How far did England become a feudal state during the reign of William I?
Plan



Social structure and hierarchy
Ecclesiastical aspects
Fiscal aspects
Note – Feudalism is the label that historians have given to the way that William organised the
country. William would have never heard of the word ‘feudalism’. The word is based on the word
‘fief’ or the word ‘fiefdom’ which was the land that a lord gave to their vassal. According to
historians, feudalism is heavily based on the social structure and hierarchy of the land (that nonschematic triangle that we discussed). That social structure is usually seen as a way of William
extracting the maximum amount of wealth and power from England, as the whole thing was
organised so that money and military service went up the hierarchy to William. So, it would be
fitting to write paragraph about how feudalism helped to enrich William. Religious matters also
play a part, though ecclesiastical people don’t fit neatly into the social structure (which is why it
isn’t a schematic triangle). Bishops were probably as important as barons and archbishops were
probably even more important than both, though there were exceptions; for example, William
FitzOsbern(a baron) was probably more powerful and wealthy than your average bishop and
maybe equally as powerful or more powerful than the archbishops of York and Canterbury.
Bishop Odo (note he wasn’t an archbishop) was probably more powerful and wealthy than the
archbishops and most or all barons. It is impossible to say as we simply don’t have the evidence
to know exactly how rich people were at any given time but the point it that it is far too simplistic
to suggest that all of society fitted nicely into a lovely little neat triangle. And so to the essay
which will begin in a different way for this sort of question because I will need to show the
examiner that I know what ‘feudalism is……
The Essay
Feudalism a term invented by historians to categorise in simple terms what was in reality a
complex social structure. When assessing how far England became a feudal state during the
reign of William it is important to consider the social structure which was central to the feudal
system, but also the ecclesiastical aspects and fiscal aspects which were both crucial features of
how William organised his country. In the end it is difficult to argue anything other than England
was a feudal system by 1087 but interestingly, England may well have been largely a feudal
state even before William came to England.
Much of the social structure of the feudal system was merely an adaptation of existing English
structures that took into account the needs of an absentee monarch and thus even in 1066
England was largely a feudal state. In 1066 the hierarchy began with the king, then the earls,
thegns and peasants. By 1087 the hierarchy began with the king, then the barons, knights and
peasants. Clearly the king and peasants occupy the same standing in the structure and on closer
inspection it is clear to see many similarities between the thegns and knights. Thegns usually
controlled land and in return owed money or goods and military service to their overlord, which
was usually an earl or the king. This is very similar to the terms under which knights controlled
land from their lord, the main difference being that under Edward the terms of military service
was decided based upon the amount of land controlled as measured in hides, whereas William
would arbitrarily set the terms of service. The three major earldoms were dismantled under
William and the ensuing power vacuum was filled by the barons and sheriffs. This did constitute
some change but, upon closer inspection, it seems that barons were less powerful versions of
earls and sheriffs certainly existed before William’s arrival and only became more powerful
because of the need to rule by writs. The social structure and hierarchy of William’s England
could undoubtedly be referred to as a key aspect of a feudal state but the vast majority of the
structure was already in place in 1066 and so it supports the argument that England had largely
been a feudal state even before William arrived.
The hierarchy that was central to feudalism, also helped to significantly enrich William as it
went hand in hand with his fiscal policies however William tended to use existing structures and
alter them to increase his own wealth. Under Edward the earldoms were potentially on the way to
becoming inherited through different generations of the same family, for example Mercia passed
from Leofric to Aelfgar to Edwin and Wessex from Godwin to Harold Godwinson but as William
lay claim to all of England, he could choose who to appoint as his tenants-in-chief and he usually
choose the person who was willing to pay him the most. For example, Gospatric offered William
significant wealth for the right to be tenant-in-chief in Northumbria. However, upon closer
inspection Edward also choose his earls based on his own preference, for example when Siward
died he appointed Tostig who was said to be one of Edward’s favourites at court. The only
difference here is that Edward was not as motivated by the need for money as William was.
Similarly, William used the existing Danegeld tax which had been traditionally raised in times of
need and usually when there was a significant threat from Scandinavia but it was also the only
contemporary European example of a tax that was fairly regularly and efficiently collected and so
William used it for his own purposes and integrated it with feudalism to further enrich himself. He
turned it into a regularly collected annual tax and, when the threat from the Danes materialised in
1084, he significantly increased the Danegeld to pay for military forces to counter the threat. In
fiscal matters William clearly took an already efficiently functioning economy and used it to
further enrich himself and his followers, merely adapting what was already there. In particular it
this was clearly the case with the Danegeld and thus, William did not really create a feudal state
because most features of feudalism already existed.
Religion was a key feature of feudalism and it was tied into the social structure of feudalism.
William adapted the existing structures in some cases but, compared to his fiscal policies and the
social structure he introduced he made more significant changes with ecclesiastical matters and
brought England more into line with what can be recognised as a feudal society. Unusually for a
king who seemed obsessed with money and power, William introduced ecclesiastical courts and
allowed Lanfranc to establish the primacy of Canterbury over York and thus set the tone for a
conflict between crown and church that would last for centuries. Ecclesiastical courts were a rare
example of William willingly giving up power and a potential money making aspect of his kingdom
as the church could impose fines and control the population from crimes against God, such as
blasphemy or adultery. William was also far more willing to work with the Pope, perhaps in part
because the papacy helped William to gain the throne with the granting of the papal banner. In
1070 papal legates arrived to make alterations to the church in England that fell into line with the
wishes of the Pope, most significantly they replaced Stigand who had long earned the
disapproval of the Pope due to his pluralism. In summary, William allowed the church to separate
somewhat from the power of the crown and laid the foundations for future centuries of
ecclesiastical conflict, whereas Edward seemed unconcerned with the wishes of the papacy and
retained control of the power to make ecclesiastical appointments such as with Stigand or Robert
of Jumieges. In this sense more than any other William changed England into a feudal state.
It is almost impossible to argue that England was not a feudal state under William because
feudalism is a term created by historians specifically to describe William’s kingdom. However, it
is misleading to suggest that William transformed the country into a feudal state because most of
the features of feudalism existed under Edward, in particular sheriffs existed, the Danegled was
established and the heirachy was largely the same though the names of the roles were different
and their terms of service were slightly different too. England largely became a feudal state under
Edward the Confessor but William completed the process.