Synopsis: The Anarchy was the first civil war in post-Conquest England, enduring throughout the reign of King Stephen between 1135 and 1154. It ultimately brought about the end of the Norman dynasty and the birth of the mighty Plantagenet kings. When Henry I died having lost his only legitimate son in a shipwreck, he had caused all of his barons to swear to recognize his daughter Matilda, widow of the Holy Roman Emperor, as his heir and remarried her to Geoffrey, Count of Anjou. When she was slow to move to England on her father’s death, Henry’s favorite nephew Stephen of Blois rushed to have himself crowned, much as Henry himself had done on the death of his brother William Rufus. By following both sides of the dispute and seeking to understand their actions and motivations, Matthew Lewis aims to reach a more rounded understanding of this crucial period of English history and asks to what extent there really was anarchy.
Again, this is not a period that I have come into blindly - I have a number of books on the subject matter on my own books shelves. What I found in Lewis' book, with his alternating chapters between Stephen and Matilda, was a more balanced history of this turbulent period.
For most, the most common definition of this period is summarised as follows:
The Anarchy was a civil war in England and Normandy between 1135 and 1153, which resulted in a widespread breakdown in law and order. The conflict was a succession crisis precipitated by the accidental death by drowning of William Adelin, the only legitimate son of Henry I, in the sinking of the White Ship in 1120
However, what Lewis questions is that whilst this period was called The Anarchy, did this period between the death of Henry I (1153) and the accession of Henry II (1154) - see a complete and total breakdown and absence of government during Stephen's reign. For the very definition of the word anarchy is ".. a state of disorder due to absence or non-recognition of authority or other controlling systems ..." and ".. absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal. ..." For this was not the case - a king was in situ and recognised by both the Church and the Anglo-Norman Magnates, including Robert of Gloucester.
The Anarchy was quite simply a civil war in which there were four potential claimants - with only two interested enough to battle it out for a period of 19 years - Stephen and Matilda. I am taken back to the events of the Norman Conquest, when the death of a King left the playing field wide open - in this instance, we are not only left with a male relative who was favoured by the late King but with a female, whilst of unquestionable royal blood, at a time when such acceptance of a sole female monarch was just not on the cards. There was only one crown ... and for as long as one wanted it and the other refused to give it up, there were be no coming to terms.
The actual violence and destruction was not as widespread as is documented by the three main contemporary writers of the times, all of whose accounts are riddled with their own forms of bias. These chronicles were in essence, written by churchmen, recounting localised events and their direct effects whilst providing an opportunistic moral lesson at the same time.
England was hardly the peaceful realm when Stephen took the throne (for succession was still not hereditary at this point) - Normandy was in rebellion, Scotland and Wales were simmering with tension, and the selection of a king was more preferable to ".. the enforcement of lineal descent ...'' and the oaths made under duress in favour of the late king's nominated heir. Matilda was absent and in no hurry; Stephen, like his uncle before him, was on the spot, and once anointed, few with loathe to remove him "... for who can stretch out his hand against the Lord’s anointed ....".
As I mentioned, Lewis portrays both Stephen and Matilda evenly. Stephen is lauded for his careful balancing act in governing and maintaining unity of the realm whilst not upsetting the powerful magnates around him and on both sides of the Channel; and Matilda, who had " ... achieved more than many of her sex in her period .." and like so many women both before and after her, is only remembered for the men in her life. This is a fascinating period of history filled with powerful personalities that is worth exploring, and this book will provide a good introduction into the period.
further reading:
The Anarchy of King Stephen's Reign edited by Edmund King
Matilda: Empress, Queen, Warrior by Catherine Hanley
King Stephen and the Anarchy by Chris Peers
Stephen and Matilda: The Civil War of 1139-53 by Jim Bradbury
The Empress Matilda: Queen Consort, Queen Mother and Lady of the English by Marjorie Chibnall
The Reign of Stephen: Kingship, Warfare and Government in Twelfth-Century England by Keith J. Stringer
King Stephen's Reign (1135-1154) edited by Paul Dalton & Graeme J. White
King Stephen by Donald Matthew
Henry I by C. Warren Hollister
Henry I: King of England and Duke of Normandy by Judith A. Green
The Government of England Under Henry I by Judith A. Green
No comments:
Post a Comment