The idea for this post came when putting together the posts on Abbeys & Monasteries and Gem Towns. It struck me as quaint that events that happened over 600 years ago should still be relevant today and that some of these events (and laws) still manifest themselves. It might seem unimaginable now that the church or royalty could have held so much power…
I have included “The Last Wolf” and “The Anarchy” for my own interest as I find them intriguing…
Everything here is very top-line and links are shown for further information…
The Dark Ages
The term Dark Ages refers roughly to the period from 400-1066. Although some historians now prefer to use the terms “early medieval” or “early middle ages”. Needless to say, not everyone agrees with those terms…
Records of 5th and 6th century Britain are few and mostly written long after the events they describe. So, perhaps we should refer to them as the “Obscure Ages” because so little is known about them – unless we accept that “dark” equates to “obscure”, in which case…
Some historians don’t like including the 7th to 11th centuries in the catch-all Dark Ages as society had begun to develop and change dramatically. Some historians don’t like the term “Anglo-Saxon” despite it referring to the Angles and Saxons who settled here from Germany and so it goes on…
Anyway…
The Roman legions and civilian governments began to withdraw from Britain around 380 to secure the Empire’s borders elsewhere in mainland Europe and this was all but complete by 410. After 350 years of Roman rule the people left behind were not just Britons, they were Romano-Britons – and they no longer had an imperial power to call upon to protect themselves. Tradition has it that in 410 the Emperor Honorius wrote to the British Romans instructing them to look to their own defence. While it seems unlikely that the letter was actually sent, such advice would have reflected the realities of the time. Britain was no longer subject to an imperial power that could protect it.
At first, the chief enemies of an independent Britain were Irish raiders from the west and Picts from the north. Confusingly, until around 1400, the name “Scot” referred to people from Ireland. Later, Angles, Saxons and Jutes arrived from across the North Sea. We don’t know exactly how they invaded or settled in England, but by AD 500 Germanic speakers seem to have settled deep into Britain.
The Britons successfully counter-attacked under Ambrosius Aurelianus, ‘the last of the Romans’. It’s during this early period that the figure of Arthur emerges. A record made three centuries later credits him with 12 battles, from Scotland to the south coast. Only the last, in about 500, is confirmed in earlier sources – but makes no mention of an Arthur. This British victory halted the Saxon advance for half a century.
In independent kingdoms across the north and west, the British also resisted the repeated onslaughts of the peoples who were later called ‘English’. By the 650s, almost all the lowlands were under Saxon control. Religion also divided the Christian British from the invading pagan Angles and Saxons. Within a century a flourishing English Church had made dramatic advances in art and architecture.
The Venerable Bede (673-735), describes that the Angles settled in the east, the Saxons in the south and the Jutes in Kent. Recent archaeology suggests that this is broadly correct...
See: https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/Anglo-Saxon-Kingdoms-Dark-Ages/
Eventually, separate groups of disparate peoples from the east coalesced into larger independent kingdoms, whose power fluctuated in parallel with their success and failure in war. The 7th-century dominance of Northumbria in the north was succeeded by that of Mercia in the midlands, especially under King Offa, builder of Offa’s Dyke. It was the crisis of Viking invasion, however, that brought a single, unified English kingdom into existence.
Sporadic Viking raids began in the 790s, then in 865 an invading ‘Great Army’ began plundering from kingdom to kingdom, extorting protection money. Northumbria, Mercia and East Anglia all fell, leaving only Wessex to fight on. King Alfred of Wessex defeated the Viking army decisively at Edington (878). Its leader, Guthrum, accepted Christian baptism, and agreed a treaty which allowed the Vikings to control much of northern and eastern England: the Danelaw.
From the 910s King Edward the Elder and his sister Æthelflaed, the ‘Lady of the Mercians’, conquered the Danelaw south of the Humber. Edward’s son Æthelstan advanced still further: in 937 he destroyed a coalition of Vikings and Scots, and became known as ‘Ruler of All Britain’.
The Norman Conquest
In the 980s Viking raids resumed, motivated by the ease of extorting vast quantities of silver from English coffers. The raids developed into full-scale invasions which eventually overwhelmed the disastrous King Æthelred ‘Unraed’ (Ethelred the Unready). The Danish leader Cnut, later also King of Denmark and Norway, was popularly recognised as Æthelred’s successor and made England part of a Scandinavian empire.
The old West Saxon (Wessex) dynasty was revived with the accession of Edward the Confessor in 1042. But when he died without heirs in 1066, Harold Godwinson seized the throne. England was immediately threatened both by Cnut’s heir, Harald Hardrada of Norway, and Edward’s choice of successor, Duke William of Normandy. Hardrada invaded first and was beaten at Stamford Bridge in Yorkshire, on 25 September 1066. Harold marched his weakened army south to face William at the Battle of Hastings and the rest is history, as they say – except there’s now a school of thought that suggests Harold’s fleet was intact and he and his troops sailed down…
The Bayeux Tapestry is one of the world’s most famous pieces of medieval art, although, more correctly, it’s an embroidery. It is 70 metres long, and chronicles the legendary tale of the Norman conquest of England, when William the Conqueror invaded and defeated King Harold Godwinson. Probably commissioned by Bishop Odo – William the Conqueror’s half-brother – the Bayeux Tapestry spent seven centuries in the Treasury of Bayeux cathedral before going on display in the former Seminary of Bayeux in 1983. Intriguingly, there is a full-size replica in Reading Museum, which is well worth seeing…
See: https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/learn/story-of-england/early-medieval/ https://www.historyextra.com/period/medieval/dark-ages-term-what-when-how-obscure/ https://www.readingmuseum.org.uk/collections/britains-bayeux-tapestry
The Domesday Book
Domesday is Britain’s earliest public record. It contains the results of a huge survey of land and landholding commissioned by William I in 1085. Domesday is the most complete record of pre-industrial society to survive anywhere in the world and provides a unique window on the medieval world.
In 1066 William, Duke of Normandy defeated the Anglo Saxon King Harold II, at the Battle of Hastings and became King of England. But in 1085 England was again threatened with invasion, this time from Denmark. William had to pay for the mercenary army he hired to defend his kingdom. To do this he needed to know what financial and military resources were available to him.
At Christmas 1085 he commissioned a survey to discover the resources and taxable values of all the boroughs and manors in England. He wanted to discover who owned what, how much it was worth and how much was owed to him as King in tax, rents, and military service. But Domesday is much more than just a tax record. It also records which manors belonged to which estates and gives the identities of the King’s tenants-in-chief who owed him military service in the form of knights to fight in his army. The King was essentially interested in tracing, recording and recovering his royal rights and revenues which he wished to maximise. It was also in the interests of his barons to co-operate in the survey since it set on permanent record the tenurial gains they had made since 1066.
The word ‘Domesday’ does not appear in the book itself. A book written about the Exchequer in 1176 (the Dialogus de Sacarrio) states that the book was called ‘Domesday’ as a metaphor for the day of judgement, because its decisions, like those of the last judgement, were unalterable. For many centuries Domesday was regarded as the authoritative register of ancient landholding and was used mainly for that purpose. Domesday was also known as the Winchester Roll or King’s Roll, and sometimes as the Book of the Treasury as it was originally kept with the royal treasury at Winchester. But from the early 13th century, when it was not travelling around with the King, it was housed in Westminster. From about 1600 it was kept in a chest, which had three different locks, the keys to which were divided between three different officials, so that it could only be opened by consent of all three. In 1859 Domesday was removed to the new Public Record Office in Chancery Lane, London. In 1996 it was moved to The National Archives, Kew.
For many centuries Domesday was used for administrative purposes, especially to provide proof of landholding, tenures and boundaries. From the late 16th century it has been used as a historical source. For the vast majority of places within its pages, Domesday provides the first recorded description of their human and natural resources. Over 90% of the towns and villages in Domesday still exist as modern day communities.
See: https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/domesday/
https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/Domesday-Book/
The Anarchy
The Anarchy was a period of civil war in England between 1135 and 1153, following the death of Henry I. In 1120, Henry I’s only legitimate son and heir, William Adelin, was killed when his ship sank in the English Channel. Although Henry had other sons, none were legitimate. Fearing for the succession, Henry married Adeliza of Louvain in 1121 in the hope of fathering another male heir but this marriage was childless thereby leaving his daughter Matilda as the only legitimate heir. Henry named Matilda his heir and made his court swear an oath to follow her, but his decision was not popular, and agreement was given reluctantly. Matilda had spent little time in England and her husband, Geoffrey of Anjou, was not popular with the English nobles and he was technically at war with Henry when the king died. England had never had a reigning queen before, and people were suspicious of a woman on the throne. When Henry I died, some nobles declared that the king had released them from their oath to Matilda. The Norman barons believed that Theobald of Blois, Henry’s nephew, would be the ideal choice for England’s king. Theobald’s younger brother Stephen, however, had other ideas. He was a prominent, well-liked member of Henry’s court, and had the support of the Church. Wasting no time, Stephen crossed the Channel to England from Boulogne, seizing the crown on 22 December.
Matilda refused to renounce the crown. Her claim was upheld by her half-brother Robert of Gloucester (one of Henry I’s illegitimate sons), as well as her uncle King David I of Scotland. Robert’s declaration of support for Matilda caused a rebellion to rise up across the southwest of England as well as Kent, while Geoffrey of Anjou invaded Normandy and David I attacked northern England. In 1139, Matilda arrived in England to claim her throne and stayed at Arundel Castle, which Stephen besieged, effectively trapping Matilda inside. As she had not yet declared herself as a threat to him, he allowed her safe passage to meet up with Robert in Bristol. There, she established a base in the southwest. Over the next few years there were minor scuffles and an attempt at peace as Stephen tried to reclaim the region.
As Stephen’s rule progressed, he began to alienate many nobles who had been key advisors to Henry I, by promoting his own friends. Stephen had also made an enemy of the clergy when he arrested Roger, Bishop of Salisbury, and his position as king became unstable. Members of the clergy saw this as an attack on the church itself and many now threw their support behind Matilda’s claim. Many barons and clergy became a law unto themselves. Authority broke down, Stephen’s government lost control – hence the term ‘anarchy’ – and unlicensed castles began to appear. A number of nobles wanted to regain what they saw as hereditary rights to lands that had changed hands during Henry I’s reign, and some changed sides frequently to gain advantage.
In 1141, Stephen besieged Lincoln Castle, where he was set upon by forces led by Robert of Gloucester and Ranulf of Chester. Defeated in the ensuing battle, Stephen was taken to Bristol and held prisoner for nearly nine months. Even though he was the anointed king, his legs were chained, and his poor treatment served to lessen Matilda’s popularity.
With Stephen behind bars, Matilda took her chance and made it as far as Westminster, with preparations underway for her coronation. However, she quickly lost support from the people of London for another reason. In the lead up to a coronation, the soon-to-be monarch would traditionally listen to petitions about tax concessions and requests for favours, but Matilda granted no favours and banished all petitioners from her presence. The people now saw that Matilda as queen was no better a solution for the country. Matilda was forced to flee to Oxford when an angry mob and the London militia advanced on Westminster.
In September 1141, Robert was captured at Winchester by Stephen’s queen, also called Matilda, who led loyal nobles and Flemish mercenaries in Stephen’s name. Robert was exchanged for Stephen, weakening the former empress further. Stephen then proceeded to attack Oxford and besieged its castle, where Matilda was based, forcing her to flee.
The war carried on with skirmishes and victories on both sides, but neither Stephen nor Matilda’s forces were able to deliver a decisive blow. In 1147, Robert of Gloucester died, and with him the main thrust of Matilda’s military campaign. She left for Normandy the following year and passed her claim to the throne to her son, Henry Plantagenet.
Henry enjoyed military success in Normandy and set his sights on England – in 1153, he undertook an effective campaign, managing to take control of much of the country with little fighting.
The first vestiges of a resolution appeared at Wallingford in July 1153: Stephen and Henry’s forces camped on either side of the Thames, but the barons on both sides refused to fight. Many had already made peace amongst themselves and forced Henry and Stephen to do the same – though there were skirmishes while the peace was ironed out.
Stephen’s son Eustace was less than happy with the idea of a truce, but his sudden death simplified matters as far as claimants to the throne were concerned, leading to a more formal agreement – the Treaty of Winchester, in which Stephen would continue to rule, with Henry as his successor. When Stephen died in 1154, Henry Plantagenet became Henry II – the first of the dynasty that ruled England until 1485.
Stephen and Matilda’s battle for the English crown in the mid-12th century has long been cast as one of the most turbulent episodes in British history.
See: https://www.historyextra.com/period/medieval/guide-the-anarchy-what-civil-war-stephen-matilda/
Time Immemorial
Definition & Legal Meaning: Period way back in time where there is no recollection or record to prove a custom, right or claim. In UK a statute of the year 1275 saying that time before King Richard I reign or 1189 was declared to be time immemorial. Also known as time out of mind. The date of this is 3rd September 1189 as set by the Statute of Westminster 1275.
So why should 3rd September 1189 be the date considered by lawyers as the beginning of time immemorial or the limit of legal memory, so important as a limitation period in real property?
We will never know definitively why the date of Richard’s coronation was chosen, but it is likely that reforms enacted by his father, Henry II, were beginning to take effect. The strong central court was doing justice term after term on a large scale and it was beginning to have a legal memory which would ensure for all ages in the form of a series of judicial records. Richard I was crowned on 3rd September 1189, to be followed, in 1199, by his hapless brother John – who unwittingly instigated another milestone in English history, albeit not effective in his lifetime…
Time Immemorial is still one of the most important pieces of law that is still in force…
The Magna Carta
It was agreed by King John on 15 June 1215 as a way of making peace with a group of English barons and church leaders. The barons were protesting against high taxes demanded by King John from the English people to pay for his wars against France.
Magna Carta limited the powers of the monarchy. It said that the King or Queen was subject to the law and could not exploit their position and power to rule just as they wanted to. Magna Carta also stated that individuals had specific rights. In Magna Carta, King John agreed many clauses, not just about taxes, but on many other issues important to the English people in the 1200s. These included: the rights of widows, the seizing of corn and horses, and the standardisation of measures for wine and cloth. Most of the clauses listed in Magna Carta have now been replaced by new laws but two key clauses are still part of English law today. These two clauses assert the rights and freedoms of individual citizens.
In immediate terms, Magna Carta was a failure—civil war broke out the same year, and John ignored his obligations under the charter. Indeed, he complained to Pope Innocent about being subjected to it, and even got the Pope to annul it.
On 11 February 1225, Henry III issued what became the final and definitive version of Magna Carta. It is clauses of the 1225 charter, not the charter of 1215, which are on the Statute Book of the United Kingdom today. The 1225 Magna Carta, in terms of its content, had far more status and authority than the versions issued in 1216 and 1217. The 1225 version of Magna Carta was authenticated with the Great Seal of Henry III himself, which had been introduced in 1218, and it also removed, once and for all, any suggestion that its liberties were the product of coercion. In its final clause Henry declared that, in return for the charter, everyone in the kingdom had given him a tax amounting to a 15th part of their moveable property. The charter was thus part of a bargain freely entered into between king and kingdom. It was in a proclamation of February 1218 that the name ‘Magna Carta’ itself first appears, in order to distinguish the Great Charter from the Charter of the Forest.
Needless to say, that wasn’t the end of the matter…
The Provisions of Oxford were created in 1258 by a group of barons led by Simon de Montfort. The provisions forced Henry III to accept a new form of government. Written confirmations of the Provisions of Oxford were sent to sheriffs in all of the contemporary counties of England. The ‘Provisions of Oxford’ placed the king under the authority of a Council of Fifteen, to be chosen by twenty-four men made up of twelve nominees of the king, and twelve nominees of the reformers. The chief ministers, the Justiciar and Chancellor were to be chosen by and responsible to the Council of Fifteen, and ultimately to the community of the realm at regular parliaments to be held three times a year. This was revolutionary. It was the most radical scheme of reform undertaken before the arrest and execution of King Charles I in the 1640s.
As a consequence of the Provisions, Henry III effectively lost power over the government to the council of fifteen, one of which was Simon de Montfort. By 1261, the king had regained power and had the Provisions of Oxford condemned by the Pope. He had regained power by exploiting divisions in the reforming group of earls. Richard de Clare, earl of Gloucester had become less enthusiastic about the damage local reform could do to his own vast local interests. It was left to Henry’s son, Edward I, to bring about the social and political reconciliation between the crown and the barons…
Magna Carta has been subject to historical exaggeration; it did not establish Parliament, nor more than vaguely allude to the liberal democratic ideals of later centuries. However, as a symbol of the sovereignty of the rule of law, it was of fundamental importance to the constitutional development of England. Four original copies of Magna Carta of 1215 exist today: one in Lincoln Cathedral, one in Salisbury Cathedral, and two in the British Museum.
Throughout history Magna Carta has inspired human rights legislation including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations in 1948. Magna Carta holds a prominent place in the history of the United States where its concepts of equality under the law is enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the US Bill of Rights.
The Liber Albus was compiled in 1419 by London’s Town Clerk, John Carpenter and the Mayor, Richard Whittington. It is considered one of the first books of English common law. It records the laws and civic regulations relating to the City of London, beginning in 1067 but concentrating on the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. It is written mostly in Latin, with parts in French.
The Charter of the Forest
In 1217, all of the rules that were contained in the 1215 version of Magna Carta and related to the forest were put into a separate charter – the Charter of the Forest. In 1225, some minor adjustments were made, and the charter was issued in its definitive form.
The Norman definition of forest extended beyond wooded areas and was used to describe any rural area that contained natural resources such as wood or peat, or where animals that provided game for sport and meat lived. These areas were often enclosed and became the exclusive property of the royal family. This state of affairs existed as a result of the Norman forest laws enacted by William the Conqueror. Following the death of William I, his son William II had extended the ‘royal parks’, as the forests became known, and introduced harsh penalties for anyone who intruded upon his newly enclosed forests. Any person who was caught poaching the King’s deer or felling a tree for firewood could expect the amputation of a limb or execution. William II’s arrangement existed largely unaltered in the reigns of his successors and increased under Richard I, who required all the resources he could muster for his persistent need to crusade. His brother John, continued this legacy out of a penchant for administering the King’s justice, an overriding desire to control the nations resources for his own gain, and a general need to operate out of spite. John’s abrasive style of leadership brought him into conflict with his Barons, who demanded their liberties and a release from total royal oversight in what eventually became the demands of Magna Carta.
During the reign of King John, roughly a third of the country was royal forest, and the penalties imposed for forest offences were a major source of revenue for the king. One aim of the Forest Charter was to reduce the area of the royal forest by removing everything which King Henry II (chiefly blamed for the forest’s vast extent) had placed within it. The Charter also banned capital punishments for forest offences (such as poaching and hunting the protected deer), and exempted those having woods within the forest from fines for erecting buildings and creating new arable land.
The Last Wolf (from rags to riches)
You may have wondered how it was that England developed the wool trade and became extremely wealthy as a result. Well: you have to go back to the beginning, which in this case was 1281…
In 1281, Edward I (“Longshanks”) summoned Peter Corbet, a Shropshire knight, and gave him a curious task: to rid the country of wolves. By 1290, wolves had been hunted to extinction across much of England.
By the early 13th century there weren’t many wolves left in the country following centuries of hunting and destruction of forests. But there were enough to annoy Edward I by killing and eating his deer…
To be finished…
The Black Death
In June 1348 the black death arrived at Weymouth. By September it had reached London, spreading rapidly throughout the country. It is believed that the disease killed 70% of those infected and, between 1348 and 1350, reduced the population by 30-45%. Roughly 2 million out of a population of around 5 million died (note: figures are estimates as no precise data exists).
It has long been acknowledged that the plague’s origins were in central Asia and recent research has narrowed it down to the Chüy Valley in modern-day Kyrgyzstan, occurring around 1338-9. The disease spread along the trade routes, reaching Genoa in May 1347 on a ship from Caffa. Caffa (now Feodosija, Ukraine) was a trading port on the Black Sea, established by the Genoese in 1266. The plague spread throughout Italy and arrived in France in November 1347.
The disease started off as a bubonic plague – believed to have been carried by the fleas on infected black rats. However, it mutated into a pneumatic plague, transmission became airborne and was more deadly – killing 100% of those infected.
Most people who caught it died within days and so there was not much time for treatment and so we don’t know much about what treatments were used. Because death happened quickly when people caught the Black Death, most people focused on trying to prevent the spread of the disease. Some of the methods used to try to prevent the spread of the disease were the same as the treatments. For example, common actions included confession, prayer, fasting, and carrying posies (bunches of flowers) and herbs. Some local authorities also took action to prevent the spread of the disease. A common belief today is that the Black Death was spread by the fleas on rats. Some disagree and suggest that the bacteria was spread from human to human. Whatever is true, it is clear that if the following actions had been more widespread, they might have prevented more deaths. Under quarantine laws, people new to an area had to stay away from others for 40 days. Houses were placed in quarantine where there had been an outbreak of the Black Death. Sometimes marks were placed on the doors of those believed to have been affected. Strangers were not allowed to enter a village. Events that attracted large crowds, such as religious processions, were banned. Burial sites were created where the dead could be buried in mass graves. This was done quickly and without much religious ceremony. However, all of these actions were difficult to enforce because the Church continued to have a lot of power. Individuals continued to follow the advice given by the Church, which meant they tried to prevent the spread of the Black Death with prayer, fasting and confession of sins.
These huge death tolls sparked off a chain of events that would change the position of the peasant in England forever. Because so many had died, there were far fewer people to work the land: peasants were therefore able to demand better conditions and higher wages from their landlords. The power and influence of the church waned as it was clear that prayer, fasting and confession had no impact whatsoever.
Nor was that the end of it. While death rates in later epidemics were lower, the disease became more targeted. In 1361 there was a second pestilence, which was called the “mortality of children” as it primarily affected children. In 1369 there was a third pestilence and was, again, particularly fatal to children. Between 1371-5 the fourth pestilence hit the country and was similarly fatal to children. In 1390 yet another plague ravaged the country that affected adolescents and boys, who died in large numbers in towns and villages everywhere. Modern research shows that it was entirely possible for the plague to have become both age and gender specific by the 1360s, with profound consequences for the reproductive cycle of the population. By the 1370s, the population of England had been halved and it was not recovering.
Further plague epidemics occurred in 1563, 1593, 1625 and 1665. The 1563 outbreak is believed to have killed around 18,000 Londoners – around 30% of the population. This outbreak continued into 1564 before dying out. The next outbreak, in 1592, again seems to have started in London before spreading across the country and dying out in 1594. There were minor outbreaks of plague in the early 1600s with the 1625 outbreak again affecting London badly. The so-called Great Plague started in London in June, 1665. It raged through the summer and early autumn, started to decline in October and was finally killed by sharp frosts in November and December. Though seventeenth-century documents and official records are comparatively plentiful, the truth about the 1665 epidemic is still surrounded by a great deal of myth but it is estimated that around 70,000 died and possibly as many as 100,000.
See: https://www.historytoday.com/archive/feature/plague-england
The Dissolution
In 1534, Henry VIII broke with the Catholic Church, declaring himself Supreme Head of the Church in England. Behind this move was the pope’s refusal to annul Henry’s marriage to Catherine of Aragon, so that he could marry Anne Boleyn. The decision initiated the Reformation of English religion. This focused on the authority of the pope in English religious affairs, but was soon extended to what were alleged to be ‘abuses’ and ‘superstition’ in religious observance and belief. Monasteries were especially vulnerable to attack, because of what they stood for. Many had close ties with the papacy and were home to monks and nuns who were loyal to traditional religion. Religious reformers who gained influence under Henry were especially critical of the monasteries. But monasteries were also at risk because many of them were extremely rich and the king was often desperately short of money. The Dissolution of the Monasteries proceeded in stages. The ‘lesser monasteries’ (those with an income of below £200 a year and fewer than 12 inmates) were dissolved in 1536. This was followed by further dissolutions that gathered pace in 1538, and by the middle of 1540 every monastery in England and Wales, many with histories stretching back to the Anglo-Saxons, had been dissolved.
Many monasteries in early 16th-century England were thriving, and could not have anticipated their impending extinction. It seems likely that this was not envisioned when Henry VIII and Thomas Cromwell first embarked on their dissolution. Daily life still revolved around the dignified observance of religious services, and people from across society still entrusted the monasteries with their spiritual salvation, also turning to them for hospitality, employment, education and charity. Many monasteries were home to shrines containing relics of Christ and saints, attracting pilgrims from across the land.
There was nothing especially novel about the dissolving of religious houses. Between the late 13th and early 15th centuries dozens of so-called ‘alien priories’ – religious houses dependent on larger monasteries in France – were dissolved, and their endowments (revenue-generating lands and churches) redistributed to other religious houses. Other monasteries were no longer viable and simply ceased to exist. Monasteries were also deliberately dissolved to fund educational establishments. In 1496 Bishop John Alcock of Ely received papal permission to dissolve the small Cambridge Benedictine nunnery of St Radegund and convert its buildings into Jesus College, for graduate priests reading for higher degrees in theology. Cardinal Wolsey suppressed over 20 small monasteries, directing their endowments to the colleges he founded in Ipswich and Oxford. The assault on the smaller monasteries, worries about wider reforms in the Church and economic grievances led to revolts – such as the Lincolnshire Rising, also referred to as being part of the Pilgrimage of Grace. But by 1540 every single abbey and priory in England – around 800 in total – was dissolved, or forcibly closed.
The Dissolution was not universally popular and people in Lincolnshire and Yorkshire protested. What started as the Lincolnshire Rising in Louth, in October 1536, soon became known as The Pilgrimage of Grace. It was the worst uprising of Henry VIII’s reign and was a direct result of the dissolution of the monasteries, a policy which confused and angered many people. The presence of a royal commission was the spark; the local clergy encouraged it to flame. The Lincolnshire rebellion only lasted a fortnight, but Beverley, Yorkshire – led by the lawyer Robert Aske – was next and the rebellion spread quickly from there.
Dissatisfaction with the king’s religious and fiscal policies was deep and widespread. An army of perhaps 30,000 men gathered in the north. The king ordered the dukes of Norfolk and Suffolk and the earl of Shrewsbury to respond. But there was no standing army in England; also, popular sympathy lay with the rebels. The king’s forces were hopelessly outnumbered. Worse, their soldiers lacked equipment and the desire to fight their countrymen. And the rebel forces were far more experienced in battle, having fought the Scots near-continuously during Henry’s reign.
Faced with such odds, the king turned to diplomacy. The rebels, after all, did not seek to overthrow him. Their primary desire was for the dissolved monasteries to be restored. They also criticized the king’s ‘low-born’ advisers, particularly Thomas Cromwell. His policies of high taxation and forced enclosures had worsened poverty throughout northern England. The king negotiated peace through Norfolk, conceding their demands and promising a free pardon to all rebels who dispersed. Monastic lands would be restored and a new parliament called to address their concerns. The rebels accordingly dispersed. But, inevitably, Henry broke his word; martial law was declared, rebel leaders were indicted and put on trial. Several hundred rebels, including Aske, were executed.
See: https://englishhistory.net/tudor/the-pilgrimage-of-grace-1536/ https://www.tudorsociety.com/the-pilgrimage-of-grace-a-timeline/ https://www.tudorsociety.com/the-pilgrimage-of-grace-by-sarah-bryson/
The Civil War
Civil War definition: a war between citizens of the same country
The English Civil Wars comprised three wars, which were fought between Charles I and Parliament between 1642 and 1651. The wars were part of a wider conflict involving Wales, Scotland and Ireland, known as the Wars of the Three Kingdoms. The human cost of the wars was devastating. Up to 200,000 people lost their lives, about 5% of the population. This was as great a loss, proportionally, as during the First World War. The causes of the wars were complex but revolved around disagreements about religion, and discontent over the king’s use of power and his economic policies. In 1649, the victorious Parliamentarians sentenced Charles I to death. His execution resulted in the only period of republican rule in British history, during which military leader Oliver Cromwell ruled as Lord Protector of the Commonwealth. This period is known as the Interregnum, and lasted for 11 years until 1660 when Charles’s son, Charles II, was restored to the throne. The Civil Wars saw the beginning of the modern British Army tradition with the creation of the New Model Army – the country’s first national army, comprised of trained, professional soldiers.
Many castles were besieged during the wars, resulting in severe damage. Others were deliberately destroyed after the fighting. The ruinous state of many of England’s castles that we see today can be traced back to these events. It wasn’t just castles that suffered. Towns and cities besieged during the war suffered considerable damage and loss of life. Oliver Cromwell’s puritans damaged many churches and cathedrals, destroying precious artworks, religious icons and other artefacts…
It puzzles me that we refer to this period of conflict (1642-51) as “the civil war”. As we have seen there was civil war between Stephen and Maud from 1135-53. A civil war, known as the first Barons War, occurred during King John’s reign during 1215-17. There was then another period of civil war from 1264-7. This is known as the second Barons War and was led by Simon de Montfort, fighting against Henry III. There was then, of course, the Wars of the Roses that lasted from 1455 to 1485.
The Plantagenet King Henry VI was a weak king, married to an ambitious French princess, Margaret of Anjou. The Queen and her circle of nobles were known as Lancastrians after Henry’s surname of Lancaster. The party of nobles who opposed the Queen and the Lancastrians was led by Richard, Duke of York, Henry’s cousin, who was also descended from King Edward III and therefore also had a claim to the throne of England. They were known as Yorkists. Henry VI suffered from periods of insanity. During one of these periods in 1454, Richard of York was appointed ‘Protector of the Realm’. His first act was to dismiss some of the Queen’s Lancastrian advisors which caused great bad feeling. The King recovered some months later and York was summarily dismissed. It ended when Richard III, the Duke of York, was killed at the Battle of Bosworth and the Lancastrian Henry Tudor became King Henry VII. Henry married Elizabeth of York thus uniting the two houses, and founded the Tudor dynasty.
There was a brief rebellion in 1685 against James II. It was led by Charles II’s illegitimate son, the Duke of Monmouth. It was crushed after the battle of Sedgemoor in 1685, and savage punishments were imposed by the infamous Lord Chief Justice, Judge Jeffreys, at the ‘Bloody Assizes’. James’s reaction to the Monmouth rebellion was to plan the increase of the standing army and the appointment of loyal and experienced Roman Catholic officers. Fear of Catholicism was widespread and the possibility of a standing army led by Roman Catholic officers produced protest in Parliament. As a result, James prorogued Parliament in 1685 and ruled without it. Within three years, the majority of James’s subjects had been alienated…
A bloodless coup…
In 1688, members of Parliament invited William of Orange and Mary, daughter of James II, to England. William landed at Torbay in Devonshire with an army of 15,000 men and advanced to London, meeting no opposition from James’ army, which had deserted the king. James himself was allowed to escape to France, and in February 1689 Parliament offered the crown jointly to William and Mary, provided they accept the Bill of Rights…
2 thoughts on “104. Since Time Immemorial”