised him the crown of England when he retired, and swore to that in 1063. King Harold’s, first obstacle was to face his brother Tostig, who had combined forces with the then King of Norway to overthrow Harold’s rule. Tostig’s desire to rise to power nevertheless, came to an abrupt end in September of that year when the English army won against them (Warren 1987, pg. 18). Buoyed by the victory he had just had over his brother, Harold marshalled his troops to carry on with their match, with their next destination being King William’s sphere of influence, located within the northern region of France. In October of 1066, the two warring parties met near Hastings, and the great battle over the English crown began. At first, Harold Godwin’s men were destined to beat the Normans. However, their weariness became evident when the situation changed suddenly and Harold was killed in the process. The battle did not stop until such a time when all of Harold’s loyal bodyguards were all eliminated (Warren 1987, pg. 19). William the then Norman king ascended to the English crown, and with it came the Norman invasion of England. The Norman Conquest As mentioned in the section above, the Norman conquest of England began in 1066, following the invasion of the Kingdom of England by William the Duke of Normandy. Moreover, William’s victory during the battle of Hastings heightened his claim for the English crown. Though it came with a mixed bag of reactions, the Norman conquest of the English Kingdom proved vital for the history of England (Roche 1995, pg. 46). This is majorly because the invasion linked England more closely to continental Europe, thereby making it easier for English traders to access strategic markets. In as much as the Norman conquest is remembered for several reasons including influencing the English language and culture, historians have overtime held the ideology that it similarly set the stage for an intense rivalry with France, which went on until World War one. William I of England, commonly known as the conqueror, as well as other subsequent rulers of the Kingdom of England employed different strategies to consolidate their conquest; some of which are discussed in the section below. Additional Conquests One of the strategies that the Norman leadership employed in order to consolidate their control of the Kingdom of England was through fresh conquests. After conquering England for example, the leaders expanded their spheres of influence to include both Scotland and Wales. Taking control of these two regions nevertheless was much easier majorly because their rulers were willing to corporate with the Normans (Alexander 1998, pg. 11). Malcom I of Scotland for example employed personnel of Norman origin to some key positions within his government. In like manner, he incorporated a few Norman practices into their way of doing things. In as much as such events were deemed to be carried out due to respect for the Norman culture, historians have since come to the conclusion that the main reason why that took place was the need to strengthen their political position, notably because of the new wave that had swept through the region (Barley 1990, 15). Scottish leaders such as King David I took the incorporation a notch higher, by offering huge pieces of land to Frenchmen of Norman origin as grants. One such example is the Annandale region that was granted to Robert Bruce. The Scottish kings and religious leaders made it easier for the Normans to exert their rule on them by structuring their religious systems in close proximity with Christendom, which was the main religious belief of the Normans (Barley 1990, 16). Malcom and his wife Margaret for example led the line by coming up with the Benedictine Ministry, while David I put in place the monastic orders, which were to be used by Scottish occupants as the basis of their religious beliefs. The spread out of Normans into Wales employed an altered form that practiced in both England and Scotland. While in England, the incursion was headed by the duke, and in Scotland Normans came upon the offer of the kings of the native line, in Wales, aristocracy led forceful Norman spread out. Spreads took place throughout the Anglo-Welsh border, particularly in the north, beginning with the earldom of Chester, all the way to the southern areas (Chibnall 1999, pg. 21). In the concluding regions, there was the advent Marcher lordship, examples being those of Pembroke and Ceredigion. Over and above, the ease with which the Normans conquered both Scotland and Wales brought about much admiration for their leaders. In a way, it made citizens of the English kingdom accept their leadership. Though that was the case, it is of great significance to take into consideration the fact that there were incidences of antagonism in the process of conquering the two regions. The English Economy The economy of England had been registering substantive escalation before conquest by the Normans. This was evident by the manner in which their markets were ever growing, as well as how extensive their towns were. Their economy was so much outstanding such that by the 12th century, English writers through their works of literary art discredited the markets of other economies, often describing them as nascent, notably for their lack of solid exchange platforms and towns (Coss 1995, pg. 18). In like manner, the introduction of coinage and the establishment of boroughs by David I of Scotland and his successors most evidently points to the fact that kings and lords outside England purposely wanted to inspire the capital of their realms. Within an economy such as the English one, there was undoubtedly room for men to grow by accumulating their wealth (Lavelle 2010, pg. 59). Similarly, it continued to be an outstanding hierarchic society, and the process of conquest itself strengthened the role of lordship. The Domesday Book, the product of William Is great survey of his realm in 1086, demonstrates that the eleven foremost associates of the upper crust controlled approximately a quarter of the empire (Williams 2003, pg. 27). An additional part was in the hands of less than two hundred extra aristocrats. These landed gentry had received their parks by kingly awards, and in turn donated a number of their parcels to their own supporters. This form of land ownership is every so often regarded as a significant component of a medieval arrangement: a form of societal organization once habitually thought to have been introduced by the Normans in 1066 (Thomas 2008, pg. 20). In contemporary ages there has been substantial deliberation about the complications arising after the usage of the term feudal, an argument wittily predicted by the great Victorian historian, F.W Maitland, who said: Feudalism is a useful word, and will cover a multitude of ignorance. Nonetheless, whatever the broader difficulties feudalism brings forth, the manner of Norman takeover and settlement did connect a diversity of categories of lordship meticulously together, based on security, amenity, and influence. Moreover, it associated them to the union of land tenancy, the holding of what men at the time denoted as a fief. The gift of lordship might bring about royal flaw and the break-up of huge administrative control. This ensued in England for the period of the civil conflict of the period of influence of Stephen, 1135 - 1154. Thus far, it would be erroneous to see nobility and monarch, as well as lordship and kingship as essentially divergent (Clanchy 2014, pg. 56). Kings and lords habitually viewed one another as regular companions, tied up in an equally advantageous relationship. Moreover, in England both kings and aristocrats unrelentingly operated in both political and judicial fields further than those demarcated by lordship did. Most prominent among these were the regions, which the Normans got from the Anglo-Saxons (Clanchy 2014, 59). The Practice of Art The Normans had a colossal influence on architectural progress in Britain. There had been extensive invigorated settlements, known as burghs, as well as fortified houses in Anglo-Saxon England, the castles though, were Norman importations. Numbers are unclear, but it seems probable that approximately a thousand castles had been put up, roughly four decades after the Norman takeover (Fry 2005, pg. 32). A number of them were fortifications on mounds, walled by larger enclosures. At the same time, others were massive, most outstandingly the vast palace-castles William I built at Colchester and London. These were the major none-spiritual structures in stone from the time of the Romans, over six eras earlier. They were a fete of Williams feat, but correspondingly a sign of his want to impress the conquered. Cathedrals were similarly erected in excessive statistics, and in abundant variety, though habitually following the Romanesque style with its distinctive round-topped arches (Campbell 2000, pg. 67). The immense houses of worship of the late 11th and early 12th centuries, colossal in measure by European principles, underscored the authority of the Normans as well as their modification of the church in the seized empire. Buildings such as the Durham cathedral suggest the forte and enthusiasm of the constructors arts in somewhat similar approach as the initial high-rise buildings of New York. The Normans likewise persisted with the countless construction of parish churches, which had arisen in England in the twilight Anglo-Saxon era. Such churches appeared as well in the rest of the British Isles, and can still be observed, for example at Leuchars in Fife (Freeman 2011, pg. 20). A lord might parade his treasure, supremacy and devoutness through a blend of castle and church in adjacent juxtaposition, yet again as still stunningly noticeable at Durham. Over and above, striking are local groups of abundant churches, a distinctive too of 11th century Normandy (Brenchley et.al 2006, pg. 186). One of the most telling examples is the group of border abbeys in southern Scotland, David Is groundwork of Jedburgh, still inspiring and capping its hill; the Pre-monstratensian dynasty of Dryburgh; the Cistercian house at Melrose; and most spectacular of all in the magnificence which even the partial vestiges specify, an additional royal ground work at Kelso. References ALEXANDER, M. V. C. (1998). Three crises in early English history: personalities and politics during the Norman conquest, the reign of King John, and the Wars of the Roses. Lanham, Md. [etc.], University press of America. AMODIO, M. (2014). The Anglo-Saxon literature handbook. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=566365. ABELS, R. P., BACHRACH, B. S., & HOLLISTER, C. W. (2001). The Normans and their adversaries at war: essays in memory of C. Warren Hollister. Woodbridge, UK, Rochester, NY, Boydell Press. BARLEY, M. W. (1990). The buildings of the countryside: 1500-1750. Cambridge u.a, Cambridge Univ. Pr. BRENCHLEY, P. J., & RAWSON, P. F. (2006). The geology of England and Wales. London, Geological Society. CAMPBELL, J. (2000). TheAnglo-Saxon state. London [u.a.], Hambledon and London. CLANCHY, M. T. (2014). England and its rulers, 1066-1307. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=707192. CHIBNALL, M. (1999). The debate on the Norman Conquest. Manchester, Manchester University Press. COSS, P. R. (1995). Thirteenth century England V: proceedings of the Newcastle-upon-Tyne conference 1993. Woodbridge, Boydell. FREEMAN, E. A. (2011). The History of the Norman Conquest of England Its Causes and Its Results Volume 1 Volume 1. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. http://ezproxy.is.ed.ac.uk/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139003056. FRY, P. S. (2005). Castles: England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland : the definitive guide go the most impressive buildings and intriguing sites. Newton Abbot, David & Charles. Hudson, J., 2011. BBC. [Online] Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/normans/overview_normans_01.shtml [Accessed 4 November 2014]. LAVELLE, R. (2010). Alfreds wars: sources and interpretations of Anglo-Saxon warfare in the Viking age. Woodbridge [u.a.], Boydell. ROCHE, R. (1995). The Norman invasion of Ireland. Dublin, Anvil Books. THOMAS, H. M. (2008). The Norman conquest: England after William the Conqueror. Lanham, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. WARREN, W. L. (1987). The governance of Norman and Angevin England, 1086-1272. Stanford, Calif, Stanford University Press. WILLIAMS, A. (2003). Domesday book: a complete translation. London [u.a.], Penguin Books. Read More