Norman Conquest

The Norman Conquest (or the

Conquest) was the 11th-century
invasion and occupation of
England by an army made up of
thousands of Norman, French,
Flemish, and Breton troops, all led
by the Duke of Normandy, later
styled William the Conqueror.

William's claim to the English

throne derived from his familial
relationship with the childless
Anglo-Saxon king Edward the
Confessor, who may have
encouraged William's hopes for
the throne. Edward died in
January 1066 and was succeeded
by his brother-in-law Harold
Godwinson. The Norwegian king
Harald Hardrada invaded
northern England in September
1066 and was victorious at the Location of major events during the Norman Conquest in 1066
Battle of Fulford on 20 September,
but Godwinson's army defeated
and killed Hardrada at the Battle of Stamford Bridge on 25 September. Three days later on 28
September, William's invasion force of thousands of men and hundreds of ships landed at
Pevensey in Sussex in southern England. Harold marched south to oppose him, leaving a
significant portion of his army in the north. Harold's army confronted William's invaders on 14
October at the Battle of Hastings. William's force defeated Harold, who was killed in the
engagement, and William became king.

Although William's main rivals were gone, he still faced rebellions over the following years and was
not secure on the English throne until after 1072. The lands of the resisting English elite were
confiscated; some of the elite fled into exile. To control his new kingdom, William granted lands to
his followers and built castles commanding military strong points throughout the land. The
Domesday Book, a manuscript record of the "Great Survey" of much of England and parts of
Wales, was completed by 1086. Other effects of the conquest included the court and government,
the introduction of the Norman language as the language of the elites, and changes in the
composition of the upper classes, as William enfeoffed lands to be held directly from the king.
More gradual changes affected the agricultural classes and village life: the main change appears to
have been the formal elimination of slavery, which may or may not have been linked to the
invasion. There was little alteration in the structure of government, as the new Norman
administrators took over many of the forms of Anglo-Saxon government.

Origins
In 911, the Carolingian French ruler Charles the Simple allowed a
group of Vikings under their leader Rollo to settle in Normandy as
part of the Treaty of Saint-Clair-sur-Epte. In exchange for the land,
the Norsemen under Rollo were expected to provide protection along
the coast against further Viking invaders.[1] Their settlement proved
successful, and the Vikings in the region became known as the
"Northmen" from which "Normandy" and "Normans" are derived.[2]
The Normans quickly adopted the indigenous culture as they became
assimilated by the French, renouncing paganism and converting to
Christianity.[3] They adopted the langue d'oïl of their new home and
added features from their own Norse language, transforming it into
the Norman language. They intermarried with the local population[4]
and used the territory granted to them as a base to extend the frontiers
of the duchy westward, annexing territory including the Bessin, the
Cotentin Peninsula and Avranches.[5]

In 1002, English king Æthelred the Unready married Emma of

Normandy, the sister of Richard II, Duke of Normandy.[6] Their son
Edward the Confessor, who spent many years in exile in Normandy,
succeeded to the English throne in 1042.[7] This led to the
establishment of a powerful Norman interest in English politics, as
Edward drew heavily on his former hosts for support, bringing in
Norman courtiers, soldiers, and clerics and appointing them to
positions of power, particularly in the Church. Childless and 13th-century depiction of
embroiled in conflict with the formidable Godwin, Earl of Wessex, and Rollo (top) and his
his sons, Edward may also have encouraged Duke William of descendants William I
Normandy's ambitions for the English throne.[8] Longsword and Richard I of
Normandy
When King Edward died at the beginning of 1066, the lack of a clear
heir led to a disputed succession in which several contenders laid
claim to the throne of England.[9] Edward's immediate successor was the Earl of Wessex, Harold
Godwinson, the richest and most powerful of the English aristocrats. Harold was elected king by
the Witenagemot of England and crowned by the Archbishop of York, Ealdred, although Norman
propaganda claimed the ceremony was performed by Stigand, the uncanonically elected
Archbishop of Canterbury.[9][10] Harold was immediately challenged by two powerful
neighbouring rulers. Duke William claimed that he had been promised the throne by King Edward
and that Harold had sworn agreement to this;[11] King Harald III of Norway, commonly known as
Harald Hardrada, also contested the succession. His claim to the throne was based on an
agreement between his predecessor, Magnus the Good, and the earlier English king, Harthacnut,
whereby if either died without an heir, the other would inherit both England and Norway.[12][a]
William and Harald at once set about assembling troops and ships to invade England.[16][b]

Tostig's raids and the Norwegian invasion

In early 1066, Harold's exiled brother, Tostig Godwinson, raided southeastern England with a fleet
he had recruited in Flanders, later joined by other ships from Orkney.[c] Threatened by Harold's
fleet, Tostig moved north and raided in East Anglia and Lincolnshire, but he was driven back to his
ships by the brothers Edwin, Earl of Mercia, and Morcar, Earl of Northumbria. Deserted by most of
his followers, Tostig withdrew to Scotland, where he spent the summer recruiting fresh
forces.[23][d] King Harold spent the summer on the south coast with a large army and fleet waiting
for William to invade, but the bulk of his forces were militia who needed to harvest their crops, so
on 8 September Harold dismissed them.[24]

Hardrada invaded northern England in early September, leading a fleet of more than 300 ships
carrying perhaps 15,000 men. Harald's army was further augmented by the forces of Tostig, who
threw his support behind the Norwegian king's bid for the throne. Advancing on York, the
Norwegians defeated a northern English army under Edwin and Morcar on 20 September at the
Battle of Fulford.[25] The two earls had rushed to engage the Norwegian forces before Harold could
arrive from the south. Although Harold Godwinson had married Edwin and Morcar's sister
Ealdgyth, the two earls may have distrusted Harold and feared that the king would replace Morcar
with Tostig. The end result was that their forces were devastated and unable to participate in the
rest of the campaigns of 1066, although the two earls survived the battle.[26]

Hardrada moved on to York, which surrendered to him. After taking hostages from the leading
men of the city, on 24 September the Norwegians moved east to the tiny village of Stamford
Bridge.[27] King Harold probably learned of the Norwegian invasion in mid-September and rushed
north, gathering forces as he went.[28] The royal forces probably took nine days to cover the
distance from London to York, averaging almost 25 miles (40 kilometres) per day. At dawn on 25
September Harold's forces reached York, where he learned the location of the Norwegians.[29] The
English then marched on the invaders and took them by surprise, defeating them in the Battle of
Stamford Bridge. Harald of Norway and Tostig were killed, and the Norwegians suffered such
horrific losses that only 24 of the original 300 ships were required to carry away the survivors. The
English victory was costly, however, as Harold's army was left in a battered and weakened state,
and far from the English Channel.[28]

Norman invasion

Norman preparations and forces

William assembled a large invasion fleet and an army gathered from Normandy and all over
France, including large contingents from Brittany and Flanders.[30] He mustered his forces at
Saint-Valery-sur-Somme and was ready to cross the Channel by about 12 August.[31] The exact
numbers and composition of William's force are unknown.[32] A contemporary document claims
that William had 726 ships, but this may be an inflated figure.[33] Figures given by contemporary
writers are highly exaggerated, varying from 14,000 to 150,000 men.[34] Modern historians have
offered a range of estimates for the size of William's forces: 7000–8000 men, 1000–2000 of them
cavalry;[35] 10,000–12,000 men;[34] 10,000 men, 3000 of them cavalry;[36] or 7500 men.[32] The
army would have consisted of a mix of cavalry, infantry, and archers or crossbowmen, with about
equal numbers of cavalry and archers and the foot soldiers equal in number to the other two types
combined.[37] Although later lists of companions of William the Conqueror are extant, most are
padded with extra names; only about 35 individuals can be reliably claimed to have been with
William at Hastings.[32][38][e]

William of Poitiers states that William obtained Pope Alexander II's consent for the invasion,
signified by a papal banner, along with diplomatic support from other European rulers. Although
Alexander did give papal approval to the conquest after it succeeded, no other source claims papal
support before the invasion.[f] William's army assembled during the summer while an invasion
fleet in Normandy was constructed. Although the army and fleet were ready by early August,
adverse winds kept the ships in Normandy until late September. There were probably other
reasons for William's delay, including intelligence reports from England revealing that Harold's
forces were deployed along the coast. William would have preferred to delay the invasion until he
could make an unopposed landing.[40]

Landing and Harold's march south

The Normans crossed to England a few

days after Harold's victory over the
Norwegians at Stamford Bridge on 25
September, following the dispersal of
Harold's naval force. They landed at
Pevensey in Sussex on 28 September and
erected a wooden castle at Hastings, from
Arrival in England scene from the Bayeux Tapestry, depicting which they raided the surrounding
ships grounding and horses landing area.[30] This ensured supplies for the
army, and as Harold and his family held
many of the lands in the area, it weakened
William's opponent and made him more likely to attack to put an end to the raiding.[41]

Harold, after defeating his brother Tostig and Harald Hardrada in the north, left much of his force
there, including Morcar and Edwin, and marched the rest of his army south to deal with the
threatened Norman invasion.[42] It is unclear when Harold learned of William's landing, but it was
probably while he was travelling south. Harold stopped in London for about a week before
reaching Hastings, so it is likely that he took a second week to march south, averaging about 27
miles (43 kilometres) per day,[43] for the nearly 200 miles (320 kilometres) to London.[44]
Although Harold attempted to surprise the Normans, William's scouts reported the English arrival
to the duke. The exact events preceding the battle remain obscure, with contradictory accounts in
the sources, but all agree that William led his army from his castle and advanced towards the
enemy.[45] Harold had taken up a defensive position at the top of Senlac Hill (present-day Battle,
East Sussex), about 6 miles (10 kilometres) from William's castle at Hastings.[46]

Contemporary sources do not give reliable data on the size and composition of Harold's army,
although two Norman sources give figures of 1.2 million or 400,000 men.[47] Recent historians
have suggested figures of between 5000 and 13,000 for Harold's army at Hastings,[48] but most
agree on a range of between 7000 and 8000 English troops.[49][50] These men would have
comprised a mix of the fyrd (militia mainly composed of foot soldiers) and the housecarls, or
nobleman's personal troops, who usually also fought on foot. The main difference between the two
types was in their armour; the housecarls used better protecting armour than that of the fyrd. The
English army does not appear to have had many archers, although some were present.[49] The
identities of few of the Englishmen at Hastings are known; the most important were Harold's
brothers Gyrth and Leofwine.[32] About 18 other named individuals can reasonably be assumed to
have fought with Harold at Hastings, including two other relatives.[39][g]

Hastings

The battle began at about 9 am on 14 October 1066 and lasted all day, but while a broad outline is
known, the exact events are obscured by contradictory accounts in the sources.[51] Although the
numbers on each side were probably about equal, William had both cavalry and infantry, including
many archers, while Harold had only foot soldiers and few archers.[52] The English soldiers formed
up as a shield wall along the ridge, and were at first so effective
that William's army was thrown back with heavy casualties.
Some of William's Breton troops panicked and fled, and some
of the English troops appear to have pursued the fleeing
Bretons. Norman cavalry then attacked and killed the pursuing
troops. While the Bretons were fleeing, rumours swept the
Norman forces that the duke had been killed, but William
rallied his troops. Twice more the Normans made feigned
withdrawals, tempting the English into pursuit, and allowing
the Norman cavalry to attack them repeatedly.[53] The available
sources are more confused about events in the afternoon, but it
appears that the decisive event was the death of Harold, about
which different stories are told. William of Jumieges claimed
that Harold was killed by the duke. The Bayeux Tapestry has Likely depiction of Harold's death
been claimed to show Harold's death by an arrow to the eye, from the Bayeux Tapestry
but this may be a later reworking of the tapestry to conform to
12th-century stories that Harold had died from an arrow
wound to the head.[54] Other sources stated that no one knew how Harold died because the press
of battle was so tight around the king that the soldiers could not see who struck the fatal blow.[55]
William of Poitiers gives no details about Harold's death.[56]

Aftermath of Hastings

The day after the battle, Harold's body was identified, either by his armour or marks on his
body.[h] The bodies of the English dead, who included some of Harold's brothers and his
housecarls, were left on the battlefield,[58] although some were removed by relatives later.[59]
Gytha, Harold's mother, offered the victorious duke the weight of her son's body in gold for its
custody, but her offer was refused. William ordered that Harold's body be thrown into the sea, but
whether that took place is unclear.[58] Another story relates that Harold was buried at the top of a
cliff.[60] Waltham Abbey, which had been founded by Harold, later claimed that his body had been
buried there secretly.[58] Later legends claimed that Harold did not die at Hastings, but escaped
and became a hermit at Chester.[59]

After his victory at Hastings, William expected to receive the submission of the surviving English
leaders, but instead Edgar the Ætheling[i] was proclaimed king by the Witenagemot, with the
support of Earls Edwin and Morcar, Stigand, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and Ealdred, the
Archbishop of York.[62] William therefore advanced, marching around the coast of Kent to London.
He defeated an English force that attacked him at Southwark, but being unable to storm London
Bridge he sought to reach the capital by a more circuitous route.[63]

William moved up the Thames valley to cross the river at Wallingford, Berkshire; while there he
received the submission of Stigand. He then travelled north-east along the Chilterns, before
advancing towards London from the north-west, fighting further engagements against forces from
the city. Having failed to muster an effective military response, Edgar's leading supporters lost
their nerve, and the English leaders surrendered to William at Berkhamsted, Hertfordshire.
William was acclaimed King of England and crowned by Ealdred on 25 December 1066, in
Westminster Abbey.[63][j] The new king attempted to conciliate the remaining English nobility by
confirming Morcar, Edwin and Waltheof, the Earl of Northumbria, in their lands as well as giving
some land to Edgar the Ætheling. William remained in England until March 1067, when he
returned to Normandy with English prisoners, including Stigand, Morcar, Edwin, Edgar the
Ætheling, and Waltheof.[65]

English resistance

First rebellions

Despite the submission of the English nobles, resistance continued for several years.[66] William
left control of England in the hands of his half-brother Odo and one of his closest supporters,
William fitzOsbern.[65] In 1067 rebels in Kent launched an unsuccessful attack on Dover Castle in
combination with Eustace II of Boulogne.[66] The Shropshire landowner Eadric the Wild,[k] in
alliance with the Welsh rulers of Gwynedd and Powys, raised a revolt in western Mercia, fighting
Norman forces based in Hereford.[66] These events forced William to return to England at the end
of 1067.[65] In 1068 William besieged rebels in Exeter, including Harold's mother Gytha, and after
suffering heavy losses managed to negotiate the town's surrender.[68] In May, William's wife
Matilda was crowned queen at Westminster, an important symbol of William's growing
international stature.[69] Later in the year Edwin and Morcar raised a revolt in Mercia with Welsh
assistance, while Gospatric, the newly appointed Earl of Northumbria,[l] led a rising in
Northumbria, which had not yet been occupied by the Normans. These rebellions rapidly collapsed
as William moved against them, building castles and installing garrisons as he had already done in
the south.[71] Edwin and Morcar again submitted, while Gospatric fled to Scotland, as did Edgar
the Ætheling and his family, who may have been involved in these revolts.[72] Meanwhile, Harold's
sons, who had taken refuge in Ireland, raided Somerset, Devon and Cornwall from the sea.[73]

Revolts of 1069

Early in 1069 the newly installed Norman Earl

of Northumbria, Robert de Comines, and
several hundred soldiers accompanying him
were massacred at Durham; the Northumbrian
rebellion was joined by Edgar, Gospatric,
Siward Barn and other rebels who had taken
refuge in Scotland. The castellan of York,
Robert fitzRichard, was defeated and killed,
and the rebels besieged the Norman castle at
The remains of Baile Hill, the second motte-and-bailey
York. William hurried north with an army,
castle built by William the Conqueror in York, on the
defeated the rebels outside York and pursued
west bank of the River Ouse
them into the city, massacring the inhabitants
and bringing the revolt to an end.[74] He built a
second castle at York, strengthened Norman forces in Northumbria and then returned south. A
subsequent local uprising was crushed by the garrison of York.[74] Harold's sons launched a second
raid from Ireland and were defeated at the Battle of Northam in Devon by Norman forces under
Count Brian, a son of Eudes, Count of Penthièvre.[75] In August or September 1069 a large fleet
sent by Sweyn II of Denmark arrived off the coast of England, sparking a new wave of rebellions
across the country. After abortive raids in the south, the Danes joined forces with a new
Northumbrian uprising, which was also joined by Edgar, Gospatric and the other exiles from
Scotland as well as Waltheof. The combined Danish and English forces defeated the Norman
garrison at York, seized the castles and took control of Northumbria, although a raid into
Lincolnshire led by Edgar was defeated by the Norman garrison of Lincoln.[76]
At the same time resistance flared up again in western Mercia, where the forces of Eadric the Wild,
together with his Welsh allies and further rebel forces from Cheshire and Shropshire, attacked the
castle at Shrewsbury. In the southwest, rebels from Devon and Cornwall attacked the Norman
garrison at Exeter but were repulsed by the defenders and scattered by a Norman relief force under
Count Brian. Other rebels from Dorset, Somerset and neighbouring areas besieged Montacute
Castle but were defeated by a Norman army gathered from London, Winchester and Salisbury
under Geoffrey of Coutances.[76] Meanwhile, William attacked the Danes, who had moored for the
winter south of the Humber in Lincolnshire, and drove them back to the north bank. Leaving
Robert of Mortain in charge of Lincolnshire, he turned west and defeated the Mercian rebels in
battle at Stafford. When the Danes attempted to return to Lincolnshire, the Norman forces there
again drove them back across the Humber. William advanced into Northumbria, defeating an
attempt to block his crossing of the swollen River Aire at Pontefract. The Danes fled at his
approach, and he occupied York. He bought off the Danes, who agreed to leave England in the
spring, and during the winter of 1069–70 his forces systematically devastated Northumbria in the
Harrying of the North, subduing all resistance.[76] As a symbol of his renewed authority over the
north, William ceremonially wore his crown at York on Christmas Day 1069.[70]

In early 1070, having secured the submission of Waltheof and Gospatric, and driven Edgar and his
remaining supporters back to Scotland, William returned to Mercia, where he based himself at
Chester and crushed all remaining resistance in the area before returning to the south.[76] Papal
legates arrived and at Easter re-crowned William, which would have symbolically reasserted his
right to the kingdom. William also oversaw a purge of prelates from the Church, most notably
Stigand, who was deposed from Canterbury. The papal legates also imposed penances on William
and those of his supporters who had taken part in Hastings and the subsequent campaigns.[77] As
well as Canterbury, the see of York had become vacant following the death of Ealdred in September
1069. Both sees were filled by men loyal to William: Lanfranc, abbot of William's foundation at
Caen, received Canterbury while Thomas of Bayeux, one of William's chaplains, was installed at
York. Some other bishoprics and abbeys also received new bishops and abbots and William
confiscated some of the wealth of the English monasteries, which had served as repositories for the
assets of the native nobles.[78]

Danish troubles

In 1070 Sweyn II of Denmark arrived to take personal

command of his fleet and renounced the earlier agreement to
withdraw, sending troops into the Fens to join forces with
English rebels led by Hereward the Wake,[m] at that time based
on the Isle of Ely. Sweyn soon accepted a further payment of
Danegeld from William, and returned home.[80] After the
departure of the Danes the Fenland rebels remained at large,
protected by the marshes, and early in 1071 there was a final
outbreak of rebel activity in the area. Edwin and Morcar again
turned against William, and although Edwin was quickly
betrayed and killed, Morcar reached Ely, where he and
Hereward were joined by exiled rebels who had sailed from Coin of Sweyn II of Denmark
Scotland. William arrived with an army and a fleet to finish off
this last pocket of resistance. After some costly failures, the
Normans managed to construct a pontoon to reach the Isle of Ely, defeated the rebels at the
bridgehead and stormed the island, marking the effective end of English resistance.[81] Morcar was
imprisoned for the rest of his life; Hereward was pardoned and had his lands returned to him.[82]

Last resistance

William faced difficulties in his continental possessions in 1071,[83] but in 1072 he returned to
England and marched north to confront King Malcolm III of Scotland.[n] This campaign, which
included a land army supported by a fleet, resulted in the Treaty of Abernethy in which Malcolm
expelled Edgar the Ætheling from Scotland and agreed to some degree of subordination to
William.[82] The exact status of this subordination was unclear – the treaty merely stated that
Malcolm became William's man. Whether this meant only for Cumbria and Lothian or for the
whole Scottish kingdom was left ambiguous.[84]

In 1075, during William's absence, Ralph de Gael, the Earl of Norfolk, and Roger de Breteuil the
Earl of Hereford, conspired to overthrow him in the Revolt of the Earls.[85] The exact reason for
the rebellion is unclear, but it was launched at the wedding of Ralph to a relative of Roger's, held at
Exning. Another earl, Waltheof, despite being one of William's favourites, was also involved, and
some Breton lords were ready to offer support. Ralph also requested Danish aid. William remained
in Normandy while his men in England subdued the revolt. Roger was unable to leave his
stronghold in Herefordshire because of efforts by Wulfstan, the Bishop of Worcester, and
Æthelwig, the Abbot of Evesham. Ralph was bottled up in Norwich Castle by the combined efforts
of Odo of Bayeux, Geoffrey of Coutances, Richard fitzGilbert, and William de Warenne. Norwich
was besieged and surrendered, and Ralph went into exile. Meanwhile, the Danish king's brother,
Cnut, had finally arrived in England with a fleet of 200 ships, but he was too late as Norwich had
already surrendered. The Danes then raided along the coast before returning home.[85] William
did not return to England until later in 1075, to deal with the Danish threat and the aftermath of
the rebellion, celebrating Christmas at Winchester.[86] Roger and Waltheof were kept in prison,
where Waltheof was executed in May 1076. By that time William had returned to the continent,
where Ralph was continuing the rebellion from Brittany.[85]

Control of England
Once England had been conquered, the Normans
faced many challenges in maintaining control.[88]
They were few in number compared to the native
English population; including those from other parts
of France, historians estimate the number of Norman
landholders at around 8000.[89] William's followers
expected and received lands and titles in return for
their service in the invasion,[90] but William claimed
ultimate possession of the land in England over
which his armies had given him de facto control, and
asserted the right to dispose of it as he saw fit.[91]
The White Tower of the Tower of London, Henceforth, all land was "held" directly from the king
originally built by William the Conqueror to in feudal tenure in return for military service.[91] A
control London.[87] Norman lord typically had properties scattered
piecemeal throughout England and Normandy, and
not in a single geographic block.[92]
To find the lands to compensate his Norman followers, William initially confiscated the estates of
all the English lords who had fought and died with Harold and redistributed part of their lands.[93]
These confiscations led to revolts, which resulted in more confiscations, a cycle that continued for
five years after the Battle of Hastings.[90] To put down and prevent further rebellions the Normans
constructed castles and fortifications in unprecedented numbers,[94] initially mostly on the motte-
and-bailey pattern.[95] Historian Robert Liddiard remarks that "to glance at the urban landscape of
Norwich, Durham or Lincoln is to be forcibly reminded of the impact of the Norman invasion".[96]
William and his barons also exercised tighter control over inheritance of property by widows and
daughters, often forcing marriages to Normans.[97]

A measure of William's success in taking control is that, from 1072 until the Capetian conquest of
Normandy in 1204, William and his successors were largely absentee rulers. For example, after
1072, William spent more than 75 per cent of his time in France rather than England. While he
needed to be personally present in Normandy to defend the realm from foreign invasion and put
down internal revolts, he set up royal administrative structures that enabled him to rule England
from a distance.[98]

Consequences

Elite replacement

A direct consequence of the invasion was the almost total elimination of the old English aristocracy
and the loss of English control over the Catholic Church in England. William systematically
dispossessed English landowners and conferred their property on his continental followers. The
Domesday Book of 1086 meticulously documents the impact of this colossal programme of
expropriation, revealing that by that time only about 5 per cent of land in England south of the
Tees was left in English hands. Even this tiny residue was further diminished in the decades that
followed, the elimination of native landholding being most complete in southern parts of the
country.[99][100]

Natives were also removed from high governmental and ecclesiastical offices. After 1075 all
earldoms were held by Normans, and Englishmen were only occasionally appointed as sheriffs.
Likewise in the Church, senior English office-holders were either expelled from their positions or
kept in place for their lifetimes and replaced by foreigners when they died. By 1096 no bishopric
was held by any Englishman, and English abbots became uncommon, especially in the larger
monasteries.[101]

English emigration

Following the conquest, many Anglo-Saxons, including groups of nobles, fled the country[102] for
Scotland, Ireland, or Scandinavia.[103] Members of King Harold Godwinson's family sought refuge
in Ireland and used their bases in that country for unsuccessful invasions of England.[69] The
largest single exodus occurred in the 1070s, when a group of Anglo-Saxons in a fleet of 235 ships
sailed for the Byzantine Empire.[103] The empire became a popular destination for many English
nobles and soldiers, as the Byzantines were in need of mercenaries.[102] The English became the
predominant element in the elite Varangian Guard, until then a largely Scandinavian unit, from
which the emperor's bodyguard was
drawn.[104] Some of the English migrants
were settled in Byzantine frontier regions
on the Black Sea coast and established
towns with names such as New London
and New York.[102]

Governmental systems

Before the Normans arrived, Anglo-Saxon

governmental systems were more Depiction of the Varangian Guard, which had many English
sophisticated than their counterparts in recruits, from the 12th-century Madrid Skylitzes, in the
Normandy.[105][106] All of England was Biblioteca Nacional de España in Madrid.
divided into administrative units called
shires, with subdivisions; the royal court
was the centre of government, and a justice system based
on local and regional tribunals existed to secure the rights
of free men.[107] Shires were run by officials known as
shire reeves or sheriffs.[108] Most medieval governments
were always on the move, holding court wherever the
weather and food or other matters were best at the
moment;[109] England had a permanent treasury at
Winchester before William's conquest.[110] One major
reason for the strength of the English monarchy was the
wealth of the kingdom, built on the English system of
taxation that included a land tax, or the geld. English
coinage was also superior to most of the other currencies
in use in northwestern Europe, and the ability to mint
coins was a royal monopoly.[111] The English kings had
also developed the system of issuing writs to their
officials, in addition to the normal medieval practice of
issuing charters.[112] Writs were either instructions to an
official or group of officials, or notifications of royal English counties in 1086 – most of these
actions such as appointments to office or a grant of some have a modern equivalent in the 21st
sort. [113] century.

This sophisticated medieval form of government was

handed over to the Normans and was the foundation of further developments.[107] They kept the
framework of government but made changes in the personnel, although at first the new king
attempted to keep some natives in office. By the end of William's reign, most of the officials of
government and the royal household were Normans. The language of official documents also
changed, from Old English to Latin. The forest laws were introduced, leading to the setting aside of
large sections of England as royal forest.[108] The Domesday survey was an administrative
catalogue of the landholdings of the kingdom, and was unique to medieval Europe. It was divided
into sections based on the shires, and listed all the landholdings of each tenant-in-chief of the king
as well as who had held the land before the conquest.[114]

Language

One of the most obvious effects of the conquest was the introduction of Anglo-Norman, a northern
dialect of Old French with limited Nordic influences, as the language of the ruling classes in
England, displacing Old English. Norman French words entered the English language, and a
 further sign of the shift was the usage of names common in
France instead of Anglo-Saxon names. Male names such as
William, Robert, and Richard soon became common; female
names changed more slowly. The Norman invasion had little
impact on placenames, which had changed significantly after
earlier Scandinavian invasions. It is not known precisely how
much English the Norman invaders learned, nor how much the
knowledge of Norman French spread among the lower classes,
but the demands of trade and basic communication probably
meant that at least some of the Normans and native English
were bilingual.[115] Nevertheless, William the Conqueror never
developed a working knowledge of English and for centuries
afterwards English was not well understood by the nobility.[116]

Immigration and intermarriage

Page describing Warwickshire in the
Domesday Book of 1086 An estimated 8000 Normans and other continentals settled in
England as a result of the conquest, although exact figures
cannot be established. Some of these new residents
intermarried with the native English, but the extent of this practice in the years immediately after
Hastings is unclear. Several marriages are attested between Norman men and English women
during the years before 1100, but such marriages were uncommon. Most Normans continued to
contract marriages with other Normans or other continental families rather than with the
English.[117] Within a century of the invasion, intermarriage between the native English and the
Norman immigrants had become common. By the early 1160s, Ailred of Rievaulx was writing that
intermarriage was common in all levels of society.[118]

Society

The impact of the conquest on the lower levels of

English society is difficult to assess. The major
change was the elimination of slavery in England,
which had disappeared by the middle of the 12th
century.[119] There were about 28,000 slaves listed in
the Domesday Book in 1086, fewer than had been
enumerated for 1066. In some places, such as Essex,
the decline in slaves was 20 per cent for the 20
years.[120] The main reasons for the decline in
slaveholding appear to have been the disapproval of
the Church and the cost of supporting slaves who,
unlike serfs, had to be maintained entirely by their Modern-day reconstruction of an Anglo-Saxon
owners.[121] The practice of slavery was not outlawed, village at West Stow Anglo-Saxon Village in
and the Leges Henrici Primi from the reign of King Suffolk
Henry I continue to mention slaveholding as
legal.[120]

Many of the free peasants of Anglo-Saxon society appear to have lost status and become
indistinguishable from the non-free serfs. Whether this change was due entirely to the conquest is
unclear, but the invasion and its after-effects probably accelerated a process already underway. The
spread of towns and increase in nucleated settlements in the countryside, rather than scattered
farms, was probably accelerated by the coming of the Normans to England.[119] The lifestyle of the
peasantry probably did not greatly change in the decades after 1066.[122] Although earlier
historians argued that women became less free and lost rights with the conquest, current
scholarship has mostly rejected this view. Little is known about women other than those in the
landholding class, so no conclusions can be drawn about peasant women's status after 1066.
Noblewomen appear to have continued to influence political life mainly through their kinship
relationships. Both before and after 1066 aristocratic women could own land, and some women
continued to have the ability to dispose of their property as they wished.[123]

Historiography
Debate over the conquest started almost immediately. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, when
discussing the death of William the Conqueror, denounced him and the conquest in verse, but the
king's obituary notice from William of Poitiers, a Frenchman, was full of praise. Historians since
then have argued over the facts of the matter and how to interpret them, with little agreement.[124]
The theory or myth of the "Norman yoke" arose in the 17th century,[125] the idea that Anglo-Saxon
society had been freer and more equal than the society that emerged after the conquest.[126] This
theory owes more to the period in which it was developed than to historical facts, but it continues
to be used to the present day in both political and popular thought.[127]

In the 20th and 21st centuries, historians have focused less on the rightness or wrongness of the
conquest itself, instead concentrating on the effects of the invasion. Some, such as Richard
Southern, have seen the conquest as a critical turning point in history.[124] Southern stated that
"no country in Europe, between the rise of the barbarian kingdoms and the 20th century, has
undergone so radical a change in so short a time as England experienced after 1066".[128] Other
historians, such as H. G. Richardson and G. O. Sayles, believe that the transformation was less
radical.[124] In more general terms, Singman has called the conquest "the last echo of the national
migrations that characterized the early Middle Ages".[129] The debate over the impact of the
conquest depends on how change after 1066 is measured. If Anglo-Saxon England was already
evolving before the invasion, with the introduction of feudalism, castles or other changes in
society, then the conquest, while important, did not represent radical reform. But the change was
dramatic if measured by the elimination of the English nobility or the loss of Old English as a
literary language. Nationalistic arguments have been made on both sides of the debate, with the
Normans cast as either the persecutors of the English or the rescuers of the country from a
decadent Anglo-Saxon nobility.[124]

See also
Ermenfrid Penitential
Anglo-Norman invasion of Ireland
Norman invasion of Wales
Norman conquest of southern Italy

Notes
a. Harthacnut was the son of King Cnut the Great and Emma of Normandy, and thus was the
half-brother of Edward the Confessor. He reigned from 1040 to 1042, and died without
children.[13] Harthacnut's father Cnut had defeated Æthelred's son Edmund Ironside in 1016 to
claim the English throne and marry Æthelred's widow, Emma.[14] After Harthacnut's death in
1042, Magnus began preparations for an invasion of England, which was only stopped by his
own death in 1047.[15]
b. Other contenders later came to the fore. The first was Edgar Ætheling, Edward the Confessor's
great nephew who was a patrilineal descendant of King Edmund Ironside. He was the son of
Edward the Exile, son of Edmund Ironside, and was born in Hungary, where his father had fled
after the conquest of England by Cnut. After his family's eventual return to England and his
father's death in 1057,[17] Edgar had by far the strongest hereditary claim to the throne, but he
was only about thirteen or fourteen at the time of Edward the Confessor's death, and with little
family to support him, his claim was passed over by the Witenagemot.[18] Another contender
was Sweyn II of Denmark, who had a claim to the throne as the grandson of Sweyn Forkbeard
and nephew of Cnut,[19] but he did not make his bid for the throne until 1069.[20] Tostig
Godwinson's attacks in early 1066 may have been the beginning of a bid for the throne, but
after defeat at the hands of Edwin and Morcar and the desertion of most of his followers he
threw his lot in with Harald Hardrada.[21]
c. Tostig, who had been Earl of Northumbria, was expelled from that office by a Northumbrian
rebellion in late 1065. After King Edward sided with the rebels, Tostig went into exile in
Flanders.[22]
d. The King of Scotland, Malcolm III, is said to have been Tostig's sworn brother.[22]
e. Of those 35, 5 are known to have died in the battle – Robert of Vitot, Engenulf of Laigle, Robert
fitzErneis, Roger son of Turold, and Taillefer.[39]
f. The Bayeux Tapestry may possibly depict a papal banner carried by William's forces, but this is
not named as such in the tapestry.[40]
g. Of these named persons, eight died in the battle – Harold, Gyrth, Leofwine, Godric the sheriff,
Thurkill of Berkshire, Breme, and someone known only as "son of Helloc".[39]
h. A 12th-century tradition stated that Harold's face could not be recognised and Edith the Fair,
Harold's common-law wife, was brought to the battlefield to identify his body from marks that
only she knew.[57]
i. Ætheling is the Anglo-Saxon term for a royal prince with some claim to the throne.[61]
j. The coronation was marred when the Norman troops stationed outside the abbey heard the
sounds of those inside acclaiming the king and began burning nearby houses, thinking the
noises were signs of a riot.[64]
k. Eadric's by-name "the Wild" is relatively common, so despite suggestions that it arose from
Eadric's participation in the northern uprisings of 1069, this is not certain.[67]
l. Gospatric had bought the office from William after the death of Copsi, whom William had
appointed in 1067. Copsi was murdered in 1068 by Osulf, his rival for power in Northumbria.[70]
m. Although the epithet "the Wake" has been claimed to be derived from "the wakeful one", the
first use of the epithet is from the mid-13th century, and is thus unlikely to have been
contemporary.[79]
n. Malcolm, in 1069 or 1070, had married Margaret, sister of Edgar the Ætheling.[70]

Citations
1. Bates Normandy Before 1066 pp. 8–10
2. Crouch Normans pp. 15–16
3. Bates Normandy Before 1066 p. 12
4. Bates Normandy Before 1066 pp. 20–21
5. Hallam and Everard Capetian France p. 53
6. Williams Æthelred the Unready p. 54
7. Huscroft Ruling England p. 3
8. Stafford Unification and Conquest pp. 86–99
9. Higham Death of Anglo-Saxon England pp. 167–181
10. Walker Harold pp. 136–138
11. Bates William the Conqueror pp. 73–77
12. Higham Death of Anglo-Saxon England pp. 188–190
13. Keynes "Harthacnut" Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Anglo-Saxon England
14. Huscroft Norman Conquest p. 84
15. Stenton Anglo-Saxon England pp. 423–424
16. Huscroft Ruling England pp. 12–14
17. Huscroft Norman Conquest pp. 96–97
18. Huscroft Norman Conquest pp. 132–133
19. Stafford Unification and Conquest pp. 86–87
20. Bates William the Conqueror pp. 103–104
21. Thomas Norman Conquest pp. 33–34
22. Stenton Anglo-Saxon England pp. 578–580
23. Walker Harold pp. 144–145
24. Walker Harold pp. 144–150
25. Walker Harold pp. 154–158
26. Marren 1066 pp. 65–71
27. Marren 1066 p. 73
28. Walker Harold pp. 158–165
29. Marren 1066 pp. 74–75
30. Bates William the Conqueror pp. 79–89
31. Douglas William the Conqueror p. 192
32. Gravett Hastings pp. 20–21
33. Bennett Campaigns of the Norman Conquest p. 25
34. Lawson Battle of Hastings pp. 163–164
35. Bennett Campaigns of the Norman Conquest p. 26
36. Marren 1066 pp. 89–90
37. Gravett Hastings p. 27
38. Marren 1066 pp. 108–109
39. Marren 1066 pp. 107–108
40. Huscroft Norman Conquest pp. 120–123
41. Marren 1066 p. 98
42. Carpenter Struggle for Mastery p. 72
43. Marren 1066 p. 93
44. Huscroft Norman Conquest p. 124
45. Lawson Battle of Hastings pp. 180–182
46. Marren 1066 pp. 99–100
47. Lawson Battle of Hastings p. 128
48. Lawson Battle of Hastings pp. 130–133
49. Gravett Hastings pp. 28–34
50. Marren 1066 p. 105
51. Huscroft Norman Conquest p. 126
52. Carpenter Struggle for Mastery p. 73
53. Huscroft Norman Conquest pp. 127–128
54. Huscroft Norman Conquest p. 129
55. Marren 1066 p. 137
 56. Gravett Hastings p. 77
57. Gravett Hastings p. 80
58. Huscroft Norman Conquest p. 131
59. Gravett Hastings p. 81
60. Marren 1066 p. 146
61. Bennett Campaigns of the Norman Conquest p. 91
62. Douglas William the Conqueror pp. 204–205
63. Douglas William the Conqueror pp. 205–206
64. Gravett Hastings p. 84
65. Huscroft Norman Conquest pp. 138–139
66. Douglas William the Conqueror p. 212
67. Williams "Eadric the Wild" Oxford Dictionary of National Biography
68. Walker Harold pp. 186–190
69. Huscroft Norman Conquest pp. 140–141
70. Huscroft Norman Conquest pp. 142–144
71. Douglas William the Conqueror pp. 214–215
72. Williams English and the Norman Conquest pp. 24–27
73. Williams English and the Norman Conquest pp. 20–21
74. Williams English and the Norman Conquest pp. 27–34
75. Williams English and the Norman Conquest p. 35
76. Williams English and the Norman Conquest pp. 35–41
77. Huscroft Norman Conquest pp. 145–146
78. Bennett Campaigns of the Norman Conquest p. 56
79. Roffe "Hereward" Oxford Dictionary of National Biography
80. Douglas William the Conqueror pp. 221–222
81. Williams English and the Norman Conquest pp. 49–57
82. Huscroft Norman Conquest pp. 146–147
83. Douglas William the Conqueror pp. 225–226
84. Douglas William the Conqueror p. 227
85. Douglas William the Conqueror pp. 231–233
86. Bates William the Conqueror pp. 181–182
87. Douglas William the Conqueror p. 216 and footnote 4
88. Stafford Unification and Conquest pp. 102–105
89. Carpenter Struggle for Mastery pp. 82–83
90. Carpenter Struggle for Mastery pp. 79–80
91. Carpenter Struggle for Mastery p. 84
92. Carpenter Struggle for Mastery pp. 83–84
93. Carpenter Struggle for Mastery pp. 75–76
94. Chibnall Anglo-Norman England pp. 11–13
95. Kaufman and Kaufman Medieval Fortress p. 110
96. Liddiard Castles in Context p. 36
97. Carpenter Struggle for Mastery p. 89
98. Carpenter Struggle for Mastery p. 91
99. Thomas English and Normans pp. 105–137
100. Thomas "Significance" English Historical Review pp. 303–333
101. Thomas English and Normans pp. 202–208
102. Ciggaar Western Travellers pp. 140–141
103. Daniell From Norman Conquest to Magna Carta pp. 13–14
104. Heath Byzantine Armies p. 23
105. Thomas Norman Conquest p. 59
106. Huscroft Norman Conquest p. 187
107. Loyn Governance of Anglo-Saxon England p. 176
108. Thomas Norman Conquest p. 60
109. Huscroft Norman Conquest p. 31
110. Huscroft Norman Conquest pp. 194–195
111. Huscroft Norman Conquest pp. 36–37
112. Huscroft Norman Conquest pp. 198–199
113. Keynes "Charters and Writs" Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Anglo-Saxon England p. 100
114. Huscroft Norman Conquest pp. 200–201
115. Huscroft Norman Conquest pp. 323–324
116. Crystal "Story of Middle English" English Language
117. Huscroft Norman Conquest pp. 321–322
118. Thomas Norman Conquest pp. 107–109
119. Huscroft Norman Conquest p. 327
120. Clanchy England and its Rulers p. 93
121. Huscroft Ruling England p. 94
122. Huscroft Norman Conquest p. 329
123. Huscroft Norman Conquest pp. 281–283
124. Clanchy England and its Rulers pp. 31–35
125. Chibnall Debate p. 6
126. Chibnall Debate p. 38
127. Huscroft Norman Conquest pp. 318–319
128. Quoted in Clanchy England and its Rulers p. 32
129. Singman Daily Life p. xv

References
Bates, David (1982). Normandy Before 1066. London: Longman. ISBN 978-0-582-48492-4.
Bates, David (2001). William the Conqueror. Stroud, UK: Tempus. ISBN 978-0-7524-1980-0.
Bennett, Matthew (2001). Campaigns of the Norman Conquest. Essential Histories. Oxford,
UK: Osprey. ISBN 978-1-84176-228-9.
Carpenter, David (2004). The Struggle for Mastery: The Penguin History of Britain 1066–1284.
New York: Penguin. ISBN 978-0-14-014824-4.
Chibnall, Marjorie (1986). Anglo-Norman England 1066–1166. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
ISBN 978-0-631-15439-6.
Chibnall, Marjorie (1999). The Debate on the Norman Conquest. Issues in Historiography.
Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press. ISBN 978-0-7190-4913-2.
Ciggaar, Krijna Nelly (1996). Western Travellers to Constantinople: the West and Byzantium,
962–1204. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-10637-6.
Clanchy, M. T. (2006). England and its Rulers: 1066–1307. Blackwell Classic Histories of
England (Third ed.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. ISBN 978-1-4051-0650-4.
Crouch, David (2007). The Normans: The History of a Dynasty. London: Hambledon & London.
ISBN 978-1-85285-595-6.
Crystal, David (2002). "The Story of Middle English". The English Language: A Guided Tour of
the Language (Second ed.). New York: Penguin. ISBN 0-14-100396-0.
Daniell, Christopher (2003). From Norman Conquest to Magna Carta: England, 1066–1215.
London: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-22216-7.
Douglas, David C. (1964). William the Conqueror: The Norman Impact Upon England.
Berkeley: University of California Press. OCLC 399137 ([Link]
Gravett, Christopher (1992). Hastings 1066: The Fall of Saxon England. Campaign. Vol. 13.
Oxford, UK: Osprey. ISBN 978-1-84176-133-6.
Hallam, Elizabeth M.; Everard, Judith (2001). Capetian France 987–1328 (Second ed.). New
York: Longman. ISBN 978-0-582-40428-1.
Heath, Ian (1995). Byzantine Armies AD 1118–1461. London: Osprey. ISBN 978-1-85532-347-
6.
Higham, Nick (2000). The Death of Anglo-Saxon England. Stroud, UK: Sutton. ISBN 978-0-
7509-2469-6.
Huscroft, Richard (2009). The Norman Conquest: A New Introduction. New York: Longman.
ISBN 978-1-4058-1155-2.
Huscroft, Richard (2005). Ruling England 1042–1217. London: Pearson/Longman. ISBN 978-
0-582-84882-5.
Kaufman, J. E. & Kaufman, H. W. (2001). The Medieval Fortress: Castles, Forts, and Walled
Cities of the Middle Ages. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press. ISBN 978-0-306-81358-0.
Keynes, Simon (2001). "Charters and Writs". In Lapidge, Michael; Blair, John; Keynes, Simon;
Scragg, Donald (eds.). Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Anglo-Saxon England. Malden, MA:
Blackwell. pp. 99–100. ISBN 978-0-631-22492-1.
Keynes, Simon (2001). "Harthacnut". In Lapidge, Michael; Blair, John; Keynes, Simon; Scragg,
Donald (eds.). Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Anglo-Saxon England. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
pp. 229–230. ISBN 978-0-631-22492-1.
Lawson, M. K. (2002). The Battle of Hastings: 1066. Stroud, UK: Tempus. ISBN 978-0-7524-
1998-5.
Liddiard, Robert (2005). Castles in Context: Power, Symbolism and Landscape, 1066 to 1500.
Macclesfield, UK: Windgather Press. ISBN 978-0-9545575-2-2.
Loyn, H. R. (1984). The Governance of Anglo-Saxon England, 500–1087. Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press. ISBN 978-0-8047-1217-0.
Marren, Peter (2004). 1066: The Battles of York, Stamford Bridge & Hastings. Battleground
Britain. Barnsley, UK: Leo Cooper. ISBN 978-0-85052-953-1.
Roffe, David (2004). "Hereward (fl. 1070–1071)" ([Link]
4). Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford University Press.
doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/13074 ([Link] Retrieved
29 March 2013. (subscription or UK public library membership ([Link]
bscribe#public) required)
Singman, Jeffrey L. (1999). Daily Life in Medieval Europe. Daily Life Through History. Westport,
CT: Greenwood Press. ISBN 978-0-313-30273-2.
Stafford, Pauline (1989). Unification and Conquest: A Political and Social History of England in
the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries. London: Edward Arnold. ISBN 978-0-7131-6532-6.
Stenton, F. M. (1971). Anglo-Saxon England (Third ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
ISBN 978-0-19-280139-5.
Thomas, Hugh M. (2003). The English and the Normans. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
ISBN 978-0-19-925123-0.
Thomas, Hugh (2007). The Norman Conquest: England after William the Conqueror. Critical
Issues in History. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. ISBN 978-0-7425-3840-5.
 Thomas, Hugh M. (April 2003). "The Significance and Fate of the Native English Landowners
of 1086". The English Historical Review. 118 (476): 303–333. doi:10.1093/ehr/118.476.303 (htt
ps://[Link]/10.1093%2Fehr%2F118.476.303). JSTOR 3490123 ([Link]
490123).
Walker, Ian (2000). Harold the Last Anglo-Saxon King. Gloucestershire, UK: Wrens Park.
ISBN 978-0-905778-46-4.
Williams, Ann (2003). Æthelred the Unready: The Ill-Counselled King. London: Hambledon &
London. ISBN 978-1-85285-382-2.
Williams, Ann (2004). "Eadric the Wild (fl. 1067–1072)" ([Link]
8512). Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford University Press.
doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/8512 ([Link] Retrieved
29 March 2013. (subscription or UK public library membership ([Link]
bscribe#public) required)
Williams, Ann (2000). The English and the Norman Conquest. Ipswich, UK: Boydell Press.
ISBN 978-0-85115-708-5.

External links
Essential Norman Conquest ([Link]
[Link]/) from Osprey Publishing
Normans – a background to the Conquest ([Link]
ground_01.shtml) from the BBC

Retrieved from "[Link]