How did William deal with opposition? William I’s suppression of rebellions, his
military qualities, castle building and the new Norman elite, the harrying of the North
How did the Normans secure the kingdom?
The length of the Battle of Hastings would suggest the two sides were evenly
matched, and had Harold’s forces been able to last the day then the likelihood is that
they would have won. Despite victory at Hastings, William had yet to win the
kingdom, and both Archbishop Stigand and the Witton (a meeting of the prominent
men of England) quickly put forward Edgar Atheling as the new king. Edgar would
however find it impossible to raise an army- the bulk of the English army had been
killed at Hastings, and there was little enthusiasm for further conflict. Furthermore,
the death of Harold Godwin’s brothers meant there were few with experience who
could lead this army, ensuring that effective oppiositon was made impossible due to
the Norman successes at Hastings. Although Edwin and Morcar (the Northern Earls)
arrived in London on the day of the Battle of Hastings, their military experience was
limited (both had been defeated by the Vikings at Fulfordgate) therefore their
leadership abilities were questionable. In addition to such weaknesses, William’s
systematic rape of the southern counties stubbed out any immediate resistance.
The March on London
After Hastings, William marched east to secure the Kentish ports. Crucially once he
gained control of Sandwich he had the 8 key ports of East Sussex and Kent. This was
important so that he could bring in both supplies and reinforcements from Normandy
as well as prevent inhabitants from these towns disrupting Norman shipping. Having
taken these ports he then headed to Winchester- the second most important town in
southern England.
When arriving in Winchester, Edith (Edward the Confessor’s widow and Harold
Godwin’s sister) agreed to comply with Norman demands and back down and pay
tribute, demonstrating how opposition was seen as futile. Having received the
submission of Winchester, William marched on London and stopped at Berkhamsted
to receive the surrender of the leading citizens of London. Crucially, Edgar Atehling
having been unable to raise an army surrendered and agreed to become a pensioner in
William’s court (this enabled William to keep a close eye on him, without inflaming
Saxon anger by killing him). In addition to this, prominent Saxon clerics such as
Archbishop Ealdred of York and the Norman Earls Edwin and Morcar also appeared
in order to pledge their allegiance and hand over hostages as a sign of their good faith.
Although there was resistance to Norman control later on in the north, the evidence
left by the Domesday Book questions just how much destruction there was in the
south. Little wasteland is recorded in the region, and it would seem that most towns in
the south acquiesced (backed down) to the Normans as their was little desire to fight
on.
It is however important to note that before this surrender happened, a band of 500
English did attack (and were subsequently slaughtered by the Norman knights).
Whilst this demonstrates that some opposition did exist, it also shows the futility of
opposition. Whilst the lack of obvious leaders (following the death of Harold and all
his brothers at Hastings) is perhaps the main reason behind the lack of effective
opposition, there was also a feeling from Edwin and Morcar that William wouldn’t
bother them in the north, and that obedience therefore seemed a far better option!
Archbishop Stigand (the Archbishop of Canterbury) would later submit to William at
the town of Wallingford - interestingly his manners (possessions) in the south
remained largely intacked, demonstrating how obedience was perhaps a better option
than opposition! It was however important for William to win the approval of these
Saxon Bishops, as although he would later remove them it allowed him to keep the
support of the clergy in important diocese such as Canterbury and York. Furthermore
it meant tthat William could use these figures to help him implement his planned
reforms of the English Church, before discarding them.
On Christmas day 1066 William was crowned with the full coronation rites of an
Anglo Saxon king. This is particularly interesting, as by doing this he was trying to
push the issue of continuity and make it look like he was the natural heir, rather than a
usurper/ invader- it was William’s attempt at public relations! By now William had
Winchester (England’s2nd city), London, Dover (biggest port) and Canterbury
(ecclesiastical capital). He could now largely do what he wanted!
William was however keen to prevent encouraging rebellion early on, and one of his
first moves was to grant a charter (issue a writ) to London stating they would be
worthy of the laws of Ed’s reign (essentially saying he would not interfere in their
rights) in an attempt to push continuity and win favour. Again, at his coronation he
confirmed to the people of London the laws they had enjoyed under Edward (not
Harold who he would not recognise as king) and for several years he used English
nobles to help with the transition from the old to the new government (more an
ornamental position- they were kept at court but deprived of any power e.g. Edwine of
Mercia).
How well did William deal with the rebellions he faced?
In 1067 William returned to Normandy (albeit only temporarily), leaving England
under the care of 2 of his most trusted lords, his cousin William FitzOsbern and his
half brother Odo, Bishop of Bayeux. Crucially, William also took Morcar and Edwin
as well as Edgar temporarily to Normandy as hostages in order to remove potential
leadership for any English resistance. William returning to Normandy would however
precipitate a number of rebellions (however most of these lacked the support required
in order to become a rebellion and can more accurately be described as raids).
Although revolts were common in the period 1067-71, only once did they approach
the unity of a national rebellion. Although kingdom had been taken over by a
foreigner, and the high nobility replaced, the effect on the middle and lower orders
was quite uneven, and in Mercia and Northumbria process of Normanisation was
slow, with many aspects of life still the same, making rebellion unlikely in the early
stages. In spite of this, unrest in the north was particularly dangerous as it could be
exploited by Danes or Scots.
Edric’s Revolt 1067
The Welsh Marches (border region) was a turbulent region where the English Kings
had traditionally exerted little control, and in 1067, Edric the Wild raised a revolt in
Hertfordshire along the Welsh border, encouraging Welsh princes to join him.
Ultimately, Edric failed to take control of the border and withdrew to jWales with
plunder. Whilst this revolt was ultimately not particularly dangerous as he had no
foreign support and very limited aims, praise must also go to William for the way in
which it was dealt with. Having already identified that the Welsh marches were a
potentially troublesome region he had sent FitsOsborn to Hertfordshire. As a result
Fitsosborn was able to quickly deal with this using Norman troops in the immediate
vicinity, preventing the incident from escalating, and meaning an army did not have to
be raised to deal with it. Crucially there were no later disturbances within this region,
suggesting William was also successful in the long term.
Unrest in South West
The Exeter Revolt 1067/8
The unrest in Exeter (where the rebels said they would pay tribute and perform due
service but not pay fealty) was potentially more dangerous, given the fact that Gytha
(Harold Godwin’s mother) had fled there with some of Harold’s sons. The presence of
a replacement candidate was of great concern to William, who feared the aim of the
revolt was to put Harold’s son Harold on the throne. The danger of the rebellion was
also both increased and reduced by its geographic location; although its relative close
proximity to the Viking kingdom of Ireland increased the potential for support, Exeter
was also a long way from London, so of limited direct threat to William.
Although the revolt began in 1067, it was not until early 1068 that William focussed
his attentions on Exeter. This was however extremely sensible on William’s part- as
the rebels were content to simply stay behind their walls, they posed no direct threat
therefore it made sense for William to obtain complete control over the south and
raise a powerful army before marching on Exeter which was the chief rebel centre. It
is also interesting to note that upon his return from Normandy William commanded
the siege of Exeter himself (testimony to its perceived danger?) After an 18 day siege
and heavy losses (it is noticeable that a battle was actually fought!) William took the
city having undermined the walls. In order to prevent a rebellion in the region
occurring again Brian of Brittany (an example of the Norman elite) was then given an
Earldom in the region and a castle was built. Although William was successful in
preventing further disturbances in the region, it is noticeable that he failed to capture
Harold Godwin’s children who were able to flee to Ireland, allowing them to become
involved in future rebellions.
The Godwin Landings in the Avon Region
In mid summer 1068 some of Harold Godwin’s children named by Florence of
Worcester as Godwin, Edmund (who had fled to Ireland from Exeter) appeared in the
Avon with a number of raiding ships. It seems they landed there as Godwin
Haroldsson (Harold’s son) in particular had held lands here. Their first target was
Bristol, but the inhabitants successfully resisted, so they withdrew resorted to raiding
the surrounding area (this is interesting as it suggests there was little mood for
rebellion in England at this point).
Interestingly the Godwins were opposed by Eadnoth, who had been a constable for
HG, and recently sworn allegiance to William. The brothers then left for Somerset,
where they once again indulged themselves in a spot of pillaging, however here they
were opposed by forces led by the Saxon Eadnoth the Staller, who commanded the
local Norman garrison. This again is particularly interesting as it shows that William
had been able to secure the support of prominent individuals. Although Eadnoth
would be expected to be loyal to the children of Harold Godwin (it was in fact
Godwin who made him constable of the region), a lot of credit must go to William
who persuaded Eadnoth to swear an oath of loyalty to him. This demonstrates just
how skilled William was, as in the early stages, when he was most vulnerable he was
able to keep the support of key Saxons. Furthermore, most inhabitants in the region
followed Eadnoth’s lead and refused to join the rebels cause, ensuring that just like
Edric’s Revolt it was more a raid than a full scale rebellion.
Further comparisons can be drawn with Edric’s Revolt in that William had identified
the area as potentially vulnerable, hence why he set up a Norman garrison here. This
demonstrates William’s impressive ability to identify potential trouble spots (as he did
with Edric’s Revolt sending FitsOsborn to the region) and meant his forces could
quickly deal with the disturbance and prevent it from escalating.
It must however be acknowledged that Godwin’s children were able to flee back to
Ireland, however the defeat of the rebels made William feel suitable enough to bring
Mathilda across and declare her Queen. Although the rebels landed again in North
Devon in 1069 with 60 ships they were driven back by Mortain Count of Devon
(Norman Elite), and we have no mention of the children of Godwin from the
chroniclers after this.
The North 1069-70- The Northern Revolt
In spite of William’s willingness to forgive Edwin (who kept his title of Earl of
Mercia), and to a lesser extent Morcar (stripped of his title of Earl of Northumbria),
both defected and fled to the semi independent north in 1068 with Edgar Atheling.
There were various reasons for this- Edwin was angered as under pressure from
Normans, William went back on his promise to let Edwin marry his niece Judith. In
the case of Edgar it would seem that he wanted to take advantage of the turmoil in the
north (there had been a rapid turnover of the Northumbrian Earls- the Norman
appointment Copsi had been killed by Oswulf, and then in 1069 Oswulf was replace
by Gospatric, who bought the Earldom from William!) This rebellion was particularly
dangerous, as the north had always been largely independent-the northern Earls had
not intervened to save Godwin in 1051 or help Edward in 1052 and had thrown out
Tostig in 1065. Their separatism was therefore potentially dangerous for William,
especially as this could lead to Viking involvement.
Edgar was the nominal head of insurgents, and in addition to the Northern Earls,
Malcolm of Scotland and the Welsh princes were involved. The catalyst for the revolt
was when William’s first Norman appointee as Earl of Northumberland Earl Robert
of Commines (he was actually a Norman unlike Copsi) was murdered in the bishop’s
house in Durham alongside the 900 men with him. When news of the arrival of a
Danish fleet of 240 ships commanded by Swein II reached York it sparked a rising
there, and by 20th September the city was lost. At a similar time, two of Harold’s
children raided Devon, and Edric the Wild also attacked Shrewsbury, with rebellion
also flaring up in Devon and Cornwall. Yorkshire was now in rebel hands, and within
days Edgar Atheling had arrived in York leaving his exile in Scotland. Unlike other
disturbances, this had become a full scale rebellion which had all the characteristics
required to be dangerous- foreign backers, mass support and crucially an Englishman
with a strong claim to the throe who opponents of William could rally behind.
William’s response- the Harrying of the North
William dealt with the north leading his professional Norman army, whilst Norman
barons supported by loyal elements of the fyrd dealt with other disturbances (this
shows some continuity I that he retained the fyrd) but the nucleus of the army were
the Norman mounted knights. As William’s troops marched north, they devastated the
countryside slaughtering all adult males to prevent such a rebellion happening in the
future (no further rebellions occurred in the region) and created a second castle in the
city. Over 80% of the wasteland recorded in the Domesday book was in Yorkshire,
testimony to the brutality of the event. William spent Christmas in the city, and after
this he set about a systematic destruction of Yorkshire gaining the surrender of
Gospatric and Waltheof. In gaining the surrender of Waltheof however William also
displayed his considerable diplomatic skills, promising him marriage to Judith should
he leave the rebels, which he subsequently did. This skill of William in dividing the
rebels was further demonstrated when he paid the Vikings a bribe to leave. With one
of their main leaders deserting the (Waltheof) and their much of their military might
gone (after the Vikings left), the rebels could offer little resistance. The Norman
cinquest was now confirmed.
The effects of the Harrying of the North
William’s devastation of the north led to a power vacuum in the region, with Malcolm
of Scotland sending troops into the northern counties of Durham and Cleveland. As a
result, William spent 1072 preparing another army taking them all the way to Perth in
Scotland into Malcolm’s Kingdom. Malcolm met William at Abernethy and
recognised him as king of England and expelled Edgar to show his good faith.
The Rebellion of Hereward the Wake
The main cause of this was a combination of rumour, and William’s failure to
completely remove the Viking threat. After the death of Abbot Brand, the Abbey of
Peterborough was handed to the Norman Turold of Fecamp. Claiming to save the
treasures of the abbey a group of individuals including Hereward seized them. What
started off as disorder (and not rebellion) suddenly became more dangerous in the
summer of 1070 when King Swegn of Denmark appeared and entered East Anglia
occupying isle of Ely where he was joined by Hereward as well as Edwin and Morcar.
The fear was that this could turn into active defiance (like the Exeter Rebellion).
Again, William skilfully bought off the Danes (showing that they were no longer an
active threat as they were more interested in plunder than conquest) leaving the other
rebels to fend for themselves. As William advanced on Ely Morcar surrendered, and
Edwin fled north where he was killed by his followers and Hereward disappeared.
William’s breaking of Saxon resistance transformed the power of the English
monarchy and led to huge changes in the composition of the nobility, methods of
government and arrangement of society. This was not just the triumph of
William as King, but the victory of the Norman way of life. Although in 1066
William had acted as if he was the legal claimant and not a conqueror (as shown
at his coronation) when the peace was threatened by a series of revolts from
1067-71, William responded brutally, and any pretence of being the legal heir of
Edward were essentially ended by his process of castle building.
Revolt of the Norman Earls 1075
This revolt was significant as most (but not all!) of those turning against William were
the Norman elite, whose support he had relied upon to deal with the earlier revolts he
faced! The revolt was caused by the William’s refusal to permit the marriage between
Emma (daughter of William FitsOsbern, 1st Earl of Hereford) and Ralph de Guader,
Earl of East Anglia in 1075 (they married just the same). This shows William’s fears
(didn’t want a family to get too powerful) and suggests that William’s suspicions
certainly played some role in turning Normans against him. Possibly because William
was away in Normandy at this point, Ralph, Roger de Breteuil (2nd Earl of Hereford
and son of FitOsborn), and Waltheof (the Saxon Earl of Northumbria) began the
revolt.
Although Ralph de Gael received encouragement from King Philip of France and
limited Viking support, the rebellion was never a great threat (the Saxons for a start
were reluctant to rally to the Norman cause) and was quickly stifled, with William
remaining in Normandy. Although the loss of certain Norman supporters was
certainly a shock to William, he kept the loyalty of the majority of the key figures
within England (both Saxon and Norman). The troops under the command of the
Norman Abbott of Evesham remained loyal and were able to keep Earl Roger bottled
up in Herefordshire (with later reinforcements Norman reinforcements coming from
Odo of Bayeux and Geoffrey de Montbray). As a result, he was unable to join forces
with Ralph de Gael, was held in check at the River Severn by the Worcestershire fyrd
which was led by the English bishop Wulfstan. Although a Viking fleet arrived led by
Canute (son of Swegn) this was too late to make any difference, with William
returning to England in Christmas 1075. Breton rebels were blinded and murdered
and Roger de Breteuil was imprisoned.
William’s Military Qualities (in terms of dealing with rebellions)
This is mentioned as one of the things you must know about when looking at
William’s handling of rebellions. I don’t feel that it is necessary to write a section on
this, as there is enough information
in the above section.
Castles
One of the most significant visual effects of the Norman Conquest was the building of
castles. Although built both before and after the rebellions to secure his position and
offer protection, they became the ultimate sign of Norman superiority. Prior to the
conquest, castles were virtually unheard of in England, where the traditional method
of defence were Burghs (walled towns). Castles were not however completely new in
England, and Ralph of Mantes (Edward’s Norman nephew) had however built some
Motte and Bailey castles in Herefordshire in the 1050s. Castles soon became part of
the fabric of Anglo Norman society, and were a great humiliation for the English who
were forced to build them. Motte and Bailey castles were crude, simple constructions.
The motte was the mound, the bailey held stables, forges etc, with soldiers retreating
to the motte in times of danger. They could be erected quickly, like the kit castle that
William erected at Pevensey.
William’s comprehensive programme of castle building began before the rebellions,
as FitsOsborn built a stone keep at Chepstow, and William started construction of the
White Tower (Tower of London) in 1067. Crucially, after every rebellion that
William suppressed he would build castles in the region to prevent it from happening
again, as shown by Exeter (1068) and York where he built a second castle in 1070.
These were deliberately built in town centres with houses cleared to create a statement
and a visible presence (see your class notes for precise examples of these) in order to
provide a menace to those living within the region.
In an alien land where Normans were in the minority, castles were crucial to the
survival of William’s kingship as they gave a permanence to the terror he inflicted in
1069. Furthermore, the castles often also incorporated the seat of local government.
Given the importance of castles, royal control over the castles was essential (they
could not be run by men of dubious lyalty) and the men appointed to manage the
castles were of high calibre such as FitsOsborn. During 1075 revolt when certain
Normans turned against him, the
maintenance of these castles in royal hands helps explain why the rebellion failed.
Talking about castles in an essay
You might talk about essays if asked about William’s suppression of rebellions, or
exerting his control over the country (e.g. how important were castles in comparison
to other factors). Make sure that if looking at castles you consider the issue of relative
significance. Whilst they are important, I would say that William’s military qualities
were more important. In order to pacify a region sufficiently to build a castle, military
force was needed e.g. William couldn’t build a castle in Exeter until he had defeated
the rebellion through military force. Having said this, after William built the castle at
Exeter it was important in repelling the later Godwin landings.
Even in areas where castles were built rebellions could however occur, as shown at
York in the Northern Revolt.
The New Norman Elite
Again the role of the new Norman elite in helping William deal with rebellions has
already been mentioned above, so doesn’t really merit an extended section on its own.
Upon invading England, William imposed a new Norman ruling class upon themmen who were for the most part intensely loyal, and played a key part in helping
William deal with rebellion. Examples include FitsOsborn dealing with Edric’s
Revolt, Odo of Bayeux/ Geoffrey de Montbray dealing with the Revolt of the Norman
Earls and Brian of Brittany/ the Count of Mortain dealing with the Godwin landings
in Devon.
Having said this, William must also be praised for the support he kept from
prominent Saxons. Although William was extremely manipulative, keeping these
figures in power positions and then discarding them once they were no more use, the
use of Englishmen in his early days reduced the chance of mass rebellion against him.
William for example kept Stigand as one of his advisors in 1067 (when rebellions first
broke out) to convince the English that he was not anti Saxon, yet promptly dismissed
him in 1070 as the Northern Revolt was brought under control. William kept the
support of Eadnoth (who dealt with the Godwin landings) and Wulfstan (helped deal
with the Revolt of the Norman Earls), suggesting his support from key Saxons was
almost as importance as his support from the new Norman elite.