Assess the Reasons why William was able to defeat opposition to his rule
Throughout the first half of his reign, William faced significant opposition to his rule
from numerous quarters; this included challenges from members of the family of
Harold Godwin as seen in the 1067 Exeter Revolt, a combination of Saxons, Scots
and Vikings in the shape of the Northern Rebellion, and even his own Norman Earls
in 1075. William was however able to overcome these through a combination of his
dynamic and aggressive leadership, the weaknesses of the rebels, and the introduction
of the castle to England.
A principle reason why William was able to defeat opposition to his rule was his own
military prowess. Having led the conquest of England himself, William was keen to
take an active part in dealing with opposition. This was well demonstrated by the
Exeter Rebellion of 1067/8, where William led the 18 day siege of Exeter, which led
to the town’s surrender. What however helped William most here was his meticulous
planning. Aware that the Exeter rebels were unwilling to move from behind their
walls, William had spent several months raising sufficient troops to put the rebellion
down, ensuring that when he did march on Exeter, he was suitably prepared. In
addition to meticulous preparation, William’s brutality would also help in overcoming
opposition to his rule, as demonstrated most notably by the Harrying of the North
which was deployed to overcome the northern Revolt of 1069/70, and culminated
with all men of military age slaughtered within the region. Once more however, such
an aggressive approach could not have been utilised by William were it not for his
meticulous planning. Although called the “Northern Revolt” the disturbances of
1069/70 also saw limited rebellion in the south. William however realised that the
main threat came from the north, and thus was able to deploy loyal units of the fyrd to
deal with the southern disturbances, whilst he led his knights against the disturbances
in the north. Whilst William was fortunate in that the majority of the Saxon thegns
and Housecarls who could have put up meaningful opposition had been killed at
Hastings, William’s organisational capacity, and ability to establish where they major
threat came from would however remain key in overcoming opposition.
Although William must take a huge degree of credit for overcoming the rebellions he
faced, his hand was strengthened by the weakness of the rebels. This was particularly
apparent with the Revolt of the Norman Earls in 1075 and the Revolt of Edric the
Wild in 1067. The small number of Norman Earls who did rebel understandably failed
to gain any Saxon support, and similarly Edric failed to gain the support of the Welsh
princes for his attack on Herefordshire preventing him from mustering significant
numbers, making it easy for William’s appointee in the region, FitsOsborn to deal
with. Such weaknesses are further evident in the Northern Revolt; whilst this was
potentially extremely dangerous as it contained Viking support from Sweyn II,
Scottish support from Malcolm Canmore, as well as a potential replacement candidate
in Edgar Atheling, no real unity existed, with William able detach the Northern
magnate Waltheof through promising marriage to his cousin Judith of Lens, and also
promising to pay the Vikings off. Such a pattern would become something of a
recurring theme, with the Revolt of Hereward the Wake later in 1070 made far easier
to defeat once a bribe had been paid to make the Vikings return home. Whilst such
examples threaten to detract from the role of William, the contrary is in fact true; it is
testimony to William’s qualities as a leader that he was able to immediately spot such
divisions and utilise them to their advantage. The importance of William’s proactive
nature in dealing with opposition to his rule is again demonstrated extremely well
with the revolt of Edric the Wild, as it was William’s awareness of the vulnerability of
the region to potential Welsh attack that led him to appoint his loyal ally FitsOsborn
as Earl in the region, essentially pre empting Edric, and turning what could have been
a major revolt into a minor disturbance.
William’s comprehensive programme of castle building is something that
characterised the Norman invasion and this 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 significant 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. There is
little doubt that the building of such castles made it easier to overcome opposition to
his rule, and this is demonstrated particularly well in the aftermath of the defeat of the
Exeter Rebellion, where a Castle was built at Exeter under the command of William
of Mortain. This allowed William to deal with future opposition particularly well as
shown when the children of Godwin launched an attack in the region in 1069, but
were beaten back by Mortain’s garrison. It is however important not to overstate the
importance of William’s programme of castle building in relation to other factors, as
the presence of a Norman castle in York was insufficient to stop the Northern revolt,
with the rebels burning it to the ground. Whilst castles did play a role in helping
William deal with opposition, it was only possible to build a castle in an area once
William had received its submission militarily, as shown by the castles built in both
Exeter and London. As such, it was William’s military prowess and organisation that
was once more the principle factor in allowing him to overcome opposition to his
rule, as this underpinned and facilitated all other reasons for his success. .
Whilst it is evident that there are several reasons that explain why William was able to
overcome opposition to his rule, it is clear that all of these stem from his personal
attributes and military skill. Whilst he was fortunate in that he rarely faced united
opposition, it was William’s skill in splitting the rebels that often accounted for this,
allowing him to defeat the main opposition to an extent that he could begin the mass
process of castle building.