Brighter Thinking
A/AS Level History for AQA
Royal Authority and the
Angevin Kings, 1154–1216
Written for the AQA A/AS Level English Language and Literature specification for first teaching from
2015, this Student Book supports learning at every stage of the new linear A/AS Level courses.
Building on the ethos behind the new qualifications, including the use of innovative research from
higher education, this resource focuses on the exam specification and allows for wider breadth and
depth of learning.
•
•
Includes a unique three-part structure with
‘Beginning’, ‘Developing’ and ‘Enriching’ sections
helping to bridge the gap between GCSE and
A level, develop knowledge and understanding of
the specification and extend learning beyond the
curriculum.
Supports both AS and A Level teaching, with AS
content signposted throughout the book.
Series Editor Marcello Giovanelli is Assistant Professor in
English Education at the University of Nottingham and has
published widely in the fields of applied linguistics and
stylistics. He has many years’ experience of teaching English
Language and Literature in schools and in higher education.
Andrea Macrae is a Senior Lecturer in Stylistics at Oxford
Brookes University, and researches and publishes work in
narratological, performative, cognitive and pedagogical
stylistics. She has also been a resource writer and trainer for
A Level teaching.
Felicity Titjen is a course leader at Oldham Sixth Form
College and has been a resource writer, trainer and
presenter across a range of professional development
courses for teachers on effective A Level teaching.
Ian Cushing teaches English at secondary and sixth-form
levels. He has published a range of materials related to
language and linguistics, and presents training courses for
teachers, primarily on A Level English. His interests are in
integrated approaches to teaching grammar, language and
literature.
Visit www.cambridge.org/ukschools for full
details of all our A/AS Level English resources
and for information on the Cambridge Elevate
digital subscription service.
Activities throughout the book focus on key
language topics, issues and concepts, and provide
guidance on responding to examination
questions.
•
Cambridge Elevate-enhanced Edition features
additional rich digital content, including tutorialstyle videos covering key specification topics and
interviews with writers and academics.
This book has been approved by AQA.
A /AS Level History for AQA
Student Book
Martin Evans
Series Editors: Michael Fordham and David Smith
A/AS LEVEL HISTORY FOR AQA STUDENT BOOK
About the authors
•
Contents
Contents
iv
Part 1 THE REIGN OF HENRY II,
1154–11891
Defeat in the war with France
Relations between King John and the barons
The First Barons’ War
‘King John’s legacy
2 The Crisis of Royal Authority, 1166–1174
7
12
16
23
Acknowledgements135
23
34
37
42
Index136
sa
The conflict between Church and state
Henry II and Ireland, 1166–1174
The origins of the Great Rebellion The course of the Great Rebellion Bibliography134
pl
1
113
118
123
128
Glossary132
1
The political, economic and social condition
England in 1154
The restoration of royal authority under
Henry II
The place of religion in society
Henry II and England’s overseas territories
113
m
1 The Restoration of Royal Authority, 1154–1166
6 The end of John’s reign, 1214–1216
e
About this Series
3 The Struggle for Royal Authority, 1174–1189
48
ft
Attempts to consolidate royal authority
after the Great Rebellion 49
Relations between Church and state,
1174–118955
England’s overseas territories
57
Social and economic developments in England 67
ra
Part 2 ENGLAND UNDER HENRY II’S
SUCCESSORS, 1189–1216
70
4 Richard I, 1189–1199 70
D
The character and aims of Richard I
England without Richard, the absentee king
Relations with France and the conflict
between Richard and Philip II
Social and economic developments
5 King John, 1199–1214
Royal government under King John
Relations with the Church
The loss of Normandy and war with France
Scotland, Ireland and Wales
70
73
79
84
90
91
96
103
108
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
iii
A/AS Level History for AQA: Royal Authority and the Angevin Kings, 1154–1189
About this Series
Icons used within this book include:
e
Key terms
pl
Voices from the past/Hidden voices
Practice essay questions
m
Cambridge A/AS Level History for AQA is an exciting new
series designed to support students in their journey
from GCSE to A Level and then on to possible further
historical study. The books provide the knowledge,
concepts and skills needed for the two-year AQA History
A-Level course, but it is our intention as series editors
that students recognise that their A-Level exams are
just one step on to a potential lifelong relationship with
the discipline of history. The book is thus littered with
further readings, extracts from historians’ works and
links to wider questions and ideas that go beyond the
scope of an A-Level course. With this series, we have
sought to ensure not only that the students are well
prepared for their examinations, but also that they gain
access to a wider debate that characterises historical
study.
Chapter summary
ft
sa
The series is designed to provide clear and effective
support for students as they make the adjustment from
GCSE to A Level, and also for teachers, especially those
who are not familiar with teaching a two-year linear
course. The student books cover the AQA specifications
for both AS and A Level. They are intended to appeal to
the broadest range of students, and they offer not only
challenge to stretch the top end but also additional
support for those who need it. Every author in this
series is an experienced historian or history teacher,
and all have great skill both in conveying narratives
to readers and asking the kinds of questions that pull
those narratives apart.
Cambridge Elevate is the platform which hosts a digital
version of this Student Book. If you have access to this
digital version you can annotate different parts of the
book, send and receive messages to and from your
teacher and insert weblinks, among other things.
We hope that you enjoy your AS or A Level History
course, as well as this book, and wish you well for the
journey ahead.
Michael Fordham and David L. Smith
Series editors
D
ra
In addition to quality prose, this series also makes
extensive use of textual primary sources, maps,
diagrams and images, and offers a wide range
of activities to encourage students to address
historical questions of cause, consequence, change
and continuity. Throughout the books there are
opportunities to critique the interpretations of other
historians, and to use those interpretations in the
construction of students’ own accounts of the past. The
series aims to ease the transition for those students
who move on from A Level to undergraduate study,
and the books are written in an engaging style that
will encourage those who want to explore the subject
further.
About Cambridge Elevate
iv
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
sa
m
pl
e
2 The Crisis of Royal Authority, 1166–1174
the conflict between Church and state: Thomas Becket and the crisis of 1170;
the clash between Henry II and the papacy
ra
••
ft
The focus of this chapter is on the troubled middle years of the reign of Henry II.
In this traumatic period clashes with both the Church and with his own family
threatened to tear Henry’s empire apart. We will look into:
Henry II and Ireland: the invasions of 1169 and 1171; relations with the Irish
nobility
••
the origins of the Great Rebellion: dynastic instability and Henry II’s relations
with the three rebellious sons, Eleanor of Aquitaine and their supporters; the
role of Louis VII of France
D
••
••
the course of the Great Rebellion: political instability; the barons; William I of
Scotland; the re-establishment of Henry II’s rule.
The conflict between Church and state
Henry II was determined to exercise greater control of the English Church. His
driving ambition was to enjoy the royal authority he believed his grandfather,
Henry I, had wielded. Henry I had exercised considerable influence over the
English and Norman churches. In reality he had controlled the appointment of
prelates (bishops and abbots) even though he had surrendered the formal right to
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
23
A/AS Level History for AQA: Royal Authority and the Angevin Kings, 1154–1189
do so in 1107. Henry I had also controlled, to a degree, communications between
the Church in his possessions and the papacy in Rome. He had regulated visits to
his territories by papal legates and had continued to exercise control over Church
councils in both England and Normandy. Henry II was not in nearly as strong a
position regarding the English Church by 1154. Papal influence in England had
increased after 1135 along with the increasing development of canon law, which
led to growing appeals to the papal curia in Rome.
Key term
In 1161 Henry II saw an opportunity to reassert some royal control over the English
Church when the Archbishop of Canterbury, Theobald of Bec, died. At Rouen,
in February 1162, he reissued the decrees of the Council of Lillebonne (1080)
that had established firm controls over the Norman Church. (At the Council of
Clarendon, two years later, he would demand similar measures for England.) He
was firmly established on the throne and pushed successfully for his close friend
and chancellor, Thomas Becket, to be elected. Thomas Becket was duly elected in
May 1162. However, if Henry hoped to use his close friendship with Becket to gain
stronger control over the English Church he was to be frustrated. Between 1162
and 1164 Thomas Becket challenged and defied the King over several key issues,
most notably at a series of church councils. The Archbishop then fled abroad into
exile and relations between the King and his former friend were acrimonious
between 1164 and 1170. When peace was finally re-established between them
Thomas Becket returned to Canterbury, where he was murdered by four of the
king’s knights on 29 December 1170.
sa
Figure 2.1: King Henry II of England in
dispute with his former friend, Thomas
Becket, the Archbishop of Canterbury
m
pl
e
Papal curia: the ‘court’ of
individuals that served the
Pope, gave him advice and
helped him to run the Western
Church.
Why did relations between Henry II and Thomas Becket sour?
A matter of principle
ra
ft
Henry II refused to accept that many of the ‘freedoms’ enjoyed by the English
Church were legitimate rights. He saw many of them as undermining royal
authority. Perhaps the most famous of these was the issue of so-called ‘criminous
clerks’ – members of the clergy who had committed crimes. This was no small
matter. Technically as many as one in six adult males in England could claim to
be a clerk in holy orders. According to the English Church it had the exclusive
right to try and punish these clerks in its own church courts and it cited canon
law in defence of this position. Thomas Becket supported the rights of the Church
against his royal master. Henry II rejected this alleged monopoly of the Church
regarding justice over the clergy. He took his coronation oath to uphold justice
very seriously. This principled clash was exacerbated by the leniency which the
church courts often showed to offenders, in stark contrast to the harshness of royal
justice. Between 1162 and 1164 there were several high-profile cases in which
Henry believed the actions of the Church undermined royal authority and general
confidence in justice (see Chapter 1, ‘Ecclesiastical courts’).
Key terms
D
Excommunication: the
most severe spiritual
penalty possible. It placed a
responsibility on everyone
to avoid those who were
excommunicated, and not to aid
them in any way.
Tenant-in-chief: anybody who
held land directly from the king.
24
Another matter of principle concerned the excommunication of the king’s
tenants-in-chief and royal officials. Given the importance of these individuals
to Henry II’s own government and authority he insisted that such men could
only be excommunicated with his approval. By claiming this he was upholding
the customs enjoyed by the Norman kings of England between 1066 and 1135.
Thomas Becket completely rejected this custom and used the theories of the
reform movement to support his position. He argued that spiritual penalties were
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
2 The Crisis of Royal Authority, 1166–1174
a matter for the Church alone and had nothing to do with secular royal authority.
This came to a head in summer 1163, shortly after the Council of Woodstock, when
Thomas Becket excommunicated William of Eynsford, a tenant-in-chief of the
king. The excommunication was disregarded by Henry II and the issue became
part of the quarrel that ultimately led to Becket’s murder in 1170.
m
pl
Henry II had secured Thomas Becket’s election to Canterbury because of the
personal trust that he had in him. Becket had shown conspicuous loyalty to his
royal master as chancellor between 1155 and 1162. He had acted for Henry II
in delicate situations including diplomacy at the French royal court as well as
supporting the raising of substantial revenue from the English Church and the
wider realm to finance the king’s military campaigns. This added to the sense of
personal betrayal that Henry II felt when Becket first surrendered the office of
chancellor and then resisted Henry’s attempts to raise further sums of money.
Henry II was stunned at the council of Woodstock in July 1163 when Thomas
Becket refused to pay sheriff’s aid directly to the exchequer and led the opposition
to it. This fee had been traditionally paid by all tenants-in-chief (ecclesiastical and
secular) to sheriffs.
e
A matter of personality
sa
The public nature of this resistance by his former friend and the senior prelate
in England was profoundly humiliating to Henry II. Becket’s defiance of the king
continued at the council of Westminster in October 1163, where Henry demanded
that the English bishops uphold what he considered to be the customs of England
regarding matters such as excommunication, criminous clerks and appeals
to Rome. Led by Thomas Becket, the bishops would only swear a partial and
conditional oath (‘saving their order’), and Henry II was furious.
ra
ft
Although the dispute at the Council of Westminster was arguably a principled
dispute primarily over ‘criminous clerks’, Henry’s reaction to Becket’s continued
public opposition shows how personally he took the opposition from his former
friend. Henry stormed out of the council and immediately stripped Becket of all
his remaining royal honours, including the castles of Eye and Berkhamsted. Most
significantly he removed his son and heir, Young Henry, from Becket’s household.
He also began showing favour to known rivals of Becket within the English Church.
He sought a papal legateship for Roger, Archbishop of York, and backed the
abbot of St Augustine’s monastery in Canterbury, Clarembald, who was disputing
Becket’s authority over him.
D
At the stormy council of Clarendon in January 1164, Henry once again demanded
that the bishops unconditionally uphold the ‘customs of England’. Led by Becket,
the bishops at first refused, but then Becket surrendered and made the bishops
swear to do so. However, Becket then refused to attach his seal and sent the
written customs to Pope Alexander III for confirmation. After Clarendon, the
gates of the royal hunting lodge at Woodstock were shut in Becket’s face when he
attempted to meet with the king. It is clear that Henry II regarded Becket’s position
as a personal betrayal and acted accordingly.
Another personal matter that possibly impacted upon the relationship between
Henry II and Thomas Becket between 1162 and 1164 revolved around Henry’s
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
25
A/AS Level History for AQA: Royal Authority and the Angevin Kings, 1154–1189
youngest brother, William. William of Anjou was close to his royal brother but
he did not have any lands of his own. King Stephen’s younger son died childless
in 1159 and William sought Isabel de Warenne, his wealthy widow, as his bride
during 1162 and 1163. But William was blocked by Thomas Becket, who refused to
secure him a dispensation, which was needed because they were closely related.
William died in January 1164 and it is claimed that Henry II blamed Becket for his
brother’s death.
m
pl
e
At the council of Northampton in October 1164 Thomas Becket was summoned to
stand trial and formally charged with a series of alleged financial offences relating
to his time as chancellor of England and as custodian of the castles of Eye and
Berkhamsted, for which it was claimed he owed the crown £300. He apparently
also owed Henry II 500 marks for money borrowed during the Toulouse campaign
of 1159. Given how much time had passed since then and the nature of Becket’s
activities in support of his royal master’s agenda between 1155 and 1162 it is
hard to escape the conclusion that the charges were trumped up due to Henry II’s
personal animosity and the resultant desire to ruin the Archbishop.
ACTIVITY 2.1
sa
Use the chart to complete the table relating to responsibility for the breakdown of
relations between Henry II and Thomas Becket between 1162 and 1164.
Actions that contributed to the breakdown
Henry II
ft
Thomas
Becket
ra
Timeline: Events between 1162 and 1164
D
1162
26
February:
Henry II reissues at Rouen the decrees of the Council of
Lillebonne (1080).
May:
Thomas Becket’s election as Archbishop of Canterbury is
confirmed by the bishops.
June:
Thomas Becket is officially installed as Archbishop of
Canterbury.
August:
Thomas Becket receives his pallium of office from the
Pope.
Autumn:
Thomas Becket resigns as Chancellor and returns the Great
Seal to Henry II.
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
2 The Crisis of Royal Authority, 1166–1174
July:
The Council of Woodstock: dispute over sheriff’s aid. Henry
II is humiliated and furious.
Summer:
Increasing numbers of criminous clerk cases, notably Philip
de Broi. Becket excommunicates William of Eynsford.
October:
The Council of Westminster. Becket is stripped of honours,
and Young Henry removed from Becket’s household.
Winter:
Henry II seeks a legateship for Roger of York and gives his
support to Gilbert Foliot and Clarembald.
1164
The Council of Clarendon. Becket reluctantly accepts the
Constitutions of Clarendon, subject to papal approval.
August:
Becket is refused access to the king at Woodstock and
unsuccessfully attempts to flee England to seek papal
support.
October:
Thomas Becket is summoned to stand trial at the Council
of Northampton. He rejects the charges of embezzlement
and then flees.
Winter:
Henry II’s representatives and Becket both appeal in
person to the Pope.
sa
m
pl
January:
e
1163
Henry II seizes of all churches and revenues of Thomas and
his clerks, and exiles his relatives and household.
Thomas Becket and the crisis of 1170
ft
In October 1164, Becket fled England in disguise. Exacerbated by the actions of
both Henry and Thomas Becket, and by the intervention of others, the conflict
between the King and the Archbishop dragged on for six years.
Henry II’s appeals to the Pope
D
ra
Henry II was swift to act against his former friend when Thomas Becket fled. He
immediately sent ambassadors to make his case before Pope Alexander III at Sens
in France, and hinted that if Alexander III failed to support him in his dispute with
the Archbishop he might recognise the authority of his rival, the antipope Paschal
III. In May 1165 one of Henry’s clerks, Richard of Ilchester, even swore allegiance
to Paschal. It was a tactic, and was later disavowed by Henry II, but the threat
was clear. In June 1165, Alexander quashed the sentence imposed on Becket at
Northampton, and wrote to Gilbert Foliot asking him to intercede with the King,
reminding him of his obedience to Canterbury. Gilbert Foliot, however, wrote to
the Pope warning him not to excommunicate the King for fear that Henry II would
throw his support behind the antipope. In June 1166, Gilbert Foliot led an English
church council in London that sent a joint letter from the bishops to Alexander III
asserting how reasonable Henry II had been and how unjustly Thomas Becket had
been acting.
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
27
A/AS Level History for AQA: Royal Authority and the Angevin Kings, 1154–1189
Henry II’s personal quarrel with Becket
By Christmas 1164 Henry II had ordered the seizure of all the churches and
revenues of Thomas Becket and the clerks who had joined him in exile. He also
drove many members of Thomas Becket’s family and household into exile.
He forbade them from appealing to the Pope. Henry’s actions over the next
six years clearly prolonged the conflict, as he was in no mood to compromise
with his former friend and often took actions which made it harder for Becket
to compromise.
m
pl
e
In 1166 Henry II summoned Becket’s loyal clerks to his court. They reiterated their
loyalty to the renegade archbishop, and Henry refused to pardon them and restore
their possessions. Henry II also stirred up the English Church against Becket. He
gained the support of most of the bishops and in particular secured the backing
of Roger, Archbishop of York, and Gilbert Foliot, the respected bishop of London.
In June 1170 the King arranged for the coronation of his eldest son, Young Henry,
as King of England. This was performed by Roger, Archbishop of York, in violation
of Canterbury’s traditional rights. It was a deliberate provocation that made
reconciliation even harder.
Thomas Becket’s attitude to the Constitutions of Clarendon
sa
In January 1164 Thomas Becket had eventually (although with deep reluctance
and only subject to papal approval) accepted the terms of the Constitutions of
Clarendon. However, as soon as he was safely in exile he rejected them completely
and in June 1166 he formally denounced them, excommunicating some of his
enemies in the process. His opposition to areas that were crucial to Henry II’s
Voices from the past: Thomas Becket
D
ra
ft
Thomas Becket, former royal chancellor, and
Archbishop of Canterbury from 1162 until his violent
death in December 1170, was the key player in the
dispute between Henry II and the Church in the 1160s.
Becket had been a loyal servant to Henry II and he
had also enjoyed the favour of Theobald of Bec, his
predecessor at Canterbury. Becket shifted to become
an outspoken advocate of the rights of the Church
after he became archbishop. He wrote many letters to
secure the support of the papacy or to chastise those
in England who did follow his instructions. The extract
below is from a letter written by him to Cardinal Albert
de Morra, a member of the papal curia whom Becket
had most probably known when he was a law student
in Bologna. It was written in April 1170 as a response
to the absolution of Gilbert Foliot by the papal legate
which lifted the excommunication placed upon him by
Becket in 1169.
28
Would that your ears, my dear friend, were open to the
mouths of our people and might hear what is being
chanted to the shame of the Roman church. For by the
Apostolic mandate the bishops of London and Salisbury
are absolved, although it is well known that the former
has been from the first the instigator of schism and the
author of all evil. He it was who seduced the bishop of
Salisbury, along with all whom he could influence, into
the crime of disobedience. I know not how it is that in
the papal curia the Lord’s side is always sacrificed. We
cannot defend the liberty of our Church, because the
Apostolic See has now prolonged our exile to the end of
the sixth year.1
Discussion points
1. Who does Thomas Becket blame for his inability to
control the English Church?
2. Why does Thomas Becket complain about the
conduct of the Pope at this time?
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
2 The Crisis of Royal Authority, 1166–1174
perception of his own royal authority, notably regarding ‘criminous clerks’ and the
excommunication of tenants-in-chief and royal officials, was a major stumbling
block to any reconciliation. In November 1167 Henry offered a compromise on the
Constitutions; although the papal legates accepted this, Becket refused.
pl
In November 1167, Gilbert Foliot was summoned to Normandy to meet with
papal legates and the King. Roger of York, Hilary of Chichester, and Roger of
Worcester were also summoned. Henry appears to have agreed that the papal
legates could judge his case and that of his bishops against Becket, but Becket
refused to accept their intercession. Becket wrote relentlessly to Pope Alexander III
in defence of his position between 1164 and 1170 and secured papal protection
from Henry II. His exile in France was only possible with the support of Louis VII
of France, and his closeness to Henry II’s royal rival was a provocation to the
English king.
e
Thomas Becket’s personal quarrel with Henry II
sa
m
In July 1168, Alexander III wrote to both Henry and Becket. He suspended Becket’s
power to inflict any harm on Henry II and the English bishops until March 1169,
but promised to restore Becket’s authority in full at that point. Henry would not
be permitted any further appeals. The very next month, in April 1169, Becket
made another thinly disguised attack on Henry II by excommunicating the bishops
closest to him, including Gilbert Foliot, Bishop of London, and Joscelin, Bishop of
Salisbury. He not only excommunicated the bishops but also some royal officials
and Hugh Bigod, an English earl, underlining his determination to ignore Henry II’s
insistence that such actions required his consent.
ft
In July 1170, Becket threatened to put the whole of England under an interdict.
Henry and Becket met at Freteval, and came to an agreement that allowed Becket
to return to England, but did not address the Constitutions of Clarendon or the
other outstanding issues. One of Becket’s first actions on returning in November
1170 was, once again, to excommunicate Roger of York, Joscelin of Salisbury and
Gilbert of London for their roles in the coronation that Henry had asked them
to perform.
ra
In December, having arrived in England, Becket refused to lift the three bishops’
excommunications and refused to allow them to appeal to the Pope to have them
lifted. Roger, Joscelin and Gilbert left England to report to Henry II at Christmas
in Normandy. On 29 December, four of the King’s household knights arrived at
Canterbury and murdered Becket in his cathedral.
Key term
Constitutions of Clarendon:
sixteen articles which Henry II
had insisted that the English
bishops agree to at the Council
of Clarendon in January 1164.
They extended royal authority
over the English Church.
Interdict: a spiritual
penalty less severe than
excommunication but which
blocked an individual or an area
from participating in the rites of
the Church.
D
The interventions of Pope Alexander III
Pope Alexander III’s actions clearly played an important role in prolonging the
conflict. Alexander III was in a difficult position. He was a reformer and many of the
principles that Becket claimed to be fighting for were ones that he too sought to
defend. However, there were rival claimants to be pope – between 1164 and 1170,
Paschal III and Calixtus III in turn. Alexander III could not risk totally alienating
Henry II for fear that the English king might recognise his papal rival and reject his
authority. Furthermore, it was clear that Becket did not enjoy the support of the
English bishops.
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
29
A/AS Level History for AQA: Royal Authority and the Angevin Kings, 1154–1189
pl
e
For Henry II and Thomas Becket, Alexander’s equivocation meant that neither was
able to establish a dominant position over the other on the matters at stake. In
the winter of 1164 Alexander III refused to confirm the Constitutions of Clarendon
but he did agree to Henry II’s request to make Roger of York, Becket’s rival, a
papal legate. In the summer of 1165 he required Clarembald to submit to the
Archbishop, and asked Louis VII to give financial aid to Becket, but he also forbade
the Archbishop from provoking Henry II any further. In May 1166 Alexander III
made Becket a papal legate too, but in July 1168 he temporarily stripped him
of the power to attack Henry II or English bishops while promising to restore his
full authority without reference to further royal appeal if the dispute were not
settled by March 1169. Despite this, in April 1170 he pardoned those who had been
excommunicated by Becket. All of these situations show both his desire to push
the rivals towards a settlement but also, arguably, how his intermittent support
enabled both to remain in conflict.
The interventions of Gilbert Foliot
sa
m
Gilbert Foliot was another individual whose intervention in the conflict can be
seen to have prolonged it. The Bishop of London was a highly respected prelate.
Although it has been alleged that he acted against Becket out of jealousy because
he wanted to be archbishop, this charge is hard to substantiate. There had been
tension on account of his refusal to swear a new oath of obedience to Becket when
he moved from Hereford to London. However, he had cautiously backed Becket
until the Archbishop’s last-minute submission at Clarendon in January 1164.
It seems that Gilbert Foliot came to see Becket because of his broken personal
relationship with the King and his desire to be respected within the Church rather
than as a sincere defender of its position. In June 1165 Alexander III had to remind
him of his obedience to Canterbury and in June 1166 he led an English Church
Voices from the past : Gilbert Foliot
and which he himself desires to be observed. He did
not institute these customs; he found them already
established. You should have handled such matters with
mature deliberation, not with the ardour of a novice. You
should have sought advice from your fellow bishops and
others. You should have studied the works of the Fathers
and weighed the gains of the Church against her losses.
Those terrible letters, which you dispatched to the king
in 1166, displayed neither the affection of a father nor
the modesty of a bishop, and all that had been painfully
secured through the pope and the devotion of many
others was ruined by your threats.2
The whole dispute is with the king and about the king,
regarding certain customs, which he asserts were
observed and maintained by his predecessors,
1. How does Gilbert Foliot portray Henry II? Why
might this be the case?
2. What complaints are made by Gilbert Foliot with
regard to Thomas Becket’s actions and conduct?
D
ra
ft
Gilbert Foliot was a senior English prelate at the time
of the Becket crisis. He was the Bishop of London
and he became a fierce critic of Thomas Becket. He
seems to have been suspicious of Becket’s motives
because he was a former royal favourite. He believed
that Thomas Becket’s resistance to the King was more
about his personality than about the principles of the
Church. Foliot became a key agent of Henry II in his
dispute with the Archbishop of Canterbury. The extract
below is taken from Multiplicem, an open letter written
by Gilbert Foliot to Thomas Becket in 1166. In that year
the dispute was in full swing, Becket was in exile and
both sides were appealing to the papacy to support
their cause.
30
Discussion points:
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
2 The Crisis of Royal Authority, 1166–1174
council that called on the Pope to act against Becket. In his open letter that year,
Multiplicem, he levelled a devastating personal attack on Becket. Without his
willing support (and that of Roger of York) it would have been hard for Henry II to
continue to make his case that it was Becket that was so far out of step that even
his own bishops opposed him.
pl
Becket’s many supporters aided and encouraged him during his exile. These
included Louis VII of France, who provided him with a safe refuge, but most
prominent of them all was Herbert of Bosham. He was an abrasive but notable
scholar, He had taught Becket theology and urged him to continue to fight against
Henry II in defence of what he saw as the principle of the liberty of the Church. He
remained at Becket’s side throughout the exile and strengthened his resolve.
Timeline: Events between 1164 and 1170
m
1164
e
The interventions of Becket’s allies
Thomas Becket places himself under papal protection and then
flees England.
Winter:
Henry II’s representatives and Becket both appeal in person
to the Pope at Sens. Pope Alexander III refuses to confirm the
Constitutions of Clarendon but does make Roger of York a papal
legate.
Christmas:
Henry II dispossesses Thomas and his clerks, and exiles his
relatives and household.
sa
October:
June:
Pope Alexander III quashes Becket’s sentence and asks Gilbert
Foliot to intercede with the King.
Summer:
ft
1165
ra
Gilbert Foliot threatens the Pope with losing Henry II’s support.
Alexander III requires Clarembald to submit to Becket and asks
Louis VII to aid Becket, but orders Becket not to provoke Henry II.
1166
Henry II meets Becket’s loyal clerks but neither side will
compromise.
May:
Pope Alexander III makes Becket a papal legate (excluding the
diocese of York).
D
Easter:
June:
Becket formally condemns the Constitutions of Clarendon and
excommunicates some of his enemies.
June:
The English Church council in London write to Alexander III.
1167
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
31
A/AS Level History for AQA: Royal Authority and the Angevin Kings, 1154–1189
November:
Gilbert Foliot, Roger of York, Hilary of Chichester, and Roger
of Worcester (who was sympathetic to Becket) summoned to
Normandy to meet with the papal legates. Thomas Becket refuses
Henry’s compromise on Clarendon.
1168
July:
e
After rival petitions to the Pope in the preceding winter Alexander
III writes to both Henry II and Thomas Becket. Becket is promised
restoration of his authority after March 1169.
1169
April:
pl
Becket excommunicates bishops Gilbert Foliot and Jocelin of
Salisbury as well as an earl and seven royal officials.
1170
After a direct appeal to the Pope Gilbert Foliot is absolved and
excommunication is lifted.
June:
Young Henry is crowned king of England by Roger of York in
flagrant violation of Canterbury’s traditional rights.
July:
m
April:
Becket threatens to place England under interdict. Becket and
Henry meet at Freteval and agree Becket’s return to England.
Thomas Becket excommunicates Roger of York, Jocelin of
Salisbury and Gilbert Foliot of London.
sa
November:
December:
Becket lands in England and upholds the excommunications.
The three bishops go to Henry II in Normandy. On 29 December
Becket is murdered.
The events of 1170
D
ra
ft
In July Becket threatened to place England under interdict. This led to direct
negotiations between the Archbishop and Henry II at Freteval, leading to a
tentative peace. Thomas Becket was, by this time, more angry with the English
bishops than with Henry II. Terms were agreed allowing Thomas Becket to return
to England. Henry II was worried about Alexander III’s threat to place Henry’s
continental territories under an interdict. The peace between Becket and Henry
was precarious. No mention was made of the Constitutions of Clarendon and
Henry II made vague promises to support the Archbishop against those who had
opposed him. Becket took the opportunity to punish those he regarded as having
infringed his rights. On 29 November he issued the papal bulls he had previously
secured that suspended Roger of York and the bishops involved in the recent
coronation and excommunicated the bishops of Salisbury and London. In doing
so he acted against the Pope’s guidance to act with prudence and moderation.
Becket then returned to England. He replaced the prior of Canterbury and actively
sought to enforce his rights within his diocese. The manner in which he did so was
regarded as provocative and his refusal to absolve his enemies of the sentences he
had placed upon them enraged both the bishops and Henry II.
What happened next is disputed. It appears that Henry II was determined to act
against Becket and ordered his men to deal with the threat from the obstinate
32
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
2 The Crisis of Royal Authority, 1166–1174
The clash between Henry II and the papacy
The murder of Thomas Becket
Using the information from this
book and your own research,
rank in order of culpability
those who were to blame for the
conflict between Henry II and
Becket dragging on for six years.
Consider Henry II, Becket and the
involvement of others. Justify your
choices.
m
pl
On hearing of the death of Thomas Becket, Henry II himself was said to be griefstricken and utterly appalled. The news reached Pope Alexander III’s court about
a month later. The Pope was shocked and went into a state of mourning. Accounts
of how Becket was struck down before the altar in his own church very rapidly
spread across Europe. Regardless of what had happened before, it was clear to all
that Becket, in death, had become the champion of the liberty of the Church. His
murder was martyrdom and appeared as a vindication of his actions. Under his
clothes a penitential hair shirt had been found and stories had already spread that
the martyr’s blood had been the focus of miracles.
ACTIVITY 2.2
e
archbishop. At first it seems that he wished for Becket to be arrested, but whatever
his wishes, four household knights, Reginald FitzUrse, William de Tracy, Hugh de
Morville, and Richard le Bret, hearing the King’s angry words, crossed quickly to
England. They forced their way into Canterbury cathedral on 29 December 1170.
Thomas Becket resisted them and they struck him down. He died between two of
the altars. Immediately, word spread of the dramatic murder.
sa
Henry II at first sought to control news of the Archbishop’s death and, more
importantly, his role in it. This proved impossible because the French church had
no interest whatsoever in obscuring Henry’s potential guilt. Henry’s connection
to the knights who had murdered the Archbishop was verified by many French
prelates and it became impossible to hide it. Henry II had already sent a mission to
the papal curia to protest against Becket’s previous excommunication of bishops
loyal to the English king but, unsurprisingly, news of the murder completely
undermined the mission. Political pressure on Henry II mounted when his rivals,
including Louis VII of France and Theobald of Blois, wrote to condemn the English
king and demand the punishment of those responsible.
D
ra
ft
William, the Archbishop of Sens, had previously been appointed as a papal
commissioner to oversee the peace between Becket and Henry II. He had been
given the authority to impose an interdict on Henry’s lands if the peace broke
down. Despite the attempts of the other commissioner, Rotrou, Archbishop
of Rouen, to prevent him William of Sens placed all of Henry II’s continental
territories under an interdict with the unanimous support of the French prelates.
The Norman Church was ordered to obey its terms too although Rotrou refused.
Both William of Sens and Henry II wrote to the Pope to present their version of
events. The French archbishop portrayed Henry II as a wicked tyrant, whereas the
English letter expressed the King’s regret and upset that his anger had, in any way,
inadvertently contributed to Becket’s death. Henry II’s representatives were at
first ignored by Pope Alexander III and, only through the desperate measure of a
public submission by the King to the Pope’s judgement, did they avert the laying
of an interdict upon England. Alexander did, however, insist that the interdict laid
upon Henry’s continental possessions, including Normandy, be honoured. He also
extended the interdict to the person of Henry II himself. The murderers were also
excommunicated, and Becket’s excommunication of the bishops of London and
Salisbury, and his suspension of Roger, Archbishop of York, were all confirmed.
Figure 2.2: A depiction of the murder
of Thomas Becket by the four knights at
Canterbury on 29 December 1170
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
33
A/AS Level History for AQA: Royal Authority and the Angevin Kings, 1154–1189
Henry’s conciliatory actions
ACTIVITY 2.3
In response to the political and spiritual penalties that he faced, Henry II returned
to England and from there travelled to Wales where he prepared for an invasion
of Ireland (see Henry II and Ireland). This was a clever move, as he had been
previously asked to do this by the papacy and it was also a long way away from
the fallout of the murder. When Henry II returned to Normandy in May 1172 he
was able to present himself as a contrite but loyal servant of the papacy who
had conquered Ireland as requested and had reformed the Irish Church. By that
time Alexander III had lifted the suspension of the Archbishop of York and the
excommunications of the bishops of London and Salisbury. Henry II was to pay
to maintain 200 Knights Templar to defend Jerusalem for a year. He was to take
the cross himself and to set off the following year (although this never happened).
Henry II also agreed that he would abolish ‘evil customs’ that he had introduced
with regard to the English Church. This was a reference to the Constitutions of
Clarendon. Henry II was specifically and explicitly forbidden to block appeals
made to Rome through canon law. He also agreed that the secular courts did not
have jurisdiction over the clergy.
m
pl
e
Using specific examples from
this book and your own research
make notes for a debate to
consider the positive and negative
consequences for Henry II resulting
from the murder of Thomas
Becket.
ra
ft
sa
This arrangement, known as the compromise of Avranches, appeared to mark
a real defeat for Henry II but in reality he had not lost as much as first appeared.
Alexander III was keen to restore good relations with Henry II and in many ways
he allowed the English king to exert greater control over the English Church than
he had previously. Although Henry could not prevent bishops from travelling
to Rome he was allowed to take securities for good behaviour from those he
suspected of malice against him. He was also able to assert the principle that the
Crown had the right to defend itself if the Church encroached upon its authority
or on royal government. As Henry II had asserted in the defunct Constitutions
of Clarendon, cases involving advowson (the right to appoint to a church
living), and those concerning lands that the Church held in return for secular
services, remained in the royal courts. Although Henry II promised to observe
free elections to bishoprics he was, in reality, allowed to get his way in this area
of primary importance to him. In 1173 Richard of Dover was chosen as the new
archbishop of Canterbury, and although this was technically independent of the
King it proceeded only after it became clear that Henry II was happy with the
appointment.
D
Henry II and Ireland, 1166–1174
34
Although Henry II had briefly considered the conquest of Ireland in the 1150s
he had become distracted by other issues and until the late 1160s it was clearly
not a priority. Ireland was not a rich country and was therefore not immediately
attractive. The Irish were widely regarded throughout Europe as semi-barbaric and
they fought unarmoured with primitive weaponry. Henry’s initial desire to conquer
Ireland to provide for his landless younger brother William had, in any case,
become irrelevant when William died childless in January 1164. Henry II was also
aware that Ireland would not be an easy land to control. It was divided up between
many petty kings, the seven most powerful of which contested with each other to
be recognised as High King, a role that was largely honorific. Local loyalties were
intensely important in Ireland. Nevertheless, it was not entirely unconnected
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
2 The Crisis of Royal Authority, 1166–1174
The invasions of 1169 and 1171
Ailech
Gartan
Dalriada
Derry
Tir Owen
ULSTER
Using specific examples from
this book and your own research
construct a timeline of Henry II’s
interactions with Ireland between
1166 and 1174.
pl
ULADH
Tir Connell
ACTIVITY 2.4
e
to Henry II’s existing territories. The Irish Church, in particular, had looked to
Canterbury for leadership. It was a desire to further reform the Irish Church that
had led Pope Adrian IV to support a mooted invasion of Ireland in the 1150s with
the papal bull Laudabiliter.
Dal Araidhe
BR
EF
RI
Armagh
EL
m
OI
NY
Kells
Tara
sa
CONNAUGHT MEATH
CRICH MAINE
Clonmacnoise
O F FA LY
RM
O
THOMOND
O
N
D
Kildare
OSSORY
Durrow
L E I N ST ER
ft
Cashel
M U N ST ER
0
Scale of English Miles
10 20 30 40 50 60
D
ra
DESMOND
Figure 2.3: Medieval Ireland immediately prior to the invasion of 1169
Henry II’s interest in Ireland was revived in the late 1160s for a number of reasons.
First, the political situation in the country led to the driving out of the King of
Leinster. Dermot MacMurrough. In August 1166 he sailed to England with his
daughter Aife and sought the aid of Henry II. Dermot found Henry in Aquitaine
but although the King was not in a position to aid Dermot directly he did give him
permission to recruit a military force. Dermot raised this force in South Wales
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
35
A/AS Level History for AQA: Royal Authority and the Angevin Kings, 1154–1189
and, notably, he persuaded Richard FitzGilbert of Clare, known as ‘Strongbow’,
to lead the invasion in return for the hand of his daughter Aife and the succession
to Leinster.
pl
e
Between 1167 and 1169 Dermot raised forces in Wales and by 1169 those forces
that had been raised in Henry’s dominions were fighting for him in Ireland.
Prominent Norman lords included Richard FitzGodebert, Robert FitzStephen
and Maurice FitzGerald as well as many others. The small but capable force
assembled by Dermot and led by Strongbow captured Dublin in September 1170.
This success troubled Henry II who now worried that many of his nobles would
become excessively powerful and more difficult to control. Second, Henry II’s
youngest son, John, was born in December 1166 and he began to consider, just as
he had in the 1150s, the possible conquest of Ireland for a member of his dynasty.
The immediate aftermath of the murder of Thomas Becket meant that 1171 was a
judicious year to do this (see Henry’s conciliatory actions).
sa
m
Henry II’s first instinct was to restrain the nobles that he had previously allowed
to intervene in Leinster. In early 1171 he placed an embargo on shipping between
England and Ireland and ordered his vassals to return to England. These measures
had little effect and it was clear that only Henry’s personal intervention would
prevent his vassals from carving out petty kingdoms of their own in Ireland,
independently of his authority. In October 1171 Henry II, accompanied by a
substantial force of approximately 500 knights, crossed from Milford Haven in
Wales to Waterford in Ireland. The Norman barons at once submitted to their king
as to do otherwise would put their lands in Wales and England in jeopardy. The
prelates of the Irish Church and many petty Irish kings did the same.
Relations with the Irish nobility
D
ra
ft
Henry II presented himself as an arbiter of the disputes between the native
Irish rulers and the Norman invaders. What was imperative to him was that
they all recognised his overlordship. Not all of the Irish were willing to do this.
Rory O’Connor of Connacht rejected Henry’s claims outright and he was joined
in his opposition by the kings of Ulster and Meath. Nevertheless, Henry II was
able to establish a degree of Angevin control. Leinster became a barony held by
Richard FitzGilbert from the English king and the key towns of Dublin, Wexford
and Waterford were to be held for king by royal officials. Henry II also bestowed
Meath upon Hugh de Lacy as a consequence of the native ruler’s refusal to accept
his overlordship, although it remained for Hugh to undertake the difficult task of
establishing his authority over the territory.
Henry II also held a synod of the Irish Church at Cashel in the winter of 1171–1172,
which cemented his acceptance by the Irish Church. It also accepted reforming
canons, in line with the papacy’s wishes. Henry II thus fulfilled one of his other
goals for intervention in Ireland; at a time when he was in great danger because
of his involvement in Thomas Becket’s death he was able to present himself as a
loyal servant of the Roman Church and a pious reformer.
Henry II planned to spend the summer of 1172 completing his conquest of Ireland
but he was drawn back to France by the promise of absolution from a papal legate
for his role in the murder of Thomas Becket. He received this and in September
36
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
2 The Crisis of Royal Authority, 1166–1174
pl
Key to Henry’s attempt to establish a degree of firm governance in Ireland was
Hugh de Lacy. In addition to his other titles he was made warden of Dublin
and also the chief justiciar of Ireland. Attempts to assert greater control over
Ireland were severely set back in 1174 when, in response to rebellion in his other
territories, Henry II recalled Hugh de Lacy, Strongbow and many others from
Ireland. Although Ireland had come, somewhat unexpectedly, under the titular
authority of Henry II it was clear by 1174 that his authority there was very far
from secure.
e
1172 also received confirmation from Pope Alexander III of his lordship over
Ireland. Therefore, in his absence, it was left to Henry’s officials and Norman
followers to conquer territories that he had permitted them to take, while most
of the remaining native rulers also sought to remain on good terms with his
representatives to avoid being attacked themselves.
The origins of the Great Rebellion
sa
m
Henry II was a powerful and able man. He ruled what historians call the ‘Angevin
empire’ which was, in reality, a collection of territories that dominated most of
western Europe. These included England, Normandy, Brittany, Aquitaine, Anjou,
Maine, Touraine and Ireland. In addition, he held an increasingly dominant
position over Wales and Scotland. Yet this accumulation of territories was not to
endure. The so-called Great Rebellion was an early warning of the divisions ahead.
Homage: the oath and
associated ceremony by which
a vassal acknowledged that he
was ‘the man’ of his lord. This
included mutual obligations.
ft
Henry II faced the problem of what was to become of his territories after his death.
He never seems to have considered that all of his possessions would be passed on
to just one heir. By the 1160s it seemed increasingly clear that Henry II intended
his eldest surviving son to hold England, as well as Normandy and Anjou. In this
way he would be gaining the lands inherited by Henry II himself. In accordance
with this intention Young Henry was crowned as King of England in June 1170
by the Archbishop of York. Henry II intended his second son, Richard, to possess
Aquitaine as the inheritor of the lands that Henry’s wife, Eleanor, had brought
to their marriage. The third son, Geoffrey, was to control Brittany which he had
acquired by his marriage to the heiress of the previous duke.
Key term
D
ra
Young Henry’s position regarding England and Normandy, at least, had been
clarified by the time of his marriage to Margaret, the daughter of Louis VII in 1160.
Furthermore, at a conference at Montmirail in January 1169 Henry II and Louis VII
agreed that Young Henry should hold Normandy, Maine and Anjou directly from
the French king, his father-in-law. It was also agreed that Richard would marry
another of Louis VII’s daughters, Alice, and that he would hold Aquitaine from the
French king too. Both of the brothers then performed homage to the French king;
the equality of their positions as senior French barons was a later source of friction
between them. In May 1169 Geoffrey secured the allegiance of the Breton barons.
Henry II had also acted to enhance the authority of Richard in Aquitaine. In 1167
Eleanor of Aquitaine had been despatched to her native land to assert control over
her fractious and independent-minded homeland. She had taken her son Richard
with her in clear recognition of the understanding between her and Henry II that
their second son would succeed her in Aquitaine. In 1169 Richard was recognised
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
37
A/AS Level History for AQA: Royal Authority and the Angevin Kings, 1154–1189
as Count of Poitou and as heir to his mother’s duchy. In 1172, when he was 15,
ostentatious ceremonies marked Richard’s formal installation as Count of Poitou.
pl
e
In 1172 Count Humbert of Maurienne arranged a marriage treaty between his
daughter and Henry II’s youngest son, John. John had been born in December
1166. By then the future distribution of Henry II’s lands in France had largely been
decided, and the plans did not include him. Henry II had begun to consider his
recently acquired possession of Ireland as a suitable inheritance for his youngest
son but his control of that distant land was far from complete. The marriage
possibly provided John with an opportunity to gain land in Savoy but in early
1173 Humbert demanded that his future son-in-law be suitably endowed with
French possessions. Henry II’s decision was to grant John three castles: Chinon in
Touraine, Mirebeau and Loudon in Poitou.
ra
ft
sa
m
This caused outrage among Henry’s other sons. Young Henry, the eldest, was
particularly incensed. Despite being 18 years old, the crowned king of England and
the acknowledged lord of Normandy, Anjou, Maine and Touraine, he was still tied
to his father’s household and did not control a single castle. To see three castles,
including Chinon in Touraine, granted to his six-year-old brother was the final
straw. Young Henry insisted that he be granted the effective government of part of
the vast territories he expected to inherit. Henry II refused to allow this, which led
Young Henry to flee to Paris in March 1173. Once there he gained the support of his
father-in-law, Louis VII of France. Louis enthusiastically promoted Young Henry’s
cause among the other French barons and, in return for the promise of money
and land, Young Henry gained the crucial backing of Philip, Count of Flanders and
Theobald, Count of Blois. Young Henry also wrote to Pope Alexander III requesting
his support against the alleged tyranny of his father. He promised reform of
the Church. More shockingly, Queen Eleanor sent her other sons, Richard and
Geoffrey, to join Young Henry in rebellion against their father. She also attempted
to join the rebels but was captured in November 1173 while making her way to
Paris, allegedly disguised as a man. Throughout 1173 there was an eruption of
local revolts and rebellions throughout his territories aimed at dislodging Henry.
Rebels in England joined the conflict and William the Lion (also known as William I
of Scotland), invaded. The Great Rebellion against Henry II had begun.
D
Henry II’s contribution to dynastic instability
38
Henry II himself is an obvious candidate when looking for the cause of the Great
Rebellion. He had made the decision to provide for the inheritance of all of his
sons and had made clear how he intended to do it. He had gone beyond a general
statement of intent though when, in 1169, he had formally invested Young Henry
with the titles of Duke of Normandy as well as Count of Anjou, Maine and Touraine.
He had also recognised Richard as Count of Poitou (and future Duke of Aquitaine)
and both sons had sworn allegiance for these lands not to him but to the feudal
overlord of France, Louis VII. But having encouraged their ambitions he thwarted
them by restricting their access to any real power. He remained in control of all of
Young Henry’s possessions. His decision to have his eldest son crowned as King
of England in 1170 was aimed largely at undermining his former friend and rival,
Thomas Becket.
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
2 The Crisis of Royal Authority, 1166–1174
Eleanor of Aquitaine’s role
m
pl
Eleanor’s decision to send her sons Richard and Geoffrey to join Young Henry’s
rebellion against her husband was undoubtedly the most shocking event of the
Great Rebellion to contemporaries. It was hardly unknown for ambitious sons
to rebel against their fathers but for a wife to openly challenge her husband,
especially when that husband was a king, was simply unthinkable. Her capture
on her way to join the rebels was made more scandalous by her reported attempt
to disguise herself as a man. It is has been argued that Eleanor was motivated by
jealousy of Henry II’s many affairs, most famously with Rosamund Clifford.
e
Again, he had no intention of giving Young Henry any real power in his English
kingdom. Likewise, although he had given formal authority in Aquitaine to Richard
he continued to exercise a large amount of control over the southern duchy. In
February 1173 the Count of Toulouse finally performed homage, but this went
first to Henry II before then going to Richard, despite the fact that Toulouse was
formally part of Aquitaine. In short, Henry II had given his sons titles but no real
authority and having whetted their appetites his determination to hold on to
power himself bred frustration and resentment.
Figure 2.4: Eleanor of Aquitaine was
one of the most famous women in
Medieval European history.
D
ra
ft
sa
However, this is rather unsatisfactory. After all it would hardly have been
exceptional for a medieval king to have mistresses. It is plausible to consider
whether Eleanor’s rebellion was more a reaction to her frustration at lacking
independent political authority herself. Although she had been sent to Aquitaine
to head a regency council Henry II had intervened on several occasions in a
manner that she may have found humiliating. It is likely that she believed that her
own authority would be greater if Richard (who was now 15) had full control over
Aquitaine. It is also extremely likely that she would have been encouraged in her
actions by the independent-minded lords of Aquitaine who frequently regarded
Henry II as a foreign oppressor. Either way her actions greatly added to the severity
of the initial revolt led by Young Henry.
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
39
A/AS Level History for AQA: Royal Authority and the Angevin Kings, 1154–1189
pl
e
The ambitions of Henry II’s sons
m
Figure 2.5: Young Henry’s coronation in June 1170. He was ambitious and resentful of his
father by 1173
ft
sa
Young Henry’s actions and his flight to the French court at Paris precipitated the
Great Rebellion. Henry II’s refusal to give any real authority to his eldest surviving
son was an obvious motive for his actions but there may well have been reasons
for the elder king’s reluctance. Accounts of Young Henry’s character do not suggest
any real interest or ability with regard to government. His charm was well known
but his interest was largely restricted to tournaments and the concept of chivalry.
The lands and wealth that Young Henry promised to those French princes who
would support him in 1173 suggests a degree of political short-sightedness.
Richard was 15 when the Great Rebellion began. He had only recently been
formally invested with authority in Aquitaine. Henry II had, nevertheless, remained
in firm control of the duchy’s finances and military assets.
ra
The Great Rebellion was Richard’s first independent military command. His
eagerness for such an opportunity is reflected in the fact that he was the last of
his brothers to remain in the field against their father: he only surrendered in late
September 1174. Geoffrey of Brittany was one year younger than Richard. His
role in the rebellion is not well-documented but he joined him in rebellion and
surrendered to his father with Young Henry in early September 1174.
Key term
D
Adulterine castles: a castle
built by an individual without
the permission of their lord.
40
Supporters of the Great Rebellion
Henry II’s rule over his territories was, for the most part, very strong. Yet it was
this very strength that may well have led so many of his barons, in all of his
territories, to support his rebellious sons. Henry II had destroyed or seized the
adulterine castles of many of those English barons who rebelled when he had
first become king of England. Henry II’s use of instruments such as Carta Baronum
(1166) to extract more money in the form of scutage from his English barons was
another point of tension, as was the Inquest of the Sheriffs (1170), which explored
the behaviour of baronial as well as royal officials. Hugh Bigod, Earl of Norfolk, was
a good example of a rebel who had suffered due to his earlier defiance of the King
and was looking to enhance the influence in East Anglia that he had been denied
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
2 The Crisis of Royal Authority, 1166–1174
pl
In Normandy the barons most active in opposing Henry II came from its border
regions. Henry had worked to reduce their power and independence. In 1171
he launched an investigation into lands that had belonged to his grandfather
Henry I in the duchy and he began to reclaim them. In 1172 he instituted a version
of Carta Baronum in Normandy that led to tensions just as it had in England.
The cumulative effect of this increased scrutiny had an impact on the decision
of Henry, Count of Eu, on the Norman border with Picardy to join the rebellion
against Henry II. Gilbert of Tillieres, the lord of Damville, was another disgruntled
Norman rebel.
e
by Henry II. Hugh of Chester’s grievances related to grants promised by the King
to his father Ranulf but never delivered because he became too strong to need to
do so. Likewise William de Ferrers, the earl of Derby, had suffered the confiscation
of lands in 1155 and wanted them back. Many other rebels, such as Robert
Blanchemains, the new earl of Leicester, were young men who may have seen the
Young Henry as the future and decided it was in their interest to side with him.
sa
m
In Henry II’s other French possessions an element of separatism joined resentment
in playing a role for those supporting the Great Rebellion. Many of those rebelling
felt little or no connection to Henry II and looked to his sons as their local lords.
In Brittany the rebels were led by Ralph de Fougères, a nobleman who had lost
lands in Buckinghamshire and had led resistance to Henry’s takeover of the French
duchy in the 1160s. In Touraine and Poitou lords such as Ralph de Faye, the uncle
of Eleanor of Aquitaine, and Hugh de Sainte-Maure were not only loyal to Young
Henry but had played a role in persuading him to undertake the rebellion.
The role of Louis VII of France
D
ra
ft
Louis VII’s role in orchestrating the Great Rebellion was clearly a pivotal one.
Richard was only 15 years old and Geoffrey just 14. Although their elder brother,
Young Henry, had turned 18 even he was comparatively young to have built up
the network of alliances needed to threaten the power of their father, Henry II.
Queen Eleanor had clearly encouraged her sons but her role in Aquitaine and the
constraints placed upon her by position and gender limited her ability to direct
events. This was not the case for Louis VII of France. As the feudal overlord of
all of Henry II’s sons he was in the perfect position to encourage, sanction and
direct their rebellion. It was he who encouraged Young Henry to demand a greater
control over his inheritance and had allowed him to come to Paris. His connection
with the young man as his father-in-law tightened his control over him. Louis
VII had been outmanoeuvred by Henry II time and time again and he must have
been alarmed at the seemingly inexorable growth of Angevin power in France. If
Louis VII could divide the Angevin dynasty then it would be far less threatening.
He could use its dynastic strength, most apparent in Henry II’s many sons by
the woman who Henry had married so rapidly after the annulment of his own
marriage to her, against their father.
Louis VII was the director of the Great Rebellion. It was he who called the French
barons to Paris and encouraged them to join Young Henry. He also coordinated the
attacks on Normandy in 1173 and again in 1174. He rejected the truce suggested
by Henry II at Gisors in September 1173 and it was his failure to capture Rouen that
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
41
A/AS Level History for AQA: Royal Authority and the Angevin Kings, 1154–1189
The course of the Great Rebellion
The Great Rebellion against Henry II lasted for 18 months and involved virtually
all of the most important princes and lords in England and France. Henry II faced
a bewildering array of enemies including his three eldest sons and his own wife.
However, in the end it was Henry II who emerged triumphant.
1173
February:
Henry II promises Count Humbert of Maurienne that his son,
John, will receive the three castles of Chinon, Loudon and
Mirebeau in order to be suitably endowed to marry the count’s
daughter. Young Henry demands that his father assign him a part
of his inheritance. Henry II refuses but is alarmed when Young
Henry claims that his demands are supported not only by the
barons of England and Normandy but also by Louis VII of France.
Raymond of Toulouse warns Henry II that his family are plotting
against him.
Young Henry escapes from Henry II’s household at Chinon to
Paris where he is aided by Louis VII of France. Louis VII refuses
Henry II’s requests to return his son by claiming that he has
surrendered his titles to his children so therefore does not have
the authority. Eleanor of Aquitaine sends her sons Richard
(aged 15) and Geoffrey (aged 14) to join Young Henry in Paris.
Louis VII summons a council of French barons to pledge their
support to Young Henry. They are promised large sums of money
and land by Young Henry. Matthew of Boulogne, is promised
Mortain in Normandy and English lands. Philip of Flanders is
promised Kent and Theobald of Blois is promised Amboise and
lands in Touraine. In Brittany the rebels are led by Ralph de
Fougères. King William of Scotland is promised Northumbria in
return for joining the rebellion. Hugh Bigod, the earl of Norfolk,
Robert Blanchemains, the new earl of Leicester, Hugh, the Earl
of Chester and William de Ferrers, the Earl of Derby, all swear to
support Young Henry.
D
ra
ft
sa
March:
m
pl
What were the sources of political
instability that exacerbated the
Great Rebellion? Produce a mind
map which identifies the possible
sources such as the barons,
William I of Scotland, Louis VII of
France and the Angevin dynasty.
Use specific examples from this
book and your own research as
examples.
led to the final collapse of the enterprise. The Great Rebellion ended when Louis
accepted that the cause was lost, and not before.
e
ACTIVITY 2.5
42
May:
Young Henry attacks Pacy and Gournay in Normandy. Philip
of Flanders captures Aumale and Louis VII attacks Verneuil on
the Norman border with Blois. The Bretons attack Avranches in
western Normandy.
July:
Richard de Lucy, chief justiciar of England, focuses his attacks
on the rebel town of Leicester. It falls to his forces but the attack
by William the Lion in northern England prevents him from
capturing the castle itself.
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
The advance of Philip of Flanders in Normandy is halted after
his capture of Driencourt. Matthew of Boulogne, Philip’s heir,
is seriously injured in battle and later dies, Philip then retires.
Henry II focuses his forces on Louis VII's army. The rebel castle
of Breteuil is destroyed and the forces of the French king retreat.
Henry II uses mercenaries to attack the Bretons in the west. He
rushes to join them, catches the Breton forces by surprise and
forces them to surrender. Ralph de Fougères is captured.
September:
Henry II arranges talks at Gisors to tempt his enemies to abandon
their armed struggle but he is unsuccessful. Louis VII and the
Earl of Leicester are prominent in the rejection of Henry II’s offer.
Richard de Lucy is successful in driving the Scottish army back
across the border. His intention to raid into Lothian is prevented
by the news of Earl Robert of Leicester’s landing in East Anglia.
October:
Robert of Leicester joins forces with Hugh Bigod and the two
rebels capture Henry II’s castle at Haughley. Loyalist forces catch
up with the rebels at Fornham (17 October) and decisively defeat
the larger rebel army. Robert of Leicester is captured.
November:
Henry II moves into Touraine and forces the surrender of rebel
castles including Haye and Champigny. Eleanor of Aquitaine is
captured while trying to join her rebellious sons. Truces are made
to last until Easter 1174.
sa
m
pl
August:
e
2 The Crisis of Royal Authority, 1166–1174
1174
Rebel forces attempt to strike and capture Seez in Normandy but
they are unsuccessful.
April:
The rebels intend to lure Henry II to England and use his absence
to conquer Normandy, so the campaign season reopens with
hostilities in England. King William of Scotland crosses the border
into northern England. He blockades Wark and Carlisle, then
captures many small northern castles including Harbottle. His
army is joined by English rebels led by Roger Mowbray. David of
Scotland (the younger brother of William the Lion) marches south
to relieve Leicester Castle. They achieve this, successfully raid
Northampton and then capture Nottingham.
ra
ft
January:
Henry II asserts his authority in Maine and Anjou. William the Lion
fails to capture Carlisle and Roger Mowbray’s army is defeated by
the force led by Henry II’s illegitimate son, Geoffrey Plantagenet.
Roger Mowbray is captured. The cause of the rebels in England
is in serious jeopardy by the end of the month. Philip of Flanders
prepares for an invasion of England. Flemings assist Hugh Bigod
in capturing Norwich.
D
May:
June:
Henry II is persuaded of the necessity to return to England and
begins to put plans in motion for his return. He also works on the
defences of Normandy.
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
43
A/AS Level History for AQA: Royal Authority and the Angevin Kings, 1154–1189
Henry II embarks for England (7 July) and his enemies then
attack Normandy instead. Louis VII of France is joined by Philip
of Flanders and they besiege the Norman capital, Rouen. Henry II
makes a penitential visit to Canterbury (12 July) where he prays
for the intercession of his old friend and and recently canonised
rival, St Thomas Becket. He submits to a public scourging to
atone for his sins. Robert de Stuteville, the sheriff of Yorkshire,
captures the king of Scots while he is besieging Alnwick (13
July 1174). This spectacular and unexpected victory is widely
attributed to the intervention of Thomas Becket. Henry II
marches to Huntingdon and Northampton, both surrender to the
King and the Great Rebellion in England comes to an end.
August:
Louis VII of France and Philip of Flanders are still attempting,
unsuccessfully, to capture Rouen. Henry II returns to Normandy
(8 August) and it is clear that the attack from his enemies is
now doomed to failure. A truce is established (10 August) but
then broken by Louis VII who attempts, again unsuccessfully,
to capture Rouen. Henry II arrives (11 August) with his large
mercenary army and drives off the French forces.
Louis VII agrees to a truce with Henry II (8 September). Henry II
concludes peace negotiations with all of his enemies at Montlouis
(30 September).
D
ra
ft
sa
September:
m
pl
e
July:
44
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
2 The Crisis of Royal Authority, 1166–1174
Principal Fortress
Castle
Approximate border of Cumbria
(Scottish to 1092)
Modern border
Fantosme Lines 1050–1454
Fantosme Lines 1455–1523
Fantosme Lines 1635–1700
H
T
FOR
H OF
FIRT
Dunbar
Edinburgh
Berwick
Norham
Wark
Belford
Roxburgh
NORTH
SCOTLAND
AND
GALL
OWAY
IRT
H
Warkworth
ROGER
FITZRICHARD
NORTH SEA
Prudhoe Ty n e River
Bywell
Newcastle
Carlisle
ODINEL
ROBERT
ND
DE VALO
RLA
BE
M
CU
ROGER
FITZRICHARD
Durham
DURHAM
R
MO
T
ES
W
Tees R
iv e r
Barnard
Castle Richmond
R ib
0
12
24
36
Scale of Miles
ble
e
Riv
r
Skipton
ha
W
Lancaster
LANCASHIRE
IRISH SEA
r
ive
tR
sa
FURNESS
Derw
en
ND
LA Brough
Bowes
Appleby
m
SO
LW
AY
F
Alnwick
WILLIAM
DE VESCI
L
UMBER
CHEVIOT
HILLS
Bamburgh
e
Caddonlee
Tweed River
pl
LOTHIAN
YORKSHIRE
York
rfe
Riv er
ENGLAND
ft
Figure 2.6: The second Scottish invasion that led to William the Lion’s capture at Alnwick in
1174
ra
The re-establishment of Henry II's rule
D
When Henry II met his vanquished opponents at Montlouis on 30 September 1174
he could begin to re-establish the foundations of his rule. All of the rebel alliances
that had been made against him were broken off and the promises that Young
Henry had made to gain them were equally declared to be void. Young Henry
accepted that there was a need to establish a suitable inheritance for John from
his lands. Henry II provided greater revenues for his sons in a tacit admission that
he had not provided them with enough independence. Young Henry was given two
castles in Normandy and £15 000, Richard was granted two Poitevin castles and
half the revenues of Poitou, and Geoffrey gained half the revenues of Brittany, with
all of it to go to him after his marriage to Constance. Henry II drove home the point
about the benefits of loyalty and obedience by rewarding his youngest son John,
who was still only seven years old, with more than his older brothers. He received
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
45
A/AS Level History for AQA: Royal Authority and the Angevin Kings, 1154–1189
two castles in England (Nottingham and Marlborough), two castles in Normandy
and three in Anjou, as well as revenues from the English and Norman exchequers.
m
pl
e
Having dealt with his sons Henry II had to re-establish his authority in other areas
too. His wife Eleanor of Aquitaine, who had so scandalised medieval society by
rebelling directly against her husband, was not forgiven. She remained in captivity
and was not released until after Henry II’s death in 1189. While his son’s prisoners
were released Henry II kept a hold on the most valuable of his. King William
the Lion of Scotland was forced to agree to the humiliating Treaty of Falaise in
December 1174 in order to secure his release. William acknowledged that Henry II
was his overlord for Scotland. He was required to hand over five key Scottish
castles to be garrisoned by English soldiers at his expense. William’s submission
was made publicly at York and demonstrated, definitively, Henry II’s dominance
in northern England and Scotland. Hugh Bigod of Norfolk, Hugh of Chester and
Robert of Leicester lost many of their castles but kept their lands and titles and
were eventually released but the message was clear that those who rebelled
against Henry II’s authority would suffer and that their suffering would only
increase his power.
Further reading
sa
A detailed account of the dispute between Henry II and Thomas Becket can be
found in Frank Barlow’s Thomas Becket (London, Orion, 2000). The concepts at
stake are also developed in Martin Aurell’s book The Plantagenet Empire, 1154–
1224 (Pearson, London, 2007). John Gillingham’s The Angevin Empire (Hodder,
London, 2001) considers Henry II’s holdings in France and the problems he faced.
Practice essay question
D
ra
ft
1. ‘Henry II’s reasons for intervening in Ireland in 1171 were the same as
when he had considered it in 1155.’ Explain why you agree or disagree
with this view.
2. ‘Louis VII was of utmost significance in launching the Great Rebellion.’
Explain why you agree or disagree with this view.
3. How far were personality clashes responsible for the origins of the
conflict between Thomas Becket and Henry II?
4. With reference to the two 'Voices from the past' sources and your
understanding of the historical context, which of these two sources
provides the more convincing interpretation of why Thomas Becket
was unable to control the English Church between 1164 and 1170.
46
Further examples of the style of question used in AQA A level essay
questions are presented in Chapters 4, 5 and 6.
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
2 The Crisis of Royal Authority, 1166–1174
Chapter summary
why Henry II ended up in a conflict with Thomas Becket and why it
endured for so long
••
the timing of the intervention of English forces in Ireland and Henry’s
attitude to this development
••
the reasons for the divisions in the Angevin dynasty that led to the
Great Rebellion and the role that Louis VII played
••
how Henry defeated his opponents in 1173–1174 and re-established his
authority over his family.
D
ra
ft
sa
m
pl
••
e
By the end of this chapter, it is important to have a deeper understanding of
the challenges to Henry’s rule. Particular areas to know include:
Endnotes
1
2
G. Greenway (ed.), The Life and Death of Thomas Becket,. London, Folio Society, 1961, pp. 131–32.
Greenway, The Life and Death of Thomas Becket, p. 116.
© Cambridge University Press
Third party permissions pending
47