Ruling England 1042-1217

Richard Huscroft

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• Print ISBN: 9781138786554
• eBook ISBN: 9781317334750
• Edition: 2
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: British History
• Index: History

Ruling England, now in its second edition, is a key text for students wishing to understand the complexities of medieval kingship in England from 1042–1217. Beginning just before the Norman Conquest, and ending with the ratification of Magna Carta, this book is divided into three parts: Late Anglo-Saxon England, Anglo-Norman England and Angevin England. Richard Huscroft considers the reign of each king during these periods, including their relationships with the nobility, local government, the courts and the Church and poses the central question of how the ruler of the most sophisticated kingdom intwelfth century Europe was eventually compelled to submit to the humiliation of Magna Carta at the start of the thirteenth.

This new edition has been fully revised and updated to take into account the latest scholarship. Throughout the book key areas of historiographical debate are highlighted and analysed, including nationhood, feudalism and Magna Carta. The narrative is supported by maps, a genealogy of the kings of England, a chronology, a glossaryand an introduction to the principal narrative sources and their authors to provide a thorough introduction to the political history of medieval England.

This book will be essential reading for students of English medieval history.

Part I
Late Anglo-Saxon England, 1042–1066

1
The Reigns, 1042–1066

Edward the Confessor, 1042–1066

1042–1050

Edward the Confessor was the surviving son of King Aethelred II (978–1016) and Emma of Normandy, and the half-brother of King Harthacnut (1040–2). However, despite his lineage he was an unlikely king. He had fled England after the invasion of King Sweyn of Denmark in 1013 and, although he had returned for a short period in 1014 and again, perhaps, in 1036, he had spent his formative years in Normandy at the duke’s court and out of the mainstream of English politics. His chances of becoming king must have appeared slim when his father died in 1016 (there were several potential claimants at that stage) and even slimmer in 1035 on the death of King Cnut (1016–35), who left two sons to continue the Danish line. Edward’s prospects had improved since being summoned back to England in 1041, to rule either alongside or as a deputy for the second of Cnut’s sons, Harthacnut; but the latter’s death in 1042 was probably unexpected and, after only a year back in England, the traditions, structures and systems of his new kingdom must still have been unfamiliar to Edward. Furthermore, he had as yet no independent power-base of his own from which to draw support. His inheritance was not a straightforward one. Aged about thirty-seven on his half-brother’s death, Edward would need powerful support if he was to rule effectively.

According to most of the sources, such support came in the person of Earl Godwin of Wessex, the richest and most powerful nobleman in the kingdom, who took the lead in persuading his fellow magnates to accept Edward as king. In fact, there was no other obvious candidate in 1042, but Godwin was determined nevertheless to assert himself and take the lead; perhaps so that he could put himself in a position to dominate the new, inexperienced king or, perhaps, to convince Edward of his loyalty. After all, Edward may have regarded the earl of Wessex with suspicion in 1042. Godwin’s father, Wulfnoth, had betrayed Edward’s father, Aethelred, in 1009; Godwin himself was deeply implicated in the murder of Edward’s brother, Alfred, in 1036, and the earl had spent his life fighting for the Danish kings, to whom he owed his fortune and status. The Vita Edwardi records the present made to Edward by Godwin at the start of the reign of a great ship, and this is likely to have been a peace offering of some sort.¹ At the same time, Edward may have felt the need to cultivate Godwin’s support, not just because he was the most powerful of the English earls, but also because of his Danish links. Through his wife, the earl was a kinsman of Sweyn Estrithson, king of Denmark. Sweyn was struggling in 1042 against King Magnus of Norway, who almost certainly had his own designs on the English throne; so Edward had a vested interest in Sweyn’s victory and needed him as an ally. Godwin was thus an important point of common reference for the two kings.

Distasteful as both men might have found such an idea, therefore, king and earl needed each other in 1042–3. Nevertheless, that Edward was not crowned until Easter 1043 may suggest that a good deal of horse-trading took up the ten months or so after Harthacnut’s death. The two other leading earls, Leofric of Mercia and Siward of Northumbria, retained their positions, and Godwin’s two eldest sons, Sweyn and Harold, became earls of Herefordshire and East Anglia respectively in or shortly after 1043. Godwin’s nephew, and Sweyn of Denmark’s brother, Beorn, was granted an earldom in the east midlands in 1045 and, to set the seal on the relationship, Edward married Godwin’s daughter Edith in 1045. The next king, it was assumed, would be of Godwin blood, and the fortunes of the family looked secure.

Another consequence of the pre-coronation bargaining may have been the humiliation of Edward’s mother, Queen Emma, in 1043. Some time shortly after his coronation Edward, in company with Earls Leofric, Godwin and Siward, rode to Winchester where Emma was living. There they ‘deprived her of all the treasures which she owned…because she had formerly been very hard to the king, her son, in that she did less for him than he wished both before he became king and afterwards as well’.² Perhaps this was Edward’s initiative, but the great earls would also have stood to benefit if Emma was removed from the political scene. She had meddled before, and one price of their loyalty to Edward could have been his promise that he would distance himself from his mother. She eventually died at Winchester in 1052 and was buried there alongside her second husband, Cnut.

The marriage of political convenience between Edward and Godwin first showed signs of strain in 1046, when the earl’s eldest son, Sweyn, was disgraced. Whilst campaigning on the Welsh border (part of his normal responsibilities as earl of Herefordshire), Sweyn abducted Eadgifu, the abbess of Leominster. According to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, ‘he ordered the abbess…to be brought to him and kept her as long as it suited him.’ John of Worcester injected an element of romance to the story by alleging that Sweyn wanted to marry the lady in question and that the king refused him permission to do so. More likely, he was interested in the lands of her abbey within his earldom. Either way, his behaviour was intolerable and, having surrendered his captive, Sweyn went into exile, first in Flanders and then in Denmark where, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle mysteriously states, ‘he ruined himself.’³

Godwin was unable to do anything to prevent Sweyn’s exile; the earl’s power in England was not absolute. The limits of Godwin’s influence were also evident in 1047 when he tried to persuade Edward to send ships to help Sweyn of Denmark, who was struggling in his war against Magnus of Norway. The earl’s suggestion was dismissed as, according to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, it seemed a ‘foolish plan to everybody’.⁴ Even though Edward would probably have preferred to see Sweyn triumph over Magnus, the king was apparently happy on this occasion to let the Scandinavian kings thrash things out between themselves. In the event, any threat to England from Magnus was removed by his death in October 1047. He was succeeded by Harald Hardrada, a Viking warrior with a legendary reputation.

The relationship between Edward and Godwin was perhaps further undermined in 1049 when Edward received a request for naval assistance from the German king and emperor, Henry III, in his campaign against Baldwin, count of Flanders. Edward was probably pleased to have the opportunity to take action against Baldwin, who regularly allowed his harbours to be used by Scandinavian pirates who preyed upon English ships in the North Sea. More importantly, Flanders was the regular first port of call for exiles from the English court. Queen Emma had gone there in 1036, and in 1046 Sweyn had fled to Baldwin’s court before going on to Denmark. Edward never had to use the fleet which he gathered at Sandwich in 1049, as Baldwin and the emperor came to terms, but the pointedness of the hostile stance he adopted towards a friend of Godwin cannot have gone unnoticed by the earl and his followers.

After Sweyn Godwinson’s exile, his lands in England were shared out between his brother, Harold, and his cousin, Beorn. Not surprisingly, they were dismayed to see him return to England in 1049. However, Sweyn appears to have expected them to help him regain the king’s favour. Harold and Beorn initially refused to do this, but Beorn later prevaricated with fateful consequences. On meeting with Sweyn, he was abducted and murdered. Sweyn had thus added a crime of international significance (Beorn was the king of Denmark’s brother) to his already lengthy list of previous convictions. Edward and his counsellors declared him nithing, an outcast irrecoverably disgraced, and he fled into exile once more. His lands were given to the king’s French nephew, Ralph of Mantes.⁵ In 1050, however, Sweyn returned to England again and, remarkably, was pardoned by the king. This event has usually been seen as further evidence of Edward’s vulnerability and weakness in the face of Godwin’s power. On the other hand, Sweyn’s pardon may have been intended in part to abate the tension which probably existed between Godwin and the king by this stage; or, indeed, perhaps Edward thought that Sweyn’s return might sow further dissension amongst his wife’s kin. Whatever the reasons behind Sweyn’s pardon, it is clear that, by 1050, Edward had shown himself capable of acting independently and against the interests of his father-in-law. But however strained their relationship was by then, it was as nothing compared with what was about to happen.

1051–1052

In 1051, Edward tried to rid himself of the Godwins for good and he almost succeeded. The spark which lit the fuse appears to have been the death of Archbishop Eadsige of Canterbury in October 1050. The monks of Canterbury elected one of their number, a relative of Godwin’s named Aethelric, as Eadsige’s successor. However, the king was determined not to allow such an important appointment to slip out of his control, and he nominated the bishop of London, Robert de Jumièges, a Norman and an old associate of the king, to the post. What happened next is unclear, and accounts differ as to what led to Godwin’s eventual disgrace. Robert de Jumièges, anxious for influence within Kent, may have poisoned Edward’s mind against the earl. Alternatively, Godwin lost Edward’s favour because of the way he responded to a fight which took place in Dover between Godwin’s men and the men of Eustace, count of Boulogne, Edward’s brother-in-law. When Eustace complained to the king about the incident and Edward ordered Godwin to go to Kent and discipline his people (Kent was part of Godwin’s earldom of Wessex), the earl refused. Godwin and his eldest sons were then summoned before the king to explain themselves, but before they reached London in September 1051 they became convinced that Edward was determined to make impossible demands of them and refuse them a fair hearing. Their only option was to flee abroad, Godwin, Sweyn, Tostig and Gyrth to Flanders, Harold and Leofwine to Ireland. As for Queen Edith, she was sent to live as a nun at Wherwell in Hampshire. The triumphant king immediately set about dismantling the Godwins’ power-base. Aelfgar, son of Earl Leofric, was granted Harold’s earldom of East Anglia and the Godwins’ lands in the south-west were granted to another of Edward’s loyal supporters, Odda of Deerhurst. Wessex was probably retained by the king himself. And according to more than one source, after Godwin and his sons left England, Duke William of Normandy visited the king and was fêted by him.⁶ Whether Edward made William his heir during this visit is far less clear.

If Edward thought the Godwins had gone for good, though, he was being unrealistic. Godwin tried to send conciliatory messages to the king from Flanders, but they fell on deaf ears and an armed return was inevitable. In June 1052 Godwin landed in Kent and then sailed on to Sussex; but he returned to Bruges before he was confronted by the English defenders. Perhaps this was just a preliminary trip to assess the amount of support Godwin still retained within his earldom. Meanwhile, Harold Godwinson and his brother Leofwine had crossed from Dublin and ravaged in Somerset and Devon. Eventually they met up with their father, who had left Flanders again, on the Isle of Wight, probably in August. Together, they then sailed around the coast to Sussex and on to Kent. Finally they began their voyage up the Thames and towards London, where the king, with a large naval and land force, was awaiting their arrival. On his arrival in Southwark, Godwin sent messengers to the king asking for the restoration of all that he and his sons had been deprived of in the previous year. Edward refused and appears to have been prepared to fight. However, he found that he had little support for such a course of action, and the prospect of civil war was too much for those advising him, in particular Earls Siward and Leofric: ‘it was hateful to almost all of them to fight against men of their own race,’ says the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, ‘and also they did not wish the country to be laid the more open to foreigners through their destroying each other’.⁷ In the end a truce was negotiated and terms of settlement were agreed. Godwin and his family, including Queen Edith who returned to court, were restored to their lands and titles and many foreigners, Robert de Jumièges amongst them, who were widely blamed for having provoked the crisis in the first place, fled the country after having been outlawed. Robert was replaced as archbishop of Canterbury by Stigand, who was already (and continued to be) bishop of Winchester.

1053–1062

Edward’s attempt to free himself from the control of Godwin and his kin had failed. Indeed, the king was perhaps more compromised than ever. The earl and his sons had been restored to their former positions of power, Edith had returned to the king’s side, and the king’s Norman supporters had been forced to flee the country. As a result, after 1052, Edward’s room for independent action was severely circumscribed. Much of his time after this point was taken up with hunting and supervising the construction of his new abbey at Westminster. Although Edward was still an active king in the last decade or so of his reign, it is arguable that meaningful control of the realm rested with others.

Earl Godwin’s personal triumph was short-lived, however; he died in April 1053 after having celebrated Easter with his sons and the king at Winchester. Suitably, he was buried near his great patron, Cnut, at Winchester. Into Godwin’s shoes as earl of Wessex stepped his son Harold, and he was to dominate the rest of the reign. Hitherto, Harold had been earl of East Anglia and, presumably in an attempt by Edward to maintain some parity of power between the great clans, his position there was taken by Aelfgar, the son of Earl Leofric of Mercia.

Events in northern England now began to assume an ominous importance. In the summer of 1054, the king ordered Earl Siward to march into Scotland, remove its king, Macbeth, and install Malcolm, the son of King Duncan (who had been killed by Macbeth in 1040), as the new king. Despite being assisted by Normans who had fled to Scotland in the aftermath of 1052, Macbeth was defeated and fled. In the same year, according to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Bishop Ealdred of Worcester travelled to the court of Emperor Henry III in Cologne. John of Worcester explains that he was on a royal mission to make contact with Edward ‘the Exile’, the son of Edmund Ironside, Edward’s half-brother, who had died in 1017. The younger Edward was now in Hungary, and it was Ealdred’s task to bring him back to England, ‘for the king had decided to make him his heir to the kingdom’.⁸ Edward finally returned to England in 1057 but he died before seeing the king and left in England his son, Edgar, who would pursue his own claims to the throne in due course.

Meanwhile, in 1055 the dominant figure in the north, Earl Siward, had died. Who should succeed him was a question of crucial importance, given the extent to which the earl was relied upon to prevent Scottish and Scandinavian incursions into England. Siward’s eldest son and his nephew had both been killed on the Scottish campaign of 1054 and his remaining son, Waltheof, was very young and incapable of governing. So the king had to make a decision and, fatefully, his choice as the new earl of Northumbria was Tostig, Earl Harold’s younger brother. This choice has eluded convincing explanation ever since it was made, but it is often used as yet further evidence of King Edward’s weakness in the face of Godwinson might and of his political ineptitude. Overnight, the already far-reaching power of the Godwinsons was massive...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• List of Debates
• Preface to the second edition
• Introduction
• Chronology of main events, 978–1217
• A note on money
• References and abbreviations
• Maps
• The kings of England, 979–1272: A selective genealogy
• PART I Late Anglo-Saxon England, 1042–1066
• PART II Anglo-Norman England, 1066–1154
• PART III Angevin England, 1154–1217
• The Principal Narrative Sources and Their Authors, 1042–1217
• Glossary of terms
• Suggestions for Further Reading (updated for the second edition)
• Index