Legal Succession Part II: Henry I

Tags

Buckingham Palace, Germany, Henry I of England, Kings and Queens of England, Robert II of Normandy, William I of England, William II of England, William Rufus, William the Conqueror

With the Norman Conquest and the Witan abolished the monarch had greater authority in name his successor. This authority later evolved into a more concise hereditary system.

William I “the Conqueror” divided his lands upon his death in 1087. This was a common practice in this age. This practice was continued in many German states leading to many problems…but I digress. William gave Normandy to his eldest son Robert, and the Crown of England went to his next surviving son, William Rufus. The third surviving son, Henry, received 5,000 pounds in silver and there is a legend that says that the old king, William I, had declared to Henry: “You in your own time will have all the dominions I have acquired and be greater than both your brothers in wealth and power.”

William Rufus was therefore the new and lawful king and is counted as William II and ruled until his death in a hunting accident in 1100. By that time the “prophecy” about Henry had come true. Robert II of Normandy was on a crusade in the Holy Land in August of 1100 when William II died in a hunting accident in the New Forest. With Robert far a way Henry claimed the throne. Did Henry usurp the throne from his brother Robert?

There had been an agreement between Robert II and William II to become one anothers hier should either of them die without issue. This was made in 1087 upon the death of the conqueror. This brotherly love did not last long for in 1088 the two rebelled against one another. This rebellion was spurred on by the barons in both Normandy and England. Dividing the lands between the two brothers created a problem for the barons. The Barons owned land in both England and Normandy and having to serve two different rulers created many difficulties so they sided with Robert II to defeat William II and take the Crown of England from him. The major problem with this rebellion is that when it became time Robert II did not arive at the battle for Rochester Castle and the rebellion swiftly ended.

From that time on who the legal successor to William II should be was never settled. The Crown was up for grabs until William could name a successor. He never got the chance. When he was killed in a hunting accident and with Robert too far away from England to claim the throne, Henry siezed the opportunity and was crowned King of England. In 1106 Henry I of England took Normandy from his brother thus unifying England and Normandy once again.

From a legal standpoint it seems that Henry can be considered the legal hier since the 1088 rebellion dissolved any agreement between William II and Robert II and in the abscence of a named heir the crown went to the first person to grab it.

Advertisements

Bad Kings.

Tags

Bad Kings, King Edward II of England, King Henry VI of England, King Henry VIII of England, King James II of England, King John of England, Queen Mary I of England, William II of England

Since I am going on vacation next week I thought I would not stick to my usual schedule and do some fun lists for the next couple of days. When I get back on September 17, I will go back to my normal schedule.

So here is a list of few of the “bad” Monarchs of England. I will just limit myself to the kings and queens from the post-conquest era until the union of England and Scotland. These are in Chronological order.

William II 1087-1100. He was at constant war with his brothers and the Church. He had a ruthless temper and was killed while hunting. Was it an accident? Historians do not know for sure. Never the less he was not mourned much.

John 1199-1216. The infamous King of the Robin Hood mythos. He had better point than is depicted in fiction but he wasn’t forced to sign the Magna Carta for nothing!

Edward II 1207-1227. He was a weak king and ineffectual. He was deposed by his wife and her lover in favor of his son, Edward III, and came to a brutal and horrific end (a red-hot poker thrust into his anus) after he was forced to abdicate. Historians now question if his brutal death actually happened as the legend goes.

Henry VI 1422-1461 & 1470-1471. He came to the throne at the age of 9. When he took the reigns of government over in 1437 it was the middle of the 100 Years War with France. Henry VI was soon dominated by the nobility and his wife, Margaret of Anjou. He later suffered a mental breakdown.

Richard III 1483-1485. It is still questioned if he was a bad administrator. Was he responsible for the death of his nephews, the young King Edward V and his brother, Richard, Duke of York? We may never know. After two short years as king he was killed in the battle of Bosworth Field and the Plantagenet Dynasty came to an end bringing the Tudor dynasty to the throne.

Henry VIII 1509-1547. He is your typical tyrant. Too much power and it corrupted him. Many beheadings under his rule including two wives and Sir Thomas More among them. Just surfing the web I found this information so take it with a grain of salt. The exact figure may never be known, but according to Raphael Holinshed, an English Chronicler who died in 1580, the number of executions in this 38 year reign amounted to 72,000. (Although this is considered to be an exaggeration as it is hard to imagine this would have been tolerated by the people) Source: Tudor Wiki.

Mary I 1553-1558. Daughter of Henry VIII and a chip off the old chopping block. 😉 A radical and zealous Catholic had an estimated 284 Protestants murdered giving her the well deserved sobirquet. Bloody Mary.

James II & VII 1685-1688. His zeal for the Catholic faith also cost him his throne. He was tolerated as long as his heir was Protestant but as soon as his wife gave birth to a Catholic heir it was an excuse to get rid of him.

There you have it. A simple and brief look at some bad kings and queens of England. Sure, George I and George IV may not have been considered good kings but by then the wind had been taken out of their sails and a lot of what went wrong can be also attributed to their ministers.