William II of England
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| William II | |
|---|---|
| King of the English (more...) | |
 |
|
| William II, from the Stowe Manuscript | |
| Reign | 9 September 1087–2 August 1100 |
| Coronation | 26 September 1087 |
| Predecessor | William I |
| Successor | Henry I |
| Royal house | Norman dynasty |
| Father | William I |
| Mother | Matilda of Flanders |
| Born | 1056 Normandy, France |
| Died | 2 August 1100 The New Forest, England |
| Burial | Winchester Cathedral, Winchester |
William II (c. 1056 – 2 August 1100), the third son of William I the Conqueror[1], was King of England from 1087 until 1100, with powers also over Normandy, and influence in Scotland. He was less successful in extending his control in Wales. William was commonly called "Rufus", perhaps because of his red-faced appearance.
Although William was an effective soldier, he was a ruthless ruler and was little liked by those he governed; according to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, he was "hated by almost all his people." The chroniclers of his time took a dim view of Rufus because many literate men of the day were men of the Church, against which Rufus fought hard and long; and in Norman tradition, William Rufus scorned the English and their culture.[2]
William himself seems to have been a flamboyant character, and his reign was marked by his bellicose temperament. He never married or had illegitimate children; William's favourite was Ranulf Flambard, whom he appointed Bishop of Durham in 1099, an appointment based on political requirements, for a see that was at the same time a great feudal fief. William was roundly denounced in his time and after his death for his numerous homosexual liaisons.[3]
Contents |
[edit] Early years
William's exact date of birth is unknown, but it was sometime between the years 1056 and 1060. He was the third of four sons, born in his father's duchy of Normandy, which would be inherited in due course by his elder brother, Robert Curthose. During his youth, he was educated under the eye of Lanfranc and seemingly destined to be a great lord but not a king, until the death of the Conqueror's second son, Richard, put him in the line of succession. His father's favourite son, William succeeded to the throne of England on his father's death, but there was always hostility between him and his eldest brother—though they became reconciled after an attempted coup in 1091 by the youngest brother, Henry.
Relations between the three brothers had never been excellent; Orderic Vitalis relates an incident that took place at L'aigle, in 1077 or 1078: William and Henry, having grown bored with casting dice, decided to make mischief by pouring stinking water on their brother Robert from an upper gallery, thus infuriating and shaming him. A brawl broke out, and their father King William was forced to intercede to restore order.
[edit] Appearance
| English Royalty |
|---|
| House of Normandy |
| William I |
| Robert II Curthose, Duke of Normandy |
| Richard, Duke of Bernay |
| William II Rufus |
| Adela, Countess of Blois |
| Henry I Beauclerc |
| William II |
According to William of Malmesbury, William Rufus was "thickset and muscular with a protruding belly; a dandy dressed in the height of fashion, however outrageous, he wore his blond hair long, parted in the centre and off the face so that his forehead was bare; and in his red, choleric face were eyes of changeable colour, speckled with flecks of light" (Barlow).
[edit] England and France
The division of William the Conqueror's lands into two parts presented a dilemma for those nobles who held land on both sides of the Channel. Since the younger William and Robert were natural rivals, these nobles worried that they could not hope to please both of their lords, and thus ran the risk of losing the favour of one ruler or the other (or both of them).[4] The only solution, as they saw it, was to unite England and Normandy once more under one ruler. The pursuit of this aim led them to revolt against William in favour of Robert in the Rebellion of 1088, under the leadership of the powerful Bishop Odo of Bayeux, who was a half-brother of William the Conqueror.[5]Robert failed to appear in England to rally his supporters, and William won the support of the English with silver and promises of better government, and defeated the rebellion, thus securing his authority. In 1091 he invaded Normandy, crushing Robert's forces and forcing him to cede a portion of his lands. The two made up their differences and William agreed to help Robert recover lands lost to France, notably Maine.
Thus William Rufus was secure in the most powerful kingdom in Europe (with the contemporary eclipse of the Salian Emperors) and, within England, the least trammeled by feudal obligations. As in Normandy, his bishops and abbots were bound to him by feudal obligations; and his right of investiture in the Norman tradition was unquestioned within the kingdom, during the age of the Investiture Controversy that brought excommunication upon the Salian Emperor Henry IV. Anglo-Norman royal institutions reached an efficiency unknown in medieval Europe, and the king's personal power through an effective and loyal chancery penetrated to the local level to an extent unmatched in France. Without the Capetians' ideological trappings of an anointed monarchy forever entangled with the hierarchy of the Church, the King's administration and the King's law unified the kingdom, rendering the English King relatively impervious to papal condemnation, as the reign of William Rufus demonstrated.
[edit] Relations with the church, and personal beliefs
Within a few years he lost his father William I of England's advisor and confidant, the Italian-Norman Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, who died in 1089. After the death of Archbishop Lanfranc, he delayed appointing a new archbishop for many years, appropriating ecclesiastical revenues in the interim. Finally, in a time of panic during his serious illness in 1093, William nominated as archbishop another Norman-Italian, Anselm of Bec–considered the greatest theologian of his generation—and this led to a long period of animosity between church and state. Anselm was a stronger supporter of the Gregorian reforms in the Church than Lanfranc had been. William and Anselm disagreed on a range of ecclesiastical issues. At one point the King declared of Anselm "that he hated him much yesterday, that he hated him much today, and that he would hate him more and more tomorrow and every other day." The English clergy, beholden to the king for their preferments and livings, were unable to support Anselm publicly. In 1095 William called a council at Rockingham to bring Anselm to heel, but the Archbishop remained firm. In October 1097, Anselm went into exile, taking his case to the Pope. The new pope, the diplomatic and flexible Urban II, was involved in a major conflict with the Holy Roman Emperor, Henry IV, who supported an antipope. Reluctant to make another enemy, Urban came to a concordat with William Rufus, whereby William recognized Urban as pope, and Urban gave sanction to the Anglo-Norman ecclesiastical status quo. Anselm remained in exile, and William was able to claim the revenues of the Archbishop of Canterbury to the end of his reign.[6]
However, this conflict was symptomatic of medieval English politics, as exemplified by the murder of Thomas Becket during the reign of the later Norman king Henry II of England, and indeed by Henry VIII's actions centuries later, and as such should not be taken as a defect of William II's reign in particular. Of course, contemporary churchmen were themselves not above engaging in such politics: it is reported that, when Archbishop Lanfranc suggested to William I of England that he imprison the rebellious bishop Odo of Bayeux, he exclaimed 'What! he is a clergyman'. Lanfranc retorted that 'you will not seize the bishop of Bayeux, but confine the earl of Kent': Odo was both bishop of Bayeux, and earl of Kent.[7] Moreover, while we have the complaints of contemporaries regarding William II's personal behaviour, on the other hand it is reported that his 'usual oath' was 'By the Face at Lucca!'[8] It seems reasonable to suppose that such an oath is indicative of William II's personal beliefs.
[edit] War and rebellion
William Rufus inherited the Anglo-Norman settlement whose details are reflected in Domesday Book (1086), a survey that could not have been undertaken anywhere else in Europe at that time and a signal of the control of the monarchy; but he did not inherit William's charisma or political skills. He was less effective than his father in channeling the Norman lords' propensity for rebellion and violence. In 1095, Robert de Mowbray, the earl of Northumbria, refused to attend the Curia Regis, the thrice-annual court where the King announced his governmental decisions to the great lords. William led an army against Robert and defeated him. Robert was dispossessed and imprisoned, and another noble, William of Eu, accused of treachery, was blinded and castrated.[9]
In external affairs, William had some successes. In 1091 he repulsed an invasion by the Scottish king, Malcolm III, forcing Malcolm to pay homage. In 1092 he built a castle at Carlisle, taking control of Cumbria, which had previously been claimed by the Scots.[5] Subsequently, the two kings quarreled over Malcolm's possessions in England, and Malcolm again invaded, ravaging Northumbria. At the Battle of Alnwick, on 13 November 1093, Malcolm was ambushed by Norman forces led by Robert de Mowbray. Malcolm and his son Edward were slain and Malcolm III's brother Donald seized the throne. William supported Malcolm's son Duncan, who held power for a short time, and then another of Malcolm's sons, Edgar. Edgar conquered Lothian in 1094 and eventually removed Donald in 1097 with William's aid in a campaign led by Edgar Ætheling. Edgar recognised William's authority over Lothian and attended William's court.
William made unsuccessful forays into Wales in 1096 and 1097.
In 1096, William's brother Robert Curthose joined the First Crusade. He needed money to fund this venture, and pledged his duchy to William in return for a payment of 10,000 marks—a sum equalling about one-fourth of William's annual revenue. In a display of the effectiveness of Norman taxation inaugurated by the Conqueror, William raised the money by levying a special, heavy, and much-resented tax upon the whole of England. William then ruled Normandy as regent in Robert's absence—Robert did not return until September 1100, one month after William's death.
As regent for his brother Robert in Normandy, William campaigned in France from 1097 to 1099. He secured northern Maine but failed to seize the French-controlled part of the Vexin region. At the time of his death, he was planning to invade Aquitaine, in southwestern France.
[edit] Death in the New Forest
Perhaps the most memorable event in the life of William Rufus was his death, which occurred while William was hunting in the New Forest. He was killed by an arrow through the lung, but the circumstances remain unclear.
On a bright August day in 1100, William organised a hunting trip in the New Forest. An account by Orderic Vitalis described the preparations for the hunt:
- ...an armourer came in and presented to him (Rufus) six arrows. The King immediately took them with great satisfaction, praising the work, and unconscious of what was to happen, kept four of them himself and held out the other two to Walter Tyrrel... saying It is only right that the sharpest be given to the man who knows how to shoot the deadliest shots.
On the subsequent hunt, the party spread out as they chased their prey, and William, in the company of Walter Tirel (or Tyrell), Lord of Poix, became separated from the others. It was the last time that William was seen alive.
William was found the next day by a group of local peasants, lying dead in the woods with an arrow piercing his lungs. William's body was abandoned by the nobles at the place where he fell, because the law and order of the kingdom died with the king, and they had to flee to their English or Norman estates to secure their interests; William's younger brother, Henry, hastened to Winchester to secure the royal treasury, then to London, where he was crowned within days, before either archbishop could arrive. Legend has it that it was left to a local charcoal-burner named Purkis to take the king's body to Winchester Cathedral on his cart.
According to the chroniclers, William's death was not murder. Walter and William had been hunting together when Walter let loose a wild shot that, instead of hitting the stag he aimed for, struck William in the chest. Walter tried to help him, but there was nothing he could do. Fearing that he would be charged with murder, Walter panicked, leapt onto his horse, and fled. A version of this tale is given by William of Malmesbury in his Chronicle of the Kings of the English (c. 1128):
Another version of the above story was that William was ducking down for some reason and Walter mistook William's red hair for a squirrel and shot at him.
- The day before the king died he dreamt that he went to heaven. He suddenly awoke. He commanded a light to be brought, and forbade his attendants to leave him. The next day he went into the forest... He was attended by a few persons... Walter Tirel remained with him, while the others, were on the chase. The sun was now declining, when the king, drawing his bow and letting fly an arrow, slightly wounded a stag which passed before him... The stag was still running... The king, followed it a long time with his eyes, holding up his hand to keep off the power of the sun's rays. At this instant Walter decided to kill another stag. Oh, gracious God! the arrow pierced the king's breast.
- On receiving the wound the king uttered not a word; but breaking off the shaft of the arrow where it projected from his body... This accelerated his death. Walter immediately ran up, but as he found him senseless, he leapt upon his horse, and escaped with the utmost speed. Indeed there were none to pursue him: some helped his flight; others felt sorry for him.
- The king's body was placed on a cart and conveyed to the cathedral at Winchester... blood dripped from the body all the way. Here he was buried within the tower. The next year, the tower fell down. William Rufus died in 1100... aged forty years. He was a man much pitied by the clergy... he had a soul which they could not save... He was loved by his soldiers but hated by the people because he caused them to be plundered.
To clerical chroniclers, such an 'Act of God' was a just end for a wicked king. However, over the centuries, the obvious suggestion that one of William's many enemies may have had a hand in this extraordinary event has been repeatedly made. Even chroniclers of the time point out that Walter was renowned as a keen bowman, and unlikely to fire such an impetuous shot. And William's brother Henry, who was among the hunting party that day, benefited directly from William's death, as he was shortly thereafter crowned king.
Abbot Suger, another chronicler, was Tirel's friend and sheltered him in his French exile. He said later:
- It was laid to the charge of a certain noble, Walter Tirel, that he had shot the king with an arrow; but I have often heard him, when he had nothing to fear nor to hope, solemnly swear that on the day in question he was not in the part of the forest where the king was hunting, nor ever saw him in the forest at all.
[edit] The Rufus Stone
A stone known as the Rufus Stone marks the spot where some believe he fell. grid reference SU270124
The inscription on the Rufus Stone reads:
Here stood the oak tree, on which an arrow shot by Sir Walter Tyrell at a stag, glanced and struck King William the Second, surnamed Rufus, on the breast, of which he instantly died, on the second day of August, anno 1100. King William the Second, surnamed Rufus, being slain, as before related, was laid in a cart, belonging to one Purkis, and drawn from hence, to Winchester, and buried in the Cathedral Church, of that city.
The current monument is made of cast iron and was erected in 1865.
 The Rufus Stone |
 The Rufus Stone (side 1) |
 The Rufus Stone (side 2) |
 The Rufus Stone (side 3) |
[edit] Sources
The main source for William Rufus is the history of Orderic Vitalis. The modern biography by Frank Barlow, William Rufus 1983, has replaced the judgmental Victorian account of Freeman, The Reign of William Rufus, which saw him as a precursor of the United Kingdom who combined "the habits of the ancient Greek and modern Turk" with unseemly irreligion.
[edit] Fictional treatments
William Rufus is a major character in Valerie Anand's historical novel, King of the Wood (1989).
He is also a major character in Parke Godwin's Robin and the King (1993), the second volume in Godwin's reinterpretation of the Robin Hood legend.
William II is indirectly the subject of two historical novels by George Shipway, called The Paladin and The Wolf Time. The main character of the novels is Walter Tirel (or Tyrell) the supposed assassin of King William, and the main thrust of the plot of the novels is that the assassination was engineered by Henry.
The death of William Rufus is portrayed in Edward Rutherfurd's fictionalised history of the New Forest, called The Forest (novel) (2000). In Rutherfurd's version of events, the King's death takes place nowhere near the Rufus Stone, and Walter Tyrrell is framed for it by the powerful Clare family. Also, Purkiss is a clever story teller who manages (much later) to convince Charles II that one of his ancestors had been involved.
Flambard's Confession (1984) by Marilyn Durham purports to tell the story of William Rufus' reign through the eyes of his right-hand man, Ranulf Flambard.
William Rufus and his relationship with Tyrell is mentioned and the manner of his death is included in Lammas Night by Katherine Kurtz and Deborah Turner Harris.
William Rufus is a character in Stephen R. Lawhead's King Raven Trilogy about Robin Hood.
On television, William was portrayed by Peter Firth in the 1990 play Blood Royal: William the Conqueror.
[edit] Ancestors
[edit] See also
[edit] References
- ^ William II
- ^ Cantor, Norman F. The Civilization of the Middle Ages pp 280–84.
- ^ H. Montgomery Hyde, in The Love That Dared not Speak its Name, pp.33-35, quotes contemporary sources Ordericus Vitalis, William of Malmesbury, and Serlo, Bishop of Bayeux and Abbot of Gloucester, as well as Edward Freeman, professor of History at Oxford towards the end of Queen Victoria's reign. William of Malmesbury decries William Rufus' court, which he describes as being filled by "effeminate" young men in extravagant clothes mincing about in "shoes with curved points". Orderic Vitalis makes mention of the "fornicators and sodomites" who held favour during William Rufus' reign, and remarks approvingly that when Henry became king, one of his first acts was to have his courtiers shorn of their long hair.
- ^ Carpenter, pp. 125-26.
- ^ a b Carpenter, p. 129.
- ^ Carpenter, p. 132.
- ^ William of Malmesbury, in e.g. A History Of The Norman Kings (1066 - 1125), Llanerch, 1989, p. 60.
- ^ William of Malmesbury, in e.g. A History Of The Norman Kings (1066 - 1125), Llanerch, 1989, p. 63 and, for a reported example of the oath in use, see ibid., p. 69. See also Holy Face of Lucca.
- ^ Carpenter, p. 131.
- Barlow, Frank William Rufus. Berkeley, CA : University of California, 1983. ISBN 0-300-08291-6
- Cantor, Norman F. The Civilization of the Middle Ages pp 280–84. ISBN 0-06-092553-1
- Carpenter, David The Struggle for Mastery: Britain 1066-1284. Allen Lane, London, 2003.
- Douglas, David C. William the Conqueror; the Norman impact upon England. Berkeley, CA : University of California, 1964. ISBN 0-520-00350-0
- Hollister, C. Warren. "The Strange Death of William Rufus." Speculum, 48.4 (1973): 637-653.
- Mason, Emma. "William Rufus: myth and reality." Journal of Medieval History, 3.1 (1977): 1-20.
- Warren, W. L. "The Death of William Rufus." History Today, 9 (1959)
- William II of England at Genealogics
|
William II of England
Born: 1056 Died: 2 August 1100 |
||
| Regnal titles | ||
|---|---|---|
| Preceded by William I |
King of England 1087 – 1100 |
Succeeded by Henry I |
| English royalty | ||
| Unknown | Heir to the English Throne as heir apparent 1087 |
Succeeded by Robert II, Duke of Normandy |
| Family information | ||
|---|---|---|
| Robert II of Normandy
House of Norman
|
William I King of England |
William II of England |
| Herleva of Falaise | ||
| Baldwin V of Flanders
House of Flanders
|
Matilda of Flanders | |
| Adela of France
House of Capet Major
|
||
| Notes and references | ||
| 1. Tompsett, Brian, Directory of Royal Genealogical Data (Hull, UK: University of Hull, 2005). 2. Ross, Kelley L., The Proceedings of the Friesian School (Los Angeles, US: Los Angeles Valley College, 2007). |
||
|
|
||
|---|---|---|
 |
Monarchs Pre-Conquest * also monarch/lord of Ireland. † also monarch of Scotland and Ireland. |
 |
