The Conquest of England

The Foundation of Western Democracy

Jun 11, 2023

Kingship attempted to maintain the community but focus recognition upon itself, and then to the next status below the king, etc. As we discussed no one ever was satisfied with being of lower status and so the history of kingship was a history of tumultuousness and unending struggles to remove the status of the overlords. Now let’s jump ahead about four millennia to medieval England. In roughly 1215 a king agreed to grant certain rights (at this time though, only to the few in the most prominent position to depose him). Now the Magna Carta did little for anyone but a few high placed nobles, but by granting these nobles certain equity, it seeded what was to become modern democracy. The king abandoned total autocracy for allowing a few nobles equity to prevent his own dispatch at their hands. While it was not the complete end of all contestation to the throne of England, the continuous civil challenges, and dynastic changes. It came about primarily when the Normans (basically) made the last successful conquest of England; there were far more powerful non-Normans than Normans and William and his successors needed to enlist their support. Also in any European nation at the time the Catholic Church was a dual authority and had to be reckoned with by any king wishing to rule. (Not something new developed by the western christian church but had just as the first kings had had to enlist a class to support their kingship they had had to create a religious caste to lend support to their right to rule, even those that claimed their own divinity. The power of religion always paralleled the power of kings and created their own castes within their ranks. By attempting To control humanity they were forced to control the spirituality of men who had strived to maintain a balance. I imagine spiritual leadership had always existed but in pre-king days the role of the spiritualist was to guide the community into maintaining an environmental balance through respecting life that gave life to communities; with kings, religious support was necessary to support the imbalance created by kings both within the community and with nature, so spiritualization needed to also become organized and became co-powerful to support the inequality as natural right. At any rate, to maintain the success of his invasion William brought the church leaders in England, and the former powerful leaders into a Great Council with his own supporters that had helped him succeed in his conquest. In theory the Council ruled with the king as executor. But these councilors were, to a degree, related to William.

Originally, the Cerdicings were of Saxon descent who had settled in southern England way back in the sixth century. The family, to become known as the House of Wessex, became dominant in all of southern England with King Ecgberht in 802. From this family arose Alfred the great, who was never great in that he controlled all of England (and we are not speaking of England to include Scotland for several centuries, or at this time even Wales), but as the king who took to battle and successfully defeated the Viking intrusion into Wessex. But only into Wessex. After several battles culminating in a big win at the Battle of Edington in 878, a treaty was negotiated that left the Wessex lands free of Viking control, leaving Danelaw under their control (most of the Midlands, East Anglia, and Viking control of much of York, called Scandinavian York). Alfred, in his success also enabled the church to flourish in Viking controlled sections of England, converting Viking leader Guthrum to Christianity, thus extending the church's influence over the entire boundary of what would become England.

Alfred did not really abide by the treaty he had made with Guthrum, and with church support, made further encroachments into Viking territory, including eventually moving his control over London. Alfred’s grandson, Æthelstan finally conquered the last Viking stronghold inYork and was crowned as the first “King of England” in 927. But in 978, at the age of 12, Æthelred the Unready ascended to the crown. Æthelred, the name had the meaning in old English, of “well-advised”. Calling him “unready” is something of a misnomer, or a confusion of the root of the word that he came to be called after the Battle of Maldon (which was itself at the end of several losing battles), and he was referred to as Unræd which actually was the opposite meaning of Æthelred, or “poorly advised.” After the loss at Maldon, Æthelred, now called Unræd, was forced into paying tribute to the latest invaders, the Danes, under Danegold. Feeling ridiculed and attempting to regain his own status, Æthelred ordered a surprise massacre upon Danish farming settlements in what became known as the Brice’s Day Massacre. The consequence of this was a full scale Danish invasion by King Sweyn Forkbeard in 1013. Once again Æthelred tried to rebel sneakily but both he and his son Edmund Ironside died in battle, Cnut led the Danes to complete victory and crowned himself King of England.

Well Cnut’s son, Harthacut (succeeding his brother Harold Harefoot in 1040 became king of England and Denmark, only to die two years later. Magnus, in Norway, had already led a successful rebellion in Norway to break away from Danish control and upon Harthacut’s death, Magnus became king of Norway and Denmark, but Magnus did not contend for the throne of England.

In 1037, the year that the church consented to crowning Harefoot king since Harthacut was too busy defending his European territory from Magnus, his regency of England and his kingship began, another invasion began in England, led by two half brothers (or step-brothers depending on your source), Edward and Alfred. The question of whether Edward was half-brother or step brother of course is that when his mother Emma was married to Cnut (after the death of her first husband, Æthelred, and the father of Edward) the marriage agreement allowed Emma’s sons by Æthelred to be adopted as full sons by Cnut, so they became half-brothers by marriage to Harthacut and Harold Harefoot. Today we would consider them to be step-brothers.) But they were half brothers as well because Harthacut was also Emma’s son. Emma sent her sons by Æthelred to Normandy to be brought up by her brother Richard II of Normandy. Emma actually favored her son Harthacut (probably more accurately spelled Harthacnut, but generally England has referred to him as Harthacut) and was trying to hold on to a co-regency with Harefoot England until Harthacut could succeed against Magnus (the Swedish were also rebelling for accuracy’s sake). So when the church switched sides and agreed to Harefoot being crowned king, Emma sent for Alfred and Edward. Alfred was captured and blinded by a hot iron to his eyes and died from the wounds. Edward, now with his mother, Emma fled back to Normandy. But then Harold Harefoot died only three years later, and now Harthacut, along with his mother, and his half-brother-step-brother, Edward sailed with an army to England. They set sail in 1039 but there was no great war, or much contestation due to Harefoot’s death and the crown was offered to Harthacut. Harthacut, however, soon became ill and designated Edward to be king. Edward’s transition was rather peaceful (supposedly), but he did quickly eliminate any potential rivals that might challenge his succession. Thus, Edward, the son of Æthelred , kingship restored the Saxons of the House of Wessex to the throne, and his relationship through his mother, to the Normans, that would invade upon his death, lend to the historical notion that the Wessex dynasty would rule England until Elizabeth I’s death in 1603.

And so even though William had to conquer England in 1066, the stage was set to insure a semi-democracy of nobles and churchmen to support him through the organization of a”great council”. So the story of the Magna Carta actually predates its signing to this period, and the nobles who attempted to force John into signing the document were merely attempting to establish the rights they had been given prior to John’s ascendancy.

William was the son of Richard I, Duke of Normandy, who was the son of Emma’s brother, Richard II, and why the II preceded the I is a story of french-norman history, but also the story of saxon-norman history.

The UnUtopian Optimist

Discussion about this post