Rating the Monarchs of Britain: Now Disc. George III

Yes and no. Jane wasn't officially crowned queen, but she does turn up on lists of kings and queens of England. And I feel we must recognise her simply through respect and lament alone, especially seeing what happened to her.

 

Nobody seems to have a long life expectancy with the throne at this point; however, our next king will be the exception.

 

Next: Canute the Great

[image=http://www.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/4628227/2/istockphoto_4628227-canute-the-great.jpg]

Born: 980/990

Death: 1035

Ruled: 1016-35

Father: Sweyn Forkbeard

Mother: Saum-Aesa of Poland

Wife: (1)Elfgiva

Children: 2 sons

Wife: (2) Emma of Normandy

Children: 1 son, 1 daughter

Description: "Knut was exceptionally tall and strong, and the handsomest of men, all except for his nose, that was thin, high-set, and rather hooked. He had a fair complexion none-the-less, and a fine, thick head of hair. His eyes were better than those of other men, both the handsomer and the keener of their sight."
?Knytlinga Saga

Reputation: Good general, good statesman, all-around tough customer

Achievements: Conquered England, Norway, and part of Sweden, and ruled Denmark; "Through his reign, Cnut brought together the English and Danish kingdoms, and the people saw a golden age of dominance across Scandinavia, as well as within the British Isles.[37] His mutilation of the hostages at Sandwich is ultimately seen to be uncharacteristic of his rule. He reinstated the Laws of King Edgar to allow for the constitution of a Danelaw, and the activity of Scandinavians at large. He also reinstituted the extant laws with a series of proclamations to assuage common grievances brought to his attention. Two significant ones were: On Inheritance in case of Intestacy, and, On Heriots and Reliefs. He strengthened the currency, initiating a series of coins of equal weight to those being used in Denmark and other parts of Scandinavia. This meant the markets grew, and the economy of England was able to spread itself, as well as widen the scope of goods to be bought and sold.

Cnut was generally thought to be a wise and successful king of England, although this view may in part be attributable to his good treatment of the Church, keeper of the historic record. Either way, he brought decades of peace and prosperity to England. His numerous campaigns abroad meant the tables of Viking supremacy were stacked in favour of the English, turning the prows of the longships towards Scandinavia. The medieval Church was adept to success, and put itself at the back of any strong and efficient sovereign, if the circumstances were right for it."

Remember those ominous words...the Papacy would back William.

Rating: 10/10

 

Next: Harold I 'Harefoot'

[image=http://englishhammered.com/art/harold1.jpg]

Born: 1016

Death: 1040

Ruled: 1035-40

Father: Canute I

Mother: Elgiva

Wife: (1)Elgiva

Child: 1 son

Sources: Enconium Emmae

Reputation: Unscrupulous and extremely violent

Achievements: Originally regent for his younger half-brother Harthacanute, who was detained in Denmark due to an impending invasion by the Kings of Norway and Sweden. Harald then usurped the throne. Edward the Confessor and his younger brother, Alfred Atheling, invaded, but Earl Godwin captured Alfred and blinded him on Harold's orders; he subsequently died.

Apparently Harold's mother was the real power behind the throne. He died just as Harthacanute was readying an invasion force.

Rating: 3/10

 

Poor Cnut's Danish/Norwegian/English empire came to a fairly abrupt end.

 

Next: Harold I 'Harefoot'



Born: 1016

Death: 1040

Ruled: 1035-40

Father: Canute I

Mother: Elgiva

Wife: (1)Elgiva

Child: 1 son

Sources: Enconium Emmae

Reputation: Unscrupulous and extremely violent

Achievements: Originally regent for his younger half-brother Harthacanute, who was detained in Denmark due to an impending invasion by the Kings of Norway and Sweden. Harald then usurped the throne. Edward the Confessor and his younger brother, Alfred Atheling, invaded, but Earl Godwin captured Alfred and blinded him on Harold's orders; he subsequently died.

Apparently Harold's mother was the real power behind the throne. He died just as Harthacanute was readying an invasion force.

Rating: 3/10

 

Not quite yet:

Next: Harthacanute

[image=http://www.nashfordpublishing.co.uk/monarchs/images/hardicanute.gif]

Born: 1018

Death: 1042

Ruled: 1040-42

Father: Canute I

Mother: Emma of Normandy

Wife: None

Child: None

Successor: Half-brother, Edward the Confessor

Sources: Enconium Emmae, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle

Reputation: Unscrupulous and extremely violent

Achievements: Became King of Denmark in 1935, and then King of England in 1940 when his half-brother Harold I died. "Harthacnut was a harsh and unpopular ruler: to pay for his fleet, he severely increased the rate of taxation, and in 1041 the people of Worcester killed two of Harthacnut's housecarls who had been collecting the tax, prompting an attack by Harthacnut in which the city was burned. The story of Lady Godiva riding naked through the streets of Coventry to persuade the local earl to lower taxes may come from the reign of Harthacnut. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle gives a dismal assessment of him: "He never accomplished anything kingly for as long as he ruled." It also says that in 1041 Harthacnut broke a pledge and betrayed Earl Eadwulf of Northumbria, who was under his safe conduct.

In 1041, Harthacnut invited his half-brother Edward the Confessor (his mother Emma's son by Ethelred the Unready) back from exile in Normandy to become a member of his household, and probably made Edward his heir. Harthacnut was unmarried and had no known children. It is rumoured he fathered an illegitimate son, William Canute. On 8 June 1042, he died at Lambeth ? he "died as he stood at his drink, and he suddenly fell to the earth with an awful convulsion; and those who were close by took hold of him, and he spoke no word afterwards?"[2] He was buried at Winchester, his father's place of rest, and his mother's, on her death. Edward assumed the throne on Harthacnut's death, restoring the Saxon royal line of Wessex." He was the last of the four Danish kings of England. I believe they constitute the shortest dynasty in English (though possibly not British) history...26 years.

Rating: 3/10

 

Next: Edward III the Confessor

[image=http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/M/monarchy/biogs/images/akg1EN-953-A1.jpg]

Born: 1003/4 or 5

Death: 1066

Ruled: 1044-1066

Father: Ethelred II

Mother: Emma of Normandy

Wife: Edith, daughter of Godwine, Earl of Essex

Children: None

Successor: Brother-in-law, Harald Godwinsson, to whom he left the throne with the consent of the Witan, though there is some doubt this was Edward's actual wish.

Sources: Enconium Emmae, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle

Reputation: Pious in the extreme

Achievements: "Historically, Edward's reign marked a transition between the 10th century West Saxon kingship of England and the Norman monarchy which followed Harold's death. Edward's allegiances were split between England and his mother's Norman ties. The great earldoms established under Canute grew in power, while Norman influence became a powerful factor in government and in the leadership of the Church.
Edward's funeral, as depicted in the Bayeux Tapestry

It was during the reign of Edward that some features of the English monarchy familiar today were introduced. Edward is regarded as responsible for introducing the royal seal and coronation regalia. Also under Edward, a marked change occurred in Anglo-Saxon art, with continental influences becoming more prominent (including the "Winchester Style" which had become known in the 10th century but prominent in the 11th), supplanting Celtic influences prominent in preceding painting, sculpture, calligraphy and jewellery (see Benedictional of St. Æthelwold for an example of the Winchester Style). His crown is believed to have survived until the English Civil War when Oliver Cromwell allegedly ordered it to be destroyed. Gold from it is understood to have been integrated into the St. Edward's Crown, which has been used in coronations since Charles II of England in 1661."

He founded Westminster Abbey and was canonized as a saint in 1161.

Edward is very hard to rate. If you evaluate him on the basis of the requirements of medieval kingship, he was deficient; he was no soldier, and he did not provide an heir (the canard that his marriage was unconsummated was just that, however). However, his reign was a peaceful and prosperous one, possibly because he allied himself with the Godwins, who provided the muscle he lacked. It was not always a happy alliance; he imprisoned Godwin in 1051 over a disagreement on the appointment of the Archbishop of Canterbury. But the rift was soon patched up, despite Godwin's role in the death of Edward's younger brother, Alfred. The only Wessex candidate was Edgar Atheling, grandson of Edmund II. He was only 14, so the Witan decreed that Harald get the job, perhaps sensing that an adult king would be needed. They were right, but despite Harald's abilities, even he could not prevail.

Rating: 5/10

 

Next: Harald II Godwineson

[image=http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/images/harold_ii_king.jpg]

Born: 1020/2

Death: 1066

Ruled: 1066

Father: Godwine, Earl of Essex

Mother: Gytha, sister of Sweyn Forkbeard of Denmark (and briefly King of England)

Wife: (1) Edith Swansneck

Children: Four sons, two daughters

Wife: (1) Edith of Mercia

Children: Twin sons

Successor: William of Normandy

Sources: Enconium Emmae, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle

Reputation: Hard-luck Harald

The Situation: The only Wessex candidate was 14 years old, so the Witan (and Edward the Confessor) chose Harald to succeed him. The result was a good old-fashioned fight for the throne, but not by Wessex relatives...by Harald against two foreign claimants, Harald Hardrada of Norway in the north, and William of Normandy in the south.

Neither claimant had any blood right to the throne; they both came as conquerors.

Achievements: Harald defeated and killed Harald Hardrada in September, 1066, at Stamford Bridge in the north. He then had to rush south to meet William's invasion. Harald very nearly managed it, but was slain on the field, and William prevailed.

If Harald had lived, he might have been a very good king.

Rating: 7/10

 

I love Harald! And I feel so bad for him. It would have been interesting to see what would have happened if he hadn't been killed at the battle of Hastings, if he had been William.

 

But Harald's failure was really a disaster for the Anglo-Saxons, as we shall see. They entered a long period of eclipse, with only the Celtic fringe, Wales, Scotland and Ireland opposing William. But I suppose there was no reason at first to suppose that William's line would last any longer than Canute's.

They were to be sorely disappointed.

 

The Bayeux Tapestry is probably the world's most famous embroidery. It certainly brings that moment in history to life in ways that may in fact not be completely accurate, or more to the point its interpretation may not be accurate. From Wikipedia:

Historians are divided over whether the Bayeux Tapestry depicts Harold being shot in the eye (the figure that has his name above) or whether Harold is actually the next figure being mutilated beneath a horse's hooves.

Not that it necessarily matters how Harold bit it. The results are what count - Norman invasion: successful!

 

Harold might have had his faults, but he certainly got the "point" in the end!

And you know why the Saxons were defeated by the Normans at Hastings, don?t you?

 

Lots of reasons...they had to rush from the north, the Papacy backed William...and speaking of *that* why the hell did they? The English church had always been loyal.

 

The main reason is because the Normans had cavalry and the Saxons only had infantry. So, in battle the Normans mowed straight over their enemy, just like you see in ROTK.

 

The Anglo-Saxon Cavalry

 

The Bayeux Tapestry is really quite impressive. Though I've never heard the trampling thing; everything I've read indicated shot in the eye (and I'm too tired to dig up texts).

 

Ironically, the current royal family *is* descended from Harald...one of his daughters by his first wife married the Duke of Kievan Rus [the embryonic Russia] and is the ancestress of the wife of Edward III, the Norman one.

 

Okay, here we go: William I; aka William of Normandy; aka William the Conquerer

[image=http://www.solarnavigator.net/history/explorers_history/William_Conqueror_Bayeux_Tapestry.jpg]

Description: "No authentic portrait of William has been found. Nonetheless, he was depicted as a man of fair stature with remarkably strong arms, "with which he could shoot a bow at full gallop". William showed a magnificent appearance, possessing a fierce countenance. He enjoyed an excellent health until old age; nevertheless his noticeable corpulence in later life increased eventually so much that French King Philip I commented that William looked like a pregnant woman.[18] Examination of his femur, his only bone to survive when the rest of his remains were destroyed, showed he was approximately 5' 10" tall."

Born: 1027/28

Death: 1087

Ruled: 1066-1087

Father: Robert of Normandy

Mother: Herleva, daughter of a tanner

Wife: Matilda of Flanders, descendant of the Kings of France, and the Wessex Kings of England

Children: Four sons, six daughters

Successor: William II 'Rufus"

Sources: Bayeux Tapestry

Reputation: Tough and unscrupulous

The Situation: Upon Harald II's death in battle, the Witan proclaimed Eagar Atheling as king, but he was never crowned. William swept him aside. There were numerous attempts to overthrow him in England...by Edgar (supported by his brother-in-law, Malcolm, King of Scotland), by the northern earls and by Harald II's sons. None were successful.

Achievements: William's ancestor, Rollo, founded Normandy in the 10th century. Prior to that, he was a Viking pirate. So the Vikings won in the end, if indirectly. William had three problems when his father died in 1035: he was only seven years old; he was illegitimate; and his mother was base-born, in days when the last two mattered a lot and the first one quite a bit. Three of his guardians were killed. But he survived, and retained his patrimony. So he was tough, a good general, and provided lots of heirs. That is, he was a good medieval king.

"His reign, which brought Norman-French culture to England, had an impact on the subsequent course of England in the Middle Ages. The details of that impact and the enormity of the changes have been debated by scholars for over a century. In addition to the obvious change of ruler, his reign also saw a programme of building and fortification, changes to the English language, a shift in the upper levels of society and the church, and adoption of some aspects of continental church reform. More controversial are possible changes in law, royal administration, trade, agriculture, the peasantry, women's roles and rights, and education."

"William initiated many major changes. He increased the function of the traditional English shires (autonomous administrative regions), which he brought under central control; he decreased the power of the earls by restricting them to one shire apiece. All administrative functions of his government remained fixed at specific English towns, except the court itself; they would progressively strengthen, and the English institutions became amongst the most sophisticated in Europe. In 1085, in order to ascertain the extent of his new dominions and to improve taxation, William commissioned all his counselors for the compilation of the Domesday Book, which was published in 1086. The book was a survey of England's productive capacity similar to a modern census.

William also ordered many castles, keeps, and mottes, among them the Tower of London's foundation (the White Tower), to be built throughout England. These ensured effectively that the many rebellions by the English people or his own followers did not succeed.
William I built the central White Tower in the Tower of London.

His conquest also led to French (especially, but not only, the Norman French) replacing English as the language of the ruling classes for nearly 300 years.[12][13] Furthermore, the original Anglo-Saxon culture of England became mingled with the Norman one; thus the Anglo-Norman culture came into being.
The chapel

 

Hey, his descendants are going on a thousand years on the throne. A man could do worse.

 

This is true.

 

The Domesday Book is an extraordinary administrative/logistic achievement, both the inquest itself and the two volumes. The book itself may not have been compiled until 1088 to help sort out the mess of the rebellion against Rufus of that year.

 

William II; aka William II 'Rufus'

Description: "According to William of Malmesbury, William Rufus was 'well set; his complexion florid, his hair yellow; of open countenance; different coloured eyes, varying with certain glittering specks; of astonishing strength, though not very tall, and his belly rather projecting."

Born: 1056

Death: 1100

Ruled: 1087-1100

Father: William I 'the Conquerer'

Mother: Matilda of Flanders

Wife: None

Children: None known

Successor: his younger brother, Henry I

Sources: Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, Church chronicles

Reputation: Tough and grasping

The Situation: The Conquerer disliked his eldest son, Robert, deeming him feckless and untrustworthy. He agreed to leave his patrimony, Normandy, to his eldest son, but England, which he had conquered, he insisted lay within his gift, and he left it to his second surviving son, William, with the consent of the Witan. To his youngest son, Henry, William left money, but no lands. The brothers then began a typical Wessex-like take-down.

Achievements & Legacy: William was able to put down a rebellion of the barons on behalf of Robert; a Welsh rebellion; and an invasion by the Scots. He invaded Normandy, but Robert and he came to an agreement. They then beseiged and divested their younger brother, Henry of the French lands he had purchased from Rufus. Bad idea, gentlemen. Henry had a long, long memory.

Reputation: Very bad. Rufus taxed the Church, and the Church bitterly resented it; Rufus was basically not much loved by his people, but they preferred him to the feckless Robert, who allowed criminals to run rampant in Normandy, and hocked the Duchy to William for 10,000 marks so he could go on a crusade.

Death: Much debate on whether Rufus' death (he was killed by an arrow while hunting) was an accident or murder. His brother, Henry, was in the hunting party (remember him, the one Rufus cheated?) There was much debate on whether Henry, knowing that Robert was on his way back from the Holy Land with a bride, seized his chance. My opinion is if it was an accident, it was a terribly convenient one.

Rating: 6/10 Good general but did not secure the succession, which made dear brother Henry damn dangerous.